MILITARY MANŒUVRES BILL [Lords]. (Hansard, 11 December 1911)

§ Sir H. CARLILE
I really must enter a protest against taking this Bill at this hour. It is half-past three in the morning, and if the right hon. Gentleman proposes to take it now it will be necessary for me to call upon him to make a clear statement, and it must be a long statement, on the contents of the Bill. The alterations are most serious. We have had no notice of any proposal to take the Bill, and it is not treating the House with due respect at this hour of the morning to insist upon the Second Reading

§ Colonel SEELY
I hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman will not persist in his objection to our taking the Bill now. I should be very glad to make a very full statement if he wishes it. In point of fact, if he will consider the Bill and the Memorandum he will find the difference is very small. The Bill has been very fully discussed in another place, and has been on the Paper for more than a week. The 2100 only two points of difference in the Bill are that it proposes to shorten the period for which notice shall be given from six months to four months, but, per contra, the 30th April is fixed as the date by which notice must be given. Those most intimately concerned in the matter are satisfied that by fixing the date at 30th April it will be really more convenient to all parties concerned than the plan under the Bill as unamended, under which it is provided that six months' notice should be given. There are other matters in connection with the closing of the roads. I think, on the whole, if the hon. and gallant Gentleman will refer to the Debates in the Lords he will see that every care is taken that no possible inconvenience can be caused to anybody concerned. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will refer to Clause IV. of the Bill he will see the substantial alteration. At any rate, there will remain a majority of persons elected in the locality.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
The right hon. Gentleman refers me to Clause IV. of the Bill. He has made no reference to the fact that during manœuvres it is proposed to go through woodlands and parks. We are to have our parks run over by Artillery and Cavalry. My own park should certainly be available for anything of the kind, but I insist on the point that this Bill should be considered by the House. It is not sufficient for the right hon. Gentleman to say that it has been considered in another place. I am surprised in these days that the right hon. Gentleman should suggest such a thing. Is this to take place in our woodlands at a time of year when any game there is quite young?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER
I would remind the hon. and gallant Member that he has already made one speech.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
I was merely drawing the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that he was passing Section IV. without giving any explanation of the most important provisions. That is not fair to the House. I absolutely protest against it. It is perfectly ridiculous.

§ Colonel SEELY
The hon. and gallant Gentleman has forgotten, I think, that we are on the Second Reading of the Bill. I should be most happy to explain to him fully the whole provisions of the Bill at a subsequent stage. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman wishes to raise the point with regard to the woodlands, I assure him I 2101 will be most glad to point out how the matter stands. It is proposed in the Bill that woodlands and parks may be used by the troops under the present Act. The landowners of this country are most anxious that there should be no restrictions placed on the troops, and I cannot believe that the hon. and gallant Gentleman wishes, at whatever hour in the morning to stand out as the one hon. Member of this House who wishes to prevent this Bill going through.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
It ought to be discussed.

§ Colonel SEELY
Yes, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman must allow me to make my statement.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
You have no right to put words into my mouth. [Interruption.]

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER
I must again remind the hon. Gentleman that he has already spoken. I allowed him one very lengthy interruption, and he must listen patiently to what the hon. and gallant Gentleman has to say in reply.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
On a point of Order. May I say I rose because the right hon. Gentleman attributed to me an expression of opinion I did not use. The right hon. Gentleman said I proposed to be the only man apparently who objected to this Bill. I expressly stated that I had no objection so far as my own place is concerned. I insisted on discussion.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER
The hon. Gentleman has already stated that in his speech.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
And the right hon. Gentleman had no business to deny it.

§ Colonel SEELY
I said I hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman would not be the only hon. Member to object to the Bill, and I still hope he will not be the only hon. Gentleman to object. If he wants me to discuss the matter, I can only say that I have here particulars for a very lengthy explanation. But I repeat that I hope he will not be the only hon. Gentleman to object.

§ Sir H. CARLILE
Object to what?

§ Colonel SEELY
To any of the provisions of this Bill. I assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman I did not mean to impute to him in any way that he would be so unpatriotic as to close his place to the 2102 troops. I think the House is now satisfied, and may give the Bill a Second Reading.