§ Further considered in Committee.
§ [Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]
§ Postponed Proceeding on Amendment proposed in, Clause 1, Sub-section (1), 2000 after the word "or" ["or ask for a ballot"], to insert the word "knowingly."—[Mr. Godfrey Locker-Lampson.]
§ Question again proposed, "That the word 'knowingly' be there inserted." Debate resumed.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI do not quite understand why the Government 2001 have refused to insert this word "knowingly." Surely they do not intend to penalise a man who is guilty of a technical offence without the least intention of committing one! I know that the theory of the Government is that all these people who are plural voters are educated men, and that the great majority are Conservative. A very large majority are what I may call, without offence, small men, and I am perfectly certain that many of them would be absolutely ignorant of the provisions of this Bill. How can the severe penalty be justified if they act without knowledge that what they are doing is an offence? Not merely that, but if a person breaks this law he is to be guilty of a corrupt practice, and he may invalidate election, and all because he has acted in ignorance of the law. I know that the Government will contend that everybody will know that this Act has passed and what it provides, but a very similar thing happens at the present time. In some constituencies you get people who are registered in more than one polling district. These people, to my certain knowledge, occasionally vote more than once in the same constituency without knowing that it is an offence. I remember the case of a man who came to me and said, "I have voted for you once already in such a place. I am voting for you again in this polling district, and after that I am going to vote in a third district." I said, "I strongly advise you not to. Do not tell anybody else what you have already told me, because if you do you will be guilty of a very serious offence, and there will be a heavy fine for voting more than once in the same constituency." That was an exactly similar instance to this. That man acted in absolute ignorance, though the existing law had been in operation for many years. Therefore, it is perfectly certain if you bring in this Bill, at all events for the first election after it comes into operation, that many of these plural voters would be totally ignorant of the law which had been passed. If that be so, are they to be penalised, and are you to run the risk of invalidating the election? This afternoon the Government stated that it will be printed on the ballot paper that no one can vote in more than one constituency. I do not know what authority there was for that statement. If they refuse to insert this word, are they willing to take any steps to inform electors of the passing of the law? Are they going 2002 to print this notice on the ballot paper, or put it over every polling booth, or take any steps whatever to warn electors of the risk they run? We are entitled to have some fuller explanation than we have got at the present, or what the intention of the Government is, of why they will not, insert this word, and what steps they propose to take to inform elecotrs of the risk they run.
§ Mr. GOLDSMITHI listened with greatest care to the statement made by the Solicitor-General, and though I am unable to agree with him that no importance attaches to the word "knowingly," I was not quite able to understand his explanation. He admitted that it might be possible for a man to vote a second time without really having any intention to contravene the provisions of the Act.
§ Sir J. SIMONI said I could hardly conceive it.
§ Mr. GOLDSMITHYes, but he admitted that it might be possible for a person to act without having any intention to defraud, and he went further, and said that if that happened the magistrate is under no obligation to inflict the whole penalty under the Act. In Section 6 of the Corrupt Practices Act, the penalty imposed is that the person may be imprisoned with hard labour for a term not exceeding one year, or have to pay a fine not exceeding £200. I quite agree that the maximum penalty need not be inflicted, but I ask the Solicitor-General to look at Section 3, which states that a man if convicted will, during a period of seven years, be unable to be registered as an elector, or vote at any election in the United Kingdom. He is also prevented from holding any public or judicial office within the meaning of this Act. That is if a man, without any intention, to contravene the meaning of the Act, does give a second vote, or ask for a second ballot paper, he is, even if the magistrate does not wish to inflict the maximum penalty, debarred from exercising his right as an elector for seven years, and from holding any public or judicial office for seven years. In Section 23 of the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act power is given to the High Court and to the Election Court to except innocent acts from being an illegal practice; that is to say, the High Court is given power to relieve any person or whitewash any person who has innocently committed an offence under that Act. If the right hon. Gentleman refuses to accept this 2003 word "knowingly" will he later on add a proviso in the same way as in the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act of 1883. The Plural Voting Bill of 1906, as amended Committee, used the word "knowingly" in the same place as my hon. Friend wishes to insert it in this Bill. I cannot see any reason why the Government should refuse to insert the word.
§ Sir J. SIMONWhen I spoke before I pointed out that assuming that the offence was proved to have been committed, the magistrate in that, as in every other case, can exercise his discretion and decide not to convict on the ground that the offence was trifling, and if the magistrate did not convict then the consequences would not ensue at all. As regards the other point raised by the hon. Member, I am afraid I did not make myself plain. It is not the fact, especialy if the accused person acted without any sort of guilty intention at all, that he would be convicted under the Statute as it stands. It would not be necessary for the prosecution to prove that the person knew what he was about; it would be for him to get out of the difficulty. That is the difference between having the word "knowingly" and leaving it out.
§ Mr. MALCOLMWhat kind of magistrate would he be who would have to decide this point? There are magistrates and magistrates, and I ask the Solicitor-General for an explanation of the point. It might be that the magistrate, perfectly bonâ fide, would not take advantage of the Act and lean towards mercy, as suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. It seems to me that we really need the word "knowing." As long as a man is acting bonâ fide, and does not want to go behind the law, we do not want to penalise him for voting in two constituencies in the course of a General Election. The word "knowingly" might well be inserted if only to make the law clear to laymen, and it would certainly be to the advantage of those who really act bonâ fide. I suppose the Government has in contemplation some idea of Redistribution, and with alteration in the constituencies voters might find themselves in a difficulty as to the dividing line of the constituency. You would not, surely, penalise them in a case like that. The whole point really is to make this Bill as convenient and as clear as it possibly can be, and if the elector is acting bonaâ fide, why not put in the word "knowingly."
§ Mr. NEWMANIn 1906 the Colonial Secretary, who was in charge of a Bill of this kind, made great play of the word "knowingly." There was a long Debate on this very point. An Amendment was moved by the right hon. Gentleman, representing Dublin University, and the Colonial Secretary accepted after the word "knowingly," the words "with the intention of evading the provisions of the Act." He did so after listening to a very powerful speech from the late Sir Charles Dilke, who was an acknowledged authority on electoral law, and who said that his experience did not bear out that the plural voter was a person who knew he was a plural voter and was known as such. We have progressed since 1906. The Government then were all powerful and in the heyday of their youth, but if they were powerful they were merciful. In 1913 in their old age they have lost their power and they are tyrannical. The Colonial Secretary put "knowingly" in the Bill in 1906 and accepted a qualification, and surely we might now have the simple word "knowingly" agreed to by the Government.
§ Mr. BUTCHERThe additional explanation of the Solicitor-General makes it all the more essential that this Amendment should be accepted. He tells us that if a man is brought before a magistrate or a judicial tribunal, under this Bill, he will be presumed to have been animated by a guilty intention unless the contrary is proved. That is a grossly improper thing to enact. A man ought to be presumed to be innocent unless the contrary is proved. This Bill creates two entirely new offences hitherto unknown to the law, and in those circumstances it ought to be made perfectly clear, that a man is not liable to be brought before a magistrate unless he has a guilty intention. In his first speech the Solicitor-General pointed out that the word "knowingly" was not in Section 24 of the Ballot Act. The reason is perfectly clear. The offence under that Section could not possibly be committed except knowingly. The offence of personation must be committed knowingly; therefore it would be mere surplusage to have the word there. Contrast with that the actions which are made an offence under this Bill. One of the actions is to ask under certain conditions for a ballot or voting paper. Cases have been given in which it would be perfectly possible for a man with absolutely innocent intention to ask for a second voting paper. I submit that when 2005 an act is capable of two constructions, one innocent, and the other guilty, a man who acts with the innocent intention ought not to be liable to be brought before a magistrate for a criminal offence. The Solicitor-General says that a magistrate would have a discretion, and that if he thought there was no mens rea and that the offence had not been committed with a criminal intention, the magistrate would let the man off. But I say that the man ought not to be liable to be brought before the magistrate at all unless he had a guilty intention. Are we sure that the tribunal before which this presumably innocent man will be brought will always be perfectly competent or that the magistrate will always exercise his discretion properly? If the Solicitor-General is wrong in saying that that discretion will be always exercised properly, a man who, on the admission of the Solicitor-General, ought not to, be convicted, may be convicted through a want of discretion on the part of the magistrate. Under these circumstances the Amendment clearly ought to be accepted. I wish to ask the Solicitor-General a question, the answer to which may govern some votes. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] We on this side, at any rate, are honest. Is he prepared to accept an Amendment inserting the word "knowingly" a line or two lower down, so that the Clause will read "if a person knowingly acts in contravention of this Section he shall be guilty of a corrupt practice"?
§ Sir J. SIMONHonestly, I am not.
§ Mr. BUTCHERI am much obliged for that honest interjection. It makes it all the more additionally clear that the word "knowingly" ought to be inserted here. If the Solicitor-General had told us honestly—I am using his own word—that he intended eventually to put words into the second Sub-section, our objections might have been removed, because in that case it would not have been possible to convict a man of the offence under Subsection (2), unless he had "knowingly" committed the offence. But now we have the honest declaration of the Solicitor-General that he intends under Sub-section (2) to allow a man to be convicted of an offence under the Act, although he does not do it knowingly. Therefore, I say it is absolutely necessary that we who have any regard for native justice and the liberty of the subject, should have here inserted the word "knowingly."
§ Mr. SANDERSONThe reply of the Solicitor-General is by no means an answer to our point. As I understood the Solicitor-General he said that the subject was to be left to the magistrate. If the magistrate formed the opinion that a voter had voted in two constituencies without knowing he had committed an offence, the magistrate in all probability would let him off. I do not think that is a sufficient answer. If you leave this Bill in the form in which it stands at present, namely, that if a person votes in more than one constituency, etc., you may very well have the magistrate say, "I have only got to look at the Statute; the Statute says that if a man votes in more than one constituency, he is guilty of a corrupt practice, and I must fine him." It may be that the voter, in order to get the matter put right, would have to go to the High Court to put it right. There are a great many voters who would not be in such a position to be able to do that. They might not have the money, or they might not think it worth while. Is it not desirable therefore, and most essential, to make it perfectly clear what the intention of this House is: that only when a man does it "knowingly" shall he suffer. In regard to another point as to a corrupt practice, the Act of 1883 has been referred to, but obviously it refers to things which a man must have done knowingly. Take treating. A man who treats anybody with a view of getting his vote is not doing that innocently. He must do it knowing that he is doing something wrong. That is a very different matter. It is intended, as I understand, by this House not to make a man guilty of an offence unless he does it with intention. For these reasons I think there has been no sufficient answer by the Solicitor-General.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI agologise to the Solicitor-General if I show my ignorance, astounding or otherwise, in asking him a question. I understand that the chief reason he has given for not accepting this Amendment is that if a man is given into custody and brought up before a Court of Summary Jurisdiction for having voted twice, or for asking for a voting paper twice, if he proves to the satisfaction of the magistrate that he did not knowingly commit this offence—that is to say, that he was not aware that it was an offence under the Act—the magistrate will immediately say, "Very well under those circumstances, we will dismiss the case." I have always understood that to 2007 plead ignorance of the law is no defence. Everyone is supposed to know the law. In these circumstances, what position should I be in as a magistrate if a case of that sort, were brought before me? Supposing some solicitor who appeared for the defendant happened to have read the speech of the right hon. Gentleman and put that view before me and my fellow magistrates, are we to ignore it at once and say that according to the common law of England everyone is supposed to know the law, and that it was no defence to say the accused did not, know it? In these circumstances, much as I should regret it, I should feel bound to inflict a small penalty. I do not deny it may be a small penalty, but the man would go forth with the stigma of having been convicted for having done something wrong. He possibly might appeal against the decision of the magistrates. I am not sure that he could appeal if the penalty was not sufficiently large. The man would have been fined and he might not think it worth his while to appeal. When you come to the case of a poor man who left the Court with this stigma upon his character, his so-called friends or rivals would say he was convicted at the Police Courts on such or such a day and they would not inquire into the particulars. All this is likely to occur unless I am wrong, and I watched the face of the Solicitor-General and I could detect no expression to show that he dissented from what I say. Why not accept the word "knowingly." Everyone agrees — hon. Gentlemen opposite as well as those on this side—that we do not want to convict a person wrongly. All we want is to convict a person who has wilfully and knowingly committed an offence. The word "knowingly" is well understood, and I cannot conceive why it is not put into the Bill. Personally I may be glad the right hon. Gentleman will not accept it because it will show the constituencies how very careful hon. Members opposite are not to allow the poor man to have justice. [Laughter.] Hon. Members opposite must not laugh because I used the words "poor man." There are plenty of poor men who are plural voters. Besides, am I to understand that hon. Gentlemen below the
§ Gangway opposite only desire justice for poor men and nobody else. We have endeavoured to put before the right hon. Gentleman unanswerable reasons for the acceptance of this Amendment, and I hope that even now at the eleventh hour he will accept it.
§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTIt is difficult to understand why asking twice for a ballot paper under this Bill should be treated as more serious than the offence of personation. As I understand the offence of personation, it is that primâ facie a corrupt practice is committed if one person personates another in a polling booth. That is only a primâ facie assumption, and the onus is upon him to prove that his intention was an innocent one. Mr. Justice Denman, in one of his judgments, says:—
It is thoroughly understood election law that unless there is corruption and a bad mind and intention, impersonation is not an offence. If it is done under an honest belief that the man is properly there for the purpose of voting, it is held in this and all analogous cases that no offence has been committed. On the general principle that impersonation itself is not a corrupt practice, it seems to me that we ought to decide that the first vote is a good vote.That was a case under the Redistribution Act where a person attempted to vote in a borough which was divided into two divisions. Mr. Justice Denman goes on to say:—To suppose that the legislature ever intended to enact that a man who, with perfect honesty but from a mere blunder. gives a vote, and, believing that he has a right to do so, gives a second vote, he being on the register, is to be deemed guilty of a felony, is to impute an intention to the legislature which is absurd …. I do not think that is the intention of the Act. I think there is still to be added to the offence of impersonation a corrupt intention.If that be the law as regards personation, which is a far more serious offence morally than the offence which is dealt with by this Clause, surely we may ask that in all fairness, and in the interests of those who innocently make a mistake, it shall only be deemed, primâ facie, to be a corrupt practice, and it shall rest with the defendant to show that his intention was a perfectly innocent one.
§ Question put, "That the word 'knowingly' be there inserted."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 169; Noes, 271.
| Barrie, H. T. | Grant, J. A. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton) | Greene, W. R. | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Gretton, John | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (Bury S. Edmunds) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish- | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Randles, Sir John S. |
| Bigland, Alfred | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Blair, Reginald | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Rawson, Colonel R. H. |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hardy, Rt. Hon. Laurence | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Harris, Henry Percy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Helmsley, Viscount | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Boyton, James | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hewins, William Albert Samuel | Royds, Edmund |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hills, John Walter | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood) |
| Butcher, J. G. | Hoare, Samuel John Gurney | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Sanderson, Lancelot |
| Campion, W. R. | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Sassoon, Sir Philip |
| Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Cassel, Felix | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Snowden, Philip |
| Cator, John | Houston, Robert Paterson | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Cautley, H. S. | Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Cave, George | Ingleby, Holcombe | Starkey, John R. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Chaloner Colonel R. G. W. | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Stewart, Gershom |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Larmor, Sir J. | Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North) |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Swift, Rigby |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Lewisham, Viscount | Talbot, Lord E. |
| Craig, Charles (Antrim, S.) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury) | Terrell, H. (Gloucester) |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) | Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Lockwood, Lieut.-Colonel A. R. | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.) |
| Crack, Sir Henry | MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh | Touche, George Alexander |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Tuilibardine, Marquess of |
| Dairymple, Viscount | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Dalziel, Davison (Brixton) | Malcolm, Ian | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Denniss, E. R. B. | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.) | Morrison-Bell, Capt, E. F. (Ashburton) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Fell, Arthur | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.) |
| Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert | Mount, William Arthur | Winterton, Earl |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Newdegate, F. A. | Wolmer, Viscount |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Newton, Harry Kottingham | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon) |
| Fletcher, John Samuel | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Forster, Henry William | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Gardner, Ernest | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. | Wright, Henry Fitzherbert |
| Gastrell, Major W. Houghton | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William | Younger, Sir George |
| Gilmour, Captain John | Paget, Almeric Hugh | |
| Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Newman and Mr. Hume Williams. |
| Goldsmith, Frank | Parkes, Ebenezer | |
| Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Bowerman, Charles W. | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Dawes, James Arthur |
| Adamson, William | Brace, William | Delany, William |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Brady, Patrick Joseph | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Brocklehurst, W. B. | Devlin, Joseph |
| Agnew, Sir George William | Brunner, John F. L. | Dewar, Sir J. A. |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Bryce, J. Annan | Dickinson, W. H. |
| Alden, Percy | Buckmaster, Stanley O. | Dillon, John |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Donelan, Captain A. |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Doris, Wiliam |
| Arnold, Sydney | Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Duffy, William J. |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) |
| Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) | Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Duncan, J. Hastings (Yorks, Otley) |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Chancellor, Henry George | Edwards, Clement (Glamorgan, E.) |
| Barnes, George N. | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Elverston, Sir Harold |
| Barran, Sir J. (Hawick Burghs) | Clancy, John Joseph | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) |
| Barran, Rowland Hurst (Leeds, N.) | Clough, William | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) |
| Barton, William | Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Essex, Sir Richard Walter |
| Beale, Sir William Phipson | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Esslemont, George Birnie |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Falconer, James |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Cory, Sir Clifford John | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Cotton, William Francis | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Crooks, William | Ffrench, Peter |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Crumley, Patrick | Field, William |
| Black, Arthur W. | Cullinan, John | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Boland, John Pius | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Davies, E. William (Eifion) | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| France, G. A. | McGhee, Richard | Reddy, Michael |
| Gelder, Sir W. A. | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Macpherson, James Ian | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Glanville, Harold James | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Goldstone, Frank | M'Callum, Sir John M. | Richardson, Albion (Peckham) |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Griffith, Ellis Jones | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Gulland, John William | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs) |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Markham, Sir Arthur Basil | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Hackett, John | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Robinson, Sidney |
| Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Martin, Joseph | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G. | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | Meagher, Michael | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Rowlands, James |
| Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Millar, James Duncan | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Molloy, Michael | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Molten, Percy Alport | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Hayden, John Patrick | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Hayward, Evan | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Hazleton, Richard | Mooney, John J. | Sheehy, David |
| Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Morgan, George Hay | Sherwell, Arthur James |
| Hemmerde, Edward George | Morrell, Philip | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Alisebrook |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Morison, Hector | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Muldoon, John | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Munro, R. | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Hinds, John | Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon, R. C. | Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert |
| Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Murphy, Martin J. | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Hodge, John | Murray, Captain Hon. A. C. | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Hogge, James Myles | Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Holt, Richard Durning | Nolan, Joseph | Sutton, John E. |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Norman, Sir Henry | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Hudson, Walter | Norton, Captain Cecil W. | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Tennant, Harold John |
| Illingworth, Percy H. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Thomas, James Henry |
| Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| John, Edward Thomas | O'Doherty, Philip | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Donnell, Thomas | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Dowd, John | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | O'Malley, William | Wadsworth, J. |
| Jowett, Frederick William | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince) |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Wardle, George J. |
| Keating, Matthew | O'Shee, James John | Waring, Walter |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Kelly, Edward | Outhwaite, R. L. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Parker, James (Halifax) | Webb, H. |
| Kilbride, Denis | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.) |
| King, Joseph | Pearce, William (Limehouse) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton) | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Whitehouse, John Howard |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Phillips, John (Langford, S.) | Wiles, Thomas |
| Lardner, James C. R. | Pointer, Joseph | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | Pollard, Sir George H. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Leach, Charles | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Winfrey, Richard |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Pringle, William M. R. | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Radford, G. H. | Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow) |
| Lundon, Thomas | Raffan, Peter Wilson | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Raphael, Sir Herbert H | |
| Lynch, A. A. | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. G. Howard and Mr. W. Jones. |
| Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | |
| Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) |
Mr. PEASEI beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "constituency" and to insert instead thereof the words "one of the constituencies in which he is so registered." This is purely consequential on the Amendment of the hon. Member for Kingswinford (Mr. Staveley-Hill) which was accepted.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENWill the right hon. Gentleman read the Sub- 2012 section as it will read when thus amended?
Mr. PEASEIt will read as follows:—
"(1) During the continuance of a General Election of members to serve in a new Parliament, a person registered as a Parliamentary elector in more than one Division shall not vote as a Parliamentary elector, or ask for a ballot or voting paper for the purpose of so voting, in more than one of the constituencies in which he is so registered."
§ Lord HUGH CECILWill this interfere with the Amendment which raises the question of university representation?
§ The CHAIRMANNo. I propose to select the Amendment on that standing in the name of the Noble Lord.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI understand that the question of university representation comes up on the Amendment to insert the words "county or borough" in place of "constituency." If we decide now that "constituency" stand part of the Subsection, I suggest that that Amendment will not then be in Order.
§ The CHAIRMANThat is not the form in which the question will be raised. It will be by means of words added at the end of the Sub-section.
§ Question, "That the word 'constituency' stand part of the Sub-section," put, and negatived.
§ Words "one of the constituencies in which he is so registered" added.
§ Sir PHILIP MAGNUSI beg to move, in Subsection (1), after the words last inserted, to add the words, "other than a university constituency." I am not quite certain whether, with the alterations that have been made, these words come in here properly.
§ The CHAIRMANindicated assent.
§ 11.0 P.M.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSIf you, Sir, think so, I am satisfied. The Amendment is not, as most of the other Amendments have been, a drafting Amendment, nor is it one intended to make the Bill more intelligible and more readily understood. It is distinctly an Amendment of substance, which the other Amendments were not, and asks for a real concession. The Amendment suggests that the universities shall be exempted from the operation of this Bill. During the last few years there have been many Plural Voting Bills before this House, and all, with one exception, have more or less affected the university constituencies. Some of them have been similar to the Bill now before the Committee. They have left the university constituencies to continue to exist, but have prevented a university graduate from having his university vote in addition to the ordinary vote for his place of residence. On the other hand, one of the Bills which was introduced by the Financial Secretary to the War Office, did not affect 2014 universities at all. The Franchise Bill introduced at the beginning of this year abolished university constituencies altogether, whereas the present Bill, like the Bill of 1906, leaves the university constituencies in existence, but practically bleeds them of the Members who constitute those constituencies. It is a little difficult to understand what is the definite attitude of the Government in respect to the university constituencies. I think one may say, looking at all these Bills, that that attitude is certainly not a very friendly one. It has been represented in some quarters that these attacks upon university representation would not have been made if the Members for the universities had sat upon the other side of the House, instead of upon this side. Personally, I am very unwilling to regard that as the reason which has actuated the Government in making these successive attacks upon the university constituencies. I cannot help referring to a passage which occurs in one of the books of Lecky, who was a distinguished Member of this House, in which he says:—
Surely it is impossible to exaggerate the fatuity of these attacks upon university representation, and the men who make them have rarely the excuse of honest ignorance. With many the true motive is simply the desire to extinguish constituencies which return Members opposed to their politics, and, at the same time, by depreciating the great centres of intelligence, to flatter the more illiterate voters.I am unwilling to accept this as the motive that actuates the Prime Minister in the action which he has taken. At the same time, I cannot help referring to the fact that those who are voting for the extinction of university constituencies or for leaving them in such a position that they will shortly become extinguished, must remember that they may be open to that charge. This Amendment recognises the fact that in this Bill universities will continue to send a Member to Parliament, and therefore my present purpose is not to defend university representation, which would be comparatively an easy task, because university representation is conceded under the Bill, but to show reason why the universities should be exceptionally treated, and that even if it be enacted, as I hope it may not, that no one shall be permitted to vote in any two ordinary constituencies, any registered graduate of a university may still be permitted to have his vote at the university and at the same time his vote in the constituency where he resides. What I have set myself 2015 to endeavour to show is, that the Government should be willing to make a distinct exception in the Bill on behalf of university constituencies. In order to make good the claim which I am putting forward for exceptional treatment for these universities it is necessary for me to show that they differ in almost every respect from any ordinary constituency, and it is on the ground of these differences that my claim rests.There is no doubt that the university franchise is in many ways different from and, indeed, rests on altogether a different basis from that of other constituencies. Whatever may be said of the men who now or in former times may have represented universities in this House, it cannot be denied for a moment that the university constituencies are the only constituencies which consist exclusively of educated men, that is, of men who have received a protracted training covering several years and have passed examination tests showing that they have profited, at any rate to some extent, by the course of training they have received. This is one essential difference between a university constituency and any other constituency to which the Bill refers. Then, again, the franchise in a university is not conferred by virtue of ownership or of residence. It is distinctly and solely given on educational grounds, and it is open to all persons to obtain it. The wider the opportunities enjoyed for acquiring a university education, the larger the number of those persons who will be qualified to vote. It follows from what I have said—perhaps I shall not carry all Members of the House with me in this matter—that if we regard, as I know many persons do, the franchise as a right belonging to every citizen, then I say that the franchise, which a university education confers, is not a right but a privilege. It is a privilege, too, which serves as an encouragement, and I venture to say a great encouragement, to every boy in an elementary school to work for a university degree—a degree which qualifies him to take some additional share in the government of his country. I venture to think that no more democratic recognition of the value which an enlightened nation should give to education can possibly be conceived.
