§ As amended (in the Standing Committee) considered.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."
§ Mr. STEPHENI wish to raise a point with regard to this Bill. The Bill was in Committee on Thursday last. When we went to the Vote Office to get copies of the proceedings in Committee we found that the proceedings had not been printed. We wanted to put down some Amendments to this Bill but, contrary to the practice that has always been observed in connection with our Scottish business, no report was available. I wish to point out that in the Committee we occupied two hours in the discussion of certain very important questions in connection with the subject matter of this Bill. We made further inquiries as to why the proceedings had not been published, and we were informed that it. was because the Scottish Office had intimated that they did not want publication. I wish to submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that it is very important that there should be a record of this kind and, had such a record been available, possibly we would have been willing to allow this Bill to go through without any further ado. There is no record now of the position which we took up in Committee, and I wish to know if I would be in order in asking that the further stages of the Bill be postponed until the Scottish Office arrange for the publication of the report of the proceedings in Standing Committee?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have just sent for the Bill, and I find the only alterations made in it were drafting Amendments changing the title "Secretary for Scotland" to "Secretary of State for Scotland." I do not think so small an alteration justifies the printing of the proceedings and all the
§ cost involved. In regard to the other matter, the question of the printing of the proceedings in Standing Committee, I think the position is that we really had not the staff to take the report.
§ Mr. BUCHANANScotland is to be set aside.
§ Mr. STEPHENI would like to point out that the Scottish Grand Committee is the one Committee where Scottish Members have an opportunity of dealing with Scottish matters. It is of the utmost importance to Scottish Members that there should be a report of what took place. There were two hours of very important discussion. It is true that only one Amendment was accepted by the Committee, but on the second Clause there was a very important discussion, and there is no record of it. I would also submit that if there were so many Committees, and if the pressure of work on the printers was so great, this Committee which considers Scottish affairs has not, I think, unduly burdened the printers this year. I think the Secretary of State for Scotland will agree that when the Rating Bill was before us, we showed great moderation and tried to be helpful. I think that. if the Government agreed to adjourn this Bill to-night, and from the notes have a report of the proceedings printed, it would clear a great many difficulties out of the way.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think I can accept that, and it could not make any difference. But while the hon. Member has been speaking, I have been inquiring into the matter, and I find that a transcript was made, and that it is available in the Library, or it could be made available. But I will take into consideration what the hon. Member has said, and if it be desired by Scottish Members that a print should be made from the transcript, I will see if it is possible to do that.
§ Mr. STEPHENWe have not had an opportunity of putting down our Amendments again. We have been waiting for the report in order to put down our Amendments, and we have had no opportunity of doing so. The Report stage has been practically taken away from us because we have not had a publication of the report. While it may be true that a transcript is to be seen in the Library, our constituents are interested in our proceedings, and there is a big agitation in Scotland with reference to the position of Scottish Members here. There is a very powerful Home Rule Association, who are intensely interested in this question in connection with Scottish affairs, and our constituents are not going to have any record in connection with this Bill. We have not had an opportunity of putting down Amendments on the Paper in the light of the discussion. It might be said that we could have put down the Amendments that we put down before in Commitee, but the Amendments would have been altered in view of what the Solicitor-General said, but we have not any record of what he said. It is important for Scotland, if not for England, and it means that the Report stage of a Measure which is of very great importance is being taken from us, because of the mistake that has been made.
Lieut.-Colonel MOOREAs another Scottish Member present in Committee upstairs, I can say that there was nothing of importance said beyond the situation created by two hon. Members—
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe must not go into that now.
§ Captain WEDGWOOD BENNWith whom does the decision lie as to whether or not the reports of the Standing Committees are to be printed and circulated?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI believe that finally it lies with me, and, of course, I take the responsibility for the decision. But hon. Members will understand that I have a duty to perform with regard to economy, and my Estimates are already greatly exceeded for the present year by the great number of Standing Committees and the great number of sittings, particularly of the Standing Committee which considered the Electricity Bill. I must, therefore, ask the House to give some consideration to the question of 1850 economy in this matter, but I will at once look into the question, and see if there is a serious desire that these proceedings should be in print, and, therefore, on record.
§ Mr. BUCHANANMay I submit that in considering this matter, Mr. Speaker, you will not forget that this is the first time since I have been a Member, in the. past four years, that there have been any discussions, either in the House or in Committee, on the question of prison reform in Scotland, and that this Bill proposes a very fundamental change in prison administration in Scotland? For that reason, we were very anxious that the proceedings should be reported and printed, because they are the first chronicle of any real discussion of this question. On Second Reading we were going to discuss the question, but the Secretary of State for Scotland appealed to us to let the Second Reading go through, on the ground that there would be full and ample opportunity in Committee for a discussion, and the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton), who was then submitting certain reasons against the Bill, on that plea withdrew his opposition to the Second Reading. We, therefore, saved a certain expense to this House by not forcing a discussion, which we might have done, on Second Reading, and we are repaid for that by having taken from us a printed record of the proceedings in Committee. That is what happens when we treat the Secretary of State for Scotland too well.
