HC Deb 08 August 1911 vol 29 cc1093-116

(1) If any Public Bill other than a Money Bill is passed by the House of Commons in three successive Sessions (whether of the same Parliament or not), and having been sent up to the House of Lords at least one month before the end of the Session, is rejected by the House of Lords in each of those Sessions, that Bill shall, on its rejection for the third time by the House of Lords, unless the House of Commons direct to the contrary, be presented to His Majesty and become an Act of Parliament on the Royal Assent being signified thereto, notwithstanding that the House of Lords have not consented to the Bill: Provided that this provision shall not take effect unless two years have elapsed between the date of the second reading in the first of those Sessions of the Bill in the House of Commons and the date on which it passes the House of Commons in the third of those Sessions.

(2) When a Bill is presented to His Majesty for assent in pursuance of the provisions of this Section, there shall be endorsed on the Bill the certificate of the Speaker of the House of Commons signed by him that the provision of this Section have been duly complied with.

(3) A Bill shall be deemed to be rejected by the House of Lords if it is not passed by the House of Lords either without Amendment or with such Amendments only as may be agreed to by both Houses.

(4) A Bill shall be deemed to be the same Bill as a former Bill sent up to the House of Lords in the preceding Session if, when it is sent up to the House of Lords, it is identical with the former Bill or contains only such alterations as are certified by the Speaker of the House of Commons to be necessary owing to the time which has elapsed since the date of the former Bill, or to represent any Amendments which have been made by the House of Lords in the former Bill in the preceding Session and any Amendments which are certified by the Speaker to have been made by the House of Lords in the third Session and agreed to by the House of Commons shall be inserted in the Bill as presented for Royal Assent in pursuance of this Section.

Provided that the House of Commons may, if they think fit, on the passage of such a Bill through the House in the second or third Session, suggest any further Amendments without inserting the Amendments in the Bill, and any such suggested Amendments shall be considered by the House of Lords, and if agreed to by that House, shall be treated as Amendments made by the House of Lords and agreed to by the House of Commons; but the exercise of this power by the House of Commons shall not affect the operation of this Section in the event of the Bill being rejected by the House of Lords.

Lords Amendment: In Sub-section (1) after the word "Bill" ["a Money Bill"] to insert the words "or a Bill containing any provisions to extend the maximum duration of Parliament beyond five years."


I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

It has fallen to my lot on two occasions in the last few years to ask the House to resist a proposal of this character. But I think if hon. Gentlemen cast their minds back they will remember that the Government have always indicated clearly that their objection to exemptions of this character are wholly different both in principle and in degree from objections to exemptions of a class which have so often been brought before us in the discussion of this measure. We must remember that it is an essential and indispensable part of our proposals for constitutional change that the life of Parliament should be shortened. That was the view of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman on the very first occasion when these proposals were laid before the House, now nearly five years ago, and we have never varied at all from that in any respect. Further, when you are dealing with questions, we will say, of the Protestant succession, when you are dealing with questions affecting the principle of devolution, or questions affecting the Prerogative of the Crown, or questions which may be alleged to be questions of great gravity, or questions which it may be alleged were not sufficiently discussed at the election, or on which there is left room for opinion, it would be necessary to interpret any provision making exceptions of that character and to have the interpretation by a special tribunal of some sort that may be called into existence. The question of any proposal to extend the life of Parliament beyond five years is of a character so simple that no complication of that kind could arise. We are, I think, bound to make every effort in our power to give reasonable reassurance where we can, without prejudice to any essential principles of the Bill, to persons to whom we are opposed. The Government will, therefore, more to agree with the Lords' Amendment excepting from the scope of the Parliament Bill any measure designed to extend the life of Parliament beyond the new limit of five years to which the Bill fixed it.


I desire to offer practically the same protest that I made earlier in the evening with regard to this new policy of the Government. Why is this course taken; whom is it to please? For what purpose has it been brought forward? The party on the other side have not asked for it. We voted against it in Committee. We cheered the Ministers when they opposed it, and without, so far as I can see, serving any purpose, for it is not going to please the Lords, it is not going to get their support, it is not pleasing hon. Gentlemen opposite, while, I venture to say, it will displease many of the Government's supporters. If there is no reason for doing it, if it is going to satisfy no public interest or provide the basis of any compromise, I confess I cannot understand why the Government should ask their supporters to reverse the position as they are doing to-night. What does the Amendment imply? It implies distrust of the House of Commons. It implies that the House of Commons cannot represent the people. To bring forward this Amendment indicates to me that the Government have not the confidence in the House of Commons which I thought they had. I say it is unnecessarily putting the House of Commons in chains. Nobody will seriously suggest that any House of Commons would dare to propose the continuance of its power. It never has been proposed under the Septennial Act, nor is there precedent for any such proposal under the five years proposed by the Government. Therefore, if you have got no cause for fearing the House of Commons might extend this power, why limit it by statute for fear of that great danger? I can conceive no cause for further exemptions. I only desire to say again I much regret that the Government have thought fit, and in keeping with their position and their policy, to bring forward an Amendment of this kind which I think does not increase the dignity of the House of Commons.


I do not frequently find myself in agreement with the hon. Gentleman, but I think the whole House, considering his argument, must come to this conclusion that it is completely justified in this sense—that, by proposing this Amendment, the Home Secretary and the Government of which he is the mouthpiece have delivered the most positive blow at the whole principle of the Parliament Bill that has been struck in the whole course of this discussion. Some hon. Gentlemen do not agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is so, but I think that a few moments' consideration will show that it necessarily follows from the Amendment which the Government have themselves indicated. What is the basis upon which the Government found this? It is that some statutory safeguard is called for in order to prevent such abuse of powers on the part of the House of Commons as will allow them to prolong their lifetime beyond the period intended by this Bill. Why is any such security required? There can only be one reason, and it is that you have abandoned the whole and the only logical principle upon which you have founded yourselves to claim unexampled powers in the Parliament Bill.