There is no constituency in which the abolition of plural voting would have such far-reaching results in destroying entirely 2016 the character of the constituency as in the case of the universities. Nearly every constituent of a university is a plural voter, and a plural voter on account of his educational qualifications. Of course, in other constituencies a certain small percentage of the electorate are plural voters, but in my Constituency there are about 7,000 voters, and nearly everyone of these is a plural voter. The disfranchisement, therefore—because it really would amount to disfranchisement—of so many voters holding their franchise on educational lines only would certainly suggest that the universities should receive exceptional treatment. There are other important differences to which I should like to refer. The method of election in a university is absolutely distinct from the method in any other constituency. No attempt is made in a university election by any of the ordinary practices to influence the votes of the electors. No exaggerated statements are put forth, no inaccurate telephone messages are sent, no false telegrams are dispatched. There are no picture posters and no platform speeches—nothing to confuse the issues or to interfere with the free and unfettered choice of the electorate. Can this be said to be the case in any constituencies other than the universities?
§ Sir F. BANBURYYes.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSI believe it is the case to a very great extent in the City of London, but certainly it will be recognised that the conditions under which Members are returned by the universities are simply ideal. They are just the conditions which every Member of this House would like to see introduced into his own constituency. They are something for which you should strive, something to be encouraged and not discouraged. The electors of a university vote openly. Why is the ballot still used in other elections? It was adopted as a safeguard against bribery and intimidation. Electors in a university are not amenable either to bribery or intimidation. These great differences between a university election and the elections in other constituencies suggest that the university franchise should be strengthened in the country rather than weakened. I am in hopes that under a Redistribution Bill which we have been promised and which ought logically to precede, and not follow, a Plural Voting Bill, additional votes may be given to the graduates of the newer universities who have themselves put in a claim. The university system of election 2017 should be encouraged, and I look forward to a time—it may be distant—when the procedure adopted at university elections may become general, when the utter vulgarity of picture leaflets and postcards shall have disappeared, when all appeals to the self-interest and the prejudices of the people shall have vanished, and when the electors will be so trained as to regard as a positive insult to their intelligence much of the claptrap that is now heard in platform speeches.
§ The CHAIRMANI do not think that we can have a whole review of our electoral system. The purpose of this Amendment is to retain the additional vote in the special case of the university elector.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSI want to show that the university electoral system is exceptional, and that, therefore, exceptional treatment should be given. These differences to which I have referred are so far-reaching and deep-seated that although I personally am opposed to the general or partial extension of the franchise to women, just in the same way as the supporters of this Bill are opposed to plural voting, I certainly would support a proposal for giving the franchise to registered women graduates so as to enable them to vote for a university Member, and this simply because the conditions of a university election are altogether different from those of an ordinary election. This Bill proposes to treat university constituencies in the same way as ordinary constituencies. It would prevent an elector from voting in a university if he votes elsewhere. Can it be doubted for a moment that in a hotly-contested election a local agent will bring great pressure to bear upon the doctor, the lawyer, the teacher, the engineer, and other professional persons holding a university degree in the town in which the election is to take place to urge them to vote for the local candidate. He will be told that the result of the election depends upon a very few votes, and that there is a great deal more party interest in the local candidate than there is in the university candidate. The result of that will be that in nearly all constituencies the practice will be to secure votes for the local candidate instead of for the university candidate, and the university constituency will be depleted to such an extent that the next step will be to abolish altogether university representation. That, I think, would be a serious evil.
2018 But the inconvenience of the proposed arrangement is shown in this—that at a by-election the entire university constituency will vote, whilst at a General Election those only would vote who felt that the result of the election of the local candidate, whom they preferred, was secure, and that they might accordingly vote for the university candidate. It will be seen, therefore, that any by-election might reverse the decision at a General Election. This occasionally occurs in other constituencies, but the difference between the number of electors at a General and at a by-election in any ordinary constituency would be nothing as compared with the difference at a university election. We have been told that university representation is an anomaly, and that to give two votes to a graduate and only one vote to other persons would be a further anomaly. Can we say that, if this measure became law, our system of franchise would be altogether free from anomalies? Would a House of Commons elected in accordance with this Bill be a true mirror of the citizens of this country? Are we not removing one anomaly whilst we leave other anomalies untouched, and does it not frequently happen that anomalies tend to counterbalance one another, and that to withdraw one without removing others tends to accentuate the effect of those that remain. But what has the Prime Minister said as regards anomalies? He told us that he had no objection to anomalies, as such, and in a picturesque simile, defining their limits, he said—
So long as anomalies are confined within those limits, I should not raise a finger to lop them off.But by assenting to this Bill, he has done just what he said he would not do. For surely no anomaly could exist within much narrower limits than those which confine university representation. The proposed Amendment affects only six constituencies in the United Kingdom out of over 500, and granting that the suggested treatment of university representation is exceptional, it would certainly be useful, for it would indicate the value which this country attaches to educated public opinion in the direction of the affairs of the Empire. Labour and capital are each well represented in this House. It is right and proper that they should be, but the intellectual and spiritual forces of the country cannot be so distinctly represented. Yet it is these forces that direct the flow of capital and labour into serviceable channels and create those original 2019 ideas that mark new epochs in the history of industry, invention, and indeed of civilisation.Surely, therefore, it cannot be opposed to the best interests of society, but, on the contrary, must make for human progress that some slight additional weight shall be given to education in the councils of this Empire. In proposing this Amendment I have refrained from quoting John Stuart Mill in support of my arguments, because I always feel that a Member, on whichever side of the House he sits, is able to find in the works of that great political writer some passage which he can quote to suit his purpose. Still the testimony of Mill as an advanced Liberal is very pertinent to the matter we are now considering. He said:—
In any future Reform Bill which lowers greatly the pecuniary conditions Of the suffrage it might be a wise provision to all graduates of universities…to be registered specifically in those characters and to give their votes as such…retaining in addition their votes as simple citizens in the localities in which they reside.That is exactly what my Amendment proposes. I have repeatedly referred to the argument that the granting of this exceptional treatment would be an anomaly in our procedure. May I say that the greatest anomaly is that this measure, which seeks to place the university constituency on the same level as every other, and which deprives some 30,000 men in Great Britain alone of a privilege which they have enjoyed for many years, a privilege which is open to all and due entirely to their educational qualifications, should have been introduced into this House and strongly supported by the Minister of Education, whose special duty it is to encourage in every way he can the education of the citizens of the Empire!
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Harold Baker)The hon. Member who has moved this Amendment has made an earnest appeal to the House. I hope he will not think I am treating a grave subject in a rather perfunctory fashion if I reply with comparative brevity. The main substance of his speech was a plea for exceptional treatment on behalf of one section of the body of plural voters, and a section which I quite agree is a distinguished section, but still a section. We have discussed amendments in favour of other classes ranging upwards from £10 householders to what I suppose the hon. Member regards as the 2020 highest class, the university graduate. All those sections which are asking the Government to make an exception in their favour have, from the point of view of this Bill, and from the point of view of the Government, this one fatal defect, that they are all plural voters. The object and purpose of this Bill is to abolish the plural voter. If once that principle is accepted, and the House has already accepted it, then I think it is very difficult to make out a case for any exception.
The hon. Member in the main alleged two grounds why an exception should be made in the case of universities. He dwelt very eloquently on the purity of election which prevailed in universities and in universities alone. One would have thought while listening to the hon. Member that the whole of that system of which we have so little acquaintance was to be abolished by the provisions of this Bill. What are the facts? The Bill does not disfranchise the universities. Many of my hon. Friends would be very glad if it did. It does not remove one single university Member from this House. It does not prevent anyone who enjoys a university vote from exercising it in the future if he pleases. All that it does is to put the plural voter with a university vote to the necessity of making a choice. If the advantages are as great as the hon. Member suggested, the educated voter can have no doubt as to where he should cast his vote. The second ground on which the hon. Member based his claim for exceptional treatment was that of educational qualification. Many of us have associations with universities, but when you strip these away, and see in imagination not the universities but the graduates, the actual constituents, you form a very different conception of the case. Is there really any claim to be made for university graduates from the political point of view different from that which has already been made this afternoon on behalf of the men who have interests in two places, who reside in one place and have their business in another?
What is it that the hon. Member asks us to do? He asks us to make a single exception, and to perpetuate the plural vote in the case of Masters of Arts of Oxford or Cambridge; that is to say, not necessarily those who have passed the highest educational tests, but those who have happened to keep their names on the books of the university, and paid the necessary fees. I am afraid that if 2021 the educational qualification were to be taken, it would have to be extended far beyond the universities. We should have to give votes proportional to the degree of education attained. There are very good reasons why we should not do anything of the sort. The hon. Member quoted a passage from Lecky. I cannot quote the exact words, but I have a recollection of another passage of Lecky in which he states plainly and un-equivocably that in his opinion universities have always been obstacles in the way of progress. If that be so, it is a very good reason why we should not give additional votes for educational qualifications. I do not wish to labour the point, because there cannot be any doubt, at any rate on this side, on the question. The main principle already enshrined in the Bill is that the plural vote is an unfair anomaly and must go. To that principle we hold and no exception must be made. We rely on the simple plan that if you have a political personality it shall not be divided, a part in one place and a part in another, so as to have double power, but that the vote shall be exercised once, and once only.
§ Sir WILLIAN ANSONI congratulate the hon. Member (Mr. Baker) on his perspicuity. One cannot help noticing the complete change which may come over the view of an hon. Member of this House when he passes from a Back Bench to the Front Bench. What we are arguing is that we should legislate on the lines of the hon. Member's own Bill of last year, when universities were kept out of the operation of the plural voting measure then introduced. Out of the whole area and field of necessary Parliamentary reform in this House and the other House the Government have chosen one small form of reform which involves the disfranchisement to a large extent of their political opponents. The constituencies which are mostly affected by this are, as the hon. Member has truly said, constituencies that are largely composed of plural voters. I do not dispute that: they were so from the beginning. The franchise conferred by the university degree was superimposed upon any other franchise which the possessor of a degree might hold. What is proposed to be done by this Bill is so to affect university constituencies that in any future scheme of redistribution that comes along the universities will be something too small to be considered, and there is a probability of their being effaced altogether from our Parliamentary system. Why is there this 2022 hostility to university representation as such? We are told that it is undemocratic. Whatever it is it is a representation of educated and intelligent persons; and whatever the conditions are as to keeping the names of the graduates on the books, the possessors of the franchise must be persons of education and intelligence. Where you get education and intelligence concentrated in one representative body, I think it is hardly just to democracy to call such representation undemocratic!
It is said that the university representatives are all one side in politics. I think that is alleged as a distinct reason for bringing about the disfranchisement of the universities. These men must vote one side or the other. I do not think they would be acceptable to either side if they came into the House with such open minds that no one could ever rely upon them to vote one way or the other. In 1906 Wales had a large representation of hon. Members on the other side, but no one on the other side ever said that Wales should be disfranchised because the Welsh Members were all Radicals, although I feel sure that if you were to inquire as to the views of the minority in Wales you would find that they were much less satisfied with their representation than is the minority in the universities, where the representation is all Unionist. What I ask is that this question should be fairly considered and should be dealt with in such a way that when the question of university representation does come up for consideration it should not be prejudiced by a condition to which this Bill will have reduced the university franchise. I frankly say I am an advocate of plural voting on the ground that it is to some extent, though not satisfactorily, a bulwark against handing over all power to mere members. Quite apart from that I say that university representation is a large question, that it is a valuable element in our representative system and ought to be looked at from that point of view, not from any mere question of the politics of the representatives of the universities or the question of plural voting.
Whether you withdraw the vote or not, I venture to submit that for reasons I will lay before the Committee, university representation should be maintained. I will give one reason. There is no doubt that it the present moment there is a 2023 movement of educational advancement all over the country which will be stimulated and guided by legislation. There is a great interest in education all over the country, and there is a great desire that the best should be open to everybody. But there are risks attending that. There is the possibility that in order to admit everybody the standard may be lowered and it is well that there should be men sent here from the universities whose business it is to remind the House when legislation comes on of the proper relationship of the different parts of the educational system and the proper position of the universities in the country or in any country; that the university is not merely a finishing secondary school, but that it is a place devoted to the interests of knowledge and the advancement of learning, and that side by side there should be this teaching given by those advanced in knowledge, and that the only way to get an ideal treatment is that the highest ideal of learning and teaching should always be kept before the legislature that has to deal with the education of the country. I said the ideal of the university should always be present as the educational ideal before Members of the legislature, and with that object and for that purpose university representation should not be merely maintained but cherished by this House.
I will advance another argument. There is no doubt the universities new and old are gaining a great hold upon our national life. The new universities are situated in great industrial centres. They are objects of pride to the cities in which they are placed. The old universities, less favourably situated for this purpose are by means of extending their lectures and sending forth men yielding the best to the great industrial centres, and are getting hold upon the people over the country, and I know very well that workmen who come up from all parts of the country for the summer classes in the long vacation, certainly at Oxford, of which I speak from experience, go away with reverence and admiration for the place when they have discovered that there are men there who work for the advancement of knowledge and with the desire to implant knowledge as well as having the great blessing of enjoying knowledge. I ask that this matter shall not be prejudged by the refusal to introduce this Amendment. Universities may be dealt with as 2024 they now stand. The object of our representation and its character, and the whole procedure of our elections are on a different footing to that of any other constituency, and I ask, with all the earnestness that I can impress upon the House, that this subject may be dealt with seriously and with a liberality of mind which it deserves.
§ Mr. SAMUEL ROBERTSI am sure this discussion has been rendered most interesting by the eloquent speeches we have had from hon. Members representing university constituencies. I was speaking to one of the Members for Cambridge University, and I told him he would have to come forward and defend its representation. He replied "No, you ought to defend it, you are my constituents." Although it is not proposed in this Bill to abolish university seats, I hold that in practice it will do that because the constituents of universities will have to elect which constituency they will vote for, and there is no doubt that an elector will decide to vote in the constituency in which he resides. No doubt pressure will be brought upon them by the local agents to vote where the votes are most required, and that will leave a very small number of graduates to record their votes for the Member for the university, and therefore he will be a Member representing a very small constituency. In my experience those who have represented universities have been an ornament to this House. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am glad to hear those cheers, and I am sure hon. Members will agree with me when I name Professor Jebb and Professor Butcher, because you could not name two men who better represented education in this House. I always thought that the Radical party were the best friends of education, or rather, that they represented themselves to be. It looks as though we were mistaken, and that they are now afraid of education being properly represented. Why have you allowed university representation to go on under the Home Rule Bill? You have not disqualified Dublin University, and I do not know that you gave any reason why that constituency should be disfranchised. The Financial Secretary to the War Office gave no logical reason at all why this Amendment should not be accepted, but he simply stated that the Government plan was to abolish plural voting. He gave no valid reason why university 2025 Constituencies should cease to exist. We who are honoured by being the electors of the old universities are pleading to-night that these votes may be allowed to exist as they have existed for about 300 years. There are only six universities, and I hope that the Government will reconsider the position. I have great pleasure in supporting the Amendment.
§ Sir R. FINLAYI think that the Committee has some reason to complain of the very perfunctory manner in which this Amendment was dealt with by the Financial Secretary of the War Office. He took a leaf out of the book of the President of the Board of Education and thought it quite enough to say that the Amendment was inconsistent with the Amendment was inconsistent with the principle of the Bill. The principle of the Bill is simply this, that the Government desire to disfranchise those who they think are likely to vote against them. The Bill has no higher motive or principle than that, and on the Second Reading it was candidly avowed by some of the hon. Gentlemen opposite, that they supported it for that reason, and that reason only. I do put it to the Committee that the universities ought to be excepted from the operations of this Bill. I think that it is unsound as applied to the ordinary constituencies of the country in respect of the occupation and residential franchise, but it must be obvious to everyone that it is utterly unsound when applied to the universities.
The vote for university representation rests on a special qualification, and it is well known to everyone when university representation was introduced that those who enjoyed the university vote would also in almost every case enjoy the right to vote in another constituency. It is the very basis of university representation that the special educational qualification will in almost every case be in addition to the ordinary qualification possessed in on of the constituencies of the country. If that is the basis on which university representation rests, surely it is obvious that you ought not to supply to the universities the same standard that you apply to ordinary constituencies which rests on a different basis altogether. Reference has been made to what Mr. Lecky thought on this subject. The Financial Secretary to the War Office quoted one expression from Mr. Lecky. May I be allowed to remind him of another. Mr. Lecky said that in any sane system of Parliamentary representation the representation of the 2026 universities certainly deserved to be kept up. Surely it is only a right and a rational thing that some weight should be attached to education, and to educational qualification. The representation of the universities affords some recognition, a very inadequate recognition I admit, of the right of education and intelligence to some special voice in the counsels of the nation, and that the weight attached to that representation is inadequate is no reason for doing away with what representation we have. I think that in the case of the Scottish universities I may make a special appeal to hon. Gentlemen opposite on the ground that they are most thoroughly democratic institutions. Scottish university education has always been open to all classes of the community.
There is not a single hon. Gentleman, on whichever side of the House he sits, who does not know that the pride of the Scottish universities has always been that they have been open to every class of the community. The same thing might be said of other universities south of the Tweed, but it has been the glory of the Scottish universities which have existed for many hundreds of years north of the Tweed that that has always been characteristic of them, and I do ask the House whether it is right, with regard to constituencies of that kind, which have recognised the value of educational qualifications, and which are open to everyone, to whatever class they may belong—I ask whether it is right that that qualification should be attacked in such a Bill as this. The Bill itself purports to exempt universities from its application; it does not attack university representation; it leaves it intact, and I say if you do not do it directly you should not attempt to do it indirectly. Do not do by subterfuge that which you are afraid to do directly by legislation for that purpose. The object of the application of this measure to universities is to bleed university representation to death. Hon. Gentlemen opposite may applaud that statement. But what is it they want? They want to do indirectly what they dare not attempt to do directly. I hope that the House will not lend any countenance to a proposal of that kind.
I would add one other practical reason to the considerations I have advanced. There will be an extraordinary condition of affairs introduced if this Bill passes in this form, because where university graduates take a considerable part in an election it will be open to them to select 2027 the constituency in which they vote, and up to the last moment you will not know how their vote will be cast. Surely a rational principle is not to introduce a state of things whereby you will have one result at a by-election and another result at a General Election. It is beyond all question that at a by-election where this Bill would not apply, the whole university vote might be cast one way while at a General Election to which the Bill would apply the vote might be so divided as to alter that result. Surely that would not be a desirable or right state of things. On the whole I would ask the Committee to accept the Amendment which has been moved by my hon. Friend the Member for the University of London, and to say that it refuses to take any part in doing by indirect means what this Bill by direct means does not affect to do, viz., to prejudicially affect the representation of universities.
§ Lord HUGH CECILAfter the very able speeches delivered by my right hon. Friends, it will not be necessary or desirable that I should go deeply into this subject, and I will therefore only devote my observations to one or two points. The Bill, as it stands, without this Amendment, implies, as is recognised by those who defend it, that no distinction ought to be drawn between a person who has passed an educational test and one who has not. Therefore, in this Amendment, we raise an issue really apart from its ulterior effect on university representation. Is it right that the opinion of a person qualified by a certain educational standard should have a greater political weight than those of one not so qualified. I should have thought it would have been confessed on both sides of the House, and certainly not less on the Liberal side, that the importance of maintaining the full value of education should have great weight in determining the vote of hon. Gentlemen on this subject.
Is it not an absurdity to spend great sums of public money to encourage not only education in elementary schools, but also an elaborate system of secondary education that includes a large number of scholarships which enable persons to receive this university education, if you think that persons so educated are not better qualified to form a judgment upon any political question than they were when the educational process started? If education makes a person no better a political judge, 2028 if it adds nothing to his political judgment, is it worth while spending all this money upon him? Why should we educate him? Why not drop our educational expenses and greatly relieve the finances of the country? Surely no one really doubts that the political judgment of a man who has received a careful education is better than the political judgment of one who has not received a careful education. The only answer to that is what was touched upon by the Financial Secretary to the War Office, who resisted this Amendment. It is that the British universities have not been what is called "progressive," that is to say, that they have returned Unionist or Conservative Members to Parliament.
12.0 m.
There are universities in many parts of Europe which we know are progressive. In Russia, for instance, you would not find the universities were blamed for not being progressive. There is nothing essentially retrogressive in having received an education. It is quite possible to find educated people who are very progressive. It may be an unfortunate coincidence or accident that educated people, as a general rule, disagree with hon. Members opposite. Whatever the explanation may be, it is not inherent in, the nature of progress or of education. Historically, you may find some explanation of the circumstance that the universities, as they are at present, have thrown their weight on the non-Liberal side. The universities in the past have undoubtedly been closely connected with the Church of England, while Liberalism, on the other hand, has undoubtedly in the past been closely connected with Nonconformity. That circumstance has produced a severance between the universities and Liberalism, which in the nineteenth century was a very prominent fact. I do not think it is likely to continue in respect to all university education and all Liberal parties in the future.
If I may say so without offence, I think Liberal Members are very short-sighted in this matter if they suppose that the sort of political situation which existed in the nineteenth century and which has been prolonged into the early years of the twentieth century is going to last for ever. Nothing could be a greater mistake. The old quarrels between the Church and Nonconformity, of which we see the dying embers in the Established Church (Wales) Bill controversy, are rapidly becoming settled, and the sharp cleavage between the universities and Liberalism will pass away. There are growing up on every side 2029 new universities, and beyond all question there will be an immense extension of university education in the future. It will no longer be associated with any exceptional degree of wealth, or with any particular ecclesiastical opinion. University education will become very widespread and there will be no difficulty at all in constructing such a system of university representation as will quite fairly and comprehensively represent all the highly educated opinion. Why abolish university representation just now because you are dissatisfied with what has happened in the past, because from a merely party point of view university representation is a trivial obstacle in the way of the Liberal Party. It is very common to look back upon the political ideals of the past and to see in them much that seems strange. For example, many people now see very vividly how absurd it was to draw a great distinction in respect to rank and station which prevailed in earlier centuries in this country. It is quite absurd to ignore the real value of education. It will seem quite as silly to posterity that this House was inclined to say that the educational qualification had no special value in respect to voting as it seems to us that a person of noble blood ought to have special political privileges. If we look wisely back on the errors of the past it should be to warn us against making the like errors now in the different circumstances of our own affairs. It is just such an error that we shall make if we deny the real political value of education, and by rejecting this Amendment affirm the principle that an educated man is no better than an uneducated and that political judgment is dissevered altogether from the cultivation of the intellect.
