§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clause 1:
§ MR. RAWLINSON (Cambridge University)
said he wished to move the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Kingston, after the word "Possession" to insert the words "to which this Act applies, and." These words led up to a new clause which was also on the Paper in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Kingston—(1) His Majesty may by Order in Council apply this Act to any British Possession where His Majesty is satisfied that by the law of such Possession a company incorporated in the United Kingdom and having a place of business 994 in such Possession is entitled to privileges similar to those conferred by this Act. (2) His Majesty in Council may revoke any such Order when it appears that the law of the British Possession has been so altered that it would not authorise the making of an Order under this section.The Bill proposed to give power to certain companies to hold land in England—a power which they had not at present. When the matter was discussed on the Second Reading it was naturally agreed that it was necessary to prevent undesirable companies springing up here and getting the benefits of the Bill while they were not subject to proper restrictions. The object of the Amendment was to apply the Act only where the laws of the Colony or Possession to which the Act would apply properly safeguarded the interests of investors.
In page 1, line 5, after the word 'Possession,' to insert the words 'to which this Act applies, and.'"—(Mr. Rawlinson.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ *THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Sir H. KEARLEY,) Devonport
said he had had the opportunity of speaking to the hon. and learned Member for Kingston with regard to these Amendments, and when the lion. and learned Gentleman explained to him what he wanted, he saw no real necessity for them. The hon. and learned Gentleman spoke specially of the Channel Islands. Only so recently as last year they had had a most important conference with the Channel Islands' authorities with reference to their bringing their laws tip to such a point as to prevent the recurrence of the evils associated with the promotion of certain companies in these Islands. That conference had already borne good fruit. Jersey had already passed a law by which they gave no registration to a company in that Island unless it confined its operations to Jersey. As regarded Guernsey, the authorities met them to a considerable extent. Their law did not go so far as that of Jersey, but it had been already brought up to the point which satisfied the Board of Trade here. They had accepted our Companies Acts of 1890, 1893 and 1900. 995 As the House was aware the Government had a Consolidation Bill in hand which would incorporate these and last year's Act. A draft copy had been submitted to Guernsey and he had every hope that they would adopt it. Under these circumstances the hon. and learned Member for Kingston was good enough to say that the case he wanted to provide for had been met; and, therefore, he asked the hon. and learned Member to withdraw the Amendment.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
thought it was a great pity that the Bill now before the Committee had any restrictive or limiting words whatever. He should have thought that it would have been the right thing to see English companies incorporated abroad.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said he might be in order in proposing a further Amendment by inserting the words "in British Possessions or elsewhere abroad."
§ MR. RAWLINSON
said that though he was hardly satisfied with the hon. Gentleman's explanation he would not press the Amendment.
§ Leave to withdraw refused.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that all he desired to make clear was that in England we had a large number of companies formed and registered and which did business in British Possessions as well as every other country on the face of the globe. When they found there were restrictions there was not a business man who did not wonder why there were these stupid restrictions to prevent business being done in the particular country. But when they found there were similar restrictions here with reference to companies in British Possessions, and that they were 996 not permitted to hold land in this country, then they though it was only reasonable that there should be restrictions against us. He hoped the Committee would agree with him that all these restrictions should be swept away, and that it should be made as easy as possible between one country and another. He regretted this Amendment because, although it would do something in the direction of these restrictions being swept away, it did not go to the extent he would like to see it go.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD moved to add after "1907," the words "and complied with all the other requirements of Section 35 including an address to which notices might be sent or at which they might be served in accordance with such section." He said that the Amendment made it clear that, if a company registered abroad desired to do business in the United Kingdom, it must have the name and an address of a person in the United Kingdom on whom notice could be served and to whom process could be sent. It was to this particular section that the clause now before the Committee referred. If a company registered in a British Possession desired to own land in England, it was now required to company with Section 35, subsection (a), (b), (c) of the Act of 1907; "(a)" required a company to file a certified copy of its memorandum or its charter or statutes; "(b)" said it must give the names and addresses of one or more persons authorised to accept service. Why should there be a distinction made between a company which wanted to carry on business in England and a company which simply wanted to own land? This Bill wanted to make a portion of Section 35 of the Act of 1907 applicable to the company which wished to own land in England, requiring it to send in a list of its directors. But, supposing they did send in a list, if they did not go on filing one from year to year, in nine or ten years time it would be a list of dead people. What was the object of leaving out, the other requirements of the Act of 997 last year? He proposed that all the requirements of Section 35 of that Act should apply, and he would give two illustrations to show how necessary it was. Supposing a company owning land refused to pay rates, there would be no person on whom notice could be served. At present it was clear that no company could own land in this country unless it had got an address at which notice might be served; but if this Bill were passed in its present shape, it need not have an address, the list of directors might be an old list, and the articles or statutes of the company might have been altered fifty times without any of the alterations having been registered. If all the provisions of Section 35 of the Act of 1907 were applicable to a company which did business in England, they ought to be applicable to a company which simply owned land here, and he submitted that the Bill ought not to be accepted unless it was amended in that way.
