§ (1.) The Board of Agriculture shall, with the concurrence of the Treasury, appoint a fit person, in this Act called the compensation officer, whose duty it shall be, immediately the forces have ceased to occupy or pass over any part of the land within the prescribed limits, to ascertain the damage done, and. as far as practicable, to settle summarily by agreement the amount of compensation; in which case the compensation officer shall either cause the compensation to be paid at once, or shall give a notice in writing to the person entitled, stating the amount to be paid, and the place and date (not being later than thirty days from the date of the notice) at which that amount will be paid.
§ (2.) The mode in which claims of compensation are to be sent to the compensation officer shall be notified within the prescribed limits in manner directed by the consultative commission. Every claim for compensation shall be sent to the compensation officer immediately after the forces have ceased to occupy or pass over the land in respect of which compensation is claimed, and at the latest within one week after the damage is done.
§ (3.) Compensation may be paid to the person in actual occupation of the laud in respect of which it is claimed, or, in case of his absence or inability, to his wife or some member of his family, or to his steward or other person acting for him in the cultivation and management of the land, whose receipt shall he a complete discharge for the damage in respect of which the compensation is paid.
§ (4.) The Board of Agriculture may, if they think fit, with the concurrence of the Treasury, appoint two or more persons to be compensation officers, and each of the persons so appointed shall perform the duties and have the powers by this Act conferred on the compensation officer.
§ (5.) If the compensation officer tails to settle any claim for compensation, or is unable to decide the person to whom compensation is payable, the case shall be referred by him to the court of arbitration established under this Act, with a statement by the compensation officer of what he considers a fair compensation for the damage done.
1399§ (6.) A court of arbitration shall, if required, be formed, consisting of three persons, one of whom shall be named by the consultative Commission in writing under the hands of any two or more of the members of that Commission, one by the Board of Agriculture, and the third by the two persons already named in writing under their hands, or, in case of their failure to agree as to such appointment within six days, by the Lord Chancellor.
§ (7.) Any vacancy in the office of any member of the Court of Arbitration occasioned by death, resignation, unwillingness to act, or otherwise, shall be filled by the authority which appointed the vacating member, in the same manner in which the vacating member was appointed.
§ (8.) There shall be paid to the compensation officers and to the members of the Court of Arbitration such remuneration as the Secretary of State may, with the approval of the Treasury, determine.
§ (9.) The Court of Arbitration shall have full power to decide all questions whatsoever, whether of law or fact, which it may be necessary to decide for the purpose of awarding compensation under this Act, and in particular to decide in any case of alleged damage to lands, whether the damage was or was not caused by or in consequence of the forces, or the strangers accompanying the forces, passing over or occupying such lands, and also (if the damage was so caused) to determine the person entitled to receive compensation for the damage; and the Court of Arbitration shall not be liable to be restrained in the due execution of its powers by the order of any Court, nor shall any proceedings before it be removed by certiorari into any Court, nor shall any award by it be set aside.
§ (10.) The court of arbitration may examine witnesses on oath, and shall for that purpose have power to administer an oath, and with respect to the enforcement of the attendance of witnesses, after a tender of their expenses, the examination of witnesses, and the production of books, papers, and documents, shall have all such powers, rights, and privileges as are vested in the High Court for those or the like purposes.
§ (11.) The Court of Arbitration may hold its sittings at such times and places as it thinks expedient, and may act by any two of its members.
§ (12.) The Court of Arbitration may appoint a valuer, and may delegate to that valuer such powers of assessing compensation under this Act as it may think fit; but an appeal may be had from his decision to the Court of Arbitration.
§ (13.) The Court of Arbitration may examine the valuer as to the amount of compensation which in "is opinion ought to be paid in any case of damage brought before it, and may adopt or reject his opinion as it thinks just.
§ (14.) The Court of Arbitration may review and rescind or vary any order or decision previously made by it; but, save as aforesaid, every order or decision of the Court shall be final.
1400§ (15.) The Court of Arbitration shall publish in such manner as it thinks fit directions as to the mode in which applications are to be made to it under this Act.
§ (16.) The Court of Arbitration shall not be bound to hear any counsel or solicitor, but any person claiming compensation may appear in person or by some agent authorised by him in writing, and the Court of Arbitration may, in addition to compensation for damage, grant further compensation for costs reasonably incurred in substantiating a claim, or may refuse such costs wholly or partially, or reduce the amount of compensation if the person claiming refused a fair offer from the compensation officer.
