§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham)) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1:—
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 1 stand part of the Bill."
§ LORD BALCARRES (Lancashire, Chorley)remarked that this was another Bill of the late Government. It proposed to amend the law relating to the falsification of seamen's and soldiers' certificates of service or discharge and to false statements made in connection with entry or enlistment into the naval, military, or marine forces. He wished to ask why the grave crimes of forgery or perjury should under this clause be punishable with imprisonment not exceeding one month. If a man forged he ought to be punishable more severely than by one month's imprisonment.
§ MR. HALDANEstated that this Bill only proposed a summary method of procedure. Proceedings could be taken at common law against a soldier or anyone else for cheating, but it was not always easy to get the jury to take so serious a view of the crime as they should. This Bill provided that the matter could be disposed of by a magistrate summarily and leniently. If a case was so serious that one months imprisonment would be quite inadequate, the offender could be taken before a jury.
§ LORD R. CECIL (Marylebone, E.)said that from the wording of the Bill it seemed as if the only remedy provided was the remedy of the Summary Jurisdiction Act. He pointed out that the offence in the case of forgery was a very serious thing, as the man would be guilty of forging a document issued by the Crown.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid his own doubt on that very point had been removed by an examination of Section 33 of the Act of 1889.
§ Question put and agreed to.
379§ Clause 2:—
§ MR. T. L. CORBETT moved the insertion of the word "knowingly" before "makes use of." He said a man might unwittingly make use of a false statement.
§ Amendment proposed —
§ "In page 1, line 24, after the word 'forces' to insert the word 'knowingly.'" —(Mr. T. L. Corbett.)
§ Question proposed, "That the word 'knowingly' be there inserted."
§ MR. HALDANEconsidered the insertion of the word quite unnecessary, for the Bill showed no crime was committed without scienter. The draft of the Bill had been settled by the Treasury and Parliamentary Counsel and was in accordance with the wording of a long series of Acts, and he did not care to accept an Amendment which would involve a departure from long standing practice.
§ LORD BALCARRESsaid he could not understand the plea contained in the latter part of the right hon. Gentleman's answer, because they had already in effect got "knowingly" in two other portions of the Bill. He thought, however, that it was important that they should have the word "knowingly" inserted at this precise point. The right hon. Gentleman admitted that it did no harm, and it was only on a point of etiquette that he objected to the Amendment. It appeared that if a man made use of a false certificate he was liable to a certain penalty, and if he made use of any statement as to his character and previous employment which, to his knowledge, was false, he was also liable to a certain penalty. If the saving word of the Amendment were inserted, it would be an improvement. The right hon. Gentleman himself had admitted that the insertion of the word could do no harm, and it seemed to him that it might do considerable good to a person who was charged under the Bill. Under the circumstances he hoped the hon. Gentleman would press his Amendment.
§ MR. HALDANEobjected to putting the word "knowingly" in at this particular point, because the fact was that in regard to this particular offence of 380 making use of a false and fraudulent statement, scienter must be proved in the ordinary course of law. The section did provide that in the case of a statement as to his previous character and employment which was to his knowledge false in any material particular, a man should be liable to a penalty. In view of the fact, however, that the law as it stood would involve that a man should be convicted only if he knowingly made use of any forged or counterfeit statement as to his character or previous employment, it was, he thought, quite unnecessary to insert the word proposed.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSON (Oxford University)wished to know whether the right hon. Gentleman was certain that the words "to his knowledge" in the later portion of the clause were sufficient to govern the whole of the preceding portion. He thought it should be mad clear that the scienter should be proved. Did not the words "to his knowledge" really come back to a false and fraudulent statement and should they not be applicable to the whole. He feared that the clause as it stood would put trouble in the way of magistrates in the course of exercising summary jurisdiction.
§ MR. HALDANEthought it was obvious that the words "to his knowledge" only referred to any statement which the man himself made, and not to the use of any forged or counterfeit statement.
§ MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON (Lanarkshire, N. W.)said he understood that the reason the words "to his knowledge" were put in in the second part of the clause was that a statement as to character and employment was only criminal when it was made falsely, and by means of a forged or counterfeit statement. The distinction was that a man might make a statement as to his character or previous employment without knowing it to be false, but he could not use a forged or counterfeit statement without knowing it. In both cases, however, the statement would be knowingly or wilfully made.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid his point was that scienter was part of the offence in the first part of the clause as applied to a forged or 381 counterfeited statement, but in the second part there was legally no intention unless it was indicated by the word "knowledge." That passing on from the use of a document where scienter was implied gave the same effect to the clause.
