§ Postponed Proceeding resumed on Amendment proposed on consideration of First Resolution.
§ Which Amendment was to leave out "£7,303,564," and to insert instead thereof "£7,303,464."—[Mr. T. Shaw.]
§ Question again proposed, "That £7,303,564' stand part of the Resolution."
§ Mr. JOHN
When my speech was interrupted I was referring to the superseding by the Divisional Office at Cardiff 1348 of the decisions of the Rota Committees. It is very difficult to understand why a Divisional Office turns down these cases on the ground that they are "not genuinely seeking work." What are the local conditions in the mining area? The Rhondda Valley is typical of other mining valleys. There is no other industry but mining in the locality, and every mine has its own unemployment. Practically every man is working intermittently. These men go before the Rota Committees and present their lists. They have been to practically every colliery in the neighbourhood. The Rota Committee will ask a man to walk 15, 18 or 20 miles. That he does and he comes back and presents his list to the Committee as evidence. Then the Divisional Office in Cardiff turns down the decision of the Rota Committee. In the last six months, in the two Exchanges in my own constituency, 410 cases have been turned down in that way. If the Ministry appoint persons on the Rota Committees they ought to have sufficient confidence in those persons to accept their decisions.
There is the other point with regard to the turning down of cases on the ground that the men concerned have not been, during the last two years, in insurable employment. The depression in the mining industry has now been going on for more than two years, and there is no other work available for these men. They may tramp up the valleys and across the mountains to look for work without getting it, and, because they are unable to get work, they are penalised under this regulation. I would call the attention of the Minister to another complaint. That is regarding the treatment of the unemployed in some of the Employment Exchanges. As a result of the irregular working of the mines there are occasions when men have to sign and usually they are at work on the day appointed for the signing. A case occurred recently at the Treorchy Exchange where miners who were coming home from work at three o'clock in the afternoon went in to sign. No special provision had been made for them, with the result that they had to wait about the pavement in their pit clothes, some of them wet, until seven or eight o'clock that night. In fact, that Exchange is a very unsuitable building for the ordinary work, quite apart from 1349 extraordinary occasions of that kind. The lavatory conditions are disgusting. There are no facilities for the clerks to do their work; there are no private rooms, and even what is called the manager's room is simply a screened-off portion of a general apartment. The attention of the authorities of the Exchange ought to be called to the fact that when it is necessary to sign on a a number of men who have just completed a day's work, facilities should be given to them to do so.
The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that in the mining areas a large number of these men could not be absorbed. What provision is being made for them? The only provision mentioned is that of training centres or camps to fit men for the Dominions or for agricultural work at home. That, however, only involves about 700 men, and how far will that go towards the solution of a problem which concerns 1,000,000 people? It is also argued that to prevent men who are not miners engaging in the industry will have an effect but that is not going to touch the fringe of the question. The attention of the Ministry ought to be devoted to the unusual unemployment which exists at present and which shows all the possibilities of continuing in the areas of the heavy industries. The policy of the Government in regard to the relations between national and local administration is making the problem more acute. The local authorities cannot cope with the unemployment, and yet the policy of the Ministry in striking hundreds of men off the unemployment insurance benefit list means that the local guardians have to bear the responsibility for those men. To that extent the problem is being made more acute because the mining industry is suffering from the burden of higher rates. If the local authorities have to bear the burden of unemployment, it increases the rates and, as the rates are increased, the collieries are incapable of working regularly and irregularity of work further increases the cost of production. The rates in the South Wales area, it is safe to say, represents somewhere about 2s. per ton, which means that for every day lost, in addition to the ordinary colliery loss there is a loss of another 1s. per ton. These are some of the problems which we have to face in the mining industry, and I would ask the 1350 Minister to consider them, especially the two points which I have raised as to interference by the divisional office and the question of the Exchange at Treorchy.
I do not propose to repeat the facts in connection with the Employment Exchanges which have been given by the hon. Member for West Rhondda (Mr. John). In my Division we suffer in the way he has described and all our collieries are affected. I understand that this is a general discussion which includes Class 5, Vote 2, along with other Votes, and 1 wish to raise one point in connection with that Vote. I am glad to find that an increased amount is to be handed over to the Special Grants Committee. Our chief complaint in Glamorgan, with regard to the distribution of these grants, is that in the mining districts we cannot embark on any capital works other than the construction of new arterial roads or the improvement of existing roads. Since the beginning of last year, for some reason or other the Unemployment Grants Committee have set their faces against making any contributions at all with regard to roads of this class, and I ask the Minister to have some inquiry made into the matter in order to see if we cannot be restored to the position which we occupied when the Unemployment Grants Committee began to distribute this money. In areas with large unemployment it is a very important matter.
