CLAUSE 1.—(Continuation of Welsh, Commissioners.) (Hansard, 11 August 1919)

§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Shortt)
I beg to move, at the end, to add (2) Notwithstanding anything in the Welsh Church Act, 1914, the expenses of carrying that Act into execution, including the salaries and remuneration of the Commissioners and their staff shall be appointed between the property to be transferred to the University of Wales and the several county councils in proportion to the value of the property to be transferred to them respectively. This is an Amendment of which I have given manuscript notice. Its object is this: Under the 1914 Act all the alienated property vested in the Welsh Commissioners until 31stDecember of this year. They then cease to exist, and the alienated 1028 property is vested in the county councils. During the period in which the property is vested in the Welsh Commissioners the expenses of administration were to be borne by that portion of the property which was devoted to the Welsh University. For the rest of the time, from the moment the alienated property became vested in the county councils, the county councils bear all the expenses of administration. Under Clause 1 of this Bill the Welsh Commissioners' life is extended far beyond the end of this year, the intention being that they shall continue in existence until they are able to hand over to the county councils the whole of the alienated property free from any charges, which will probably mean another thirty years. Unless this Amendment is passed it would mean that whereas it was intended under the original Act that the county councils should bear their share of the administration and the Welsh University their smaller share, under the Bill as it is the Welsh Universities would have to bear the whole of the cost of administration. This Amendment is, therefore, merely to ensure that the intention of the original Act should be carried out, and that the county councils, who receive a large portion of the alienated property, should bear their fair share of the administration of the alienated property.

§ Lord ROBERT CECIL
I was startled by one observation which fell from the Home Secretary. I only rise to ask him for further information. He contemplates the existence of these Welsh Commis- 1029 sioners for thirty years. I do not remember exactly what their pay is, but that means several tens of thousands of pounds in payment to the Welsh Commissioners. Under the original Act they were only to exist at the outside for five years. That was the limit of their possible existence. I should like him to give some explanation why it has been found necessary to prolong their life at such vast expense to this fund.

§ Mr. SHORTT
The fund upon which the expense will fall will go to the county councils. It will not affect the Church in any way. The Welsh Commissioners and all parties to it are satisfied that it is the best way in which to raise the money and administer the whole detail of the Act.

§ Viscount WOLMER
This Clause raises the whole question of Disendowment insomuch as the function of the Welsh Commissioners is to carry out the Disendowment scheme of the Act of 1914, with certain modifications. I raise this issue with the greatest possible reluctance, and I shall endeavour to deal with it as dispassionately as I possibly can, because the last thing I have any desire of doing is to stir up any of that strong feeling which I am afraid characterised our Debates on this question five years ago. But when one is confronted with a proposition that one believes to be absolutely wrong and indefensible the only course open is to oppose it. These Commissioners are to be continued in order to take away from the Welsh parish-As and dioceses the Endowments that belong to them subject to the commutation of life interests. Therefore the question that we are faced with in this Clause is whether this Disendowment is a right and justifiable policy, in other words whether these Endowments do not belong to the Church in Wales.

§ Sir D. MACLEAN
On a point of Order. As I understand what the Noble Lord has said he is going to open the question as to whether the Church of England in Wales should be disendowed or not. The title of the Rill is to Continue in. office the Welsh Commissioners appointed under the Welsh Church Act, 1914. The Act is on the Statute Book, and it legalised a measure of Disendowment of 1030 the Church in Wales. Is it in order, on the Question that the Clause as amended stand part, that we should really go back to a Second Reading of the Church Bill which we fought out in 1914?

§ Viscount WOLMER
Is it not a fact that it is proposed to continue the existence of the Welsh Commissioners in order to make the Disendowment Clauses in the Act of 1914 operative? If the Welsh Commissioners were not continued in office those Disendowment Clauses would fall, and therefore the question whether the Disendowment Clauses are in themselves unjust or not is a matter for discussion.

§ The CHAIRMAN
I do not think that can be shown to be the case. But even so, that does not justify the reopening of the whole question of Disendowment by way of Debate on this occasion. The Noble Lord is only entitled to deal with that matter strictly in so far as it may be affected by the provisions of this Clause.

§ Viscount WOLMER
If this Clause is left out, the Welsh Commissioners cease to exist, and there will be no Disendowment of the Church in Wales.

§ The CHAIRMAN
I cannot admit that interpretation. Even so, the Noble Lord would not be able to open the whole question of Disendowment in the principal Act. Perhaps I can have some information from the Government as to the effect of leaving out Clause 1?

§ Mr. SHORTT
The effect of deleting Clause I would not be in the least to stop Disendowment. Disendowment would still go on. All the alienated property would still vest in the Welsh Commissioners between now and the 31st December. Therefore, there is no question of Disendowment arising upon this Clause of the Bill.

§ Lord HUGH CECIL
Unless peace is made with the Empire of Turkey and ratified before the 31st December. I do not think the Home Secretary will be able to say whether Disendowmentwill take place or not. If that does not happen, Disendowment will collapse.

§ Mr. SHORTT
That is not so.

§ Lord H. CECIL
There will be no one in whom the alienated property can vest.

§ Mr. SHORTT
It will vest in the Commissioners.

§ Lord H. CECIL
The Home Secretary has not read the Clause. The Clause provides that the funds are to be vested in the Welsh Church Commissioners, and, obviously, if there are no Welsh Church Commissioners in whom to vest them, the Clause becomes inoperative.

§ Sir OWEN PHILIPPS
May I suggest that the effect of leaving out this Clause would be that the ecclesiastical corporations holding tithe or land would be dissolved but the ownership of the land or tithe would be in the air, and no one would be in a position to collect rents or to the Therefore, the effect of leaving out the Clause does not affect the Disendowment of the Church, but only affects the ownership of the land or tithe when they are Disendowed. I think that is the correct reading.

§ Lord R. CECIL
I beg leave to differ. The Chairman has asked for the assistance of the Committee, and I think the position is quite clear. In one of the Sections of the Welsh Church Act, 1914, it is provided that on the day of Disestablishment the property of the Welsh Church—I am paraphrasing the verbiage of the Section— shall on that day vest in the Welsh Church Commissioners. The date of Disestablishment is fixed by another Act as "at the end of the War." Therefore, the question is whether there will be Welsh Commissioners to reserve the property at the rate of Disestablishment. If there are Welsh Commissioners, the Disendowment will proceed. If there are no Welsh Commissioners, the Disendowment Clause cannot take effect. [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes!"] It could not take effect. At any rate, that is the effect which we are entitled to put forward. The only possible way out of the difficulty is that the same point could be raised on a later Amendment, if it is in order. If the Chairman could tell me whether the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Salford (Sir M. Barlow) and myself is in order, perhaps it would be more convenient to raise the point there.

§ The CHAIRMAN
I am much obliged to hon. Members for helping me. I am now quite clear that the broad question does not arise on the discussion on Clause 1. In regard to the Amendment to Clause 3, referred to by the Noble Lord, I have some doubt as to that being within the scope of the Bill, but on consideration I am inclined to give the Noble Lord the benefit of the doubt.

§ Viscount WOLMER
In view of your ruling that the question of Disendowment cannot be discussed on this Clause, I will not move my Amendment. I understood that the question could be raised on this Clause.

§ Sir D. MACLEAN
Let us be quite clear about that. Do I understand that this question can be raised on a subsequent Amendment?

§ The CHAIRMAN
I propose to call the Noble Lord's Amendment when we reach it, within the limits within which it. stands on the Paper.