Commons Sitting of 16 March 1915

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKEB in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Ascot District Gas and Electricity Bill,
As amended, considered; to be read the third time.

NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
Copies presented of two Orders in Council, dated 11th March, 1915, approving Memorials of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
PATENTS, DESIGNS AND TRADE MARKS.
Copy presented of Thirty-second Report of the Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks, with Appendices, for the year 1914 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 158.]
IRELAND (AVERAGE PRICES).
Return presented relative thereto [ordered 23rd February; Mr. Newman]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 159.]
ANCIENT MONUMENTS (SCOTLAND) (ROYAL COMMISSION).
Copy presented of Sixth Report of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Constructions of Scotland (Monuments and Constructions in county of Berwick) (Revised Issue) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
AGRICULTURE (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented of Agricultural Statistics, 1913. Vol. II. Part III. Prices and Supplies of Grain, Live Stock, and other Agricultural Produce in Scotland [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT (CENTRAL COMMITTEE).
Copy presented of Interim Report on the Work of the Central Committee on Women's Employment since its appointment [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
COLONIAL REPORTS (ANNUAL).
Copy presented of Report, No. 837 (Somaliland, Report for 1913–14) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR.

    GERMAN CONSULAR SERVICE (SOUTH AFRICA).
    Commander BELLAIRSasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what was the position of Lieutenant Baron Werner von Ow-Wachendorf in the German Consular service in South Africa; whether the lieutenant gave up that position several days prior to the outbreak of War in response to a secret mobilization order; and whether he can state the evidence for the officer being treated as a civilian Consular officer at liberty during a period of over six months' residence in this country?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): Baron von Ow-Wachendorf held the post of Attaché to the German Consulate-General at Cape Town. The German Consul-General informed the Acting Governor-General at Pretoria that he was leaving Cape Town with his staff, including Baron von Ow-Wachendorf, on 1st August, and the Baron was, therefore, on his arrival in this country, naturally regarded as a Consular official and treated as such.

    TSINGTAU.
    Mr. OUTHWAITEasked whether any claim for compensation has been made by the Chinese Government upon His Majesty's Government in connection with the recent operations against Tsingtau?
    Sir E. GREY: The answer is in the negative.
    Mr. OUTHWAITEasked whether any arrangement has been entered into with the Japanese Government as to the disposal of Tsingtau; and whether in such case he can state its terms?
    Sir E. GREY: The answer to this question is also in the negative.

  FRANCE (BRITISH NAVAL SUPPORT).
  Mr. OUTHWAITEasked at what time the decision of the Cabinet to give naval support to France was conveyed to the French Ambassador at London on 2nd August; and whether he can state at what time on the same day the demand of the German Government for a passage-way through Belgium was presented at Brussels?
  Sir E. GREY: I cannot at this distance of time say precisely at what hours various communications were made, unless they were stated or recorded in the papers at the time. In any case there is no connection between the two points since, as the White Paper clearly shows, the German Government were asked by His Majesty's Government whether they would respect the neutrality of Belgium so long as no other Power violated it, and declined to give an answer, a considerable time before the question of naval support to France was even discussed.
  Mr. OUTHWAITE: Is it not a fact that the demand made by the German Government on Belgium was the first indication of Germany's intended action?
  Sir E. GREY: It certainly was-an indication. The first indication of Germany's intended action was that we addressed a request simultaneously to the French and German Governments some time—they are both reported in the documents—in the preceding week. The French Government at once replied in the affirmative that they would respect the neutrality of Belgium, but the German Government said they could not give an answer.
  Mr. KING: Is any record kept at the Foreign Office of the exact hour when telegraphic communications are sent off?
  Sir E. GREY: Of telegrams, yes; but if I make a communication to an Ambassador the date but not the hour is recorded.
  Mr. OUTHWAITE: If the decision of the Cabinet was arrived at on the morning of 2nd August and the German demand was not made until that night at seven o'clock, would it be correct then to say we only departed from our neutrality because of the violation of the neutrality of Belgium?
  Mr. SPEAKER: That is a hypothetical question and the hon. Member must give notice of any further questions.

  BRITISH PRISONERS IN GERMANY.
  Lord CHARLES. BERESFORDasked whether the scheme propounded to the German Government by which quartermasters of the United States could keep in touch with British prisoners so as to ensure their receiving fair treatment has been accepted by the German Government; and, if not, will he make further representations?
  Sir E. GREY: The reply of the German Government has not yet been received, and I cannot say what it will be. On its receipt His Majesty's Government, if necessary, will certainly consider what further steps can be taken.
  Lord C. BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the hardships and sufferings British prisoners of war are exposed to in Germany, His Majesty's Government will enter into negotiations with Germany for arranging with a neutral country to take over these prisoners and intern them until the end of the War?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. No steps could be taken to carry out such a suggestion till it had received the fullest consideration.