I take the case of one village alone with which probably the Minister is acquainted, because I think he has had some trouble there. In Mardy village there has been a complete cessation of work in the collieries on two or three occasions, and since last Saturday practically all the working men of that village have been without any employment at all, apart from a few who are being retained in order to keep the collieries in a position to restart and free from water and other dangers. Some 2,000 men in that village will be coming on the unemployment relief list, and I have gone to the trouble of taking out some figures in connection with that case. Even when there was partial employment in that village we were paying out, in addition to unemployment insurance benefit, about £800 in parish relief, and we have been doing so for the last eight or nine 1351 months. We have a scheme there which has been certified and approved and the money is at the Treasury which ought to have been granted to us by the Unemployment Grants Committee—somewhere about £50,000 or £60,000. This money could have been usefully employed, and these men, instead of breaking their hearts and doing nothing at street corners, could have been put to do the work on the new road that I am describing.
I do not know what the Minister will be able to tell us with respect to recruitment. I want to emphasise the fact that we have in the Rhondda Valleys in the two divisions anything in the region of between 10,000 and 12,000 men who never again, even under the most prosperous conditions, can be absorbed in the industry. For the last two years no new workmen have been coming into the Rhondda Valleys at all, and we recognise that, in respect of the young men whom we have—and we have a very large number who have left school for some years, and have never had a day's employment—unless we proceed very quickly to find something useful in the shape of work for these young men to do, they will fast become unemployable. For these reasons, I urge upon the Minister to put before us some scheme in which we can co-operate with him in respect to recruiting the young men in that district, so that they may find employment elsewhere, thus, as my hon. Friend the Member for West Rhondda said, relieving the burden on the rates, which at the present time is very heavy indeed.
§ Mr. MacLAREN
Complaints have been made that men who have to traverse the country looking for employment may, in the course of those Peregrinations, go considerable distances from their homes, and it is reported that they may have to find shelter in the casual wards of some of our workhouses. When they go to these casual wards, they must remain there for two days, in which case they would not be able to apply for a job which they might possibly get if they were able to do so the day after entering the wards. If that is really the case, as has been reported, cannot something be done to remedy it? This case was given to me by a number of men who had come from the north of England looking for a job in Piccadilly the other 1352 day. They could not receive the shelter of the workhouse, because it meant taking two days, and, therefore, they had to stay out of doors all night in order to apply for a job in Piccadilly.
There is another question upon which I should like some enlightenment from the Minister. I have been taking considerable interest in the activities of the Employment Exchange in my own area, and I want to know who it is in the right hon. Gentleman's Department who looks after unemployment. To whom can I appeal on matters such as finding new avenues for employment? Has the right hon. Gentleman an official in his Department who looks after unemployment?
§ The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland)
There are the Exchange managers.
§ Mr. MacLAREN
I was not meaning that. The Exchange Managers, when they are in difficulties about finding new avenues of employment for the men in their area, have no one, so far as I know, to whom they can go for advice—no one who is a permanent official at the Ministry, a man specifically dealing with the questions of unemployment and employment. The whole of the Department, it would seem—and I do not wonder at it—is entirely devoted to the question of allocating out-of-work money, or running after the careers of those who are appealing for money, or looking up the past of everybody, in that enormous building down at Kew. In a word, the whole of the organisation, it seems, is devoted to palliatives, rather than to doing anything to solve the problem of unemployment. There is another thing, which I know would involve the bringing in of a Bill. In my own area, we have men coming before the rota committee—and I have had some experiences on the rota committee—whom we know are very, shall I say, respectable. We know that they are not the usual gentlemen who know all the arts and subtleties and manoeuvres by which it is possible to get round a rota committee, but we have to ask these men, "Have you been genuinely looking for a job? "They say, "Yes," but then they have to conform to the Regulations by showing us a list of the firms to whom they have applied, and it is very pathetic to see these men trudging round the town when we know at the Exchange beforehand that it is hopeless for them to go.
