The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. William Adamson)
I beg to move, in page 7, line 34, to leave out the word "any," and to insert instead thereof the words "a landward."
The object of my Amendment is to make a point clear with regard to a difficulty that may arise as the Clause stands. It is not intended that the increased subsidy of £12 10s. should be payable in respect of houses erected within a. burgh, and this has been made abundantly clear to all local authorities. Accordingly, as a rural area never includes a burgh, the expression "any parish" at the beginning of paragraph (a) means only a landward parish (that is, a parish which does not include a burgh). The paragraph goes on to refer to the parish which is partly burghal and partly landward, and provides for the landward part being, if qualified, a rural area. As the Clause at present stands, it might be argued that it included the whole of a parish which comprised a small burgh, the valuation and population of which were so small as not to exclude it under the conditions set out in (i) and (ii) of this paragraph, and, therefore, in that special case it included the small burgh. This is not the intention, and this Amendment is designed to make the position clear.
§ Amendment agreed to.
I beg to move, in page 7, line 41, after the first "the," to insert the word "landward."
§ Mr. PRINGLE
Before going further, I should be interested to know whether the effect of the Amendment, and that of its predecessor, is to give Scotland, with regard to rural parishes, better treatment than England. In the case of an English parish the borough would be added with the rest of the parish, but, so far as Scotland is concerned, the burgh is excluded, so that in Scotland 994 a larger number of parishes will come within the definition of agricultural parishes, for the purpose of receiving a larger subsidy, than in England.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
I would ask the Minister of Health whether it is so. In the Bill, as far as it affects England, the sole question is the valuation and the population. Two tests are laid down.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
I am an English Member, and I do not wish to see any injustice shown to England. It is because I also appreciate the Scottish position, and in that I share an advantage with the Minister of Health, though he is really a trustee for England in this matter, and, obviously, must see that no injustice is done to the country for which he is mainly responsible in this House. I could give an example in Scotland for which there is no similar provision made in England. If you take a parish like Lauder, in the County of Berwick, an ancient Royal burgh, which would be reckoned a village in England, under this Amendment, as I understand for the purpose of settling whether that parish should be treated as an agricultural parish for the purpose of an increased subsidy, the whole of Lauder is excluded. There are no cases where you have such a thing arising in England as a borough being excluded from the agricultural parish so as to enable that parish to qualify for the increased subsidy.
§ Mr. E. BROWN
I take some little interest in this matter and, therefore, I am able to add a word or two to that which has been said by my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone (Mr. Pringle). Whatever may be said as to the right of England, I have no wish to stand in the way of Scotland getting this reform, but I could give an illustration which perhaps the House may consider interesting. I know a place called Milton, which is very largely agricultural, but has an urban population of 6,000 in the village. If we had some arrangement such as is here proposed in relation to the agricultural part of the village of Milton, the area and population could be so 995 arranged that many agricultural labourers in the village would be able to get the advantage of the £12 10s. who do not get that advantage now. However, I do not wish to press the objection because those in Scotland get this advantage.
§ Mr. WHEATLEY
May I tell the hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. Pringle), that, as trustee in this House for England and Wales, if the acceptance of this Amendment places Scotland in an advantageous position I will see that on the Report stage the matter is rectified.
§ Amendment agreed to.
I beg to move, in page 7, line 43, to leave out the words "for the year immediately preceding," and insert instead thereof the words "then in force."
This is a Scottish point. The object of this Amendment is to ascertain whether the area is a rural area from the last available valuation roll. As the Clause stands in the Bill, the matter is to be determined according to an earlier part of the Clause, "at the beginning of the financial year in which the proposal for the provision of the house is approved by the Board under Section 22 of the Interpretation Act; the first day of April." The valuation roll for this current year, from 15th of May of the preceding to the 15th of May of that year, will be available so that there is, therefore, no need to refer to the valuation roll of the immediately preceding year.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: In page 7, line 45, after the word "the" insert the word "landward."—[Mr. Adamson.]