§ (17.) Any person fraudulently claiming and receiving compensation to which he is not entitled shall be guilty of fraud, and be liable to be dealt with as if he had fraudulently received money under false pretences, and shall in addition be liable to pay the money received to the persons entitled thereto.
§ MR. STRACHEY moved after "Board of agriculture" in the first line of the clause, to insert "on the nomination of the County Councils wholly or partly within the prescribed limit." The object of the Amendment, he explained, was to give the County Council the power and the right to nominate the person who should be appointed as compensation officer. It was necessary, in order to guard the interests of the localities in this matter, that a fit and proper person should be appointed, and one who had some local knowledge. This could be best secured by allowing the County Council to have the power of nomination, the right of final appointment resting with the Board of Agriculture and the Treasury who, if they did not approve of the nomination, would get the County Council to submit other names. He recognised that the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill had made some concessions, and he asked turn to make this further small one of giving the County Council the power of initiation and suggestion.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS,) Birmingham, S.thought the hon. Member for Somerset had a little forgotten the duties this officer would have to perform. He would have to dispense public money, not derived from the rates, but voted by that House, and under such circumstances he must, of course, be an officer nominated by a Government Department. For his part, in a matter of this kind, he stood upon 1401 the words used by the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton the previous night, who claimed on behalf of this House that whenever there was an expenditure of public money there should be public control. That was exactly the case here. A reasonable concession had already been made in this clause. In all former cases of this kind it was usual to insert the Treasury as the authority to appoint the officer, but in this case the Board of Agriculture had been substituted for the Treasury. That was a considerable step in the direction the hon. Member wished to go, and he sincerely trusted, under the circumstances, that the Amendment would not be pressed.
§ MR. STRACHEYpointed out that what he desired to secure was not the power of control, but simply that of nomination. The question of the compensation to be assessed was of great importance to the farmers, and their interests should be safeguarded in the way he had suggested.
MR. POWELL-WILLIAMSsaid the matter was one which concerned the administration of public funds, and it was necessary the officer appointed for this purpose should be nominated by a Government Department.
§ MR. DALZIELadmitted that there was something in what the hon. Gentleman had said as to public funds being administered by a public officer, but he would point out that the Government had themselves set a precedent for this Amendment, for in the Education Bill local committees were to be appointed to spend public moneys. His hon. Friend contended that it ought to be within the power of the County Councils to make representations to the Treasury. He would suggest as a compromise that the Under Secretary should consent that due regard should be paid to any representations that might be made by the County Councils. He thought that would leave it optional to the County Council, and it need not be taken advantage of unless when there was a great deal of local dissatisfaction, because, undoubtedly, as the right hon. Gentleman knew, it affected the local people. They complained if they did not get sufficient compensation, so that it was a local rather than an Imperial difficulty.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that the nominations of the County Council 1402 would probably be valuable and due regard would be paid to them. He would accept the following words:—
Having- regard to any representations made by the County Councils wholly or partially within the prescribed limits.
§ Mr. STRACHEYasked whether the Government would accept the words, "With the concurrence of the County Council?"
§ *MR. BRODRICKNo, Sir; that would be impossible.
§ MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid that local knowledge was absolutely essential in a case of this kind, and no one would know the requirements of the district better than the County Councils concerned.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that this was not a question of administration at all. The functions of the compensation officer would be purely judicial. He was to assess the damage done by the troops, and the Government, which was one of the parties to the dispute, was actually to appoint the assessor. The County Council could have no concern but the public interest.
§ *MR. ALFRED HOPKINSON (Wilts, Cricklade)said that in the interests of the farmers it was better for the clause to stand as it was. The best way to make a satisfactory bargain was to deal with an agent of the Government which had to make the payments, and not resort to judicial proceedings. In nine cases out of 10 an agent would settle the claims more generously.
§ MR. H. E. KEARLEY (Devonport)said that if the County Council had a voice in the nomination of the assessor, the farmers would be more likely to regard the settlement as equitable. What would be the Government's objection to the Amendment?
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid the Government had already promised that due regard should be paid to the nomination of the County Councils. If the nomination were absolutely given to the County Councils, then the Board of Agriculture could not nominate anyone without the approval of the County Councils. That was an unreasonable demand, seeing that the County Councils would be in a majority on the Commission, and would settle where the troops were to go. Failing agreement as to the amount of 1403 the compensation, there was an arbitration court provided, on which the County Council would appoint one member, the Board of Agriculture a second, and the two would co-appoint a third.