§ LORD R. CECIL (Marylebone, E.)said it appeared from the argument of the right hon. Gentleman that the words "to his knowledge "in the second part of the clause were quite unnecessary. One could not intentionally make use of a false statement without knowing that the statement was false. Therefore, if it was necessary to insert the words" to his knowledge" in the second part of the clause to make the matter abundantly clear, why was it not necessary to make it abundantly clear in the first part as well as the second?
§ COLONEL LEGGE (St. George's, Hanover Square)thought the Amendment would be a very useful one, and he quite agreed with what had fallen from the noble Lord. It was urged against them that this was a Bill prepared by the late Government, but even Unionists might occasionally be able to improve their own Bills. He thought the Secretary of State for War might accept the Amendment because it made the Bill read sensibly. In the first place, it appeared that if a man used any forged or counterfeit statement he should be convicted, but it said in the second place that if he made use of any statement which to his knowledge was false he should be also convicted. It seemed to him that if the amendment were accepted it would make the clause symmetrical in both its parts.
§ MR. T. L. CORBETTsaid the right hon. Gentleman had admitted that there was no harm in the Amendment and to the simple lay mind the word "knowingly" undoubtedly made the clause clearer than it was as it stood.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid the difficulty was that the word "knowingly" in that position in the clause did nothing, because the law implied that the offence to which it referred must be done wilfully and knowingly. There was a distinction between the two branches of the clause, because it was not necessary to use the word" knowingly" in regard to the first part to constitute an offence, but in regard to the second part, which dealt with false statements, the words, "to his knowledge," were necessary. His predecessor determined to define certain offences. Certain of them were indictable, such as those coming under the first portion of the section, but those under the second portion came under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, and there it was necessary to put in the words "to his knowledge." In the indictable offences scienter was implied.
§ LORD R. CECILsaid that knowledge might enter equally into the use and the making of a false or counterfeited document. Unlesss it was knowingly made, or falsely and fraudulently, there would be no offence.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he should like to make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, because it was very important that these matters which were dealt with by courts of summary jurisdiction should be made as plain as possible. Knowledge was as essential in the one case as in the other, and therefore he would suggest that the word "knowingly" should be put in, and it should be allowed to govern the whole section, and that the words "to his knowledge" should be left out. Then it would be clear that knowledge was the essential part of the whole paragraph.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 68; Noes 314. (Division List No. 73.)
385| AYES. | ||
| Acland-Hood,Rt Hn.SirAlexF. | Banner, John S. Harmood- | Butcher, Samuel Henry |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester) | Carlile, E. Hildred |
| Anstruther-Gray, Major | Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Cavendish,Rt. Hn. Victor C.W. |
| Ashley, W. W. | Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H. | Bignold, Sir Arthur | Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone,E.) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Bowles, G. Stewart | Clarke, Sir Edward(CityL'ndon |
| Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey) | Bridgeman, W. Clive | Cooper, G. J. |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
| Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S. | Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Craig.Captain James(Down,E.) | Houston, Robert Paterson | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Kennaway,Rt.Hn. Sir John H. | Stanley, Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk |
| Dalrymple, Viscount | Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm. | Starkey, John R. |
| Doughty, Sir George | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark) |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Lee,Arthur H.(Hants.,Fareh'm | Valentia, Viscount |
| Fardell, Sir T. George | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Finch, Rt, Hon. George H. | Liddell, Henry | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Fletcher, J. S. | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R. |
| Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East) | Lowe, Sir Francis William | Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm |
| Haddock, George R. | Morpeth, Viscount | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Hamilton, Marquess of | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Younger, George |
| Hardy,Laurence(Kent,Ashford | Pease.Herbert Pike(Darlington | |
| Heaton, John Henniker | Ratcliff, Major R. F. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. T. L. Corbett, and Mr. Meysey-Thompson. |
| Helmsley, Viscount | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | |
| Hervey,F. W. F.(BuryS.Edm'ds | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) | Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Gill, A. H. |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Churchill, Winston Spencer | Ginnell, L. |
| Adkins, W. Ryland | Clancy, John Joseph | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbt.John |
| Agnew, George William | Clough, W. | Glendinning. R. G. |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Clynes, J. R. | Glover, Thomas |
| Armstrong, W. C. Heaton | Coats.Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.) | Goddard, Daniel Ford |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Gooch, George Peabody |