  PRESS BUREAU.
  Mr. OUTHWAITEasked the Solicitor-General whether he can state on what grounds of public policy the Press Bureau has excised from the notes of the military critic of the "Daily News and Morning Leader," quotations from the Reports of Sir John French, which had been already published and circulated throughout the world?
  The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir Stanley Buckmaster): I have tried, but cannot ascertain, what is referred to in this question. The dates and the details must be furnished before I can be in a position to answer it.
  Mr. OUTHWAITEasked the Solicitor-General whether he can state whether the Press Bureau has refused to allow Press publication of the fact that five social democratic members of the Duma have been sentenced to imprisonment in Siberia; and, in such case, whether he can state the reason for this decision?
  Sir S. BUCKMASTER: The statement referred to in the question has, so far as I know, only been inserted in the German wireless message and the "Daily News." I struck it out of the German wireless because, upon the information before me, it was inaccurate, and was intended to create mischief between ourselves and our Allies.
  Mr. OUTHWAITE: Are we to understand that the statement in the "Daily News," which has been refused publication, is correct?
  Sir S. BUCKMASTER: I am not prepared to answer for the accuracy of the "Daily News."

  INDIAN MEDICAL SERVICE.
  Mr. O'GRADYasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Indians acting as assistant surgeons (military) while on service in India are paid an allowance of Rs. 30 and Rs. 50 per month, and that in the present War these men at the front are deprived of this allowance; and, if so, will steps be taken in order that the allowance named shall be paid to Indians acting as assistant surgeons during the War?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Charles Roberts): I presume that the hon. Member refers to the general field allowance of Rs. 30 a month, and the special charge allowances of varying rates granted for special duties. All military assistant surgeons at the front receive the former allowance and all those who are eligible receive the latter. A few claims in respect of special allowances are being held over pending verification.
  Mr. O'GRADYasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that there are a number of Indians acting as assistant surgeons at the front and that these officers have a large and continuous military medical experience, including that of the present War; and whether, in view of these facts and the consequent shortage of medical men who must obtain their degrees in Great Britain before they can obtain the rank of commissioned officer, steps will be taken to promote to commissioned rank the assistant surgeons who have obtained certificates through examinations in India?
  Mr. C. ROBERTS: Vacancies occurring at the present time in the commissioned-ranks of the Indian Medical Service are being made good by the grant of temporary commissions to medical men, Indians and others, having a professional qualification that is registrable in the United Kingdom. It is not considered desirable or necessary to lower the standard of admission.

  SOLDIERS AND SAILORS (PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES).
  Mr. NEWDEGATEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that cases exist of the wives of soldiers on active service not having received one-third of their husband's pay, although that sum has been stopped by the wish of the husband from what he receives; and whether, on information being given to him of individual cases where this hardship exists, he will take steps to have it redressed without delay?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Harold Baker): I am not aware of such cases. I will certainly make inquiry if it is desired, but the best and quickest remedy is to apply direct to the paymaster concerned, and I hope that the hon. Member may be willing to adopt that course.

  LIEUTENANT BARON WERNER VON OW-WACHENDORF.
  Captain STANLEY WILSONasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that the War Office was informed during last October that Lieutenant Baron

  1901
  von Ow-Wachendorf, then residing in London, was an officer in the German Army and had served his military training in German South West Africa the previous year and that he ought to be interned; in view of this information, will he say why this officer was not interned; and why the War Office have allowed him to be exchanged and to return to Germany?
  Mr. TENNANT: No information relating to the Baron's previous military career or training reached the War Office. The answer to the second part of the question has been given in reply to a question put to the Foreign Office to-day by the hon. and gallant Member for the Maidstone Division. He was repatriated under the agreement for the mutual exchange of Consular officers.
  Captain WILSON: Would the right hon. Gentleman accept my statement contained in the question as correct, if I privately supply to him the name of a well-known general officer who gave this information to the Intelligence Department of the War Office on 15th or 16th October?
  Mr. TENNANT: Of course, I will accept any statement which the hon. Gentleman assures me is within his knowledge. I shall be glad to receive the information, and, if necessary, make inquiries.
  Commander BELLAIRS: As there are no fewer than three military men in the German Consular service belonging to Cape Town alone, will the War Office address a remonstrance to the Foreign Office with regard to the number of foreign military men employed by Germany as Consular officers?
  Mr. TENNANT: I think that is a question which ought to be addressed to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

  ARMY OFFICERS (PAY).
  Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) whether he is aware that certain Army officers have as much as three months' pay overdue to them; whether steps will be taken to expedite payments; and (2) whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer is aware of the delay which Army officers sometimes experience in receiving their pay, and that four different Government officials or Departments have to be notified of the actual rates of Income Duty
  1902
  payable by officers; and whether, in connection with his forthcoming Budget, he is considering whether a simplification of collection or deduction can be made, thus obviating the present delays both in payments to officers and in payment of Income Tax?
  Mr. BAKER: No cases of prolonged delay such as my hon. Friend mentions have come to my notice, but if he will give me any particulars he has I will have inquiry made.

