§ (1) In any place in which this Section is in force barrels filled with cured white herrings may be presented to an officer appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries for the purpose of being branded or otherwise marked with a mark denoting the description of the herrings contained therein, and any barrel so presented shall, on payment of the prescribed fee and on compliance with the prescribed conditions, be marked accordingly, if in the opinion of the officer after inspection and examination the construction and capacity of the barrel and the quality, curing, selection, and packing of the herrings are such as to satisfy the prescribed requirements.
§ (2) The Board of Agriculture and Fisheries may by Order published in such manner as the Board direct declare this Section to be in force in any place in England or Wales if it is shown to their satisfaction that there is a general desire on the part of the curers of herrings carrying on business in that place that such an Order should be made.
§ Before making any such Order the Board shall, at least one month before making the Order, give notice of their intention to make the Order in such manner as the Board think calculated to give publicity thereto in the locality, and shall consider any objections or representations made to them in the interval.
§ (3) For the purposes of this Act the expression "barrel" includes half-barrel.
§ Amendment made: In Sub-section (1), leave out the word "and" ["construction and"].
§ Mr. SUTHERLANDI beg to move, in the same Sub-section, after the word "capacity," to insert the words "and condition" ["of the barrel"]. The object of this Amendment is to insure that every barrel shall not only be well constructed, but that if, after it has been used for a long time, it has become unworthy of further use, the Government brand shall not be affixed to it. In other words, the object is that both the barrel and the contents shall be satisfactory.
§ Mr. SUTHERLANDI beg to move, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words "one month" ["at least one month"], and to insert instead thereof the words "two months." The object is to insure that sufficient notice shall be given to all interested in the business.
§ Mr. MILLARI beg to second the Amendment.
§ Mr. SUTHERLANDI understand that the right hon. Gentleman in charge of this Bill proposes to move an Amendment in lieu of the one I have on the Paper, and I do not, therefore, intend to press my own.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI beg to move to insert the following new Sub-section:— (3) "No barrel or half-barrel shall be branded unless it has a capacity in the case of a barrel of 26 2–3 imperial gallons or in the case of a half-barrel of 13 1–3 imperial gallons."
My hon. Friend in his proposal suggests that we should provide for a capacity of 26 2–3 imperial gallons for all barrels which shall be used for cured herrings, whether they be branded barrels or not. We cannot turn this Bill into a Weights and Measures Bill to apply to barrels which do not come under the Crown Brand at all. To do so would create considerable disturbance at some of our principal fishing ports. The main object, that the brand shall not be given to various sized barrels, and that it shall apply to quantities as well as qualities, is, I think, reasonably secured by this new Sub-section.
§ Mr. SUTHERLANDI do not oppose the new Sub-section proposed by the right hon. Gentleman, but I am sorry that he did not accept the words I had put down, i.e.,
"shall in all cases, whether presented for the brand or not, have a capacity of twenty-six and two-thirds imperial gallons, and a half-barrel thirteen and a-third imperial gallons."
What the right hon. Gentleman is doing is practically to make his Bill of little account. He is providing that anyone who presents a barrel of herrings for the brand 1161 must have that barrel of a certain size. He knows as well as most people that there will not be many applications for branding in England, and that the great majority there will not brand their herrings. The right hon. Gentleman says that the barrel to be branded will have to be of a uniform size. Suspicion therefore will rest upon those who do not brand their barrels that they are not of the standard size. When you have a uniform size of barrels in Scotland used by those who brand and those who do not, and you have a uniform size of barrel in Ireland, I fail to see why England should not fall into line. I am disappointed that the right hon. Gentleman has not accepted the Amendment I suggested.
§ Sir WALTER ESSEXThe point is, why, if you want to brand barrels, you should stereotype the size, especially an odd size like this. At the time when we are desiring the simplication of weights and measures, the Government propose to stereotype by Act of Parliament a barrel or package of fish in the way described in the Amendment, containing 26 and some fraction gallons. Why should not the trade, if they desire the liberty to vary the size, have the right to do so?
§ Mr. BOOTHI think my hon. Friend (Sir Walter Essex) is somewhat out of touch with the modern craze for meddling with everybody. He seems to think that advocacy of the kind which I am glad to hear from him is at all welcome in these days, when there is a mania for Government interference and the more interference there is with a particular thing apparently the more welcome it is to the Government Department. They are interfering now with the quality of herrings, and are trying to show the people in the business that they at Whitehall know more about fish than themselves. Incidentally, the stereotyping of a particular kind of barrel is going to be a permanent obstacle in the way of the reform of weights and measures, and therefore it is all the more dear to the officials. I rejoice to hear from my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Elgin Burghs (Mr. Sutherland) that probably through the Government Amendment the Bill will have little effect. I hope his prophecy is correct. I cannot understand why Government Departments are busying themselves looking round every industry with a view to interfering with it and poking their noses into it. 1162 My own view is that there is no need whatever for legislation of this kind. Therefore, on the ground that it will make the Bill of non-effect in England, I welcome this Amendment. What is my hon. Friend's position? He knows that the Scottish people are more Radical than we are in England. They have a certain size of barrel in Scotland. I understand it is the same in Ireland, and of course my hon. Friend wants to impose Scottish and Irish customs upon the English and the English trade. We do not want anything of the kind. We want a little more individuality and freedom, to enable the trade to go on in its natural way, and to have that size of barrel which the trade and occasion demand. Why we should go in for a blank uniformity in order to make it easier for Government inspectors to walk about and interfere, I cannot understand. I support the Amendment because I believe it will mean much less State interference, and that the Bill to a large extent will be non-effective in England.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODI am afraid I do not understand the question very thoroughly, but it does not seem to me that the ground given by the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth) for supporting the Amendment is quite sound. Neither do I understand the position taken up by the hen. Member for Elgin Burghs. If the Amendment is carried, it seems to me that the Bill will be twice as efficacious from his point of view as it is at the present time. At the present time the Bill stereotypes the brand of white herrings cured in the barred. I understand the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment not only stereotypes the type of herring the poor people of this country ought to eat, but also the size of the barrel. That makes the Bill worse. I do not understand the point taken by the hon. Member for Elgin Burghs that this Amendment will make the Bill null and void. If I thought that, I should support it. It seems to me you will have not only inspectors to inspect the fish and make a chemical analysis of them, but a different set of inspectors to see that the barrels are of the right size. It means two sets of inspectors instead of one. It is not likely to diminish the scope of the Bill, but to increase it to a dangerous extent. I ask the President of the Board of Agriculture to drop this Amendment, which evidently is unpopular among those who want the Bill, and is certainly most 1163 unpopular among those who object to the creation of fresh inspectors in this country.