CLAUSE 14.—(Registrar.) (Hansard, 22 November 1916)

Mr. DENNISS
I beg to move, to leave out the words "carrying on business 1500 within those parts of the United Kingdom in which their," and to insert instead, thereof the word "whose"
I understand that the Amendment is accepted.

§ Mr. PRETYMAN
Yes; we accept that Amendment.

Mr. DENNISS
I beg to move, after the word "situated," to insert the words "in England and Wales, Scotland, and Ireland."

§ Mr. PRETYMAN
This Amendment is-also accepted.

Mr. DENNISS
I beg to move, at the end of the Clause, to add the words "The clerk of each county and borough council shall be supplied from time to time with a copy of so much of the register as relates to firms and persons carrying on business within the area of the county or borough for which he is appointed."
This Amendment is more important. The object of this Act is that people should get to know as easily as possible who they are dealing with, and that they should be able to search the register. But to ask people in the North of England to search the register in London would be to put such an obstacle in the way that I am afraid it would not be of much use. Consider what would happen. A man in Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield or York would have to write up to the Registrar in London, and say, "Please give me the particulars of the firm of Jones Bros." The office then turns to see how much it would cost to send a copy of so many words, and so on, to the person in Yorkshire. The Board of Trade then writes to tell him that the cost is so much, and the individual in Yorkshire sends a postal order, and after that he gets his reply, with the extract copied from the register. That is a very long procedure, and a very troublesome one. The man might choose to do it by correspondence, and he could write to somebody in London to call and see the register and get a copy of what he wanted. That again would take time, and would be more expensive. The procedure that I propose is that in every county council office that part of the register which contains the names of individuals and firms within the county area should be kept there. It was suggested by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool on the Second Reading that chambers 1501 of commerce should be used for the purpose, but I understand that they do not care to undertake the duty because they would have to intervene continually and call the attention of the Board of Trade to cases of registration. Besides that, the chambers of commerce have no corporate authority and no area over which they have jurisdiction. In some areas there are no chambers of commerce at all. I suggested on the Second Reading that the County Court might be used, but some of my Friends upstairs suggested that there might be an objection to County Courts being used. For my part, I think the County Court would be the best, and there is a registrar of the County Court in nearly every town in the country.
My present proposal is a compromise, and instead of the County Court I propose that the local register should be kept in the county council office, which would be very much more accessible to the people who want to find out with whom they are dealing than would be the case if the register were kept in London. If the hon. Gentleman would like to substitute County Court for county council, I should be only too glad. I looked up the County Courts in the Law List, and I think there are about 407 or 507 registrars, who are in every town, there being a County Court registrar for each, excepting where the towns are small and are together, in which case there is one registrar for two towns. The County Court would be a very convenient place for people to go to, for it is the place where they go to collect their debts, and the registrar could easily keep that small part of the register which relates to his particular town. However, if the hon. Gentleman does not agree to the words "County Court" I propose to use the words "county council." I am quite sure, to make this Act of practical value, that in some way its machinery should be co-ordinated and made more local than it is. One single office in London for England and Wales, and one in Edinburgh and one in Dublin would be quite unworkable and practically useless; at all events, it would not be nearly so beneficial as if you had some local co-ordination, with a central office in London. The cost would be very little. It is calculated that there are about 260,000 firms that will have to be registered, and if you divide the 260,000 by the number of counties in England and Wales, and Scotland and Ireland, the cost would not be very much for each 1502 office. The clerk of the county council could do the work in the course of his ordinary duties, and the making of an inquiry would not throw very much work upon him. The Board of Trade would be able to make regulations as to the amount to be spent by the county council in respect of time occupied in keeping the register, and as to fees paid, and the work under the registrar could be done quite easily by women.

§ Mr. PRETYMAN
I quite sympathise with the object of the Amendment, but it would be really impossible to carry it out under the principle of the Bill. The matter has been very carefully considered whether it is to be a local or a central register. We cannot really have both, for the very obvious reason that all that has to be registered is the principal place of business. Take the case of a firm carrying on business in a particular locality. They might not have their principal business there, and they would not be registered there; they would only be registered in respect of their principal place of business and not anywhere else. It is necessary, therefore, to have one central register for England and Wales, and anyone can obtain particulars relating to any firm by writing through the post and sending a small fee. Everyone knows exactly where to go, and how to obtain particulars. The moment you made a local register difficulty would arise. While I quite sympathise with the suggestion which the hon. Gentleman has made, it would really be trying to do two things instead of one, and it would be outside the principle of the Bill, which is framed on the principle that a central register is on the whole the best for all interests concerned. The labour involved in extracting parts for every town and county in the country for the purposes of local registry would be enormously greater than the result that would be attained. I ask my hon. Friend not to press his Amendment, which is really impracticable.