  GERMAN PRISONERS.
  Mr. WATTasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his Department has considered the advisability of utilising the Island of Lundy, in the Bristol Channel, for the internment of German prisoners; whether he is aware that the present buildings thereon could accommodate as many as 1,600 prisoners, and that the old buildings formerly used as houses for quarrymen could in a few weeks be made suitable for several thousand prisoners; and whether he car say if the price at which this island could be acquired is less than is being paid for chartered vessels accommodating similar numbers?
  Mr. TENNANT: The advisability of using Lundy as a place of detention for prisoners of War has been considered and it was decided to be unsuitable. The question of cost was consequently not gone into and no comparison is possible between the relative cost of interning prisoners on the island and on ships. Such a comparison would in any case be unnecessary as the ships are being given up.

  INOCULATION.
  Mr. CHANCELLORasked whether leave has been refused to any men of the 18th Hussars, stationed at Tidworth, unless they would consent to be inoculated against cerebro-spinal meningitis; and whether this method of compulsion which has hitherto been applied to induce submission to anti-typhoid inoculation is now being extended to other inoculations with the consent of the War Office?
  Mr. TENNANT: I have made inquiries and can obtain no confirmation of the hon. Member's suggestion with regard to the 18th Hussars. With regard to the second

  1903
  part of the question I have already explained the circumstances in which privilege leave has been withheld in the case of men who have not undergone inoculation and are not accompanying the drafts overseas. The adoption of another form of inoculation is not contemplated at present.

  SERGEANT INSTRUCTORS (PAY AND PENSIONS).
  Mr. MORTONasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether sergeant instructors who are employed in instructing the New Army from regiment to regiment are thereby deprived of promotion, increased pay, and pension; and, if so, will he see that these non-commissioned officers are fairly treated, considering their value and usefulness to the New Army?
  Mr. BAKER: If the hon. Member will indicate to me more clearly to what men this question refers I will see that their case receives consideration.

  PARCELS UNDELIVERED TO SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
  Mr. GLYN-JONES: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state the number of parcels apparently intended for soldiers and sailors for which the Post Office can find no owner, and whether it would not be possible and desirable to distribute the contents of these parcels and of any other derelict parcels containing articles suitable for the purpose, either to soldiers and sailors in the field or to British prisoners of War interned in Germany?
  The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Hobhouse): About 9,000 parcels which are intended for soldiers and sailors are at present lying unclaimed. The suggestion which the hon. Member makes as to the disposal of these parcels is one which had already occurred to me, and which is, I think, well worthy of consideration. I hope to obtain the consent of the Treasury to the small sacrifice of revenue entailed and to carry out an arrangement for thus benefiting soldiers and sailors or other British prisoners of war, in consultation with a committee which I understand has been set up by the War Office and Foreign Office to arrange these matters.

  JAPAN AND CHINA.
  Mr. MOLTENO: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a question, of which I have given him private notice, namely: Whether the report is correct that a large military force sailed on Friday from Japan for China, escorted by a squadron of warships; whether he can state with what objects this force is being sent, and whether its dispatch is in connection with the demands made upon China by Japan?
  Sir E. GREY: My hon. Friend's question has not reached me. I was at a Cabinet Meeting the whole of the morning. It may possibly have gone to the Foreign Office, but it has not reached me, and I cannot give an answer without notice.
  Mr. MOLTENO: It was delivered at the Foreign Office this morning.
  Sir E. GREY: I could not be there; I was busy.

  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Mr. BOLANDasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether any, and, if so, what progress has been made by the Congested Districts Board in the negotiations for the purchase of estates in the parish of Dromod, county Kerry?
  Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, Ireland): If the hon. Member will furnish the names of the owners of the estates in which he is interested, inquiries will be made.
  Mr. BOLANDasked whether the Congested Districts Board or the Estates Commissioners have recently taken steps to purchase the two townlands on the Warden Estate, near Sneem, which had been withheld from sale?
  Mr. RUSSELL: The answer is in the negative.

  Government of Ireland Act (Amendment) Bill.
  Mr. LYNCHasked the Prime Minister whether, during the present Parliament, the Government intends to proceed with the Amending Bill to the Government of Ireland Act?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna): I cannot make any statement at present.

