HC Deb 01 July 1907 vol 177 cc441-62

Order for Consideration, as amended, read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered."

DR. RUTHERFORD (Middlesex, Brentford)

moved that this Bill be recommitted to the former Committee with an instruction to insert clauses to. provide that the control and management of King Edward's Hospital Fund should be vested in the president and council, and that the council be constituted on representative lines. He said that his action was dictated by no hostility to the Fund started by His Majesty the King in 1897 in commemoration of Queen Victoria. By doing this, His Majesty had dug another deep well of affection and gratitude in the hearts of the medical profession and of the people of this country, especially of the sick poor. The Fund, owing to His Majesty's guidance, had been extremely beneficent, and had opened new sources of supply, and had tapped rich veins of support for the London hospitals which had been crippled in their finances. It was now the chief reservoir for feeding the funds for the support of the hospitals, and many persons who had previously given their subscriptions to particular hospitals now contributed to this Royal reservoir. The Hospital Sunday Fund in 1905 amounted to £75,000, the Hospital Saturday Fund to £34,000, while the King's Hospital Fund reached,£111,000, so that the latter was the richest source of revenue for the hospitals of the Metropolis. Besides that, the King's Hospital Fund had now a capital of over £1,000,000. The promoters of this Bill could have done what they aimed at by Royal Charter, or by Incorporation by Act of Parliament. Clause G of the Bill enacted that— The direction, control, and management of the affairs and property of the corporation shall, subject to the provisions of the Act, be vested in the president and general council; and the members of the general council shall from time to time be appointed by the president as he may think lit, so however that the number of councillors so far as may be practicable, shall not be less than twelve. All the councillors and members of committees constituted under this Act shall hold office until the end of the year in which they had been appointed, and may be re-appointed from year 10 year. By Clause 7 the president— may from time to time, by writing under his hand, constitute committees for the administration of the funds and property of the corporation, or for any of the purposes of this Act, and appoint the members thereof, and may delegate to any committee all or any of his powers under this Act…, which power if delegated to a committee of two persons shall be deemed to be sufficiently exercised by each of such persons signing an approval in writing of the Act approval thereof is required. Further, the president— may appoint and remove any treasurers; secretaries, auditors and other officers of the corporation and fix their remuneration, and he shall have power in his sole discretion to direct the distribution and allocation of the Funds. It would be seen, therefore, that the president had full and complete power, unlimited, uncontrolled, and unchecked. Let them contrast this constitution with the constitution of the Patriotic Fund as established by the Act of 1903, and it would be found that that constitution was on very definite and representative lines. The constitution of the Patriotic Fund was to be found in the schedule of the Act. The corporation was to consist of twelve members nominated by His Majesty; the Lords-Lieutenant of counties; the chairman for the time being of every council of a county, or if that chairman was unable or unwilling to act the county council might appoint some other person in place of the chairman; of every person for the time being entitled to the style of Lord Mayor, and the Mayor for the time being of every county borough in England, Wales, and Ireland; of every person for the time being entitled to the style of Lord Provost, and the Provost for the time being of every Royal, Parliamentary, o?? Police Burgh in Scotland with a population of, or exceeding 50,000; and of any number of persons, not exceeding seven, whom the council of the corporation might think fit to co-opt as members, each of whom would be nominated as the representative of a charitable fund founded for the like purposes as the corporation. And the schedule went on to say that the executive committee should consist of not less than twelve nor more than twenty members of the corporation, of whom three should constitute a quorum. Four members in the first instance, and thereafter one member of the committee should be appointed by the Treasury, two by the First Lord of the Admiralty, two by the Secretary of State for War, and the remainder by the general council. According to the present constitution of the general council of King Edward's Hospital Fund, the principle of representation was well recognised indeed. The Church of England was represented by the Bishop of London and the Bishop of Southwark; the Roman Catholic Church by Archbishop Bourne; the Free Church Council by the Rev. Dr. J. Guinness Rogers; the Wesleyan Conference by the Rev. Dr. T. Bowman Stephenson; and the Jews by the Chief Rabbi, the Rev. Dr. Adler. Then there were the Presidents of the Hospital Sunday and the Hospital Saturday Funds, the Chairman of the London County Council, the Governor of the Bank of England, the President of the Royal College of Physicians, the President of the Royal College of Surgeons, and other gentlemen nominated. All that he and his friends asked for was that a representative council should be included in the present Bill which would meet public requirements, and its constitution could be put in a schedule to the Bill, as was done in the case of the Royal Patriotic Fund Corporation. That representative council might consist of so many members to be nominated by the president, and the remainder to be elected—one by the Corporation of the City of London, one by the London County Council, one by the London University, one by the Royal College of Physicians, one by the Royal College of Surgeons, two by the British Medical Association which represented 20,000 physicians and surgeons, 3,000 of whom practised in the metropolis, and who gave their services free to the hospitals; one by the Hospital Sunday Fund, one by the Hospital Saturday Fund, and one by the Central Hospital Council. He felt that it was not in the interest of the fund that the whole power should lie in the hands of the president, nor was it fair to the president himself, because it would place him in a false position, impose upon him great responsibility, and lay him open to criticism, some of it of a very unkindly character. The constitution of the corporation of the fund as provided for by the Bill was without precedent for a hundred years, and was contrary to the spirit of the times. The chief defence of the Bill was that the fund was a private one. It was true that in its initial stage it might have been a private fund, but now it had become a public fund for public purposes, and that was becoming more true every day. They had been told that Amendments had been offered by the promoters of the Bill, but these consisted only of an offer that the Prime Minister, the Lord Chancellor, and the Governor of the Bank of England should be allowed to nominate the president when it became essential. But it was no concession at all. In the opinion of a large section of the medical profession and those interested in the hospitals and their management, the president would be placed in an injudicious and unfortunate position. In the Committee on Unopposed Bills, the measure, received drastic censure on the part of certain Members. There was a Royal Commission sitting at the present time to inquire into the distress existing, the administration of the Poor Law, and the question of medical relief, and he thought that was a reason for delaying the further consideration of the Bill during its recommittal. They did not know what the recommendations of the Commission might be in the direction of municipal control. In foreign countries must of the hospitals were under municipal control and received State aid, and they did not know what the Commission might decide with reference to those points. He appealed to the Government not to make this a Government question by putting on the Government whips. They wished the future of the hospitals of London to be assured and in the interests of the hospitals and in the interests of the present promoters of the Bill he hoped they would see their way to accept his Amendment.