Duchess of ATHOLL
On a point of Order. May I ask why you have not accepted the Amendment standing in my name and that of my hon. and gallant Friend (Captain Bourne), in page 8, line 2—after the word "be," to insert the wordsProvided that in computing the proportion of agricultural land in a rural area the valuation of sporting rents shall ho included as part of the value of agricultural land, but railroads, water or electrical works and Undertakings, or institutions erected for the 996 public service and conferring no special advantage on the parish concerned, shall not be included in the total valuation of the rural area for the purposes of these provisions.
Duchess of ATHOLL
May I point out that my Amendment, if it coincide to some extent with those of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Rugby (Mr. E. Brown), differs in sortie very important particulars. The Committee, I submit, has not had any opportunity of realising in what important particulars this Clause, which applies to Scotland, differs from the others. It. is a very important Clause.
I am afraid we cannot now go into that. As I have already said, it is part of my duty to select Amendments.
§ Further Amendment made: In page 8, line 3, after the second word "the," insert the word "landward."—[Mr. Adamson.]
I beg to move, in page 8, lines 7 and 8, to leave out the word "thirty-five," and to insert instead thereof the word "fifty."
This Amendment is consequential on the Amendment made by the Committee in Clause 2, Sub-section (2, b), as applying to England, in regard to the definition of an agricultural parish.
§ Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR
The hon. Member for Rugby (Mr. E. Brown) dealt with the matter involved in this Amendment for, and it raises a very important question in regard to, the greater need of Scottish local areas to have an extended application of the actual population of 100 acres. I was rather surprised at the right hon. Gentleman himself, knowing his interest in Scottish affairs, did not think fit to draw attention to this aspect of the matter, particularly in view of the fact that we have had a Royal Commission on Housing which has drawn attention to the most unsatisfactory condition of rural housing. I should like to have the assurance of the right hon. Gentleman that this point will be dealt with at a later stage, and that he will 997 see that the extended facilities for village rural areas in Scotland will be more complete and clear. After a proper survey of housing needs is made, the Minister of Health for Scotland will be asked to apply his mind to the greater needs of these areas.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the. Bill."
Duchess of ATHOLL
I should like to draw the attention of the Minister and the Committee to one or two important points in which this Clause differs from the Clause which gives a definition of an agricultural parish in England. There are two points at least. For the words "agricultural parish" are substituted the words "rural area," and the calculation to be made, as stated by the Secretary for Scotland in an answer given the other day, is to be on the gross valuation and not on the net valuation. I submit to the Committee that both these points have a very important hewing on this Clause, and it is only right to bring them before the Committee, the more so because I understand the right hon. Gentleman said the other day that he would be ready to consider whether any form of property institution, or otherwise might be treated as an exception. I will deal first with this question of gross valuation as opposed to net valuation. I want to point out how inequitably this Clause may affect rural parishes in Scotland, and this was brought out forcibly in an answer given by the Secretary for Scotland to a question which I put to him as to what villages in the counties of Kinross and Perth would be eligible for the larger grant. In answer to my question I was told that all the parishes in those two counties would be eligible except nine which he enumerated, and they included eight typical rural parishes, some of them mainly agricultural; others were partly agricultural and largely moorland. They were typical rural parishes, and it was with amazement that I learned that they would not benefit by the higher grant. The first point that emerged was 998 that the inclusion of the valuation of railways in the calculation to be made would be to the prejudice of many rural areas. I think that point was made last week.
In the Amendment which I was not allowed to move I proposed that railroads, water or electrical works, and undertakings or institutions erected for the public service and conferring no special advantage on the parish concerned, should not be included in the total valuation. The possession of a station in an agricultural parish may increase the agricultural valuation, but when there is no station in the parish, or none easily accessible in another, there is no such increase; and the inclusion of railroads may prevent that parish from receiving the higher grant. And even more than the question of the exclusion of railroads from the calculation, I hope the Minister will seriously consider the question of the exclusion of waterworks. In the case of those parishes which I was told would not benefit by the higher grant in four of them the loss will be entirely duo to the presence of waterworks.
