§ "(1) On the first issue by a county council of a licence under Section thirteen of the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by this Act, for a vehicle it shall be the duty of the council to register the vehicle in the prescribed manner without any further application in that behalf by the person taking out the licence, and subject to the provisions of this section, every such council shall assign a separate number to every vehicle registered with them, and the mark indicating the registered number of the vehicle and the council with which the vehicle is registered shall be fixed on the vehicle or on any other vehicle drawn by that vehicle or on both in the prescribed manner:
§ Provided that any number which has been assigned to a motor car under Section two of the Motor Car Act, 1903, and which is the registered number of that car on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-one, shall be treated as having been assigned to the car under the provisions of this section, and no new number shall be assigned to such a car.
§ (2) If the mark to be fixed in accordance with this Act is not so fixed, or if, being so fixed, it is in any way obscured or rendered or allowed to become not easily distinguishable, the person driving the vehicle shall for each offence be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding fifty pounds:
§ Provided that a person charged under this section with obscuring a mark, or rendering or allowing it to become not easily distinguishable, shall not be liable to be convicted on the charge if he proves that he has taken all steps reasonably practicable to prevent the mark being obscured or rendered not easily distinguishable."
§ Mr. A. SHAWI should like to move, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words
and the mark indicating the registered number of the vehicle and the council with which the vehicle is registered shall be fixed on the vehicle or on any other vehicle drawn by that vehicle or on both in the prescribed manner.2671 I understand this is the provision under which an Order has already been drawn up requiring a water-tight metal-bound clamp to be fitted on every motor vehicle, and I wish to omit this provision altogether. I have been amazed to find the number of letters coming to me from my own constituency from people who only now have awakened to the amount of gratuitous departmental interference with the elementary rights of the subject which is being inflicted on them in connection with motoring.
§ The CHAIRMANI understand the hon. Member was referring to the watertight case, but the words he proposes to leave out appear to me to refer only to the registration number on the back of the car. I should like to ask the Minister of Transport if that is so.
§ Sir E. GEDDESYes, it is.
§ Mr. SHAWAm I to understand that under this Clause the provisions regarding the fixing on the vehicle of this new form of licence do not arise?
§ Sir E. GEDDESThis is the registration number.
§ Mr. SHAWI am afraid we have endured the registration numbers too long to object to them at this time of day, but I am mainly objecting to the other provision.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSMay I point out that the marginal note to the Clause is, "Registration and identification marks."
§ Sir E. GEDDESThose are the old plates.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSDoes not this come in on Clause 12?
§ The CHAIRMANYes.
§ Mr. A. SHAWI beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ The CHAIRMANI have not put it to the Committee, so there is no need for the hon. Member to withdraw it.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI beg to move, in Sub-section (2), after the word "way" ["in any way"], to insert the word "knowingly."
This is to prevent a person being liable to a penalty of £50 by the mere fact that this little label that we have to 2672 go about the world with, and which has been invented by the Minister of Transport—
§ Mr. NEALThat is the very subject my hon. Friend (Mr. A. Shaw) was referring to a moment ago. This Clause deals with the ordinary number plate.
§ Sir E. GEDDESThe licence card is new. The identification plate is the registration number which we all carry on our cars to-day, and which we shall not change. The new thing is the little card on the back.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI am raising the point of the old number plate. I have not the present regulations with me, but here it is laid down that if these plates are "obscured, or rendered, or allowed to become not easily distinguishable," you will be liable to a penalty of £50. That simply means that when you are driving along a muddy road, and you have got your number plate slightly dulled, you are liable to £50. It is absurd; no Court in the country would fine a man £50 for such a thing, and it ought not to be put in here unless the word "knowingly" is added. In London yesterday none of these numbers would have been distinguishable at all, but under this Clause every car on a foggy day in London would be liable to a fine of £50 for going out of its garage.