*MR. TREVELYAN, (Yorkshire, W.R., Elland)

in seconding the Amendment said that everyone in the House was very anxious that the Bill should be passed, as they realised the value of the fund. He considered, however, that it would be surprising if some of its provisions were passed without protest and comment by the present House of Commons. The main issue they were raising did not concern merely the present moment. What they challenged was that the Bill was to establish a constitution in perpetuity and create a governing body which was unchangeable, unless they resorted to the invidious proceeding of passing an Act of Parliament to supersede it, if its administration of the fund proved to be unpopular. The question therefore was not for the present but for the future; there had been no complaint of the administration of the fund in the past; on the contrary, there had been nothing but praise. The council lad been chosen with discretion and the same discretion had been shown, in the opinion of everybody, in the disposal of the money. There had been universal testimony to the tact with which the administration had been conducted. But dealing with the future and with personalities of which they knew nothing he must point out that they were handing over in the next generation these enormous sums upon which the London hospitals would depend, to the entire and unfettered control of some person who might not have the qualities of the past or the present president, or, having the qualities, might not exercise them because he was not so deeply interested in these funds. He hoped the Government would consider the enormous public and not private interests which were involved in the large sums of money which the president and the council would have to administer. There was at the present moment the considerable amount of £100,000 being disposed of by the president and the council, and it was an increasing sum, because as the result of the rising popularity of the fund the number of the subscriptions given to the different hospitals had been diminished. If all the donations and legacies to hospitals were now going to this central fund, more and more the London hospitals would have to depend for their prosperity upon the administrators and distributors of it. The sums of £500 to £3,000 might be vital. It was a very serious, dangerous, and questionable power to give a council of this kind. What they would like to see in the Bill was some security for the continuance of the present wise administration of these hospitals; but in the system which it was proposed to set up the council might, if it pleased, dictate the policy of a hospital in re turn for money. There was a growing public opinion in favour of public management, and the time for large and uncertain charity in the judgment of some people had passed. The hon. Member for Brentford had mentioned the Royal College of Physicians, the Royal College of Surgeons, and the Medical Association as bodies which should be represented, but what he wished to see in the Bill was a constitution making the council representative, not only of the medical profession, but of public bodies also. The constitution should make the council representative of the medical profession by including the bodies he had mentioned and also the City Corporation, the London County Council, and in order to enable the views of those managing the hospitals to be heard he thought it would have have been a wise thing to have some representatives of the hospitals themselves in the persons of those who were on the Central Hospital Council. No doubt it would be pointed out that the hospitals themselves were beneficiares of the fund, but they should have some power of representation through the central council. He could not understand why it was so difficult for the advisers of the promoters of the Bill to accept a proposal of that kind, as he was practically suggesting to perpetuate a kind of composition of the council actually in existence hitherto. He merely wished to secure the basis of the right of representation for bodies hitherto honoured by invitation. In fact all the proposals would do was to stereotype and make obligatory on his successors what the wisdom of the first president had dictated. Nor would his proposal violate the ideas which were prevalent at the time of the foundation of the fund. In the original letter in regard to it these words occurred— It may be desirable in the future to seek the assistance of representatives chosen by the hospitals; but for the first year we shall rely upon the co-operation of the Distribution Committee of the Hospital Sunday Fund. For these reasons he supported his hon. friend's suggestion that the Bill should be sent back to the Committee in order that it might be strengthened by adding the representative element which would add to the popularity and usefulness of the fund. He believed that this would be the case if it was known not to depend in the future on the continuance of the great interest of one man. The proposal he made would insure the check of public opinion, and well-informed professional opinion, while it would not materially alter the management of the fund as it was conducted at present.