§ Mr. SPEAKERCertainly this is not the first time that the report of a Standing Committee has not been printed. If it is the first occasion in. reference to the Scottish Standing Committee, it shows how well Scotland has been treated.
§ Mr. BUCHANANIt is true that this is the first occasion in reference to Scotland, and I accept, as I must do, what you have said, that it is not the first occasion outside of Scotland. It must be remembered, however, that for the first two years of the four during which I have been a Member there were practically no meetings of the Scottish Standing Committee.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have already tried to do my best to meet hon. Members.
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour)As hon. Members for Scotland know, I was not present at the Committee, but I understand from my hon. Friend who was in charge of the Bill in Committee that there was a very full discussion upon the points of the Bill on that occasion. The Committee definitely came to the conclusion that no Amendment need be made to the Bill, with the exception of one purely drafting Amendment, which was accepted. In those circumstances, while I appreciate the anxiety of Scottish Members that they should have a report of the Committee which deals with Scottish affairs, Mr. Speaker has intimated to the House that his attention having been drawn to it, he will see whether that can be met in this particular ease.
I demur from the idea that this Bill is really dealing with what an hon. Member has been pleased to describe as prison reform. It is nothing of the kind. It is a perfectly simple Measure, in the first instance, for the transfer of disused prisons, and, in particular, with regard to the Calton prison in Edinburgh, and the second part of the Bill is not to start any new custom or practice. There are in Scotland a certain number of legalised cells. I do not propose—I will be frank with the House—to legalise a large number of new cells, but quite the contrary. In fact, I look forward rather to reducing even the number of these cells which are legalised, but what I do ask is that in certain districts, particularly in the more outlying districts, the period of detention in such cells may be extended, and that is done in the main in the interests of the prisoners concerned. It is also done for the purpose, in some measure, of economy, but that is a secondary consideration. In the main it is in the interests of the prisoners concerned. It is not introducing any new principle whatever, and T will undertake to say that, in view of what has passed, I hope to revise the number of cells that are at present legalised.
§ Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAMOn a point of Order. The right hon. Gentleman gave us a speech on the merits of the Bill, but I understood that the question raised was as to whether the Bill was to be considered at all. I understand that we take exception to any further consideration of this Bill until the pro- 1852 ceedings of the Standing Committee are submitted to the Scottish Members. it seems to me that we are being jumped into the acceptance of the Third Reading. I submit that the question should be first considered whether there is to be further discussion on this matter, and whether we are to get a copy of the proceedings in Committee.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain FitzRoy)The Question is, "That the Bill be now read the Third time." [HON. MEMBERS "No"]. That is the only Question before the House. The hon. Member for the Camlachie Division of Glasgow (Mr. Stephen) it is true, raised a point of Order, but the actual Question before the House is, "That the Bill he now read the Third time."
§ Mr. MAXTONI must protest on the point of Order. There are three points at issue before we reach the Third Reading. My hon. Friend the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) certainly rose before you put the Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time," and we did discuss the question whether the Debate was to proceed without the proceedings of the Committee being published. We have also to consider the Report stage of the Bill, which was amended in Committee. That Amendment has to be reported to this House, and may be the subject of debate, and only after those matters are disposed of do we come to the question of the Third Reading.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERMr. Speaker put from the Chair the Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time." It was after that that the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) rose to a point of Order.
§ Mr. STEPHENI rose when the Bill was, called by the. Clerk at the Table, and I put a point of Order to Mr. Speaker with regard to the Report stage. I put a two-fold point of Order. I put a point of Order with regard to publication and I asked him to accept a Motion for the Adjournment of the Report stage, and I was still expecting a further reply from the Chair to my request for the Adjournment. I certainly got a reply to my point dealing with the publication: Mr. Speaker himself was going to consider the possibility of the proceedings in the Committee being published. But I still 1853 thought I had made out a very sound case for the Adjournment of the proceedings on the Report stage, and I am astounded to learn that the Third Reading is being taken, because we would certainly have desired to ask Mr. Speaker, in view of the circumstances, to allow us to hand in a manuscript Amendment for the, Report stage.