§ Sir J. SIMONWe have had by common consent an interesting discussion on this Amendment, though to some of us the arguments used in support of the Amendment appear very strained. Here is a Bill which proposes to abolish plural voting, and the Amendment suggests that plural voting should not be abolished in the very constituencies where it is most obviously present. That is the meaning of the Amendment, to exclude from the Plural Voting Bill the exercise of the plural vote by persons in university constituencies which consist of nothing but plural voters. The speeches which have been made, interesting and powerful as they undoubtedly have been, do not seem 2030 to my mind really to grapple with what is at the bottom of the whole proposal to abolish plural voting. We take the view that while of course the influence and authority of different citizens varies—it is absurd to say that since men are equal therefore one man has as much political instinct and sagacity as another—the very fact that some citizens, thanks to educational advantages have had better training and more experience than others gives them in itself an influence in our community.
The hon. Baronet (Sir P. Magnus) says the university voter is always an educated man, therefore he can only exercise a fair influence in the State if he votes twice while everyone else votes once. That is not the way in which educated people exercise their influence in the State. That is not the way in which university education ought to have its effect upon the government of the State. Anyone who knows this House of Commons knows of people serving in it who on one side or the other have had the unestimable advantage of university training who sit for seats which are not university seats and presumably exercise such influence as they have, partly because of the training they have received. I repudiate altogether the idea that, because forsooth a man who has had the advantages of a university training and has got, it may be, in some respects qualities which make him a wiser guide than others, therefore it is necessary to allow him to vote twice before we can be sure that he exercises his influence. Take just the very class who compose the electorate of such a university as Oxford. It is not a fact that those who vote in the university of Oxford are always people who have had distinguished scholastic careers, or who have a very extensive knowledge of political affairs.
In substance, and for the most part, they are men who have enjoyed the advantages of a university education, have become clergymen of the Church of England, and, for reasons which have nothing to do with the important part which Oxford graduates might play in the government of the country, have kept their names on the college books. They have done so because, in addition to being graduates, their university has got livings to give away. If they are, as many of them are, persons of culture, refinement, and education, they exercise, and rightly exercise, influence in the society where 2031 they live week by week, month by month, and it may be Sunday by Sunday. Then why on earth is it alleged that citizens who have got that advantage, and who use it perfectly honourably and uprightly, are also to have the purely mechanical advantage of voting twice, while everybody else votes once? Really the suggestion which is made that this Amendment should be accepted because of the peculiar virtues of a university constituency is one which, I fear, can hardly be supported by those who consider the history of the case.
We are told that a university constituency likes independence, and that it gives an opportunity for honourable and intelligent men to take an independent line to an extent which other constituencies do not. What is the history of the most distinguished university representative who ever sat in this House? If ever there was a man qualified to sit for a university constituency by education, training, and attachment to learning, it was Mr. Gladstone, but the moment he found himself unable to maintain the opinions which commended themselves to the body of persons who represented the university he was immediately thrown out from the representation of Oxford university, and he had to find a seat elsewhere. It will not do to say that the existence of the university plural voter can be defended on the ground that he shows a particular width of view in judging of his representative, or that he gives him a latitude which is not found elsewhere. There are great popular constituencies which do give such latitude to the men who represent them, but I question very much whether that can be said of university constituencies. When university representatives have taken a view contrary to the general trend of opinion among those who returned them I do not think they have found themselves particularly generously treated by the constituencies. We were told a year or two ago that there were certain topics which in the view of hon. Gentleman opposite should be referred to a referendum. Was their view that a referendum was a system by which anybody else should have one vote and every university graduate should have two votes? From time to time this House has set up constitutions for the Empire beyond the seas. Does anybody suggest that we could with the slightest prospect of not being laughed out of this House propose for any other part of the British 2032 Empire that there should be one man one vote for everybody except university graduates in Melbourne or Toronto.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSWhat about Ireland?
§ Sir J. SIMONIreland is really an instance the other way. We found there an existing set of constituencies, and we regrouped those constituencies in order to avoid the drawing of new lines of division between one constituency and another. I am afraid that the day has gone by when anybody could justify the idea that the university graduate should have two votes and everybody else should have only one, and while I do not resent, but I sympathise with the arguments, of those who speak of their great attachment to the universities, their very argument is an admission that this thing is an anomaly which it is extremely difficult, even from their point of view to defend by systematic logical argument, and they must know how impossible it is for the masses of the people of this country to accept or understand such a contention.
It really is not the fact that certain persons who are members of universities, those great centres of learning about which we never think of using any language except the language of affection and admiration, but it really is not true—and Oxford and Cambridge men would be wise to realise it—to say that we do not find a high degree of education and culture among many people who unfortunately have had no university training or degree. Therefore we are only left with the choice of two things. One is to have an elaborate system which sets up throughout the country a series of tests on examination lines, and give a man two votes if he gets a certain total and additional votes if he scores higher, and the other is that all citizens should be treated on a political equality. In this particular case this special class needs the special privilege which is advocated for them less than any other class. I trust that I will never speak in language other than that of admiration and devotion of the great seats of learning to which many of us in this House owe far more than we are ever likely to be able to express or repay, and I do not associate and I never have associated myself with those who speak slightingly of the great work of those institutions. But I cannot bring myself to believe that if these institutions, 2033 exercise their true functions in a modern state it is really necessary to confer upon those who have enjoyed the exceptional advantages of that training and that association the purely mechanical advantage of multiplying their voting power in the State by two and telling everybody else that they must be content with one vote and one vote only.
Mr. BALFOURIt may perhaps be desirable that on this side of the House some one who has never been a university representative and is never going to be a university representative should take some part in this Debate. I feel very strongly on this subject, and, as I consider the speeches delivered from the Front Bench opposite utterly inconclusive, perhaps the Committee will allow me to say a very few words. We have had a few very distinguished Oxford representatives who are determined, if they can, to deprive their university of the representative privileges which it now enjoys. The right hon. and learned Gentleman who has just sat down (Sir J. Simon), a most brilliant son of Oxford, has told us, I think, in two separate passages of his speech, how deep is his devotion and how great his affection for that seat of learning, For myself, I hope never to hear a Cambridge man praise Cambridge as the right hon. and learned Gentleman has praised Oxford. There are some arguments which I think are weighing with hon. Gentlemen opposite who propose to support the Bill in its present form—some which are unexpressed and some which are expressed. There is the wire-puller's argument, and there is the doctrinaire's argument.
The wirepuller's argument is, of course, a simple one. At the present moment all the universities return Members hostile to the party now in power, I do not propose to deal with that argument. I do not suppose that anybody on the other side would care to develop it, however much they may be moved by it. I think the more thought that those Members of the House have given to the subject, or are giving thought to the arguments of my Noble Friend, the more they will see that there is not so much advantage to be gained from abolishing the present system as in their most sanguine moments they may suppose. In regard to the doctrinaire's view, the argument takes two forms—the less plausible and the more plausible form. The less plausible form 2034 is the form developed by the Under-Secretary—that the Bill has been brought in to abolish plural voting, and that it would be very illogical to have any Amendment in it which modifies the uninterrupted and consistent pursuit of that principle in every department of our political life. Therefore, he would not accept the Amendment. The right hon. and learned Gentleman put it somewhat differently. He said, this is obviously an anomaly, which is utterly indefensible from. the point of view of what he called logic—it was not the logic he learnt at Oxford—and one of his most astonishing developments of the doctrinaire's argument was that you never would dare to suggest it in any new country, or any of your own self-governing Dominions where you intended to establish democratic institutions. [An HON. MEMBER: "The Referendum."] That does not touch the argument I am going to lay before you. In the first place I venture to doubt the right hon. and learned Gentleman's facts.
I do not believe that you can lay down now and for all time that our great and rising democracy are going to hold university education in such contempt that it would be regarded as an absurdity to suggest that a great and growing university like Melbourne—the case which was put—is for ever to remain without special representation. I am not sure it is so, but whether it is true or not it is utterly irrelevant. Is not one of the advantages of living in a country where institutions have slowly grown up, not in accordance with logic as understood by the learned Gentlemen opposite, but under the moulding influence of circumstances, acting from generation to generation, is it not one of the enormous advantages of such a constitution that it has what you call anomalies? It does not fit in, in other words, to some chess-board pattern which suits your notions of logic, and fits in with some irreproachable process of ratiocination for certain premises which you first lay down. Is it not the very test of a statesman that he knows how to use those anomalous institutions which have come down from the past for every new purpose, that comes with decision before the community in a way which, unfortunately for themselves, the new country is not able to do, and cannot do, and it would be a great advantage in many cases if it could. Indeed, in some respects, I am not at all sure that they do 2035 not. Are you prepared to say that the common law of England, the common heritage of all the English speaking communities, is wholly free from anomalies? Would you like to set out your new idea of democratic government in some remote part of the world with a new code of your own construction, with no roots in the past whatever, simply based upon the ideal construction of some gentleman in a university or with university training, with all the notions of symmetry and logic which all events appear to commend themselves to some of those who speak in the name of Oxford in this House?
It fits in now with my general argument that I may be permitted to take up this argument of the Referendum. I understand it is this, that if you have a Referendum being recommended by many gentlemen, I think most gentlemen on this side of the House, and, certainly, most earnestly by myself, as an institution which might well be added to our present institutions, the objectors say, "a Referendum only gives one man one vote, and how then can you frame a system of constituencies in which there will not be a system of one man one vote." When I listen to these Debates upon the franchise I never hear anything whatever about the constitution of this House, and I always hear something about this House, as it is said, "reflecting the people." That is a very absurd metaphor. When you come to think of it it is almost a ludicrous metaphor, which entirely diverts attention from one of the aspects that ought to be the main concern of every Member of this House. Look round the world, I do not care in what country you look—the danger of democratic institutions is this, that democracies, however you arrange the voting power, seem constantly to create bodies, and when they have created them to treat them with contumely and contempt. There is no place where you hear particular representative institutions more heartily attacked, more contemptuously treated in private and familiar conversation, more denounced in the newspapers, than in those very countries which are Always talking about how absolutely necessary it is so to frame your electoral law that the House of Representatives shall reflect what they call the "public opinion of the country."
That is one of the great dangers we have to face. Of course, public opinion must rule. You must have a 2036 machinery, and our object ought to be to get a machinery which shall reflect public opinion, partly in its passing phases, and more especially in its general tendency; but you will never get that done to the full advantage of the community unless you try so to arrange matters that when you have got your Assembly it shall be looked up to. I do not pretend that the reputation of this House will be very great if you keep university representation, and very small if you destroy it. I do not say that the presence of nine university representatives—I hope before long there will be more than nine, and that the newer universities will be represented—make the whole difference as to the character of this House or the estimation in which the House is held by the public at large. But I do say that it has an appreciable, if a small, effect which perhaps is not quite understood by the House itself. I think that that is due to quite separate causes. In the first place, I think it adds dignity to the whole idea of university representation that you should be able to continue an honour which the great seats of learning have for centuries enjoyed. You may call it a privilege as far as they are concerned, if you like; but it is an honour paid by the country to the cause of higher education, and I do not think that you can with advantage withdraw that honour. It is not a question of giving representation to universities in a new country. It is a case of taking away in an old country from the great Scottish and English universities—I suppose that Ireland is out of the question—a privilege which our fathers, who we rather foolishly suppose cared less for education than we do, were glad to give them. That is not the only reason. When we talk of making this assembly a mirror or reflection of the people, does the House remember what obstacles are put in the way—not deliberately, not by legislation, but by the inevitable course of democratic institutions—of some of the very best men we want being elected to this House? In former times the sort of difficulty I am talking about was got over by a really dangerous anomaly—an anomaly which was not only dangerous, but in some cases was very like governmental corruption—I mean the system of rotten boroughs. That did notoriously give an entrance to this House to men who would not have got in, would not have desired to get in, and, if they had desired, could not have got in in a modern democratic industrial, county, or rural constituency.
2037 Well, we have abolished, and we have rightly abolished, rotten boroughs. Nobody would wish to restore them; but do not let us forget that in destroying rotten boroughs we have kept out of this House a great many men who most of us would be glad to see in it, simply considering the character of the assembly and the quality of the intellect which you get. Mere brains, however they may be backed up by the necessary funds in the person or the party, do not make a good candidate. Everybody knows it. In the first place an iron constitution is required for a very large number of constituencies, brazen lungs, perfect indifference to repeating the same speech innumerable times to an ill-attentive and indifferent audience, and the same readiness to leave out of account arguments which the speaker knows to be of importance, but which he equally knows in the time of stress and excitement of a general election it is hopeless to bring before an excited meeting, however friendly, and still less before a meeting which in addition to being excited happens to be stormy and hostile. Let us be candid with ourselves and let us admit this. I have passed through all these things and I do not think I am exaggerating what happens at such times, and what, at all events, is the lot of a very great many of the gentlemen to whom I am speaking.
It is impossible to give a quiet, a dull, a difficult account of a dull and difficult political problem to people who are either relatively uneducated or unreceptive, or who, are excited or passionately roused over some special problem. Well, that does not prevent Gentlemen I am addressing having come into this House, and it does not show that they are less excellent Members of this House than the other class who will not go through that process; and all I want them to remember is that the process they have gone through keeps out a good many people who will not do that, and they are not always the worst people. I do not want this House to be composed of a lot of learned gentlemen who cannot stand up to a hostile audience, which is prepared to be argued with, and face out a question; I do not want this House to be composed entirely of pedants and professors; I do not want it to have too large an element of arm-chair politicians or of men who with, perhaps, great political, social, and economic learning, yet have not that power of dealing with men in masses which, after all, is an essential part of the equipment of 2038 ordinary politicians. I do not desire that; but neither do I desire that from this House every man should be excluded who has not the health, the strength, the time, and the enormous patience necessary to go through the process which I have described. I have not mentioned, by the way, the interstitial labours of going down in the middle of a heavy Session to tea parties, and smoking concerts, and all the other apparatus by which we succeed in exactly reflecting public opinion.
If you take the limitations which, as I say, want of health in some cases, want of patience in others, and want of time in yet others, impose and which exclude a certain valuable element, and you find that by a happy anomaly history and the tradition of this country has given you some power of getting into this Assembly men of science, men of scholarship, men of special and peculiar gifts quite alien to the ordinary working politician, then I say that you are mad to throw it away. I do not say that they alter the whole quality of this institution—they leave the House of Commons broadly speaking, what it would be without them—but surely they are an improvement, they are an addition, they do give us on certain questions advice and information which we could get from no other quarter except by a happy accident.
In these days when the chief title of the Assembly to respect is that the men in it should be men of character and dignity and distinction, it really is folly to say that you deliberately mean to exclude from your numbers many men partly because they happen to disagree with your political opinions and partly because the fact that they are elected by plural voters does not happen to square precisely with the principle of your Bill. A suspicion almost crosses my mind that the two speeches we have heard to-night from the Front Bench opposite are really intended as subtle but convincing proofs that a university training is really not the proper thing for a man who claims to deal with these great problems of politics in a large, generous, and may I add, historic spirit. I hope I have not said anything unpleasant of Gentlemen opposite, and certainly I trust I have not been discourteous—that is the last thing I should wish to be—but I do assure the House that I feel they are on the wrong tack in dealing with this question, and many of the arguments we have heard advanced against the Amend- 2039 ment have only served to convince me that we ought to prevent this theoretical application of logic being driven to its extremest limits in the refraining of our institutions.
| Division No. 153.] | AYES. | [12.40 a.m. |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Newman, John R. P. |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Forster, Henry William | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Gilmour, Captain John | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Astor, Waldorf | Goldsmith, Frank | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Baird, J. L. | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Paget, Almeria Hugh |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Grant, J. A. | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Greene, W. R. | Pease, Herbert (Darlington) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, London) | Gretton, John | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Guinness, Hon.W. E. (Bury S. Edmunds) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Barlow, Montague (Salford, South) | Hall Frederick (Dulwich) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Barnston, Harry | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Harris, Henry Percy | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Helmsley, Viscount | Rawson, Colonel Richard H. |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Hoare. Samuel John Gurney | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Bird, Alfred | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen) |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Boyton, James | Hops, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Horne, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hunt, Rowland | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. | Starkey, John R. |
| Butcher, J. G. | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Cassel, Felix | Kerry, Earl of | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Cator, John | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Cautley, H. S. | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) |
| Cave, George | Larmor, Sir J. | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Sonar (Bootle) | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University) | Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Lee, Arthur H. | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Clay, Captain H H. Spender | Lewisham, Viscount | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Williams. Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Malcolm, Ian | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Wilson, Hon. A. Stanley (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Winterton, Earl |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Younger, Sir George |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Mount, William Arthur | |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Neville, Reginald J. N. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir |
| Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert | Newdegate, F. A. | Philips Magnus and Sir Henry Craik. |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes |
| NOES | ||
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Dawes, James Arthur |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Brady, Patrick Joseph | Delany, William |
| Adamson, William | Brocklehurst, William B. | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Brunner, John F. L. | Devlin, Joseph |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Bryce, John Annan | Dewar, Sir J. A. |
| Agnew, Sir George William | Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Dillon, John |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Donelan, Captain A. |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Doris, William |
| Arnold, Sydney | Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Duffy, William J. |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Chancellor, Henry George | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Duncan, J. Hastings (Yorks, Otley) |
| Barnes, George N. | Clancy, John Joseph | Elverston, Sir Harold |
| Barran, Sir J. (Hawick Burghs) | Clough, William | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) |
| Barran, Rowland Hurst (Leeds, N.) | Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) |
| Barton, William | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Essex, Sir Richard Walter |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Esslemont, George Birnie |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Cotton, William Francis | Falconer, James |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles |
| Bentham, G. J. | Crooks, William | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Crumley, Patrick | Ffrench, Peter |
| Black, Arthur W. | Cullinan, John | Field, William |
| Boland, John Pius | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
§ Question put "That those words be there inserted."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 133; Noes, 233.
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Lyell, Charles Henry | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Lynch, A. A. | Reddy, Michael |
| Glanville, Harold James | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Goldstone, Frank | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Griffith, Ellis Jones | Macpherson, James Ian | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Gulland, John William | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | McGhee, Richard | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Hackett, John | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leicester) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Meagher, Michael | Rowlands, James |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Mechan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Hayden, John Patrick | Middlebrook, William | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Hayward, Evan | Millar, James Duncan | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Hazleton, Richard | Molloy, Michael | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Hemmerde, Edward George | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Mooney, John J. | Sheehy, David |
| Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Morgan, George Hay | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Henry, Sir Charles | Morison, Hector | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Morrell, Philip | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Muldoon, John | Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert |
| Hinds, John | Munro, Robert | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Murphy, Martin, J. | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Hogge, James Myles | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. | Sutherland, John E. |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Needham, Christopher T. | Sutton, John E. |
| Hudson, Walter | Nolan, Joseph | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Tennant, Harold John |
| Illingworth, Percy H. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| John, Edward Thomas | O'Doherty, Philip | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Donnell, Thomas | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Dowd, John | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | O'Malley, William | Wadsworth, John |
| Jowett, Frederick William | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Keating, Matthew | O'Shee, James John | Webb, H. |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Sullivan, Timothy | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Kelly, Edward | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Kilbride, Denis | Parker, James (Halifax) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| King, J. | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Wiles, Thomas |
| Lambert, Rt. Hon. G (Devon, S. Morton) | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Pointer, Joseph | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Lardner, James C. R. | Pollard, Sir George H. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow) |
| Leach, Charles | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Pringle, William M. R. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Wm. Jones and Mr. Geoffrey Howard. |
| Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Raffan, Peter Wilson | |
| Lundon, Thomas | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI rise to move "That the Chairman do now report Progress and ask leave to sit again."
I do not think I have any difficulty finding a good reason for the course I propose. We have established eleven o'clock as the hour of closing our sittings, but it is now two hours past that time, and we have had, as I am sure everyone who has been present will admit, a very interesting discussion, and the kind of discussion which it is quite impossible can take place at the late hour we are now approaching. I think there is a special reason why we should ask the Government to accept this Motion now. It is all very well to have all-night sittings when the business of the House is con ducted under the method of free discus- 2042 sion, but it is asking too much of this Committee to have practically the whole of our business carried on by means of the guillotine and then to expect us to sit up all night in addition to that outrage on our procedure. I do hope that the Government do not mean to try to impose all-night sittings in a Session which is not over-burdened with work, and when during that Session they have so far carried on all their business by means of Resolutions which make it practically impossible that this House can take any part in the discussion.
Mr. PEASEThe House at an earlier hour this evening suspended the eleven o'clock rule with a view to make substantial progress with the Committee stage of this Bill. I am not going to say 2043 that we have not already made some progress, but I do think we have reached a point when we can see the end of the Committee stage very shortly in front of us. I have been looking through the Amendments on the Paper, and, so far as I can see, there is only one more Amendment of real substance which is likely to be raised, and that is, the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Kingston (Mr. Cave), which deals with the penalty. That being so, I really would invite the House to allow us to pass this Clause and the next Clause—a nominal one—to-night on the understanding that on Friday we should discuss the new Clauses in the expectation that we should be allowed to dispose of them that day. In that way I believe an all-night sitting would be avoided. I do not think it is necessary for us to have a very protracted discussion on the remaining Amendments, and if that view commends itself to the House I trust this Motion may be withdrawn and we may proceed with the Amendments on the Paper.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI recognise that the right hon. Gentleman has met us to a certain extent in a conciliatory way—that is, he did not get up and say he intended at all hazards to go on with this Bill. He has endeavoured to advance reasons why under certain circumstances certain steps should be taken, but I think I can show he has rather misunderstood or under-estimated the Amendments on the Paper and the feeling which animates hon. Members on this side. The right hon. Gentleman has said that there is only one Amendment which is important, but it is perfectly impossible for the right hon. Gentleman to lay down the proposition that out of four pages of Amendments—or 3¾ pages to be exact—there is only one Amendment which is of any vital consequence and worth discussion. I would like to point out how easily the right hon. Gentleman may be deceived in taking such a view as he has taken. An Amendment of my hon. Friend was passed over by the Chairman earlier this evening. On it being pointed out to you, Sir, that my hon. Friend had some particularly good reason for the Amendment, you allowed it. It proved one of the most interesting Amendments we have had, and ended in the Government considering three points, none of which would have arisen if that Amendment had not been discussed.
2044 Therefore it is perfectly clear that, however sincere one may be, one cannot say that out of 3¾ pages of Amendments there is only one which needs further consideration. It must be remembered that through no fault of the Opposition something like two hours were taken out of the discussion on this Bill this evening. I do not in the least object to hon. Members below the Gangway opposite moving their motion, but when they have taken two hours out of our time it is hardly fair to ask us to sit up in the small hours of the morning to discuss what everyone must admit is an extremely important Bill. It is really absurd after one day's discussion to say that we must sit up late in order to discuss the Bill. I do not think anyone on the other side will say that there has been considerable obstruction either to-day or yesterday. I have had occasion many times to come to an arrangement with the right hon. Gentleman who is now leading the House, and I have always found him most anxious to meet all reasonable requirements. I feel quite certain that in his own heart he knows that this is a reasonable request and that he himself will not lose anything by it.
1.0 A.M.
These long, protracted Debates at early hours of the morning do not tend to the credit of this House. What does the right hon. Gentleman think he is going to get? Supposing, for the sake of argument, that he does not get the whole of the Bill on Friday, he will get the rest of it early on Monday. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Well, it is very probable that the whole of Friday and three or four hours on Monday will give him the rest of his Bill. Is it worth while that the House should be kept up when proper discussion cannot be carried on and when there are no reports in the newspapers? [Laughter.] I really do not understand the laughter. Surely this House is here to deliberate, and to inform the country of its deliberations, and if the country does not know what we are doing, how can it form an opinion as to whose contention is right in this House? We are not here merely to register the decrees of one party; we are here to discuss, properly and deliberately, whether or not certain things can be done. We cannot do that at this late hour in the morning. I have endeavoured, without heat, to put forward the views which I know the right hon. Gentleman knows that I sincerely entertain on these 2045 questions. Over and over again I have arranged with the right hon. Gentleman, and with the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, methods by which all-night sittings can be avoided, and I do not think either of them will deny that those arrangements, generally, have been successful. Do not let us go back and arouse all the old controversies which usually distinguish all-night sittings. I sincerely hope that the request which I have made will be accepted, and that the right hon. Gentleman will not insist on going on into the remaining hours of the morning.