Amendment proposed— To leave out from the words 'be,' to the end of the Question, and add the words 'recommitted to the former Committee.' "—(Dr. Rutherford.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question."

MR. JOWETT (Bradford, W.)

said he supported the Amendment, not only for the reasons given by the proposer and seconder, but for other reasons of a far wider character than those already given. He respectfully objected to the fundamental principle upon which the Bill was drawn, and with all due respect to H.R.H. the Prince of Wales he could not agree that any one man should be placed in such a position of power as the provisions of this Bill would place him in. It seemed to him at any rate that on the other side of the House, if the professions which they heard from time to time were sincere, as he believed they were, one might expect a very large vote indeed in favour of the Amendment and against the principle upon which the measure was drawn. As had been said already by the two Members who had spoken, the fund was already a very important one and was likely as time went on to become more and more important. The mover went so far as to say that it would be the chief source from which the support of the London hospitals would be drawn in future. The fund would be made up of donations and subscriptions from members of all classes of society, and he was not satisfied even with the suggestion of the mover and seconder that the various medical organisations, the College of Physicians, the College of Surgeons, and the Medical Council, should have representation. That would not satisfy him, and he ventured most respectfully, feeling that on this matter he was entitled to speak for many others besides himself, to ask what appeared to him to be n, most pertinent question, and it was, "Where do the people come in?" Nothing short of some form of representation would, he thought, satisfy the reasonable and just demands of those people who would sub-scribe in years to come to this fund. He objected to the suggestion that there should be this over-powering representation of the medical profession guiding and controlling these hospitals. He admitted that it was true, as the seconder of the Resolution had said, that to appoint these members of the medical profession would be only stereotyping what had been the practice under which the late president acted, but whether what was done was done by a single president, however exalted a personage he might be, or by the work of any committee he might select or selected by this House, he objected to the over-powering representation of the medical profession. In the past the public had to his mind serious ground for complaint against the medical profession for the way they had utilised public funds to support their own professional interests in education, and he thought it was true that between 1897 and 1903 no less than £40,000 of money subscribed by the public for the conduct of hospitals supposed to be maintained for the relief of the poor went to support medical students. If public support was needed for medical schools let that support be directly applied for. Under the present system all kinds of subsidiary interests connected with the medical profession were sought to be served. The fund was largely controlled by the medical profession without any real representation of the people. They all knew that prominent medical men sought assiduously for honorary posts in connection with our great hospitals, and under such a system there would be, with the committee largely composed of the medical profession, power to exclude any man. It had also been suggested, and he believed with truth, that the medical profession utilised these hospitals unfairly for the training of future members of the profession, and that surgical operations were conducted by men who would not be allowed to carry out such operations outside upon richer patients. All that had been said pointed to the necessity for representative control over this fund, and in the belief that the rejection of the Bill, or action antagonistic to the Bill, would emphasise, the necessity, he supported the Amendment.

