HC Deb 16 December 1919 vol 123 cc301-15

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Major BARNES

I think the Secretary of State for war would like to give us some explanation on this Vote of a matter Which has attracted some attention outside. I refer to the sale by the Minitry of the Turnhouse farm. It will be remembered that a Noble Lord, who at one time occupied a very exalted position in the Government of this country, was surprised the other morning on opening his newspaper to find an advertisement of the pending sale of one of his best farms by order of the Disposal Board of the Ministry of Munitions. He was naturally surprised that anybody, least of ail the Government, should propose to dispose of his property without his knowledge or acquiescence. Some correspondence passed in the Press in regard to. the matter. So far as I understand the case, possession was taken of this farm under the provisions of the Defence. of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1916, for purposes connected with the War, that of erecting buildings to be used by the Air Force. To the best of my knowledge no objection was raised by the Noble Lord to this proceeding. Like everybody else, he was perfectly willing that his property should be taken and used if the War could be furthered by such procedure. I have no doubt an agreement was made and proper provision made for compensation. Buildings were erected and used, but the use for which they were required has now, happily, passed away. Under the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1916, very considerable powers were given to the Government for dealing with property, and it is probable that what has been done by the Government has been done within the provisions of the Act, which gave them power to take possession of the land on payment of rent. That Act also gives power to erect buildings and to remove the buildings after proper compensation has been paid. There is also provision in the Act under which the property may not only be taken possession of, but may be actuaily acquired, either by agreement or compulsorily, for the purpose of Government Departments, and particularly for the purposes of the Ministry of Munitions, the Admiralty, the Army, and the Air Force.

The position that has apparently arisen is that the Disposal Board has been endeavouring to dispose of buildings that were erected on the land, but they came to the conclusion that, to remove the buildings and to sell them would not be such a profitable matter as to dispose of the whole thing as a going concern—that is, the buildings which belong to the Government, and the land which does not belong to the Government. They accordingly took steps by advertisement to offer the property for sale. I am not quite sure that that was within the intention of the Act when it was passed. Is this a case which ought fairly to he taken under the Defence of the Realm Act? Quite obviously what was intended to be done was that land should only be taken where it was required for the purposes of the defence of the realm, and the possession could only be continued for that purpose. Where land was permanently acquired it could only be acquired because it was in the interests of the Department occupying the land or of the Services that it should be so acquired. The course taken in tins case does not arise out of any of those things. There is no contention that at the present time the land is required for the purpose of the defence of the realm or that the Air Ministry desires to remain in occupation for their own purposes. The Disposal Board has come to the conclusion that they can make more out of it by selling the whole than by simply selling the buildings. It is quite natural that they should want to get the most for the assets at their disposal, and they evidently think that they can get some thousands of pounds more by selling the land and the buildings than by dismantling the buildings and selling them. The question arises whether this sort of thing ought to be done under the Defence of the Realm Act. Clause 13, Sub-section (4), says: Nothing in this Act shall authorise the compulsory acquisition of land with respect to, which an agreement has been made for the restoration thereof to the owner or the person previously in occupation thereof. I assume that when this land was taken such an agreement was made to restore it to the owner or to the person in previous occupation. If that agreement was made it would appear that the action which the Government is now taking does not fall within the provisions of the Act. Clause 13, Sub-section (5), provides: Nothing in this Act shall authorise the compulsory acquisition of land without the consent of the Commission where the purposes for which it is required are purposes other than those for which land can be acquired under the Defence Acts, 1842 to 1873, of the Military Lands Acts, 1892 to 1903. If at the very outset when possession was taken it had been acquired outright this Section would have applied, because the land was being acquired for this purpose. It is being acquired now for an entirely different purpose. It is not being acquired for the Defence Acts or the Military Lands Acts, but it is being acquired for the purpose of reselling with other property at a profit. The action of the Government in this case raises a large issue. Here is a composite property; part belongs to them and part does not. They have taken pos- session of the part which does not belong to them. They have added to it something which does. Now they say, "Because we can get more for our part by selling the whole we are going to sell the whole." There is no question here of the defence of the realm or of military purposes. This taking possession of other people's property and adding to it Government. property in the shape of some expenditure or other is a policy which is being largely pursued by the Government. They have just taken possession of the railways, and are going to spend a great deal of public money on them. They were going to take possession of a great many electrical undertakings and spend public money on them. This principle which is being adopted in the ease of the land may have far-reaching effects. The whole matter is one on which the right hon. Gentleman should give some explanation.