I am not in any way authorised to make a proposal, and the suggestion I would throw out may not be approved of—but might I suggest that if we take the first Sub-section of Clause I, and take the first words of the second Sub-section, so as to avoid any further Amendment on the first Sub-section, that that will meet the point. [HON. MEMBER: "No."] Well, if hon. Members want to sit up, of course, we are perfectly willing to do so. They must not think that any suggestion that I may make comes from any weakness on the part of hon. Members on this side of the House; it is merely made to avoid what I think is—I will not say a disgraceful—but an unseemly exhibition of passing legislation at these late hours. Everybody knows perfectly well that all the trouble that has arisen in various Acts of Parliament lately has arisen because those Acts have been shoved through the House without proper and due discussion. This Bill itself is evidence of it. The Solicitor-General, earlier in the evening, accepted one or two important Amendments, which were entirely due to hon. Members on this side of the House, and were not moved in any party spirit. If they had not been put in, the working of the Bill would have been rendered very difficult. I think I have shown very good reason for the request of my right hon. Friend being accepted, and I hope the Government will do that.
Mr. STANLEY WILSONI should like to urge the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider the decision he has announced. The Government have had a most reasonable proposal made to them. Already they have made considerable progress with their Bill—a great deal more progress than they looked like making at one period of the evening. I think the Government might rest satisfied with the work which has been already done. They will have plenty of time on Friday, and if they have 2046 not time, completely to finish their Bill, as my hon. Friend has just suggested, they have got Monday as well. A few hours will see the end of the whole thing. The President of the Board of Education cannot accuse anybody on these Benches, of obstructing the measure. We have given him, as I think he will readily admit, considerable assistance. We have helped him to amend a Bill which is probably one of the worst drafted measures which has, ever been submitted to this House. If the right hon. Gentleman will allow us to postpone the rest of this discussion, we will help him again on Friday to amend this Bill still further. The Bill is one of considerable importance. Its effect, as we all know is to disqualify voters because they are Unionists. Here we are, in the middle of the night, with the Government so ashamed of their Bill that they intended to force it through this House in the small hours of the morning, because they are ashamed to face the daylight. The Government appear to have one object in view at the present time, and that is to force all the business through this House at express speed so that, at all costs, and all hazards, their supporters can get away and can take a holiday in the country. They might postpone their departure by one day, and allow-this measure to have a fair, fit, and proper discussion. The Government are frightened that if they keep their supporters here beyond a few days in August, they will be beaten in this House, because we are ready to stop.
There is one strong protest that I should like to make, and which I have made on previous occasions during all-night sittings. It is against the absence of the Prime Minister. [Laughter]. Hon. Members can laugh, but this is the usual proceeding that takes place in this House, when there is, an all-night sitting. The Prime Minister seems to forget his duties to the House of Commons. He seems to forget that he is the Leader of this House, and that he ought, on occasions such as these, to be here to direct the proceedings. On one Memorable occasion, a few years ago, after an all-night sitting, when I had called attention to the Prime Minister's absence from the House, he came down the following day, and apologised for his absence—for his continual absence. He said he had much work to do, and he could not sit up all night. The Prime Minister cannot say that we have had many all-night sittings, and I think that on this occasion, at any rate, the right hon. Gentleman 2047 might have taken the trouble to be present. Is it his wish, and has he given instructions to right hon. Members on the Front Bench that we are to sit up all night whilst he comfortably rests in bed? I protest, as most hon. Members of our party protest, against his absence on this occasion. One last appeal I should like to make. I appeal to the President of the Board of Education, on behalf of the Irish Nationalist party, whose mouths have been closed, who dare not speak their real opinions. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh," and "Name."] I will not give them away, at the same time, they have told me that they do no want to stop up all night, and that they hoped we were not going to keep them up late. Everything depends on the Government, it is nothing to do with us. The Government can accept this Motion, and I urge them, once more, to reconsider the decision they have made, and to let us depart in peace.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEI am about to make an observation which I am well aware is in doubtful taste, but my conviction of its truth compels me to say it, all the same. Let alone the Prime Minister, it is unfortunate that we should be asked to continue the discussion at this time, when all the more competent Ministers are absent. [HON. MEMBER: "Oh, the new style."] It is true that they have made excuses for one or two of them. The Chancellor of the Exchequer presumably is absent, either on medical advice, or because his vocabulary is exhausted, and possibly in that case, he may be endeavouring to attune his mind to a judicial frame, to which the proceedings of this evening are singularly inappropriate. Then with regard to the Foreign Secretary, I imagine he is assisting His Imperial Majesty the Tsar of Russia in his labours with regard to the Balkans. For that there may be some excuse, but I think it is rather singular that the Secretary of State for the Colonies, who has acted as sponsor to at least one Bill of this kind in the past, and who presumably knows the difficulties and weaknesses of this one, should be absent.
I am very sorry for the Solicitor-General, and I feel that while he is in charge of the Bill, the reputation of my university must necessarily suffer. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I have directed my remarks to sound truth, rather than to the niceties of debate. I must express 2048 my commiseration to the President of the Board of Education. I should have thought that that office was in itself sufficiently difficult, and that its problems were sufficiently wearying without his undertaking in addition, the disenfranchising a number of electors. I understand that before many days have passed, the right hon. Gentleman will lay a great scheme of educational reform before this House. I think it unfortunate, for the sake of the solution of conflicting schemes between so many parties, which it will be his duty to endeavour to achieve, that such an invidious task should be laid on him as that which falls to his lot to-night. But seriously I do say that on a Bill of this magnitude it is an outrage, when none of the Ministers who are ordinarily accustomed to lead the House can be present, to ask the House to do business in their absence. Even if the Bill were non-contentious—and it is the very opposite of that—it is doubtful whether under the sort of guidance that is given from the Front Bench opposite we could make much progress in a businesslike way, and considering the nature of the Bill it is absolutely impossible to do so. I think my hon. Friend the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury) was far too liberal in the terms he offered to the Government, and I do trust that we shall not be over-yielding in this matter.
§ Sir J. BANBURYMay I say that what I endeavoured to do was to make a suggestion which I had hoped the Government would have accepted. It may not have been a good suggestion, but I do think it would have been a little more courteous if a representative of the Government would get up and say why they will not accept it.
Mr. PEASEI admit that the hon. Baronet did make a practical suggestion, and he did so in a way which appealed to Members on this side of the House. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no."]
§ The CHAIRMANI must remind hon. Members on my right that it would really conduce to a more speedy termination of the Debate if they refrained from interruptions while Members are addressing the House.
Mr. PEASEIn response to the hon. Baronet's appeal I am prepared to say again what the Government are willing to do. He alluded to the Committee stage 2049 being protracted into next week. I will at once tell the House that I do not think the Government are prepared to accept that proposition; but if the Opposition would undertake to allow the Bill to be reported to the House on Friday evening we should be prepared to accept the Motion which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite. If, however, the Opposition are not prepared to allow that, then I think we ought to proceed with the Committee stage to-night, and make as much progress as we possibly can.
Major MORRISON-BELLThe Minister for Education mentioned a short time ago that he had come to the conclusion that there was only one more Amendment of substance, but I think that in making that statement he was speaking rather in the hope of getting the Bill through quickly. I have here a Bill which has been marked with those Amendments which are in order, and I expect that the right hon. Gentleman has a copy also. I find that on the Paper there still remain fourteen Amendments which have been marked, I understand, after consultation with the Chairman of Committees, as in order, and it is impossible to say that of those Amendments there is only one that is an Amendment of substance. I can only
| Division No. 154.] | AYES. | [1.20 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) |
| Adamson, William | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Hackett, John |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Crooks, William | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) |
| Agnew, Sir George William | Crumley, Patrick | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Cullinan, John | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) |
| Arnold, Sydney | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth} | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Dawes, J. A. | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry |
| Barnes, George N. | Delany, William | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick Burghs) | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Hayward, Evan |
| Barran, Rowland Hurst (Leeds, N.) | Devlin, Joseph | Hazleton, Richard |
| Barton, William | Donelan, Captain A. | Helme, Sir Norval Watson |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Doris, William | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Duffy, William J. | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness) | Henry, Sir Charles |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Elverston, Sir Harold | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Higham, John Sharp |
| Boland, John Pius | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Hinds, John |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Esslemont, George Birnie | Hogge, James Myles |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Falconer, J. | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Hudson, Walter |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Ffrench, Peter | Hughes, Spencer Leigh |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Field, William | John, Edward Thomas |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Fitzgibbon, John | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) |
| Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) | France, G. A. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) |
| Chancellor, H. G. | Gladstone, W. G. C. | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Glanville, Harold James | Jowett, Frederick William |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Goldstone, Frank | Joyce, Michael |
| Clough, William | Greig, Colonel J. W. | Keating, Matthew |
§ suppose that the right hon. Gentleman must have taken a very hurried glance through the Bill if he thinks that the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Kingston (Mr. Cave), is really the only Amendment of substance. As has been pointed out by my right hon. Friend the Member for the City of London, one Amendment has occupied over three hours, and it is not alleged by Members opposite that there was any obstruction, as in fact there was not. In these circumstances, I think the right hon. Gentleman must recognise the facts of the situation. It is impossible to conceive that we can get through the Committee stage before breakfast time this morning, and therefore I think the Minister for Education should come to the conclusion that the better plan would be to deal fairly with Members on this side of the House.
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 226; Noes, 139.
| Kellaway, Frederick George | Murphy, Martin J. | Roche, Augustine (Louth, N.) |
| Kelly, Edward | Murray, Captain Hon. A. C. | Rowlands, James |
| Kilbride, Denis | Needham, Christopher | Rowntree, Arnold |
| King, Joseph | Nolan, Joseph | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S.Molton) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Lardner, James C. R. | O'Doherty, Philip | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | O'Donnell, Thomas | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | O'Dowd, John | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B |
| Leach, Charles | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Sheehy, David |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | O'Malley, William | Simon, Rt, Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Lundon, Thomas | O'Shee, James John | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Lynch, A. A. | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Sutherland, John E. |
| Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Parker, James (Halifax) | Sutton, John E. |
| Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Macpherson, James Ian | Pointer, Joseph | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Pollard, Sir George H. | Toulmin, Sir George |
| M'Curdy, C. A. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| McGhee, Richard | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Verney, Sir Harry |
| M'Laren, Hon.F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Wadsworth, John |
| M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.) | Pringle, William M. R. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Marshall, Arthur Harold | Raffan, Peter Wilson | Watt, Henry A. |
| Meagher, Michael | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Webb, H. |
| Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Reedy, M. | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Middlebrook, William | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Millar, James Duncan | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Molloy, Michael | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Rendall, Athelstan | Winfrey, Richard |
| Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Mooney, John J. | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow) |
| Morgan, George Hay | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Morison, Hector | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | |
| Morrell, Philip | Robinson, Sidney | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Gulland. |
| Muldoon, John | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) | |
| Munro, Robert |
| NOES. | ||
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts, Mile End) |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Craik, Sir Henry | Lee, Arthur Hamilton |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Lewisham, Viscount |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Dairymple, Viscount | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) |
| Astor, Waldorf | Denison-Pender, J. C. | Lloyd, George Butler (Snrewsbury) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Duncannon, Viscount | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Malcolm, Ian |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, Lond.) | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Mason, James F. (Windsor) |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Forster, Henry William | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. |
| Barnston, Harry | Gilmour, Captain John | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Goldsmith, Frank | Mount, William Arthur |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Neville, R. J. N. |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Grant, J. A. | Newdegate, F. A. |
| Bigland, Alfred | Greene, Walter Raymond | Newman, John R. P. |
| Bird, Alfred | Gretton, John | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Blair, Reginald | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (Bury S.Edmunds) | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Denis Fortescue | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Boyton, James | Harris, Henry Percy | Paget, Hugh Almeric |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Helmsley, Viscount | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Butcher, J. G. | Hoare, S. J. G. | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hohler, G. F. | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Campion, W. R. | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Cassel, Felix | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Rawson, Colonel R. H. |
| Cator, John | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Cave, George | Hunt, Rowland | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Ingleby, Holcombe | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University) | Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.) | Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen) |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Kerry, Earl of | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Larmor, Sir J. | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Staveley-Hill, Henry | Walker, Colonel William Hall | Winterton, Earl |
| Steel-Maitland, A. D. | Walrond, Hon. Lionel | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Talbot, Lord E. | Weigell, Captain A. G. | Younger, Sir George |
| Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) | Weston, Colonel J. W. | |
| Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.) | Wheler, Granville C. H. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. S. Wilson and Capt. Morrison-Bell. |
| Touche, George Alexander | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) | |
| Tryon, Captain George Clement | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ Mr. PRINGLE(seated and covered): Mr. Deputy-Chairman, on a point of Order. You have not collected the voices.
§ The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN (Mr. Maclean)I have collected the voices.
| Division No. 155.] | AYES. | [1.29 a.m. |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fitzroy, Hon. E. A. | Newman, John R. P. |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Forster, Henry William | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Archer-Shee, Major M. | Gilmour, Captain John | Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield) |
| Ashley, W. W. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Astor, Waldorf | Goldsmith, Frank | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Grant, James Augustus | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Greene, Walter Raymond | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City, Lond.) | Gretton, John | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (Bury S.Edmunds) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Barnston, Harry | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Harris, Henry Percy | Rawson, Colonel R. H. |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Helmsley, Viscount | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Renaldshay, Earl of |
| Bird, Alfred | Hill-Wood, S. | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Blair, Reginald | Hoare, S. J. G. | Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen) |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hohler, G. F. | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Smith, Harold (Warrington) |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Boyton, James | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hunt, Rowland | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Ingleby, Holcombe | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Butcher, J. G. | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Terrell, G. (Wilts, N.W.) |
| Campion, W. R. | Kerry, Earl of | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.) |
| Cassel, Felix | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Touche, G. A. |
| Cator, John | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Larmor, Sir J. | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Cave, George | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End) | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University) | Lee, Arthur Hamilton | Welgall, Captain A. G. |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Lewisham, Viscount | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Wilson, A. Stanley (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Winterton, Earl |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Wood, Hon, E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Younger, Sir George |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Mount, William Arthur | |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Neville, Reginald J. N. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Lord |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Newdegate, F. A. | Edmund Talbot and Mr. Sanders. |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Arnold, Sydney |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Agnew, Sir George William | Baker, H. T. (Accrington) |
| Adamson, William | Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Baring Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Barnes, George N. |
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENIf you gave the decision "the Ayes have it," I submit that the "Noes" do not count; it was not challenged.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIt is quite true I said, "The Ayes have it," but I immediately corrected myself and said, "The Noes have it."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 142; Noes, 226.
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick Burghs) | Hazleton, Richard | O'Donnell, Thomas |
| Barran, Rowland Hurst (Leeds, N.) | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | O'Dowd, John |
| Barton, William | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | O'Malley, William |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Henry, Sir Charles | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Higham, John Sharp | O'Shee, James John |
| Black, Arthur W. | Hinds, John | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Boland, John Pius | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Hogge, James Myles | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Hudson, Walter | Pointer, Joseph |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Illingworth, Percy H. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Bryce, J. Annan | John, Edward Thomas | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Chancellor, H. G. | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Jowett, Frederick William | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Clough, William | Keating, Matthew | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Kellaway, Frederick George | Redmond, Wiliam (Clare, E.) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Kelly, Edward | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Kilbride, Denis | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | King, J. | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Crooks, William | Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molten) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Crumley, Patrick | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Cullinan, John | Lardner, James C. R. | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) |
| Dalziel, Davison (Brixton) | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Leach, Charles | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Dawes, J. A. | Levy, Sir Maurice | Rowlands, James |
| Delany, William | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Devlin, Joseph | Lundon, Thomas | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Lyell, Charles | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Doris, William | Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Duffy, William J. | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Sheehy, David |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Macpherson, James Ian | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrok |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | McGhee, Richard | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Esslemont, George Birnie | M'Curdy, C. A. | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Falconer, J. | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Strauss, Edward A, (Southwark, West) |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.) | Sutton, John E. |
| Ffrench, Peter | Marshall, Arthur H. | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Field, William | Meagher, Michael | Tennant, Harold John |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Middlebrook, William | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Millar, James Duncan | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Molloy, M. | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Glanville, Harold James | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Wadsworth, John |
| Goldstone, Frank | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | Mooney, John J. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | Morgan, George Hay | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Gulland, John William | Morison, Hector | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Morrell, Philip | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Hackett, John | Muldoon, John | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Munro, R. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Murphy, Martin, J. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | Murray, Captain Hon. A. C. | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Needham, Christopher T | Wood, Rt Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow) |
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Nelan, Joseph | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Doherty, Philip | Guest and Mr. Webb. |
| Hayward, Evan |
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe next Amendment I select is that standing in the name of the hon. Member for Kingswinford (Mr. Staveley-Hill).
§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILLI beg to move, after Sub section (1), to insert—
2056 "(2) The following question may be asked of any voter at a poll at a General Election of Members to serve in a new Parliament, in addition to those authorised already to be asked:—
Have you already voted in any constituency during this General Election?
2057 And if the answer is in the affirmative that person shall not vote.
In the case of an university elector there shall be inserted in the voting paper, after the words, 'I declare that,' the words, 'I have not already voted in any constituency during this General Election.'"
Those words were in the Bill introduced in 1906, and it is a question which in the ordinary way at Parliamentary elections is asked to-day if there is any suspicion that an elector has voted in another place in the same constituency. Of course, it does not occur at a university election, but this Amendment provides that a declaration shall be made in the case of a university election. It is clear to my mind that some question of this sort should be asked, in order, amongst other things, to make it obvious to the elector that there is an Act of Parliament in existence which says a man shall not vote in more than one constituency, and, therefore, it is to put him on his guard. Further than that, he is at any rate entitled to be protected against personation. If he has made this declaration it is at least some safeguard. I would ask the right hon. Gentleman who is in charge of this Bill whether a vote can be rejected unless the statutory question has been put to him as to whether he has voted or not before. I do not myself believe that any vote can be rejected unless that statutory question is put. Therefore, I am only asking the Government to put into their Bill words which shall make it perfectly clear to the electors, and not to put on the voters any possibility of their incurring penalities because of ignorance, but to protect them from personation. I sincerely hope the Government will see their way to put into the Bill words to make matters clear where there is a doubt.
Mr. PEASESuch questions as the hon. Members suggests are, of course, not unknown at the present time. There are, I think, two or three somewhat similar questions. Two, I think, were established by the Act of 1842, and after the Reform Bill of 1885 a further question was asked, that is after the redistribution which then took place. I do not think there is any reason why we should not allow this particular question to be added to those that already are asked. I would suggest here one or two slight alterations in the form of the Amendment which the hon. Member has moved. I take no exception whatever 2058 to the first four lines of the Amendment, but I think there is a reason why we should alter the words
And if the answer is in the affirmative that person shall not vote.It is quite possible that a voter might not reply at all, and I think that such a case ought to be met in some other way. I would suggest that instead of those words we should insert the following:—And unless there is an answer given in the negative, that person shall not vote.I believe the object is equally well secured by those words, and they make the Subsection a little more watertight. In the next paragraph I think the word ought to be "election." [In the case of an university elector] instead of "elector." It would be better to put in the word "election," and it would then readIn the case of an university election.I have looked up the Statute in which the declaration which the hon. Member has inserted occurs, and I find that in order to make it read properly, we ought to add the words, at the end of his Amendment, "and that." Then the declaration would read as follows:—In the case of an university election there shall be inserted in the voting paper, after the words 'I declare that,' the words 'I have not already voted in any constituency during this General Election, and that I have signed no other voting paper.'And so on, in accordance with the Statute. With these alterations, we would accept the Amendment.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANDoes the hon. Member (Mr. Staveley-Hill) accept these Amendments, and move his Amendment in the altered form?
§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILLYes, I beg to move the Amendment in the form suggested by the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILLTo put it in order, I will ask leave to withdraw the Amendment, in order to move it with the words suggested by the right hon. Gentleman inserted.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
2059§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILLI beg to move, after Sub-section (1) to insert:—
"(2) The following question may be asked of any voter at a poll at a general election of members to serve in a new Parliament, in addition to those authorised already to be asked:—
Have you already voted in any constituency during this general election?
And unless there is an answer given in the negative that person shall not vote.
In the case of an university election there shall be inserted in the voting paper, after the words 'I declare that,' the words 'I have not already voted in any constituency during this General Election, and that.'"
§ Mr. POLLOCKI think the original form in which my hon. Friend moved the second part of his Amendment was right. It should be "In the case of an university elector," not "In the case Of an university election." This Amendment follows the Sub-section (1) which begins:
During the continuance of a General Election.You are dealing here with the questions which may be put in the course of an election. You deal, first, with the questions which may be put to a particular person, viz., to a voter, and, if you look at the first line of the Amendment you will see it runs:The following question may be asked of any voter.So that it is the personal voter with whom you are dealing, and not with an election in which that voter is going to vote. So an antithesis necessarily comes in. Where you have the case of an university elector, the antithesis is between the voter in the first case, and the university elector in the other. The questions that are going to be put in the course of a General Election are to be put to (a) a voter, or (b) to an university elector. You do not want, therefore, to put in the words "in the case of an university election," as you are dealing with the case of putting a question to a person who is going to exercise the franchise. I think the right hon. Gentleman has overlooked that, and that is why I rose to point it out. If I am in order I should like to move that the word "election" now proposed in the Amendment should be struck out and the word "elector" should be restored.
§ Mr. SAMUEL ROBERTSMay I move an Amendment before that of my hon. Friend? It is that the first "may" ["The following question may be asked of any voter"] be altered into "shall." I would point out that in the case of the university elector the word used is "shall," as the Amendment runs, "there shall be inserted in the voting paper," and the word "may" in the first paragraph should therefore be altered to make it correspond.
§ Mr. CAVEI hope my hon. Friend will not press this Amendment. The object of the whole Amendment, I understand, is to ensure that in any case where the presiding officer thinks there is reason to ask the question, "Have you already voted in any constituency during this General Election," he shall ask it, and that is the effect of the entire proposal. As a matter of fact, I think the original Amendment provides for every case.
§ Mr. HICKS BEACHI think it would be an improvement to alter the word to "shall," and for a reason which I can explain very briefly. You may have one presiding officer who will think it is his duty to ask every elector the question whether he has already voted in another constituency, whereas in another case you may have a presiding officer who will only ask one or two electors the question in the course of the whole day. I submit, therefore, that in the interests of the ordinary elector it would be much better to proceed on the lines that the presiding officer in every case when the elector asks for a ballot paper should put the simple question: "Have you voted before in this General Election." It would be much fairer to make every elector submit to this question rather than to have the matter left merely to the option of the presiding officer.
Mr. PEASEIt is very well understood by the presiding officer that when there is really any obvious reason why the question should be put it is his duty to put it. It is no doubt within the discretion of the presiding officer to put the question on his own initiative, but, as a matter of fact, in practice it is only done when a person representing one of the political parties in the polling booth asks the presiding officer to put the question. I think it would be unfortunate if that question had to be put to every elector, and I hope the Committee will not agree to the proposal.
§ Mr. S. ROBERTSI ask leave to withdraw my Amendment to the proposed Amendment.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI hope that my hon. Friend will not withdraw his Amendment, because I think it is important. The right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Education, does not, I think, realise how important it is. The object really is to inform the electors of the passing of this measure. That, I contend, is absolutely a necessary thing to do, because I think nobody will dispute the statement that undoubtedly a very large number of electors will be in total ignorance that the Act has passed, if it should eventually reach the Statute Book, unless some means are taken to inform them either by printing a statement on the ballot paper that no elector may vote more than once, or by putting up a notice in a prominent place in the polling booth. If this is not done I feel convinced in my own mind that a large number of electors may break the law quite inadvertently, and thus render themselves liable to all sorts of severe penalties. I do not think the Amendment would have been necessary if the Government had agreed at an earlier stage to accept the insertion of the word "knowlingly," but they did not do that. That being the case, we have to guard against the fact that a large number of persons may quite innocently in consequence of the passing of the measure, find that they have been guilty of a corrupt practice by voting in more than one constituency. It happens now sometimes that electors make the mistake of going to vote in a constituency where they are registered in more than one polling place and mistakes of that kind are certain to occur in future, especially at the first General Election after the passing of this Bill. But if it is made compulsory upon the presiding officer to put to each elector the question, "Have you already voted in any other constituency at this General Election?" the danger of any man voting inadvertently a second time would disappear. I hope that my hon. Friend will persist in the Amendment and that a Division will be taken upon it, because unless the Government bring home in some way or other to the minds of the people the fact that there has been this great change in the law I am certain that a large number of innocent people will suffer.