THE ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir JOHN WALTON, Leeds, S.)

said there were one or two features connected with the constitution of the fund which he thought should be borne in mind by Members who criticised the provisions of the Bill. It should be recollected that the fund was in existence, and that it had been under the control of the president, to whom it was proposed to give power by legislation. There could be no doubt that the very great affection and regard of the people of this country for the Royal Family had created the fund at present at the disposal of those; in whose hands it was placed for the benefit of the hospitals of the Metropolis. It might be said the Bill might have been avoided by the grant of a Royal charter to perpetuate a constitution which most commended itself to those who advised the Sovereign in regard to this matter, and that was for some time under consideration. But it was the wish of the highest persons interested in the proposal that the matter should be left to the consideration of Parliament, and it was intimated that any provision Parliament should think wise would be cordially accepted by those entrusted with the administration of the fund. Therefore the Bill passed through the other House and had been considered by a Committee of the House of Commons. There was a weakness in the Bill indicated and remedied in the House of Lords. No one had cavilled at the powers of the present president during the time he had been graciously disposed to discharge the duties of the office, but it was contemplated that on the resignation of the Prince of Wales of the position of president there might be a question in reference to his successor and the qualifications his successor might possess for the discharge of the duties and responsibilities legislation might cast upon him. That suggestion was put before the House of Lords' Committee, and a provision was introduced that on the termination of tenure of office by the present president the office should pass to his successor, to be chosen on the unanimous recommendation of the very prominent individuals who were named in the Bill. When the Prince of Wales resigned his post as president it would be necessary for the Lord Chancellor, the Prime Minister, and the Governor of the Bank of England for the time being to concur in the recommendation of some Member of the Royal Family whom they considered qualified to accept the post now occupied by the Prince of Wales, the member of the Royal Family being son, grandson, or brother to the Sovereign. Therefore, there was assurance that three persons holding high and responsible public positions would unite in recommending a qualified president; but if they did not concur, if they were unable to agree in their recommendation, then the duties of president would devolve into the hands of three persons; there would no longer be a president, but three governors. The public, therefore, had the guarantee of a unanimous recommendation with all the responsibility of the three high officials mentioned, or failing that there was the responsibility of the three persons who would fill the place occupied as president by the Prince of Wales. Then it was said the council should be elected; but the difficulty was to give the council an elective character, seeing that it was almost impossible to specify a constituency to carry out election. It had been suggested that it should largely consist of the medical profession, and, again, it had been suggested that subscribers to the fund should be the electorate, and if that was adopted he believed that the majority, and those who contributed the largest amounts, had no wish to interfere with the discretion of the Royal Family. If these were not to be the electorate, then was it to be the county council, or who? The fund had been in existence for ten years, and had been exceedingly successful; it had risen to a large amount, and its administration in the past was an indication of what it should be in the future. If reference was made to the names of the present council it would be found a representative council in the best sense of the term. It was clear there would be a large representative element on the council.

DR. RUTHERFORD

All we ask is that the representative element shall be actually inserted in the Bill.