Take, for example, the parish of Amgark. The total valuation is £17,870, the agricultural valuation £3,900, and the valuation of the waterworks is £9,000. The presence of the .waterworks there excludes a typical rural parish. In the parish of Glendevon the total valuation is £11,400, the agricultural value £2,600, and the valuation of the waterworks is about £8,000. In the parish of Aberfoyle the total valuation is £38,600, agricultural valuation £1,593, and the waterworks valuation is £28,000. In the landward parish of Callender we have the same story. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman to seriously bear in mind that it cannot be held that the presence of waterworks will send up the value of other subjects in the parish—that if you have waterworks within a parish the presence of these waterworks in no way changes the character of the parish or adds to the value of other subjects. It may mean the presence of a few additional persons, but that is only a trifling addition to the value of the parish, and the presence of waterworks does not deprive the parish of its rural character, although it enormously increases the gross valuation.
999 The Minister for Health sits for a Scottish constituency, and I think there is a consideration which he should not forget, and it is that there are many Scottish rural parishes which have already been severely penalised by the presence of waterworks in their midst. If the right hon. Gentleman has read, as no doubt he has, the Report of the Committee on Local Taxation, issued two years ago, he will remember the striking instances given of how under the present system, by which educational expenditure to be borne by each parish is calculated on the gross valuation, the presence of waterworks with a high gross valuation has increased the educational expenditure to be met by that parish. Then a considerable deduction is made off the waterworks, which means that those who have to pay on the other subjects are left with an additional burden. That was clearly pointed out by the Dunedin Committee, and it is a consideration which no one can afford to overlook, because this system severely penalises a number of our rural parishes.
If the right hon. Gentleman has much knowledge of life in the rural parishes in Scotland he will perhaps know that sometimes a great city some 30, 40 or 50 miles away requires more water, and wishes to take it from a certain loch, and the people in those parishes are not always too anxious to see the water taken away, because it often means the spoiling of some rural amenities or scenery. if this Clause passes as it stands, it will not be made easier for the cities of Scotland to get the water they need from the rural areas, because those areas will be conscious that they may be heavily penalised by the presence of those waterworks. It is because I recognise the needs of great cities, and because I wish to see rural districts do their best to meet the needs of those cities that I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider most carefully whether he will not exclude waterworks, and make his calculation on the net valuation.
I also wish to draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the fact that in this Clause he says that the designation of the area is to be altered from the somewhat narrow definition in the 1000 English part of the Bill "agricultural parish" to the wider term "rural area." Yet he still proposes to limit the basis on which the character of the area is defined by only allowing the agricultural valuation to reckon towards the grant. There are many parishes in Scotland which are typically rural. One could not imagine, for instance, any parish more typically rural than Killin, which is to be excluded from this grant, and there are many such parishes which, unless the sporting valuation is allowed to be counted with the agricultural valuation, will find it impossible to qualify for the higher grant. There are a good many parishes in the Highlands that will qualify for the grant owing to a later Clause, which provides that the parishes which benefit by the Highlands and Islands grant shall rank for the larger grant, but there are a good many other parishes, typically rural and typically Highland in character, which are not included in the area that benefits by that Act, and those parishes will suffer severely unless the sporting valuation may be counted.
I do nor wish to claim for sporting values that they should be regarded as being anything so important to the country as is agriculture, but I do say that, where you have land such as is described in the Report of the Committee on Deer Forests, one may be thankful that these very poor areas in Scotland have a certain value for sporting purposes, and those who are responsible for raising rats in those areas know well the value of sporting subjects there. I want just to remind the right hon. Gentleman that the sporting subjects have an important connection with the agricultural subjects. In the first place, if it were not for the keepers who work in these sporting areas—grouse moors and deer forests—agriculture in the surrounding country would suffer severely from foxes and other vermin. A great part of the time of the gamekeepers is spent in protecting the land of the neighbouring farmers and smallholders from the ravages of foxes, rabbits and so on. I would also remind the right hon. Gentleman that, if a deer forest is unlet, it is rated as sheep grazing. Therefore, whatever his opinion may be as to the 1001 value, from a national point of view, of these sporting subjects, I submit that, as to their value from the rating point of view, there can be no question. Whatever may be the right hon. Gentleman's views as to the general question of sport, I would ask him to remember that it has a very important bearing in its relation to agriculture, and, most unquestionably, if he continues to omit from this Clause all mention of sporting value, he will make it impossible for many typical rural parishes in the Highlands of Scotland to qualify for the higher grant.