Mr. CHURCHILL

I have no wish to enter into any stormy controversy on this matter. There are many cases of the dispossession of the owners of land, and the conditions on which it should be restored and the compensation to be paid are subjects of prolonged negotiation at the present time. But I do not suppose there has been any case which has been more. thrashed out than this question of Lord Rosebery's farm. The most expert controversialists have been contributing almost daily letters setting forth the, two points of view, and anyone who has followed the correspondence will be inclined to think that the two cases have really been better stated than they can be here. As far as I am concerned, on behalf of the Government and the public Departments, I may say that they proceed within the existing limits of the law of the land. They are bound to do so. If they go beyond that they can be challenged in the Courts, and if they fall short of what their rights are they must be ready to show in the House of Commons why they have not fully asserted all their rights under the law. In any case, the matter is not now at a stage in which it can be benefited by a. discussion in this House, and I propose to allow matters to take their course. The tribunals which are set up, the methods of appeal, and the legal process will be sufficient to protect the community from abuse and individuals from injustice.

Mr. DEVLIN

The right hon. Gentleman has adopted an attitude which, though somewhat new, has become characteristic—an attitude of complete contempt for all opinion except official opinion. I am not interested in this case, but I have taken advantage of the opportunity of reading the correspondence, and one would expect, when a matter of this sort is brought before the House of Commons, that some representative of the Ministry of Munitions or the Disposal Board would be here to take part in the discussion and offer some explanation in regard to what is not in controversy at all, but is a subject of bitter complaint by a very distinguished public man who was once Prime Minister of England and who, at all events, made in the War the sacrifice of his son, a brilliant Member of this House, Mr. Neil Primrose, who was honoured and even loved by every Member of every party in this House, and for a Minister of the Crown to treat the complaint of this eminent public man as the right hon. Gentleman has done, is only another proof of how the Minister's mind is poisoned by the information supplied to him from the official sources. No doubt it is perfectly true that this farm was taken during the time of the War by the Government for war purposes, but when it was no. longer needed for war purposes it should have been restored to it, owner. Things have come to a pretty pass In the House of Commons when I, an Irish Nationalist and an opponent of Lord Rosebery and his Irish policy, have to come here to defend him against the Bolsheviks who sit upon the benches opposite—because this is Bolshevism pure and simple. You seize the man's farm. I am not interested in Lord Rosebery or his farm, but I am interested in common right or common justice, whether it be for a lord or for a sweep, and I think that Lord Rosebery has very good reason to complain; and for the right hon. Gentleman to come here and tell the House, with a contemptuous gesture, that this was a matter for Lord Rosebery, the person whose farm was seized, and some jackanape of an official, and that he could not enter into controversies in a newspaper, is the most astounding doctrine I have ever heard. It has come to this, then, that so low is the moral of public life in this country that the most eminent Bolshevist, orators are to be found on the Ministerial Bench, and you can go and seize an ex-Prime Minister's farm with the same avidity as you suppress a newspaper in Ireland.