SIR JOHN WALTON

said he was trying to show that that was not necessary. If public confidence was to be secured and public support of the fund maintained, it was obvious that the counsels of prudence which had regulated the constitution of the council as it now stood would continue to regulate its constitution. If it was found that a large representative element was necessary for these purposes they might rest assured the representative element would be secured in future. It was exceedingly undesirable, however, to stereotype a scheme by means of a statute, because what a statute did could only be undone by statute. The hon. Gentleman behind him might rest assured that in hospital management there must be a large representation of the medical element, under whose counsel and guidance the spending of this money must be regulated. The hon. Member who had spoken on the other side regretted that they had put so much power into the hands of the committee; but some concessions had been made, and he thought the House would bear with him while he read the provision which had been inserted in the Bill, and which limited the individual power of the president, so that on his part, and on his own authority, the president could deal with neither the distribution, nor the investment, nor the application of the property; and that covered nearly the whole of the objects of the fund. [The Attorney-General here read the clause.] Therefore the objects were the collection of the fund, its investment, its application, its expenditure, and its distribution. The president was controlled by the majority of his council in all matters relating to the investment, expenditure, application, and distribution of money. His power of his own motion was limited to the mere collection of money. That came in Clause 6, as part of Sub-section 3. Let him point out what full appreciation this concession showed of the observations which had been made with regard to the provisions of the Bill. It was of importance that the name of the Royal Family should be connected with appeals made to the public for funds. It was absolutely that association which had made the fund and given it its great success. It was all important that this association should continue. Those who were anxious that no undue influence should be brought to bear on His Royal Highness with regard to the distribution of the money had the guarantee of this clause that in all such action he would not only have the council in association with him, but would be subject to the control of the majority. Subsection 3 made it plain that the Prince's control was subordinate in all those matters of account. Therefore on all those questions the Prince was subject to the control of the members of the council. Those who came to the council were there by the president's invitation, and they were men whose public position was a guarantee that they would not give advice that they could not wisely and properly give, and they would be responsible for any course they invited the president to adopt. The suggestions he had made in a report he was called on to make, and which had been adopted by the Committee, were to the best of his judgment, and in his honest opinion, a moderate proposal to carry out the scheme consistently with its original constitution, and he commended it to the adoption of the House.

*MR. G. GREENWOOD (Peterborough)

said there was an Amendment on the Paper in his name in very similar terms to that of his hon. friend behind him, though from a paternal interest he somewhat preferred his own. It proposed that certain representative persons should be appointed as ex-officio members of the general council of the fund, which would really be left very much in its present position. He felt very strongly the force of what the Attorney-General had said. No one in the House or out of it would offer anything like unreasonable opposition to the Bill. One must remember the origin of the fund, its voluntary character, and the noble work which it had done. It would be not only unreasonable but it might be called ill-conditioned to offer factious opposition to a Bill of this sort. But he must say that he thought it was not, unreasonable, when the promoters of the Bill came to the House of Commons and asked for very large powers to deal with very large funds, which they were told now amounted to a million of money, that they should take precautions, or at any rate make suggestions with a view to safeguarding the interests of the public in the future, and also of commanding its confidence, which was so essential to the fund. It was said sometimes, "After all, this is a voluntary fund," but it would not be a fund dependent on annual subscriptions. It now amounted to a million of money; there would be large investments, and the promoters asked for very large powers, as, for instance, to hold land without licence in mortmain. No doubt in the future, as had already been pointed out, the controllers of this fund would be able to dictate the policy of the hospitals and really control their management. What had fallen from the Attorney-General, he thought, really constituted the justification of those who had put down Amendments asking that the Bill should be recommitted, because there had now been made a most substantial concession which they all welcomed, and for which they were all most grateful to His Royal Highness the president. Of course it was for his hon. friend to consider whether this concession was sufficient. As had already been said, they had most entire confidence in the present management, but they were legislating for the future, and they did not know whether in the years to come this rich fund might not come under the management of a president who would not command the confidence of the nation as it was now commanded by the present president. Under this Bill the entire power was vested in the president. The members of the council were appointed by the president for a year only, and nothing would be more easy, at the end of such period, than to say that it was not desired to reappoint such and such a mem- ber. The president, therefore, had entire power in the constitution and election of the council, and he had entire power in appointing the secretary and treasurer, auditors, and other officers. If there was any difference of opinion, the president's determination was final; and, as the Bill originally stood, the president had control of the application not only of the funds but of the capital. He might have applied the money given to the hospitals to the medical schools, to which his hon. friend opposite had already called attention. That matter had already been inquired into by a Committee, who reported in very clear terms that the money subscribed to the hospitals ought not to be diverted to the medical schools. That was laid down very definitely in the report which he held in his hand. He agreed that it was a monstrous thing that public money subscribed for the sick in hospitals should be diverted to the medical schools, where practices went on which many of them disapproved of. They did not ask that the whole council should be representative, but only that some re presentation should be secured for the future, and he. thought it was reasonable to ask that such representative men as the Lord Mayor and the Chairman of. the County Council should be ex-officio members. He did not desire that the medical profession should have a preponderating influence in this matter. It had been suggested on behalf of the hospitals that certain bodies like the City Corporation, the County Council, the Metropolitan Asylums Board, and other similar bodies should be allowed to nominate members of the council, but that scheme had not been accepted. He was anxious that certain representative persons in whom the public had every confidence should be members of the council. He had put forward these views in the interests of the public, and he would support the Amendment of his hon. friend.