In page 1, line 9, after the word '1907,' to insert the words and complied with all the other requirements of Section thirty-five, including an address to which all notices or processes may be sent or served in accordance with such section, and continues from time to time to comply therewith.'"—(Mr. William Rutherford.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ SIR H. KEARLEY
said he could assure the hon. Member that they had secured all they wanted and that there was no necessity to draft the whole of the provisions of the section of the Act of last year into the clause. The main provision of the section was made applicable, and they were satisfied that no company would be able to take an improper advantage of the Bill. Under certain circumstances the other provisions of the section of the Act of 1907 would also apply.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that no provision was made for the filing of any alterations in the company's articles or statutes or in the list of directors, and subsection 2 of Section 998 35 which said that "a process shall be sufficiently served if it is left at that address," was left out. What was the object of providing for an address if they left out those words? Then why should not a company owning land in this country have to file a summary of its affairs at Somerset House the same as any other company, and be liable to the same fine of £50 if it broke any of the provisions of the section? He maintained that any common-sense man would insist upon these provisions being incorporated in the present Bill.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said he certainly suggested, that because they took certain subsections and said they should apply to companies owning land in this country but they did not intend to include the rest of the matters which were included in the section outside (a), (b) and (c). They were entitled to complain that the President of the Board of Trade was not there. He supposed he should not be in order to move to report progress, but at all events he desired to press his Amendment.
§ MR. MARKHAM (Nottinghamshire, Mansfield)
said as he was responsible for these paragraphs, and the Government had accepted his Amendments relating to paragraphs (a) and (b) of Clause 35 of the Companies Act of last year, he thought the Secretary to the Board of Trade would be well advised in having alterations in the memorandum and articles of association registered at Somerset House. He had an Amendment moved that all companies registered abroad with transfer offices in this country should deposit their Articles and Memorandum of Association together with a list of their shareholders and the Government accepted that Amendment. It was very careless on his part not to have put down in the same paragraph an Amendment to the effect that any alterations in the Memorandum and Articles of Association should be at once registered at Somerset House; otherwise the articles might be altered 999 from time to time in foreign countries where British companies were registered and they have no knowledge of it. He hoped the Under-Secretary would on the Report stage introduce such Amendments as would cover that point, which would be helpful in finding out exactly the position of these companies.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that if the hon. Gentleman would assure him that in the meantime the matter should be looked into with a view of seeing whether there were not some other provision in Section 35 that ought to be included, he would withdraw the Amendment.
§ *SIR H. KEARLEY
said that Section 35 applied to every company incorporated outside the United Kingdom which had a place of business in the United Kingdom or a transfer office. Therefore, these particular Colonial companies in whose interest the Bill was being passed, only got the benefit of the Bill provided they were carrying on business in this country. If they were, the section in its entirety would apply to them. It was specified in the Bill that they must comply with (a), (b), and (c), which he thought was sufficient for the purpose. Section 35 of the Act of 1907 applied to all companies, whether foreign or Colonial, if they carried on business in this country.
§ carrying on business in this country? A company may fall wider this Act and not under the 1907 Act.