If it be true, as was well put by the hon. Gentleman, that the only logical principle upon which the Parliament Bill was ever founded can be successfully defended by argument, universal admission must be given to this view that the principle is this that there is an irresistible presumption that within a short time of a General Election the House of Commons on all questions represents the will of the people. That principle may be good or bad, but there is no other principle which can be represented as the substratum of the Parliament Bill. If that is so it is childish folly to say that in the case of a proposal to prolong the duration of Parliament any restriction is necessary when over and over again matters however important you have attempted to leave to the unrestricted power of the House of Commons. The hon. Gentleman has with complete logic and consistency pointed out that the moving of this Amendment on the part of the Government has destroyed the only logical basis on which the Parliament Bill has ever been founded. It is clear that the House of Commons does not in the view of the Government even during those critical years during which they can propose any measure however subversive of anything we prize in our Constitution, necessarily represent the considered will of the people. If that is so there is no reason at any other point for a strong irresistible presumption that it represents the will of the people. In this one Amendment the Government have done more to reinforce the argument I and my friends have introduced to the House and the Country than all the arguments we have used. The whole case is stripped of any vestige of plausibility or truth it ever had by this Amendment.

Lords Amendment: At the end of Subsection (1), insert—

"Provided further that any Bill—

  1. (a) Which affects the existence of the Crown or the Protestant succession thereto; or
  2. b)Which establishes a National Parliament or Assembly or a National Council in Ireland, Scotland, Wales, or England, with legislative powers therein; or
  3. (c)Which has been referred to the Joint Committee, and which in their opinion raises an issue of great gravity upon which the judgment of the country has not been sufficiently ascertained
shall not be presented to His Majesty nor receive the Royal Assent under the provision of this Section unless and until it has been submitted to and approved by the electors in manner to be hereafter provided by Act of Parliament.

(2) Any question whether a Bill comes within the meaning of paragraphs (a), (b), of Sub-section (1) of this Section shall be decided by the Joint Committee."


I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

I do so for reasons which have been abundantly stated to the House in the course of the long debates on this matter this year and last, of which reasons I gave a short epitome this afternoon, and also for reasons which have been most clearly placed before the country at two general elections.


I do not know whether the Government think that this is a proper hour at which to have a debate upon this question. There may be some truth in the statement that this which is a fundamental part of the controversy has been discussed on previous occasions, though I do not know that the right hon. Gentleman's summary added much to our knowledge. Still it is true that we have dealt at great length with this irreconcilable point of difference between the two Houses. I do not believe it is possible at this time of night to continue, with either dignity or utility, the discussion of this question; therefore, it is sufficient for me, as far as I am concerned, to say, not with more emphasis than before, but with renewed emphasis, that this Amendment, and this Amendment alone, is the cause of the vital difference before the two Houses. It is this Amendment and this Amendment alone that has caused the Government to give the criminal advice to the Sovereign. It is in order to prevent this Amendment being introduced into the Bill, and for that purpose alone, that they propose to destroy the independence and the whole existence of the Second Chamber so far as this particular Bill is concerned. It is on account of this Amendment, and this Amendment alone, that they are turning avowedly to a single chamber system of government.

What is this Amendment? It is in substance and in essence an Amendment intended to give the people of this country an opportunity of saying whether they will or will not have the great revolution in our Constitution which the Government propose to bring forward in the shape of Home Rule. It does not prejudge the case of Home Rule. When the Government Bill is brought forward it may meet with universal acclamation in every part of the House and of the country. Ulster as well as Connaught may embrace it. It may receive favour in Scotland as well as in England. This Amendment does not seek to condemn an unknown scheme of Home Rule; but it says that when that scheme is brought forward the country shall have an opportunity of pronouncing upon it. The Government are determined that the country shall not have that opportunity. For that reason, and that reason alone, they refuse to accept this Amendment, and are determined to thrust it down the throats of the other House by a procedure which, I think, after the debate of the last two days, every impartial person will admit is utterly subversive, not only of the ancient constitution of this country, but of every constitution that is based upon the independent existence of a second legislative chamber. I therefore propose, for my part, to take no further part in this debate. I do not suggest that my hon. Friends who have not had the same opportunity of speaking that I have had should imitate my reticence. I do not think anybody on this Bench at all events wishes to add to what has already been said upon this controversy. We shall content ourselves by recording a final vote against the procedure on the part of the Government which stands out in signal infamy in the whole history of the Constitution of this country.


What we contend, and what we have said before, is, that the existence of the Monarchy, of the Protestant succession to the Throne, and the integrity of the United Kingdom are matters of such vital importance that they are not to be left to the mercy of a single chamber. Say what hon. Members will, even with the Amendments foreshadowed by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, this Bill establishes the omnipotence in fundamental matters of a temporary majority in the House of Commons. Such a settlement is at variance with all the traditions of the Liberal party. No civilised country throughout the world, however advanced, would consent to it for one moment. You are turning your backs upon all your old declarations in this House, and your action in connection with Home Rule is going to be the very action that you have denounced over and over again. For many years you have constantly denounced that state of affairs under which, according to you, a Unionist Government selected for a specific purpose was enabled to force upon the country measures that it did not want, and which indeed it positively disliked. The Unionist Government of 1900, you have said, was elected to finish the war and not to pass the Education Bill. You are going to follow in the steps of that Government.