Mr. E. KELLY

The largest part of this Vote is the Vote in respect of the Grant for works and new buildings. This particular Sub-head for the combined Services under (c) has my heartiest sympathy, and my only regret is that in the Estimates with which I have hitherto come in contact it has not been possible to give a larger proportion of the total sum voted to new works. Under this Vote the right hon. Gentleman has adopted a very good scheme in regard to the manner in which -Sub-head (b) is set forth. That is to give a list of the various descriptions of work -and an estimate for the work to be done in the course of the current year. I think that that is an explanation which might very well apply to some of the larger Votes, because it comes as a shock to some Members of this House when there are vast sums of £5,000,000 and £10,000,000 expended and there is no such explanation as is offered under this Sub-head. In reference to No. 2 of Sub-head (b)— "Liquidation of War Contracts and Completion of necessary War Services, £4,586,000"—I assume that this was the inevitable loss on various materials and supplies which had been ordered in the course of the War, and. which it was necessary to dispose of at a figure much below what was paid for them. Under Sub-head (g)—"Rents of Land Hired or Requisitioned"—perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will tell us on what principle compensation has been paid for land which has been taken. Nothing has made the Air Service more unpopular than the manner in which land required has been taken both for aerodromes in the country and also as sites for Headquarter Staff in the towns. These sites were taken in the most oppressive and irritating manner possible. At this very moment one of the Government Departments has taken to the House of Lords a case in which the judges of the Chancery Division and the Court of Appeal laid down the principle that when a public Department takes land for its own use it must pay for it. Has the compensation for land which has been acquired in the past been held up pending a decision of this case, or if when compensation is given to people from whom land is taken do you proceed according to the principles of the Act passed only a few years ago, taking all the circumstances into consideration, as this Act was intended to guide public Departments in regard to the manner in which compensation should be assessed and when it should be paid?

7.0 P.M.

I am driven to make these observations with regard to the acquisition of land because when land was taken in. Ireland, at any rate, it was quite impossible to get compensation out of the War Office, the Air Ministry, or any other public Department. I quite recognise the right hon. Gentleman may well plead that these were the sins of the Ministry of Munitions, but it is part of the penance of a Minister to inherit the sins of his predecessor, just as it is his privilege to shuffle off his own sins on to the head of a successor, and many hon. Members would like the right hon. Gentleman to give some explanation as to the sort of policy which will regulate the operations of his Department in future. This Grant in respect of land is particularly important, because on this Vote we are dealing with the policy which will regulate future purchases of land by this Department. That question of policy, however, can be more appropriately raised on the next Vote. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to explain one point, the importance of which will grow in the future. Sub-head H refers to the incidental expenses of the Air Ministry estates. I do not like that word "estates," because it seems to indicate that the Ministry is likely to have a large estate in the future. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to assure us that the estates referred to are only those portions of land adjoining existing aerodromes and hangars which have been acquired. Lastly, as in many instances the lands which have been acquired are the most valuable lands in the country, I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell us how they are used and if they produce any credits for the Department. In Ireland some very fine land in and around Dublin belongs to the Air Ministry, and a very valuable crop of meadow has been taken off it. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell me if these lands are let or if they are used directly by the Air Ministry, and if any credits come to the Department from the use of them.

Mr. HOGGE

I am sorry that my right hon. Friend has not been able to give a decision about the case of Lord Rosebery's farm, because a great deal of public land has also been used for war purposes, and it raises the important point whether land which has been lent for emergency purposes is to remain the property of the people who have lent it. I do not wish, however, to raise that point so much as to examine this Estimate again a little meticulously. No greater public service can be performed at the moment than the meticulous examination of these Estimates. Frequently, the House and the Government are committed to some large policy by the want of a careful examination of particular Estimates. There is a sum of £20,000 to be taken in the forthcoming year for the creation of a boys' training establishment; indeed, there is over £1,000,000 to be devoted, I suppose, to the completion of this particular establishment. I presume it means the beginning of a policy by which the Air Service is going to train up boys for the Service, probably on the mechanical side. in connection with the production of aeroplanes in the workshops. If that be so, it is committing the Government to a particular policy at a time when we are told that the proper thing to do is to reduce all our military establishments. I do not mind spending the money if it be part of a preconceived scheme upon which the Government have decided. That would be only taking a long view of the necessities of the Service and getting ready to make the Service, like the Navy and the Army, self-contained, so that everybody who entered it would pass through the portals of this training establishment and eventually reach the position which their merit and record deserved. I do not think that the House ought to approve of the spending of £1,250,000 on the foundation of this establishment unless we really understand how far it is part and parcel of a clear and defined policy, and where, after all, it is going to lead us. I presume that this establishment is at Halton Park. If hon. Members will look at the Estimates, they will see that the camp has not been particularly sanitary, because some £40,000 has been required to put the site into a sanitary condition.