  Manchester Telephone Exchange.
  Mr. RAFFANasked the Postmaster-General whether it is proposed to institute a new system at the Manchester telephone exchange known as the split duties system; whether he is aware that the result of its adoption would be that girl telephone operators would commence duty at 8 a.m. and, although at liberty for a rest period in the middle of the day, would not be released from duty till 9 p.m.; and, seeing that this would involve hardship to girl operators living at some distance from the exchange, who would require to leave home at an unreasonably early hour and would not be able to return till very late in the evening, whether he will see that no alteration will be made in the present system without further consideration?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: There are no proposals in hand at present for altering the duties of telephonists at Manchester. A new scheme of duties for the supervising telephone staff at Manchester has been prepared, but its introduction has been postponed.

  Agricultural Holdings (Military Occupation).
  Mr. PETOasked the President of the Local Government Board whether it is intended that poor rate shall be levied on that portion of any agricultural holding which is in military occupation and thereby rendered unfit for agricultural purposes, and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?
  The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Herbert Samuel): Assuming that the military occupation is of a temporary character the matter seems to be one for agreement between the rateable occupier and the War Office. I have no power to take any action with respect to it.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Lord EDMUND TALBOT: Might I ask what business the Government propose to take when the House reassembles?
Mr. McKENNA: On Wednesday, 14th April, we shall move to get Mr. Speaker out of the Chair on the Civil Service Estimates, and on Thursday, 15th April, we shall take the Office of Works Votes.
Mr. HOGGE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government intend to meet four days in the week, as usual, after the Recess, or whether there is any intention of shortening the week?
Mr. McKENNA: I am afraid that I am unable to say anything on that point.
Mr. KING: May I ask whether on the Thursday after we resume the Houses of Parliament Vote will be taken, or the other Office of Works Vote?
Mr. McKENNA: All the Office of Works Votes will be placed on the Paper.
Mr. JAMES HOPE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Budget is likely to be brought in?
Mr. McKENNA: No, Sir, I am afraid I cannot.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.
  NAVAL MARRIAGES BILL.
  Order read for resuming adjourned Debate on Lords Amendments.
  NAVAL MARRIAGES BILL.

    CLAUSE 1.—(Relaxation during the Present War of the Law as to the Place where Naval Marriages may be Solemnised.)
    Where, during the continuance of the present War, one of the parties to an intended marriage is an officer, seaman, or marine borne on the books of one of His Majesty's ships, and the parties to the intended marriage have duly fulfilled all the conditions required by law for enabling them to be married in any particular place of worship or in any particular district in the United Kingdom, then, if the officer, seaman, or marine obtains from the officer commanding the ship on whose books he is borne a certificate that owing to the exigencies of the public service the officer, seaman, or marine cannot be
    1916
    allowed to proceed to that place of worship or to that district, the marriage may be lawfully solemnised or contracted in any other building in the United Kingdom in which marriages may be lawfully solemnised or contracted as though the parties thereto had duly fulfilled all the conditions required by law for enabling them to be married at that building.
    Lords Amendment: At the end of the Clause, add the words,
    "Provided that in England no marriage after banns published or an episcopal licence granted in England shall be solemnised elsewhere than in a church or chapel of the Church of England in which marriages may lawfully be solemnised."
    Question again proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    Debate resumed.
    The CIVIL LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. G. Lambert): I think that we shall be able to arrive at a form of words which will satisfy all parties in this matter. I suggest that we negative the Amendment inserted in the Lords, and that the following words should be inserted, "Provided that where, apart from the above provision, the marriage would not have been solemnised elsewhere than in a place of worship of a particular denomination, nothing in such provision shall be construed as authorising the solemnisation of the marriage elsewhere than in such place of worship." That leaves the law exactly as it stands so far as the church or place where the marriage is solemnised is concerned. We do not wish to alter the law at all. All we wish to do is to change the venue of the marriage for the convenience of the sailor. I am informed, in fact I have taken means to ascertain, that this Amendment will commend itself to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield (Mr. James Hope), to the Church of England, and also to my hon. Friend the Member for Somerset (Mr. King). That being so, I hope that we shall be able to proceed with this Bill with unanimity.
    Mr. KING: Is this to be substituted for the Lords Amendment.
    Mr. LAMBERT: Yes.
    Mr. JAMES HOPE: I should like to say that the suggestion of the Civil Lord of the Admiralty undoubtedly meets the objections I held yesterday, and I am very

    1917
    glad to find myself in such remarkable and unprecedented agreement with the hon. Member for North Somerset (Mr. King).
    Mr. KING: I reciprocate that sentiment. I should like, however, to ask whether it commends itself to the right hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment in another place. It does not at all accomplish the object he had in view. I hope that the Bill will be accepted as we send it up to another place.
    Mr. HOGGE: May I ask my right hon. Friend whether in any case this does not apply to marriage under the Scotch law? In Scotland it does not matter whether anybody is married in a church or not. We marry people in Scotland in a businesslike fashion. I want to be perfectly clear that neither the original nor the substituted words affect Scotland.
    Mr. LAMBERT: No, I think my hon. Friend can rest assured that we do not intend to interfere with the business arrangements of marriage in Scotland.
    Question, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment," put, and negatived.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That, in lieu of the Lords Amendment, the words, 'Provided that where, apart from the above provision, the marriage would not have been solemnised elsewhere than in a place of worship of a particular denomination nothing in such provision shall be construed as authorising the solemnisation of the marriage elsewhere than in such place of worship,' be there inserted."—[Mr. Lambert.]
    Question put, and agreed to.