§ MR. HERBERT LEWISurged the acceptance of the Amendment of the hon. Member for Somerset. All that was asked was that there should be concurrence between the County Council and the Board of Agriculture as to the nomination.
§ MR. DALZIELhoped that the words which the Government had promised to accept would satisfy his hon. Friends. If the concurrence of the County Council were necessary, there would be Debates on the qualifications of the person suggested by the Board of Agriculture. Undoubtedly the practice would be to accept the nomination of the County Council.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that if the hon. Member had been a lawyer he would have known that the words he suggested were utterly futile and ineffective. The successful working of the Act would depend far more upon the manner in which the assessment of damage was made than on any other condition. The person appointed to make the assessment would be practically in the position of a Court of first instance, and the arbitrators would occupy the position simply of the Court of Appeal. There were certain districts—sheep-farming districts—in Wales and elsewhere, which no man could deal with under this Bill, who had not full local knowledge. ["Hear, hear!"] But wherever, or whatever, the district, it was desirable that a man should be appointed who had local knowledge of it, and could speak authoritatively with regard to it. ["Hear, hear!"] He could not understand why the Government did not accept this Amendment, for he believed it would facilitate the working of the Bill. ["Hear, hear!"]
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,) Inverness Burghssaid, be thought there was some misapprehension on the point under Debate. The officer referred to would not be an assessor, or valuer, or a judical officer, to determine finally; he would be appointed merely as an agent to settle by agreement with the farmer, the extent of damage done. If an agreement could 1404 not be arrived at, the case would go to the Court of Arbitration, which was an altogether different authority, and would be appointed in such a way as to secure independence. In these circumstances he thought the Amendment was unreasonable.
§ MR. LOGANagreed that a man, whose duty it would be to go over the land and ascertain the damage done, should have intimate knowledge of the locality. Moreover, having the power, as far as possible, to settle the amount of damage, surely he would be the valuer of that damage?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERALBy agreement.
§ MR. LOGANsaid, that, nevertheless, the official would be a valuer, and it was desirable that he should be a man in whom, not only the farmers, but the general community, also, had confidence. For it was not sufficient to tell him that the farmer would be compensated. Who was to pay the compensation? Why, the general community would have to pay it, and, therefore, he thought the person selected for the duty should be appointed by the County Council rather than by a Government Department.
§ *MR. BRODRICKwould remind the Committee of the position in which Parliament stood with regard to the Bill. If the Measure was not passed into law by the 10th of May, it would be almost impossible to hold the manœuvres this year. There was not a Member of the House who did not desire the Bill to become law with proper restrictions. ["Hear, hear!"] Well, a large number of restrictions had been introduced in deference to the wishes of hon. Members, and the Government had accepted every Amendment to which they could possibly accede, and they had made every possible concession. ["Hear, hear!"] But on principle they could not accept the present Amendment, and he would remind hon. Members that even in this case the conditions were in favour of the tenant farmer, for while the agreement could not be enforced against the farmer, it would be binding against the Government. The passing of the Bill was regarded as a matter of great importance by the military authorities, and after the explanations already given he appealed to the Committee to dispose of this Amendment in 1405 order that further progress might be made with the Bill.
§ MR. KEARLEYsaid the point at issue was whether or not the official referred to was to be a man who would command the confidence of the farmers and the community. He maintained that it was essential to the working of the Measure that the appointment should be controlled by the local authorities.
§ MR. STRACHEYsaid the remarks of the Under Secretary had not met the point he had raised, and, therefore, he could not withdraw his Amendment. He was strongly impressed with the necessity that the farmers should be fully and fairly protected.
§ SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid that on the grounds of economy, it was advisable that some person thoroughly acquainted with the locality should be appointed for the duty in question. It was scarcely reasonable to think that any stranger sent down to a neighbourhood by the Central Department would be so well able to understand or appreciate the damage done by the manœuvres as a man thoroughly acquainted with the locality, and he urged, therefore, that it would be in the interests of the Exchequer itself that such a man should be appointed. ["Hear, hear!"]
§ MR. LOGAN, who was received with cries of "Divide!" said hon. Gentlemen seemed to be anxious to divide, but he protested against the necessity of this Bill being rushed through the House.
§ MR. LOGANsaid all he wished to say was, that feeling that the Bill would very materially affect the interests of the tenant farmers, he protested as emphatically as he could against any attempt on the part of hon. Members to rush it through the House.
