§ None of the provisions of the House of Commons (Disqualifications) Act, 1782, or of the House of Commons (Disqualifications) Act, 1801, shall be construed so as to extend to—
- (a) a contract or agreement entered into before the twenty-first day of February, nineteen hundred and seventeen, for or relating to the supply of property to any Government Department for purposes connected with the present War; or
- (b) a contract or agreement entered into on or after the said date as to the price or compensation to be paid for any property requisitioned or taken by any Government Department for purposes connected with the present War or as to any other terms on which any property so requisitioned or taken is to be handed over or supplied.
§ Amendment proposed [2nd April]:] To leave out paragraph (a).—[Mr. Rowlands.]
§ Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'property,' stand part of the Clause."—[Mr. Rowlands.]
§ Sir G. HEWARTI intervene at this moment in order to deal with certain difficulties which were raised, or were being raised, at the close of yesterday's Debate. Exception was taken to Clause 4 upon two main grounds—first, because it contained paragraph (a), which is in some respects contrasted with paragraph (b), and secondly, because, from the generality of 1213 the words employed, some at any rate of the hon. Members of the Committee thought it might go somewhat beyond the necessities of the case. Therefore, in the meantime, I have drafted certain Amendments which I venture to hope will meet the difficulties that have been raised in various quarters. Perhaps it will be convenient if, before I move, if I may move, indeed, the first necessary Amendment, I were to read the Clause as a whole, as it would read in its amended form. I would like to say just this about it before I read it, that it seemed to some of us that this Clause, which is manifestly of an exceptional nature, should be prefaced in the Statute by some words of an explanatory and introductory character, that will clearly explain to the casual reader of the Statute, if any such curious person should arise, the special circumstances in which this Clause became law. That is my first observation. My second is that the effect of the alteration which I shall propose to make is to limit the relief granted by the Clause to cases in which there has been in some form or other requisition by a Government Department. I venture to hope that these two ingredients have been secured—first, the explanatory and limiting words, and secondly, a clear statement that the foundation of that which is being dealt with is in some form or another a requisition—though it may be sometimes a rather informal requisition—for the purposes of the War. The new Clause, with the Amendments which I propose to submit, if they are accepted by the Committee, will read in this way:
Whereas, by reason of the emergencies of the present War, Members of the Commons House of Parliament have sometimes been, or may hereafter be, required to supply property to, or to permit the use thereof—
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANBefore the hon. and learned Gentleman proceeds further, I would suggest to him that it is necessary that the hon. Member for Dart-ford (Mr. Rowlands) should withdraw his Amendment.
§ Sir J. SIMONI understand that the learned Solicitor-General is now generally dealing with certain Amendments, and indicating the form of those Amendments, and I do not understand that he is 1214 going to move them, and therefore it would not be necessary that the hon. Member for Dartford should withdraw his Amendment.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI thought it well to make it quite clear, before the Solicitor-General came to the end of his observations, as I was under the impression that he was then going to move the first Amendment.
§ Mr. PRINGLEHave we not agreed that all the words of the Clause down to paragraph (a) are to stand part?
§ Sir G. HEWARTNo Amendment has yet been put or accepted on this Clause.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe Amendment of the hon. Member for Dart-ford (Mr. Rowlands) has been put, but it is quite open to him to withdraw it.
§ Sir J. SIMONAssuming that the question was put and negatived, would not the Solicitor-General then be in order in moving his Amendments?
§ Sir G. HEWARTMy right hon. Friend (Sir J. Simon) was perfectly right in saying that I was speaking to the Amendment which has already been moved. With the Amendments which I propose to move the Clause would read:
Whereas by reason of the emergencies of the present War Members of the Commons House of Parliament have sometimes been or may hereafter be required to supply property to or to permit the use thereof by a Government Department for purposes connected with the present War, it is hereby declared that none of the provisions of the House of Commons (Disqualifications) Act, 1782, or of the House of Commons (Disqualifications) Act, 1801, shall be construed so as to extend to a contract or agreement entered into during the present War as to the price or compensation to be paid for any property so requisitioned or taken or as to any other terms on which any property so requisitioned or taken is to be handed over or supplied.It will be apparent at once that if those Amendments are accepted that which is desired by the Amendment of my hon. Friend will have been done, because there will be no paragraph (a) or paragraph (b,) and the words which distinguish those paragraphs will have disappeared. The 1215 whole matter will then be founded on requisition, I do not know whether in those circumstances my hon. Friend is prepared to withdraw.
§ Sir J. SIMONI feel certain my hon. Friend would want to consider these words before he withdraws. I think the suggestion made by the Solicitor-General has got these two very considerable advantages. In the first place, if we are going to do anything at all, surely we ought to do it in a form which shows upon the face of the Statute that we are doing something entirely exceptional. If we put it in the form in which it appeared in the original Bill I think it was open to very grave objection, because it undoubtedly did give the impression when you read it that we were quite prepared to throw over the well-known provisions in our Statute which prevent Members from making contracts with the Government. I think it is a very desirable thing that we should adhere to that quite strictly in ordinary times, if only for the sake of example. The circumstances of the time are exceptional. Probably we have all had experience of that in the different stages of the War. If you happened to be a person who owned a horse, or a rick of hay, or many other things, it would probably happen that someone representing the authorities would come along and intimate their desire to take what belonged to you for the service of the State. I think it is only proper that not only should a man show himself not unwilling, but that he should do everything he could to assist the authorities to carry the transaction through without any loss of time. In many cases Members of this House with the best of motives may have assisted in transactions of that sort. As long as we have something to show that the Government are not seeking' to cover up some flagrant case, but are endeavouring to meet what is an incident in connection with the requisitioning by the authorities, I should rather hope we may be disposed to meet the hon. and learned Gentleman. As I took objection to the form of the Clause as it originally appeared, and as I do not feel the same objection to what is now proposed, it is only right I should get up and say so. I am sure we are very grateful to the Solicitor-General not only for the care he has taken throughout the Bill in explaining its provisions, but for the suggested form 1216 of words which may meet what my hon. Friend wishes to effect. As far as I am concerned, I do not propose further to resist this proposal, but I hope my hon. Friend will have an opportunity of studying these words, which I have only just read, before he is really asked to withdraw his own proposal.