The burden of your song for years has been, "Look at the evils which have resulted from uncontrolled legislation by a single chamber; when the Unionists are in power representative Government is a sham; they act in direct opposition to the will of the people." Now you produce, as your ideal solution of the difficulties before us, an even wider extension of that very evil which you have denounced in such unmeasured terms. You propose to make use of these methods to pass Home Rule behind the backs of the people. I do not believe in bitter recriminations, but we have come to the conclusion that your action is due to the necessities of your position—your position of dependence upon the Irish Nationalist members. I do not believe in throwing wounding accusations across the floor of the House, or of intentionally rubbing opponents up the wrong way, but we cannot help thinking that you have thrown all your old principles to the winds, because the Irish members have said: "This must be your solution; you must pass Home Rule without referring it to the people of England, or out you go." I know the Home Secretary resented earlier in the Debate the suggestion that Home Rule had been kept in the background at the last election, and stated that hon. Members on that side of the House have quoted passage after passage from Unionist speeches at the last election pointing out that the danger of Home Rule is imminent, and saying that Home Rule was the real question. Of course we did our best to point out the imminence of the danger of Home Rule, but were we successful? We were successful in Devonshire, which was represented in 1900 by ten supporters of the Government and three Unionists, but which is now represented by eleven Unionists and two supporters of the Government. But elsewhere it cannot be denied for one moment that success attended the persistent efforts of Liberal candidates to keep Home Rule out of sight. It is quite true that here and there Cabinet Ministers perorated about the concession of local self-government to Ireland subject to the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament, but what about the rank and file? County electors do not read the speeches of Cabinet Ministers; they take their programmes from the rival political party candidates, and we all know that the Liberal candidates generally avoided Home Rule like the plague, and any references to Home Rule had to be dragged out of them. How can it possibly be contended that Home Rule was not kept in the background in view of its deliberate and purposeful exclusion from the election addresses of most of the Liberal candidates, and in view of its still more significant exclusion from the election addresses of Cabinet Ministers? Has not the election address of the Prime Minister always been looked upon in the past as a comprehensive exposition of the whole policy of his party. It was so regarded in Mr. Gladstone's time. I put it frankly to hon. Gentlemen opposite, Can they honestly pretend, in view of the deliberate exclusion of the mention of Home Rule from the election addresses of the Prime Minister and of the great bulk of his supporters, that we are not justified in saying Home Rule was kept in the background? Is it not perfectly certain that if declarations in favour of Home Rule would have added to the popularity of the Liberal candidates such declarations would have been included in their election addresses? Did not exclusion mean that the result of inclusion was feared? How positively foolish to contend otherwise. The facts are against hon. Gentlemen opposite and that is why we think you will be incurring a very serious responsibility if you try to pass Home Rule behind the backs of the people. You say the people have changed their minds in regard to Home Rule. Well, why not give them the opportunity of saying so. Do not try to pass Home Rule by trying to trick the people out of their rights. It is perfectly certain it will not pay you in the end. This legislation will not be accepted by the country. All these Amendments seek to do is to lay down some such distinction as is drawn by every democratically governed country between ordinary legislation and legislation fundamentally affecting the Constitution. We are absolutely confident in regard to the future. You may for the moment put false issues before the people but truth is bound in the end to prevail, and sooner or later the people will realise we are struggling now not to preserve the veto of the House of Lords but to secure the right of absolute veto for the people themselves, to whom it rightly belongs.

Mr. JOHN GORDON (Londonderry, S.)

I represent a people deeply interested in the matters now under discussion. I am one of the representatives of the loyalist people of Ireland [Hon. MEMBERS: "Divide, divide."]. Interruptions of that kind show the tempers of hon. Gentlemen who do not want to listen to discussion. We are just as industrious and worthy a part of the population as any other portion of the United Kingdom, and all we ask for is British fair play. If we are to have a change in the form of government under which we have lived and under which the Unionist people in Ireland have prospered, that change ought not to be brought about until the opinion of the people has been obtained. I do not claim anything more than simple fair play on this question. The Home Secretary announced last night in this House that the Government intended to pass Home Rule in this Parliament. That announcement makes this matter of vital importance to us. We know that on previous occasions when this matter was brought before the Houses of Parliament and passed on two occasions the country disapproved of Home Rule. I think we have a right to demand that the opinion of the people should be taken on a question which is of such vital importance to a very large section of the people of Ireland. All I ask for and suggest for my fellow Unionist in Ireland is that the people of Great Britain should accord to us fair play by allowing the opinion of the people to be taken upon this great question before it is passed into law. If that opinion proves to be against us, however much we may regret it, and however much it may be to our disadvantage, at all events it will show that we are in a minority.

How can you expect the Unionists of Ireland to acquiesce in a great change in the form of government under which they have lived so long when they feel that that change is only being carried by a Government which is under the control of the Nationalist representatives in this House? You must have some regard for the will of the people of the United Kingdom. How can we be expected to acquiesce in the wishes of a Cabinet which is under the domination and control of the Nationalists, of those whom we have known to be disloyal to the Constitution, who are against the industrial improvement of Ireland, who have no sympathy or knowledge of our industries, and who are wholly incapable of understanding what is necessary for the progress and prosperity of Ireland? I ask this House, in common justice to the Unionists of Ireland, not to disagree with the Lords Amendment, at all events so far as they relate to Home Rule. You ought not to force upon an industrious and law-abiding community a system of Government which is foreign to everything they desire, which they believe to be contrary to their best interests, and which they regard as being the most disastrous thing that could happen to a country in which they have the deepest interest and love.


I should not have intervened at this late hour but for the fact that when I rose this afternoon the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the closure, although not a single Member on the Back Benches had had the slightest opportunity of speaking upon a situation which is absolutely new. The hon. Member for the City of Cork this afternoon threw out a suggestion that a conference might be held with regard to the Irish difficulty. I believe a great number of Members on this side of the House would cordially welcome such a conference. [HON. MEMBERS: "'Vide, 'vide."]


I would remind the House that at an earlier stage this afternoon, we specifically suspended the Eleven o clock Rule in order that the Debate might be continued. I therefore suggest the hon. Member should be allowed to proceed.


