HC Deb 31 January 1918 vol 101 cc1849-57

  1. (1) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a Parliamentary elector for a constituency (other than a university constituency) if she—
    1. (a) has attained the age of thirty years; and
    2. (b)is not subject to any legal incapacity; and
    3. (c)is entitled to be registered as a local government elector in respect of the occupation of land or premises in that constituency, or is the wife of a husband entitled to be so registered.
  2. (2) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a Parliamentary elector for a university constituency if she has attained the age of thirty years and would be entitled to be so registered if she were a man.
  3. (3) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a local government elector for any local government electoral area where she would be entitled to be so registered if she were a man; or where she is the wife of a man who is entitled to be so registered in respect of premises, in which they both reside, and she has attained the age of thirty years.

Lords Amendment:

In Sub-section (1, c), after the word "occupation," insert the words "in that constituency."

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That tins House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Sir W. DICKINSON

Is this not proportional representation?

Mr. H. SAMUEL

it is merely transposing the words.

Sir G. CAVE

This and the next Amendment run together for the purpose of drafting, and I do not know whether any objection is raised to it. At present I move to agree with the Lords.

Mr. M. HEALY

As the right hon. Gentleman says this involves the next Amendment, I shall be glad to get an explanation of the next Amendment. As I understand it, the consequences will go a meat deal further than he may suppose, because it introduces for the first time the word "dwelling-house." Hitherto the word "dwelling-house" has not been introduced, and no definition has been necessary, but if you once introduce the word "dwelling-house" we are back again at the Act of 1867 and the question of whether part of a dwelling-house is a dwelling-house. I apprehend that there will be very few of us who would be content to let the word "dwelling-house" be introduced in this way without, at any rate, qualifying it in the way in which it was qualified by the Act of 1867, when part of a dwelling-house separately occupied was deemed to be a dwelling-house. In the first place, this disfranchises a woman who occupies part of a dwelling-house.

Sir W. DICKINSON

indicated dissent.

Mr. HEALY

I am glad my right hon. Friend disagrees with me, but I think this is a, most formidable objection to this Amendment and one which requires explanation. This Bill will entirely get rid of the existing Code of the Franchise. [HON. MEMBERS "Page 26."] Well, that meets the first part of my objection, that as regards a dwelling-house this would really make a distinction.

Mr. A. WILLIAMS

Is not "dwelling-house" confined to that Section?

Mr. HEALY

I think the House will see that this is a matter of great importance, and will not blame me if I am somewhat insistent about it. I thought I was right in saying that the Act contains no different definition of "dwelling-house," and the reference of my hon. Friend, instead of giving an answer to me, is a corroboration of what I say. That definition is in the Scottish Clause; and why was it introduced in the Scottish Clause? Because the Scottish Members most foolishly want a special lodger qualification, and, because they want that special lodger qualification, they have revived for themselves the old tangle created by the Act of 1867 and all the difficulties with which we have been familiar.

Sir G. CAVE

I am quite in agreement -with the hon. and learned Gentleman, and if he will move to put in the words "part of a dwelling-house," I will accept them.

Mr. HEALY

I have not the slightest doubt that if we agree to admit this word "dwelling-house" we shall have to have a definition for England and Ireland of the word "dwelling-house," just as Scotland has had to do by reviving the lodger franchise and bringing in the old definition of dwelling-house. I confess that, according to my view, one of the advantages of this Bill was that it got rid of all that class of matter, of what was a dwelling-house and what was not. I suppose since the Act of 1867 was passed there must have been a thousand cases gone to the High Courts of the three countries on this question of what a dwelling-house was, what was assumed to be a dwelling-house, and what construction was to be put on the word. My view of the matter was that it was one of the great advantages this Bill gave us that it got rid of all that tangle, and now when the Scottish Members—

Sir W. DICKINSON

Might I point out to the hon. and learned Gentleman that on page 12 of these Amendments it says

The expression 'dwelling-house' includes any part of a house where that part is occupied separately as a dwelling-house. I think that applies to this Section.

Mr. HEALY

Of course, I am taking the Bill as it stands, and here we have not the word "dwelling-house." That is to me a blessed relief, and I do not regard it as a benefit to introduce the word even in the definition. We shall have all the old difficulties now for the purpose of the female franchise, and we cannot regard that as a good thing. To tell me that you are going to bring back the definition of a dwelling-house is to me an abominable thing. Since the word got into our Acts in 1867 there has not been a year since in which there has not been this litigation.

