HC Deb 07 April 1903 vol 120 cc1254-60
MR. HAYES FISHER (Fulham)

Mr. Speaker, I desire, in accordance with precedent, to inform the House that I yesterday tendered my resignation to the Prime Minister of the Office of Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and my right hon. friend has accepted it. As it is a matter which involves my personal character, I trust the House will give me their utmost indulgence while I shortly relate the circumstances which have led, so far as I can see, to the abrupt termination of my political career. I will ask the House to bear with me if I do not give them all the details of the case, because I am hampered by the consideration that the case is still sub judice; and from chivalrous and honourable motives which will be understood, I am desirous not to say anything which would injure anyone else whose conduct might be the subject of criticism. I will just place the salient facts of the case before the House, and, as the defence of myself involves others, I am quite sure the House will see that it is difficult for me to have sufficient control over myself not to be liable to say something which may injure someone else who cannot state his case before the House; and, therefore, I have reduced my statement to writing. The hon. Member then read the following statement:— In 1896—that is to say, seven years ago—I was approached by Mr. R. Wallace, K.C., a gentleman then in very large practice at the Bar in patent cases, and asked to contribute towards a fund of £5,000 required by a private syndicate for the development of an exceedingly ingenious invention in which he was personally interested. The invention interested me very much, especially as so great a scientific authority as the late respected Dr. Hopkinson, whom I consulted, told me that he thought so well of it that he was himself going to contribute £1,000 of the £5,000 required, and that he intended to give it his personal attention. Unfortunately he was killed shortly after in an Alpine accident. There were four persons, who each contributed £1,000 towards the fund required, of whom I was one. It was one of the essential conditions upon which I consented to contribute that the syndicate should continue to be a private one, that no shares should be issued to the public or parted with to them, no prospectus, and no directors' fees; and under these conditions we considered ourselves at liberty to make such arrangements among ourselves with reference to our proportion of interest in the concern as we thought right, and to allow the capital to be allotted accordingly. To show our bonâ fides, we were offered a large sum for the patent, but refused to let the public in, as we considered the patent insufficiently developed. In order to determine our share in the said invention, the chairman, Mr. Roger Wallace, transferred 2,000 shares to each of us, Professor Hopkinson, myself, and Sir Joseph Lawrence; and when this transfer was effected every member of the syndicate was fully aware of the fact and approved of its being done. These shares were part of a number of shares to which Mr. Wallace was entitled under some arrangement with the vendor which was not disclosed to me. I do not understand that had the syndicate remained a private one there was anything in the least degree questionable, objectionable, or un-businesslike in the course adopted. The vendor, however, parted with some of his shares against our wish and in breach of the arrangement I have mentioned. The shares which he sold had been deposited by him with a foreign banker as security for advances, and were sold by the banker. I did not know of the transfer until some time after it took place, and immediately protested. It now appears that, in the opinion of Mr. Justice Buckley, when the vendor so parted with some of his shares the distribution of shares by Mr. Wallace (to which, when it was done, no one could object) assumed in law a different complexion. Other equally eminent Judges take an opposite view. If Mr. Justice Buckley is right, I can only say that I was totally unconscious of that fact and that I have been the victim of a breach of the original arrangement; but I cannot, looking back upon the course which I followed, reproach myself with having acted in any way, I will not say unworthily, but even with' want of business caution. There is a second matter which his Lordship laid to our charge, and that was that during the last few years Sir Joseph Lawrence and myself bad left the entire management of the syndicate to the chairman, Mr. R. Wallace. It is true that this was done; but I should like to emphasize the fact that the syndicate was not, and never had been, a trading concern, and that, apart from the development of the invention (for which I believe the chairman, Mr. R. Wallace, K.C., had special qualifications), there was no business to manage; and in this connexion I would also point out that the moneys for such development, and, indeed, the only money in this syndicate of any sort, kind, or description, was our own money. In the result the syndicate was wound up, being indebted to only a few creditors, and for no very considerable amount. Before the liquidation and since the liquidation, and, indeed, at all times, Sir Joseph Lawrence and myself have told the creditors that we would pay them—and this we will do. But, further, Mr. Justice Buckley, in his judgment last Tuesday, has suggested that we should repurchase at par the shares which the vendor transferred in breach of the arrangement that no shares should be sold to the public; for which shares, I need scarcely point out, he, the vendor, received the whole price. I cannot myself under the circumstances see that there is the least moral claim against us on the part of the purchasers of these shares, with whose introduction into the syndicate we were in no way concerned and from whom neither we nor the syndicate derived any benefit. And I am advised that there is no legal claim, so that his lordship's suggestion seems to me to be very much a counsel of perfection. However, he has thought right to make it, and although I am not a rich man I will not have it said that anybody has lost money through me. And this is the view that Sir Joseph Lawrence also shares; and we yesterday handed to our lawyer cheques for £5,000, which is more than sufficient to pay every creditor and the shareholders in question. The Judge was good enough to state that in his opinion there was no ground for attributing to either of us any want of personal integrity. And may I also point out that we made no profit of any sort or description, that we drew no director's fees, that we issued no prospectus of any kind, and that I took up and paid for in cash over 1,100 shares, and that I have advanced the company money which I have not been repaid, so that I have lost sums in connection with the matter which to me are heavy and considerable. Now, some people may say, "Why did you not make this statement before?" Well, I was advised by the very highest legal authority that I ought not to address myself to the Press, and I ought not to mate any statement to this House while the case was still sub judice, and until I had carried out the direction of the learned judge; and my own sense of right and wrong told me that the one important matter for me was to pay everybody so that nobody could say they had lost a penny through me. I was not in a position to do that until to-day. I only had a few days, and, as I have said, I am not a rich man. I was not in a position until to-day to make that statement to the House. I can only say Sir Joseph Lawrence and I have lodged the money, and every shareholder, and every contributor, and every creditor can have back every single penny that is due to him. I have wronged no man: I have myself been greatly wronged, and I bow to the full force of the terrific punishment which has come upon me for this error of judgment committed seven years ago. Some people may say, "Why do you resign?" I say emphatically not because I think I am unfit to hold the high office under the Government I held until a day ago, but because I accept the judgment of those on whose judgment I rely—for we are not always good judges in our own case—that the censure of a certain judge, to which wide circulation has boon given, renders me open to attack inside and outside this House in the conduct of the business of the Treasury, and, instead of a source of strength, I have become a source of weakness to the Government to which I am absolutely devoted. All I will ask of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister, to whom I know these proceedings may be oven more painful than they are to me is that he will say, that whatever I have done, however I may have been remiss in my own private business, during the time I have had the conduct of the financial business of this country entrusted to me I have not been remiss or careless, I. have not shown any want of prudence or caution, and I have not shown any want of capacity. I have been for nearly eighteen years a member of this House, and for nearly eight years a member of this Government. If I have neglected my private affairs, it is because I have devoted the whole of my time to the service of the House. In seven years I only missed three divisions, public or private, which I think will show, at all events, that my whole life has been devoted to this House. In conclusion I wish to say how deeply touched I am by the kindly messages of sympathy which have come from political opponents who might have used this opportunity to say something harsh about me, and how much I shall always treasure them.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

