HC Deb 01 April 1908 vol 187 cc539-57

Order for Committee read.

The Clerk at the Table informed the House of the unavoidable absence, owing to indisposition, of the Chairman of Ways and Means.

Considered in Committee.

[Mr. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid.) in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Mr. CLAUDE HAY

moved the omission, after "The provisions of Section 2 of the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1884," of the words "which unite the office of Director of Public Prosecutions with that of the Treasury Solicitor." He contended that the words were wholly unnecessary, and the reference given would be entirely mis- leading, seeing that the Act of 1884 was repealed in totoin the schedule of the Bill. Another part of the Act of 1884 dealt with the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the reference, to a number of provisions in that Act was meaningless. It was very surprising that the, words should have been allowed to remain in the Bill, but he supposed the Attorney-General had been occupied in other work, or he would not have overlooked such a drafting matter. He hoped the hon. and learned Gentleman would accept the Amendment. He had the whole of the references, but he did not want to occupy the time of the House. If, however, the Amendment was resisted, he would be obliged to make further remarks.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 6, to leave out from '1884' to the word 'shall,' in line 7."—Mr. Claude Hay.

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

Sir W. ROBSON

said the words were not unnecessary; they were there simply as a matter of convenient explanation in order to save any one who read the Bill from the necessity of referring to the Act of 1884. That was the whole reason. The reference was explanatory and nothing else.

Sir F. BANBURY

said he would not put himself in antagonism on a legal point to the hon. and learned Gentleman, but he thought the words instead of simplifying the matter and helping lawyers to understand it would have exactly the contrary effect. The clause of the Act of 1884 to which the reference related was as follows— On and after the passing of this Act, appointments made in pursuance of the principal Act are revoked, and the person for the time being holding the office of Solicitor for the affairs of Her Majesty's Treasury shall be the Director of Public Prosecutions and perform the duties and have the powers of such Director. Then Section 3 of the Solicitors Act of 1876 authorised any Assistant Solicitor for the affairs of Her Majesty's Treasury to act on behalf of the Solicitor to the Treasury in his capacity of Director of Public Prosecutions. They knew the ingenuity of the legal mind and they knew the little points that were taken when a case was before the Law Courts so that either delay was caused or an end put altogether to the proceedings. It might be held that the second paragraph of Clause 2 of the Prosecution of Offences Act did not unite the offices of Director of Public Prosecutions and Treasury Solicitor, but only authorised the Assistant Solicitor to assist the Director of Public Prosecutions.

VISCOUNT HELMSLEY (Yorkshire, N. R., Thirsk)

called attention to the fact that forty Members were not present.

*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I have already ascertained that there are more than forty Members present.

MR. CLAUDE HAY

Not since the House has been in Committee.

*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

It does not matter. Besides that there has been a recent division.

SIR F. BANBURY

said they wanted to make the meaning of the clause as clear as possible. He was inclined to think the schedule contradicted these words; the two were not consistent. If these words were in, the schedule ought to be amended, but if they were cut out the scehdule could be left as it was. The hon. and learned Gentleman had better accept the Amendment because then they would not have to make any alteration in the schedule. It had just struck him that the reason why the hon. and learned Gentleman would not accept the Amendment was, possibly, that his interpretation was correct. The hon. and learned Gentleman told them he only intended to appoint one Director, but they might anticipate a certain number of appeals—

*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

That has nothing to do with the question, which is whether these words, which are merely explanatory of the section, should be in or not. They have no enacting effect and the section is repealed by the schedule.

Sir F. BANBURY

said it was he who had called attention to the fact that the schedule took all the words out and there was no reason in leaving them in unless there was some ulterior object. It might be that when they came to the schedule the hon. and learned Gentleman might mean to amend it.

*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

These words cannot be put beyond their definite meaning which is explanatory of the contents of the section. They are not enacting words.