§ Sir W. BULLI am strongly in favour of retaining the word "may," because I 2062 believe that, as a matter of practical politics, it would be found quite impossible to put the question to every individual elector. The result, if the presiding officer was required to do so, would be that a large number of people who wished to vote between six o'clock and eight o'clock in the evening would be disfranchised, as they could not all be dealt with if the question had to be put every time a voter asked for a ballot paper. Therefore I say that really it would not be possible to make it work, and for that reason I think the word "may" should not be altered. It has been well known that at elections in the past the matter has always been left to the discretion of the presiding officer and that if either of the personation agents call his attention to an elector as to whom there are doubts he puts the question to the voter. As the result of all my experience as an election agent I am strongly against the word "shall" being put in.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI wish to put before the Committee one consideration. If the word "shall" were inserted a question might arise after the election between an elector and the presiding officer as to whether the question had been asked or not. That might raise a serious point, and it might even affect the election. That being the case, I think it would be dangerous to alter the word "may" into "shall."
§ 2.0 A.M.
§ Earl WINTERTONI cannot, I am afraid, agree with my hon. Friends who have argued against the word "shall." I would observe in passing that it is rather curious that when on a previous Amendment we were discussing the word "knowingly," and we put forward arguments which we thought overwhelming in favour of using some means by which electors would be made acquainted with the state of the law, we were told that there was no reason to do so. My hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith (Sir W. Bull) has, of course, a very wide knowledge of election law and I should be the last to attempt to contradict him or even to argue with him, in regard to any point he has made. But at the present time the returning officer invariably asks the voter who comes for his ballot paper what is his name and his number on the roll. I have always understood that the returning officer, when the voter goes into the polling booth, invariably asks his name and 2063 number, and I do not think there would be much more trouble or delay in asking the other question, "Have you voted in any other constituency in this general election?" I think the use of the word "may" will leave the procedure open to grave abuse. It might be that one returning officer would be over-keen or overanxious and would ask every elector this question, and another returning officer would not ask the question at all. I think it is really time that Ministers opposite made up their minds upon this question, which is really after all a vital part of the Bill, and may have the gravest consequences in practice. We are legislating in the dark, and it would be much better to make the practice universal and not leave it to the caprice of each individual returning officer. I think it is in the highest degree unfortunate that we should be without the presence of one of the Law Officers when we are debating a question of legal importance.
§ Mr. CASSELI should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman opposite whether it would not be convenient for some of them to state what the effect of the Amendment would be in their opinion. It seems to me that if the elector applied for a ballot paper under the Bill as it stands an offence would have been already committed. If the word "shall" is inserted would it really save the elector from committing an offence? Before the Question is put, perhaps some of the Law Officers would say what would be the effect of it.
| Division No. 156.] | AYES. | [2.7 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) |
| Adamson, William | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Essex, Sir Richard Walter |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Esslemont, George Birnie |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Chancellor, H. G. | Falconer, J. |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Clancy, John Joseph | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson. |
| Arnold, Sydney | Clough, William | Ffrench, Peter |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Field, William |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Barnes, George N. | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick Burghs) | Crooks, William | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Barton, W. | Crumley, Patrick | France, G. A. |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Cullinan, J. | Gladstone, W. G. C. |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Glanville, H. J. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Goldstone, Frank |
| Bentham, G. J. | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Greig, Colonel J. W. |
| Black, Arthur W. | Dawes, J. A. | Griffith, Ellis Jones |
| Boland, John Pius | Delany, William | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Gulland, John William |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Devlin, Joseph | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Donelan, Captain A. | Hackett, John |
| Brady, P. J. | Doris, William | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Duffy, William J. | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Elverston, Sir Harold | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) |
§ Sir F. BANBURYI do not agree with my hon. and learned Friend that this matter will cause a great deal of trouble. The elector gives his name and address and supposing the word "shall" is inserted the returning officer has simply to ask the additional question. I do think, however, it would add to the progress of the Debate if the Law Officers were present to give information. Can they say that the absence of the word "shall" will invalidate an election?
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONI am unable to agree with the Noble Lord about the importance of the words "may" or "shall." Our opponents have always used the word "shall" when they thought it necessary, and therefore I say we should not be afraid to challenge their votes in a matter of this kind.
Major MORRISON-BELLI am sorry to disagree with my hon. Friend. I think the word "shall" would complicate this Clause. On questions of personation a similar question is asked, and to make this further question compulsory would complicate elections. It is necessary that the procedure should be as simple as possible, and I ask the hon. Gentleman if he cannot see his way not to press the Amendment.
§ Sir W. BULLrose in his place, and claimed to move "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 221; Noes, 128.
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | M'Curdy, C. A. | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Hayden, John Patrick | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Hayward, Evan | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Meagher, Michael | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) |
| Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Henry, Sir Charles | Middlebrook, William | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Millar, James Duncan | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Molloy, M. | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Hinds, John | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Rowlands, James |
| Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Hogge, James Myles | Morgan, George Hay | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Morrell, Philip | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Morison, Hector | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Hudson, Walter | Muldoon, John | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Munro, Robert | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Illingworth, Percy H. | Murphy, Martin J. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| John, Edward Thomas | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. | Sheehy, David |
| Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Needham, Christopher T. | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Alisebrook |
| Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Nolan, Joseph | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts., Stepney) | O'Doherty, Philip | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Jewett, Frederick William | O'Dowd, John | Sutherland, John E. |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Sutton, John E. |
| Keating, Matthew | O'Malley, William | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Kelly, Edward | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Kilbride, Denis | O'Shee, James John | Toulmin, Sir George |
| King, Joseph | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton) | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Parker, James (Halifax) | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Lardner, James C. R. | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Watt, Henry A. |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Pointer, Joseph | Webb, H. |
| Leach, Charles | Pollard, Sir George H. | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Lundon, Thomas | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Pringle, William M. R. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Raffan, Peter Wilson | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| McGhee, Richard | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | |
| Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Reddy, Michael | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Staveley-Hill and Sir William Bull. |
| MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | |
| Macpherson, James Ian | Redmond, William (Clare, E) |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Craik, Sir Henry | Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Hunt, Rowland |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Dairymple, Viscount | Ingleby, Holcombe |
| Astor, Waldorf | Denison-Pender, J. C. | Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Duncannon, Viscount | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Kerry, Earl of |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Fitzroy, Hon. E. A. | Lane-Fox, G. R. |
| Barnston, Harry | Forster, Henry William | Larmor, Sir J. |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Gilmour, Captain John | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) |
| Benn, Ion H. (Greenwich) | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Lewisham, Viscount |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Goldsmith, Frank | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) |
| Blair, Reginald | Grant, J. A. | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortscue | Greene, Walter Raymond | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Gretton, John | Malcolm, Ian |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (Bury S. Edmunds) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) |
| Butcher, J. G. | Haddock, George Bahr | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas |
| Campion, William Robert | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) |
| Cassel, Felix | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) |
| Cator, John | Harris, Henry Percy | Mount, William Arthur |
| Cave, George | Helmsley, Viscount | Neville, Reginald J. N. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Newdegate, F. A. |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Hoare, S. J. G. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Hohler, G. F. | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Craig, E. (Cheshire, Crewe) | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) | Starkey, John R. | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Perkins, Walter F. | Steel-Maitland, A. D. | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Pollock, Ernest Murray | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Pretyman, Ernest George | Talbot, Lord E. | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. | Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Remnant, James Farquharson | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) | Winterton, Earl |
| Ronaldshay, Earl of | Thynne, Lord Alexander | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen) | Touche, George Alexander | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Sanders, Robert Arthur | Tryon, Captain George Clement | Younger, Sir George |
| Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) | Walker, Colonel William Hall | |
| Smith, Harold (Warrington) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir A. |
| Spear, Sir John Ward | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) | Griffith-Boscawen and Mr. Hicks |
| Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) | Weigall, Captain A. G. | Beach. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the word 'may' stand part of the proposed Amendment."
| Division No. 157.] | AYES. | [2.15 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Ffrench, Peter | Lundon, Thomas |
| Adamson, William | Field, William | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Fienness, Hon. Eustace Edward | Lynch, Arthur Alfred |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Fitzgibbon, John | Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | McGhee, Richard |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Francis Gerald Ashburner | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. |
| Arnold, Sydney | Gladstone, W. G. C. | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Glanville, H. J. | Macpherson, James Ian |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Goldsmith, Frank | MacVeagh, Jeremiah |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick | Goldstone, Frank | M'Curdy, C. A. |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Greig, Colonel James William | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald |
| Barnes, George N. | Griffith, Ellis Jones | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) |
| Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick Burghs) | Gulland, John William | Marshall, Arthur Harold |
| Barton, William | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Hackett, John | Meagher, Michael |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim. N.) |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | |
| Bentham, G. J. | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Middlebrook, William |
| Black, Arthur W. | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | Millar, James Duncan |
| Boland, John Plus | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Molloy, Michael |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Morgan, George Hay |
| Brady, P. J. | Hayden, John Patrick | Morrell, Philip |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Hayward, Evan | Morison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Morison, Hector |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Henry, Sir Charles | Mount, William Arthur |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Muldoon, John |
| Cator, John | Higham, John Sharp | Munro, Robert |
| Cave, George | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Hinds, John | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. |
| Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Hoare, S. J. G. | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Newman, John R. P. |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Hogge, James Myles | Nolan, Joseph |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Clough, William | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Hudson, Walter | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | O'Dowd, John |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Illingworth, Percy H. | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Crooks, William | John, Edward Thomas | O'Malley, William |
| Crumley, Patrick | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Cullinan, J. | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Shee, James John |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts., Stepney) | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Dawes, J. A. | Jowett, Frederick William | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Delany, William | Joyce, Michael | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Keating, Matthew | Phillips, John (Longford, S,) |
| Devlin, Joseph | Kellaway, Frederick George | Pointer, Joseph |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Kelly, Edward | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Doris, William | Kilbride, Denis | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Duffy, William J. | King, J. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Lardner, James C. R. | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Law, Hugh, A. (Dontgal, West) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Esslemont, George Birnie | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Falconer, James | Leach, Charles | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Levy, Sir Maurice | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 236; Noes, 112.
| Reddy, Michael | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Scanlan, Thomas | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Rendall, Athelstan | Sheehy, David | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook | Watt, Henry A. |
| Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | Spear, Sir John Ward | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Robinson, Sidney | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) | Starkey, John Ralph | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Roche, Augustine (Louth) | Staveley-Hill, Henry | Winfrey, Richard |
| Ronaldshay, Earl of | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Rothschild, Lionel de | Sutherland, John E. | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Rowlands, James | Sutton, John E. | Young, William (Perthshire, East) |
| Rowntree, Arnold | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) | |
| Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. | Tennant, Harold John | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Captain |
| Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) | Guest and Mr. Webb. |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Newdegate, F. A. |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Forster, Henry William | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Archer-Shoe, Major Martin | Gilmour, Captain John | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Astor, Waldorf | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Orde-Powiett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Grant, J. A. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Greene, Walter Raymond | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Barnston, Harry | Gretton, John | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (Bury S.Edmunds) | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Been, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Haddock, George Bahr | Pryce-Jones, Colonel Edward |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Remnant, James F. |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Blair, Reginald | Harris, Henry Percy | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Helmsley, Viscount | Smith, Harold (Warrington) |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hohler, G. F. | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) |
| Butcher, John George | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Campion, W. R. | Hunt, Rowland | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cassel, Felix | Ingleby, Holcombe | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, S.) | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Kerry, Earl of | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Weigall, Capt. A. G. |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Larmor, Sir J. | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Lewisham, Viscount | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninlan | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Malcolm, Ian | Younger, Sir George |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. S. Roberts and Earl Winterton. |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Neville, Reginald J. N. | |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes |
§ Viscount HELMSLEYOn a point of Order, Sir. I wish to submit that if the main Question is put now, the Amendment will not be grammatical. The House ought to have an opportunity——
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThat is not a question of Order. The mere question of grammar is a question of merits, not a point of Order.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYIs it in order for the Chairman to put Amendments to the Committee which do not read grammatically?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThat is a matter for the House, and not for the Chair. I must put the Question which is laid before me. The main Question having been claimed and granted by the Chair, excludes other Amendments being moved.
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONWho claimed it?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIt was claimed by the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Question put accordingly, "That those words be there inserted."
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENOn a point of Order. Should not the Division 2071 have been taken on the Question, "That the Question be now put"? That Question has not yet been put from the Chair.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIf the hon. Gentleman will consult the Standing Order of the House, under which I acted, he will see that I put the Question quite in accordance with that Standing Order.
| Division No. 158.] | AYES. | [2.28 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Greig, Colonel James William | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Griffith, Ellis Jones | Morgan, George Hay |
| Adamson, William | Gulland, John William | Morrell, Philip |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Morison, Hector |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Hackett, John | Muldoon, John |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Munro, Robert |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Arnold, Sydney | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | Murray, Captain Hon. A. C. |
| Baird, J. L. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Nolan, Joseph |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Barnes, George N. | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Barton, William | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Hayward, Evan | O'Dowd, John |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Malley, William |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Henry, Sir Charles | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon, S.) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Boland, John Pius. | Higham, John Sharp | O'Shee, James John |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Hinds, John | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Hogge, James Myles | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Hudson, Walter | Pointer, Joseph |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Illingworth, Percy H. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | John, Edward Thomas | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Clough, William | Jowett, Frederick William | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, Michael |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Keating, Matthew | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Kellaway, Frederick George | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Crooks, William | Kelly, Edward | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Crumley, Patrick | King, Joseph | Rendall, Atheistan |
| Cullinan, John | Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton) | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Lardner, James C. R. | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Dawes, J. A. | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Delany, William | Leach, Charles | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Levy, Sir Maurice | Roche, Augustine (Louth, N.) |
| Devlin, Joseph | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Rowlands, James |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Lundon, Thomas | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Doris, William | Lyell, Charles Henry | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Duffy, William J. | Lynch, A. A. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | McGhee, Richard | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Macpherson, James Ian | Sheehy, David |
| Falconer, James | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Ffrench, Peter | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding) | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) |
| Field, William | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Meagher, Michael | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Sutton, John E. |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Middlebrook, William | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Millar, James Duncan | Tennant, Harold John |
| Glanville, H. J. | Molloy, Michael | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Goldstone, Frank | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Toulmin, Sir George |
§ Earl WINTERTONOn a point of Order. I submit that the Question read out has not been put. The word inserted originally was "elector."
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI have not the slightest doubt that I put the Question absolutely correctly.
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 215; Noes, 124.
| Trevelyan, Charles Philips | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) | Young William (Perthshire, East) |
| Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander | White, Patrick (Meath, North) | Young, Sir George |
| Verney, Sir Harry | Williams, John (Glamorgan) | |
| Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Captain |
| Watt, Henry A. | Winfrey, Richard | Guest and Mr. H. Webb. |
| White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Gilmour, Captain John | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Archer-Shee, Major M. | Goldsmith, Frank | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Astor, Waldorf | Grant, J. A. | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Greene, W. R. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Gretton, John | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Haddock, George Bahr | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Barnston, Harry | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Been, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Harris, Henry Percy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesell) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Helmsley, Viscount | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Blair, Reginald | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hickman, Colonel Thomas E. | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boyle, William (Norfolk, Mid) | Hoare, S. J. G. | Smith, Harold (Warrington) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Butcher, John George | Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hunt, Rowland | Talbot, Lord E. |
| Campion, W. R. | Ingleby, Holcombe | Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.) |
| Cassel, Felix | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Cater, John | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Thynne, Lord A. |
| Cave, George | Kerry, Earl of | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Clay, Captain H H. Spender | Larmor, Sir J. | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Lewisham, Viscount | Weigall, Captain A. G. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Malcolm, Ian | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Winterton, Earl |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripen) |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Mount, William Arthur | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Neville, Reginald J. N. | |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Newdegate, F. A. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. R. McNeill and Mr. W. Guinness. |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Newman, John R. P. | |
| Forster, Henry William |
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI beg to move, "That Mr. Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
I think it must be perfectly evident to anybody who is in the House at this moment that nothing will be gained by continuing our proceedings now. The time is already very late, and, as I said in moving a similar Motion earlier in the night, it is really absurd, in my opinion, that in a Session when so little of the business is done under free conditions the Government should grudge us whatever time is necessary to carry this Bill through under conditions to which the House of Commons is accustomed in the ordinary routine of its business. I put it to the Government themselves that they are certainly adding nothing to the dignity of the House of Commons by continuing the Debate at this time of night, and I am sure that in 2074 the long run they will find they are doing nothing to facilitate their own business throughout the rest of this Session. Under all the circumstances I feel certain that I shall have many Members of the Committee with me when I say that it is not unreasonable for us to ask that the further stages of the Bill should be conducted under conditions which admit of proper discussion. If it is true, as the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education said, that there is very little to be done now in connection with the Committee stage of the Bill, then I think, without any attempt at, a bargain, he has every right to expect that the Bill would be carried through on Friday. If he is wrong, and there is more discussion in it than he thinks, it is, I submit, an outrage that we should be asked to carry the Bill under the conditions appertaining to an all-night sitting.
§ The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley)I must point out to the right hon. Gentleman that it is a short time only since the last Motion of this kind was made by him.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWIt think it is about two hours.
§ The CHAIRMANI am bound to say that it is not quite usual to accept a second Motion of the kind after so short an interval, but I will do it on this occasion.
Question proposed "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
Mr. PEASEPerhaps I need hardly tell the Committee that nobody likes all-night sittings less than I do. I have had a good deal of experience of them during the last twenty years, and I can only say that if an arrangement can be arrived at between the two sides of the House on the lines which I have previously indicated, I am quite prepared to accept, as I was before, the Motion made by the right hon. Gentleman. But I should point out that we have made very little progress since the right hon. Gentleman moved a similar Motion some one-and-a-half hours or so ago. It is true that an Amendment has been moved and accepted by the Government, but there has been considerable divergence of opinion on the other side as to its precise effect, and it is really hon. Members opposite who are responsible for the delay which has occurred.
If we had not desired to meet hon. Gentlemen opposite I do not think we should have accepted the Amendment, but we did accept it in the spirit in which it was proposed. I think that in these circumstances we may proceed with the Bill and try to get through the Committee stage. If the right hon. Gentleman could let us have that stage completed on Friday we could come to some arrangement; otherwise I am afraid we cannot.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI do not think that what the right hon. Gentleman has just said has done anything more than confirm the wisdom of the suggestion which I made. I am certainly not prepared to make any bargain in the matter. If the Bill is really so little a matter for discussion as the right hon. Gentleman suggests, it may get through on Friday; probably it will, if he is right. I do not agree with him in that view. I do not agree with the suggestion that the suspension of the Five o'clock Rule on Friday is likely to get the Bill through, but I am willing to agree to it.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI do not think the complaint of the right hon. Gentleman is well founded. I do not think it is a matter of legitimate complaint that when one Amendment is accepted other Members should move other Amendments so as to put it into correct shape. It is one of the disadvantages of legislating under the conditions in which we now are that an Amendment is hastily accepted by the Government without taking the trouble to find out whether or not it is in correct form for an Act of Parliament. I recognise that the right hon. Gentleman thought it was going to facilitate a way out of a complicated position, and, to a certain extent, the acceptance of the Amendment has had that result, but I do not think he has any right to complain of dilatory tactics on this side when hon. Gentlemen are really trying to make the Amendment a proper one to go into the Bill. I fail to see why private Members should be accused of dilatory tactics simply because they try to do their duty in that way. It just illustrates the effect upon Members on that side of the House when we are working under conditions of this kind. They do not seem to care what happens so long as they can manage to ram their Bill through. It is not a question with them whether the words are suitable or not. What they want is to ram the Bill through in the shortest time possible. I do not think that it adds to the reputation of this House to pass legislation in that way.
There are important Bills going on upstairs and the Committees are sitting to-morrow. I think some of the Bills upstairs are more important and more valuable than the one we are debating now. Some hon. Gentlemen opposite apparently prefer a party advantage to social reform. I do say that to press the Bill in this way is a gross imposition, not only upon Members, but upon Ministers themselves. Whatever they may say now, they know they are not able to fulfil their duties, as they ought to do, when they sit up all night and are asked to come down next day at eleven o'clock. A great many Members of the House have to serve upon Committees, and it is one of the great difficulties of these Committees to secure attendance of Members when the House has been sitting all night. It is really overworking human nature, and it is debasing the whole tone of the system by which we carry on legislation in this House. I cannot help thinking that the proposal to report Progress is an eminently reasonable one, and Ministers must know that if they accept it 2077 it will not in any way endanger the prospects of business throughout the Session. I daresay some of them think that if they keep the House up all night it may enliven and hearten their supporters. I suggest that the effect will be much the same on both sides, and that we may be equally exhiliarated by such proceedings. I do hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the decision the Government have taken, and that they will be influenced by a reasonable discussion which has taken place on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition and will allow us now to report Progress.
Mr. PEASEIt has been suggested that we should suspend the Five o'clock Rule on Friday, and I understand that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bonar Law) agrees to that. The object would be to secure that we should report the Bill from. Committee this week. May I put forward an alternative suggestion, namely, that we should meet on Friday at eleven o'clock by agreement without any Motion? That would do away with the need for suspending the Five o'clock Rule, and it would be on the understanding that the Bill is got through on Friday.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWSo far as I am concerned, I can promise that we shall agree to suspend the Five o'clock Rule on Friday.
Mr. PEASEThe difficulty about that is that hon. Gentlemen, on both sides, I am sure, have made their arrangements for Friday. They have made engagements for the country. I think my alternative suggestion is a reasonable one.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI am sorry we cannot agree with the right hon. Gentleman. It is not merely a question of meeting at eleven o'clock or suspending the Five o'clock Rule. If we agree to his proposal it means that we make a bargain to get the Bill through at five o'clock on Friday. To that we cannot consent.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENIf right hon. Gentlemen cannot come to any agreement about suspending the Five o'clock Rule on Friday, I see nothing for it but to go on with the Bill. The work has been very badly done. I think it is highly improbable they will get the Bill through on Friday. I protest against what the right hon. Gentleman has said about what has happened since the last Motion to report Progress was made. He tried to make out that the Government had been con- 2078 ciliatory and that therefore we proceeded to obstruct. He forgot to point out that the Government proposed to alter the whole language of the Amendment and when the question was put from the Chair we were unable to understand what the Amendment actually was. It is my view and the view of a great many Members on this side that the word "elector"——
§ The CHAIRMANThat matter cannot be now reopened.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI will not reopen the question, but I will merely point out how impossible it is properly to carry on the business at this hour. Inasmuch as the Minister in charge of the Bill himself moved Amendments to the Amendment, is it to be wondered at that confusion has ensued? The Amendment was accepted by the Government subject to certain alterations, and the wording of the Amendment had to be varied from beginning to end. When that took place, naturally certain Amendments were moved from this side. Of course, if the Government choose to proceed at this hour of the night, even if they accept an Amendment, it is almost certain we shall differ on the wording, and it is impossible to get through the Bill at any reasonable hour. So far as I am concerned, I am perfectly willing to stop here, and everyone on this side is prepared to do so, but as an old Member of the House I do protest against rushing a very important and technical measure of this sort through at this hour. If the Bill does pass it will be full of flaws like so many of the present Government's Bills.
§ Mr. WALTER GUINNESSI think when the right hon. Gentleman's wits have been refreshed by a little sleep he will regret the course he has taken. He really cannot realise that as a result of accepting this Amendment and changing it from one moment to another the greatest absurdities have been put into the Bill. He is probably not aware that the last Amendment will rule out from voting any man who is deaf and dumb.
§ The CHAIRMANThe question raised by the last Amendment cannot now be reopened.