    CLAUSE 2.—(Prolongation of the Validity of Certificates of Publication, of Banns or Notice of Marriage.)
    Where, during the continuance of the present War, one of the parties to an intended marriage is an officer, seaman, or marine borne on the books of one of His Majesty's ships, any certificate of the publication of banns or of notice of marriage issued for the purpose of the intended marriage shall, notwithstanding anything in any other Act, continue to be valid for twelve months, and the marriage may accordingly be lawfully solemnised or contracted at any time within those twelve months.
    Lords Amendment agreed to: After the word "publication," insert the words "or proclamation."

DEFENCE OF THE REALM (AMENDMENT) BILL.
Lords Amendments considered

CLAUSE 1.—(Right of British Subject Charged with Offence to be Tried by Civil Court.)
(1) Any offence against any regulations made under the Defence of the Realm (Consolidation) Act, 1914, which is triable by court-martial may, instead of being tried by a court-martial, be tried by a Civil Court with a jury, and when so tried the offence shall be deemed to be a felony punishable with the like punishment as might have been inflicted if the office had been tried by court-martial.
(2) Where a person, being a British subject but not being a person subject to the Naval Discipline Act or to military law, is alleged to be guilty of an offence against any regulations made under the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, 1914, he shall be entitled, within six clear days from the time when the general nature of the charge is communicated to him, to claim to be tried by a Civil Court with a jury instead of being tried by court-martial, and where such a claim is made in manner provided by regulations under the last-mentioned Act the offence shall not be tried by court-martial:
Provided that this Sub-section shall not apply where the offence is tried before a Court of Summary Jurisdiction:
Provided also that before the trial of any person to whom this Section applies, and as soon as practicable after arrest, the general nature of the charge shall be communicated to him in writing and notice in writing shall at the same time be given, in a form provided by regulations under the said Act, of his rights under this Section.
(3) The Vexatious Indictment Act, 1859, as amended by any subsequent enactment shall apply to a felony under this Section as if it were included among the offences mentioned in Section 1 of that Act, but a felony under this Section shall not be triable by a Court of Quarter Sessions.
(4) For the purpose of the trial of a person for a felony under this Section the offence shall be deemed to have been committed either at the place in which the same actually was committed or in any place in the United Kingdom in which the offender may be found or to which he may be brought for the purpose of speedy trial.
(5) An indictment under this Section shall not be deemed void or defective by reason that the facts or matters alleged in the indictment for the felony amount in law to treason; and if the facts or matters proved at the trial of any person indicted for any felony under this Section amount in law to treason, the person shall not by reason thereof be entitled to be acquitted of such felony; but no person tried for such felony shall be afterwards prosecuted for treason upon the same facts.
(6) In the event of invasion or other special military emergency arising out of the present War, His Majesty may by Proclamation forthwith suspend the operation of this Section, either generally or as respects any area specified in the Proclamation, without prejudice, however, to any proceedings under this Section which may be then pending in any Civil Court.
(7) The expression "British subject" in this Section includes a woman who has married an alien but who before the marriage was a British subject.
(8) In the application of this Section to Scotland "a Civil Court with a jury" means the High Court of Justiciary, and Sub-section (2) shall not apply.
(9) This Section shall apply in the case of offences committed and persons arrested before as well as after the passing of this Act.
Lords Amendment: At the end of Subsection (2) insert:—
(3) In addition and without prejudice to any powers which a Court may possess to order the exclusion of the public from any proceedings, if, in course of the trial of a person for felony under this Section, application is made by the prosecution, in the interests of the national safety, that all or any portion of the public should be excluded during any part of the hearing, the Court may make an order to that effect, but the passing of sentence shall in any case take place in public.
Lords Amendment read a second time.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir J. Simon): I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
This is put in by way of precaution rather than in order to effect any substantial change in the law. I should be slow to suppose that where national safety was involved there would not be power in a British Court of Justice so to
1920
conduct the proceedings as to ensure that national safety should not be jeopardised, but in order to remove any possible doubt upon the matter this Amendment has been made in another place, and I move that we agree.
Mr. HOGGE: May I ask whether this applies to the whole of the trial? When the last German spy was tried there were certain periods of the trial at which the public were excluded. At other times they were admitted to the trial. Does this new Clause mean the exclusion of the public all the time or only at such time as national safety would be involved by their presence?
Sir J. SIMON: The Clause is drawn in order to cover the possibility of either case. I imagine that in almost every conceivable case there can be no reason why the public should be excluded from beginning to end. It is obvious that the public ought to be there when sentence is pronounced. I do not myself see why in any case I can imagine the public should not be there during some portion of the trial, but if the person you are prosecuting is a spy, and, supposing it is necessary to produce evidence how the spy endeavoured to communicate with the enemy, it is evident that you could not allow the public to be present when that evidence was being given and considered. I think my hon. Friend may be confident that the prosecution, in asking the Court to exercise its power under this Section, will only do so within the limits of what is necessary for national safety.
Sir RYLAND ADKINS: I suppose we may take it that in every case not only the sentence but the charge also will be made public?
Question put, and agreed to.
Lords Amendment agreed to: Sub-section (8) leave out "(2)" and insert instead thereof "(4)."