SIR F. BANBURY

said that was quite true, but if these words were left in would the second paragraph of the repeal section have any effect or not? If it had the same effect whether the words were in or out, the Amendment should be accepted, because it had always been held that in an Act of Parliament the fewer words put in the better, and that words should not be put in unless they had an object and meaning. These words had no object and no meaning, and the effect would be exactly the same whether they were in or out. He hoped the Amendment would be pressed to a division.

CAPTAIN CRAIG

thought the hon. and learned Gentleman ought to accept the Amendment for a reason which had not been touched on. It certainly struck him, on looking at the wording, that it was a matter more of Memoranda that might be attached to the Bill, than of the wording of the Bill itself. He took it that the Attorney-General in drafting the section took it upon himself to lay down that Section 2 of the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1884, united the offices of Director of Public Prosecutions and Treasury Solicitor. He took it that that was a matter for discussion, and not a matter to set out in a clause of that Bill. If the hon. and learned Gentleman was correct in his decision that the words were not necessary and were merely put there in order to be a convenience to people, was there not a great fear that the very effect of leaving the words in would lead to endless litigation in the future? If the words were practically an explanatory note, and if the hon. and learned. Gentleman intended to insist that the section united the two offices, it might be just as reasonable for him to go on and explain what else Section 2 did. Was the Bill to be overburdened with unofficial statements of that sort? If the Bill was drafted in that way, if there was as much surface matter running through it as in the first few lines, there must be some fault somewhere. He could not conceive the hon. and learned Gentleman whose colleague appeared to be giving way on the matter, stating that the words were unnecessary, and at the same time that he must have them in the Bill. If the words were unnecessary they should be struck out. If they were necessary the hon. and learned Gentleman should explain more fully why they were necessary. The greatest possible care should be taken in introducing extraneous matter. He should certainly vote with his hon. friend in order to elicit a more reasonable excuse for including the words.

MR. CLAUDE HAY

said the Attorney-General had not really given any explanation but had made his case worse. He said the words were in the nature of an explanation but they only partially described the section to which they referred and did not give a true index to its purport. Whenever they proposed to put words in they were told they could not be accepted because the great thing in an Act of Parliament was to have simplicity and as few words as possible. Now they were told they were wrong, and that these words which were meaningless and misleading must be left in. It was quite clear that the Bill had been prepared in a very slipshod way, with the idea, he supposed, that it did not much matter because it would be put through the House without discussion. He was glad to think they were giving this measure and would give all similar measures close attention, so that they would not see things run hurriedly through the House with bad and slipshod wording, giving trouble thereafter and putting the country to unnecessary expense in ascertaining in Courts of Law the proper meaning of words in Acts of Parliament. It was all very well for the Attorney-General to give his own interpretation of the words and the necessity for having them in the Bill. They all had proper respect for the hon. and learned Gentleman's opinion, but the Judges in interpreting the Act would not be guided by the words that had fallen from him. He appealed to the hon. and learned Gentleman to meet an absolutely reasonable and simplifying Amendment.

SIR W. ROBSON

said the difficulty complained of could not arise because the whole of the section in question was repealed in the schedule.

VISCOUNT HELMSLEY

said the words proposed were intended to make the matter clear and to obviate the disadvantages which always arose from legislation by reference. The inclusion of some such words as those contained in the Amendment, he thought, was desirable. He could not understand why the clause did not start by saying that the offices of Director of Public Prosecutions and Solicitor of the Treasury should no longer be united. That would have been far simpler and the clause would then have commenced by saying exactly what was intended, without containing this peculiar parenthesis, the intention of which they appreciated, but which he was informed many lawyers considered would lead to ambiguity in future. Would it not be possible for the Attorney-General to meet the views of his hon. friend by undertaking at a subsequent stage to redraft the beginning of the clause so as to make it clear what its object was, and then it would not be open to the objection which had been raised.

THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. GEORGE WHITELEY,) Yorkshire, W.R., Pudsey

made an appeal to the Opposition to let this Bill go through. As the House was aware it was originally the intention of the Government to take the Housing Bill that day, but owing to strong representations from hon. Gentlemen opposite they agreed to postpone it, and he came to an agreement with the right hon. Gentlemen the Member for Somerset that instead of taking the Housing Bill he should give them the first four Orders on the paper. The fourth Order, the Children Bill, was of some importance, and a great many hon. Members wished to discuss it. It would be very much to the convenience of the House if they could get to that measure and shorten the present discussion.

SIR F. BANBURY

said he was not aware that any such arrangement had been made, and he did not think it was right for the right hon. Gentleman to ask them to curtail the discussion upon an important Bill because another important measure was to come on later. He was prepared to move to report progress. [Cries of "No, no."] They had a right to discuss every Bill and now the Party of freedom of speech, the Radical Party, were laying down that Bills were not to be discussed, but passed without discussion in order to enable them to bring on a Bill to which they attached importance. The proper course to take was to report progress and resume the discussion on some other occasion. He begged to move to report progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report progress and ask leave to sit again. "—(Sir F. Banbury).

MR. CLAUDE HAY

said he must protest against what the right hon. Gentleman had just said. He had just said that before 8.15 some four or five Bills were to be rushed through the House. He hoped that afternoon would be a lesson to the Government in thinking that they were going to ride roughshod over the liberties of hon. Members in respect of important Bills affecting the rights and liberties of the subject.

MR. GEORGE WHITELEY

said he only intervened to mention the arrangement which had been come to. It would cause great inconvenience if they could not adhere to agreements arrived at between the Whips.

CAPTAIN CRAIG

said he was not aware that any arrangement had been come to. They were, however, in the hands of the Patronage Secretary, and he would ask him to postpone this Bill. The other Bills alluded to were not important, and they might be discussed on some other occasion. There was a desire on the part of the Opposition to discuss the Amendments to this Bill on the Paper, and a few hours some other day might suffice. They might even drop one of the Bills which had proved so unpopular.

SIR F. BANBURY

said he would only ask for an hour upon some other occasion.

SIR W. ROBSON

said it was of the utmost importance that this Department should be authorised by 18th April, and by that time they should be able to make not anticipatory but authoritative arrangements. The Bill had been accepted by right hon. Gentlemen on the Front Opposition Bench and both sides of the House were equally anxious that it should pass forthwith. He hoped the Committee would not accede to the Motion to report progress.

MR. RAWLINSON (Cambridge University

said the Bill was urgent and he agreed that it was necessary if the Criminal Appeal Act was to work at all. He hoped his hon. friends would not press the Motion for the Adjournment of the debate, although he sympathised with the criticisms in regard to the financial Resolution.

MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH (Anglesey)

asked the Chief Opposition Whip to exercise a little supervision and control over his followers ["Oh, oh!"]

MR. RAWLINSON

That is not the way to get it. We are not sheep.

MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH

said the Bill was urgent, and although their appeals to hon. Gentlemen opposite had not succeeded he was sure the appeal of the right hon. Gentleman would not be made in vain. The debate up to the present had been of a most frivolous character.

Mr. CLAUDE HAY

asked if the word "frivolous" was Parliamentary?

*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

It is not unparliamentary, but it is irrelevant.

Sir F. BANBURY

said the hon. and learned Member for Anglesey had not poured oil on the troubled waters when he described the discussion as frivolous. With regard to the agreement which had been referred to, no man was more anxious than he was to carry out any arrangement entered into by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Somerset. The Amendments to be moved on the Opposition side of the House would; not prevent the Children Bill being taken before 8.15. All the effect of considering these Amendments would be to curtail the discussion on the Children Bill. Why should the Members of the Opposition finish their discussion on the Committee stage of this Bill, because hon. Gentlemen on the Government side wished to discuss another Bill? They should bring pressure to bear on their Government to give

them sufficient time for the discussion of the Bill in which they were interested.