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted:"—
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 127; Noes, 245.—(Division List, No. 107.)
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNER moved an Amendment, providing that 1406 concurrence of the Treasury in the appointment of the compensation officer should not be necessary. He contended that if the concurrence of the Treasury were made a condition of the appointment, farmers would not place the same confidence in the compensation officer as they would if he were appointed by the Board of Agriculture independently.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that if this officer were an arbitrator the Amendment would deserve consideration. But as the case stood it would be unprecedented to give the right of disposing of public money to an official in whose appointment the Treasury had not concurred. The consent of the Treasury to the appointment would, he believed, be mainly a formal matter.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid that it should be remembered that this was to be permanent legislation. The compensation officer would practically be an arbitrator. He would have to assess damages, to represent the case for the Government, and to pay Government money. He would decide between the Treasury and the farmer, and there was to be an appeal against his decisions to a court of arbitration.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthought that the rejection by the Government of the last Amendment rendered the present Amendment very necessary. They ought not to act in consultation with the Treasury in respect to the appointment of the compensation officer, for the object of the Treasury would be- to out down claims as much as possible. Surely the Board of Agriculture could appoint a fit and proper officer without the concurrence of the Treasury.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that no expenditure of public money was ever made by any Department without the consent of the Treasury. The Secretary of State for War, for example, could not pay out 5s. without such consent. The Amendment of the hon. Member would introduce a complete change in the practice that now prevailed, and it was impossible to accept it.
§ SIR WALTER FOSTERsupported the view of the Under Secretary for War. The Board of Agriculture had no money to apply to the purposes contemplated in the Bill. When the officer was appointed to disburse large sums of 1407 money it was only right that the Treasury that had to find the money should be given a nominal power of concurring in the appointment. The provision practically gave the Treasury very little real authority; but it connected the Department with the process of making good the damage done, and he thought that that connection should not be broken.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYappealed to the hon. Member to withdraw his Amendment. He understood that there was no opposition to this Bill, and that it was generally agreed that it was desirable to give the military authorities power to hold manœuvres this year. The Bill had been put down on the Paper day after day, but very little progress had been made with it. If there was any further delay it would be useless to pass the Measure, for no good would result from it. The object in view was one of great public importance. In the circumstances, he trusted that the remaining stages of the Bill would not be impeded.
MR. LITTTRELLsaid that there was, no doubt, a general desire that the Bill should pass; but there was also a desire that it should pass in the best possible form. He hoped, however, that the speeches delivered by hon. Members would be short, so that the Bill might be got through.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNERasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
§ MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid that the Leader of the House had referred to the special circumstances of one year in support of an appeal to pass a Bill which would be permanent. The reason why the progress of this Bill should be watched very carefully was because it was an innovation constitutionally. Bills relating to the Army had hitherto been annual Bills. There was no desire to delay the Measure unduly; but, as it would apply for all time, they could not consent to take into consideration the circumstances of one particular year.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *MR. BRODRICK moved an Amendment providing that, in the appointment of the compensation officer, regard should be had to any representations of the 1408 County Councils wholly or partially situated within the prescribed district.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE moved to insert after the word "person," in line 23, the words, "who shall be a resident within the prescribed limits."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE moved, after the words, "within the prescribed limits," sub-section (1), to insert the words, "after notice given to the owner or occupier of the affected land." He thought the owner or occupier ought to have some notice when the person appointed by the Board of Agriculture was coming down to assess the damage. Otherwise, he did not see how they were likely to come to terms at all.
§ Amendment agreed to.
MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid it was provided in the clause that, when the assessment of the compensation had been agreed upon, the money was not be paid in the ordinary way, but the person injured was to go to certain places to get his money. Most of the tenant farmers in his district were very poor, and a railway journey of 20 or 30 miles would be a very serious thing for them. He therefore proposed to leave out the words, "and place and date," in line 31.
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERALsaid the Amendment would make the clause quite incomprehensible. The clause as it stood was really in favour of the tenant. Nobody could suggest that a public department would wish to compel a poor man to make a journey in order to receive his money. It was obviously meant that arrangements would be made for the payment of the money at local post offices and such places.
*THE CHAIRMANI do not think the Amendment is in order. It would make nonsense of the clause. [Laughter.]
§ MR. STRACHEYpointed out that, as the Bill stood, it was required that notice of the damage should be given within one week after the troops had 1409 passed over the land. It was quite ridiculous to expect a farmer to make out his claim within one week. He thought he would be very moderate in asking for three weeks. However, he would content himself by moving the substitution of three weeks for one week.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid he was willing to make it a fortnight, though he believed that would be against the locality and the tenant farmer.