§ Mr. ROWLANDSI join with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Waltham-stow (Sir J. Simon) in thanking the Solicitor-General for the way in which he has set to work to meet the desire we had and the objection some of us raised to the Clause in its present form. If I decide to withdraw, seeing that this is an entirely new Clause, has not the first part of the Clause to come out, and that stood part, I believe, before I moved my Amendment?
§ Sir G. HEWARTMy proposed Clause is, in fact, the old Clause with the middle part left out. and with a new introductory part.
§ Mr. ROWLANDSHow will the hon. and learned Gentleman get that; new part in without going back?
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIn order that we may go back the hon. Member must withdraw. If he does not withdraw. then in all probability his Amendment will be negatived, and the negatived words, proposed to be left out will stand part and therefore we will have to go on from those. If he withdraws his Amendment there is nothing to prevent us going back to the beginning again.
§ Mr. ROWLANDSUnder those conditions, I beg leave to withdraw, and we-can consider the matter on Report.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI beg to move, at the beginning of the Clause, to insert the words "Whereas by reason of the emergencies of the present War Members of the Commons House of Parliament have sometimes been or may hereafter be required to supply property to or to permit the use thereof by a Government Department for purposes connected with the present War, it is hereby declared that."
This is the first of the little series of Amendments which will give effect to the reconstruction of the Clause that I have outlined.
§ Mr. KINGI believe I was the first Member of this House to call attention to this Clause. I spoke on the second read- 1217 ing and interested other Members in the peculiar nature of it. I have followed the discussions on it right through, listening more than speaking upon it. In the first place, I thank the Solicitor-General very heartily indeed for his attempt to meet what has evidently been not only the strong feeling, but I venture to say also the better sense and higher aspirations of the House in this matter. Whatever may go in these times of war, let our integrity and our high sense of public spirit and freedom from all desire of personal gain or suspicion of profiteering be maintained. I am quite sure we are all at one in that, and we thank the hon. Gentleman very heartily for his Amendments. Let me say, however, that he must not expect us entirely to give him the reputation of being infallible until we have seen his Amendments all together on the Report stage. I shall not interrupt at all now, but he must allow us to have the Report stage after Easter, when we shall have it all before us, and I hope that any delay in the Bill will be of no real public detriment.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI beg to move to leave out paragraph (a).
I am quite sure my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Rowlands) will hear this suggestion without reluctance.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI beg to move to leave out the words "on or after the said date," in order to insert instead thereof the words "during the present War."
The effect of that is to provide that the operation of this Clause is limited to the period of the War.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI beg to move to leave out the words "by any Government Department for purposes connected with the present War."
That is because, as the Clause is now sought to be reconstituted, these words become unnecessary inasmuch as they appear in the earlier part of the Clause.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. KINGI beg to move, after the word "supplied," to insert the words "This Section shall not affect any legal proceedings instituted before the 21st day of February, 1917."
1218 The object is quite plain, namely, that if legal proceedings have been already instituted which this Section would now prevent, those proceedings shall not by this subsequent legislation be prevented from going on. I understand the Solicitor-General will accept this, as it is quite obvious that it is a necessary addendum to the Clause.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI propose to accept this Amendment, and I do so for this reason only, that in the absence of the fullest particulars of the case in question it seems to me and to others to be a strong thing to ask the House of (Commons to pass a Bill which would have the effect of defeating an action known to have already commenced. My hon. Friend was good enough to tell me of this action on the eve, I think, of the Second Reading of the Bill, and since then I have had the opportunity of learning a little more about it, and in accepting this Amendment I should like to make this observation, in order that there may be no mistake: It must not be in the smallest degree inferred from the fact that this Amendment is accepted that I think there is any foundation at all for the action to which my hon. Friend has called my attention. It must not be in the smallest degree inferred that I anticipate for that action a certain result, but in the circumstances, and without prejudice to any question arising in that action, it did seem right to provide that nothing in the new Clause should affect the proceedings commenced before the date of the introduction of the Bill.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Mr. BILLINGI did not hear what you said, Mr. Maclean. I was listening very carefully, so that I might be able to move an Amendment to leave out Clause 4. standing in the name of the hon. Member for North Somerset (Mr. King) and myself.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI am sorry. I thought I put the Question quite clearly, "That Clause 4, as amended, stand part of the Bill." We have passed it.
§ Mr. BILLINGOn a point of Order. I have been waiting the whole evening to move my Amendment, and I thought that the Question you put would be spoken in the tone that one could hear. I must say that I was sitting here carefully listening, 1219 and I did not hear you put the Question. Perhaps you will admit, Mr. Maclean, that you read it rather quickly, and that it was quite reasonable that I should not have heard it. Under these circumstances, perhaps you will permit me to make the remarks I intended to make on the Clause.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI cannot add anything to what I have already said. I read the Question quite distinctly.
§ Clause 5 (Short Title) ordered to stand part of the Bill.