1353 It is all very well for us to sit here comfortably and talk about these things, but one sees these poor chaps coming before the rota committee, with their boots nearly off their feet, and before they go out again, we could tell them that it is hopeless for them to go to these various firms for work. But they have to do it, because of the Regulations of the Ministry. We have been trying, in Burslem more particularly, to get the employers to send their notifications of vacancies to the Employment Exchange, and I do not think I am overstating the case when I say, from my own personal experience, that the manager of the Burslem Employment Exchange can tell to a nicety, every month, the number of jobs in the area. He can tell every day-after 11 o'clock in the morning if there is likely to be a job for any man on the list among all the large firms in the town, for the employers who do not record their vacancies with him are insignificant in number. We know the vacancies which are likely to be open, and yet we have to keep these poor fellows trudging along, and knocking at doors at which we know there is no chance of employment.
Could something not be done, if not nationally, then by giving some area power to experiment on this question? Could we not get the employers to notify all the vacancies to the Employment Exchange, and could we not have such an equipment at the Exchange, with the manager and his assistants, as to obviate the necessity for these people going about on this fruitless quest, and thus do away altogether with this ridiculous question, "Are you genuinely seeking work?" Not infrequently, it has been my experience on the rota committee that the man who is most enthusiastic in producing a list of the employers from whom he has been seeking work is usually the man who has never been to anybody at all; and the honest man, who for some reason or other has not been able to get around for the last two or three days, owing perhaps to illness, is usually the man who has to suffer most because of his very honesty. I do not know if the Minister will consider that point. I am very keen about it. If he cannot do anything nationally, can he try this experiment in one district, giving the manager of the Employment Exchange there full power to secure notification of all the vacancies in his area, 1354 so that he would know whether it was of any use to send men here and there seeking jobs?
While listening to the Debate this afternoon, I have heard many questions raised in connection with the main problem of unemployment. It would be unkind to take advantage of a Conservative Minister of Labour being in his place to lecture him upon what he should do and should not do. If Conservatism means anything at all it means the maintenance of a system to which those of us who criticise him are diametrically opposed; and therefore I think it would be futile to ask the Minister of Labour to go into the country with the Minister of Agriculture in order to open up the land in the manner suggested by the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton). The Conservative party is based upon an historic development going back to the time when the land was ruthlessly torn from the people and when unemployment was generated. When land is free and men can secure a piece for themselves, not only is a man's share of the wealth produced very high but the difficulty is to get combined labour at any price. The words I am now using are the words of no less a person than Karl Marx, if he may be quoted to a Conservative Minister. Robinson Crusoe was not unemployed, nor was his man Friday, though if a Conservative landowner had come along and "collared" the land he could have kept both of them out of a job until they submitted their labour to him and he had exacted the full fruits of their labour for the maintenance of himself. That is the dispensation we have in England, and so why waste time about it? One Member after another rises in the House with schemes. The hon. Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Edwards) is not only very voluble but has a great command of Welsh eloquence, and I thought we were going to hear something useful when he began to say in his vehement way, "The Government must diagnose this disease and come forward with a scientific explanation." But it is late in the day to ask any Government to do that. We know perfectly well that man is a land animal and that he can only live by using the land, and that if land is restricted in its uses those who cannot get it will be unemployed. Why waste time? There is the reason why you have unemployed—acres 1355 of unused land in England, thousands of men looking for jobs, the Employment Exchanges in between, and respectable gentlemen on the rota committees asking these dear men, "Have you been looking for a job?" That is a system of economy such as one might expect to find in a lunatic asylum.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member seems to be developing his speech along the lines of proposing new legislation.
§ Mr. MACLAREN
I was waiting until you stopped me, Sir, but so far I have not suggested the taxation of land values. I thought I was keeping quite clear of the suggestion of how to open up the land, and, therefore, that I would not come under the restriction of your ruling. However, as I appear to have indicated to the Minister of Labour what I had in mind I will not pursue that, subject. Among all the suggestions heard in the course of the Debate there was one which I thought the Minister might adopt; it follows along a line which has been in my own mind. It was the suggestion that the Minister of Labour might do a great deal in co-operation with the Minister of Agriculture. That suggestion was made by the hon. Member for Perth. I am sure the Ministers can submerge any little jealousies that may exist between them in the effort to produce something for the unemployed.