The suggestion of the hon. Member for the City of Cork would, I am sure, receive support from many sides of the House because I believe everyone wants to see what is the irreducible minimum which can possibly be accepted. He told us that "The Times" and its brother the "Daily Mail" were prescribing the Unionist policy because at one time they mentioned they were in favour of Home Rule. I must ask him to believe it does not follow that either "The Times" or the "Daily Mail" represent the views of the majority of the Unionist party. If the hon. Member for Waterford stands where Parnell stood I think we can promise him in the future as we have given him in the past uncompromising resistance to his proposals. We have been told that it is the will of the people that Home Rule should be passed. I think that the predominant partner— England—which has clearly expressed its opinion against the Parliament Bill will never rest until the policy you are forcing upon it now has been reversed and until once more we have double chamber government such as every civilised country in the world possesses. When we are told that Home Rule was demanded by the people I think we are entitled to ask—has anyone a right to say the Government received a mandate when the people had not the smallest idea what the Home Rule Bill was! I very much doubt if any hon. Gentleman opposite knows what the Home Rule Bill is, and it is perfectly certain that the electors of Great Britain and Ireland had no conception whatever of what the measure might be. I think it is a hollow mockery to say that there was a mandate in favour of Home Rule. I had the honour of fighting a Liberal candidate and he professed great horror when it was suggested that he was in favour of Home Rule. He, in fact, described himself as a Liberal Home Ruler. At both the last elections when I heard the words "Home Rule" mentioned I was told that it was a bogey and that it was no part of the policy of the Government. If you say then that the electors voted for Home Rule at the last election you cannot any longer continue to say that the Parliament Bill was the absorbing question at that election. Everybody knows that in every constituency in the country Home Rule was hidden like a corpse. Hon. Gentlemen opposite were ashamed of it. Even the Prime Minister only became a Home Ruler at the point of the bayonet. Had the Government introduced their proposals for reform with the Preamble the delaying process would have been of some value, because there would have been a strong Second Chamber. But the mere fact that they have omitted any endeavour to reform the House of Lords, which we are told contains the idle rich, the robbers of the poor box and which was likened by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to an assembly of kangaroos, and the mere fact that they have done nothing whatever to alter the constitution of the House, shows that they have deliberately deceived the electors and that the whole foundation of their attack was not upon the functions of the Second Chamber but upon its hereditary constitution.


That point does not arise on this Amendment.


As to the Amendment, I venture to think that had the country realised that the Home Rule Bill was to be forced through by this back-stair method of the Parliament Bill instead of going through the ordinary British front door, the electors would most certainly have given a very different verdict at the recent elections. How could the right hon. Gentleman so frequently have said they had a mandate for Free Trade, for the Disestablishment of the Church in Wales, and for other questions? It is absolutely impossible to lay down that the people of this country have in any way declared that they desire to have the Parliament Bill alone. The Sovereign has been coerced—


I think I did not make myself clear to the hon. Member. The Debate which is now possible must be relevant to the Amendment which it is moved that this House disagree with—the Amendment circulated with the Papers. The hon. Member must confine his remarks to reasons in support of that Amendment.


Those who sit on these benches are of opinion that this is one of the vital questions which it is impossible to accept, the question of Home Rule, and there is no doubt whatever that if this Amendment was accepted there would be no question of the creation of Peers, and therefore until the electors have been able to give a clear expression of opinion upon this question, which twice they have rejected, there is not the smallest doubt that they are being betrayed and being deprived of their final vote as the arbiters of their fate. Because we are told that a Home Rule Bill is to be introduced under the Parliament Bill, I hope the Peers will stand firm in defence of the rights of the electors to declare whether they desire to have a Home Rule

Bill or not. I believe it is in the interest of the Government themselves that they should accept this Amendment, because once the electors realise that when the Government were making this appeal with regard to the abolition of the hereditary system in the Second Chamber, and that under that cloak they are prepared to introduce a Home Rule Bill, I believe the electors will agree with those who like myself are not in the smallest degree ashamed of anything that has been said in this House that the Government have been guilty of trickery and deception and have betrayed the electors.

Mr. CHURCHILL rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The House divided: Ayes, 311;Noes, 216.