§ Sir J. GILMOURI am sure I am in the recollection of the House that Mr. Speaker said he was unable to accept the proposal made by the hon. Member. It is clear that he promised to see if we could have the report of the Committee printed, but undoubtedly he did not accept the point of Order made by the hon. Member and the question now is the Third Reading. I want to say this to my hon. Friends from Scotland, that I see no real and material advantage which they will gain by objecting at this stage to The passing of the Bill. On the contrary, I see very great disadvantages which will accrue to Scotland if the Bill fails to pass; and I would remind hon. Members from Scotland that we have received a very fair share of the time of the House for these matters. This is a Bill, as we have tried to explain to the House, which embodies no new principle.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMMay I put to the right hon. Gentleman our point of view on this side, which was raised before Mr. Speaker left the Chair? We asked for a postponement of the consideration of the Bill till we got a report of what happened in the Committee, and, speaking for myself, I understood when the right hon. Gentleman rose that it was to meet that print, and to give us an indication of whether he was willing to adjourn the discussion. I would like a direct answer to that question: Are you willing to adjourn the discussion to-night until we get the report of the Committee proceedings?
§ Sir J. GILMOURNo, Sir. I think the situation is clear. The Committee have no right to demand the printing of the proceedings of the Committee, and Mr. Speaker has already ruled on that subject.
§ Mr. MAXTONI must insist—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] On a point of Order—
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERDoes the hon. Member rise to a point of Order?
§ Mr. MAXTONThe point of Order I wish to make is this: That, the right hon. Gentleman has no right to usurp your duties, that on the question of Order you, Sir, have the last word and not the Secretary of State for Scotland. I was under the same misapprehension as the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) that when the right hon. Gentleman rose it was to make some concession and not a Third Reading speech against us. We thought it would be something that would enable us to get the Bill recommitted to the Committee or that he was proposing to adjourn the debate. If his tone is to be the tone and spirit of the discussion of the Bill at this stage I rather fancy the House is in our hands rather than in his. I do not want that spirit. The hon. and gallant Member for Ayr Burghs (Lieut.-Col. Moore) suggests there is nothing in the Bill that matters to anybody. That is not, my view. It is a very important matter for Scotland. We have a perfect right at this stage before the right hon. Gentleman moves the Third Reading to move to recommit the Bill to the Committee.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThere seems to be some misunderstanding as to the actual Question before the House. The question was whether this Bill be read the third time. After that was put, there was a point of Order by the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen), and I understand that point of order was settled by Mr. Speaker before he left the Chair. If there be any desire that that particular point of order, or that the consideration of the Bill he deferred, the hon. Member must move to that effect.
§ Mr. STEPHENI beg to move "That this Bill he recommitted to the Scottish Committee." I desire to do so because of what I believe to be a very sound objection to what has taken place.
§ Mr. DENNIS HERBERTOn a point of Order. Was not the Secretary of State for Scotland in possession of the House?
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERI understand the hon. Gentleman is now moving to recommit the Bill. That would be an Amendment to the Third Reading.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMWould it be in order to move the adjournment for further consideration of the Bill?
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThat is not the point before the House.
§ Sir J. GILMOURMight I appeal to hon. Members? There does not seem to me to be any substance in the objections they have raised. If anything like the recommittal of the Bill were effected, the Bill is lost. That is a serious matter from the point of view of Scotland, and I beg my colleagues not to carry their opposition to that extent. I gave them a definite assurance that there is no new policy in this Bill. I am not asking the House to give its sanction to anything new. Indeed, it is rather a limitation in the system of machinery. If the hon. Gentlemen take the responsibility of losing this Bill against the wishes of the Corporation and City of Edinburgh they know exactly what responsibility they are taking. I must insist upon giving the Bill the Third Reading.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERDoes the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) move that the Debate be adjourned?
§ Mr. STEPHENI beg to move, "That the Debate be now adjourned."
I am sorry if there is a difficulty and this misunderstanding. If I were to move the adjournment of this Debate and that Motion were accepted by the Government and the House, and the Secretary of State for Scotland arranged in the interval for a report of the Committee proceedings to be printed, we might possibly take the Third Reading on Thursday again. As far as we are concerned, I think we may promise there will be no serious objection in the way of the Government with regard to the next stage. It seems to me to be a matter of great importance that the Bill should be in the hands of Members of the Committee before the Bill finally goes from this House. We are prepared to face any responsibility in connection with this Bill with regard to the Corporation of Edinburgh or any other Corporation. But the House must recognise the difficulty of the position in which we are placed. I would like to put this matter to the Secretary of State for Scotland. It was stated that Mr. Speaker is ultimately responsible for the decision with regard to publication of the report of the proceedings for the Committee, but I want to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland 1856 if it is not the case that it was the Scottish Office, his department that was responsible for the proceedings not being published? That at least was conveyed to me. I made inquiries in connection with this matter. I think we have made a very reasonable proposal to the Government. The Solicitor-General for Scotland, who was in charge of the Bill, will bear me out when I say-that at the proceedings in Committee, we did not show any desire to obstruct the Measure, but we put forward matters that we thought were of very great importance. We are anxious to safeguard the interests for the Scottish people, and I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland will reciprocate by accepting the friendly proposal we have made.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI beg to Second the Motion.