§ Mr. NEALThis is one of several Amendments the object of which is to insert knowledge as the essence of a criminal offence. That has been considered most carefully by the advisers of the Government from the point of view of parliamentary draftsmanship, and there is a strong objection to the insertion of the word "knowingly" or "intentionally" in some Statutes when it is not put in others. It results in a great confusion in the Statute Book. The matter was most carefully considered, and the general principle of law is that a criminal offence cannot be committed unknowingly. I cannot therefore accept the Amendment. As a matter of fact, these words are introduced exactly from the Motor Car Act, 1903. They do not introduce any new offences at all, and it is most important that these identification numbers should be legible and easily distinguishable. The object of that identification number is well known. A motor car proceeding along the road is involved in some accident, and unless the mark is readily observable that car may get clear 2673 and never be found, and therefore to whittle down the provisions as to the necessity for identification marks being clear would, I think, be a retrograde step. When you come to practical matters, of course any Court which tried a case of this description, and came to the conclusion that a defendant had committed an offence without criminal intent, the Court need not record a conviction. That which my hon. Friend has in mind is covered by the general law because under one of the Summary Jurisdiction Acts, when a Court has come to a conclusion that a person has not committed an offence intentionally, they are not to record a conviction.
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSI hope the hon. and gallant Member will not withdraw his Amendment, which, I think, absolutely necessary after what the Parliamentary Secretary has said. The Parliamentary Secretary has just made what is to many of us a very astonishing statement, that you cannot commit a crime unknowingly. That may be the law, but I think it is within the knowledge of all of us who have any experience of bicycles or motors that that is not the practice of the Courts, and that these technical offences are used as a revenue-producing machine. People are sent out to catch those whose tail lamps have blown out on a windy or wet night, or for some other small and involuntary offences, and they have mulcted them in very considerable fines. I think it is absolutely necessary that we should have some word to secure the object mentioned by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Southampton. I do not think the word "knowingly" would get out of the difficulty. You would still be prevented from using your motor car in the conditions he mentioned. I think you want something more comprehensive and something to provide that P man shall not be fined unless the technical offence is his own fault. It is rather a matter for legal drafting than for a lay man to suggest, but we ought to have some direction, or else this Bill will be used for the purpose of blackmail.
§ Viscount CURZONI do hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman will not withdraw his Amendment. I plead guilty to having a certain experience of what sort of chance a. motorist, who errs absolutely unwittingly, has when be appears before a Court of so-called justice. The word 2674 of anybody is taken against him. A policeman may say anything he likes. It does not matter what the motorist says; a conviction is almost invariably recorded against him. I hope, therefore, if the right hon. Gentlemen cannot accept the word "knowingly," some other word or words will be found, so that where a motorist has been had up for an offence of which he is quite unconscious, a certain latitude, at any rate, may be given to the law to cover that point. I was present at a police court not very long ago where a discharged soldier was had up for riding a motor-bicycle, and allowing some portion of his coat to blow across the number-plate. It was quite an unconscious offence on his part. He wrote to the court that he was a married man, had a family of seven children, had been out of work for four months, that this was the only time he had had his motor-bicycle out in that time, and he could not at the moment afford any petrol to run it any more. He asked if he could be given time to pay. They fined him 40s. I nearly asked a question in the House, but did not do so, because I thought I was not entitled to ask it. That is the sort of penalty inflicted for such an offence. I admit that you cannot mete out too severe a sentence on a man who obscures his motor-plate by putting grease or dust on it, but in a small petty case, such as I have described, cannot we possibly make some provision in this Clause, so that a man may not have a penalty inflicted on him unless he commits an offence knowingly?
§ Mr. HOHLERI hope the hon. and gallant Member will persist in this Amendment. I am bound to say I do not agree with the statement of law made by the Parliamentary Secretary. My view is that the word "knowingly" has a very important value, and it has a well-recognised definition. Under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act you have an offence for selling some article not of a certain quality, and there is another offence in the same Statute, to my recollection, preceded by the word "knowingly," and the Courts have ever drawn a distinction between the two. My recollection of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, again, varies from that of the Parliamentary Secretary, and that if the offence charged is mens rea, and the magistrates do not think, in their discretion, that they need 2675 record a conviction, they may dismiss the case on payment of costs. I do not think it can be suggested that, because you are in a dark fog and your mark is obscured, you have committed an offence. I think the word "knowingly" covers the matter. I do not think I would go all the way with the Noble Lord opposite, but I think it is within the experience of some that benches of magistrates are not always so well disposed towards motorists as towards some others.