Division No. 313.] AYES. [11.55 p.m.
Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)
Abraham, Rt. Hon. William (Rhondda) Cotton, William Francis Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)
Acland, Francis Dyke Cowan, W. H. Gulland, John William
Adamson, William Craig, Herbert James (Tynemouth) Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)
Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D. Crawshay-Williams (Eliot) Hackett, John
Agnew, Sir George William Crooks, William Hall, Frederick (Normanton)
Ainsworth, John Stirling Crumley, Patrick Hancock, J. G
Alden, Percy Cullinan, John Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)
Allen, A. A. (Dumbartonshire) Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)
Allen, Charles Peter (Stroud) Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)
Armitage, Robert Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds.)
Baker, H. T. (Accrington) Dawes, James Arthur Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)
Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) De Forest, Baron Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)
Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark) Delany, William Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)
Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) Denman, Hon. R. D. Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.)
Barnes, G. N. Devlin, Joseph Harwood, George
Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick) Dewar, Sir J. A. Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)
Barry, Redmond John (Tyrone, N.) Dillon, John Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry
Barton, William Donelan, Capt. A. Haworth, Sir Arthur A.
Beck, Arthur Cecil Doris, William Hayden, John Patrick
Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) Duffy, William J. Hayward, Evan
Bentham, G. J Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) Helme, Norval Watson
Bethell, Sir J. H. Edwards, Clement (Glamorgan, E.) Henderson, Arthur (Durham)
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) Henry, Sir Charles
Black, Arthur W. Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of Higham, John Sharp
Boland, John Pius Elverston, Sir Harold Hinds, John
Booth, Frederick Handel Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.
Bowerman, C. W. Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N) Hodge, John
Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) Essex, Richard Walter Hope, John Deans (Haddington)
Brace, William Esslemont, George Birnie Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich)
Brady, Patrick Joseph Falconer, James Hudson, Walter
Brocklehurst, William B. Farrell, James Patrick Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Bryce, J. Annan Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan)
Burke, E. Haviland Ferens, Thomas Robinson Illingworth, Percy H.
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Ffrench, Peter Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus
Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North) Field, William Jardine, Sir Thomas (Roxburgh)
Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar) Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward John, Edward Thomas
Byles, Sir William Pollard Fitzgibbon, John Johnson, W.
Cameron, Robert Flavin, Michael Joseph Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea)
Carr-Gomm, H. W. Furness, Stephen Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)
Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) Gelder, Sir W. A. Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)
Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd Jones, Leif Stratten (Notts, Rushcliffe)
Chancellor, Henry George Gibson, Sir James Puckering Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)
Chapple, Dr. William Allen Gill, A. H. Jowett, Frederick William
Churchill, Rt. Hon.-Winston S. Glanville, Harold James Joyce, Michael
Clancy, John Joseph Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford Keating, M.
Clough, William Goldstone, Frank Kellaway, Frederick George
Clynes, John R. Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) Kelly, Edward
Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) Greig, Colonel James William Kennedy, Vincent Paul
Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Kilbride, Denis
Condon, Thomas Joseph Griffith, Ellis Jones King, Joseph (Somerset, North)
Lamb, Ernest Henry Nugent, Sir Walter Richard Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)
Lambert, George (Devon, S. Molton) Nuttall, Harry Scanlan, Thomas
Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)
Lansbury, George O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) Seely, Col. Rt. Hon. J. E. B.
Lardner, James Carrige Rushe O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) Sheehy, David
Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) O'Doherty, Philip Sherwell, Arthur James
Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) O'Donnell, Thomas Simon, Sir John Allsebrook
Leach, Charles O'Dowd, John Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe)
Levy, Sir Maurice Ogden, Fred Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)
Lewis, John Herbert O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) Snowden, Philip
Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.) Soames, Arthur Wellesley
Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) O'Malley, William Stanley, Albert (Staffs., N.W.)
Lundon, Thomas O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) Strachey, Sir Edward
Lyell, Charles Henry O'Shaughnessy, P. J. Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West)
Lynch, Arthur Alfred O'Shee, James John Summers, James Woolley
Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) O'Sullivan, Timothy Sutherland, John E.
Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) Palmer, Godfrey Mark Sutton, John E.
Maclean, Donald Parker, James (Halifax) Taylor, John W. (Durham)
Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South) Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) Tennant, Harold John
Macpherson, James Ian Philips, John (Longford, S.) Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)
MacVeagh, Jeremiah Pointer, Joseph Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)
M'Curdy, Charles Albert Pollard, Sir George H. Toulmin, Sir George
McGhee, Richard Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. Trevelyan, Charles Philips
M'Kean, John Power, Patrick Joseph Verney, Sir Harry
M'Laren, H. D. (Leicester) Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) Walsh, Stephen (Lancs, Ince)
M'Laren, Walter S. B. (Ches., Crewe) Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) Walters, John Tudor
M'Micking, Major Gilbert Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) Walton, Sir Joseph
Manfield, Harry Pringle, William M. R. Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)
Markham, Sir Arthur Basil Raffan, Peter Wilson Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)
Marks, Sir George Croydon Rainy, Adam Rolland Wardle, George J.
Marshall, Arthur Harold Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay
Mason, David M. (Coventry) Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) Webb, H.
Masterman, C. F. G. Reddy, Michael White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)
Meagher, Michael Redmond, John E. (Waterford) White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)
Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) Redmond, William (Clare, E.) White, Patrick (Meath, North)
Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) Rendall, Athelstan Whitehouse, John Howard
Millar, James Duncan Richards, Thomas Whyte, A. F. (Perth)
Molloy, Michael Richardson, Albion (Peckham) Wiles, Thomas
Mond, Sir Alfred M. Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) Wilkie, Alexander
Montagu, Hon. E. S. Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) Williams, John (Glamorgan)
Mooney, John J. Roberts, George H. (Norwich) Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)
Morgan, George Hay Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs) Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)
Morrell, Philip Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford) Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)
Muldoon, John Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Munro, Robert Robinson, Sidney Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow)
Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C. Roche, John (Galway, E.) Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)
Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C. Roche, Augustine (Louth) Young, William (Perth, East)
Nannetti, Joseph P. Roe, Sir Thomas Yoxall, Sir James Henry
Needham, Christopher T. Rose, Sir Charles Day
Neilson, Francis Rowlands, James
Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster) Rowntree, Arnold TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. William Jones and Mr. Geoffrey Howard.
Nolan, Joseph Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Norman, Sir Henry Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)
Norton, Captain Cecil W. Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Bird, Alfred Clay, Captain H. H. Spender
Aitken, Sir William Max Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dennis Fortescue Clive, Captain Percy Archer
Amery, L. C. M. S. Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- Clyde, James Avon
Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid) Cooper, Richard Ashmole
Anstruther-Gray, Major William Boyton, James Courthope, George Loyd
Archer-Shee, Major M. Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)
Arkwright, John Stanhope Bridgeman, W. Clive Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)
Ashley, Wilfrid W. Bull, Sir William James Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet)
Baget, Lt.-Col. J. Burdett-Coutts, William Croft, Henry Page
Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) Burn, Col. C. R. Dalrymple, Viscount
Balcarres, Lord Butcher, John George Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)
Baldwin, Stanley Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. Dixon, Charles Harvey
Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, Lond.) Campion, W. R. Doughty, Sir George
Banbury, Sir Frederick George Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred Duke, Henry Edward
Banner, John S. Harmood- Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.
Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester) Cassel, Felix Faber, George D. (Clapham)
Barlow, Montagu (Salford, South) Castlereagh, Viscount Faber, Captain W. V. (Hants., W.)
Barnston, Harry Cator, John Falle, Bertram Godfrey
Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) Cautley, Henry Strother Fell, Arthur
Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks Cave, George Finlay, Sir Robert
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes
Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford Univ.) Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.
Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) Chaloner, Col. R. G. W. Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue
Bennett-Goldney, Francis Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worcr.) Fleming, Valentine
Beresford, Lord Charles Chambers, James Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)
Bigland, Alfred Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry Forster, Henry William
Foster, Philip Staveley Larmor, Sir J. Rolleston, Sir John
Gardner, Ernest Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End) Ronaldshay, Earl of
Gastrell, Major W. Houghton) Lewisham, Viscount Rothschild, Lionel de
Gibbs, George Abraham Lloyd, George Ambrose Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)
Gilmour, Captain J. Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury) Salter, Arthur Clavell
Goldman, Charles Sydney Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) Sanderson, Lancelot
Goldsmith, Frank Long, Rt. Hon. Walter Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)
Gordon, John (Londonderry, South) Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)
Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) Lowe, Sir F W. (Birm., Edgbaston) Smith, Rt. Hon. F. E. (Liverp'l, Walton)
Goulding, Edward Alfred Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo. Han. S.) Smith, Harold (Warrington)
Grant, J. A. Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich) Stanier, Beville
Greene, Walter Raymond MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)
Gretton, John Mackinder, Halford J. Starkey, John Ralph
Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward Macmaster, Donald Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)
Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne) M'Mordie, Robert Steel-Maitland, A. D.
Haddock, George Bahr McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine) Stewart, Gershom
Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) Mallaby-Deeley, Harry Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)
Hall, Fred (Dulwich) Meysey-Thompson, E. C. Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutstord)
Hall, Marshall, (E. Toxteth) Middlemore, John Throgmorton Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)
Hamersley, Alfred St. George Mildmay, Francis Bingham Talbot, Lord Edmund
Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington) Mills, Hon. Chas. Thomas Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)
Hardy, Rt. Hon. Laurence Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)
Harris, Henry Percy Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)
Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire) Mount, William Arthur Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.)
Hickman, Col. Thomas E. Neville, Reginald J. N. Thynne, Lard Alexander
Hill, Sir Clement L. Newdegate, F. A. Tobin, Alfred Aspinall
Hill-Wood, Samuel Newman, John R. P. Touche, George Alexander
Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter Newton, Harry Kottingham Tryon, Captain George Clement
Hills, John Waller Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) Tullibardine, Marquess of
Hoare, Samuel John Gurney Nield, Herbert Walker, Col. William Hall
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid.) Walrond, Hon. Lionel
Hope, Harry (Bute) Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)
Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)
Home, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) Paget, Almeric Hugh Weigall, Captain A. G.
Homer, Andrew Long Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) Wheler, Granville C. H.
Houston, Robert Paterson Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge) White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport
Hunt, Rowland Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton) Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)
Ingleby, Holcombe Perkins, Walter Frank Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud
Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.) Peto, Basil Edward Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.)
Jessel, Captain Herbert M. Pirie, Duncan Vernon Wolmer, Viscount
Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr Pollock, Ernest Murray Wood, John (Stalybridge)
Kerry, Earl of Pretyman, Ernest George Worthington-Evans, L.
Keswick, William Pryce-Jones, Col. E. Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Quilter, W. E. C. Younger, Sir George
Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford Rawson, Colonel Richard H.
Kyffin-Taylor, G Remnant, James Farquharson TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Viscount Valentia and Mr. Sanders.
Lane-Fox, G. R Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

