HC Deb 20 August 1909 vol 9 cc1736-8

Save as hereinafter mentioned this Act shall apply from and after the twenty-eighth day of May, nineteen hundred and ten, to all dwelling-houses within the police boundaries of every Royal, Parliamentary, and police burgh in Scotland, provided that this Act shall not come into operation in any such burgh which, at the date of the census of nineteen hundred and one, contained within the police boundaries thereof a population not exceeding ten thousand, until it has been adopted by a Resolution of the town council of such burgh, at a meeting called for the purpose at any time after the passing of this Act, after one month's previous notice in a newspaper published or circulating in the burgh.

Such resolution shall be intimated to the Secretary for Scotland and published in the "Edinburgh Gazette," and shall come into force as from the twenty-eighth day of May immediately following such publication.

Amendment made: After the word "all" ["all dwelling-houses"], to insert the word "small."—[Mr. Ure.]

Sir F. BANBURY moved, after the word "burgh"["circulating in the burgh"], to insert the words "and the adoption of this Act may be similarly rescinded." This is a proposal to allow burghs, if they find they have made a mistake in adopting the Act, to rescind it. If a burgh adopts the Act voluntarily, surely the natural sequence is that the burgesses may, if they think well, rescind it?

Mr. T. L. CORBETT

I second the Amendment, which is a small one. The word "small" is one that the Lord Advocate is very fond of. I think he will admit that this is a very fair and reasonable and small Amendment.

Mr. URE

I cannot agree to insert these words. The view of the Government is that a small burgh of 10,000 inhabitants or under ought to consider well before it adopts this Act. Once it has adopted it, that decision must be irrevocable.

Mr. WATT

The small burghs which have the option of bringing themselves under this Act ought to have the option, if they find they have made a mistake, of rescinding their resolution. It should not be like the laws of the Medes and Persians—irrevocable.

Lord ROBERT CECIL

I always thought that the Scotch people were a righting race, but no English Member would be content to be treated in the way the Lord Advocate treats the Scottish Members. He has given no reasons at all for his refusal. He says: "The Government have decided; the Government says this or that"—generally in a sentence, and then he sits down again. That may be good enough for Scotland; it may be the way its Members are accustomed to be treated; but if the Lord Advocate thinks that that

Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."—[Mr. Ure.]

Mr. SCOTT-DICKSON

I do not propose to divide the House against the third reading. I only desire to renew the protest I have already made against the Compound-

kind of manner is suited to Members generally, he may find out that his Bills do not pass so easily.

Sir HENRY CRAIK

As representing a small Scottish minority on these benches, I cordially support the words of my Noble Friend. The attitude of the Lord Advocate has been in strong contrast to that which he showed upstairs. He has not deigned to give us any reasons whatever. He says: "That is our decision, and you must accept it," or "The law is so-and-so, and that, therefore, is the reason"—as on this Amendment. I strongly protest against our having no argument but the ipse dixit of the Lord Advocate.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The House divided: Ayes, 20; Noes, 73.

Division No. 490.] AYES. [4.40 p.m.
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Gretton, John Randles, Sir John Scurrah
Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) Guinness, Hon. R. (Haggerston) Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel
Corbett, T. L. Hamilton, Marquess of Tuke, Sir John Batty
Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott- Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert Watt, Henry A.
Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Hills, J. W.
Fell, Arthur Lamont, Norman TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir F. Banbury and Sir H. Craik.
Fletcher, F. S. Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Forster, Henry William Morpeth, Viscount
NOES.
Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) Gill, A. H. O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)
Balfour, Robert (Lanark) Glendinning, R. G. O'Grady, J.
Barnard, E. B. Griffith, Ellis J. O'Malley, William
Barnes, G. N. Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) Parker, James (Halifax)
Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) Rees, J D.
Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-sh.) Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Bryce, J. Annan Haworth, Arthur A. Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Hazleton, Richard Russell, Rt. Hon. T. W.
Byles. William Pollard Henderson, Arthur (Durham) Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)
Cleland, G. W. Henry, Charles S. Sears, J. E.
Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) Herbert, Colonel Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) Seddon, J.
Cooper, G. J. Hobart, Sir Robert Sloan, Thomas Henry
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) Hyde, Clarendon G. Steadman, W. C.
Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) Idris, T. H. W. Stewart, Halley (Greenock)
Crooks, William Jowett, F. W. Sutherland, J. E.
Cross, Alexander Kekewich, Sir George Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)
Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) Kelley, George D. Thorne, William (West Ham)
Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) Laidlaw, Robert Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander
Erskine, David C. Mackarness, Frederic C. Waring, Walter
Esslemont, George Birnie M'Callum, John M. White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)
Everett, R. Lacey M'Micking, Major G. Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)
Faber, G. H. (Boston) Mallet, Charles E. Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Falconer, J. Marnham, F. J.
Fenwick, Charles Myer, Horatio TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain Norton and Mr. Fuller.
Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter Nicholls, George
Gibson, J. P.

ing Clause, which I consider is an excrescence on this Bill. I have no objection to the other proposals of the Bill, which are designed to remove the evils complained of.

Question, "That the Bill be now read the third time," put, and agreed to.