§ Sir F. BANBURYMight I suggest that we put in the word "wilfully" instead of "knowingly"? That would go a little further. I am not a motorist, and have never been had up in a police court, but I am a magistrate, and I do think some word is necessary.
§ Sir E. GEDDESIt is very difficult for a layman, when lawyers disagree, to know exactly what to say. If the Committee would allow me, I would like to get the Clause now, and I will see what I can do between now and Report or in another place. Undoubtedly, rightly or wrongly, motorists have a feeling—as some of us know—there may not have been a reason for it—on the subject that the revenue from fines on motorists is an important consideration to the local authority. If that is in the minds of hon. Members, let me say that this Bill provides for all these fines going into the Road Fund; that is a very important safeguard. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] If the Committee will allow me I will look at the matter with the Parliamentary draughtsman and see if I cannot in some such way and by words suggested by the right hon. Baronet, "wilfully or negligently" meet the case. But I would point out that this very provision has been in force for 17 years, and I do not think there has been any great cause for complaint—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"]— of persons being penalised knowingly. However, I will look into the matter.
§ Major HAYWARDI should like to be quite sure what it is that is proposed by the right hon. Gentleman between now and the further consideration of the Bill. As the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite pointed out, there seems to be a difference from the view of the Parliamentary Secretary who said an offence could be committed under this Clause whether the subject did or did not know the identi- 2676 fication mark had been obscured. Certainly there is all the difference in the world as to whether you have an element of knowledge between an act committed by a person or an act which is to be done or not by the person, and, as in this case, a fact to be established. Surely in this-case if the board is obscured and is not easily distinguishable an offence will be committed whether the owner of the car knew it was so obscured or did not know. I understand, and that is what I want to make clear, that the Minister is going to have words considered which will provide that no offence shall be committed unless the subject has knowledge that the registration number is obscured, and not easily distinguishable.
§ Major HAMILTONMay I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman could not see his way to insert words at this stage to meet the point put forward? Whether he inserts "knowingly" which I think is preferable, or "wilfully" which will meet the case I have in mind does not much matter; but if we leave it to the right hon. Gentleman's very courteous promise of consideration to put in words, this Bill may come on on Report stage at four o'clock in the morning, and those of us who are interested may be having a snooze in the library, and the Sub-section might get through without it being noticed. I do think my right hon. Friend will agree that this is really an important point. He says that he does not think that many of these cases have appeared in the Courts. May I tell hon. Members that I have been quite unconscious of the fact that my tail-light was out and have been shaken out of my car in the suburbs of Manchester and run in, and although I could show that my light was actually warm I was brought up before a very wise, magistrate who acted on the advice of my hon. and learned Friend below me. Otherwise I might have had my licence endorsed. It was actually said in Court by the policeman that the tail-light was warm when he put his hand on it. So that these sort of charges are made, and you get very little consideration in a court of summary jurisdiction. I do hope, therefore, my right hon. Friend will not leave this point to the Report stage, but put in one or other of the words suggested, and if, on further consideration with his advisers, he finds that the word or words will not do then it can be altered on the Report stage or in another place.
§ Sir E. GEDDESI hope the Committee will not press me, because one has really to take the advice of the parliamentary draftsmen before coming to a conclusion in this matter. It is well known that the Committee or the House always gives great consideration to the experts in matters of this sort. But I will do my best and try to meet the point, if it is necessary to meet it, between now and the Report stage. At the same time I am really forced to the conclusion that the concluding paragraph of the Clause provides very much for what we are discussing. It says:
Provided that a person charged under this Section with obscuring a mark or rendering or allowing it to become not easily distinguishable shall not be liable to be convicted on the charge if he proves that he has taken all steps reasonably practicable to prevent the mark being obscured or rendered not easily distinguishable.That goes a very long way, I think, to meet the point.
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSI hope this Amendment will not be withdrawn, though I agree it is not reasonable to ask the Minister of Transport to commit himself now. But I do not think he would in any way suffer by accepting these words without prejudice to his putting down an Amendment on the Report stage if so advised by the draftsman. If something of this kind is not done, this Bill may come up at three or four o'clock in the morning, and the matter will probably not be challenged at all, as there will be no one here, and we shall get no redress.