I want to ask something about paragraph (b). We sometimes find embedded in these Estimates a rather distinct Empire fact. The phrase used in paragraph (b) is "accommodation at stations on aerial route between Egypt and India, £50,000." What is that aerial route? is it a route over British territory, or territory over which we have some protection? For what is it designed? Is it an Imperial venture, or has it anything to do with the situation of Egypt and India from the point of view of possible disturbances in either of those countries or in both at the same time? I suppose that the route must have been mapped out. Is it part and parcel of another route? One observes in the newspapers the kinds of routes that are taken by airmen on these wonderful flights. The last flight from Great Britain to Australia covered a great deal of British territory. We get this kind of thing in an Estimate, and then we find that we are committed to further expenditure in later years in developing the complete route of which this may be more or less a part. I should like to know for what my right hon. Friend wants this £50,000 on this particular route.

I am sorry that more hon. Members are not examining these Estimates in view of the demand of people outside that we should cut our coat according to our cloth. Members are lacking in their duty if they do not attend to their work of examining these Estimates and finding out upon what the money is being spent. It is one of the highest public duties that any hon. Member can perform, and I am sorry that it is being left, as so many things which are vital to the prosperity of this Empire are left, to some of the Nationalist members from Ireland, whose party has been killed by the policy of the head of this Government. I notice that among the Appropriations-in-Aid in this particular Vote there is a repayment of £250,000 from an Allied Government. This is the first Estimate which I have seen in which an Appropriation-in-Aid has been received from an Allied Government. I want to know how far we are going to be repaid the money which we have advanced from time to time. Usually the British Government have to find the money in the first instance, and hope to make some arrangement with the other countries for the subsequent payment of that money. Here is a repayment of £250,000. I should like to know from what Allied Government it comes, or if it comes from one or from more than one, and for what it is repaid. I do not think that my right hon. Friend will feel that the three questions which I have asked are anything but apposite to this Vote, and I hope that he will be able to give us some information on them before we proceed to give him the Vote.

Mr. CHURCHILL

The hon. Member spoke first of the aerial route from Cairo to India. This £50,000, which is taken in the Vote this year, is only the beginning of the preparation for the aerodromes and accommodation which will be required at Cairo, at Bagdad, and at Karachi, the three main points on the route from Cairo to India. This is the most important section of the route from London: to Australia, and it will come into existence as a going concern long before the other parts of the route are perfected. In the first place, it is in clear fine weather, where there are no clouds or disturbances such as affect flying enterprises in these islands, you are able to fly all the year round along that route, and long journeys will be or ought to be made with great certainty and safety there. In the second place, Cairo, Karachi, and Baghad are all places where we have our garrisons of Air Force in any case for military purposes, because we expect to hold this Middle East theatre very largely through the instrumentality of the air. They will be a substitute for large bodies of troops, and will supplement the troops which are holding these regions. Therefore, there will be three great air stations at these three centres. There will be, probably, eight or nine squadrons distributed among them. They have to be there in any case as part of our general strategic arrangement. It will be very convenient to let mail flying, passenger flying, and civil flying take place over this route because we shall have to keep the stations there anyhow. It will mean that you will not have to saddle the mail contract with the burden of all the aerodromes and hangars and the regular plant, because those will be there for military purposes. Of all the places where you can bring civil aviation into effective commercial use this section between Cairo and India is the best. It has also the effect of buckling the Empire together in a very remarkable manner, because by the saving of time it ought to be possible to fly in two days, or in three days at the outside, from Cairo to Karachi, and that saves a large part of the eleven or twelve days which would be spent at sea. It is, therefore, a very remarkable section in our aerial policy, and it brings Australia that much nearer. It is the pick of all the civil and commercial aviation routes which exist. On every ground, military as well as commercial and civil, it is the best.