I do not want the right bon. Gentleman to make the meshes of his net too close; I do not want him to throw the doors open too wide, so that he upsets the finance of his Bill; but I do want to say to him that we want equity and fair dealing as between different rural parishes. If the right hon. Gentleman feels able to adopt any of the suggestions I have made in regard to this Clause—they would, I admit, if the basis otherwise remained the same, mean a considerable addition to the number of parishes that would rank for the higher grant—I fully admit the necessity of requiring the combined agricultural and sporting valuation to bear a higher proportion of the total than is proposed in the Bill; but what I do ask for is fair dealing between rural parish and agricultural parish, and that is what, I submit, we have not got under this Clause as it stands. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot, between now and the Report stage, see his way to do anything more in the direction suggested by myself and by the lion. Gentleman the Member for Rugby (Mr. E. Brown) last week, I assure him that there is bound to be a great deal of heartburning and sense of injustice as between neighbouring rural parishes, and that it will make it extremely difficult for district committees to do what we all wish to see them do, and that is to build as many houses as possible under this Bill.
I can assure the Noble Lady that I have no desire to draw invidious distinctions between one parish and another. Moreover, there is another side to the picture which the Noble Lady so eloquently put before the Committee While she pointed out that these waterworks largely increase the valuation of a number of our rural parishes, she forgot to point out at the same time that rates 1002 are paid by these waterworks, and that—
Duchess of ATHOLL
If I may interrupt the right hon. Gentleman, I did not deny that they paid rates. What I said was that the deduction usually made in the case of waterworks was considerably larger than the deductions made in the case of other subjects in the parish.
I was pointing out that these waterworks all pay rates—[HON. MEMBERS: "Not to the parish!"]—for which they get no benefit. For instance, they get no benefit from education.
Duchess of ATH0LL
If the presence is required of persons to look after the waterworks—and I expressly admitted that these persons and their houses would add to the value of the parish—schools have to be provided for their children.
The occupant of the house pays his rates as an ordinary ratepayer, and is entitled to education for his children, but I am pointing out that these waterworks do not require any expenditure so far as education is concerned. They pay teind, and they do not get any spiritual benefit. As a matter of fact, these waterworks only get the privilege of paying the rates, and they reduce to a considerable extent the amount of rates that the landlord would require to pay in these parishes.
Duchess of ATHOLL
I am very sorry to interrupt again, but that really is too important a point to allow to pass. The Dunedin Committee clearly showed how the other ratepayers in the parishes were penalised by the presence of the waterworks, because its gross valuation was so much larger than its net valuation.
I want to point out, in addition to what I have already said, that a very large proportion of the parishes in Scotland are included and a very small proportion excluded. Out of 869 parishes in Scotland, 714 will be eligible for the £12 10s. That is a very large proportion. Moreover, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health has already said that he is prepared to consider what further concessions can be given under this Clause. I want to say quite frankly that, when that consideration is being given, I shall take care that Scotland secures her share. I do not think the Noble Lady need have so much 1003 fear as she evidently has as to the rural parishes suffering so seriously.
Duchess of ATHOLL
Might I just point out that this is not a question of Scotland suffering, but a question of justice as between the agricultural parish and the rural area?
§ Mr. PRINGLE
A very important point has arisen in this discussion, not solely as regards Scotland, because I understand that there is in contemplation by the Government some further concession which will apply both to Scotland and to England.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
The Minister says that it is only consideration, which, obviously, is intended to give rather cold comfort to my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. E. Brown) and to the Noble Lady the Member for Kinross (Duchess of Atholl). Apparently the consideration is not going to lead to anything substantial. I was surprised that my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. E. Brown) gave way when he was told it was only to be consideration, because as I understand it, if any concession is made it will be an alteration of the financial provisions of the Bill and it will be necessary for the right hon. Gentleman to re-commit the Bill in order to make the concession.
