§ 18. Mr. FELLasked the Home Secretary if he is proposing to bring in any legislation or to frame regulations to restrict the power of all persons to change their names and the names of their business firms and their names when they turn themselves into limited companies; and if he will consider the suggestion that in all cases of such change of name the person or firm desiring to take a new name should be compelled to use the old name together with the new name for a period of 10 years so that the public may not be deceived by the new name?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna)The hon. Member is probably aware that an Order in Council has been made under the Aliens Restriction Act which prohibits alien enemies from changing their names. The hon. Member's proposal, which is a wider one, would require legislation; and, as at present advised, I am not satisfied that it is required.
§ Mr. FELLMay I ask in regard to the second part of the question if the Government can give any reason why a man who changes his name from a foreign name should not afterwards use the new English or Scottish name, and say lately so-and-so?
540 It must be done with the object of concealing what his nationality was.
§ Mr. McKENNASo far as war purposes were concerned the matter has already been dealt with as a general proposal. I think that ought to be considered a little more.
§ Mr. McKENNAOh! certainly.
§ 19. Mr. NEWTONasked the Home Secretary whether Baron Bruno Schroeder, a native of Hamburg, trading with another as J. Henry Schroeder and Company, merchant bankers, at 145, Leadenhall Street, E.C., and whose son joined the German army on the outbreak of the War, was granted a certificate of naturalisation in this country on the 7th August last; whether Julius Rittershaussen, also a native of Hamburg, and holding an important position in the above-mentioned firm, was granted a certificate of naturalisation on the 28th September last; and whether any protests have been received and, if so, from whom, against the granting of British rights and citizenship to such persons at the present time?
§ Mr. KINGOn a point of Order. This question was answered in the Votes some days ago. Is it in order to put down a question which has already received a full and adequate answer?
§ Mr. SPEAKERNo, for presumably the answer would be the same now. I have known several cases where the same question has been asked on different days. It is impossible for anybody, when editing the questions, to bear in mind all the questions which have been asked and answered.
§ Mr. McKENNAThis question was answered last Monday.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSI put the question on behalf of the hon Member. I did not get the letter until afterwards. I am perfectly certain that the question was not answered.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe answer was circulated with the Votes?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes, Sir, the answer was circulated with the Votes, and it has appeared in all the Papers.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSThe hon. Member does not appear to have asked the question, and if the Minister chooses to put the answer in the Votes does that prevent the Member from asking the question?
§ Mr. SPEAKERIf an hon. Member puts a question on the Paper and does not ask it the Minister is ordered by S.O. 9 (5) to circulate the answer with the Votes.