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ENEMIES BILL.
Lords Amendments considered.

CLAUSE 1.—(Provision with Respect to Writs Issued Against Enemy in Certain Vases.)
(1) Leave may be given to issue a writ of summons in the High Court for service on an enemy out of the jurisdiction or of which notice is to be given to an enemy

1921
out of the jurisdiction if the Court or judge is satisfied that the case is a case to which this Section applies, and the Court or a judge may, on an application made at the time leave is so given, or at any subsequent time, if satisfied that the writ cannot promptly be served or brought to the notice of the enemy defendant by any of the usual means, make an order (in this Act referred to as an enemy service order) directing substituted or other service of the writ or the substitution of notice for service by means of advertisement or otherwise; and on that order being complied with, all proceedings may be taken on the claim as if the writ had been served on the enemy defendant by the usual means.
(2) The Lord Chief Justice shall give directions for expediting proceedings and regulating procedure generally in a case where an enemy service order has been made and the enemy defendant does not appear; and any directions so given shall have effect as if they were included in the rules of Court for the time being in force.
(3) The Court or judge, where an enemy service order has been made and it appears not to be practicable to obtain the best evidence of any document which is, in the opinion of the Court or judge, material to the case, may admit such other evidence thereof as appears proper in the circumstances.
(4) The Court or judge shall have power, where an enemy service order has been made and the enemy defendant does not appear, to order the plaintiff, though successful, to pay the whole or any part of the costs of the proceedings, if he considers that it is just to do so in the special circumstances of the case.
(5) The fact that, for the purpose of obtaining the benefit of this Section, a writ of summons has been indorsed only with a claim for a declaration in accordance therewith shall not prevent any other declaration or any consequential or other relief being claimed in other proceedings, or prevent the case being dealt with, although no such other declaration or consequential or other relief is claimed.
(6) This Section applies to cases where—

(a) the plaintiff is a British subject and is entitled for the time being to bring an action in the High Court; and

(b) the defendant or one of the defendants is an enemy; and

1922

(c) the writ is endorsed only with a claim for a declaration as to the effect of the present War on rights or liabilities of the plaintiff or defendant under a contract entered into before the outbreak thereof; and

(d) there is written evidence of the contract.

Lords Amendments: In Sub-section (2) leave out the words "Chief Justice shall give directions" and insert instead thereof the words "Chancellor may make such rules as he thinks fit."
Sir J. SIMON: I beg to move. "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
Mr. POLLOCK: I desire to ask why this alteration has been made? If I recollect rightly very great care was taken to draft this Bill in order that it might have as much elasticity as possible, and after the consideration which I am quite sure the Attorney-General gave to these words, it was decided to give the Lord Chief Justice power to make directions for expediting procedure and for regulating it. That is no formal process. When rules are required it is usual to give power to the Lord Chancellor to make them, and there must have been some express purpose in giving it to the Lord Chief Justice in this particular Bill. I assume that purpose was to make the proceedings and rules more flexible. The Bill which we are now asked to pass is one which may be of some use, or it may be of very little use. It is very important indeed we should keep in view the end aimed at. We have before us the fact that the whole basis of the Bill depends upon whether it is worked with due elasticity; whether the hitherto rather stringent protection given to defendants should be relaxed for the advantage of the British subjects, and whether we shall have an opportunity of proceeding against alien enemies who are in foreign countries by means of substituted service.
The object of the Bill is to ensure flexibility, and that will be better secured by placing this power in the hands of the Lord Chief Justice, who is more familiar with the manner in which business is conducted at the Royal Courts of Justice. If it is left in the hands of the Lord Chancellor, and if we are to have the rules made as hitherto, we shall once more get ourselves into the old trouble; possibly the rules may become the subject of appeal, and, instead of getting an easy and speedy remedy for the British subject, we may