The hon. and gallant Member for Abingdon (Major Glyn) suggested an extension of the training centres in order to qualify Britishers to go to the Colonies. If the Minister adopts the suggestion of the hon. Member for Perth and peruses the volumes of information to hand from the Ministry of Agriculture he will find many suggestions as to providing work for the unemployed; but I have to be careful, and I will not press the policy which was in my mind. Frankly, I see no use in making suggestions to Ministers of Labour as to what they may do or can do. All I have attempted this afternoon is to put a few questions as to the machinery of the Department and to hope that it may be improved. Before I sit down may I say that it was a ghastly thing to see what I saw the other morning in Piccadilly, 15,000 men crowding into that street to look for work. I spoke to some of those 1356 men afterwards. That state of thins is a ghastly reflection on the state of the country. I know that many hon. Members opposite look upon it as ghastly. We are looking for solutions of the problem. I have a solution as clear as the light which is running through this Chamber this evening, and if I did not know it and understand it I would not be in politics now, but how many people would follow me I do not know, and I must content myself with the reflection of the philosopher who said, "The older I get the more wise men become."
§ Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMS
I always like to listen to the speeches of the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren).They are always interesting, and they always give rise to a little speculation as to how long it will take him to reach a certain subject. He rather horrified me to-night, because I thought he had abandoned his allegiance to Mr. Henry George and transferred it to Karl Marx, but. I think that was merely a device to enable him to approach his subject without being pulled up. I want to comment on the interesting remark made by the hon. Member for West Rhondda (Mr. John) when he was discussing the problem of juvenile unemployment, always difficult in times of trade depression. He drew attention to the conditions which no doubt, exist in South Wales and the difficulty some of the young people there have in getting a start. I was wondering whether the decision to restrict recruiting in the coal mines may not conceivably aggravate the situation to which he draws attention. On the other hand, the situation is not a had one generally. Taking the country as a whole, the problem of juvenile unemployment is nothing like so serious now as it was three or four years ago. In a Debate on unemployment in which I spoke some months ago I produced figures as to the number of young people who were becoming registered as insured persons at the age of 16—or between the ages of 16 and 18; that being an indication, of course, that they have started work: and as the rate at which those young people were becoming insured was—allowing for those who were still at school—roughly equal to the number of young people attaining those ages it seemed to show, broadly speaking, that we were not only absorbing the whole lot but overtaking some of the arrears.
1357 The importance of that from the point of view of my hon. Friend's speech is this. If in the country as a whole the problem of juvenile employment is considered to be a particularly difficult one—and it is peculiarly difficult in certain areas—evidently what we have to do is to use the Employment Exchange system to see if we can get these young people started at work wherever there are opportunities. I agree that there is nothing more deplorable than to see young people running about with no occupation at all. I want to refer to the practice of crowds of men rushing to places where some much advertised public work is to be started. I had a case of this kind in my own constituency in which a farmer wrote to the daily papers about the difficulty he had experienced in obtaining labour to deal with a sugar-beet crop, and the result of this publicity was that a large number of men turned up in the hope of getting a job. As a matter of fact, when the farmer wrote that letter he had succeeded in getting locally all the help he required, and he had solved his problem. Nevertheless, a large number of men tramped long distances in the hope of obtaining temporary employment. I am sure that is the kind of hardship which we all want to avoid, and, if the Press would help in this direction and avoid giving undue publicity to the places where these new public works are being undertaken, this difficulty might be avoided. If the Press find it necessary to announce these things, they might make it quite clear whether all the necessary labour has been secured locally in order to avoid these men making such heartbreaking journeys.
The workhouse rule also presents a serious difficulty. I know I shall be out of order in discussing Poor Law administration, and all I wish to say is that I have experienced these difficulties locally, because some boards of guardians have been asked to enforce the two nights rule while other boards are not enforcing it. In my constituency, the result has been that we have had to keep an extra staff, because an unusually large number of these people pass from casual ward to casual ward. Of course, I do not regard the Minister of Labour as necessarily being the appropriate 1358 Minister to deal with the problem of finding jobs in the big centres of population. I know it is his duty to make sure that such jobs as may be available are filled by the people who want them, and he is also concerned with alleviating the position of those who are unable to obtain employment. I think it is a mistake to concentrate our Debates in regard to unemployment too much on the salary of the Minister of Labour instead of devoting more attention to the salary of the President of the Board of Trade, who is responsible for doing the things that may lead to less unemployment.