I should like to draw attention to the reply made by the Secretary of State for Scotland, who throws the responsibility of the defeat of the Bill on us. If he were more conciliatory to us, there would be no need to interfere with it at all. He says we must take responsibility, and we are prepared to do so. The right hon. Gentleman had some friends on Friday from Scotland. Most of them stayed away because they were frightened to vote. Those who came had not even the courage to force a division.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThe Question is, "That the Debate be now adjourned." The hon. Member must confine himself to the Motion before the House.
§ Mr. BUCHANANFor the moment I temporarily left that point, but I submit that this point was not raised by me. It was a perfectly legitimate reply to the Secretary of State for Scotland, who stated that we must take the responsibility. He should recollect the spirit shown by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) when the Second Reading of this Bill was before the House. It was taken about midnight. There had been matters of contention in the House. The hon. Member raised what he thought was an important matter. While the hon. and gallant Member for Ayr Burghs (Lieut.-Colonel Moore) may not think so, we have a right to state our opinion here. We could have delayed the Second Reading. We could have made speeches which Mr. Speaker would have accepted. Yet, for the sake of harmony in Scotland, 1857 we agreed, without any further Debate, to allow the whole question of this Bill to go to the Committee for further discussion. It never passed through our minds that no report was to be taken of the Committee's proceedings, or we could have had our thoughts placed on record in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Because we wished the Bill to proceed, we withdrew our opposition and allowed the Secretary of St ate to get this Bill through to Committee at the earliest possible moment. Our guarantee to facilitate business has been met by the Secretary of State for Scotland, and the Scottish Department, by a refusal to print the proceedings, and now he refuses to delay consideration until a later day. Our political opinions may be only worthy of contempt, but the Secretary of State for Scotland should be fair even to his opponents from Scotland. On the Second Reading we could have stated objection after objection. English Members may think we should not ask for the proceedings of the Scottish Committee to be published. There was the Electricity Committee on which the hon. Member for Watford (Mr. D. Herbert) was—
§ Mr. D. HERBERTI was not on the Committee.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThis has very little to do with the Adjournment of the Debate.
§ Mr. BUCHANANWe are moving the Adjournment because the proceedings were not printed. The hon. Member for the Hulme Division (Sir J. Nail), was on the Electricity Committee. That Committee had long-continued meetings. Their proceedings were printed and brought thoroughly up to date. The Scottish Grand Committee has been a thoroughly business-like assembly. Criticism has never been unduly carried on and there were no attempts to unduly delay the proceedings. We could have had many more meetings. Now we are being rewarded by the Secretary of State carrying this thing to a degree never known on the part of any previous Secretary for Scotland. Members who have been long in the House say they have never known an occasion on which the Scottish Grand Committee was not reported; at no time have they known the proceedings not to be printed. The Secretary for Scotland has recently 1858 been promoted to be Secretary of State, and one of his first actions has been to deprive the Scottish Grand Committee of a legitimate thing.
§ Mr. MAXTONI regret that the Secretary of State for Scotland, supported I think by the Prime Minister, has taken the line that this Bill must be passed to-night or no further opportunity will be available this session and that the whole responsibility for the wrecking of this Measure will rest on the shoulders of one or two of us who are asking for what I regard as a very simple thing. I do not think that in the three or four years T have been in the House, I have ever asked for the report of a Committee and not received it. I went on this occasion, because I was very anxious to study closely certain statements of the Solicitor-General. I had had these statements and assurances him and I wanted to see them in cold print at my leisure to see if there was any substance in them. I want to say to English Members that there are principles involved in this Bill, if I understand it properly, which are of very vital importance to the whole of the country. There is, as the Secretary of State has said, power conferred upon him to extend the use of police cells for the detention of prisoners, tried rind untried, from 14 days to 31 days. This is well known by everyone who has taken any interest in the prison question and I have done so for some considerable time. It is time, with regard to the unfortunate section of our community that gets into prison, that this House of Commons should take very seriously anything affecting their condition while there. While there is often great interest in a prisoner's trial, and people are prepared to be interested in him after he comes out, while he is in no one hears very much about him, and this Bill extends the time a man can be kept in the cells from 14 to 31 days. As I was saying, people who are interested in prison questions realise that the big proportion of the prisoners in our ordinary prisons are prisoners who are there for 30 days or less. This proposal which the Secretary of State for Scotland is bringing forward is to detain men under 30 days' arrest in the police cells. That means that our ordinary prisons maintained out of the national cost are 1859 to be half-emptied and the police cells maintained by the local authorities are to be filled to an extent they have never been before. The population of the police cells is going to be doubled and the population of the prisons is going to be halved, and in the doing of that there is going to be transferred a financial responsibility from the Central Authority on to the local authority. And there are a lot of other things involving a prisoner in prison. He is entitled to certain rights.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain FitzRoy)I do not think the hon. Member can make a thorough survey of this Measure on the Motion for the Adjournment of the Debate.