MR. CLAUDE HAY

said that any arrangement arrived at between the right hon. Gentlemen would be loyally carried out on that side of the House, but the present situation did not arise from anything done by them. They were doing their duty in discussing the Bill now before the Committee, and if the discussion prevented the consideration of other Bills, the blame was upon the right hon. Gentlemen opposite. He thought the Government should not be so greedy; they should treat their opponents with some regard for the rights and liberties of private Members. He was greatly interested in the Children Bill, and he would like to have the opportunity of bringing forward some points in the Second Reading debate. The measure was so important that he doubted whether there would be sufficient time for its discussion that day. He resented the remarks made by the hon. Gentleman opposite. When the hon. Gentleman was in opposition in the last Parliament he never considered the convenience of their Government, but took the course which he thought proper in advancing his views. He appealed to the Patronage Secretary not to try when framing the Order Paper to rush through Bills of this character. The discussion of matters of the greatest importance was interfered with when they endeavoured to do too much in one day.

SIR F. BANBURY

asked leave to withdraw his motion.

Motion by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 282: Noes, 71. (Division, List No. 64)

AYES.
Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)
Abraham, William (Rhondda) Ambrose, Robert Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)
Acland, Francis Dyke Armstrong, W. C. Heaton Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)
Adkins, W. Ryland D. Ashton, Thomas Gair Barker, John
Agrew, George William Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)
Alden, Percey Atherley-Jones, L. Barlow, Percy (Bedford)
Barnes, G. N. Flavin, Michael Joseph M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)
Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.) Flynn, James Christopher M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)
Beale, W. P. Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter M'Micking, Major G.
Beauchamp, E. Freeman-Thomas, Freeman Maddison, Frederick
Beck, A. Cecil Gibb, James (Harrow) Mallet, Charles E.
Bellairs, Carlyon Gilhooly, James Markham, Arthur Basil
Benn, W. (T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo. Gill, A. H. Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)
Bennett, E. N. Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John Masterman, C. F. G.
Bethell, Sir J.H. (Essex, Romf'rd Glen-Coats Sir T. (Renfrew, W Meagher, Michael
Black, Arthur W. Glover, Thomas Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.
Boland, John Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.
Boulton, A. C. F. Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) Money, L. G. Chiozza
Bowerman, C. W. Griffith, Ellis J. Montagu, E. S.
Brace, William Gulland, John W. Mooney, J. J.
Bramsdon, T. A. Gurdon, Rt Hn. Sir W. Brampton Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)
Branch, James Hall, Frederick Morrell, Philip
Bright, J. A. Halpin, J. Morse, L. L.
Brocklehurst, W. B. Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis Morton, Alpheus Cleophas
Brodie, H. C. Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) Muldoon, John
Bryce, J. Annan Hart-Davies, T. Murnaghan, George
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) Napier, T. B.
Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E. Nicholls, George
Byles, William Pollard Haslam, James (Derbyshire) Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r
Cameron, Robert Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) Nolan, Joseph
Carr-Gomm, H. W. Hazleton, Richard Norman, Sir Henry
Cawley, Sir Frederick Healy, Timothy Michael Norton, Capt. Cecil William
Chance, Frederick William Hedges, A. Paget Nussey, Thomas Willans
Channing, Sir Francis Allston Henderson, Arthur (Durham) O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)
Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)
Cleland, J. W. Henry, Charles S. O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)
Clough, William Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe) O'Doherty, Philip
Clynes, J. R. Higham, John Sharp O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Cobbold, Felix Thornley Hobart, Sir Robert O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)
Collins, Sir Wm.J. (S. Pancras, W Hodge, John O'Dowd, John
Compton-Rickett, Sir J. Holland, Sir William Henry O'Grady, J.
Condon, Thomas Joseph Holt, Richard Durning O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)
Cooper, G. J. Horniman, Emslie John O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) Horridge, Thomas Gardner O'Shee, James John
Corbett, C H (Sussex, E. Grinst'd Howard, Hon. Geoffrey Partington, Oswald
Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Hudson, Walter Pearson, W.H.M. (Suffolk, Eye)
Cotton, Sir H. J. S. Hutton, Alfred Eddison Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton
Cowan, W. H. Idris, T. H. W. Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)
Crean, Eugene Illingworth, Percy H. Pickersgill, Edward Hare
Cremer, Sir William Randal Jacoby, Sir James Alfred Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.
Crooks, William Johnson, John (Gateshead) Priestley, W.E.B. (Bradford, E.)
Crosfield, A. H. Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) Pullar, Sir Robert
Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) Jones, Leif (Appleby) Radford, G. H.