Mr. SAMUEL

Might I point out to the hon. and learned Gentleman that the word "dwelling-house" appeared in the Bill as it left this House?

Mr. HEALY

I am aware of that in connection with what is called the service franchise. I was very reluctant to let it in, and I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that it was let in undefined. I do hope that we shall hesitate before bringing back upon our heads all the old class of case which has produced this terrible litigation.

Take the case of the latch key. It is not six years since that went three times to the English Court of Appeal—whether you want a latch key or not in order to have a separate dwelling-house. Are you to have all that over again? That I gather is what is proposed, and I regard it with apprehension and dismay. We have got rid of it for male suffrage, and we should not vote for it for the purpose of female suffrage if this old tangle as to what was and what was not a dwelling-house is to be brought back. The only object of this is to create a property franchise in reference to land. Why should we have a property franchise? Is it to be laid down that a woman of means is to have a vote while the poor woman is not to have one? That was the rock upon which the Conciliation Bill split. In other words, for the whole of the local government franchise and for the Parliamentary franchise, in the case of women, we are creating this new aristocracy among the female voters. We discussed this matter fully in Committee. A Motion was made that no one was to be qualified out of land unless he had a valuation. That was negatived in the case of men. Why is it to be the law now in the case of women? There is no ground for it. In Ireland it would work very unfairly. There are a great many small holders whose votes would be affected by it. Over great parts of Ulster there are many female occupiers on whom this Bill, as it left the House of Commons, conferred a vote, and who would be deprived of the vote because they have not a £5 franchise. The proposal is contrary to the whole spirit of the Bill. It is bad in itself, and it is doubly bad because it brings back the whole terrible tangle of what is a house, whether a latch key is necessary, whether your landlord must live on the premises. In one of the cases in Ireland a poor man lost his vote because another poor man, in order to get to his own room, had to cross his room. The House should know what it is voting in this matter, and we should have an explanation from the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. D. WHITE

As these two Amendments appear to be bound up with one another, I would reinforce the appeal of my hon. and learned Friend for an explanation of what is proposed to be done. I am not clear as to what is the object of bringing in this £5 limit to which we did not assent on a previous occasion. It adds to the complication of what this House has tried to make a comparatively simple matter. Under the sub-Clause referred to, dealing with franchise for women, a woman is entitled to the franchise if she is entitled to be registered as a local government elector in respect of the occupation of land or premises in the constituency, or as the wife of a husband entitled to be so registered. These words seem to be plain enough, but, if you bring in this Amendment, you bring in a £5 limitation in the case of land or premises but not in the case of a dwelling-house, and so it qualifies the man for local government enfranchisement in respect of land or premises of somewhat less than the value of £5, and, as I gather, the result then would be that though a man would have a vote, his wife would not have a vote, and if the lady had land or premises of less than £5 she would not have the vote which she would have if they were over £5. This seems to bring in a new property qualification, and a property qualification of a character which threatens to make something which is of necessity fairly complicated a great deal more complicated still.

The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Hayes Fisher)

I think that the House of Lords in putting in this Amendment desired, as the sole purpose, to prevent women voters in respect of occupation of land being made on a very large scale, a thing which could very easily be done by taking some small allotment and sharing that allotment out among a great many women. The allotment might not be of any considerable value, and might not be obtained for the purpose of cultivation as an allotment, but for the sole purpose of making it the means or channel by which votes might be obtained. There was some apprehension expressed in this House when we were taking this point, and certainly on one occasion, and I think on more than one occasion, there was a suggestion to put a limitation on the value of land which would qualify a woman for a Parliamentary vote. I would point out that it is quite possible that a small piece of land might be acquired and divided into allotments, with the object of manufacturing votes for the Parliamentary franchise. None of us desires that. We all of us desire to grant the franchise, but that does not mean that votes should be obtained by someone purchasing a piece of land of no high value and separating it into small allotments in order to create votes. This Amendment proposed by the House of Lords is to limit the value of the land and dwelling-house, and it is not contemplated that there should be an occupation of an allotment which has not a dwelling-house.

Mr. WHITE

It should be "buildings," and not "dwellings."

Mr. FISHER

It should be "dwelling-house." The point raised by this Amendment gave rise to a good deal of feeling. I may state that we, also, desire to stop faggot votes, and so far as the Amendment achieves that object, I think we ought to agree to it.

Mr. WHITE

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the £5 limit is rather high, and that the limit should be reduced to £3?