May we have this definitely settled, whether it is necessary to re-commit the Bill for further consideration?
§ Mr. WHEATLEY
It is not necessary to re-commit the Bill in order to enable me to carry out my promise.
We shall not carry out our previous intention of dividing against the Clause in consideration of the statement made by the Secretary for Scotland, but I warn him that, in view of the very casual treatment which he has meted out to Scotland, both in regard to the quota and in regard to the very germane points raised by the Noble Lady, we shall scrutinise very closely the suggested Amendment which he brings forward on Report, and if we do not get satisfaction we shall have no hesitation whatever in dividing against the proposal that the Clause shall apply to Scotland.
§ Mr. E. BROWN
I rise because the matter concerns me rather intimately. I asked leave to withdraw my Amendment, and, indeed, voted against my own Amendment, on hearing the following statement, which led me to believe it was rather more than a consideration.You must accept some basis, and if you do, you will always have bard cases. I want the Committee to be reasonable in this matter. If there is any particular kind of institution, which would not lead us, say, from an asylum to a hospital or from a prison to some other institution, and so on, which can be excluded without creating any of these administrative difficulties, and which would bring relief to particular parishes or to parishes generally, then I will consider whether that institution, if we can find it, can be dealt with on the Report stage. I think that that is as far as the Committee might reasonably ask me to go.Then I said:There is a slight difference in this case. This is not the ease of individual hardship. The question of railways is universal in its application throughout the country. It cuts out innumerable little hamlets.The Minister replied:If I said that I would take railways, would I not have immediately the advocates of some other form of property. [HON.MEMBER: 'No!'] I have said that I will ascertain whether there is any form of property, institution or otherwise, which I could, without raising administrative difficulties, treat as an additional conceasion."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th July, 1924; col. 514, Vol. 176.]On that, I withdrew my Amendment, and indeed voted against it. I suggest to the Committee that that statement made to me implied more than consideration of the points raised. They implied dealing with the points. I shall be very interested to hear what the Minister himself has to say on this point.
§ Mr. WHEATLEY
I can only assure the hon. Member that I considered the matter in the spirit in which I made that promise.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GORE
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he definitely intends to put down an Amendment covering the. points of railways and waterworks, because, if not, there is bound to be misunderstanding when we reach the Report stage. We have what is rather more than an promise of mere consideration by Departments and something less than a specific undertaking to bring forward some Amendment, so that all bona fide agricultural truly rural, parishes shall get the benefit. 1005 I have had the same difficulty with private Bills upstairs—the Thames Conservancy Bill the other day, for instance—about which parishes are really agricultural and which are not, which are to contribute and which are not. I really think before passing this Clause we ought to get a definite undertaking from the Secretary for Scotland or the Minister of Health that he will bring forward the necessary Amendment to make the substance of the arguments used on both sides of the House good and substantial.