| Asquith,Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry | Corbett,CH(Sussex,E.Grinst'd | Grant, Corrie |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Cory, Clifford John | Greenwood, G. (Peterborough). |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Grove, Archibald |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Cox, Harold | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill |
| Barker, John | Craig, Herbert J.(Tynemouth) | Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton |
| Barnard, E. B. | Crean, Eugene | Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B. |
| Beale, W. P. | Crombie, John William | Hall, Frederick |
| Beauchamp, E. | Crosfield, A. H. | Halpin, J. |
| Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham) | Crossley, William J. | Hammond, John |
| Bell, Richard | Dalziel, James Henry | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis |
| Bellairs, Carlyon | Davies, David (MontgomeryCo | Hardie,J.Keir(Merthyr Tydvil) |
| Bennett, E. N. | Devlin CharlesRam say (Galway | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore'r) |
| Bertram, Julius | Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) | Hart-Davies, T. |
| Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Haslam, James (Derbyshire) |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Dillon, John | Haworth, Arthur A. |
| Billson, Alfred | Dolan, Charles Joseph | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Donelan, Captain A. | Hazel, Dr. A. E. |
| Black, Arthur W.(Bedfordshire | Duckworth, James | Hazleton, Richard |
| Blake, Edward | Duffy, William J. | Hedges. A. Paget |
| Boland, John | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) |
| Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey) | Duncanl J. H. (York, Otley) | Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S. |
| Brace, William | Dunn, A. Edward (Cam borne) | Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe) |
| Bramsdon, T. A. | Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall) | Higham, John Sharp |
| Branch, James | Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) | Hobart, Sir Robert |
| Brigg, John | Edwards, Frank (Radnor) | Hogan, Michael |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lanes, Leigh | Elibank, Master of | Hope, John Deans (Fife, West) |
| Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire) | Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward | Hope,W.Bateman(Somerset,N) |
| Bryce, Rt. Hn. James(Aberdeen | Erskine, David C. | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Hudson, Walter |
| Burke, K. Haviland- | Evans, Samuel T. | Illingworth. Percy H. |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Everett, R. Lacey | Jardine, Sir J. |
| Burnyeat, J. D. W. | Faber, G. H. (Boston) | Jenkins, J. |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Fenwick, Charles | Johnson, John (Gateshead) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hn.SydneyCharles | Ferens, T. R. | Johnson. W. (Nuneaton) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Ferguson, R. C. Munro | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Cairns, Thomas | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire |
| Caldwell, James | Findlay, Alexander | Jowett, F. W. |
| Cameron, Robert | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Joyce, Michael |
| Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | Flynn, James Christopher | Kearley, Hudson K. |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry | Kennedy, Vincent Paul |
| Causton,Rt.Hn.RichardKnight | Fuller, John Michael F. | Kilbride, Denis |
| Cawley, Frederick | Fullerton, Hugh | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) |
| Chance, Frederick William | Furness, Sir Christopher | Kitson, Sir James |
| Channing, Francis Allston | Gibb, James (Harrow) | Laidlaw, Robert |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Gilhooly, James | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) |
| Lambert, George | O'Brien, William (Cork) | Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John |
| Lamont, Norman | O'Connor, James (Wicklow,W. | Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie |
| Law, Hugh Alexander | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Smyth, Thomas (Leitrim, S.) |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid | O'Grady, J. | Snowden, P. |
| Layland-Barratt, Francis | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Leese,Sir Joseph F.(Accrington | O'Kelly,James (Roscommon,N | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Lehmann, R. C. | O'Malley, William | Spicer, Albert |
| Lever, W. H. (Cheshire,Wirral) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh. |
| Lewis, John Herbert | Parker, James (Halifax) | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Paul, Herbert | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) |
| Lough, Thomas | Paulton, James Mellor | Sullivan, Donal |
| Lundon, W. | Pearce, William (Limehouse) | Summerbell, T. |
| Lupton, Arnold | Pearson, W.H.M. (Suffolk, Eye) | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Perks, Robert William | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe) |
| Macdonald, J. M. (FalkirkB'ghs) | Pirie, Duncan V. | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E. |
| Maclean, Donald | Power, Patrick Joseph | Thorne, William |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh,Central) | Tomkinson, James |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S. | Price.Robert John (Norfolk,E.) | Toulmin, George |
| MacVeigh.Charles(Donegal, E.) | Priestley, W.E.B. (Bradford,E. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| M'Callum, John M. | Rainy, A. Rolland | Ure, Alexander |
| M'Crae, George | Raphael, Herbert H. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Reddy, M. | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| M'Kenna, Reginald | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Walsh, Stephen |
| M'Kiliop, W. | Redmond, William (Clare) | Ward, W. Dudley (South'mptn |
| M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester) | Richards, T.F. (Wolverh'mpt'n | Wardle, George J. |
| M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Richardson, A. | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| M'Micking, Major G. | Rickett, J. Compton | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) |