With regard to Halton Boys' Training College, I can report that the buildings and estate now belong to the State. They were taken over in the War, but were so much knocked about, both the house and the estate generally, that it was a better investment for the Crown to purchase than to pay money to the owner. We made a good bargain in the interest of the State, and it is now one of the most valuable properties in the possession of the Air Force. We not only propose to put our staff into the house, but we propose to put in the grounds the principal training college for young air mechanics. It is all part of the full scheme which was embodied in the Trenchard Memorandum. Nearly all the mechanics in the Royal Air Force want to go, at any rate, the overwhelming majority wish to go, and we should not be able to put any aeroplanes into the air unless we set to work at Once with the training of new and trustworthy mechanics. That, of course, takes time. For many months we have had between 3,000 and 4,000 boys in training. It is an imposing sight to see those enormous long walls with their hundreds of lathes, at which the boys are being taught professions which will be of the very greatest utility to them, apart from the Air Force, in their after-life. When you have these boys being trained there it is essential that the conditions should be suitable and provide for their health. At present the buildings are falling to pieces. We are going to replace the huts by a regular system of brick buildings, making the place a great and permanent centre of Air Force training. The sanitary arrangements also are being considered. There will be a gymnasium and a recreation room, and, I think, a cinema. At any rate, there will be all the regular institutions of a small, modern, educational community. With regard to the Appropriations-in-Aid, the principal payment has been made by the United States. Hon. Members will perhaps remember that in the last year of the War we undertook to assemble for the United States an enormous number of aeroplanes that they were not able to assemble themselves. The aeroplanes were brought over to this country in parts, and we fitted them together. Aerodromes were fitted up at considerable expense for this particular work. They have been able to repay us the charge agreed upon, and we have not had to wait, as we have had to do in regard to repayments by all other countries.

Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 224; Noes, 40.