§ SIR H. KEARLEY
said the Act only applied to companies established in British Possessions and carrying on business here. It had nothing whatever to do with ordinary businesses carried on here.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that if a company registered in a British Possession carried on business here it must comply with the whole of the 35th Section. But this Act would clearly only benefit a company registered in a British possession which aid not carry on business here and was not complying with the whole Act but simply desired to own land, and the right hon. Gentleman's Bill was to allow that company to own land without complying with the whole section and without carrying on business, and it did not apply to a company that was carrying on business here at all.
§ SIR H. KEARLEY
said that was exactly what the Bill did apply to. It applied to companies carrying on business here which were incorporated in British Possessions.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 32; Noes, 168. (Division List No. 225.)1001
|Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. Sir Alex. F||Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham)||Gretton, John|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.||Hamilton, Marquess of|
|Balcarres, Lord||Courthope, G. Loyd||Harris, Frederick Leverton|
|Baldwin, Stanley||Craig, Charlse Curtis (Antrim, S.)||Harrison-Broadley, H. B.|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Craik, Sir Henry||Heaton, John Henniker|
|Baring, Capt. Hn. G (Winchester)||Dalrymple, Viscount||Hill, Sir Clement|
|Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)||Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon||Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)|
|Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks||Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers.||Hunt, Rowland|
|Beckett, Hon. Gervase||Du Cros, Arthur Philip||Joynson-Hicks, William|
|Bowles, G. Stewart||Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan)||Keswick, William|
|Bridgeman, W. Clive||Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.)||Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.|
|Bull, Sir William James||Fardell, Sir T. George||Lockwood, Rt. Hn.-Col. A. R.|
|Butcher, Samuel Henry||Fell, Arthur||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin, S.)|
|Carlile, E. Hildred||Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey||Lowe, Sir Francis William|
|Cave, George||Forster, Henry William||Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Gardner, Ernest||MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh|
|Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey.||Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)||McArthur, Charles|
|Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)||Goulding, Edward Alfred||Magnus, Sir Philip|
|Mason, James F. (Windsor)||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)||Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)|
|Morpeth, Viscount||Salter, Arthur Clavell||Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)|
|Morrison-Bell, Captain||Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)||Willoughby de Eresby, Lord|
|Nield, Herbert||Sloan, Thomas Henry||Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B. Stuart.|
|Parkes, Ebenezer||Starkey, John R.||Younger, George|
|Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)||Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.|
|Percy, Earl||Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Ashley and Mr. William Nicholson.|
|Remnant, James Farquharson||Valentia, Viscount|
|Ronaldshay, Earl of||Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)|
|Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)||Faber, G. H. (Boston)||Lynch, H. B.|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Farrell, James Patrick||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)|
|Adkins, W. Ryland D.||Fiennes, Hon. Eustace||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Findlay, Alexander||Maclean, Donald|
|Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)||Fuller, John Michael F.||Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.|
|Ashton, Thomas Gair||Fullerton, Hugh||M'Hugh, Patrick A.|
|Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry||Gill, A. H.||M'Micking, Major. G.|
|Balfour, Rebort (Lanark)||Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John||Maddison, Frederick|
|Barker, John||Glendinning, R. G.||Mallet, Charles E.|
|Barnes, G. N.||Glover, Thomas||Markham, Arthur Basil|
|Barran, Rowland Hirst||Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford||Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)|
|Beauchamp, E.||Gooch, George Peadboy (Bath)||Marnham, F. J.|
|Beaumont, Hon. Herbert||Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)||Massie, J.|
|Beck, A. Cecil||Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward||Micklem, Nathaniel|
|Bell, Richard||Griffith, Ellis J.||Mond, A.|
|Bellairs, Carlyon||Gulland, John W.||Montagu, Hon. E. S.|
|Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt)||Gurdon, Rt. Hn. Sir W. Brampton||Mooney, J. J.|
|Benn, W, (Tw'r Hamlets, S. Geo.)||Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.||Morse, L. L.|
|Berridge, T. H. D.||Hall, Frederick||Morton, Alpheus Cleophas|
|Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romf'rd||Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)||Murphy, John (Kerry, East)|
|Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)||Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)||Myer, Horatio|
|Bowerman, C. W.||Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-sh||Napier, T. B.|
|Branch, James||Harwood, George||Nicholls, George|
|Brooke, Stopford||Haslam, James (Derbyshire)||Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r|
|Bryce, J. Annan||Haworth, Arthur A.||Nolan, Joseph|
|Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn||Hasel, Dr. A. E.||Norton, Capt. Cecil William|
|Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Hedges, A. Paget||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard|
|Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles||Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Nuttall, Harry|
|Byles, William Pollard||Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)|
|Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Higham, John Sharp||O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)|
|Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight||Hobart, Sir Robert||O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)|
|Cawley, Sir Frederick||Hogan, Michael||O'Grady, J.|
|Channing, Sir Francis Allston||Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N.||O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)|
|Cheetham, John Frederick||Horniman, Emslie John||Parker, James (Halifax)|
|Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.||Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Partington, Oswald|
|Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.||Hudson, Walter||Paulton, James Mellor|
|Cleland, J. W.||Hyde, Clarendon||Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)|
|Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)||Idris, T. H. W.||Pearce, William (Limehouse)|
|Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras, W)||Illingworth, Percy H.||Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Isaacs, Rufus Daniel||Pickersgill, Edward Hare|
|Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinst'd)||Jenkins, J.||Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.|
|Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.||Johnson, John (Gateshead)||Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh, Central)|
|Cotton, Sir H. J. S.||Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)||Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford. E.)|
|Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)||Jones, Leif (Appleby)||Radford, G. H.|
|Crooks, William||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire||Rainy, A. Rolland|
|Crosfield, A. H.||Jowett, F. W.||Rea, Russell (Gloucester)|
|Delany, William||Kearley, Sir Hudson E.||Rees, J. D.|
|Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)||Kekewich, Sir George||Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th|
|Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras. N)||King, Alfred John (Knutsford)||Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton|
|Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles||Laidlaw, Robert||Ridsdale, E. A.|
|Dobson, Thomas W.||Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster)||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)|
|Duckworth, James||Lambert, George||Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)|
|Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)||Lardner, James Carrige Rushe||Robson, Sir William Snowdon|
|Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall||Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich)||Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)|
|Edwards, Clement Denbigh)||Levy, Sir Maurice||Roche, Augustine (Cork)|
|Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)||Lewis, John Herbert||Roche, John (Galway, East)|
|Essex, R. W.||Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas||Rogers, F. E. Newman|
|Evans, Sir Samuel T.||Luttrell, Hugh Fownes||Rowlands, J.|
|Everett, R. Lacey||Lyell, Charles Henry||Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter|
|Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)||Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)||Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)|
|Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)||Sutherland, J. E.||Whittaker, Rt. Hn Sir Thomas P|
|Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)||Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)||Wiles, Thomas|
|Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)||Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury||Wilkie, Alexander|
|Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne||Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
|Seaverns, J. H.||Thomasson, Franklin||Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)|
|Seddon, J.||Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset, E||Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)|
|Shackleton, David James||Thome, G. R. (Wolverhampton||Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)|
|Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick, B.)||Tillett, Louis John||Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)|
|Sheehan, Daniel Daniel||Torrance, Sir A. M.||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoushton)|
|Sherwell, Arthur James||Wads worth, J.||Winfrey, R.|
|Simon, John Allsebrook||Walsh, Stephen||Wood, T. M'Kinnon|
|Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie||Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent||Young, Samuel|
|Stanger, H. Y.||Wason, Rt. Hn. E (Clackmannan|
|Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N. W.)||Waterlow, D. S.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.|
|Steadman, W. C.||Weir, James Galloway|
|Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)||White, Sir George (Norfolk)|
|Strachey, Sir Edward||White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)|
|Straus, B. S. (Mile End)||Whitehead, Rowland|
|Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. Sir Alex. F||Forster, Henry William||Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)||Starkey, John R.|
|Ashley, W. W.||Gordon, J.||Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.)|
|Balcarres, Lord||Gretton, John||Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)|
|Banner, John S. Harmood.||Hamilton, Marquess of||Valentia, Viscount|
|Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks||Hill, Sir Clement||Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)|
|Bowles, G. Stewart||Houston, Robert Paterson||Younger, George|
|Bridgeman, W. Clive||Hunt, Rowland|
|Carlile, E. Hildred||MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Watson Rutherford and Mr. Hugh Barrie.|
|Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey.||Mason, James F. (Windsor)|
|Clive, Percy Archer||Morrison-Bell, Captain|