Davies, Timothy (Fulham) Jowett, F. W. Rea, Russell (Gloucester)
Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.) Joyce, Michael Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'
Delany, William Kavanagh, Walter M. Rees, J. D.
Devlin, Joseph Kearley, Hudson E. Rendall, Athelstan
Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N Kelley, George D. Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th
Dillon, John Kilbride, Denis Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n
Dobson, Thomas W. King, Alfred John (Knutsford) Richardson, A
Donelan, Captain A. Laidlaw, Robert Ridsdale, E. A.
Duckworth, James Lambert, George Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)
Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness Lamont, Norman Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)
Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) Lehmann, R. C. Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)
Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall Levy, Sir Maurice Robinson, S.
Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David Robson, Sir William Snowdon
Erskine, David C. Lough, Thomas Roche, John (Galway, East)
Esmonde, Sir Thomas Lundon, W. Roe, Sir Thomas
Essex, R. W. Lyell, Charles Henry Rowlands, J.
Esslemont, George Birnie Maclean, Donald Runciman, Walter
Evans, Sir Samuel T. Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. Russell, T. W.
Everett, R. Lacey MacNeill, John Gordon Swift Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)
Faber, G. H. (Boston) Macpherson, J. T. Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne
Fenwick, Charles MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S. Sears, J. E.
Ferguson, R. C. Munro MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) Seaverns, J. H.
Ffrench, Peter M'Crae, George Seddon, J.
Fiennes, Hon. Eustace M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald Seely, Colonel
Findlay, Alexander M'Killop, W. Shackleton, David James
Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) Tillett, Louis John White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.) Tomkinson, James Whitehead, Rowland
Sheehy, David Torrance, Sir A. M. Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)
Shipman, Dr. John G. Toulmin, George Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer
Silcock, Thomas Ball Verney, F. W. Wiles, Thomas
Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie Wadsworth, J. Williamson, A.
Spicer, Sir Albert Walsh, Stephen Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)
Stanger, H. Y. Ward, WDudley (Southampton Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)
Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.) Wardle, George J. Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)
Stewart, Halley (Greenock) Waring, Walter Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Strachey, Sir Edward Wason, Rt. Hn. E (Clackmannan Winfrey, R.
Straus, B. S. (Mile End) Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) Yoxall, James Henry
Summerbell, T. Waterlow, D. S.
Taylor, John W. (Durham) Watt, Henry A. TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.
Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) Wedgwood, Josiah C. Whiteley and Mr. Herbert
Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr Whitbread, Howard Lewis.
Thomasson, Franklin White, Sir George (Norfolk)
Thompson, J.W.H (Somerset, E White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)
NOES.
Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. Sir Alex. F Faber, George Denison (York) Randles, Sir John Scurrah
Anson, Sir William Reynell Faber, Capt. W.V. (Hants, W.) Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel
Ashley, W. W. Fell, Arthur Remnant, James Farquharson
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H. Forster, Henry William Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)
Balcarres, Lord Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West) Salter, Arthur Clavell
Baldwin. Stanley Guinness, Walter Edward Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert
Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) Hamilton, Marquess of Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D
Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Helmsley, Viscount Smith, F.E. (Llverpool, Walton)
Bignold, Sir Arthur Hill, Sir Clement Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Bowles, G. Stewart Hills, J. W. Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)
Bridgeman, W. Clive Hunt, Rowland Thornton, Percy M.
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H. Tuke, Sir John Batty
Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey- Kimber, Sir Henry Valentia, Viscount
Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E. Lane-Fox, G. R. Walker. Col. W. H. (Lancashire)
Clive, Percy Archer Lockwood, Rt. Hn Lt.-Col. A. R. Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Lonsdale, John Brownlee Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)
Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birmingh'm MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) M'Calmont, Colonel James Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-
Courthope, G. Loyd Magnus, Sir Philip Younger, George
Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. Mason, James F. (Windsor)
Craig, Captain James (Down, E) Moore, William TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Craik, Sir Henry Morpeth, Viscount Mr. Claude Hay and Sir
Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield) Frederick Banbury.
Douglas, Rt Hon. A. Akers- Nield, Herbert
SIR F. BANBURY