Mr. FISHER

I cannot very well alter the Amendment. I would remind the hon. Gentleman that we are trying to come to an agreement with another place, and I think £5, after all, has a good deal to be said for it. We find that figure in more than one statutory example, and I do rot know of any example of less than £5.

Lords Amendment agreed to. Lords Amendment:

In paragraph (c), leave out the words "in that constituency," and insert in- stead thereof the words "(not being a dwelling-house of a yearly value of not less than five pounds or of a dwelling-house").—Agreed to.

Lords Amendment:

In Sub-section (2), after the word "and" ["years and would"], insert the word "either."

Mr. FISHER

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

This is a drafting Amendment and is associated with the Amendment following, which is also a drafting Amendment, but relates to an important point which was much debated in this House. It relates to women who are qualified at Oxford and Cambridge Universities and who desire to have the vote under the university franchise. There was a good deal of feeling expressed in the House, and I thoroughly shared it in regard to this subject. It would have been most disappointing that while men, after all the examinations to qualify and by residence for degrees at Oxford and Cambridge get the degrees, yet degrees are refused to women, how ever well qualified by examinations, and there was a good deal of disappointment, for they felt that they would never find themselves on the roll of the universities. I promised that T would communicate with the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge to see whether some means could not be found by which those women who were highly qualified for the vote might be put upon the register in those two ancient universities, and thus find themselves on the roll of electors. A good deal of correspondence took place, and I think it was largely owing to the fact that the attention of those who are responsible for the government of Oxford and Cambridge was called to the Debate in this House, where some very strong opinions were expressed in regard to the matter, that the authorities of the two universities consented to support an Amendment put down in another place, by which women would be permitted to obtain the vote if duly qualified. This Amendment proposed by the Lords carries out that object, and I hope it will have the unanimous approval of the House.

Mr. SAMUEL

I wish to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the success of his efforts, and to thank him for the steps he has taken to remove .what was a flagrant injustice to women.

Lords Amendment:

At the end of Sub-section (2), insert the words "or has been admitted to and passed the final examination, and kept under the conditions required of women by the university the period of residence, necessary for a man to obtain a degree at any university forming or forming part of a university constituency which did not at the time the examination was passed admit women to degrees."—Agreed to.

Lords Amendment:

In Sub-section (3), leave out the word "or" ["or where she is the wife"], and insert instead thereof' the words "and (b)."

Mr. FISHER

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Sir W. DICKINSON

I want to draw attention to the fact that if this Amendment be adopted there would be no paragraph (a). I think we ought to have a paragraph (a), and apparently neither this House nor the other has thought of it. I propose to put in the paragraph after the word "area" ["electoral area"] and to insert (a)."

Mr. FISHER

I think my right hon. Friend is right, and that "(a)" ought to come in before the word "where," and then (b).

Sir W. DICKINSON

With my Amendment the Clause would read—"A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a local government elector for any local government electoral area," and after "area" I propose to insert "(a)," and it would go on "where she would be entitled to be so registered if she were a man, or (b) where she is the wife of a man who is entitled to be so registered," and so forth.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I must have the Amendment before me.

Mr. SAMUEL

There is a prior point that arises. It is proposed at the end of the Sub-section to insert the words "and is not subject to any legal incapacity." If we have the paragraphs (a) and (b) and leave these words in at the end they would only apply to paragraph (b). Therefore, under paragraph (a) a woman would be entitled to be registered although she might be subject to any legal incapacity.

Sir W. DICKINSON

I have discussed that very position with the draftsman, and he holds the view that it is only necessary to insert the words in the place proposed.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: In Sub-section (3), after the word "area," insert "(a)."—[Sir W. Dickinson.]

Lords Amendment: In Sub-section (3), leave out the word "or" ["or where"], and insert instead thereof "and (b)."

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House cloth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Mr. HEALY

I think the word should be "or," as otherwise there is some risk that both branches of the Clause will not be included.

Sir E. POLLOCK

I differ from my hon. Friend for this reason, that a woman is entitled to be registered in certain cases, and by the introduction of the second "where "you read the two paragraphs (a) and (b) disjunctively, and those cover the cases in which the vote is given. I think my hon. Friend will see that the Clause carries out what is desired.

Lords Amendments:

At the end of the Clause, insert the words "and is not subject to any legal incapacity."—Agreed to.

For the purpose of this provision, a naval or military voter who is registered in respect of a residence qualification which he would have had but for his service, shall be deemed to be resident in accordance with the qualification.—Agreed to.

In Sub-section (3) (i), leave out the words "or military" ["or military forces"], and insert instead thereof the words "military or air."—Agreed to.