§ Mr. W. GUINNESSI am not going to reopen the question. I only wish to point out that as a result of this procedure we are putting absurdities into the Bill. I am quite sure it is not the wish of the right hon. Gentleman to bring about 2079 such results as the last Amendment, but if Amendments are to be put through at this time of the night these disastrous effects cannot be avoided. It would be very much better for the right hon. Gentleman to accept the Motion to report Progress, and to hope to get the Bill through by suspending the Five o'clock Rule on Friday.
§ Earl WINTERTONI wish to point out to the Minister of Education that he does not seem to be aware of the fact that his reason for accepting our Amendment was not out of any consideration for the feelings of the Opposition. The right hon. Gentleman was compelled to admit that his refusal to accept the word "knowingly" earlier in the Bill made the measure far more drastic, and there has never been a more complete volte face than when the right hon. Gentleman accepted the last Amendment, with the result that deaf and dumb people will be precluded from voting. I only mention that to show the ridiculous position into which the House will be got if the Debate is continued at this hour of the morning. I desire to say further that I think we have great reason to complain that the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the President of the Local Government Board, the Attorney-General, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and many other Members of the Cabinet are not present.
I have been a Member of this House for some ten years, and I have seen a disposition during the time of the present Government to leave more and more the conduct of business in the hands of understrappers and juniors. I do think we have the strongest reason for objecting to the absence of the Prime Minister when a first-class measure mentioned in the King's Speech and brought under the Parliament Act is under discussion. I think it shows very scant courtesy to the Opposition and the Leader of the Opposition, and we are very glad on this side that the Leader of the Opposition did not agree to any bargain. We desire no bargain of this or any kind with the present Government, and we are perfectly willing to stop here until Eleven o'clock to-day. If we do we hope the Prime Minister will find it convenient after his breakfast to come down and attend to his duties. One thing has emerged very clearly from the deliberations during the last two months. Whatever else the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Attorney-General——
§ The CHAIRMANThis is going beyond the Motion to report Progress.
§ Earl WINTERTONI do not wish in any way to go outside your ruling, but I say that the absence of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer on a night when we are discussing a matter of first-class importance is a fit subject for protest on the part of the Opposition. I hope the public will judge of the way in which these right hon Gentlemen carry out their duties. Whatever consideration they have for their own private affairs, they have none for the House of Commons, and if they are not able to come down when Bills of this kind are being discussed, I hope they will cease to take part in the deliberations of an assembly of which they have ceased to be any ornament, and to which they have ceased to be of any use.
§ Mr. MORRELL rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put," but the CHAIRMAN withheld his assent, and declined then put that Question.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLI wish to add a very few words as a contribution to the history of what has occurred in support of the Motion of my hon. Friend. I suppose it is a consideration which hardly weighs at all with the Government that their Bill, when it becomes an Act of Parliament, should even appear in decent English, but I do think it would be rather remarkable if, when it was remembered that this Bill was in charge of the Minister of Education, it was found that the Amendment which the right hon. Gentleman himself moved to-night appeared in language——
§ The CHAIRMANWe cannot go back on previous questions which are closed.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYOn a point of Order. Is it not in order on a Motion for the Adjournment to review the events which have led up to that Motion?
§ The CHAIRMANA matter which has already been decided by the Committee cannot be re-opened. The Noble Lord can suggest that this would be an inconvenient hour for business, that has often been done on Motions to report progress at this time in the morning, but he certainly cannot review the previous proceedings.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYIs it not in order for hon. Members to give an account 2081 of events which have taken place, as illustrations of events that are likely to take place if the debate continues?
§ The CHAIRMANI do not think it is in order.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLI do not, Mr. Chairman, in the least dispute your ruling on that point. All that I wished to point out was the danger in which the Committee stands of slip-shod legislation, if carried on under the conditions that were ruling at the moment. It is for that purpose that I want to call the attention of the Minister for Education, as I am perfectly certain he is unaware of the fact. You, Sir, were not in the Chair when this Amendment was carried. No one has seen it in writing in the form in which it was carried, so far as I know, except the Deputy-Chairman of Committees. Only
| Division No. 159.] | AYES. | [3.3 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Elverston, Sir Harold | Keating, Matthew |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Kellaway, Frederick George |
| Adamson, William | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Kelly, Edward |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Kilbride, Denis |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Falconer, James | King, Joseph |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton) | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Lambert, Rt. Hon, G. (Devon,S.Melton) |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) |
| Arnold, Sydney | Ffrench, Peter | Lardner, James C. R. |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Field, William | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal (West) |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Flennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) |
| Barnes, George N. | Fitzgibbon, John | Leach, Charles |
| Barran, Sir John (Hawick Burghs) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Levy, Sir Maurice |
| Barton, William | France, Gerald Ashburner | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Gladstone, W. G. C. | Lundon, Thomas |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Goldstone, Frank | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Been, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Greig, Colonel J. W. | Lynch, Arthur Alfred |
| Bentham, George Jockson | Griffith, Ellis Jones | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Gulland, John William | McGhee, Richard |
| Boland, John Plus | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Macnamara, Rt. Hort. Dr. T. J. |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Hackett, John | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Macpherson, James Ian |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | M'Curdy, Charles Albert |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | M 'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding) |
| Bryce, John Annan | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Marshall, Arthur Harold |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Meagher, Michael |
| Carr Gomm, H. W. | Hayden, John Patrick | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Hayward, Evan | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Hazleton, Richard | Middlebrook, William |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Millar, James Duncan |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Molloy, Michael |
| Clough, William | Henry, Sir Charles | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred |
| Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Herbert, General, Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Higham, John Sharp | Morgan, George Hay |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Hinds, John | Morison, Hector |
| Crooks, William | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Morrell, Philip |
| Crumley, Patrick | Hogge, James Myles | Muldoon, John |
| Cullinan, John | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Munro, Robert |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Illingworth, Percy H. | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Dawes, James Arthur | John, Edward Thomas | Nolan, Joseph |
| Delany, William | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Devlin, Joseph | Jones, A. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Dowd, John |
| Doris, William | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Duffy, William J. | Jewett, Frederick William | O'Malley, William |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness) | Joyce, Michael | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
§ those of us who happened to be struck by the words introduced in the Amendment by the right hon. Gentleman became aware that it was couched in language for which no schoolboy would be accountable. It is in order that we may avoid, in the rest of this Act of Parliament, having the disgrace of its reaching the Statute Books in that slip-shod form that I suggest it would be in the interests of the dignity of legislation that the Motion of my right hon. Friend should be accented, and that we should all go home to bed.
§ Mr. PEASE rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 213; Noes, 113.
| O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Rendall, Athelstan | Sutherland, John E. |
| O'Shee, James John | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Sutton, John E. |
| O'Sullivan, Timothy | Roberts. Charles H. (Lincoln) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Parker, James (Halifax) | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Robinson, Sidney | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) | Travelyan, Charles Philips |
| Pointer, Joseph | Roche, Augustine (Louth) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Pollard, Sir George H. | Rowlands, James | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Rowntree, Arnold | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Samuel, J. (Stockton) | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Primrose, Hon. Neil James | Scanlan, Thomas | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Pringle, William M. R. | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Raffan, Peter Wilson | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Sheehy, David | Winfrey, Richard |
| Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Reddy, Michael | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Smyth. Thomas F. (Leitrim) | |
| Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Captain |
| Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) | Guest and Mr. Webb. |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Goldsmith, Frank | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Ashley, W. W. Aster, Waldorf | Greene, Walter Raymond | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Aster, Waldorf | Gretton, John | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pryce-Jones, Col. E. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Barnston, Harry | Harris, Henry Percy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Helmsley, Viscount | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Henderson, Major H. (Abingdon) | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Blair, Reginald | Hoare, Samuel John Gurney | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dennis Fortescue | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Stanley, G. F. (Preston) |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Bull, Sir William James | Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Burn, Col. C. R. | Hunt, Rowland | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Butcher, John George | Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Campbell, Capt. Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Talbot, Lord E. |
| Campion, W. R. | Kerry, Earl of | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Cassel, Felix | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Thynne, Lord A. |
| Cator, John | Larmor, Sir J. | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cave, George | Law. Rt. Hon. A. Boner (Bootle) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lewisham, Viscount | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Chaloner, Col. R. G. W. | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Wairond, Hon. Lionel |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Weigell, Capt. A. G. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | McNeill, Ronald (Kent, S. Augustine's) | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Malcolm, Ian | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Winterton, Earl |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Mount, William Arthur | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripen) |
| Eyres-Monsell, B. M. | Neville, Reginald J, N. | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Newdegate, F. A. | Younger, Sir George |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. F | Newman, John R. P. | |
| Forster, Henry William | Newton, Harry Kottingham | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Meysey-Thompson and Mr. Lane-Fox. |
| Gilmour, Captain J. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | |
| Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
| Division No. 160.] | AYES. | 3. 11 a.m. |
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Cassel, Felix |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Blair, Reginald | Cator, John |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Cave, George |
| Astor, Waldorf | Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Bridgeman, William Clive | Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Bull, Sir William James | Clay, Captain H. H. Spender |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Burn, Colonel C. R. | Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham |
| Barnston, Harry | Butcher, John George | Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Campion, W. R. | Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) |
§ The Committee divided: Ayes 113; Noes, 213.
| Craik, Sir Henry | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Larmor, Sir J. | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Boner (Bootle) | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Lewisham, Viscount | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Forster, Henry William | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Gilmour, Captain John | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Goldsmith, Frank | Malcolm, Ian | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Greene, W. R. | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Touche, George Alexander |
| Gretton, John | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Guinness, Hon.W. E. (Bury S. Edmunds) | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Mount, William Arthur | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Neville, Reginald J. N. | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Harris, Henry Percy | Newdegate, F. A. | Weigall, Captian A. G. |
| Helmsley, Viscount | Newman, John R. P. | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire) | Newton, Harry Kottingham | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Hill-Wood, Samuel | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Hoare, Samuel John Gurney | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Kohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Ormsby-Gore, Hon William | Winterton, Earl |
| Hope, Harry (Bute) | Perkins, Walter Frank | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Pollock, Ernest Murray | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) | Pretyman, Ernest George | Younger, Sir George |
| Hunt, Rowland | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. | |
| Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Remnant, James Farquharson | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Lord |
| Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) | E. Talbot and Mr. Pike Pease. |
| Kerry, Earl of | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Kilbride, Denis |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | King, Joseph |
| Adamson, William | Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton) |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Falconer, James | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Lardner, James C. R. |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West) |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Ffrench, Peter | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) |
| Arnold, Sydney | Field, William | Leach, Charles |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Levy, Sir Maurice |
| Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple) | Fitzgibbon, John | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert |
| Barnes, George N. | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Lundon, Thomas |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick Burghs) | France, G. A. | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Barton, William | Gladstone, W. G. C. | Lynch, A. A. |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Goldstone, Frank | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Greig, Colonel J. W. | McGhee, Richard |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Griffith, Ellis Jones | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Gulland, John William | Macpherson, James Ian |
| Boland, John Pius | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Hackett, John | M'Curdy, C. A. |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | M'Laren, Hon, F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | Marshall, Arthur Harold |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Meagher, Michael |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire) | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Middlebrook, William |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Hayden, John Patrick | Millar, James Duncan |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Hayward, Evan | Molloy, Michael |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Hazleton, Richard | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Morgan, George Hay |
| Clough, William | Henry, Sir Charles | Morrell, Philip |
| Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Morison, Hector |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Higham, John Sharp | Muldoon, John |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Hinds, John | Munro, Robert |
| Crooks, William | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Crumley, Patrick | Hogge, James Myles | Murray, Captain Arthur C. |
| Cullinan, John | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H.(Kirkcaldy) | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Nolan, Joseph |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Illingworth, Percy H. | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | John, Edward Thomas | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Dawes, J. A. | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Delany, William | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | O'Dowd, John |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Devlin, Joseph | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | O'Malley, William |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Jowett, Frederick William | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Doris, William | Joyce, Michael | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Duffy, William J. | Keating, Matthew | O'Shee, James John |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | Kelly, Edward | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Parker, James (Halifax) | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Robinson, Sidney | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Pointer, Joseph | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Pollard, Sir George H. | Roche, Augustine (Louth) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Rowlands, James | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Rowntree, Arnold | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) | Watt, Henry A. |
| Primrose, Hon. Neil James | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) | Webb, H. |
| Pringle, William M. R. | Scanlan, Thomas | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Raffan, Peter Wilson | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Russell, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | Sheehy, David | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Reddy, Michael | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Alisebrook | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) | Winfrey, Richard |
| Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.) | Young, William (Perthshire, East) |
| Rendall, Athelstan | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) | |
| Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Sutherland, John E. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Wm. Jones and Mr. Geoffrey Howard. |
| Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Sutton, John E. |
§ Mr. W. GUINNESSThere is an Amendment dealing with the question of penalising an elector who is not a plural voter. Is that within the scope of the Bill?
§ The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley)That is not now before the Committee. I call upon Mr. Cave.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLI wish to move an Amendment before that. I think it has been handed in at the Table.
§ The CHAIRMANNo.
§ Earl WINTERTONI wish to ask whether or not the Chairman has accepted my Amendment, or, if not, whether I can move it in another form later on upon this Bill.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLI believe my Amendment is now before the Chairman. May I ask whether I can move it?
§ The CHAIRMANI have no other Amendment before me and I cannot deal with the matter now. I call upon Mr. Cave.
§ Mr. CAVEYou have not said which Amendment I am entitled to move. Is it the Amendment on line 9 to insert the word "knowingly."
§ The CHAIRMANNo. It is the Amendment on line 10.
§ Mr. CAVEI beg to move in Subsection (2) to leave out the words "guilty of a corrupt practice other than personation, within the meaning of the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act., 1883, and the expression 'corrupt practice' shall be construed accordingly," and to insert instead thereof the words "liable on summary conviction is to be fined any sum not exceeding one hundred pounds."
This deals with the penalty to be imposed upon the person who commits the 2088 offence of voting in more than one constituency, and I wish to point out what the effect of the Bill is. It makes the man who has contravened the Act guilty of a corrupt practice, and he is liable to one year's imprisonment with hard labour and to a fine not exceding £200. He is subject to further disabilities for seven years, and more than that if he were found guilty of a corrupt practice it might affect the result of the election. I think these penalties are very severe. What are they to be imposed for? For voting in more than one constituency in a General Election or for asking for a voting paper in more than one constituency. The word "knowingly" has not been inserted in the Bill and we must take the Bill exactly as it stands. A person may ask for a voting paper, though he may have already voted, and he may do so in ignorance of the law. The Government have accepted an Amendment which leaves it open for the presiding officer to ask whether the voter has applied for a voting paper or not but I do not think that is sufficient. It is quite clear the man may be deaf or dumb. He may not be able to answer the question, or even to hear it. He may ask twice for a paper through sheer ignorance of the law. This is new legislation and it may take some time for a knowledge of a law of this kind to penetrate into every mind, and yet a man who through mere inadvertence or ignorance asks for a voting paper twice is to be liable to these extreme penalties. I really think the House will agree that the penalty proposed is too severe. I am not sure whether a man who asks for a voting paper and votes twice is not guilty of a double offence at one and the same time, but, whether that is so or not, it is clear that the Bill introduces a new 2089 statutory offence which it treats with very great severity. I think it is really a savage and monstrous penalty in view of all the circumstances, a penalty far greater than the nature of the offence deserves. I put down the Amendment to raise the point whether the penalties for a corrupt practice are to be incurred in all cases, or whether a period of imprisonment or a fine of some limited amount should be substituted.
§ Sir J. SIMONThe hon. and learned Member has put forward his Amendment, as he has just said, because he wants to know whether the Bill means that the maximum penalty is to be inflicted. Well I do not think that if it is proved that an offence is of a trifling character any legal tribunal would impose the maximum penalty. In order to judge whether the maximum penalty is to be imposed or not it is necessary to see the nature of the offence. At the same time I think in view of the gravity of a breach of the provisions of this Bill a fine of more than £100 is not unnecessarily severe. There are various ways in which the offence might be committed. For example a candidate himself might have actively and deliberately induced well educated persons to break the law so as to bring about a false return at an election. In a case of that kind I am not satisfied that £100 fine would be enough. That being so the question is whether we should fix £100 as the maximum. I say it is not enough to cover what ought to be a very outrageous abuse of the law.
§ Sir J. SIMONI am not sure about that. So far as I am aware the election could not possibly be affected by any corrupt practice unless it takes place by and with the consent and knowledge of the candidate. Now the actual way in which this Amendment stands as it presents itself to me is this: there are three alternatives before the Committee. If you desire to deal with this offence on the terms of the maximum penalty you deal with the case of personation. That has already been done in the case of some other electoral offences. Personation is a felony and it is punishable by a process much more severe than anything we propose in this Bill. We should, indeed, not have gone beyond precedent if we had taken that course. So extreme a punishment as that, extending as it does to hard labour 2090 for two years, is attached by the law to anybody who votes in more than one ward in a Municipal Borough or in more than one electoral division of a county. We thought, and I hope the Committee will agree, that although we should be justified by precedent, we should be going a little too far if we endeavoured to put so severe a maximum penalty on any breach of this statute, so we took a more moderate course, and we recommend the Committee to deal with it as a corrupt practice less than personation. The proposal of the hon. Gentleman would reduce it to what is known in electoral law as an illegal practice, such as forgetting to put the names of your printers on one of your pamphlets. That is not our view of the nature of the offence under this Bill, and, although it is quite right in trivial cases that the penalty should not be imposed at anything like its maximum, and, indeed, in trivial cases, if people were so foolish as to prosecute, no penalty should be imposed at all, we suggest that it is quite right that the maximum punishment should be preserved as a deterrent to evil doers.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI think there is one consideration the right hon. and learned Gentleman has left out of account altogether, and it is that this Bill is confessedly only a stopgap. It deals temporarily with a position which is anomalous, and which will be entirely altered when the promised complete amendment of the electoral law and franchise is introduced by the Government. Therefore, the argument used by my hon. and learned Friend has particular weight, namely, that those persons who are now doing an absolutely illegal act, and which has always been an illegal act, if they repeat that action without any premeditation or without knowledge of wrong, they will be committing a fault which is punishable, as the Bill is now drawn, by a very excessive penalty, and I am perfectly certain that treating this as a temporary measure my hon. and learned Friend's proposal is surely an ample penalty to meet any offence which is likely to be committed under this Bill until the electoral law is remedied. A very great difference is made with regard to this Amendment by the refusal of the Government to insert the word "knowingly." That obviously must make a very considerable difference, and there are other Amendments which have been refused, notably the Amendment which was moved early in the evening to omit that part of the first Sub-section 2091 which extends this offence to merely asking for a ballot paper, in which case the offence may be so slight that it hardly seems in accordance with the ordinary practice of the House that a very heavy penalty should be imposed. It is extremely unlikely that any individual is going knowingly and wilfully to break this Statute should this Bill be passed into law. I am quite sure the penalty of £100 is amply sufficient, and I sincerely hope the Government will see their way to accept it.
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONI look at this question in an entirely different light from that in which the Solicitor-General looks at it. He invited the Committee to approach this matter from the point of view of considering whether the maximum penalty proposed by my hon. and learned Friend was sufficient. I think in doing that the Solicitor-General has misconceived the way in which he ought to approach the subject. The way I look at it is this: Are you or are you not suggesting something by this Bill by which substantial injustice can be worked upon anyone? The right hon. Gentleman has, of course, foreseen cases. He has pointed out one of a man whose name appears on several registers and for some reason or other is disqualified from voting in one district, but who has asked for the ballot paper in that district and afterwards asked for another ballot paper in another district. He only votes once, but under the Bill he commits an offence. The Solicitor-General says that no doubt the Courts would only inflict a trivial penalty, but under your Bill they would have to find that man guilty of a corrupt practice, although he has committed no offence at all. The penalty for that, if convicted on indictment, might be imprisonment with or without hard labour for a year, or he might be fined any sum not exceeding £200. The Solicitor-General says he would not be convicted, but my contention is that the Court would be bound to convict that man. The Act of 1883 provides that a person who is convicted on indictment of any corrupt practice shall be not capable during a period of seven years from the date of his conviction of being registered as an elector or voting at any election in the United Kingdom whether it be a Parliamentary election or an election for any public office, or of holding any public or judicial office, or of being elected to and sitting in the House of Commons.
§ Sir J. SIMONI have dealt with the point more than once. Assuming such a trivial offence, I have said that no magistrate would commit and no tribunal convict.
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONI think it is going a little too far to suggest that for the protection of the subject against being disfranchised for seven years he must rely on a magistrate not committing him on indictment. I agree that if the right hon. Gentleman really could imagine a case so bad as he put it, he might be justified in saying that perhaps the suggestion of my hon. and learned Friend does not go quite far enough. I agree, if you are to take everything at its very worst, and if there something in his contention, that whether you mean it or not, you will in fact run a very great risk of causing serious injustice to men who may have perfectly innocent intentions, but who, owing to the way your Bill is drawn, will be guilty of an offence, and whom any Court will have to find guilty.
§ Mr. CASSELThe learned Solicitor-General in addressing the House, said that there might be cases which deserve not a maximum penalty but a slight penalty. The point he did not quite appreciate was that any case in which a penalty, however slight, was inflicted, would be bound to carry with it the more serious consequences to which my hon. Friend referred. It is for that reason this penalty is inappropriate. The Solicitor-General was dealing with a case where you do not wish to inflict a maximum penalty, but only a slight penalty. The provision in the Bill is so large that you will not be able to inflict a slight penalty. If you desire to inflict any penalty at all, you must disenfranchise a person for a certain period. I can only attribute that to the spiteful feeling which the Liberal Party feels towards plural voters. There may be a case where an offence may be a very trivial one, but still where a conviction, with a small penalty is appropriate. In a case like that, the Liberal party—from the very old feeling against the plural voter, which is so strong, and out of vindictiveness, I cannot attribute it to anything else—want the penalties extended altogether beyond the proportion of the offence. That is a very serious matter, for if there is a conviction at all, it must also have an affect on the election, in the case where the man is an agent. The term "agent" is very wide indeed. It has received very different 2093 interpretations from different judges. Really the result of this provision is that in any case where the Court thinks it right to convict at all, it cannot convict and impose a slight penalty without, at the same time, possibly avoiding the whole election. On those grounds—if the Government think £100 is too little, they may make it £200—I think they ought not to impose a penalty in such a way that it could not possibly be inflicted without incurring these very serious consequences, both on the man himself and possibly on the whole election.
§ Mr. POLLOCKI quite agree with my hon. and learned Friend that this is a severe penalty. I am not without some experience in election law, and in its administration. These very heavy penalties, in practice, defeat themselves, because if you go before an Election Court, you will find that so heavy are these penalties, that devices are constantly resorted to to try and avoid convictions, where persons ought to be convicted, and where some penalty ought to be imposed. All the ingenuity of persons before the Court, and the ingenuity of the Court itself, is exercised in order to let persons who ought to suffer some penalty go free, because of the very serious results which for a long period of time must follow if they are convicted. Take this case here. In regard to corrupt practices, who can possibly say that in a case where there has been a conviction on an indictment, that it is right that, a person should then be incapable of sitting or being elected to the House of Commons for seven years? That really is monstrous, and it is very remarkable to see the Solicitor-General adopting arguments which a hundred years ago appealed to Lord Ellenborough and Lord Eldon, and refusing the argument so eloquently applied by Sir John Romilly.
