CLAUSE 10.—(Stallions on Commons and in the New Forest.) (Hansard, 14 May 1918)

§ Mr. BRUNNER
I have some knowledge of the Commons Act of 1908, and I would like to know what is the meaning of this Clause. Does it mean that the jurisdiction of the meeting of the commoners called under that Act is to be ousted so far as these animals are concerned? The meeting of the commoners under the Act of 1908 does not issue any licences. It merely makes Regulations for the purpose of seeing that there are proper animals upon the common, and if they are not they are removed. Does this Clause mean that the Board of Agriculture is going to oust the jurisdiction of these meetings of the commoners and grant licences themselves, or are they, after the meetings have decided to make Regulations, going to review their decisions and to grant, revoke, or suspend the licences over their heads?

§ Mr. PROTHERO
As the hon. Member rightly suggests, under the Commons Act of 1908 the commoners have power to make their own Regulations dealing with the stallions on the commons, and a similar power is contained in the Act of 1877 dealing with the New Forest. This Clause means that if the commoners in the exercise of their powers to make Regula- 315 tions decide to adopt the provisions of this Bill, then the Bill shall apply to the commons or the New Forest whose commoners so elect to adopt the Bill.

§ Mr. BRUNNER
I am afraid that is not very clear in the wording of the Clause, because it says the Board shall have power to grant, revoke, or suspend these licences for the purpose of any Regulation. There are no words which convey to my mind the impression that the commoners are to have the power to adopt this Bill when it becomes an Act. I cannot see that in any words in the Clause.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
I think the hon. Member is quite right. The hon. and learned Member for Glasgow (Mr. Watt) is the only legal authority in the House at the moment, and I appeal to him, as being learned in the law, whether I am not right in my interpretation of this Clause as being quite contrary to the interpretation which the President of the Board of Agriculture has put upon it? He says that the commoners, and also the commoners in the New Forest, if they think fit, have power to adopt this Act. That is exactly what this Clause does not give them power to do. What it does is to give power to the Board to compel the commoners to adopt the Act, which is a totally different thing. The words are quite clear— The Board shall have power to grant, revoke. or suspend licences. Take the case of the New Forest. Say they do not adopt this Act. The Board say, "We wish you to adopt this Act." The New Forest authorities say they prefer to remain under the powers of the Act of 1908 or any other Act which regulates the conditions in the New Forest. The Board of Agriculture may then say, "Under this Clause we have power to compel you to adopt this Act, and we intend to do it." It is quite true that there is no obligation on the Board to compel the commoners to adopt the Act, but they have the power to compel them under this Clause. In those circumstances, I think that the only course to be adopted is to omit the Clause from the Bill, and to bring up another Clause on the Report stage which carries out the intentions of the right hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. PROTHERO
The right hon. Baronet has omitted the important words, 316 "for the purpose of any Regulation under the Commons Act, 1908." It is only when the commoners themselves have made the Regulation that the Board can grant, revoke, or suspend the licence. That is, I am instructed, not only the purpose of the Clause, but its legal construction. The Clause does not attempt to oust the jurisdiction of the commoners to make their own Regulations. If their own Regulations are Regulations which they mean to come under this Act, then the Board shall have the power to grant, suspend, or revoke licences under this Act, but not until the Regulations are made under the Commons Act of 1908, which authorise their intervention.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
I rather think that the observations of the right hon. Gentleman confirm what I have said. As I understand him, the commoners may make Regulations. When they have made their Regulations, the Board shall have power to grant, revoke, or suspend licences for the purpose of that Regulation. Therefore, if they make a Regulation which the Board does not like —

§ Mr. PROTHERO
No.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
There is a difference of opinion. The English language seems to me to be quite clear in this case. When the commoners have made a Regulation it has to be submitted to the Board for the granting pf a licence, and they can either grant, revoke, or suspend it. Therefore that means that the ultimate power of granting licences, and the conditions of granting licences, are vested, contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1908, in the Board of Agriculture. That may be right; I am not arguing whether it is right or wrong; but I submit that the Clause does alter the Act of 1908, and pats upon the commoners the obligation to come under the power of the Board of Agriculture to do away with the rights given them in ancient times. There seems to be considerable doubt about this matter, and as we are to have a Report stage, I suggest that the simplest way would be to drop the Clause, or, at any rate, to consider the point before the Report stage, when we should have present a Law Officer of the Crown to give his view on a matter which really does affect rights which have been in existence from time immemorial, and on what is the real meaning of the provision.

§ Mr. BRUNNER
If the right hon. Gentleman will look at the Act of 1908, he will see that the Board of Agriculture has already power to object to any Regulations made by the commoners under the Act. With regard to the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman, I am perfectly satisfied if his advisers are really of opinion that what he has said is carried out by the Clause, but, as a matter of fact, I do not think that the commoners will be free. They may make Regulations adopting the provisions of this measure, and then the Board has power either to grant, revoke, or suspend a licence. That, I presume, will give them additional powers beyond what they have now under the Act of 1908. If that is so, it seems to me to be satisfactory, and I do not think I should object.

§ Mr. PROTHERO
I may confirm what the hon. Member has said. If the Regulations or by-laws made by the commoners require a stallion to be licensed under this Bill, the whole procedure of the Bill will then follow, but it will not deal with the Regulations or those by-laws. The right hon. Gentleman (Sir F. Banbury) put a question which was rather a question of English than of law. On the question of English I do not submit to his reading of the Clause, but in matters of law I defer to him absolutely. But not to prolong this discussion, I am quite willing to consider the Clause, and see if we cannot make it more clear before the Report stage.

§ Mr. WATT
I, think the right hon. Baronet has stated the law accurately. The commoners may make regulations and this Clause gives the Board of Agriculture power to override the regulations made by the commoners under the Act of 1908, and they may grant, revoke, or suspend a licence.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
It has been suggested to me that the insertion of the word "made" after the word "regulation" would meet the point, so that it would read: The Board shall have power to grant, revoke or suspend licences for the purpose of any Regulation made under the Commons Act, 1908. I think that would meet the whole point, and although it is too Late to introduce it now, if the right hon. Gentleman will consider whether the introduction of that word in that place would not meet the case I should be much obliged.

§ Mr. PROTHERO
I am obliged for the suggestion.