said he did not wish to say more than a word or two in support of the next Amendment, the object of which was to restrict the number of Assistant Directors which the Treasury might appoint to one. The hon. and learned Gentleman had told the Committee that the new Department was going to have only a Director at present, and he thought that the Treasury should not have the power to appoint more than one Assistant Director without the sanction of the House of Commons. He begged to move.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 11, to leave out from the word 'appoint' to end of the sub-section, in order to insert the words 'with the sanction of the Treasury one Assistant Director.'"—(Sir. F. Banbury.)

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

SIR W. ROBSON

said he was sorry he could not accept the Amendment. They could not tell exactly the volume of business that would come to the department under the new Act. The hon. Baronet suggested that there should be not more than one Assistant Director appointed even at the initial stage. He hoped that they would be able to go on for some time with one Assistant Director, but they could not tell what the volume of business might be five or six weeks or three months hence. There might be appeals in all the cases which came before the magistrates and quarter sessions throughout the country when the Criminal Appeal Act came into operation. They began on the most modest scale possible, but they might within a few weeks have a very large accession of work, and they thought it better to have this provision in the Bill.

*MR. GEORGE FABER

said that he would like to point out to the Attorney-General that under Section 3 of the Prosecution of Offenders Act of 1879, the secretary of State might from time to time appoint such assistants as were necessary, but not exceeding six.

SIR W. ROBSON

As a fact only one assistant Public Prosecutor had been appointed.

*MR. GEORGE FABER

said that that did not destroy his argument. In the Bill they were now discussing there was no such limit. The clause read that there should be appointed one Director and such number of Assistant Directors as the Treasury might sanction. He could not see why such an unlimited power of appointment should be granted to the Treasury. If the hon. and learned Gentleman said that only one was to be appointed let him put in one. He did not think the Treasury should have a free hand in making these appointments. He did not know whether he would be in order in moving an Amendment to the Amendment but he would suggest as an Amendment the insertion of the words "not more than six in number."

MR. CLAUDE HAY

said that no valid reason had been given by the Attorney-General why he should not accept the limit proposed by the hon. Baronet. If more than one Assistant Director was subsequently required the salaries could be put on the Supplementary Estimates. By adopting the Amendment of his hon. friend they would observe sound business

principles and defer to the proper date the demand for the necessary money and so give an opportunity to the Government to show what staff was really required. He hoped the hon. Baronet would go to a division to show what the views of the Government were and what their policy was in regard to expenditure without any control by Parliament. It was evident from the statement of the Attorney-General that the Government could not indicate within £100,000 what amount of expenditure there would be under this Bill.

*MR. GEORGE FABER

said he did not want to interfere with any arrangement that had been made for concluding the debate, and he would withdraw his suggestion as to an Amendment to the Amendment

SIR W. ROBSON

said he could only repeat what he had already said more than once, that he hoped there would not be a large number of appeals to begin with, but there might be within a measurable distance of time an immense accession of work to the Department. He could not suggest to the Treasury that they should limit the number of Assistant Directors to anything like six. Hon. Members must know that the Treasury would not give their sanction to the appointment of additional Assistant Directors without full consideration with the Law Officers of the Crown and without being fully satisfied that they were absolutely necessary

*MR. GEORGE FABER

said he did not suggest for a moment that six Assistant Directors should be appointed but that there should be a limit to the number.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 294; Noes, 65. (Division List No. 65.)