1923
involve him in a number of appeals which certainly is not to be desired. I regret very much the alteration which is now proposed, because I have some misgivings about it. I had hoped that the Attorney-General would adhere to the words which were proposed in this House, and I trust he will explain the reason why he is prepared to sacrifice those words, because, for my own part, I feel the change is by no means advantageous to the Bill. I foresee that, in the stringent rules which may be laid down, it may be quite possible for this Bill to become of very small value indeed. I believe the House at large would regret that. I should myself have preferred the Lord Chief Justice to be the authority for giving the directions to deal with difficulties that are under his cognisance without having to refer the matter to another very important and very much respected legal authority who cannot, however, have the same familiarity with day to day proceedings in the Courts of Justice.
Sir CLIFFORD CORY: I would ask whether the Lord Chancellor has not already made rules under the Trading with the Enemy Amendment Act which are so ambiguous that it has made it necessary to bring in this Bill. I endorse the remarks which have fallen from the last speaker. I trust the Attorney-General will keep the provision in the Bill, whereby the Lord Chief Justice and not the Lord Chancellor will make the rules. I am advised that the proceedings under the Act will take place in the King's Bench Division. The Lord Chief Justice is head of that Division, and it is therefore only consistent that he should draft the rules. I agree that the Bill is an excellent Bill as far as procedure goes, but we are anxious to see the Amending Bill promised by the Attorney-General with the object of enlarging its scope. At present it only applies to claims for a declaration as to the effect of the present War on rights or liabilities under a contract entered into before the outbreak of War, and does not enable a British creditor to claim from an alien enemy debtor for debt or damages. Consequently, it is of little or no use. I hope the Amendment Bill, therefore, will soon be introduced.
Mr. BUTCHER: Perhaps the Attorney-General will tell the House the difference between giving directions and making rules? It may not seem a large matter,
1924
but I am not sure it is the same thing. For instance, will the effect of giving the Lord Chancellor power mean that he will have to provide machinery for making the rules with the assistance of the Rules Committee? If so, I can only say that it will make a serious inroad on the usefulness of the measure. It will introduce a great amount of machinery and delay and, probably, deprive the Bill of a good part of the flexibility it now possesses. I thought, in the first instance, that the Rules Committee should make the rules, but the Attorney-General satisfied me that that was too cumbrous a process. Having been so satisfied, I am not prepared to again change my views, unless he can satisfy me that his new proposal is right. I support the protest of my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Pollock), and I ask the Attorney-General to stick to his original proposal. What we want is to devise some means of bringing alien enemies before the Court in a way somewhat different from the rather cumbrous procedure which has hitherto existed. We want to put an end to the rigidity of procedure which existed formerly, a procedure which is really inapplicable to the cases to be dealt with under this Bill. I am under the impression that if the Lord Chief Justice gives the directions we should get over those formalities which might delay and impede matters most seriously. If we go back to the formality of the Rules Committee and the Lord Chancellor we shall make a very large infringement on the valuable character of this Bill.
Sir J. SIMON: The general object which we all aim at has, I think, been admirably stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman who has just spoken. Certainly we should not make any change in this Bill which would result in substituting something cumbrous, technical, and slow moving for that which we originally had in mind, and which was something flexible and rapidly acting. If I thought that the change made in another place would have that undesirable effect I would join with those who have already spoken in deprecating it. But really that is not so. May I, first of all, point to the change which is proposed? Most certainly it does not mean that the rules are to be what are technically known as Rules of Court made by the Rules Committee. I wish to speak with all proper respect of the Rules Committee, which consists of most eminent judicial authorities,