§ Sir A. BENNThe Sub-section reads:
If the mark to be fixed in accordance with this Act is not so fixed ….What does "so fixed" mean? If it is three and a half inches from the centre of the glass and it ought to be three inches—
§ Sir E. GEDDESWe are not dealing with that point at the moment.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI do hope my right hon. Friend will not force it to a Division. We have been very agreeable to him this afternoon, and we might have criticised more, or perhaps taken more exception to things; but there is here put upon the person charged the onus of proving his innocence, which English law 2678 never does. It is not fair. Motorists have to prove, supposing there is mud on our numberplate, that we have taken all steps reasonable and practicable to take it off—in other words, that we have got out on a muddy road and wiped the numberplate with our best silk handkerchief.
§ Sir E. GEDDESThat does not sound reasonable.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSIt would not, perhaps, be reasonable for my right hon. Friend to take his handkerchief, but the court might hold that it was reasonable that we should carry a rag for the purpose of wiping off the mud. I think the right hon. Gentleman might accept the words suggested. We cannot keep our eyes permanently on the Report stage. If he does accept the proposed Amendment we have a chance of putting down; an Amendment on the Report stage, and so has he, and the matter will not, therefore, be forgotten. He has been so amiable that I trust he will accede to the present request.
§ Sir F. BANBURYThe right hon. Gentleman can put down "wilfully and negligently" on the clear understanding that after he consults the draftsman he is at liberty either to withdraw the words or to put in other words. He is not in any way injured if he meets the wishes of the House, and it will save time now.
§ Sir E. GEDDESOn the understanding that, if necessary, I can revise the matter on Report, and because of the amiability of the Committee, I will accede to the request put to me.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI beg to move, in Sub-section (2), after the word "way" ["is in any way observed"], to insert the words "wilfully or negligently."
§ Mr. SPENCERAfter all, there is another side to this question. I have known men who have taken every precaution to keep their number plate clean. I would not accuse any hon. Member of being guilty of excessive speed driving, and after an accident riding on, but there have been cases of that character, and therefore legislation of this kind is necessary in order to catch the guilty, although such a provision may sometimes inflict hardships on the innocent. After all, 2679 people are constantly riding in motor cars and coming along streets in thickly-populated districts, and in those circumstances it may be to the advantage of some people to obscure the number plate.
§ Major HAMILTONThat would be wilful.
§ Mr. SPENCERAnd the owner might plead that it had got covered with mud riding along the road. I would like to protect any hon. Member or any person who tries to keep his number plate clean, and who is cautious in driving through thickly-populated districts, but that does not meet the case. Cases have occurred of little children being run over and killed, and instead of the motorist stopping he has rushed away to escape detection. I know we should all be pleased to lay hands on those people, but I think the Minister of Transport might have consulted some other authority before acceding to this Amendment. I think he should have waited until he had consulted his own Department in order to find some words that would have met everybody's objection.
Dr. MURRAYI am sorry the right hon. Gentleman has not stuck to his guns in regard to this point. One of the reasons given by an hon. Member opposite is that if this point is left to the Report stage he might be disturbed in the smoke room.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI beg to move, in Sub-section (2), after the word "exceeding," to insert the words
in respect to the first offence to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds, and in respect of the second or subsequent offence to a fine not exceeding.As the Bill stands at present, it is only a penalty of £20 for the first offence. You may be fined £50 if your number-plate is half an inch out of the centre-point wherever it may be ordered to be fixed. If the mark is not so fixed, or is in any way obscured, for each offence you are liable to a £50 penalty.
§ Sir E. GEDDESI am willing to accept this Amendment with certain verbal alterations. The Amendment I suggest is as follows: After the words "Summary conviction," to insert the words "in respect of the first offence to a 2680 penalty not exceeding twenty pounds and in respect of the second or subsequent offence."
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Further Amendment made: In Subsection (2), after the word "conviction," insert the words, "in respect of the first offence to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds, and in respect of the second or subsequent offence."— [Sir I. Philipps.]
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (2), to add the words
Provided also that a person shall not be liable to a penalty under this Section if he proves that he has had no reasonable opportunity of registering such vehicle in accordance with this Section, and that the vehicle is being driven on a public road for the purpose of being so registered.
