§ 42. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the facts concerning the firm of Ettlinger and Company, which are stated in the Report of the Committee appointed to advise the Board of Trade on matters arising under the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment), Act, 1916, and in particular to the statement that it is a case in which the Committee would recommend winding up without hesitation if it falls within the Act, and that if it does not fall within the Act further legislation is desirable to enable them to deal with it; whether he will state the grounds on which the Committee consider that this case did not fall within the Act; and whether, in view of the disclosures as to the nature of this firm, he will forthwith introduce legislation to enable the Committee to deal with this-firm and similar cases?
§ Mr. WARDLEThe partners in the firm of Ettlinger and Company are naturalised British subjects of German origin, and the Advisory Committee considered that, as. an agreement between the firm and Beer Sondheimer and Company came to an end at the outbreak of war, the business is not carried on wholly or mainly for the benefit of or under the control of enemy subjects. As at present advised, I doubt the expediency of so widely extending Section 1 of the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916, as to make it apply to all classes of such businesses, but, as my hon. Friend is aware, the Non-Ferrous Metals Act recently passed covers such businesses in so far as they carry on certain essential industries.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERWill the hon. Gentleman give due weight to the recommendations of the Committee that legislation is. desirable in this case?
§ Mr. WARDLECertainly.