*SIR W. J. COLLINS (St. Pancras, W.)

said there seemed to be a suspicion that there was a danger of this Fund being too largely controlled by the professional element. Even if that suspicion were true in regard to any of the London hospitals—and he doubted it—he could assure the House that with regard to the Fund and its Council it was quite untrue, because out of some thirty-nine members of the general council at most five or six belonged to the medical profession, and out of fifteen members on the executive committee only one belonged to that profession. Therefore there was no danger that the King's Fund would be unduly dominated by medical men. It had been stated that funds subscribed for the sick poor had been diverted to the medical schools; but it was at the instance of the King's Hospital Fund that a committee of inquiry was set up, and in adopting their report the executive committee laid down clearly the recommendation that henceforth no assistance should be given from the fund to such hospitals as used the subscriptions for the relief of the sick poor for maintaining medical schools. The hon. Member for Brentford had referred to the future of the London hospitals; but what of the past? Looking back to the year 1892, before the King's Hospital Fund came into existence, a committee under Lord Sandhurst was appointed to inquire into the condition of the London hospitals, and their report went to show that, apart from the three endowed hospitals, the general hospitals were maintained principally by legacies and large but uncertain donations, and the subscriptions from annual subscribers did not suffice to pay the servants employed, to say nothing of the cost of administration. That was in the year 1892. Since the King's Fund was inaugurated £750,000 had been collected and distributed by it for the benefit of London hospitals, and this had been done without injuring other funds such as the Hospital Saturday and the Hospital Sunday Funds, and other sources of revenue upon which the hospitals had previously relied. That £750,000 had been raised in addition to the ordinary revenue of the hospitals of London. He confessed that when he first saw the draft of the Bill in its original form he shared some of the misgivings of the mover of this Amendment, but he rejoiced to know that modifications had been made which vested in the president and the general council the direction, control, and management of the Fund, and that changes had also been introduced in regard to the power of nomination of any future president, and to the summary removal of members of the council, which existed in the original form of the Bill. He was also glad to hear from the Attorney-General the further concession he indicated that evening in regard to the distribution and investment of funds. The House would have heard with satisfaction the assurance of the Attorney-General that as in the past so in the future an ex-officio representative element would be found in the body controlling the fund. Out of thirty-nine members no fewer than fourteen were ex-officio members. He saw great difficulty in the way of securing representation of the various London hospitals upon the body which would distribute this money annually. If they were beneficiaries they wore hardly bodies which ought to be represented on the fund. During the last ten years the Fund had added £750.000 to the resources j of London hospitals, by introducing economies they had enabled sixteen hospitals to save £20,000 a year, they had facilitated the redistribution and the j amalgamation of hospitals, and they had assisted the transfer of King's College, Hospital to a more suitable site at Camberwell. The fund had been the moans of opening 443 beds which were previously closed. After the assurances they had heard he doubted whether any further opposition was likely to be offered to this Bill. Last Wednesday, in the debate on the Prime Ministers Resolution, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the veto of the Crown in matters of legislation had been obsolete for over 200 years. It was gratifying to know that the beneficial influence of the Royal Family was exerted in matters of voluntary administration like this, and he rejoiced to think that it had been through their personal agency that this large sum had been reaped in.