My hon. friend has made an appeal to me in the concluding part of his speech to which I respond not only readily, but most gladly. If anything could have increased the sympathy which I am confident was felt when first these unfortunate transactions were known—if anything could increase the sympathy which has been felt in all quarters of the House with my hon. friend—it is the statement which he has just made to us. And everybody, I think, will admit that he has behaved, under most trying and difficult circumstances, not merely as we should all anticipate, as a man of high integrity and high honour, but as a man who carries scrupulosity in the matter of dealing with those who he thinks have suffered in his transactions to an extent which I think must command the admiration of all those who have heard him and of those who have an opportunity of reading what he has said. My hon. friend has asked me to bear testimony to the zeal and efficiency with which he has carried out his public duties in this House and in his office. That testimony I most gladly give. My hon. friend and I have been closely associated in political work now for many long years. My hon. friend and I first came into close political and personal relations o far back as 1887, when he gave me valuable assistance in a very trying political portion of my public administrative work. Since then my hon. friend has been actively engaged in political work. He has, in and out of office, devoted himself with zeal and ability to the labours which this House throws upon the most zealous of its sons; and though he has necessarily, and as a matter of course, being as he is a strong party man, found himself divided by sharp differences from many of those with whom he has sat in this House and whom he has addressed to-day, I do not believe that he has one single enemy. Few things more painful have ever happened to me, in my political life at all events, than the events of the last few days; and I can only assure my hon. friend that I am quite confident that the course which he has taken in this House, and outside this House, in connection with this unfortunate affair—I am perfectly confident that all he has done and all he has said will augment the esteem in which he is held by his opponents, and even increase, if that were possible, the affection and confidence of his friends.

SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

It is, of course, no part of the duty, nor would it be the desire, of this House to pronounce any opinion whatever upon the legal question which may be still pending in this matter. But there will be a universal feeling in this House of sympathy with the hon. Member, and sympathy increased by the fact that we believe in a difficult, delicate and unfortunate situation he has done the right thing. The hon. Member has addressed us in terms which must engage for him an increase of respect from every one who has heard him. His conduct, not only previously in tendering the resignation of his office, but to-day in the recital that he has made of the steps he has taken, I think shows us all that we were not mistaken in the belief that in our experience he was a man deserving of our respect and regard. I will not dwell upon the matter. I think it is unnecessary to go further. But while we deeply regret the circumstances which have led to the interruption of his official career, we still hope that he will continue, at all events, to be a Member of the House, for which he is so well calculated to do useful service.

MR. BLAKE

Perhaps there are reasons why this painful incident should not close without an expression of opinion from these benches. We heartily re-echo the expressions which have fallen from the First Lord of the Treasury and the Leader of the Opposition, believing that what has happened to-day, however painful it may be to the hon. Member himself, has vindicated his own reputation, and also maintained the honour and standing of this House.