AYES.
Abraham, William (Cork, N.E Ambrose, Robert Barker, John
Abraham, William (Rhondda) Armstrong, W. C. Heaton Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)
Acland, Francis Dyke Ashton, Thomas Gair Barlow, Percy (Bedford)
Adkins, W. Ryland D. Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry Barnes, G. N.
Agnew, George William Atherley-Jones, L. Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)
Alden, Percy Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) Beale, W. P.
Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight Beauchamp, E.
Beck, A. Cecil Findlay, Alexander M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald
Bellairs, Carlyon Flavin, Michael Joseph M'Killop, W.
Benn, W. (T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo. Flynn, James Christopher M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)
Bennett, E. N. Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)
Bertram, Julius Fullerton, Hugh M'Micking, Major G.
Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romf'rd Gibb, James (Harrow) Maddison, Frederick
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine Gilhooly, James Mallet, Charles E.
Black, Arthur W. Gill, A. H. Markham, Arthur Basil
Boland, John Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)
Boulton, A. C. F. Glen-Coats, Sir T. (Renfrew, W. Massie, J.
Bowerman, C. W. Glover, Thomas Meagher, Michael
Brace, William Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)
Bramsdon, T. A. Grayson, Albert Victor Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.
Branch, James Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) Micklem, Nathaniel
Bright, J. A. Griffith, Ellis J. Montagu, E. S.
Brocklehurst, W. B. Gulland, John W. Mooney, J. J.
Brodie, H. C. Gurdon, Rt Hn. Sir W. Brampton Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)
Bryce, J. Annan Hall, Frederick Morrell, Philip
Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn Halpin, J. Morse, L. L.
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis Muldoon, John
Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) Murnaghan, George
Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles Hart-Davies, T. Murphy, N.J. (Kilkenny, S.)
Byles, William Pollard Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) Myer, Horatio
Cameron, Robert Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E. Nannetti, Joseph P.
Carr-Gomm, H. W. Haslam, James (Derbyshire) Napier, T. B.
Cawley, Sir Frederick Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) Nicholls, George
Chance, Frederick William Hazleton, Richard Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r
Channing, Sir Francis Allston Healy, Timothy Michael Nolan, Joseph
Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. Hedges, A. Paget Norman, Sir Henry
Clancy, John Joseph Henderson, Arthur (Durham) Norton, Capt. Cecil William
Cleland, J. W. Henderson, J.M. (Aberdeen, W.) Nussey, Thomas Willans
Clough, William Henry, Charles S. O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid
Clynes, J. R. Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe) O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)
Cobbold, Felix Thornley Higham, John Sharp O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)
Collins, Sir Wm.J. (S. Pancras, W Hobart, Sir Robert O'Doherty, Philip
Compton-Rickett, Sir J. Hodge, John O'Donnell, John (Mayo. S.)
Condon, Thomas Joseph Holland, Sir William Henry O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) Holt, Richard Durning O'Dowd, John
Corbett, C H (Sussex, E. Grinst'd Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N O'Grady, J.
Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Horniman, Emslie John O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)
Cotton, Sir H. J. S. Horridge, Thomas Gardner O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.
Cowan, W. H. Howard, Hon. Geoffrey O'Shaughnessy. P. J.
Crean, Eugene Hudson, Walter O'Shee, James John
Cremer, Sir William Randal Hutton, Alfred Eddison Partington, Oswald
Crooks, William Illingworth, Percy H. Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)
Crosfield, A. H. Jacoby, Sir James Alfred Pearson, W.H.M. (Suffolk, Eye)
Crossley, William J. Johnson, John (Gateshead) Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)
Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)
Davies, Timothy (Fulham) Jowett, F. W. Pickersgill, Edward Hare
Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.) Joyce, Michael Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh, Central)
Delany, William Kavanagh, Walter M. Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)
Devlin, Joseph Kearley, Hudson E. Priestley, W.E.B. (Bradford, E.)
Dickinson, W.H. (St. Pancras, N. Kelley, George D. Pullar, Sir Robert
Dillon, John Kilbride, Denis Radford, G. H.
Dobson, Thomas W. King, Alfred John (Knutsford) Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel
Donelan, Captain A. Laidlaw, Robert Rea, Russell (Gloucester)