§ MR. STRACHEYsaid the clause provided that every claim should be sent to the compensation officer immediately after the force had ceased to pass over the land, and within one week after the damage had been done. He referred more especially to the difficulty of ascertaining the damage to cattle within a week. However he did not want to go at length into the matter now, as he felt the force of the appeal of the Leader of the House, and recognised the necessity of getting the Bill through I as quickly as possible.
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERALTake 14 days. [Laughter.]
§ SEVERAL HON. MEMBERS: No, three weeks.
§ MR. LUTTRELLsaid he thought a fortnight might be sufficient, but he did not see why the Government should insist on it.
§ DR. TANNER (Cork, Mid)said the Government had chucked in one week; why could they not grant the other? If damage was done on these lands, it could not possibly be found out by what particular corps or party such damage was done.
§ MR. W. ALLEN (Newcastle-under-Lyme)hoped the Government would meet his hon. Friend in this matter. He did not think he was asking for at all too much time. Of course, in the case of crops, it would be perfectly easy to discover the damage at once: but in the case of cattle he did not think it would be so easy.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§
*MR. BRODRICK moved, at the end of Sub-section (2), after "done" to insert
or the occupation has ceased, whichever is later, or within such further time as may be prescribed in special oases by the consultative commission.
§ Amendment agreed to.
1410
§
*MR. BRODRICK moved to insert at the end of Sub-section (3), after "paid," the following:—
(4) In the case of compensation payable in respect of rights of common the compensation may be paid to the County Council for the county in which the common is situate, or in the case of the New Forest to the Court of Verderers, to be paid or applied by them to or for the benefit of the persons whose rights of common are affected, in such manner as they think just.
§ MR. LUTTRELL moved to amend the proposed Amendment by substituting the words "District Council" for the "County Council." It would be better, he contended, that the District Council should be charged with the payment of the money, inasmuch as that body would know more about the claimant and the general circumstances of the case.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid he could not accept the Amendment. He thought that the District Councils did not cover large enough areas. The land affected might be within the jurisdiction of more than one District Council.
§ MR. LUTTRELLsaid that the same argument would apply to the County Council, as the manœuvres might be extended over several counties. He must press upon the Government the necessity for substituting for the County Council the District Council. His reason for taking that course was that the District Council represented the district affected by the provisions of the Bill better than the County Council did.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid he was willing to amend his Amendment by inserting after the word "situate" the words "or if the common is wholly situated in one district, in such case to the District Council." Beyond that he could not go.
§ MR. LUTTRELLsaid that he supposed that he must be content to accept the Amendment which the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for War proposed in lieu of his own, and, therefore, he asked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
§ Proposed Amendment to the Amendment, by leave, withdrawn; Amendment of Mr. Brodrick agreed to.
§ *MR. BRODRICK moved to amend Sub-section (5), by inserting after the 1411 word "settle" the words "by agreement."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ *MR. BRODRICK moved to amend Sub-section (8), by inserting after the word "Treasury" the words "having regard to any representations made by the County Council."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ *MR. BRODRICK moved to amend Sub-section (9), by inserting after the words "determine the person" the words "resident within the prescribed limits."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEasked whether it was intended that the arbitrator appointed by the occupier should be remunerated by the Government? He begged to move the insertion of the following words: "Charged upon the War Office Vote with the assent of the Treasury."
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that he could not accept the Amendment.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ MR. STRACHEY moved, in subsection (16) to leave out the word "may" after "and the Court of Arbitration," in order to insert the word "shall." He objected to the payment of costs "reasonably incurred" in the arbitration being left to the discretion of the Court of Arbitration.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that he was willing to accept the words "shall, if they think fit."
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that the words suggested by the right hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for War would still leave the question of the payment of costs reasonably incurred in the arbitration to the discretion of the Court of Arbitration.
§ *MR. BRODRICKsaid that he could not go further than he had done. A man who had had an offer of £100 compensation might refuse unreasonably to accept it, and it would not be right that in such a case he should have the costs of the appeal.
§ Question, "That the word 'may' stand part of the Clause," put, and negatived.
§ Question put, "That the words 'shall if it think fit' be there inserted:"—
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 246; Noes, 114.—(Division List, No. 108.)
§ And, it being after ten minutes to Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Thursday.