§ Mr. MAXTONThe point I was making was a legitimate one in its beginnings, although perhaps it extended too long. I was merely trying to impress upon the Prime Minister, who seems to be the obstacle in the way of the Adjournment of the Debate and bringing forward the Bill on another occasion—I was trying to convey to the Prime Minister that this is hot a little pettifogging matter. There are principles involved in it that deserve the careful consideration of the Members of this House. Personally, I wanted to see exactly the statement that was made by the Solicitor-General in Committee, to see how much it meant or how little it meant. There ought to he good reasons why we should adjourn the Debate until some night next week. The amount of time Scotland has had out of this Session has not been very great. This is a matter worthy of consideration, and I support the statement of my hon. Friend the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen). We do not want to be fractious or objectionable about this Bill. I know it is a Scottish characteristic to start getting obstinate on account of the other fellow getting obstinate. I do not want to be like that. If the right hon. Gentleman will meet us in this way, I support the promise absolutely when the Bill is brought forward on another occasion. if the Committee proceedings report. give anything like a decent assurance then there will not be any further difficulty in the further passage of the Bill.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMLike the hon. Gentleman I was not present at the 1860 Committee, but what I have heard since this matter has been raised makes all the more clear to my mind the absolute necessity that we should have a record of what transpired in Committee so that we can be in a position to see whether the Bill is what seems to be present in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman the secretary of State for Scotland. According to the statements submitted there was something like a two hours' discussion in Committee, and a very important statement was made by the Solicitor-General for Scotland. To enable us to deal effectively and satisfactorily with the people of Scotland as a whole and not merely one particular part of it, it is essential that we should know what it is the Solicitor-General has said when dealing with this Bill, and it depends upon what he said whether we would agree that it should get an easy passage through this House. At the same time I put it to my right hon. Friend, quite frankly, that had he been in our place, had he been sitting on this side of the House, and the Labour party had done something like what has happened here—I put it to him quite fairly and to his Friends—that they would take exactly the same objection to the passage or the consideration of the Bill that we are doing now. I do not doubt but that the Bill does contain all the blessings, if there can be any such to any poor fellows who happen to be in prison, as are in the mind of the Secretary of State for Scotland. We do not wish to offer any unreasonable opposition to the passage of the Bill but we do ask that the business that was transacted at the Scottish Committee should be on record and if the Secretary of State for Scotland can give us the assurance that he is going to give us that I do not think there is any likelihood of any difficulty in the passage of the Bill on any night before the adjournment for the Christmas recess. I do not see any reason why if there is any desire for anything like mutual fairness with each other and reciprocity on this question he should not meet this reasonable request. I am sorry it is necessary that we should have had to raise this matter but if it were to become a burning question before the election in Scotland it is one that will stick. I again appeal to my right hon. Friend that he will be well advised to consider the 1861 wisdom of acceding to the reasonable request.
§ Sir J. GILMOURI very much regret if any of my hon. Friends feel any discourtesy on my part. I must say at once that the question as to whether the Committee proceedings are to be printed is not one for my decision. That is for Mr. Speaker. As to the question of adjourning this Debate, I must frankly say that I cannot accept the Motion for Adjournment. It is quite clear that we have had a long discussion both here in this House and in Committee upstairs, and in accordance with the rules of the House everything has been carried out.
§ Mr. MAXTONI assent to that.
§ 1.0 A.M.
§ Sir J. GILMOURA very full report of the proceedings in Committee was published in the Scottish Press. Hon. Members talk about the general public being informed on these matters. It is only through the Press that they can be informed, and a very full report was published in the scottish Press. In any case, the decision as to the printing is not in my hands, but in the hands of the Speaker, and I ask the House to allow the Bill to be read the Third time.
Mr. W. ADAMSONI think the Secretary of State for Scotland has misunderstood the point of complaint. Thy point of complaint is that these proceedings were not printed before the Report stage was arranged. I understood my hon. Friends to say that they intended to put forward Amendments on the Report stage and that the want of the printed proceedings has prevented them carrying out that intention.
§ Sir J. GILMOURNothing has prevented them from putting down an Amendment on the Paper.
Mr. ADAMSONYes. They could not get the printed proceedings of the Committee stage and naturally they wanted to see what was said in the Committee before proceeding to put down their Amendment. I understand that Mr. Speaker has put the Question, "That the Bill be now read the. Third time," but has promised that he will see whether the proceedings can be printed. But that will prevent my hon. Friends from carrying out their suggestion of putting down an 1862 Amendment, and what they want is that the Secretary of State for Scotland should postpone the Bill until a print of the proceedings in Committee is produced. It may be that the Secretary of State for Scotland has no responsibility for no print of the proceedings being available. At the same time, my hon. Friends have a very considerable amount of reason for complaint and I think in the circumstances that the Secretary of State for Scotland will be very well advised to agree to the suggestion that no further proceedings should take place until the proceedings of the Committee have been printed.