Duckworth, James Lambert, George Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'
Dunean, C. (Barrow-in-Furness Lamont, Norman Rees, J. D.)
Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) Lehmann, R. C. Rendall, Athelstan
Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall Levy, Sir Maurice Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th
Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) Lloyd-George. Rt. Hon. David Richards. T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n
Erskine, David C. Lough, Thomas Richardson, A.
Esmonde, Sir Thomas Lyell, Charles Henry Ridsdale, E. A.
Essex, R. W. Mackarness, Frederic C. Roberts, Chares H. (Lincoln)
Esslemont, George Birnie Maclean, Donald Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)
Evans, Sir Samuel T. Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)
Everett, R. Lacey MacNeill, John Gordon Swift Robinson, S.
Faber, G. H. (Boston) Macpherson, J. T. Robson, Sir William Snowdon
Fenwick, Charles MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S. Roche, Augustine (Cork)
Ferguson, R. C. Munro MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) Roche, John (Galway, East)
Ffrench, Peter M'Callum, John M. Roe, Sir Thomas
Fiennes, Hon. Eustace M'Crae, George Rowland, J.
Runciman, Walter Straus, B. S. (Mile End) Whitbread, Howard
Russell, T. W. Summerbell, T. White, Sir George (Norfolk)
Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) Taylor, John W. (Durham) White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)
Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Sears, J. E. Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) Whitehead, Rowland
Seaverns, J. H. Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)
Seddon, J. Thomasson, Franklin Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer
Seely, Colonel Thompson, J.W.H. (Somerset, E Wiles, Thomas
Shackleton, David James Tillett, Louis John Williamson, A.
Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) Tomkinson, James Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.) Torrance, Sir A. M. Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)
Sheehy, David Toulmin, George Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)
Shipman, Dr. John G. Wadsworth, J. Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Silcock, Thomas Ball Walsh, Stephen Winfrey, R.
Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie Ward, W. Dudley (Southampt'n Yoxall, James Henry
Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S) Wardle, George J.
Spicer, Sir Albert Waring, Walter TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.
Stanger, H. Y. Wason, Rt. Hn. E (Clackmannan Whiteley and Mr. Herbert
Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.) Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) Lewis.
Stewart, Halley (Greenock) Watt, Henry A.
Strachey, Sir Edward Wedgwood, Josiah C.
NOES.
Acland-Hood, Rt Hn. Sir Alex. F Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)
Anson, Sir William Reynell Fell, Arthur Ronaldshay, Earl of
Ashley, W. W. Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey Salter, Arthur Clavell
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H Forster, Henry William Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert
Balcarres, Lord Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West) Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East
Baldwin, Stanley Guinness, Walter Edward Smith, F.E. (Liverpool, Walton)
Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N) Hamilton, Marquess of Stone, Sir Benjamin
Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Hay, Hon Claude George Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)
Bignold, Sir Arthur Helmsley, Viscount Thornton, Percy M.
Bridgeman, W. Clive Hill, Sir Clement Tuke, Sir John Batty
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Houston, Robert Paterson Valentia, Viscount
Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey- Hunt, Rowland Walker, Col. W.H. (Lancashire)
Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E. Lane-Fox, G. R. Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)
Clive, Percy Archer Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R. Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.)
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Lonsdale, John Brownlee Winterton, Earl
Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birmingh'm MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) Magnus, Sir Philip Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-
Courthope, G. Loyd Moore, William Younger, George
Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. Morpeth, Viscount
Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.) Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield TELLER'S FOR THE NOES—Sir
Craik, Sir Henry Nield, Herbert Frederick Banbury and Mr.
Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon Randles, Sir John Scurrah George D. Faber.

Bill read a second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time to-morrow.