§ Sir E. GEDDESI do not think that I can accept this Amendment. There is no reason why a vehicle should be driven anywhere to be registered, because the whole thing can be done through the post. The form is filled up and sent to the local authority, and subsequently to the Post Office, and the vehicle need never go at all.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSI ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ Viscount CURZONOn most private cars, and, indeed, on a large number of commercial vehicles, certain number plates are used at present which are not in accordance with the Regulations—I mean alluminium number plates. Those plates are so constructed that they do not comply with the requirements of the existing Motor Car Act. When the Minister is making his Regulations, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will have it made quite clear exactly what is a legal number plate and what is not.
§ Mr. A. SHAWSupposing an offence is committed under this section by a light being blown out and a conviction follows. Is that conviction to be endorsed on the driver's licence. We all know the grave injustice which ensues. A man, say a professional paid driver, meets with some accident by which his tail light is blown out. The conviction is endorsed on his 2681 licence, and every time he goes to get a job that conviction, on a purely technical offence, remains for the rest of his life a black mark against him. Are these two Acts to be read together? The Act of 1903 provides that any offence, except the first or second offence of exceeding the speed limit, shall be endorsed on the driver's licence. We have all sorts of ridiculous offences, including a variation of one-sixteenth part of an inch in the number place, and the blowing out of a tail-light, and the magistrates must endorse them, they have no option. I would ask my right hon. Friend whether the comparatively trifling class of case covered by this section is to be endorsed on the driver's licence and remain a black mark against him for all time? I know no other offence in the criminal law which places so disabling a mark against a man as is placed against a motor driver under the provisions of the Motor Car Act, 1903. If my right hon. Friend is unable to give us an assurance that the provisions of this section are not to be read along with the Act of 1903, and that they do not include this life-long endorsing of the licence, I beg to give notice that on the Report stage, I shall move an Amendment to the effect that in none of these cases shall the driver's licence be endorsed, I hope that he will be able to tell us that he has had communications with his legal advisers on this subject, and that this very severe penalty, especially in the case of paid drivers, will not follow.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENThe whole thing should be wiped out and put an end to altogether. It is a discreditable thing to have it on the Statute Book.
§ Mr. NEALWe must all be in sympathy with a good deal of what my hon. Friend has said. Under the provisions of the Motor Car Act, 1903, if a person who holds a driver's licence is convicted of any offence in connection with the driving of a motor car, other than a first or second offence, consisting solely of exceeding any limit of speed, he shall produce his driver's licence within a reasonable time for the purpose of endorsement. If my hon. Friend looks at Clause 6, he will see that it does not deal with drivers' licences at all. It is not an offence qua driver.
§ Mr. SHAWI had occasion, when I was in practice, to go into this matter at 2682 some length, and my hon. Friend may be amazed to find that all these offences, obscuration of numbers, and lamps going out have been held by the Divisional Court to be offences in connection with the driving of motor cars, and, of course, it follows that the driver of a motor car whose number becomes not easily distinguishable or obscured has his licence endorsed.
§ Mr. NEALAll I can say is that the point is now raised for the first time, and we will give it very full consideration.
§ Sir A. BENNI desire to support what the Noble Lord the Member for Battersea (Viscount Curzon) has said and to urge that some steps should be taken to prevent people who were driving during the War, and who have letters slightly too small, finding themselves liable to this penalty. There are cars the letters on which are too small, and the owners are ignorant of the fact. There was a case where the letters were altered within 24 hours of the notice given by the police, and where the man three months afterwards was summoned and fined.
§ Sir F. FLANNERYI want to remind my hon. Friend that this Clause provides that a person driving the vehicle and committing such an offence shall be fined. Therefore his statement that the penalty and the perpetuation of the penalty applies to those who fix the plate and not to the driver is not well founded. As a matter of fact, the driver is specifically mentioned.
§ Sir I. PHILIPPSA young man who has had his licence endorsed ought, after some years, to be able to get a clean licence. In the Army, if a young fellow keeps clear for some years, he can get a clean default sheet. The same ought to obtain in the case of a young man who earns his livelihood as a motor driver. The law as it at present stands is archaic, and we ought to take this opportunity of removing any of these objectionable items. If they have not been brought to the hon. Gentleman's notice before, it is only because we have not wished to trouble such a courteous Gentleman too often.
§ Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.