The Solicitor-General appeals to election law and to the corrupt practices, and says we have had penalties and so on, but he has forgotten the history of it all. In the early Acts, in the Acts of the forties, of 1868 and 1883, all these corrupt practices had been brought forward from statute to statute. We are now creating an entirely new offence, and we have to consider whether it is right, in that entirely new offence, to impose penalties which have existed now for a period of something like 30 or 40 years, for offences to which the electorate have become accustomed, and which they perfectly understand. That is the real ground for 2094 differentiating strongly between a new offence, such as is created by this Bill, and the other classes of corrupt practices to which the community has long been accustomed. If the Solicitor-General will look at his Bill he will see that it is drawn in a manner which is particularly savage. There is a curious passage of very incomplete drafting, which says, in Sub-section (2):—
He shall be guilty of a corrupt practice, and the expression 'corrupt practice' shall be construed accordingly.That phrase has not been used previously in the Bill, and it is a little, difficult to understand, but I suppose it really means that the expression "corrupt practices" in the Act of 1883 shall, in that Act, be construed accordingly. Probably that is what it means, but it is not sense as it stands at present. Let us assume, however, that it will be made to have that meaning. Then the Solicitor-General must take the responsibility for having amended the Corrupt Practices Act, and for having made this present corrupt practice under this Bill to be one of the corrupt parctices, with all its terrible consequences, in the Act of 1883. For my part, I think we are entirely overdoing the matter. What will happen will be that there will be a reluctance to impose any penalty at all, and a reluctance to convict, and, by reason of imposing this severe penalty, the Bill will defeat its own ends. On those grounds I support the Amendment of my hon. Friend.
§ Sir W. ANSONReally the point is this: The punishment is not proportional to the offence, and the Solicitor-General is trusting to the magistrates' exercising discretion and overlooking offences altogether. We really are going back to the old state of things in which punishment of death was imposed in respect of stealing small sums; and when juries declined to find a verdict, or else judges directed them in such a way as to ensure an acquittal. Therefore, punishment was not inflicted in trifling cases. Really this is a question of fact. A man is asked for a ballot paper, and he may have been more or less careless; his intentions may have been more or less doubtful. The magistrate, having this fact to deal with, will either say, "I will ignore the Act altogether, and will not commit for trial," or he will commit for trial, and, immediately on conviction, the man will be disenfranchised for a term of years. So 2095 that really the punishment may be fearfully disproportionate to the offence, and except by the acceptance of such an Amendment as has been put before the Committee, there is no means of getting out of the difficulty which the Bill, as it stands, imposes on the magistrates and the courts.
§ Mr. E. WOODAlthough the hon. and learned Gentlemen on this side have put most if not all the legal arguments, I perhaps may be allowed to put forward one point of view of the outside layman. We are concerned here at present with the old task of trying to make a punishment fit the crime. That is a task which has puzzled a good many legislators in the past, and clearly puzzles the Solicitor-General. It all depends how you do it, what your estimate of the crime is, and some of us take a different view on that matter from the Government. The Solicitor-General's view is that on the whole, if this crime is committed, he thinks it will be committed by design and because it is committed by design, therefore the penalties that are referred to are too light. We, I think, on the whole take the other view, and therefore the penalty under the Bill as it stands will be too heavy. I can conceive of many cases in which an offence against the provisions of the Bill would be committed owing to accident; I can conceive of hardly any case in which it would be committed by desire. Few people would desire wilfully to run the risk of being rendered liable to a penalty of £200 or of being sent to prison for a year. If that is so, if what you are really trying to guard against is accident and inadvertence, then I think the Government would do well to recognise some form of compromise.
§ Mr. MALCOLMI agree with what has fallen from my hon. and learned Friend with regard to the savagery of the penalty imposed under the Bill for this new offence. I have noticed with interest, and not for the first time, the shelter which the Solicitor-General has erected for himself behind the magistrate who will have to try the unfortunate gentleman who comes up under this Bill. If the Solicitor-General were acting as a magistrate he would, under his own Bill, have to consider that man's offence corrupt and would have to inflict on him the penalties which are laid down in the measure. The man might, on the other hand, go before a chairman of quarter sessions, like my hon. 2096 and learned Friend the Member for Kingston (Mr. Cave), who would take quite a different view of the case and would wish, if he could do so, to inflict a fine not exceeding £100. He would be quite unable to do that, however, simply because of the hard and fast rule laid down in the measure. I want to ask, if I may, with great respect, why this offence of asking twice in one General Election for a voting paper is considered so heinous, and why are the Government screwing up the penalties so heavily now as compared with the Corrupt Practices Act of 1883? If the Solicitor-General would look at Section 9 of that Act he would see that if a person votes at any election knowing that he is prohibited by this or any other Act he would be guilty, not of a corrupt practice, but of an illegal practice. What has happened in the meanwhile to make that offence so much more blameworthy that it is to be turned from an illegal practice, as it was then, and has been since, into a corrupt practice? I should also like the learned Solicitor-General, if he would be good enough to do so, to look at Section 52 of the same Act, and he will see that it is much more elastice than anything in the Bill which we are considering at the present time. He will see that any person who is charged with corrupt practice may, if the circumstances warrant such a finding, be found guilty of illegal practice and the penalty would, of course, in that case, be reduced accordingly. I do not understand the reason for either the severity of the penalty or the rigid uniformity of the present Bill. As a matter of fact, I think we require some much better reason than has been vouchsafed to explain the severity of the treatment for an offence which is indeed only a light one if it is committed inadvertently. The rigidity of form which makes it obligatory upon the Magistrate or the Chairman of Quarter Sessions, before whom an offender under the Bill is brought, to say that this action when performed heedlessly is a corrupt practice is also a matter which requires better explanation.
§ Mr. JAMES MASONIn my opinion the difficulty which arises in connection with this matter is due to the fact that it is assumed in this Bill that it is necessary to legislate by reference. The point is that if this Bill, instead of referring to other Acts of Parliament, were distinctly itself to formulate or lay down certain maximum penalties which were capable of reduction to any extent, the whole 2097 difficulty would be overcome. The Solicitor-General earlier in the evening objected to the Amendment moved by my hon. and learned Friend on the ground that a fine of £100 was in certain possible contingencies not sufficient to meet an offence. If that is so then let the Solicitor-General make the maximum penalty heavier. It seems to me that you might as a maximum punishment impose as heavy a sentence of fine or imprisonment as you choose, so long as it is possible—and this is the important point—to grade that down to the vanishing point. At the same time you should, in my opinion, eliminate the condition that a necessary part of the penalty of conviction is the loss of certain civil rights and also the possibility of affecting the election. Those I submit are results out of all proportion to the kind of fault we are contemplating, and I venture to appeal to the Solicitor-General to give up altogether this idea of punishment in this Bill by reference to the Corrupt Practices Act and to state definitely certain penalties which would be possible of diminution to any extent. Moreover, he should give up these side results of conviction which it seems to me might in certain contingencies inflict a very unfair burden on a citizen.
§ 4.0 A.M.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYWe have had no explanation from the Solicitor-General as to why he is so keen on the particular phraseology in the Section. It seems to me the more one looks at the Bill in conjunction with the Act of 1883, to which we are referred, the more it becomes evident that there is some sinister design in this particular phraseology which the Solicitor-General is adopting. I have no doubt that a great many hon. Members are much more familiar with the Act than I am, but it appears to me that there are three kinds of undesirable practices which are included in the Act of 1883. There are first of all "corrupt practices." There are also illegal practices and personation, and, in the words of the Statute, there is "aiding or abetting, or concealing or procuring" the commission of an offence under the Act. This Sub-section, which covers what may be the inadvertent asking for a ballot paper for a second time, comes within the middle category of these three. I want to ask hon. Gentlemen do they really desire to inflict these harsh and severe penalties? Section 6 of 2098 the Act of 1883 imposes a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years with hard labour upon a person who commits personation. I am really surprised, after all, at the moderation of the Government and the Solicitor-General. We have had no explanation from the Government of what is meant exactly by a corrupt practice. Section 3 of the Act of 1883 defines what a corrupt practice is. It either falls within the category of treating, undue influence, bribery, and so on, or it comes within one of the definitions of undue influence which refers to the use of force or violence, or the infliction of any injury, damage, loss or harm upon any person or voter. I fail to see myself how asking for a ballot paper for a second time can come within any of the definitions of the words "corrupt practice." I agree with my hon. Friend who has said it should not come within that category. Section 7 of the Act of 1883 deals with illegal practices, and refers to payment for conveyance of electors to the poll, and to the use of any house or building or premises, and the erection of bills and notices.
Many of these offences, though illegal, are not corrupt. They are correctly described as being illegal. I think the Government have gone too far in proposing this savage penalty upon the plural voter who may act in ignorance or even through carelessness. I ask them to accept the Amendment of my hon. and learned Friend. Perhaps the Solicitor-General or some other Member of the Government will tell us why they have adopted this extraordinary course. So far we have had no adequate explanation. Earlier in the evening the Member for Oxford University asked that the law, as it was intended to be imposed, should be stated in the Bill and not be made by the magistrate, and at that time the Solicitor-General found it difficult to reply. I fail to see any reply to the appeals addressed to him on this Amendment. Surely the Solicitor-General is not going to leave the Committee without guidance in a matter of this kind. It is not a matter in which a severe penalty can be laid down and then safely left to the discretion of a justice at Petty Sessions. If that is the Solicitor-General's view this House may as well abrogate its functions and refrain from passing many of the elaborate Statutes which it is called to pass. I hope that at least the Solicitor-General will tell us why he cannot accept the Amendment 2099 and why he insists upon calling this offence a corrupt practice. It is neither English, nor is it that logic of which he is so fond.
§ The SOLICITOR-GENERALrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but the Chairman withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
§ Mr. NEWTONI do hope the Government will not take refuge in silence in a question of this kind. The Solicitor-General is in a difficult position and I have no doubt he realises it. He has said it is possible that an offence under the Act might be of a light or trifling character. If that be so, the magistrate should be able to refuse to find the man guilty or to convict him in a minor degree. It is well understood that where the punishment provided by the law is too severe, magistrates are inclined to refuse to convict, although it may be proved that an offence has been committed. If it is a trifling offence under this Bill and there is a conviction it may be met by a day's imprisonment or a nominal fine, but still that sentence under this Bill will carry with it seven years' disfranchisement. I do ask the Solicitor-General whether he desires that an offence, which he admits may be a small offence, should necessarily carry with it seven years' disfranchisement? Would that not be too severe a penalty? Cannot he conceive an offence of a mild character for which this heavy penalty is far too serious and severe?
Major MORRISON-BELLThere is one other reason why the Amendment should be accepted, and that is that the Act of 1883 mentions the period of disfranchisement as seven years. Now why was that particular maximum put in? I think the only reason can be that we were then under the Septennial Act and Parliament lasted for seven years, but now, under the provisions of the Parliament Act, the duration of Parliament has been cut down to five years. That would, I think, render the penalty under the Act of 1883 unsuitable to the present day. Therefore I suggest that by far the simplest and easiest way to meet this case is for the Solicitor-General to accept the Amendment moved by my hon. and learned Friend.
§ Mr. NEWMANHon. Members opposite seem exhausted with their own tactiturnity, and they take no part in the discussion of these Amendments whatever, 2100 though as merciful men they surely ought to do so. In 1906 the supporters of the Government did take part and spoke up for the innocent man who might be fined a severe penalty. Nothing strikes me more than the curious difference between now and 1906 in this respect. In 1906 every effort was made to let innocent men down as light as possible. I do not suppose hon. Members opposite had any less hatred of the plural voter then than they have now, but, at any rate, they did try to do justice and not to press for too severe a penalty. During the Debate in 1906 on this particular Clause an Amendment was put forward by the hon. and learned Member for Dublin University. That Amendment was at once accepted willingly by the Colonial Secretary. That was the spirit right through the Debate in which the Government dealt with this unfortunate plural voter, and I suggest that what was done then ought to be done now. Why pursue the plural voter with savage penalties? He was a criminal then and I assume he is a criminal now, but in those days he was, at any rate, shown some sort of mercy and given a chance he is not given now.
§ Mr. NEVILLEThe real difficulty that arises under this Clause is due to the fact that no guilty mind is necessary, and the result is that if you are going to allow a party magistrate—because magistrates are very often party people, on your side as well as on ours—to decide on a question in which there is no guilty mind, it seems that you are not extending to these voters the indulgence which we in this House have extended to Ministers in the Marconi business, in that business which we are glad to think has now passed away, the plea was put forward by Ministers——
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI do not see the relativeness of these remarks.
§ Mr. NEVILLEIn that case the question was inadvertence——
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI have fully made up my mind.
§ Mr. NEVILLEI will, of course, bow to your ruling, but I should like to point out to the learned Solicitor-General that very seldom in English law is there any offence without mens rea. I strongly urge this House carefully to consider the Amendment put forward by my Friend on this side before passing such a savage Clause as this.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI desire to appeal to the right hon. Gentleman. He used the argument, and the only argument, in this case that the offence might be trivial, but that the punishment might also be made trivial by the magistrates. The answer to that has been given by quoting chapter and verse from the Act, which shows that, although the offence may be trivial, the punishment cannot be trivial, because conviction must be followed by disfranchment for seven years. The right hon. Gentleman has never answered that point, and I do think we are entitled to a further statement when the very defence he has made is distinctly disproved on this side. It does extend the Debate unduly if no answer is given. This is a Committee Debate, and it is the custom and practice of the House for question and answer to pass from one side to the other. The right hon. Gentleman makes a statement which is disproved by chapter and verse from this side of the House. It is on the statement which he made that the whole defence of this Clause is vested, and naturally when he makes no answer the Debate does not move forward, and here we are, nearly at half-past four, continuing to argue the same point. Whose fault is it? It is the fault of the Solicitor-General in charge of the Bill who gives perfunctory replies. A man who asks for a ballot paper twice may be treated as a corrupt person. If that is what hon. Gentlemen opposite desire, all I can say is that we are very glad we are here to oppose it and oppose it to the very last moment we can keep this matter going. I consider it a scandalous misuse of power. This is a Bill which is carried through under the Parliament Act, and there is no opportunity of amending it. A great responsibility lies on this House. Here you are dealing with the liberty of the subject. You are imposing enormous penalties for what may be most trivial offences. There is no appeal from this House, yet here, in a spirit of levity, at 4.30 in the morning, without in the least considering what you are doing, you may be imposing the most severe and serious disabilities on many of our fellow subjects. I think I am justified in protesting against it, and I do so most earnestly. I say that the spirit in which this matter is being dealt with is no credit either to the House or to the country.
§ Sir J. SIMONI am sure the reason why the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Mr. Pretyman) makes a complaint in the tone 2102 he uses, must be because he really thinks he has something to complain about.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI do.
§ Sir J. SIMONI have already explained—I am sorry my powers of explanation are not more extensive—no less than three times. I am sorry that I cannot make it any plainer. I am not in the least ignorant of the point which the hon. and gallant Gentleman seems to think that he and his Friends have discovered. I myself first dealt with it some hours ago. The answer to the point is that no magistrate would ever think of inflicting, and no jury would ever think of convicting, and nobody would ever incur the slightest liability of being convicted in the circumstances suggested. If, as I suppose, the hon. and gallant Gentleman has sat as a magistrate, he knows perfectly well that nothing is more common than that in a trivial case the magistrate will say, "I will not convict."
§ Sir J. SIMONI did, in answer to you. I agree it was a very long time ago.
§ Mr. CAVEThe point is that we say that for a small offence against this Section, if there is a conviction, with the intention of imposing a small fine—it might be a small fine of 20s. for a small offence—the result must be, as there is no option, that the man is disfranchised for seven years. The Solicitor-General's answer is that in such cases the tribunal need not convict at all. He ought to know, and the Government and the Committee ought to know that that is not a proper answer. If an offence has been committed against the Section, the tribunal ought to convict, and the Act ought not to put the Court in the position that either they must acquit the prisoner when they know he is guilty, or else must impose on him a disproportionate penalty for the offence. That is not proper legislation. My hon. Friend, the Member for Windsor made a very fair suggestion. He would give the Court an option of putting on a small fine, or inflicting a small period of imprisonment, without these disqualifications. That would meet the whole of the arguments of the Government against the Amendment. I adopt, with not the least hesitation, my hon. Friend's suggestion, and say that if the Government will meet it in the way he suggested I shall be satisfied. The 2103 only point we want to insist on is, do not make the minimum punishment too hard for the minimum offence. If you pass a Bill of this kind, as it stands, you will be doing a very hard and improper thing, against which we ought to protest with all our might.
§ Major ARCHER-SHEEThe Solicitor-General said he had answered this point three or four times already. He may have done so, but it is our business to try and persuade him that our cause is right, and that our suggestion is a good one. Therefore he must not complain if we bring forward fresh points after he has answered others. Nearly everyone on this side of the House is convinced that the arguments put forward by the hon. Member for Kingston (Mr. Cave) are sound, and that in this case the penalties are very excessive indeed. I would like to point out to the Solicitor-General that the penalties in the case of a plural voter need not be as severe as those in the case of other people who are guilty of some illegal practice; and for this reason the existing plural voter often is a person who has a certain amount of property and different residences. He is a person who can easily be traced, whereas in the case of a man who impersonates another man, he is generally an individual of no fixed abode, who is very hard to get hold of. Therefore, in the case of a plural voter, the penalty, instead of being severe, might be a good deal less. The only reason for making the penalty so severe is that the Liberal party are afraid—at any rate, those of them in
| Division No. 161.] | AYES. | [4.29 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Essex, Sir Richard Walter |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood) | Falconer, J. |
| Adamson, William | Chancellor, Henry George | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Clancy, John Joseph | Ffrench, Peter |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton) | Clough, William | Field, William |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Arnold, Sydney | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Barnes, George N. | Crooks, William | France, G. A. |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick) | Crumley, Patrick | Gladstone, W. G. C. |
| Barton, William | Cullinan, John | Goldstone, Frank |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Greig, Colonel James William |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Davies, E. William (Eifion) | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. H'mts., St. George) | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) |
| Bentham, G. J. | Dawes, J. A. | Gulland, John William |
| Black, Arthur W. | Delany, William | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) |
| Boland, John Pius | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Hackett, John |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Devlin, Joseph | Hall, Frederick (Normanton) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Donelan, Captain A. | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Doris, William | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Duffy, William J. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Elverston, Sir Harold | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Hayden, John Patrick |
§
London are sending round intimidating notices at the elections. I remember a case in the last county council election in which a voter received a paper with the Royal Arms on the top, which began, "Take notice under certain Acts," and quoted penalties to which the voter was not in the least liable. The voter was so intimidated that he would not vote, and it was not until I went round and led him to the polling booth that he would vote. I can quite imagine if this Bill passed in its present form, that the same sort of paper might be sent to the voters quoting this paragraph (2), and then proceeding to quote from the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act. It would set out all the penalties, and would start off with:—
A person who is convicted on indictment of a corrupt practice shall,
and so forth —
for seven years.
That is the only reason I can possibly think of for putting such severe penalties into the Act. In my own Constituency there are a certain number of plural voters, a great many of whom belong to the party opposite. I shall certainly point out to them the vindictiveness with which the Solicitor-General has followed up those who have the misfortune to have two votes.
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 208; Noes, 111.
| Hayward, Evan | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Hazleton, Richard | Middlebrook, William | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Millar, James Duncan | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Molloy, M. | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Henry, Sir Charles | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) |
| Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Robinson, Sidney |
| Higham, John Sharp | Morgan, George Hay | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Hinds, John | Morrell, Philip | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Hogge, James Myles | Morison, Hector | Rowlands, James |
| Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Muldoon, John | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Hughes, S. L. | Munro, Robert | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Illingworth, Percy M. | Murphy, Martin J. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| John, Edward Thomas | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Needham, Christopher T. | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Jones, Haydn (Merioneth) | Nolan, Joseph | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Seely, Col. Rt. Hon. J. E. B. |
| Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Sheehy, David |
| Jowett, Frederick William | O'Doherty, Philip | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Dowd, John | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Keating, Matthew | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Smyth, Thomas F. |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Malley, William | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Kelly, Edward | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Kilbride, Denis | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Sutton, John E. |
| King, J. | O'Shee, James John | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Tennant, Harold John |
| Lardner, James C. R. | Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Parker, James (Halifax) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Leach, Charles | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Pointer, Joseph | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Lundon, Thomas | Pollard, Sir George H. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Lynch, A. A. | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Webb, H. |
| Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| McGhee, Richard | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Primrose, Hon. Neil James | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Pringle, William M. R. | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Macpherson, James Ian | Raffan, Peter Wilson | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Winfrey, Richard |
| M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Reddy, M. | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | |
| Marshall, Arthur Harold | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Wm. Jones and Mr. Geoffrey Howard. |
| Meagher, Michael | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | |
| Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim) |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Fitzroy, Hon. E. A. | Newman, John R. P. |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Gilmour, Captain John | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Ashley, W. W. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Baird, J. L. | Goldsmith, Frank | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.) | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Grant, J. A. | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Barnston, Harry | Greene, W. R. | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Harris, Henry Percy | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Bigland, Alfred | Helmsley, Viscount | Sanders, Robert A. |
| Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dennis Fortescue | Henderson, Major H. (Berks.) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hoare, Samuel J. G. | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Starkey, John R. |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Staveley-Hill Henry |
| Butcher, J. G. | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Campion, W. R. | Hunt, Rowland | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Cassel, Felix | Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.) | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Cator, John | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Cave, George | Kerry, Earl of | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lewisham, Viscount | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Malcolm, Ian | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Winterton, Earl |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Younger, Sir George |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honitan) | |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Mount, William Arthur | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Lane-Fox and Mr. E. Wood. |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Neville, Reginald J. N. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
| Division No. 162.] | AYES. | [4.36 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | O'Dowd, John |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Luton, Beds) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Adamson, William | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | O'Malley, William |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Shee, James John |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Arnold, Sydney | Hayward, Evan | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Hazleton, Richard | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Barnes, George N. | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick Burghs) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Barton, William | Henry, Sir Charles | Pointer, Joseph |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Higham, John Sharp | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Hinds, John | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Bentham, G. J. | Hogge, James Myles | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Hope, John Deans (Haddington) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Boland, John Pius | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Primrose, Hon. Neil James |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Illingworth, Percy H. | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | John, Edward Thomas | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Reddy, Michael |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Jowett, Frederick William | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Joyce, Michael | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Keating, Matthew | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Kellaway, Frederick George | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Kelly, Edward | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Kilbride, Denis | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | King, Joseph | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) |
| Clough, William | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Robinson, Sidney |
| Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Lardner, James C. R. | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Leach, Charles | Rowlands, James |
| Crooks, William | Levy, Sir Maurice | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Crumley, Patrick | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Cullinan, John | Lundon, Thomas | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eiflon) | Lynch, A. A. | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Macdonald, J. Ramsey (Leicester) | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Dawes, James Arthur | McGhee, Richard | Seely, Rt. H on. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Delany, William | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Sheehy, David |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Devlin, Joseph | Macpherson, James Ian | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Donelan, Captain A. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Doris, William | M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Duffy, William J. | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Sutherland, John E. |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Sutton, John E. |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe) |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Meagher, Michael | Tennant, Harold John |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Falconer, J. | Middlebrook, William | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Millar, James Duncan | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Molloy, Michael | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Ffrench, Peter | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Field, William | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Morgan, George Hay | Webb, H. |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Morrell, Philip | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Morison, Hector | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Muldoon, John | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Munro, Robert | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Goldstone, Frank | Murphy, Martin J. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Griffith, Ellis Jones | Needham, Christopher T. | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | Nolan, Joseph | Young, William (Perthshire, East) |
| Gulland, John William | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Wm. Jones and Mr. Geoffrey Howard. |
| Hackett, John | O'Dohorty, Philip | |
| Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) |
| NOES | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Baird, J. L. | Barnston, Harry |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Baker. Sir Randall L. (Dorset, N.) | Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Baldwin, Stanley | Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) |
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 208; Noes, 111.
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Bigland, Alfred | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Prettyman, Ernest George |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Harris, Henry Percy | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Helmsley, Viscount | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hoare, Samuel John Gurney | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Butcher, John George | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Campion, W. R. | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Starkey, John R. |
| Cassel, Felix | Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Cator, John | Hunt, Rowland | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Cave, George | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Kerry, Earl of | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Touche, George Alexander |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Lewisham, Viscount | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Warde, Colonel C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Malcolm, Ian | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Winterton, Earl |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Mount, William Arthur | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Neville, Reginald J. N. | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Gilmour, Captain John | Newman, John R. P. | Younger, Sir George |
| Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Newton, Harry Kottingham | |
| Goldsmith, Frank | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Major |
| Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Paget, Almeric Hugh | Morrison-Bell and Captain Morrison |
| Grant. J. A. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) | Bell. |
| Greene, W. R. |
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENMr. Chairman, may I ask, on a point of Order, whether we could not take the Amendment dealing with the combination of places? There is an Amendment on that subject.