§ Mr. WHEATLEY
I do not know that I can add anything to what I have said. If I find something that I can concede, obviously I shall put it in the form of an Amendment. I cannot at this stage go further than that, but I stand to what I said and to the spirit in which I gave that promise.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
The spirit of the Minister of Health is somewhat difficult to reconcile with the spirit of the Secretary for Scotland. The Secretary for Scotland referred to the fact that waterworks derive no spiritual benefit. Consequently we are rather led to investigate the spiritual condition of the right hon. Gentleman. The Secretary for Scotland has argued quite definitely that it was perfectly fair to include the various subjects mentioned by the Noble Lady. He said it was fair that waterworks, railways and so forth should be included in the valuation. That is quite different from the spirit of the Minister of Health. The Minister of Health said in his speech on the. Committee stage that all these cases would be considered. Now the Secretary for Scotland, apparently having considered them, rules them all out. He says the other ratepayers benefit by these things being in their midst and that they are relieved in regard to education. I am surprised to hear him say that about education. I understand that in Scotland the education rate is on a parish basis and not on the county basis. I have reason to remember that, because when the Education Bill was going through Committee I moved an Amendment and was defeated by a majority of one owing to the influence of Lord Younger, which will please the Noble Lady who desired to protect the railways. I think these facts rather show that the right hon. Gentleman is not quite right 1006 in his facts. These subjects are not specially for the benefit of the rural areas insofar as the rates are levied on a parish basis. In these circumstances I think the subjects mentioned in the Noble Lady's Amendment have the same principle applicable to them as the subject the hon. Member for Rugby had in view. Some time has passed since the discussion of my hon. Friend's Amendment. We are led to believe the Report stage is coming on Thursday, and apparently, while the Minister of Health is still considering what he is going to do, the Secretary for Scotland has absolutely made up his mind. I think it is very important that before we leave this Clause we should know which of them is going to settle the matter, whether it is the hard-hearted Secretary for Scotland, whose views are entirely determined by the absence of spiritual benefit to the waterworks, or the Minister of Health. Could not the right hon. Gentleman give us some guidance before we part from the Clause? I have no doubt it would facilitate the further progress of the Bill if some statement could be made as to the direction in which the mind of the Government, so far as it has a mind, or the two minds of the Government., so far as they have two minds, are working.
The Secretary for Scotland said we were to be considered in the same way as England. Then the Minister of Health made a pronouncement, saying, "If I find I can concede anything, I will put it down in an Amendment." That does not seem to me really to me a promise that commits the right hon. Gentleman very far. In fact, I do not see what it, is going to do at all. [HON. MEMBER: "Divide!"] I do not see how to avoid it, because the right hon. Gentleman says, "If I can think of anything between now and Thursday, I will put it down.'' This is Tuesday. [HON. MEMBERS: "Monday."]Well it will soon be Tuesday. Really we have had so much experience doming the passage of this Bill of manuscript Amendments put down covering very important points. It has been all right on the Committee stage, because we could see them on Report. Now we may have a very long, complicated and involved manuscript Amendment put down on Report, and it will be impossible for us to examine it. We shall have to press this Amendment to a Division.
§ Mr. MASTERMAN
There might be something to be said for pressing the Amendment, which was not permitted, of the Noble Lady the Member for Kinross and Western (Duchess of Atholl) to a Division. The Amendment my hon. Friend now wishes to press to a Division it to reject the whole Clause making the Bill not apply to Scotland. The Committee will know what it is doing. It does not produce any exemption of waterworks, or anything of that sort. It simply takes Scotland out of the Bill. Those voting for that know what they are doing. I am willing at the moment, as my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. E Brown) was, to take into account, not caring in the least what, happens to the remoter regions of Scotland, but thinking of the English rural parishes, the promise made by the Minister of Health on the Committee stage in the
§ spirit in which he gave it. He declared that, if there could be any means of making these rural areas really rural, and taking out lunatic asylums, inebriate homes, railways and other institutions, he would do his best to do it. If he does not do it, we can still defeat him on the Report stage, and certainly most of us are quite prepared to do so We accept his promise provisionally, in the hope and knowledge that he is going to do his best. It is under those circumstances, and with the belief that whatever the Secretary for Scotland says and believes, our faith is pinned to the Minister of Health, and I would invite my hon. Friend not to interfere in this Scottish matter, and not to vote for the rejection of the Clause.
§ Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 229 Noes, 104.1009
|Division No. 174.]||AYES.||[9.29 p.m.|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. William||Ferguson, H.||Jones, T, I. Mardy (Pontypridd)|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)||Finney, V. H.||Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W. (Bradford,E.)|
|Alden, Percy||Franklin, L. B.||Kay, Sir R. Newbald|
|Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')||Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, North)||Kedward, R. M.|
|Alstead, R.||Gavan-Duffy, Thomas||Kenyon, Barnet|
|Aske, Sir Robert William||George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)||Kirkwood, D.|
|Ayles, W. H.||Gibbins, Joseph||Lansbury, George|
|Baker, Walter||Gillett, George M.||Laverack, F. J.|
|Banton, G.||Gosling, Harry||Law, A.|
|Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)||Gould, Frederick (Somerset, Frome)||Lawrence, Susan (East Ham, North)|
|Barrie, Sir Charles Coupar (Banff)||Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)||Lawson, John James|
|Batey, Joseph||Graham, W. [Edinburgh, Central)||Leach, W|
|Birkett, W. N.||Greenall, T.||Lessing, E.|
|Black, J. w.||Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)||Linfield, F. C.|
|Bondfield, Margaret||Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Livingstone, A. M.|
|Bonwick, A.||Grigg, Lieut-Col. Sir Edward W. M.||Loverseed, J. f.|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Groves, T.||Lowth, T|
|Bramsdon, Sir Thomas||Grundy, T. W.||Lunn, William|
|Briant, Frank||Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)||McCrae, Sir George|
|Brown, A. E. (Warwick, Rugby)||Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)|
|Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)||Hardie, George D.||M'Entee, V. L.|
|Brunner, Sir J.||Harris, John (Hackney, North)||Mackinder, W.|
|Buckle, J.||Harris, Percy A.||Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)|
|Burnle, Major J. (Bootle)||Hastings, Somerville (Reading)||Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.|
|Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel||Haycock, A. W.||Macpherson Rt Hon. James I.|
|Cape, Thomas||Hayday, Arthur||Maden, H.|
|Church, Major A. G.||Hayes, John Henry||March, S.|
|Clarke, A.||Henderson, A. (Cardiff, South)||Marley, James|
|Climie, R.||Henderson, T. (Glasgow)||Martin, F. (Aberdeen & Klnc'dine,E.)|
|Cluse, W. S.||Henderson, W. W.(Middlesex,Enfield)||Martin, W. H. (Dumbarton)|
|Collins, Patrick (Walsall)||Hillary, A. E.||Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.|
|Cove, W. G.||Hindle, F.||Maxton, James|
|Crittall, V. G.||Hirst, G. H.||Meyler, Lieut-Colonel H. M.|
|Darbishire, C. W.||Hodges, Frank||Middleton, G.|
|Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)||Hoffman, P. C.||Millar, J. D.|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Hogbin, Henry Cairns||Mitchell,R.M.(Perth & Kinross,Perth)|
|Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)||Hore-Belisha, Major Leslie||Montague, Frederick|
|Dickie, Captain J. P.||Howard, Hon. G. (Bedford, Luton)||Morel, E. D.|
|Dickson, T.||Hudson, J. H.||Morris, R. H.|
|Dodds, S. R.||Isaacs, G. A.||Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)|
|Dudgeon, Major C. R.||Jackson, R. F. (Ipswich)||Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)|
|Dukes, C.||Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Muir, John W.|
|Duncan, C.||Jewson, Dorothea||Murray, Robert|
|Dunn, J. Freeman||John, William (Rhondda, West)||Murrell. Frank|
|Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)||Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)||Naylor, T. E.|
|Edwards, John H. (Accrington)||Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)||Nichol, Robert|
|Egan, W. H.||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||O'Grady, Captain James|
|Emlyn-Jones, J. E. (Dorset, N.)||Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)||Oliver, George Harold|
|England, Colonel A.||Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)||Oliver, P. M. (Manchester, Blackley)|
|Owen, Major G.||Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)||Wallhead, Richard C.|
|Paling, W.||Simon, E. D.(Manchester,Withington)||Ward, G. (Leicester, Bosworth)|
|Palmer, E. T.||Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)||Warne, G. H.|
|Parkinson, John Allen (Wiqan)||Smillie, Robert||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)||Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)||Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)|
|Perry, S. F.||Smith, T. (Pontefract)||Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney|
|Phillipps, Vivian||Smith, W. R. (Norwich)||Welsh, J. C.|
|Potts, John S.||Snell, Harry||Westwood, J.|
|Pringle, W. M. R.||Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip||Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.|
|Purcell, A. A.||Spence, R.||White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)|
|Raffan, P. W.||Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)||Whiteley, W.|
|Raffety, F. W.||Spencer, H. H. (Bradford, S.)||Wignall, James|
