§ This Act shall not apply to any man who at the date of its passing had attained the age of forty-one years.—[Mr. G. Thorne.]
§ Clause brought up, and read the first time.
§ Mr. G. THORNEI beg to move, "That the Clause be read a second time."
I move this Clause, because it seems to me vitally important to secure certainty under the Bill. It was practically stated that those who had attained the age of forty-one did not come under this Bill, and I want to make that absolutely clear. That is the object of my Clause. If that view is accepted by the Government, I do not want to say a word further, but I should like these words in, so that there is absolute certainty.
§ Sir J. SIMONPerhaps the hon. Gentleman will be kind enough to tell me whether I follow it rightly through the Act of Parliament. My hon Friend is moving a new Clause to express in plain terms what I think is the general intention, that there shall be some age limit to which this new Act will apply. He proposes that it shall not apply to any man who at the date of its passing had attained the age of forty-one years. If I understand it rightly, the Bill. as it is now drawn, would apply to everybody who cannot say that he is forty-one within thirty days of the notice given him under the Bill. If the Committee will follow me, it will work out in this way: The Military Service Act, 1916 (Session 2), brought in additional persons. It brought in everybody who had not attained the age of forty-one years before the appointed date. I look down, and I see that "the appointed date, as respects men who come within the operation of this Section on the passing of this Act," was the thirtieth day after the date of the passing of this Act—that would be a date in June, 1916. It went on to say that "the appointed date, as respects men who come within the operation of this Section after the passing 1029 of this Act," will be the thirtieth day after they come within the operation of this Section. At the time that was passed it was primarily intended to deal with the youngest, with men who were not eighteen but who would be eighteen later on. It seems to me, read strictly, that the Government is right when it says that it is those persons who do not reach forty-one within thirty days from the date of the notice under the present Bill who will be caught by the Act. If that is the case, it is a very complicated calculation, and it means reading the Section with minute care. Secondly, I do not know that anyone is anxious to encourage a lowering of the military age for these people as compared with others. A man was exposed to the first Military Service Act. It was then necessary that he should be forty-one by the date mentioned in that Act. The second Military Service Act caught everybody who became forty-one within thirty days of the passing of the Act—that is to say, by June, 1916. Now you are catching people who are forty-one within thirty days of the notice you now propose to give them. You are getting less. If that analysis is right, this is not bringing in people of greater age, but it is really bringing in people of a lower age, and the new Clause proposed by my hon. Friend would really give you a few more men. I would, therefore, suggest to the Government that there is a practical advantage in accepting that Clause. It puts quite plainly what the limit is, and, although it is quite true that you would catch people over an extra month, I do not know, if one accepts the principle of the Military Service Act, that there can be any objection. I only interposed because I want to know if I rightly read the Act of Parliament through. It is a very difficult thing for any ordinary citizen to work it out with certainty. and it is very desirable that we should have stated in plain terms what the position is.
§ Mr. MACPHERSONIt is quite true, as my right hon. and learned Friend has said, that as the Bill stands we get fewer men than we might otherwise get if we accepted the Amendment. The law, I think, is. quite clear as to the age under this Bill. Under the Bill a man is brought under the Military Service Acts as from the date of the notice. calling him up for medical re-examination. The appointed date therefore is thirty days from the date of the notice. If the man attained forty-one years of age before the 1030 appointed date—that is, thirty days after the date of the notice sent to him—he is not liable for compulsory military service. I think that is a clear statement of the case, and when we thought of leaving the Bill as it stands and without my hon. Friend's proposed new Clause we had in view the fact that we were dealing with men who had been rejected on account of illness, and we thought if a man were nearing the age of forty-one that he was as good as useless to us. However, if we pre pressed—
§ Mr. G. THORNEI only want to secure certainty, and, as I understand it, is now perfectly clear, I beg leave to withdraw the Clause.
§ Motion and Clause, by leave, withdrawn.