Question put accordingly, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

The House divided: Ayes, 321; Noes, 215.

Division No. 314.] AYES. [12.8 a.m.
Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) Brace, William Cullinan, J.
Abraham, Rt. Hon. William (Rhondda) Brady, P. J. Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)
Acland, Francis Dyke Brocklehurst, William B. Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)
Adamson, William Bryce, J. Annan Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)
Addison, Dr. C. Burke, E. Haviland- Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D. Burns, Rt. Hon. John Dawes, J. A.
Agnew, Sir George William Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N) De Forest, Baron
Ainsworth, John Stirling Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar) Delany, William
Alden, Percy Byles, Sir William Pollard Denman, Hon. R. D.
Allen, A. A. (Dumbartonshire) Cameron, Robert Devlin, Joseph
Allen, Charles Peter (Stroud) Carr-Gomm, H. W. Dewar, Sir J. A.
Armitage, R. Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) Dillon, John
Baker, H. T. (Accrington) Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) Donelan, Captain A.
Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) Chancellor, Henry George Doris, William
Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark) Chapple, Dr. William Allen Duffy, William J.
Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness)
Barnes, G. N. Clancy, John Joseph Edwards, Clement (Glamorgan, E.)
Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick) Clough, William Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)
Barry, Redmond John (Tyrone, N.) Clynes, John R. Elibank, Rt. Hon Master of
Barton, William Collins, G. P. (Greenock) Elverston, Sir Harold
Beck, Arthur Cecil Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)
Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) Condon, Thomas Joseph Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)
Bentham, G. J. Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Essex, Richard Walter
Bethell, Sir J. H. Cotton, William Francis Esslemont, George Birnie
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine Cowan, W. H. Falconer, James
Black, Arthur W. Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) Farrell, James Patrick
Boland, John Plus Crawshay-Williams, Eliot Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles
Booth, Frederick Handel Crean, Eugene Ferens, Thomas Robinson
Bowerman, C. W. Crooks, William Ffrench, Peter
Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) Crumley, Patrick Field, William
Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward Levy, Sir Maurice Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)
Fitzgibbon, John Lewis, John Herbert Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)
Flavin, Michael Joseph Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) Reddy, Michael
Furness, Stephen Lundon, Thomas Redmond, John E. (Waterford)
Gelder, Sir W. H. Lyell, Charles Henry Redmond, William (Clare, E.)
George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd Lynch, Arthur Alfred Rendall, Athelstan
Gibson, Sir James Puckering Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) Richards, Thomas
Gilhooly, James Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) Richardson, Albion (Peckham)
Gill, A. H. Maclean, Donald Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven)
Glanville, H. J. Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)
Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South) Roberts, George H. (Norwich)
Goldstone, Frank Macpherson, James Ian Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbigh.)
Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) MacVeagh, Jeremiah Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)
Greig, Colonel James William M'Curdy, Charles Albert Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)
Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward MacGhee, Richard Robinson, Sidney
Griffith, Ellis J. M'Kean, John Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)
Guest, Hon. Major C. H. C. (Pembroke) M'Laren, H. D. (Leics., Bosworth) Roche, John (Galway, E.)
Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) M'Laren, Walter S. B. (Ches., Crewe) Roche, Augustine (Louth)
Guiney, P. M'Micking, Major Gilbert Roe, Sir Thomas
Gulland, John William Manfield, Harry Rose, Sir Charles Day
Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) Markham, Sir Arthur Basil Rowlands, James
Hackett, John Marks, Sir George Croydon Rowntree, Arnold
Hall, Frederick (Normanton) Marshall, Arthur Harold Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Hancock, J. G. Mason, David M. (Coventry) Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)
Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale) Masterman, C. F. G. Samuel, J. (Stockton)
Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) Meagher, Michael Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)
Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) Scanlan, Thomas
Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds.) Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)
Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) Millar, James Duncan Seely Colonel, Rt. Hon. J. E. B.
Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) Molloy, Michael Sheehan, Daniel Daniel
Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.) Mond, Sir Alfred Sheehy, David
Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) Money, L. G. Chiozza Sherwell, Arthur James
Harwood, George Montagu, Hon. E. S. Simon, Sir John Allsebrook
Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) Mooney, John J. Smith, Albert (Lancs, Clitheroe)
Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry Morgan, George Hay Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim S.)
Haworth, Sir Arthur A. Morrell, Philip Snowden, P.
Hayden, John Patrick Muldoon, John Soames, Arthur Wellesley
Hayward, Evan Munro, Robert Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)
Healy, Maurice (Cork) Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C. Strachey, Sir Edward
Healy, Timothy Michael (Cork, East) Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West)
Helme, Norval Watson Nannetti, Joseph P. Summers, James Woolley
Henderson, Arthur (Durham) Needham, Christopher T. Sutherland, John E.
Henry, Sir Charles S. Neilson, Francis Sutton, John E.
Higham, John Sharp Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster) Taylor, John W. (Durham)
Hinds, John Nolan, Joseph Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. Norman, Sir Henry Tennant, Harold John
Hodge, John Norton, Captain Cecil W. Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E)
Hope, John Deans (Haddington) Nugent, Sir Walter Richard Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)
Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich) Nuttall, Harry Toulmin, Sir George
Hudson, Walter O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Hughes, Spencer Leigh O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) Verney, Sir Harry
Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan) O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) Walsh, J. (Cork, South)
Illingworth, Percy H. O'Doherty, Philip Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)
Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus O'Donnell, Thomas Walters, John Tudor
Jardine, Sir John (Roxburghshire) O'Dowd, John Walton, Sir Joseph
John, Edward Thomas Ogden, Fred Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)
Johnson, W. O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)
Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.) Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay
Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) O'Malley, William Webb, H.
Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)
Jones, Leif Stratten (Notts, Rushcliffe) O'Shaughnessy, P. J. White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)
Jones, W. S Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) O'Shee, James John White, Patrick (Meath, North)
Jowett, Frederick William O'Sullivan, Timothy Whitehouse, John Howard