MR. MORTON (Sutherland)

said everybody in London would be more satisfied when they could have some representative body to manage the whole of the London hospitals instead of their management being conducted in secret, as was the case at the present moment. The medical profession ought not to predominate on any of these bodies. He did not think that members of the medical profession ought to be nominated at all on any of these governing bodies; their business should be strictly confined to their medical duties. He happened to be the Governor of a hospital, and his experience of the duties of hospital governors was to say "ditto" to what the medical profession recommended. He hoped the Prime Minister would say whether it was possible to provide for the audit which was asked. He thought it was absolutely necessary if they were to retain the confidence of the public. The audit would give to the public the confidence which was necessary in the carrying out of the objects of this great Fund—confidence which the public had not got in connection with certain other institutions whose accounts were not audited in the way he desired in this case. He was most anxious to make the management of this Fund effectual in the best way, and to give all the assistance he possibly could.

THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN, Stirling Burghs)

Though this is a private Bill, it is of such a character that I think it is only right I should say a few words about it. The speech of my hon. and learned friend has sufficiently explained to the House what the object of the Hill is. It must not be forgotten, although it seems sometimes to be forgotten, that this is really a fund created by the first president, the present King. It was he and his influence that obtained the money, it was to him that the money was given—money which would not have been obtained if it had not been given to him. And therefore he and those connected with him are not the least unreasonable, or going beyond their proper limits, in desiring to have at least some say in the management of this large sum of money. Then we have, as my hon. and learned friend has pointed out, the further fact that the Fund has been the most conspicuous success. It has done, as my hon. friend the Member for West St. Pancras testified, an im- mense amount of good in the improvement of methods, and also in the interests of economy. I believe, as a matter of fact, that the expenses of the fund during the ten years it has been in existence have only been at the rate of l.35 per cent. It has been a model in the matter of management among all the infirmaries and hospitals throughout the Kingdom. That has to be remembered. Therefore it must have been well managed hitherto. Hitherto the members of the council have been selected so as to include a large number of public interests. Many Members of the House may not be aware that these are all members of the council—the Lords Lieutenant of London and Middlesex, the Bishops of London and Southwark, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, the President of the National Council of Evangelical Free Churches, the Chief Rabbi, the Lord Mayor of London, the Chairman of the London County Council, the Governor of the Bank of England, the President of the Royal College of Physicians, and the President of the Royal College of Surgeons. These gentlemen have, no doubt, rendered good service, and they are an ample proof of the desire of the president and his august predecessor to take advantage of the counsel of persons so well qualified to give advice as these are There is no reason whatever to doubt that the same practice will continue in the future. It has been said that these names ought to be inserted in the Bill. I can understand that desire, because it may be that this practice may be departed from, though I do not think it is at all likely that the president, whoever he may be, will wish to dissociate himself from the support he may obtain from having these names among his council. One of my hon. friends has said that we are legislating for the future, and that many things may be changed in the future. If the names were inserted in the Bill they might come to be held by those who would not be so much entitled to this position, and, on the other hand, if we followed this course, it would be difficult, without further legislation, to recognise any new body which might come into existence and would equally deserve to be acknowledged. That is how the matter stands at present. A further step has been announced to-day. The whole of the financial control of the fund was left, practically, by a subsection of Clause 7, in the hands of the president, but that is now put an end to, and the council has an equal voice with the president in all that concerns the investing, collecting, and distributing of the fund, and in the general treatment of the finances. That is a very large concession. I think it does away to a large extent with the necessity for the Motion in regard to something like representation being required. My hon. friend the Member for Sutherland has an Amendment with regard to the audit. The president entirely agrees that it would be desirable to have a public audit. The council, I believe, are satisfied with the audit at present, but to satisfy the not unreasonable feeling which my hon. friend has expressed, an Amendment will be moved to the following effect: "The accounts of the fund shall be annually audited by an auditor nominated by the President of the Local Government Board, the remuneration of such auditor to be fixed by the President of the Local Government Board and paid out of the Fund." I think the great concessions which have been made to meet the very reasonable criticisms which were made upon the Bill are of extreme importance and deserve to conciliate the support of some who have regarded it with some degree of suspicion. All who have had anything to do with the preparation and progress of the Bill will be glad to acknowledge the great willingness of the members of the Royal Family who have been concerned in the matter to meet the feeling and desire of the public. This was shown at the very first step by their adoption of procedure by Bill rather than by Royal Charter. That procedure testifies to their confidence in themselves, in the work they have done, and in the good sense of Parliament, which has its result in the discussion of this evening. This discussion can have no effect, I hope, but to add to the popularity and success of the Fund and to the confidence of the public in its management.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR (City of London)