1925
and with equal respect of the rules which they from time to time make, but certainly that method of making rules would not be suited for the present emergency, for the whole essence of the situation is that we want to have the thing provided for immediately. That ought to be quite understood. I would point out that in substituting the word "rules" which are not Rules of Court, for the word "directions," it is almost a verbal point, but it has its importance, which I will deal with in a moment. Let me say a word about the substitution of the Lord Chancellor for the Lord Chief Justice. My hon. Friends will sympathise with me in not desiring to say anything which possibly could be supposed to take the side of one of those eminent persons against the other. The truth about it is, that it is desirable, or seemed to us desirable, that the making of rules for expediting proceedings should be done by somebody who had a direct responsibility to Parliament. In this House I have, as best I can, to answer for such matters, even though the Lord Chancellor is the supreme judicial and legal authority and sits in another place. It was thought desirable and it is consistent with our constitutional position that so far as may be the matter should be made one for which responsibility should be accepted in Parliament by the Government in case of dispute or criticism.
Secondly, I do not think it is quite clear that all these cases would necessarily be cases in the King's Bench Division. My sympathies are all on the side of the King's Bench Division. I am surprised that the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Butcher) should be so willing to surrender this portion of judicial proceedings to those who practise in Courts, where we do not so often have the privilege of seeing him. You may have cases, I suppose, in which a declaration as to whether a contract is or is not affected by the outbreak of war, might be properly argued before the Chancery Division Whatever the Lord Chief Justice does—I should be the last to belittle his authority—he does not claim to direct proceedings in the Chancery Division. It is for these reasons, which lawyers in the House will see are of some weight, and which are of a rather technical kind, that it was thought right to substitute the Lord Chancellor for the Lord Chief Justice. The other question asked is, why do you say "rules" instead of "directions"? It is not desirable that
1926
there should be put into an Act of Parliament a provision that the Lord Chancellor is to direct the Lord Chief Justice about matters which may very well take place in the King's Bench Division; consequently we use the word "rules." They are not, of course, Rules of Court. Although I have not seen the actual draft, I know it has already been considered.
The rules to be made are rules which might say, so far as the proceedings in the King's Bench Division are concerned, that the Lord Chief Justice will give directions in his own sphere and in the Courts for which he is responsible. It is not a change of great importance, and I hope the House will agree with the House of Lords in making it. I trust I have explained that it does not mean going back to any cumbrous machinery. The substance of the Bill will be exactly as it was before. The Regulations, I believe, are practically ready, and I will make it my business to see there is no delay. If we put in the Lord Chancellor, I quite recognise that the Government would have to be held to blame supposing there were unreasonable delay in putting the machinery in motion. I am sorry my hon. Friend (Sir C. Cory) does not think much of the Bill as it stands. That question is a little beside the narrow point, and I have confined myself to the actual Amendment.
Mr. POLLOCK: With the leave of the House I should like to thank the Attorney-General for his explanation. As he offers himself as a hostage we will accept him as a hostage for the flexibility of these rules, and for the assistance the Lord Chancellor is going to give in securing that the Bill really does what it says.
Question put, and agreed to.
Remaining Lords Amendments agreed to:
In Sub-section (2) leave out the word "directions" ["any directions so given"] and insert instead thereof the word "rules."
Leave out the word "given" ["any directions so given"] and insert instead thereof the word "made."

CLAUSE 4.—(Application to Ireland.)
In the application of this Act to Ireland the Lord Chief Justice for Ireland shall be substituted for the Lord Chief Justice.
Lords Amendments agreed to: Substitute in each case "Lord Chancellor" for "Lord Chief Justice."

WELSH CHURCH (POSTPONEMENT) BILL [Lords].
Second Reading deferred till Wednesday, 14th April.
SUPPLY.
Committee deferred till Wednesday, 14th April.
WAYS AND MEANS.
Committee deferred till Wednesday, 14th April.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to:—
Consolidated Fund (No. 2) Bill,
Defence of the Realm (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, without Amendment.
That they do not insist on the Amendment to the Naval Marriages Bill to which this House hath disagreed, and they have agreed to the Amendment which this House hath made in lieu thereof.
Mr. SPEAKER: There will be a message from the Lords some time in the course of the afternoon. I will leave the Chair until such time as the message arrives, and when it does arrive the bells will be rung, so as to inform hon. Members that I am about to resume the Chair.
Sitting suspended at twenty-five minutes after Three o'clock.
The Sitting was resumed at Twenty-five minutes after Six o'clock, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Whitley) in the Chair.

ROYAL ASSENT.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
The House went, and having returned,
Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERreported the Royal Assent to:—

1. Consolidated Fund (No. 2) Act, 1915.

2. British Ships (Transfer Restriction) Act, 1915.

3. Naval Medical Compassionate Fund Act, 1915.

4. National Insurance (Part I. Amendment) Act, 1915.

5. National Insurance (Part II. Amendment) Act, 1915.

6. Army (Suspension of Sentences) Act, 1915.

7. Army (Annual) Act, 1915.

8. Army (Amendment) Act, 1915.

9. Universities and Colleges (Emergency Powers) Act, 1915.

10. Injuries in War (Compensation) Act, 1915.

11. Irish Police (Naval and Military Service) Act, 1915.

12. Defence of the Realm (Amendment) Act, 1915.

13. Naval Discipline Act, 1915.

14. Naval Marriages Act, 1915.

15. Legal Proceedings against Enemies Act, 1915.

16. Customs (War Powers) Act, 1915.

17. Defence of the Realm (Amendment) No. 2 Act, 1915.

18. Aberdeen Corporation Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

19. Local Government Board's Provisional Order Confirmation (No. 23) Act, 1915.

Whereupon, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKEB, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 15th March, adjourned the House, without Question put, until Wednesday, 14th April.
Adjourned at Twelve minutes before Seven o'clock.