§ The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley)I have given my best consideration to all the Amendments. I have gone through them carefully, and that is not one which I could take. I call upon Mr. Staveley-Hill.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLMay I ask, on a point of Order, whether you have given consideration to the Amendment on line 16 on the same subject, handed in a short time ago? It is one of some importance.
§ The CHAIRMANYes. That Amendment was handed in, but it is not one which I should select. Hon. Members are not now dealing with points of Order. It is the duty of the Chairman to go through the Amendments and to select the Amendment which he considers ought to be proceeded with, and a point of Order does not arise upon his decision. He is not called upon to give explanations to hon. Members whose Amendments are passed over. He is simply acting under the provision of the Standing Order.
§ Mr. NORMAN CRAIGMay I ask whether it is a point of Order that we 2110 should continue the official use of artificial light after it has become unnecessary?
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENMay I ask whether, under the Rules, the Chairman has a right to select the Amendments, and whether Members have no right to ask why he has selected certain Amendments or whether he had given consideration to others?
§ THE CHAIRMANUnder the Standing Order, the Chairman has the right to select the Amendment, and is not called upon to give any explanation, although he sometimes does so.
§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILLI beg to move, at the end of the Clause, to add:—
(4) This Act shall not apply to a returning officer—
Under the provisions of the Ballot Act, 1872, Section 2, the returning officer has a casting vote in the case of a tie at a Parliamentary Election. It is perfectly 2111 clear that a vote given in those circumstances is given merely to decide the election, and is not the exercise of the franchise as an ordinary elector; but under this Bill, if the returning officer complies with the Statute and has already voted once, he will be guilty of a corrupt practice by voting again, even if he only votes to give a casting vote under the provisions of the Ballot Act. I am quite sure the Government did not mean their Bill to have this effect and I think they will agree that it is necessary to make the provision clear. It is with that object alone that I move the Amendment. It is only that a returning officer should be able to exercise the franchise, first, as ordinary mortal, and, secondly, as returning officer in the case of a tie.
- (a) by reason of having voted during the, General Election under the provisions of the Ballot Act, 1872, Section two;
- (b) by reason of having already voted during the General Election and being desirous of voting under the provisions of the Ballot Act, 1872, Section two.
Mr. PEASEI congratulate the hon. Member on having found another weak spot in the drafting of this Bill.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYWe could find many more if we could discuss the Bill without the "kangaroo."
Mr. PEASEThere are occasions which have occurred when a returning officer has declined to exercise the prerogative which has hitherto been given, and I believe that two Members have been returned to this House, but in that case the constituency has been practically disfranchised, and neither Member has recorded his vote in the Division Lobby. The usual practice in the event of a returning officer possessing a vote in the constituency is to give a casting vote, and in that way he obviates a second election at great cost to the candidate. On public grounds I think it is desirable that the discretionary power given to a returning officer to exercise a vote in the event of a tie should be allowed to continue, and therefore the Government accept the Amendment. I desire, however, to make it clear that we reserve the right, if necessary, of altering the phraseology on Report.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWAs the right hon. Gentleman has congratulated my hon. Friend, may I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on having at last consented to depart from what he has told us on hundreds of occasions was the principle of the Bill, namely, that nobody on any account should exercise the plural vote? May I point out to the right hon. Gentleman that the returning officer under the Ballot Act has only the power to exercise his casting 2112 vote if he is an elector in the constituency in which he is returning officer? It follows from that that the plural vote you give to him is of infinitely more value than the plural vote you give to anyone else, and, therefore, in accepting this Amendment you are going away from the principle to a much greater extent.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI must say that I think the speech of the President of the Board of Education most instructive. I would point out to the right hon. Gentleman that there might be a great many other equally weak spots in the Bill which the Opposition would have been able to point out to the Government if the Government had not chosen to take what I cannot help considering as very arbitrary proceedings of the "kangaroo guillotine."
§ The CHAIRMANI cannot permit reflections on the fairness of the Chair. First of all, the Resolution is submitted to the Chair for acceptance, and then it is in the hands of the Committee. Certainly it is not in order to criticise that.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI do not wish to cast any reflection on the Chair, but on the system of the "kangaroo" closure.
§ Earl WINTERTONIs it not perfectly in order for any hon. Member to criticise the action of the Government in proposing a "kangaroo" Motion?
§ The CHAIRMANThat point has been raised over and over again both in Committee and in the House, and it has always been ruled that it is not in order.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYI had no intention of making animadversions against the Chair at all, but I think I shall be in order in pointing out what a dangerous instrument the "kangaroo" is. It is not conducive to good legislation. It shows that the House does sometimes adopt machinery for carrying a Bill through which is not in the interests of good legislation. I am amazed, I must say, at the Government accepting this Amendment, as the Government have refused to accept an Amendment which is far more important, viz., that for University Representation.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONMay I draw your attention, Mr. Whitley, to a Member who is reading a newspaper in this House.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONI mean the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Fiennes).
§ The CHAIRMANIt is out of order, according to our rules, to read a newspaper in the House, and if any Member has done so he will please observe the rule in the future.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYThe Government have refused an Amendment of much greater importance than this on the ground that it would interfere with the symmetry of the Bill, but I think it absurd now to ask the House to regard the symmetry of the Bill. I should like to point out to the House what an important vote the casting vote of a returning officer is. It is not only the plural vote but the whole casting vote as to who shall represent a particular constituency. I suppose the Government are willing to make this exception and no other because they think a great many returning officers are very likely to be Liberals, and therefore the exercise in this case of the plural vote would not inflict a party injury. I do not think the House ought to accept this Amendment. I think it is a bad Amendment, and that if this Bill is to go through under the Parliament Act, an Amendment of this kind, hastily drafted and inserted at the last moment, ought not to become part of the machinery of the Bill which cannot be altered. It is quite simple for the Government to put in a Clause which would have the effect of altering that Section of the Ballot Act of 1872, and for giving some other method of dealing with ties at elections. I am surprised at the Government accepting this Amendment of all others, and I certainly think they would have done better to have accepted some far more important Amendments moved from this side of the House.
§ 5.0 A.M.
§ Earl WINTERTONI agree with my Noble Friend. I am against accepting this Amendment. The Government have practically disfranchised the university graduate; they have penalised the deaf and the dumb, and made war on an infirmity of nature, yet they put the returning officer—a gentleman who, until this afternoon, I did not know was capable of deciding great issues—in a decidedly privileged position under the Bill. I am not going into the merits of the question, but the bad drafting that has characterised this Bill is a thing that puts all the previous efforts of this Government, during the seven years that they have been in office, entirely in the shade. I do not altogether dissociate the method by which this Bill 2114 has been conducted with the extraordinary collection of Ministers I see on the Front Bench opposite. If some of the heads of the Government had been present, it is very unlikely that my hon. Friend's hastily drafted Amendment would have been accepted. I should like to refer to what the President of the Board of Education said as to the possible hardship that might occur if the returning officer was not given this right under the Bill. We all know what great disturbance to ordinary business is occasioned by a General Election, or by a by-election. I venture to think it is perfectly possible to get over the difficulty which would arise in cases where you had a tie, without calling in the returning officer at all, and without putting him in the privileged position in which you place him if you pass the words of the Amendment. There are several other officials who might be given the power of deciding in case of a tie. In the first place, I do not think the returning officer is the sort of man who ought to be entrusted with this great responsibility. Cases in which a tie occur must necessarily be cases where some subject of very great moment has been discussed.
I do not think that in a crisis, which might well be a crisis of the whole affairs of this nation, that a man, possibly of very meagre intelligence and very small education, should be called in to decide a point of this kind. I have heard an alternative suggestion which, I think, would better meet the case. In some cases the mayor of a borough might give the casting vote. It is quite true that in many boroughs the mayor is is the returning officer, but it is equally true that in London, and in certain other parts, the Town Clerk is the returning officer. I myself think that it is better to have some official altogether unconnected with the civic life of the community. The only place in which a mayor should exercise this right should be in the case of the Lord Mayor of London, but in the case of the ordinary boroughs and the county boroughs this right should be given to some person who is not an officer of the municipality at all, but directly nominated by the State. It would be better almost to give it to one of the new insurance officials than to give it to the returning officer. Circumstances may arise in which a casting vote of this kind may decide peace and war between this country and another country. I would like to see the stipendiary magistrate, or any official entirely unconnected with the life of the 2115 place, and who would not be induced possibly to give his vote, not from the point of view of his opinions on Imperial questions, but from any predilection he might have to either candidate or on any issue of local politics. So unnecessary do I conceive this privileged position which has been conferred on a returning officer by the Government this evening, that I beg to move to leave out the words in Sub
| Division No. 163.] | AYES. | [5.10 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Munro, R. |
| Acland, Francis | Hackett, John | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Adamson, William | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds.) | Nolan, Joseph |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Arnold, Sydney | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Dowd, John |
| Barnes, G. N. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Barton, William | Hayward, Evan | O'Malley, William |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Hazleton, Richard | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Shee, James John |
| Bentham, G. J. | Henry, Sir Charles | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Black, Arthur W. | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Boland, John Pius | Higham, John Sharp | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Hinds, John | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Phillips, John (Longford, South) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Hogge, James Myles | Pointer, Joseph |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Hughes, S. L. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Brunner, John F. L. | John, Edward Thomas | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Primrose, Hon. Neil James |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Jewett, F. W. | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Joyce, Michael | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Clough, William | Keating, Matthew | Reddy, Michael |
| Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Kellaway, Frederick George | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Kelly, Edward | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Kilbride, Denis | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Crooks, William | King, J. | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Crumley, Patrick | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Cullinan, John | Lardner, James C. R. | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Leach, Charles | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Levy, Sir Maurice | Robinson, Sidney |
| Dawes, J. A. | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Delany, William | Lundon, Thomas | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Denman, Hon. R. D. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Rowlands, James |
| Devlin, Joseph | Lynch, A. A. | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Doris, William | McGhee, Richard | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Duffy, William J. | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | Macpherson, James Ian | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | M'Curdy, C. A. | Sheehy, David |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Falconer, James | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs, Spalding) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Meagher, Michael | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Field, William | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Sutton, John E. |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Middlebrook, William | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Millar, James Duncan | Tennant, Harold John |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Molloy, Michael | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Goldstone, Frank | Morgan, George Hay | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | Morrell, Philip | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | Morison, Hector | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | Muldoon, John | Watt, Henry A. |
§ section (b) "by reason of having already voted at a general election."
§ Mr. PEASE rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "that the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 207; Noes, 108.
| Webb, H. | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) | Young, William (Porthshire, E.) |
| White, Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) | |
| White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) | Winfrey, Richard | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. |
| White, Patrick (Meath, North) | Wing, Thomas Edward | Gulland and Mr. Webb. |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Gilmour, Captain John | Newman, John R. P. |
| Archer-Shee, Major M. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Ashley, Wilfrid | Goldsmith, Frank | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Baker, Sir Randoll L. (Dorset, N.) | Grant, J. A. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Barnston, Harry | Greene, Walter Raymond | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Pryce-Jones, Col. E. (M'tgomy B'ghs) |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Harris, Henry Percy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Helmsley, Viscount | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dentin Fortescue | Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire) | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hoare, S. J. G. | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Butcher, John George | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Campion, W. R. | Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Cassel, Felix | Hunt, Rowland | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Cator, John | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.) | Talbot, Lord E. |
| Cave, George | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Thynne, Lord A. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Kerry, Earl of | Touche, George Alexander |
| Chaloner, Col. R. G. W. | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Walker, Col William Hall |
| Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Lewisham, Viscount | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninlan | Malcolm, Ian | Winterton, Earl |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Younger, Sir George |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Mount, William Arthur | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. J. Mason and Sir A. Griffith-Boscawen. |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Neville, Reginald J. N. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That those words be there added."
| Division No. 164.] | AYES. | [5.15 p.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Essex, Sir Richard Walter |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Cassell, Felix | Falconer, James |
| Adamson, William | Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Ffrench, Peter |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Chancellor, H. G. | Field, William |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward |
| Arnold, Sydney | Clancy, John Joseph | Fitzgibbon, John |
| Baird, J. L. | Clive, Captain Percy Archer | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Baker, H. T. (Accrington) | Clough, William | France, G. A. |
| Barnes, George N. | Collins, G. P. (Greenock) | Gilmour, Captain J. |
| Barnston, Harry | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Gladstone, W. G. C. |
| Barton, W. | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Goldsmith, Frank |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Goldstone, Frank |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Crooks, William | Greig, Colonel James William |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Crumley, Patrick | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Cullinan, John | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) |
| Benn, W W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Hackett, J. |
| Bentham, G. J | Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Dawes, J. A. | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Delany, William | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Boland, John Pius | Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds.) |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Devlin, Joseph | Harris, Henry Percy |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Donelan, Captain A. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Doris, William | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Duffy, William J. | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Elverston, Sir Harold | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Hayward, Evan |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Hazleton, Richard |
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 238; Noes, 71.
| Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Millar, James Duncan | Robertson, John M. (Tyneside) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Molloy, M. | Robinson, Sidney |
| Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Henry, Sir Charles | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Morgan, George Hay | Rowlands, James |
| Higham, John Sharp | Morrell, Philip | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Hinds, John | Morison, Hector | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Mount, William Arthur | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Hogge, James Myles | Muldoon, John | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Munro, R. | Sanders, Robert A. |
| Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Murphy, Martin J. | Scanlan, Thomas |
| John, Edward Thomas | Murray, Captain Hon. A. C. | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Needham, Christopher T. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Nolan, Joseph | Sheehy, David |
| Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney) | O'Doherty, Philip | Smyth, Thomas F. |
| Jewett, F. W. | O'Dowd, John | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Keating, Matthew | O'Malley, William | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Kellaway, Frederick George | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Kelly, Edward | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Kilbride, Denis | O'Shee, James John | Sutherland, John E. |
| King, J. | O'Sullivan, Timothy | Sutton, John E. |
| Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Palmer, Godfrey | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Lardner, James C. R. | Parker, James (Halifax) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Leach, Charles | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Levy, Sir Maurice | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Touche, George Alexander |
| Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Pointer, Joseph | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Pollard, Sir George H. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Lundon, Thomas | Pollock, Ernest Murray | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Lynch, A. A. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| McGhee, Richard | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Watt, Henry |
| Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford) | Webb, H. |
| MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Primrose, Hon. Neil James | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Macpherson, James Ian | Pringle, William M. R. | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Raffan, Peter Wilson | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| M'Curdy, Charles Albert | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Reddy, M. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Marshall, Arthur Harold | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) | Wood, Hon. E. f. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Meagher, Michael | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Rendall, Athelstan | Younger, Sir George |
| Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | |
| Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Gulland. |
| Middlebrook, William | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| NOES. | ||
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Glazebrook, Capt. P. K. | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.) | Grant, J. A. | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Greene, Walter Raymond | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hoare, S. J. G. | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Starkey, John R. |
| Campion, W. R. | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Cator, John | Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford) | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Cave, George | Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Kerry, Earl of | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lewisham, Viscount | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Dairymple, Viscount | McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Winterton, Earl |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Malcolm, Ian | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Viscount |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Helmsley and Mr. Butcher. |
| Fitzroy, Hon. E. A. | Newman, John R. P. |
Mr. PEASEclaimed that the Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," be now put.
§ Question put, "That the Clause, as amended stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 206; Noes, 104.
| Division No. 165] | AYES. | [5.25 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | O'Dowd, John |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Harvey, A. G. C.(Rochdale) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Adamson, William | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | O'Malley, William |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Hayward, Evan | O'Shee, James John |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Hazleton, Richard | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Arnold, Sydney | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Baker, Harold T.(Accrington) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Barnes, George N. | Henry, Sir Charles | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Barton, William | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S. | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Higham, John Sharp | Pointer, Joseph |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Hinds, John | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Hogge, James Myles | Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) |
| Boland, John Pius | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | John, Edward Thomas | Primrose, Hon. Neill James |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Brady, P. J. | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts., Stepney) | Reddy, Michael |
| Bryce, John Annan | Jowett, Frederick William | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Joyce, Michael | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Keating, Matthew | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood | Kellaway, Frederick George | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Chancellor, H. J. | Kelly, Edward | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Kilbride, Denis | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | King, J. | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Clough, William | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Roberston, J. M. (Tyneside) |
| Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock) | Lardner, James C. R. | Robinson, Sidney |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Leach, Charles | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Crooks, William | Levy, Sir Maurice | Rowlands, James |
| Crumley, Patrick | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Rowntree, Arnold |
| Cullinan, John | Lundon, Thomas | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Dawes, James Arthur | McGhee, Richard | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Delany, William | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) | Sheehy, David |
| Devlin, Joseph | Macpherson, James Ian | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook |
| Donelan, Captain A. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Doris, William | M'Curdy, C. A. | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Duffy, William J. | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | M'Laren, Hon. F. W. S. (Lincs., Spalding) | Sutherland, John E. |
| Elverston, Sir Harold | Marshall, Arthur Harold | Sutton, John E. |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Meagher, Michael | Tennant, Harold John |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Falconer, James | Middlebrook, William | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | Millar, James Duncan | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Molley, Michael | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Ffrench, Peter | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Field, William | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Morgan, George Hay | Webb, H. |
| Fitzgibbon, John | Morrell, Philip | White J Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Flavin, Michael | Morison, Hector | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E. R.) |
| France, Gerald Ashburner | Muldoon, John | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Gladstone, W. G. C. | Munro, R. | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Goldstone, Frank | Murphy, Martin J. | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Griffith, Ellis Jones | Needham, Christopher T. | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | Nolan, Joseph | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | |
| Hackett, John | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Guiland. |
| Hall, Frederick (Normanton) | O'Doherty, Philip | |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Bennett-Goldney, Franics | Campion, W. R. |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Boles, Lieut.-Col. Dennis Fortesuce | Cassel, Felix |
| Ashley, W. W. | Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Cator, John |
| Baird, J.L. | Bridgeman, W. Clive | Cave, George |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Bull, Sir William James | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) |
| Beach, Hon Michael Hugh Hicks | Burn, Colonel C. R. | Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Butcher, J. G. | Clay, Captain H. H. Spender |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Clive, Captain Percy Archer |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Kerry, Earl of | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet) | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Lewisham, Viscount | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | Talbot, Lord E. |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Malcolm, Ian | Touche, George Alexander |
| Gilmour, Captain John | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Goldsmith, Frank | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Weston, J. W. |
| Greene, Walter Raymond | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Mount, William Arthur | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Neville, Reginald J. N. | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Harris, Henry Percy | Newton, Harry Kottingham | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Helmsley, Viscount | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) | Winterton, Earl |
| Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire) | Paget, Almeric Hugh | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon) |
| Hill-Wood, Samuel | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Hope, Harry (Bute) | Perkins, Walter F. | Younger, Sir George |
| Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Pollock, Ernest Murray | |
| Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Pretyman, Ernest George | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Newman and Mr. Barnston. |
| Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Pryce-Jones, Col. E. (Montgom'y, B'ghs) | |
| Hunt, Rowland | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
| Division No. 166.] | AYES. | [5.33 a.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour) | Elverston, Sir Harold | Joyce, Michael |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Keating, Matthew |
| Adamson, William | Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Kellaway, Frederick George |
| Addison, Dr. Christopher | Essex, Sir Richard Walter | Kelly, Edward |
| Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R. | Falconer, James | Kilbride, Denis |
| Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbartonshire) | Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles | King, Joseph |
| Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud) | Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) |
| Arnold, Sydney | Ffrench, Peter | Lardner, James C. R. |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Field, William | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) |
| Barnes, George N. | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Leach, Charles |
| Barton, William | Fitzgibbon, John | Levy, Sir Maurice |
| Beauchamp, Sir Edward | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | France, Gerald Ashburner | Lundon, Thomas |
| Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George) | Gladstone, W. G. C. | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Bentham, G. J. | Goldstone, Frank | Lynch, A. A. |
| Black, Arthur W. | Greig, Colonel J. W. | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) |
| Boland, John Pius | Griffith, Ellis Jones | McGhee, Richard |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway) | MacNeill, J. G. Swift (Donegal, South) |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Hackett, John | Macpherson, James Ian |
| Brady, Patrick Joseph | Hall, Frederick (Yorks, Normanton) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | M'Curdy, C. A. |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds) | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Harvey, A. G. C. Rochdale) | M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Marshall, Arthur Harold |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Meagher, Michael |
| Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Hayden, John Patrick | Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix) |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Hayward, Evan | Middlebrook, William |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Hazleton, Richard | Millar, James Duncan |
| Clough, William | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Molloy, Michael |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Henry, Sir Charles | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Crooks, William | Herbert, General Sir Ivor (Mon., S.) | Morgan, George Hay |
| Crumley, Patrick | Higham, John Sharp | Morrell, Philip |
| Cullinan, John | Hinds, John | Morison, Hector |
| Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Muldoon, John |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Hogge, James Myles | Munro, Robert |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Murphy, Martin J. |
| Dawes, J. A. | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C. |
| Delany, William | John, Edward Thomas | Needham, Christopher T. |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil) | Nolan, Joseph |
| Devlin, Joseph | Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Doris, William | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Duffy, William J. | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | O'Dowd, John |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Jowett, Frederick William | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W) |
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 205; Noes, 99.
| O'Malley, William | Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.) | Sutherland, John E. |
| O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.) | Rendall, Athelstan | Sutton, John E. |
| O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) | Tennant, Harold John |
| O'Shee, James John | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| O'Sullivan, Timothy | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) | Toulmin, Sir George |
| Palmer, Godfrey Mark | Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Parker, James (Halifax) | Robinson, Sidney | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) | Roth, Walter F. (Pembroke) | Verney, Sir Harry |
| Phillips, John (Longford, S.) | Roche, Augustine (Louth) | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Pointer, Joseph | Rowlands, James | Watt, Henry Anderson |
| Pollard, Sir George H. | Rowntree, Arnold | Webb, H. |
| Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. | Russell, Rt. Hon. Thomas W. | White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston) |
| Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central) | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) | White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.) |
| Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham) | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Scanlan, Thomas | Williams, John (Glamorgan) |
| Primrose, Hon. Neil James | Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton) | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) |
| Pringle, William M. R. | Seely, Rt. Hon. Colonel J. E. B. | Winfrey, Richard |
| Raffan, Peter Wilson | Sheehy, David | Wing, Thomas Edward |
| Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Allsebrook | Young, William (Perthshire, East) |
| Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) | |
| Reddy, Michael | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Gulland. |
| Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) | |
| Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Rt. Hon. Sir William R. | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid) |
| Archer-Shee, Major Martin | Gilmour, Captain John | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Glazebrook, Captain Philip K. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Goldsmith, Frank | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Gordon, Hon. John Edward (Brighton) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Barnston, Harry | Hall, Frederick (Dulwich) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Pryce-Jones, Colonel E. |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Harris, Henry Percy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich) | Helmsley, Viscount | Sanders, Robert Arthur |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Boles, Lieut.-Colonel Dennis Fortescue | Hoare, S. J. G. | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith- | Hope, Harry (Bute) | Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Starkey, John Ralph |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian) | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Butcher, John George | Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.) | Hunt, Rowland | Sykes, Sir Mark (Hull, Central) |
| Campion, W. R. | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Talbot, Lord Edmund |
| Cassel, Felix | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Cator John | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Touche, George Alexander |
| Cave, George | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lewisham, Viscount | Walker, Colonel William Hall |
| Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W. | Lloyd, George Ambrose (Stafford, W.) | Weston, Colonel J. W. |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Wheler, Granville C. H. |
| Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham | M'Calmont, Major Robert C. A. | White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's) | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Malcolm, Ian | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Craig, Norman, (Kent, Thanet) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Winterton, Earl |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Wood, Hon E. F. L. (Ripon) |
| Crichton-Stuart, Lord Ninian | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Dairymple, Viscount | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Younger, Sir George |
| Denison-Pender, J. C. | Mount, William Arthur | |
| Duncannon, Viscount | Neville, Reginald J. N. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Newman, John R. P. | William Bull and Mr. Meysey- |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Newton, Harry Kottingham | Thompson. |