Joyce, Michael Palmer, Godfrey Mark Whyte, A. F.
Keating, Matthew Parker, James (Halifax) Wiles, Thomas
Kellaway, Frederick George Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) Wilkie, Alexander
Kelly, Edward Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) Williams, J. (Glamorgan)
Kennedy Vincent Paul Philipps, John (Longford, S.) Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)
Kilbride, Denis Pointer, Joseph Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)
King, Joseph (Somerset, North) Pollard, Sir George H. Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)
Lamb, Ernest Henry Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Lambert, George (Devon, Molton) Power, Patrick Joseph Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)
Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)
Lansbury George Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) Young, William (Perth, East)
Lardner, James Carrige Rushe Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) Yoxall, Sir James Henry
Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) Pringle, William M. R.
Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld., Cockerm'th) Raffan, Peter Wilson TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Mr. William Jones and Mr. Howard.
Leach, Charles Rainy, Adam Rolland
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Anstruther-Gray, Major William Bagot, Lieut. Colonel J.
Aitken, Sir William Max Archer-Shee, Major M. Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.)
Amery, L. C. M. S. Arkwright, John Stanhope Balcarres, Lord
Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. Ashley, Wilfrid W. Baldwin, Stanley
Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, Lond.) Gibbs, George Abraham Newdegate, F. A.
Banbury, Sir Frederick George Gilmour, Captain J. Newman, John R. P.
Banner, John S. Harmood Goldman, C. S. Newton, Harry Kottingham
Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester) Goldsmith, Frank Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)
Barlow, Montague (Salford, South) Gordon, John (Londonderry, South) Nield, Herbert
Barnston, H. Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid)
Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) Goulding, Edward Alfred Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.
Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks Grant, J. A. Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Greene, Walter Raymond Paget, Almeric Hugh
Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) Gretton, John Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)
Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge)
Bennett-Goldney, Francis Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne) Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)
Beresford, Lord Charles Haddock, George Bahr Perkins, Walter Frank
Bigland, Alfred Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) Peto, Basil Edward
Bird, A. Hall, Fred (Dulwich) Pollock, Ernest Murray
Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dennis Fortescue Hall, Marshall (E. Toxteth) Pretyman, Ernest George
Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- Hamersley, Alfred St. George Pryce-Jones, Col. E.
Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid) Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington, S.) Quilter, William Eley C.
Boyton, James Hardy, Rt. Hon. Laurence Rawson, Colonel Richard H.
Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell Harris, Henry Percy Remnant, James Farquharson
Bridgeman, W. Clive Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire) Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecelesall)
Bull, Sir William James Hickman, Col. Thomas E. Rolleston, Sir John
Burdett-Coutts, W. Hill, Sir Clement L. Ronaldshay, Earl of
Burn, Colonel C. R. Hillier, Dr. A. P. Rothschild, Lionel de
Butcher, John George Hills, John Waller Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)
Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. Hill-Wood, Samuel Salter, Arthur Clavell
Campion, W. R. Hoare, Samuel John Gurney Sanderson, Lancelot
Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. Hope, Harry (Bute) Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)
Cassel, Felix Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) Smith, Rt. Hon. F. E. (L'p'l, Walton)
Castlereagh, Viscount Home, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford) Smith, Harold (Warrington)
Cator, John Horner, Andrew Long Stanier, Beville
Cautley, Henry Strother Houston, Robert Paterson Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)
Cave, George Hunt, Rowland Starkey, John Ralph
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Ingleby, Holcombe Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University) Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.) Steel-Maitland, A. D.
Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. Jessel, Captain H. M. Stewart, Gershom
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.) Kerr-Smiley, Peter Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)
Chambers, James Kerry, Earl of Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)
Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry Keswick, William Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)
Clay, Captain H. H. Spender Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Talbot, Lord Edmund
Clive, Percy Archer Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)
Clyde, J. Avon Kyffin-Taylor, G Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)
Cooper, Richard Ashmole Lane-Fox, G. R. Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)
Courthope, George Loyd Larmor, Sir J. Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.)
Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.) Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End) Thynne, Lord Alexander
Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) Lewisham, Viscount Tobin, Alfred Aspinall
Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) Lloyd, G. A. Touche, George Alexander
Croft, Henry Page Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury) Tryon, Captain George Clement
Dalrymple, Viscount Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) Tullibardine, Marquess of
Dalziel, D. (Brixton) Long, Rt. Hon. Walter Walker, Col. William Hall
Dixon, Charles Harvey Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee Walrond, Hon. Lionel
Doughty, Sir George Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston) Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)
Duke, Henry Edward Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (Hanover Sq.) Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)
Eyres-Monsell, (Bolton, M.) Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich) Weigall, Capt. A. G.
Faber, George Denison (Clapham) MacGaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh Wheler, Granville C. H.
Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.) Mackinder, Halford J. White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport)
Falle, B. G. Macmaster, Donald Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)
Fell, Arthur M'Mordie, Robert Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude
Finlay, Sir Robert McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine) Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.)
Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes Mallaby-Deeley, Harry Wolmer, Viscount
Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. Meysey-Thompson, E. C. Wood, John (Stalybridge)
Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue Middlemore, John Throgmorton Worthington-Evans, L.
Fleming, Valentine Mildmay, Francis Bingham Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead) Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas Younger, Sir George
Forster, Henry William Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Foster, Philip Staveley Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)
Gardner, Ernest Mount, William Arthur TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Viscount Valentia and Mr. Sanders.
Gastrell, Major W. Houghton Neville, Reginald J. N.