|Courthope, G. Loyd||Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington|
|Dalrymple, Viscount||Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel|
|Abraham, William (Rhondda)||Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)||Barran, Rowland Hirst|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry||Beaumont, Hon. Hubert|
|Adkins, W. Ryland D.||Balfour, Robert (Lanark)||Beck, A. Cecil|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Bellairs, Carlyen|
|Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)||Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)||Berridge, T. H. D.|
|Bowerman, C. W.||Holland, Sir William Henry||Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford, E.)|
|Bright, J. A.||Horniman, Emslie John||Radford, G. H.|
|Brodie, H. C.||Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th|
|Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh)||Hudson, Walter||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)|
|Bryce, J. Annan||Hyde, Clarendon||Roberts, Sir John H. (Denbighs)|
|Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Illingworth, Percy H.||Robinson, S.|
|Burnyeat, W. J. D.||Jones, Leif (Appleby)||Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)|
|Byles, William Pollard||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight||Jowett, F. W.||Rogers, F. E. Newman|
|Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.||Kearley, Sir Hudson E.||Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)|
|Cleland, J. W.||King, Alfred John (Knutsford)||Scarisbrick, T. T. L.|
|Cobbold, Felix Thornley||Lamont, Norman||Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)|
|Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras, W||Lardner, James Carrige Rushe||Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne|
|Cooper, G. J.||Lehmann, R. C.||Seaverns, J. H.|
|Corbett, C H (Sussex, E. Grinst'd||Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich)||Seddon, J.|
|Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)||Levy, Sir Maurice||Seely, Colonel|
|Crosfield, A. H.||Lewis, John Herbert||Shackleton, David James|
|Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)||Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R.||Sherwell, Arthur James|
|Davies Timothy (Fulham)||Luttrell, Hugh Fownes||Stanger, H. Y.|
|Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S)||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Duckworth, James||Mackarness, Frederic C.||Straus, B. S. (Mile End)|
|Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness||Maclean, Donald||Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)|
|Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)||Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.||Stuart, James (Sunderland)|
|Essex, R. W.||MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Taylor, John W. (Durham)|
|Esslemont, George Birnie||MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.)||Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)|
|Evans, Sir Samuel T.||M'Hugh, Patrick A.||Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)|
|Everett, R. Lacey||M'Micking, Major G.||Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr|
|Ferens, T. R.||Maddison, Frederick||Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton|
|Ffrench, Peter||Manfield, Harry (Northants)||Thorne, William (West Ham)|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||Markham, Arthur Basil||Tomkinson, James|
|Fuller, John Michael F.||Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)||Toulmin, George|
|Fullerton, Hugh||Marnham, F. J.||Verney, F. W.|
|Gill, A. H.||Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)||Walsh, Stephen|
|Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John||Massie, J.||Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)|
|Glendinning, R. G.||Masterman, C. F. G.||Ward, W. Dudley (S'thampton)|
|Glover, Thomas||Micklem, Nathaniel||Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.|
|Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford||Mond, A.||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)||Morrell, Philip||Waterlow, D. S.|
|Griffith, Ellis J.||Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)||White, Sir George (Norfolk)|
|Gulland, John W.||Nicholls, George||White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)|
|Gurdon, Rt. Hn. Sir W. Brampton||Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r||Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)|
|Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)||Nolan, Joseph||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
|Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil||Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)|
|Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss-sh||Nugent, Sir Walter Richard||Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)|
|Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N. E)||Nuttall, Harry||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)||Parker, James (Halifax)||Winfrey, R.|
|Haworth, Arthur A.||Partington, Oswald||Wood, T. M'Kinnon|
|Hazel, Dr. A. E.||Paulton, James Mellor|
|Hedges, A. Paget||Peace, Robert (Staffs, Leek)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Pickersgill, Edward Hare|
|Higham, John Sharp||Pollard, Dr.|
|Hobart, Sir Robert||Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.|
|Hobhouse, Charles E. H.||Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh, Central)|
Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause 2:
§ Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee proceeded to a division.
§ Mr. JOSEPH PEASE and the MASTER of ELIBANK were appointed Tellers for the Ayes, and, there being no Members willing to act as Tellers for the Noes, the Chairman declared that the Ayes had it.
§ Clause agreed to.1002
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
, on a point of order, asked the Chairman, under Standing Order 30, to record him as having voted against the clause just agreed to by the House.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment; read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.