| Maddison, Frederick | Ridsdale, E. A. | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney |
| Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
| Marnham, F. J. | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) | Weir, James Galloway |
| Massie, J. | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Whitbread, Howard |
| Masterman, C. F. G. | Robertson, Rt.Hn. E.(Dundee) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Meagher, Michael | Robertson,Sir G.Scott(Bradfrd | White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire) |
| Meehan, Patrick A. | Robertson, J. M (Tyneside) | White, Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Menzies, Walter | Robinson, S. | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Micklem, Nathaniel | Roe, Sir Thomas | Whitehead, Rowland |
| Molteno, Percy Alport | Rose, Charles Day | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Mond, A. | Rowlands, J. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Montagu, E. S. | Runciman, Walter | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Mooney, J. J. | Russell, T. W. | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) | Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford) | Williamson, A.(Elgin and Nairn |
| Morley, Rt. Hon. John | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough) |
| Morrell, Philip | Scarisbrick, T. T. L. | Wilson, J.W.(Worcestersh. N.) |
| Morse, L. L. | Schwann,Chas. E.(Manchester) | Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.) |
| Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | Seaverns, J. H. | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Murphy, John | Seddon, J. | Winfrey, R. |
| Murray, James | Seely, Major J. B. | Woodhouse,SirJT(Huddersf'd |
| Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncastr | Shackleton, David James | Young, Samuel |
| Nolan, Joseph | Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.) | Yoxall, James Henry |
| Norton, Capt. Cecil William | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel | |
| Nussey, Thomas Willans | Sheehy, David | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. v |
| O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid. | Shipman, Dr. John G. | |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Silcock, Thomas Ball |
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSON moved to omit the words "to his knowledge." It appeared to him that knowledge was as essential in the one case as in the other, and that if it could be inferred in the one it could in the other. If the previous Amendment had been accepted it would have made the matter clear, but as the clause stood a distinction was drawn between making use of "any forged or counterfeit statement as to his character or previous employment," which did not 386 carry with it the word "knowingly," and "any statement as to his character or previous employment," which required "knowledge." It was difficult to conceive how a man could use a false statement as to his character or previous employment without knowing it was false. This Amendment was to make the whole paragraph clear and uniform.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, line 2, to leave out the words 'to his knowledge.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
§ MR. HALDANEsaid it was absolutely essential that the word "knowledge" should remain in this part of the clause. The earlier part referred to a forged statement which on the face of it was evidence of guilty knowledge, but in the second case guilty knowledge was essential but was not implied.
§ LORD R. CECILsaid it was quite clear that in the earlier part of this clause the words, "makes use of any forged or counterfeit statement," meant the use of a statement that was forged or counterfeit to a man's knowledge. The right hon. Gentleman did not contemplate making it an offence unless the person using such statement knew it was a forged or counterfeit statement. There must be a guilty intention to constitute a crime at all, and that was so in the case of a forged or counterfeit statement or in that of a false statement. There was no distinction that he could see between a forged statement and a false statement. In either case the essential part was that it must be known to be forged or false. As the Bill was drafted, however, it would be an offence to make a forged statement even if it were not known by the person to be forged. Just as it was said to be quite clear in the earlier part that the forged statement must be forged to a man's knowledge, so if they left out these words it would be quite clear that the false statement must be false to his knowledge. If they inserted these words they would throw doubt on the meaning in the earlier part of the clause. It would suggest to the court that it was enough that the documents should be forged, whether forged to the person's knowledge or not. He hoped the Government, therefore, would accept the Amendment.
§ MR. GEORGE FABER (York)said the offence in question came under two heads, the man who made use of a forged statement and the man who made use of a false statement. Any alteration such as that now proposed would be wrong.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. ASQUITH, Fife, E.)reminded the Committee that this was a Bill which had already passed the House of Lords, where it had been subjected to careful scrutiny. What was the proposal? That it should be an offence for which a man might be summarily convicted to make use of any statement in regard to his previous employment which was false in any particular. That was the effect of the hon. Baronet's Amendment. A man who was perfectly innocent might be convicted, and a more monstrous proposal coming from the front Bench he never heard of. Under those circumstances he hoped the Committee would reject the Amendment.
§ LORD BALCARRESsaid that apparently the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not aware that this precise point was raised on the previous Amendment. [" No, no."] At least the analogy was close, and the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite had said that he saw no objection to the Amendment.
§ MR. ASQUITHBut this is an entirely different thing.