Lords Amendment agreed to.

Lords Amendment: After Clause 2, insert the following new Clause:—

A.—(1) At the beginning of each Parliament a Joint Committee (in this Act referred to as "the Joint Committee") shall be appointed, consisting of the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Chairman of Committees of the House of Lords, the Chairman of Ways and Means of the House of Commons, a Lord of Appeal to be chosen by and from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary and other Peers of Parliament holding or who have held high judicial office, and a Member of the House of Commons to be appointed by the Speaker, for the purposes of this Act. The Speaker of the House of Commons shall be chairman, and he shall have a casting vote.

(2) The Speaker of the House of Commons may, if he think fit, and shall, if so requested in. writing by a Minister of the Crown or upon a resolution of either House of Parliament in that behalf, call together the Joint Committee for the purpose of deciding any question which under the provisions of this Act may be decided by them.

(3) The decision of the Joint Committee on any question so referred to them shall be final and conclusive for all purposes and shall not be questioned in any court of law.


I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Lords Amendment: After Clause 3, insert the following new Clause:—

B.—(1) In every Bill presented to His Majesty under the preceding provisions of this Act, the words of enactment shall be as follows, that is to say:— Be it enacted by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Act, 1911, and by authority of the same, as follows.

(2) Any alteration of a Bill necessary to give effect to this Section shall not be deemed to be an Amendment of the Bill.


I beg to move "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."


I understand this Amendment was moved by Lord Camper-down in another place. The acceptance of it by the Home Secretary suggests an affinity of temperament otherwise demonstrated of those two distinguished statesmen. We have often heard that dog does not eat dog, and we know now that rat does not eat rat.


It is important this House should realise its debt of gratitude to the other House.

When this Amendment was moved in this House, as it was by one of my hon. Friends, we were told by the Postmaster-General that it was not necessary, and by the Attorney-General that the Amendment would be a proper thing to have, but in some other Act of Parliament. When it was brought up on Report the Postmaster-General told us that the matter had been discussed and he declined to accept it. The Home Secretary now moves to agree. Comment is unnecessary.

Lords Amendment: To insert the following new Clause:—

(C.—Provisional Order Bills excluded.)

In this Act the expression "Public Bill" does not include any Bill for confirming a Provisional Order.

Committee appointed to draw up reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing to certain of their Amendments to the Bill.

Committee nominated of the Attorney-General, Mr. Churchill, Sir Henry Dalziel, Mr. Arthur Henderson, and Mr. Patrick O'Brien.

Three to be the quorum.

To withdraw immediately.

Reasons for disagreeing to certain of the Lords Amendments reported, and agreed to.

To be communicated to the Lords.— [Mr. Churchill.]