§ Captain BENNI would like to explain how I stand about this. I do not do so from any reasons of vanity. I did not attend either the Second Reading of the Bill or the Committee stage because I was told on good authority that this Bill merely dealt with the disposal of the Calton gaol and that it was very desirable to wipe away some technicalities as to the disposal of the Calton gaol. Now I find in Clause 2 of the Bill that provision is to be made for people to be detained in people cells for 30 days instead of 14 days. I am quite unable to find out—
§ Sir HARRY FOSTERIt was fully explained on the Second Reading.
§ Captain BENNNow the position is that, very unfortunately, at a time when interest in Scottish affairs in this House is greatly stimulated and when there is a growing feeling that more attention should be given to them—
§ Captain BENNI have already explained my position on that point. Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member himself will one day either attend the Committee or make a speech in this House or do something intelligent. Those who are deprived of these proceedings feel that they have a certain amount of grievance. If it be the case that the Secretary of State for Scotland felt that the proceedings should not be printed and if there is no objection to the Bill, surely it could be taken on another day.
§ Mr. JAMES BROWNThe only question seems to me to be whether or not this Bill is to be postponed for a day or two. I understand that a promise has been made by all the other Members on this side of the House, and it will certainly be given by me, that there will be no difficulty in the passing of this Bill if it is postponed. The Secretary of State for Scotland must be aware that there is a good deal of feeling in Scotland just now regarding Scottish business in this House and very great efforts are being made to get a Government of our own in Scotland to deal with our own affairs. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] You may be glad to get rid of us. All we are asking now is that the Bill should be merely postponed for a day or two and there will be no difficulty about the Bill whatever. The Scottish members on the other side of the House are, I know, just as obstinate as those on this side, and therefore my appeal may have no effect whatever, but I make it all the same. I appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland to have the proceedings printed so that the Scottish members and the Scottish population may see them.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESI venture to rise as a member of the Celtic race, and I want to support the Scottish Members in their attitude on this matter. I think the
§ Celtic element is being ignored on this business. The Secretary of State for Scotland excused the printing of the Committee's proceedings on the ground that they had been very fully printed in the Scottish Press, but surely he does not suggest that any Scottish newspaper can replace the OFFICIAL REPORT. I entirely dissent from his view that the Scottish Press gives a full enough report. It has been a practice since Labour Members came here to send the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThat has nothing whatever to do with the Motion. The question of the printing of the reports of this Committee was disposed of by the Speaker about an hour ago.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESAlthough the Bill appears to affect Scotland only, a vital principle is at stake, and it is that every Member of this House should have access to the proceedings in Committee on any Bill. I think it necessary to make it clear that it is not only Scottish Members who object to this procedure but others Members as well.
§ Question put: "That the Debate be now adjourned"
§ The House divided: Ayes, 16; Noes, 114.
1865| Division No. 543.] | AYES. | [1.10 a.m. |
| Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife. West) | Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield) | Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline) |
| Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith) | Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) | Welsh, i. C. |
| Brown, James (Ayr and Bute) | Kelly, W. T. | |
| Dalton. Hugh | Maxton, James | TELLERS FOR THE AYES — |
| Day, Colonel Harry | Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe) | Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. |
| Fenby, r. D. | Stephen, Campbell | Buchanan. |
| Graham. D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) | Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. f. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel | Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil) | Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley) |
| Albery, Irving James | Dean, Arthur Wellesley | Hennage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur p. |
| Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S. | Dixey, A. C. | Hennessy, Major J. R. G. |
| Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley | Edmondson, Major A. J. | Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford) |
| Balfour, George (Hampstead) | Elliot, Major Walter E. | Herbert. S.(York. N.R., Scar. & Wh'by) |
| Barclay-Harvey, C. M. | Everard, W. Lindsay | Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N. |
| Barnett, Major Sir Richard | Fairfax, Captain J. G. | Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.) |
| Beamish, Captain T. P. H. | Fanshawe, Commander G. D. | Huntingfield. Lord |
| Boothby, R. J. G. | Fermoy, Lord | Jacob, A. E. |
| Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W. | Fielden, E. B. | Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) |
| Brass, Captain W. | Forrest, W. | Kidd, J. (Linlithgow) |
| Brittain, Sir Harry | Foster, Sir Harry S. | Looker, Herbert William |
| Broun-Lindsay, Major H. | Foxcroft, Captain C. T. | Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere |
| Bullock, Captain M. | Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E. | Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman |
| Burman, J. B. | Ganzoni, Sir John | MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen |
| Carver, W. H. | Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John | McLean. Major A. |
| Charteris, Brigadier-General J. | Goff. Sir Park | Macmillan, Captain H. |
| Christie, J. A. | Greene, W. P. Crawford | McNeill Rt. Hon. Ronald John |
| Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. | Grotrian, H. Brent | MacRoba.-t, Alexander M. |
| Cope. Major William | Gunston, Captain D. W. | Makins. Brigadier-General E. |
| Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. | Hanbury, C. | Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn |
| Curzon, Captain Viscount | Harrison, G. J. C. | Margesson, Captain D. |
| Davidson, J.(Hertf'd.Hemel Hempst'd) | Hawke, John Anthony | Mitchell. S. (Lanark, Lanark) |
| Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R- (Ayr) | Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham) | Templeton, W. P. |
| Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C. | Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney) | Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton) |
| Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph | Sandeman, A. Stewart | Tichfield, Major the Marquess of |
| Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) | Sanderson, Sir Frank | Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement |
| Nuttall, Ellis | Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D. | Wallace, Captain D. E. |
| O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton) | Savery, S. S. | Warner, Brigadier-General W. W. |
| Pennefather, Sir John | Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby) | Wells, S. R. |
| Penny, Frederick George | Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y) | Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H. |
| Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings) | Skelton, A. N. | Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl |
| Perkins, Colonel E. K. | Slaney, Major P. Kenyon | Wise, Sir Fredric |
| Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome) | Smithers, Waldron | Womersley, W. J. |
| Raine, W. | Sprot, Sir Alexander | Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T. |
| Remer, J. R. | Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.) | |
| Rhys, Hon. C. A. U. | Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y) | Streatfield, Captain S. R. | Captain Lord Stanley and Mr. |
| Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint) | Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn) | F. C. Thomson. |
| Ropner, Major L. |
Question put, and agreed to.
§ Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read the Third time."
§ Mr. MAXTONI regret very much that I am forced into the position of causing discomfort to the Members of the House and to the Officials and attendants about the House merely because the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Prime Minister have chosen to be obstinate, but this is a matter that I regard as being of some serious moment. I do not want to detain the House much longer than is necessary, but to be absolutely fair to the persons who are affected by this Bill. I raised on the Motion for the Adjournment the effect that this very simple Clause that the Secretary of State for Scotland has attached to the Bill the main purpose of which has no connection whatever with the second matter. I have shown the effect of this in my speech on the Motion and the Adjournment and I do not propose to repeat the arguments on the Third Reading, but I want to make an appeal to the House on behalf of the men who are going to be affected by the change proposed in the Bill. Under our present system, in Scotland as in England, while the community comes to the conclusion that certain men and women have got to be shut away behind bars either because they are a menace to the community or the community believes that this correction will make better citizens of them, it is equally true that the community has in the course of years laid down certain regulations to try to secure that the lives of these men shall not be any worse than they need be, and that the men themselves will not feel that there is any vindictive spirit on the part of the State although the State has decreed that they lose their liberty for a period. Under the ordinary prison system, it is laid down that every man 1866 confined in prison must have a certain supply of food every day, which is carefully and regularly supplied to him in measured portions. It is laid down that he shall have medical attention, and to that end a prison doctor is attached to every one of the public prisons. It is laid down that he shall have certain regular exercise, and arrangements are made in the prisons so that every person shall have one hour's open air exercise every day. It is also laid down that the religious denomination to which the prisoner may belong shall have right of entry to the prison so that he may receive the services of the appropriate clergyman of the denomination to which he belongs. It is also laid down that there shall be attached to the prison a library, from which the prisoner may borrow books and read these books either for purposes of moral uplift or education.
These Regulations are carefully carried out in the established prisons of the country under the direction of the Prison Commissioners, and under the supervision of a number of publicly appointed inspectors of prisons. This Bill proposes to transfer practically one - half of the prison population of Scotland out of these prisons, where arrangements are made to secure prisoners these rights, into the police cells, where it is absolutely impossible that these rights can be preserved to the prisoners concerned. There are now in Scotland 30 legalised police cells where it is legal to detain men for 14 days. The increase of the time of detention from 14 days to 31 days means that these places are to have their normal population doubled, and it means that the Prison Inspectors who formerly were responsible for the four or five big central prisons in Scotland have now got to visit regularly prisoners scattered in 1867 30 different police cells throughout the whole of Scotland. If this inspection is going to be carried out—if it is to be efficiently done a very considerable increase must be made in the staff of the Prison Inspectors. If it is not going to be efficiently done, this Assembly, which is approving this Bill, is taking no national precaution to see that the rights of these men are being maintained in this new method of imprisonment. Most hon. Members know the condition of the local police offices and the cells attached to them in their own neighbourhood. I ask them to visualise how it is possible for the local policeman, in addition to the ordinary duties he has to perform in any district for which he is responsible, at the same time to be responsible for the health and welfare of any prisoners that may be confined in the police cells? How is a prisoner going to be fed; to be regularly exercised; how is he going to be allotted proper tasks to occupy his time and have these tasks supervised. How is he going to get the recreation to which he is entitled under the prison rules; how is he going to be fed and clothed?