I hope the speech of the Prime Minister and the two Amendments which have been announced from the Treasury Bench, will enable the House to come to a unanimous vote. I trust that the hon. Gentlemen who have thought it their duty to move Amendments from motives, I am sure, which were honourable, will not consider it necessary to press them. The mover of the Amendment now before the House seemed to think that there was a parallel between this Fund and the Patriotic Fund. There is no parallel at all. In the case of the Patriotic Fund, one of the reasons which made legislation necessary on more than one occasion was that funds subscribed for one purpose had, for reasons which I need not go into, to be diverted to another, an alteration which required Parliamentary sanction. We are now dealing with a Fund subscribed for a purpose which still remains, and will always remain, unless the public take over the hospitals altogether, one of the primary necessities, and the money was subscribed to the first president of the fund. That wholly differentiates this case from that of any fund so far as I know with which the House has ever meddled at all. The question is whether these powers are of a kind which Parliament ought to give having regard to the unique circumstances of this particular case. I submit that Parliament ought undoubtedly to do so. We have had criticism from two quite different quarters. The hon. Member for the Brentford division of Middlesex has expressed a desire to see the medical profession with large statutory powers of representation on this fund, but an hon. Gentleman below the gangway who supported the Amendment seemed to think nothing could possibly be worse for a fund devoted to hospital purposes than large representation of the medical profession.

DR. RUTHERFORD

I only asked for a small representation of the medical profession in comparison with the number of the council.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Even that modest representation seems to be regarded as too great by the hon. Gentleman below the gangway. These funds have been largely contributed through confidence in the first president, and it is to the same confidence that we look for large contributions in the future. If there are hon. Gentlemen who think that a body framed on what is called a representative basis with ex-officio members representing various public bodies, learned and unlearned, or a body having direct democratic election, would be more successful in obtaining the confidence of the subscribing public, they have only to try the experiment. If representative bodies come into competition with this Fund and tap large sources of supply which are not now coming to this Fund, or any other fund, I am sure we all wish them every success. When the House is dealing with a living fund of this description, which exists for purposes of ever increasing importance and whose subscribers are largely in existence, I urge hon. Members not to interfere with a constitution that has proved to be invaluable in inspiring confidence among the subscribers in the past. I hope that after what has fallen from the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General as to the modifications to be made in the Bill, the House may come to a unanimous decision now, and proceed to the consideration of the details of the measure on Report without going through the form of a division, which I am sure would be ungracious and probably in all respects inexpedient.

DR. RUTHERFORD

said that if the House was agreed that the concessions offered by the promoters of the Bill were valuable—and, speaking for himself, ho thought they were good—he would ask leave to withdraw his Motion that the Bill be referred back to the Committee.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed, "That the Bill be now considered."

MR. MORTON

said that if he understood rightly what the Prime Minister had said, the right hon. Gentleman proposed in somewhat different language what he suggested in the new clause standing in his name on the Paper, that the accounts of the corporation should be annually made up and audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, and laid before both Houses of Parliament. He begged to move.

New clause not seconded.

Bill, as amended, considered.

Amendments made to the Bill.

Bill to be read the third time.

Forward to