Division No. 160.] AYES. [6.21 p.m.
Acland, Rt. Han. Francis Dyke Briggs, Harold Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.)
Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte Brittain, Sir Harry E. Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Allen, Lt.-Col. William James Brown, Captain D. C. (Hexham) Dalziel, Sir Davison (Brixton)
Archdale, Edward M. Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J. Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)
Astor, Viscountess Burdon, Colonel Rowland Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Atkey, A. R. Burn, T. H. (Belfast) Davies, T. (Cirencester)
Baldwin, Stanley Campion, Colonel W. R. Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Balfour, Sir Robert (Partick) Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton) Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)
Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick Carr, W. T. Dawes, J. A.
Barnett, Major R. W. Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. Denison-Pender, John C.
Barnston, Major H. Casey, T. W. Dennis, J. W.
Barrand, A. R. Cautley, Henry Strother Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham)
Barton, Sir William (Oldham) Cayzer, Major H. R. Dixon, Captain H.
Beckett, Hon. Gervasa Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor) Dockrell, Sir M.
Benn, Com. Ian Hamilton (Greenwich) Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Oxford Univ.) Duncannon, Viscount
Benn, Captain W. (Leith) Chamberlain, N. (Blrm., Ladywood) Du Pre, Colonel W. B.
Bennett, T. J. Cheyne, Sir William Watson Edge, Captain William
Bentinck, Lt.-Col. Lord H. Cavendish- Clay, Captain H. H. Spender Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath)
Betterton, H. B. Clough, R. Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.
Billing, Noel Pemberton Coates, Major Sir Edward F. Falle, Sir Bertram Godfray
Blake, Sir Francis Douglas Cobb, Sir Cyril Fell, Sir Arthur
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. C. W. Cockerill, Brig.-Gen. G. K. Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Bowyar, G. W. E. Colvin, Brig. -General R. B. FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.
Bramsdon, Sir T. Courthope, Major George Loyd Foreman, H.
Brassey, H. L. C. Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University) Forestier-Walker, L.
Breese, Major C. E. Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim) Foxcroft, Captain C.
Ganzoni, Captain F. C. Lowe, Sir F. W. Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F,
Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross) Lynn, R. J. Rowiands, James
Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling) Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)
Gilbert, James Daniel M'Guffin, Samuel Samuel, S. (Wandsworth, Putney)
Gilmour, Lt.-Colonel John M'Lean, Lt.-Col. C. W. W. (Brigg) Sanders, Colonel Robert A.
Glanvilie, Harold James McMicking, Major Gilbert Sassoon, Sir Philip A. G. D.
Glyn, Major R. Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I. Scott, Leslle (Liverpool, Exchange)
Goff, Sir Park Macquislen, F. A. Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone)
Gould, J. C. Mallalieu, Frederlck William Seddon, James
Gretton, Colonel John Malone, Major P. (Tottenham) Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.)
Gritten, W. G. Howard Manville, Edward Simm, M. T.
Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (Leic., Leughboro') Marks, Sir George Croydon Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)
Hailwood, A. Martin, A. E. Stanton, Charles Butt
Hambro, Angus Valdemar Matthews, David Stephenson, Colonel H. K.
Hancock, John George Middlebrook, Sir William Strauss, Edward Anthony
Hanna, G. B. Moles, Thomas Sturrock, J. Long
Haslam, Lewis Molson, Major John Elsdale Sugden, Lieut. W. H.
Hayward, Major Evan Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J. Sutherland, Sir William
Hennessy, Major G. Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C. Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)
Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.) Morison, T. B, (Inverness) Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempetead)
Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon Morrison, H. (Salisbury) Taylor, J, (Dumbarton)
Hilder, Lt.-Colonel F. Mount, William Arthur Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)
Hills, Major J. W. (Durham) Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh, S.) Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell- (M'yhl)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox) Thorpe, Captain John Henry
Hood, Joseph Murray, John (Leeds, W.) Townley, Maximilian G.
Hope, Lt.-Col. Sir J. (Midlothian) Murray, William (Dumfries) Tryon, Major George Clement
Hope, John Deans (Berwick) Mall, Major Joseph Vickers. D.
Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley) Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter) Waddington, R.
Howard, Major S. G. Nicholson, R. (Doncaster) Ward-Jackson, Major C. L.
Hughes, Spencer Leigh Oman, C. W. C. Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)
Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster) O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H. Wardle, George J.
Hurd, P. A. Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William Waring, Major Walter
Inskip, T. W. H. Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow) Weston, Colonel John W.
Jackson, Lleut.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York) Parry, Lt. -Colonel Thomas Henry Whitla, Sir William
Joilett, William Morgan Pearce, Sir William Wigan, Brig. -Gen. John Tyson
Jesson, C. Perkins, Walter Frank Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavistock)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) Phllipps, Sir O. C. (Chester) Wills, Lt.-Col. Sir Gilbert Alan H.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) Pinkham, Lt.-Colonel Charles Wilson, Capt. A. Stanley (Hold'ness)
Jones, J, Towyn (Carmarthen) Pownall, Lt.-Col. Assheton Wilson, Colonel Leslie (Reading)
Kerr-Smiley, Major P. Pratt, John William Wilson, Col. M. (Richmond, Yorks.)
Kidd, James Prescott, Major W. H. Wood, Major Hon. E. (Ripon)
King, Commander Douglas Purchase, H. G. Wood, Sir J. (Stalybridge and Hyde)
Klnloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Rae, H. Norman Wood, Major S. Hill- (High Peak)
Law, A. J. (Rochdale) Raeburn, Sir William Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow) Raw, Lt.-Colonel Dr. N. Yate, Col. Charles Edward
Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.) Reid, D. D. Yeo, Sir Alfred William
Lindsay, William Arthur Rendall, Athelstan Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)
Lister, Sir R. Ashton Richardson, Sir Albion (Peckham) Young, William (Perth and Kinross)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Hunt'don) Roberts, Sir S. (Sheffield, Ecolesall)
Long, Rt. Hon. Walter Robinson S. (Brecon and Radnor) TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— Lord E.
Lonsdale, James R. Rodger, A. K. Talbot and Captain F. Guest
Lorden, John William Rogers, Sir Hallewell
NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. William Harbison, T. J. S. Rose, Frank H.
Barnes, Major H. (Newcastle, E.) Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes) Royce, William Stapleton
Bell, James (Ormsklrk) Hirst, G. H. Short, A. (Wednesbury)
Briant, F. Hogge, J. M. Sitch, C. H.
Bromfield, W. Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal, E.) Swan, J, E. C.
Cairns, John Kenworthy, Lieut-Commander Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
cape, Tom Kenyon, Barnet Thorns, W. (Plalstow)
Carter, W. (Mansfield) Lawson, John Tootill, Robert
Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe) Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan) Walsh, S. (Ince, Lancs.)
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick) MacVeash. Jeremiah Waterson, A. E.
Edwards, C. (Bedwellty) Murray, Dr. D. (Western Isles) Wignall, James
Griffiths, T. (Pontypool) Newbould, A. E. Young, Robert (Newton, Lanes.)
Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York) Onions, Alfred
Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton) Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Hallas, E. Richardson, R. (Houghton) Mr. Devlin and Captain Redmond.