§ LORD R. CECILexpressed surprise at the tone adopted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was a cardinal principle of the English law that nobody could be convicted without knowledge that he had been guilty of an offence. Whatever the wording was the courts would always require not only that the facts were different from what the soldier or sailor said they were but that he knew them to be different. Therefore it was quite unnecessary to insert the words proposed in order to safeguard the position which the Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to think might arise.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he wished to say a word in deprecation of the severity of the tone which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had adopted in dealing with this Amendment. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that any Bill which came from the House of Lords should be received with great respect, but that did not preclude members of the Opposition from considering some 389 of its details and suggesting improvements. Before the Chancellor of the Exchequer intervened, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War had informed the Committee that knowledge was a necessary element in both, these offences, and had said he was quite ready to accept the Amendment to introduce the word "knowingly" in the earlier part of the clause. If knowledge was a necessary element in each of these offences either it should be introduced in each case or else left out in each, case, but to deliberately leave out "knowingly" in the earlier part and leave it in as applied to the other offence would cause confusion. He thought the Amendment was quite a reasonable one.
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid he was sorry if his tone had conveyed any want of respect. He thought there was the plainest possible distinction between the two cases. To omit the word suggested in this instance would be a most dangerous thing, although to insert it in the other case would not have been dangerous but unnecessary.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD (Liverpool, West Derby)suggested to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that in discussing the difference between knowledge as applied to the use of a forged or counterfeit statement, and knowledge as applied to the use of a mere statement that was false he had gone entirely astray. The Committee would find that this was so if they looked not at the legal jargon of the phrase but at the common sense application of the clause. What was the clause? It related to the case of a soldier or a sailor making use of a character or recommendation for his own purposes. It was perfectly obvious that a soldier or a sailor making use of a counterfeit document might do so bona fide. He might have been making use of a recommendation or a character which unfortunately had been forged in the way in which it was signed. They had made it an offence to make use of a document which actually was forged, although the man might be perfectly innocent, and not know that the document was signed in an irregular way. He now came to the 390 case of a man making a false statement. The proposal was to leave out the words "to his knowledge." The Chancellor of the Exchequer had suggested that a man might put forward a false statement about his own character, and not know that it was false. Surely a man must know whether a statement about his character was right or not. It was perfectly redundant to retain the words. The words were wanted in the previous clause.
§ COLONEL LEGGE (St. George's, Hanover Square)appealed to the Government to accept the Amendment. The arguments used on the Ministerial side in favour of the Bill were very peculiar. The Secretary of State for War had recommended the Bill because it was a Unionist Bill, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said it ought to be accepted because it came from the House of Lords. He knew that the Unionists were a weak minority, but that was no reason why they should be trampled upon in this way.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 2 stand part of the Bill."
§ LORD R. CECILsaid the offence of giving a false written statement as to character was a serious one, and he wished to know why it was made a summary jurisdiction offence.
§ LORD WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBY (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)said a portion of the clause might have a deterrent effect upon recruiting for the Army. The previous Secretary of State for War made it a great point that the people recruited for the Army should be of the highest character, and hon. Members hoped that the present Secretary of State for War would carry out that excellent policy. It appeared to him that it was proposed to place a heavy fine on a man who, having been asked to give a certificate of character to a man wishing to join the Army, did not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. He wished to know whether anyone would be liable to be haled before the magistrates and fined £20 if in giving a certificate of character to a man who 391 desired to enter the Army he omitted to state that the person had been drunk some night and had not behaved himself properly. On the other hand, if the certificate stated that the man got drunk would the right hon. Gentleman still take him into the Army?
§ MR. HALDANEsaid the introduction of this clause did not amount to a new principle or policy. For years past it had been part of the law of the land that a person who made a false statement with respect to any person entering the Navy was liable to a penalty. It was absolutely essential that there should be something of the kind in the Army also. Fortunately, the kind of case mentioned by the noble Lord could not arise, because they had been successful in keeping in the words "to his knowledge." As to the necessity for the clause, he would mention a case which actually happened not long ago. It was illustrative of a long string of cases which he could mention. A man presented himself for enlistment, bringing with him a certificate of character to the effect that he had been in satisfactory circumstances for the last seven years. He was enlisted, but, getting into trouble afterwards, it was necessary for the police to inquire into his character. What turned out to be the truth was that the man had been in prison during the seven years. That character had been given to him by his brother-in-law, who wanted to get rid of him. What was asked for by this Bill was the necessary advantage of the rule that it was an offence for a man to give a false character knowing it to be false. That was the justification for this clause.
§ MR. CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.)said that he did not understand whether this provision applied to any person seeking employment as a soldier or a sailor. Supposing a boy had been guilty of petty theft, and his master did not think it necessary to prosecute him, or the circumstances of sufficient importance to be included in the written character he might give the boy; and supposing in the course of a year or two that boy wished to enter the Army or Navy, was that master to be liable to the penalty specified in Clause 1?
