HC Deb 28 November 1916 vol 88 cc278-81

Order for Second Reading read.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Acland)

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

This Bill is at the same time a very small one and, in possibility, a very large one. It enables the Board of Agriculture or local authorities to accept gifts of land for the purpose of the settlement or employment of men who have served in the Army or Navy. That was necessary because it is a principle of general acceptance that public Departments and authorities are not allowed to do anything which they are not particularly and expressly enabled to do by statutory authority, and there was some doubt as to whether the Board of Agriculture were enabled to accept gifts of this kind and act as trustees for carrying out trusts in connection with such gifts, and therefore it has been thought right to settle the matter by allowing the State or public authorities to accept gifts of land of that nature. So far the House will agree the matter is a small one. But it has within it large possibilities. We know already of one case in which a public-spirited man who wishes to give, as a memorial of his son, some land, so that other soldiers who have had the good fortune to return will be able to settle on that land and make a living out of it. And this gentleman would like the Board of Agriculture to see that his wishes in that respect are carried out. I have no permission to give the gentleman's name, therefore I do not give it, but it is my hope at any rate, and I think it will be the hope of hon. Members who happen to be here, that other persons may be inspired in the same public-spirited way to give as a memorial of their sons or other relatives grants of land for this extremely practical object. I have always felt that a grant of land for settlement by soldiers who have come back from the War, and the building of cottages and the provision of gardens around the cottages, would be the finest possible war memorial which the villages up and down the countryside could possibly make.

For the landowner who has lost a son or near relative to give a piece of land, and for the local builders to contribute in building, and labourers to give their labour in building and in preparation of the gardens and so forth, seems to me a finer war memorial than any number of clocks, or crosses, or things of that sort so often erected in these cases. If other persons possibly notice it, and if they follow the example which has been set, and in this way commemorate the splendid deeds of cither their own relations or people of their own village, this Bill may have considerable consequences in making it possible for them to secure that the land they offer is properly used, and that their wishes that there should be a permanent memorial of the patriotism of the people whose deeds are a rich memory will be properly carried out. It is not proposed in this Bill that either the Board of Agriculture itself or the local authorities who are prepared to accept these gifts shall contribute funds out of the rates or out of the funds at the disposal of the State to maintain this land that may be handed over to them. The maintenance of the trust will come out of the funds of the trust, and therefore there is no charge on the ratepayers or the taxpayers. The Bill, as I said, is simply to enable owners to hand over land to the local authorities for the purpose of settlement and use by members of His Majesty's Forces, and I hope the House will be willing to give the Bill a Second Heading.

Captain BATHURST

I would like to offer a word of welcome to this little Bill, that had its origin in the very generous and patriotic offer made to myself by Mr. Robert Buchanan, of Bosbury, in Herefordshire, in order to commemorate the death of his only son, who fell at the front some three or four months ago. I was rather shocked to find, when the offer was made, and which I at once transmitted to the Board of Agriculture, that in this country alone, I should imagine, amongst the countries of the world, there was no power in any Department of the State to accept a gift of land from any of its subjects in this country, to be held in trust for a definite purpose of public utility, of providing, by means of a gift, the financial requirements for carrying it out. The Board of Agriculture have wisely, in my judgment, decided to render possible, not only in this case but in any other similar cases, during the War, for any patriotically-minded person to constitute a trust in the hands of the Board of Agriculture for this desirable purpose of settling ex-soldiers and ex-sailors upon the land of the country for which they have fought so bravely. I welcome this Bill, and I only venture to hope, with the right hon. Gentleman, that this gift of land will prove to be, the first case, not the only case, but the first of many similar cases, where public-spirited citizens are prepared to constitute, a war memorial of the kind to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred.

Sir J. SPEAR

The right hon. Gentleman said that this was to constitute a trust, and I wish to ask whether I am to understand that the person who gives the land, be it a large or a small quantity, any erection of offices or buildings would be carried out by the donor or by the Board of Agriculture? It might be that an owner could afford to give a piece of land, but could not afford to erect buildings upon it. Will it be a trust in the hands of the Board of Agriculture to give full effect to, or to take advantage of the value of the gift, for the purpose of providing homes for soldiers and sailors? I do not quite understand what is the position, and I want to have it made quite clear that the donor of the land will not be responsible for the maintenance of the trust. Do I understand that to be the purport of the right hon. Gentleman's speech"

Mr. ACLAND

No. The idea is that all these should be trusts in perpetuity; therefore, the particular donor would in the nature of things not be responsible, at any rate except for the duration of his own life. Undoubtedly under trusts of this kind any money accruing must be used for the benefit of the trust; and, therefore, if a man handed over two or three farms, on which to build cottages, and to be divided up into small holdings to help discharged soldiers and sailors, the rent accruing would have to be used for that purpose; it could not be appropriated for any other purpose; and it is always our duty to use the income of the trust for the purpose of carrying out the intention of the trust.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.