Fourth Resolution read a second time.

Division No. 161.] AYES. [7.23 p.m.
Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A. Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)
Allen, Lt.-Col. William James Foreman, H. Murray, William (Dumfries)
Archdale, Edward M. Foxcroft, Captain C. Neal, Arthur
Astor, Viscountess Fraser, Major Sir Keith Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)
Atkey, A. R. Ganzoni, Captain F. C. Oman, C. W. C.
Baird, John Lawrence Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross) O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H.
Baldwin, Stanley Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Balfour, sir Robert (Partick) Gilbert, James Daniel Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)
Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick Gilmour, Lieut.-Colonel John Palmer, Brig. -Gen. G. (Westbury)
Barnett, Major R. W. Goff, Sir Park Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry
Barnston, Major H. Gould, J. C. Pearce, Sir William
Barrand, A. R. Gretton, Colonel John Perkins, Walter Frank
Barton, Sir William (Oldham) Gritten, W. G. Howard Philipps, Sir O. C. (Chester)
Beckett, Hon. Gervase Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (Leic., Loughboro') Pinkham, Lt -Colonel Charles
Bell, Lt.-Col. W. C. H. (Devizes) Kailwood, A. Pollock, Sir Ernest M.
Bennett, T. J. Hambro, Angus Valdemar Pratt, John William
Bigland, Alfred Hancock, John George Prescott, Major W. H,
Bird, Alfred Hanna, G. B, Purchase, H. G.
Blades, Sir George R. Haslam, Lewis Rae, H. Norman
Blake, Sir Francis Douglas Hennessy, Major G. Raeburn, Sir William
Bowyer, G. W. E. Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.) Raner, A. Baldwin
Brassey, H. L. C. Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil) Raw, Lieut.-Colonel Dr. N.
Breese, Major Charles Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel
Bridgeman, William Clive Milder, Lt.-Colonel F. Rees, Sir J. D.
Briggs, Harold Hills, Major J. W. (Durham) Reid, D. D.
Brittain, Sir Harry E. Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy Robinson, S. (Brecon and Radnor)
Brown, Captain D. C. (Hexham) Hood, Joseph Rodger, A. K.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J. Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) Rogers, Sir Hallowell
Burden, Colonel Rowland Hope, Lieut-Col. Sir J. (Midlothlan) Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F.
Butcher, Sir J. G. Hope, John Deans (Berwick) Rowlands, James
Campion, Colonel W. R. Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley) Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)
Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton) Howard, Major S. G. Samuel, S. (Wandsworth, Putney)
Carr, W. T. Hughes, Spencer Leigh Sanders, Colonel Robert A.
Casey, T. W. Hurd, P. A. Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)
Cautley, Henry Strother Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York) Seager, Sir William
Cayzer, Major H. R. Jephcott, A. R. Seddon, James
Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor) Jellett, William Morgan Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Oxford Univ.) Jesson, C. Simm. M. T.
Chadwick, R. Burton Johnson, L. S. Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)
Chamberlain, N. (Birm., ladywood) Jones, Sir Evan (Pembroke) Stanton, Charles Butt
Cheyne, Sir William Watson Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) Stephenson, Colonel H. K.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) Strauss, Edward Anthony
Clay, Captain H. H. Spender Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen) Sturrock, J. Leng-
Clough, R. Kerr-Smiley, Major P. Sugden, Lieut. W. H.
Coates, Major Sir Edward F. Kidd, James Sutherland, Sir William
Cobb, Sir Cyril King, Commander Douglas Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)
Cockerill, Brig.-General G. K. Knights, Captain H. Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)
Calvin, Brig. -General R. B. Law, A. J. (Rochdaie) Taylor, J. (Dumbarton)
Coote, Colin R. (Isle of Ely) Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow) Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)
Cope, Major W. (Glamorgan) Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.) Townley, Maximilian G.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University) Lister, Sir R. Ashton Tlyon, Major George Clement
Cowan, Sir H. (Aberdeen and Kinc.) Long, Rt. Hon. Walter Vickers, D.
Cozens-Hardy, Hon. W. H. Lonsdale, James R. Waddington, R.
Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim) Lorden, John William Wallace, J.
Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.) Lynn, R. J. Ward-Jackson, Major C. L.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry M'Guffln, Samuel Wardle, George J.
Croft, Brig.-General Henry Page M'Lean, Lt.-Col. C. W. W (Brigg) Waring, Major Walter
Dalziel, Sir Davison (Brixton) McMicking, Major Gilbert Weston, Colonel John W.
Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy) Macqulsten, F. A. Whitla, Sir William
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H. Maltland, Sir A. D. Steel- Wlgan, Brlg.-Gen. John Tyson
Davies, T. (Cirencester) Mallalleu, Frederick William Willey, Lt.-Col. F. V.
Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) Malone, Major P. (Tottenham) Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavlstock)
Dawes, J. A. Manville, Edward Wills, Lt.-Col. Sir Gilbert Alan H.
Denlson-Pender, John C. Marks, Sir George Croydon Wilson, Capt. A. Stanley (Hold'ness)
Dennis, J. W. Martin, A. E. Wilson-Fox, Henry
Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham) Middlebrook, Sir William Wood, Sir J. (Stalyhridge and Hyde)
Dixon, Captain H. Moles, Thomas Wood, Major S. Hill- (High Peak)
Dockrell, Sir M. Molson, Major John Elsdale Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Duncannon, Viscount Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J. Yate, Col. Charles Edward
Edge, Captain William Moore-Brabazon, Lleut.-Col. J. T. C. Yeo, Sir Alfred William
Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath) Morlson, T. B. (Inverness) Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)
Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M. Morrison-Bell. Major A. C. Young, William (Perth and Kinross)
falcon. Captain M. Mosley, Oswald
Falle, Sir Bertram Godfray Mount, William Arthur TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Fell, Sir Arthur Munro, Rt. Hon. Robert Lord E. Talbot and Captain F. Guest.
Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L. Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh, S.)
NOES.
Aclard, Rt. Hon. Francis Dyke Briant, F. Cape, Tom
Adamson, Rt. Hon. William Bromfield, W. Carter, W. (Mansfield)
Bowerman, Right Hon. C. W. Cairns, John Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Devlin, Joseph Kenyon, Barnet Swan, J. E. C.
Edwards, C. (Bedwellty) Lawson. John Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
Entwistle, Major C. F. Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan) Thorne, W. (Plaistow)
Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York) Onions, Alfred Tootill, Robert
Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton) Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) Walsh, S. (Ince, Lanes.)
Harbison, T. J. S. Raftan, Peter Wilson Waterson, A. E.
Hayward, Major Evan Redmond, Captain William A. Williams, J. (Gower, Glam.)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes) Richardson, R. (Houghton) Wood, Major Mackenzie (Aberdeen, C.)
Hirst, G. H. Royte, William Stapleton
Hogge, J. M. Short, A. (Wednesbury) TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Holmes, J. Stanley Sitch, C. H. Mr. MacVeagh and Mr. Edward Kelly,
Irving, Dan