§ SIR SAMUEL SCOTT (Marylebone, W.)wished to know whether the auxiliary forces and the reserve were included in the phrase in Clause 2, "His Majesty's naval, military, or marine forces."
§ MR. HALDANEwas understood to say that they were.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid that he concluded from the remarks of the Secretary of State for War that the Navy had already the powers provided in for this clause. He therefore suggested that the word "naval" should be left out.
§ MR. HALDANEwas understood to say that it was necessary to include "naval" in connection with false statements.
§ LORD R. CECILasked what there was essentially wicked about giving a false character to a person who wanted to be a soldier or a sailor when there was no penalty of £20 inflicted upon a person who gave a false character to a man who was to be taken into civilian personal service?
§ MR. HALDANEsaid that the question of domestic service had already been covered by the old statute of 1762; but it had to be covered in regard to recruits for the Army or Navy. He had already quoted the case of a brother-in-law who gave a character to a man who had been seven years in prison.
§ LORD WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBYsaid that that story did not really touch the point raised by his hon. friend. There was no getting over the fact that many men entered the Army who were not of an absolutely blameless character. If a man could not ask an individual or any member of his household to give him a character so as to allow him to get into the Army, it would tie his hands enormously. One might know that a man had a weak point, just as a man who wanted to sell a horse did not give away all its weak spots. But this man might be a most excellent man for the Army; and yet by this clause an employer such as he had described was to be liable to a penalty of £20 for not having told the whole truth 393 about his former employee. He remembered the President of the Local Government Board making a speech in which he said that he did not think very much of these changes, and that he thought that in many instances some of the Arab boys about the streets would make better soldiers than the boys who attended the Sunday school every Sunday. If an employer or a friend were required to give a boy a character and to tell the whole truth about him, there would be found great difficulty in filling up certain regiments in the Army.
§ MR. GEORGE FABER (York)said that the penalty in the first clause differed seriously from one part of the second clause. The first clause said that the penalty was imprison-
§ ment not exceeding one month or a fine not exceeding £20; and in the case of a second or subsequent offence imprisonment with or without hard labour, and a term not exceeding three months. But in the second clause the penalty was a fine of £20 with no alternative at all.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid that this was really the creation of a new offence which was not known at common law, and it was thought right to put the penalty under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 332; Noes, 73. (Division List No. 74.)
397| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) | Burke, E. Haviland- | Donelan, Captain A. |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Duckworth, James |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Burnyeat, J. D. W. | Duffy, William J. |
| Adkins, W. Ryland | Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness |
| Agnew, George William | Buxton, Rt.Hn. SydneyCharles | Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley) |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Byles, William Pollard | Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) |
| Alden, Percy | Cairns, Thomas | Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall) |
| Ambrose, Robert | Caldwell, James | Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) |
| Armitage, R. | Cameron, Robert | Elibank, Master of |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | Ellis, Rt. Hn. John Edward |
| Asquith, Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry | Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Erskine, David C. |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Causton,Rt. Hn. Richard Knight | Esmonde, Sir Thomas |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E. | Cawley, Frederick | Evans, Samuel T. |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Chance, Frederick William | Everett, R. Lacey |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Cheetham, John Frederick | Faver, G. H. (Boston) |
| Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Fenwick, Charles |
| Barnard, E. B. | Churchill, Winston Spencer | Ferens, T. R. |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham) | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace |
| Beale, W. P. | Clough, W. | Findlay, Alexander |
| Beauchamp, E. | Clynes, J. R. | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham) | Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew,W.) | Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry |
| Bell, Richard | Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Fuller, John Michael F. |
| Bellairs, Carlyon | Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W. | Fullerton, Hugh |
| Benn,W.(T'w'r Hamlets,S.Geo. | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Furness, Sir Christopher |
| Bertram, Julius | Cooper, G. J. | Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford,S |
| Billson, Alfred | Corbett,CH(Sussex,E.Grinst'd | Gibb, James (Harrow) |
| Black,Arthur W.(Bedfordshire | Cory, Clifford John | Gilhooly, James |
| Boland, John | Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Gill, A. H. |
| Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey) | Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Ginnell, L. |
| Brace, William | Crean, Eugene | Gladstone, Rt.Hn. Herbert John |
| Bramsdon, T. A. | Crombie, John William | Glendinning, R. G. |
| Branch, James | Crosfield, A. H. | Glover, Thomas |
| Brigg, John | Crossley, William J. | Goddard, Daniel Ford |
| Bright, J. A. | Dalziel, James Henry | Gooch, George Pea body |
| Brocklehurst, W. D. | Davies,David(Montgomery Co. | Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) |
| Brodie, H. C. | Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward |
| Brunner,J.F.L.(Lanes., Leigh) | Devlin, CharlesRamsay(Galway | Grove, Archibald |
| Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire) | Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) | Gulland, John W. |
| Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs) | Dickson. Poynder, Sir John P. | Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B. |
| Buckmaster, Stanley O. | Dolan, Charles Joseph | Hall, Frederick |
| Halpin, J. | Marnham, F. J. | Seely, Major J. B. |
| Hammond, John | Massie, J. | Shackleton, David James |
| Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis | Masterman, C. F. G. | Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (HawickB.) |
| Hardie,J.Keir(MerthyrTydvil) | Meagher, Michael | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel |
| Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r) | Meehan, Patrick A. | Sheehy, David |
| Hart-Davies, T. | Menzies, Walter | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Harwood, George | Micklem, Nathaniel | Silcock, Thomas Ball |
| Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Molteno, Percy Alport | Simon, John Allsebrook |
| Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Mond, A. | Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John |
| Haworth, Arthur A. | Money, L. G. Chiozza | Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie |
| Hazel, Dr. A. E. | Montagu, E. S. | Smyth, Thomas (Leitrim, S.) |
| Hazleton, Richard | Montgomery, H. H. | Snowden, P. |
| Hedges, A. Paget | Mooney, J. J. | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Henderson, J.M.(Aberdeen,W.) | Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S. | Morley, Rt. Hon. John | Spicer, Albert |
| Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe) | Morrell, Philip | Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh.) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Morse, L. L. | Stewart, Halley (Greenock) |
| Hobart, Sir Robert | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | Strachey. Sir Edward |
| Hogan, Michael | Murphy, John | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) |
| Hope, John Deans (Fife, West) | Murray, James | Stuart, James (Sunderland) |
| Hope,W. Bateman(Somerset,N | Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r | Sullivan, Donal |
| Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Nolan, Joseph | Summerbell, T. |
| Hudson, Walter | Norman, Henry | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Hutton, Alfred Eddison | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Illingworth, Percy N. | O'Brien.Kendal (TipperaryMid | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Isaacs, Rufus Daniel | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E. |
| Jardine, Sir J. | O'Connor,James (Wicklow.W.) | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Jenkins, J. | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Thorne, William |
| Johnson, John (Gateshead) | O'Grady, J. | Tomkinson. James |
| Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | O'Kelly.James (Roscommon,N | Torrance, A. M. |
| Jones,David Brynmor(Swansea | O'Malley, William | Toulmin, George |
| Jones, Leif (Appleby) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Ure, Alexander |
| Jones,William (Carnarvonshire | O'Shee, James John | Verney, F. W. |
| Jowett, F. W. | Parker, James (Halifax) | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Joyce, Michael | Paul, Herbert | Wallace, Robert |
| Kearley, Hudson E. | Pearce, William (Limehouse) | Walsh, Stephen |
| Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk,Eye | Walters, John Tudor |
| Kilbride, Denis | Perks, Robert William | Ward,W. Dudley (Southampton |
| Kincaid-Smith, Captain | Philips,J.Wynford (Pembroke | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) |
| Laidlaw, Robert | Pirie, Duncan V. | Wason.John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Lambert, George | Power, Patrick Joseph | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
| Law, Hugh Alexander | Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh Central | Weir, James Galloway |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid | Price,Robert John (Norfolk, E. | Whitbread, Howard |
| Layland-Barratt, Francis | Priestley, W.E.B.(Bradford, E. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Leese,Sir JosephF. (Accrington) | Rainy, A. Rolland | White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire) |
| Lehmann, R. C. | Raphael, Herbert H. | White, Luke (York, E.R.) |
| Levy, Maurice | Reddy, M. | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Lewis, John Herbert | Redmond, William (Clare) | Whitehead, Rowland |
| Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Renton, Major Leslie | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Lough, Thomas | Richards, T. F.(Wolverh'mpt'n | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Lundon, W. | Richardson, A. | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Lupton, Arnold | Rickett, J. Compton | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Luttrell, Hugh Fownes | Ridsdale, E. A. | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen) |
| Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) | Williamson, A. (Elgin and Nairn) |
| Mackarness, Frederic C. | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Wilson, Hon. C.H.W.(Hull, W.) |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Robertson, Rt.Hn. E. (Dundee) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S. | Robertson.Sir G.Scott(Bradfrd | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
| MacVeigh,Charles (Donegal,E.) | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | Wilson. J. W.(Worcestersh. N.) |
| M'Callum, John M. | Robinson, S. | Wilson. P. W. (St. Pancras, S.) |
| M'Crae, George | Rose, Charles Day | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Rowlands, J. | Winfrey, R. |
| M'Kenna, Reginald | Runciman. Walter | Woodhouse.Sir J.T(Huddersf'd |
| M'Killop, W. | Russell, T. W. | Young, Samuel |
| M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester) | Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford) | Yoxall, James Henry |
| M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | |
| M'Micking, Major G. | Scarisbrick, T. T. L. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—.Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease. |
| Maddison, Frederick | Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester | |
| Mallet, Charles E. | Sears, J. E. | |
| Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln | Seaverns, J. H. | |
| Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston | Seddon, J. |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Hood,Rt Hn.Sir AlexF. | Fell, Arthur | Nield, Herbert |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens |
| Anstruther-Gray, Major | Fletcher, J. S. | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Ashley, W. W. | Forster, Henry William | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt,Hon.SirH. | Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East) | Rawlinson, John Frederick P. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Haddock, George R. | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hamilton, Marquess of | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester) | Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B. | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Hay. Hon. Claude George | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Heaton, John Henniker | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
| Bowles, G. Stewart | Helmsley, Viscount | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hervey, F.W.F.(BuryS.Edm'ds | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) | Starkey, John R. |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.) | Stone, Sir Benjamin |
| Cave, George | Houston, Robert Paterson | Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark) |
| Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor C. W. | Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm. | Valentia, Viscount |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Lee, ArthurH. (Hants., Fareham | Wilson, A.Stanley (York, E.R.) |
| Clarke, Sir Edward (City London | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Liddell, Henry | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. G. Stuart- |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Younger, George |
| Craig, Captain James (Down. E. | Lowe, Sir Francis William | |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Charles Craig and Lord Willoughby de Eresby. |
| Dalrymple, Viscount | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | |
| Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon | Morpeth, Viscount | |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Muntz, Sir Philip A. |
Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause 3:—
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 3 stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid that in order to understand this clause it was necessary to refer to the Naval Enlistment Act of 1853. He was against the multiplying of manufactured offences. The hundreds of new offences set up by this present clause was only one illustration of how these offences could be multiplied. Under the Naval Enlistment Act of 1853, any person who sought to be enrolled by means of false statements was to be deemed a rogue and a vagabond within the meaning of another Act 5, George IV, cap 83. All the offences were taken out of that Act and were included in 16 and 17 Victoria, and the effect of passing this clause would be to make a man a rogue and a vagaband if he sought to be enrolled in the Naval Reserve by means of a statement not strictly true. What he wished to know was whether this clause extended to such bodies as the Naval Artillery Reserve of South Wales, and other bodies which were not regular but volunteer forces. If so, it was in his opinion a mistake. If the Navy and Army had been carried on successfully with regard to these matters 398 for some hundreds of years, were not the Committee making a mistake in embodying in the statute a fresh set of penalties which were never known before and which were not required. This was a very serious question. In all the great ports of the Kingdom endeavours were being made to supplement the Regular Forces by enlisting voluntary service. If it was intended to penalise a man by making him a rogue and a vagabond because he endeavoured to get enrolled in the service by means of a statement not quite accurate, he thought it was carrying the authority too far and that Parliament should hesitate before it enforced these penalties on the voluntary services.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid the true use of this clause was this. People entered, with false characters, and by false statements, into the naval as into the military service. That matter was provided for by the special provision contained in Clause 16 of the old Naval Enlistment Act of 1853. But, comparatively recently, the somewhat surprising decision had been given that the penalties for entering the Navy by means of a false character or false statements did not apply to men entering the Naval Reserve. The old theory was to give a soldier or a sailor a long period of service and then pass him out of the 399 service altogether. The present system was to give him a short term of service and then for him to enter the Reserve where he was kept sufficiently trained and was liable to be called out for service of the Crown if necessary. Under these conditions, and by being paid by the Crown, he was just as much in the service as if he were in the barracks or on board ship. It was decided that, as the Naval Reserve was the creature of statute and came into existence after the passing of the old Naval Enlistment Act of 1853, therefore, the man who got into the Naval Reserve by means of false statements could not be punished under that statute. It was owing to a technicality that that conclusion was come to, and this clause was inserted in order to enable a man entering the Reserve under such circumstances to be punished.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDThe right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question as to whether the provision applies to such bodies as the old Naval Artillery Reserve.
§ MR. HALDANENot unless they join the Reserve. The Army Reserve Act was an Act by which anybody could be enlisted in the Reserve whether they had been soldiers or not, and in fact many Volunteers were enlisted. It did not matter whether the men entering the Reserve had been Volunteers or old sailors. The question was whether they entered under the Naval Reserve Act.
§ Clause 4 agreed to.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment; read the third time, and passed.