To all these problems I tried to secure some satisfactory answer in the Scottish Grand Committee, and I failed. The House is prepared to see this matter pass into the hands of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and into the hands of the Prison Commissioners, without any assurance as to the effect upon the men in prison or likely to fall into the hands of the police in future. I am not prepared to take my responsibilities so lightly, even to those men who may be bottom dogs in the community. I am not prepared to disregard a man, though he may be shut up and may not be a voter. I want some idea as to how the Secretary of State for Scotland proposes to see that these cells are made into decent sanitary, healthy dwellings for the extra population under this legislation; I want to know how he is going to staff these places with proper warders to look after the prisoners as in ordinary prisons? How is he going to arrange for medical attention, or give to prisoners the spiritual support or guidance of the clergy of the denomination to which they belong? I want to know whether he is going to establish a prison library from which prisoners may get books for their leisure 1868 moments? Does he propose to give these prisoners regular and proper exercise? I do not know. Is it proposed to keep a man shut up for 24 hours every day for 30 days inside one cell without a breath of fresh air? Is this another reactionary Tory step towards greater vindictiveness in the treatment of the prison population? The Scottish Grand Committee got no satisfaction on any of these points. Some of the most important and influential works in the libraries of this country had to be written and broadcast throughout the land before decent sanitary conditions were established in our prisons. Many devoted men and women spout the greater part of their lives struggling to secure that the prison population should not rye treated worse than was necessary for the public welfare. We are lightheartedly chucking that away. My colleagues and I are distressed that we should be chucking away a state of affairs which was achieved by the Charles Reades and others.
We are here at this late hour because no assurance whatever has been given that the ordinary safeguard and protections which have become the established rule in the State prisons of this country will be available to the men who are confined in these police cells. I for one, considering that we have had no assurance on these points, considering in addition the fact that this throws back from the Central fund a very large charge on the local rates, considering that the Scottish Secretary and the Prime Minister have treated the Scottish Members with complete contempt in the whole matter, and considering that they have not shown the faintest desire for decent treatment aid harmony amongst colleagues of this if House I am going oppose the Third Reading as strenuously as I can.
§ Captain BENNI certainly should not have risen had it not been for the failure of the Secretary of State for Scotland to make any reply. I have listened to the extremely eloquent speech that has been made by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) on the issues that are raised in the Bill. I was of opinion that the Bill did nothing but deal with the disposal of the Calton gaol and similar matters. If these issues are raised I certainly think the House should know. We 1869 have no official record of the proceedings in Committee and I think the Secretary should do something if he can to allay the serious misgivings which such a speech as has been delivered by the hon. Member must necessarily arouse in our minds.
§ Sir J. GILMOURThere is nothing in this Bill which does anything further than what exists under the present law, with the exception that what I am asking is power to certify police cells for an extended period. The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) has dilated upon a number of things, and it would be a mischievous thing if it went out to Scotland that there was anything in this Bill that was going to effect a removal of the prison population of Scotland, and to start a new system. There is no intention of that kind at all. There are at present something like 30 certified police cells and these certified police cells are in the main in the most outlying parts of Scotland, in Orkney and Shetland, etc. These are places which are used for detaining people at the present time for 16 days. Take the present position existing in Kirkwall. If that prison is abolished any man now convicted has to be taken by sea to Inverness and detained for a considerable time. He has to be taken back by sea, and boats do not run every day of the week. He may be kept a long time before returning to his own habitation. These are the kind of things that are desired to be dealt with under this Bill. I am asking now merely for power when I am approached by the police authorities in the first instance and if I am satisfied through the Prison Commission that these particular cells are suitable, that the police authorities may have the period of detention extended to 30 days, but only when I am satisfied that they comply with the prison regulations which are set out under the Act of 1877. There the thing is definitely laid down by Statute. The same conditions apply in all the prisons of Scotland. I do not think I can make it clearer and I regret there has been so much time of the House taken up.
§ Mr. MAXTONThe right hon. Gentle man has not touched the point I have raised, the extending of the time from 14 days to 30, and the number of people to be kept in them. There is no safeguard.
§ Sir J. GILMOURThese cells can only be legalised for a certain number of prisoners and for a certain time. If any prisoner thinks he is being treated unfairly by being detained in a legalised cell he can apply to be removed to another prison if the matter is reported to the central authority.
§ Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.