|Ramage, Captain Cecil Beresford||Spero, Dr. G. E.||Williams, David (Swansea, E.)|
|Rathbone, Hugh R.||Starmer, Sir Charles||Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)|
|Rea, W. Russell||Stephen, Campbell||Williams, Col. P. (Middlesbrough, E.)|
|Rees, Sir Beddoe||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)||Williams, Lt.-Col.T.S.B.(Kennington)|
|Rees, Capt. J. T. (Devon, Barnstaple)||Stranger, Innes Harold||Williams, Maj. A. S. (Kent, Sevenoaks)|
|Richards, R.||Sullivan, J.||Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)|
|Richardson, R, (Houghton-le-Spring)||Sunlight, J.||Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)|
|Ritson, J.||Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)||Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)|
|Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)||Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)||Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)|
|Robinson, S. W. (Essex, Chelmsford)||Thornton, Maxwell R.||Woodwark, Lieut.-Colonel G. G.|
|Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)||Thurtle, E.||Wright, W.|
|Romeril, H. G.||Tinker, John Joseph||Young, Andrew (Glasgow, Partick)|
|Scrymgeour, E.||Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.|
|Scurr, John||Turner, Ben||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Sexton, James||Turner-Samuels, M.||Mr. Frederick Hall and Mr. T|
|Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)||Varley, Frank B.||Griffiths.|
|Sherwood, George Henry||Viant, S. P.|
|Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley||Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.||Pease, William Edwin|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Greene, W. P. Crawford||Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)|
|Barnett, Major Richard W.||Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)||Perkins, Colonel E. K.|
|Barnston, Major Sir Harry||Hacking, Captain Douglas H.||Perring, William George|
|Beamish, Captain T. P. H.||Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)||Rawson, Alfred Cooper|
|Becker, Harry||Harland, A.||Remer, J. R.|
|Berry, Sir George||Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)||Rentoul, G. S.|
|Betterton, Henry B.||Harvey,C. M. B.(Aberd'n & Kincardne)||Richardson, Lt.-Col Sir P. (Chertsey)|
|Bourne, Robert Croft||Henn, Sir Sydney H.||Ropner, Major L.|
|Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.||Hennessy, Major J. R. G.||Roundell, Colonel R. F.|
|Buckingham, Sir H.||Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)|
|Burman, J. B.||Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)||Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)|
|Butler, Sir Geoffrey||Hood, Sir Joseph||Sandeman, A. Stewart|
|Calne, Gordon Hall||Hope, Rt. Hon. J. F. (Sheffield, C.)||Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.|
|Cayzer, sir C. (Chester, City)||Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.||Savery, S. S.|
|Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton||Hughes, Collingwood||Shepperson, E. W.|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)||Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Jenkins, W. A. (Brecon and Radnor)||Steel, Samuel Strang|
|Clarry, Reginald George||Jephcott, A. R.||Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)|
|Clayton, G. C.||Kindersley, Major G. M.||Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||King, Captain Henry Douglas||Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)|
|Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.||Lamb, J. Q.||Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)|
|Cope, Major William||Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement|
|Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn. N.)||Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)||Warrender, Sir Victor|
|Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)||McLean, Major A.||Wells, S. R.|
|Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert||Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-||Wheler, Lieut.-Col. Granville C. H.|
|Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.||Marriott, Sir J. A. R.||Wilson, Colonel M. J. (Richmond)|
|Davies, Maj- Geo.F. (Somerset,Yeovil)||Meller, R. J.||Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George|
|Dawson, sir Philip||Milne, J. S. Wardlaw||Wise, Sir Fredric|
|Deans, Richard Storry||Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)||Wolmer, Viscount|
|Doyle, Sir N. Grattan||Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph||Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)|
|Eden, Captain Anthony||Eyres-Monsell, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.||Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.|
|Edmondson, Major A. J.||Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)|
|Elliot, Walter E.||Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Elveden, Viscount||Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert||Duchess of Atholl and Colonel|
|Forestier-Walker, L.||Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William||Lambert Ward.|
§ Clause 9 (Short title, citation and extent) ordered to stand part of the Bill.