The last speaker referred to the difficulty of interpreting the words "genuinely seeking work.'' We are all aware of that difficulty. We are constantly receiving communications from our constituents on this question, and we know the nature of the problem. The real difficulty seems to me to be that we apply to different areas the same test. The constituency which I represent is fairly lucky, because I do not think we have more than 3 per cent. of our insured workpeople unemployed. In the constituency in Staffordshire where I was a candidate in 1923, they had nearly ten times that amount of unemployment. You might apply the test to which I have referred in my constituency in an intelligible way, but where you have one-third of the people out of employment it ceases to have the same effect, because you know the great bulk of those people cannot obtain employment under any circumstances whatsoever. One is constantly meeting people who speak of the difficulty they have in getting men to do odd jobs, and, although that is no solution of the problem of unemployment, it is an alleviation of it, and my experience is that the ordinary man out of work would far rather be in some kind of employment than drawing benefit. The ordinary workman is really more anxious to earn something than to take relief from the guardians or to obtain assistance under the Unemployment Insurance Act.
Very often there is a great deterrent in the way of these people. A man by taking on half-a-day's work may lose practically as much as he gets for that work in benefit, and I have been wondering 1359 whether the Minister of Labour can do anything to ease that situation. It is quite true that a man should not be receiving benefit and simultaneously earning wages, but by Regulations things might be made a little easier for those who are only able to get half a day's work, because it would be helping to keep them in a better physical and moral condition. This problem of the casual job arises in connection with harvest work, which, after all, is not quite so casual. It is not an insured occupation, and I am told that in some of the agricultural districts which adjoin large towns frequently there is some difficulty in obtaining temporary assistance during the harvest from the men who are unemployed in the adjoining town, because, if they start on this harvest work, no stamps are put on their cards, and they may be prejudicing their future position. I ask the Minister of Labour if he can do anything to ease that situation.
There is also another difficulty in this connection which arises from the shortage of houses. Often, this difficulty arises in districts where trade is fairly good, and where there has been a tendency for the population to move into those districts. A man may hear of a job in a certain town, and he finds that he is unable to obtain a house. He may obtain lodgings, but he cannot bring his wife and family with him, and a situation arises in which that man has to pay for lodgings and keep up his home elsewhere. Under these circumstances, the man finds that he cannot meet his obligations, and he is disqualified from benefit for giving up his job. I think those in charge of our employment exchanges, when sending men to jobs a long way from their homes, should be able to inform those men what the prospects are of obtaining housing accommodation. I am sorry for having had to put a number of questions to the Minister of Labour, but they are just a few thoughts which have been running through my mind which I have not had any previous opportunity of putting before the Minister.
§ Mr. BATEY
I come from a part of the country which in regard to the probblem we are discussing may be justly described as a black area. The Parliamentary 1360 Secretary, in his speech, said that over the whole of the County of Durham the percentage of unemployment is over 22 per cent. He also said that there were parts of the country where the percentage of unemployment was 40 per cent. and even 50 per cent. In my Division, I have a number of those areas, and it is simply heart-breaking to go to those colliery villages only to find the people sinking deeper and deeper into poverty. There seems to be no hope whatever for the people in those mining areas and more especially in the necessitous areas. A week or two ago I had a letter from the secretary of an unemployment committee in my Division, giving the amount of work at the collieries around one of the smaller towns. I will read the names and figures to the Committee, as they will show the Minister how very bad unemployment is in that area. The list is as follows:
That is a very serious state of affairs; I have never known a condition of things like it in the county of Durham during all the time that I have been there. It would not, perhaps, be fair to say that it is typical of the rest of my Division, but, if I were making a guess at the number of men unemployed in my own Division, I think should be safe in guessing that throughout the whole Division it is between 40 and 50 per cent. One is anxious to know what the Government are prepared to do for these "black" areas. because our experience is that the men in these areas have no chance of getting work anywhere else. There are no shipyards, and there is no other work that they can take. They are simply doomed to unemployment and their experience is that, instead of receiving sympathy from the Ministry of Labour, they are being by scores and hundreds cut off from unemployment benefit. It seems that, if the Ministry can get a chance to make an excuse to cut off these men from unemployment benefit, they are cut off, and the result 1361 is that they are forced to go to the guardians. Just recently the Gateshead Board of Guardians issued a circular, to which I want to draw the attention of the Minister, as it is typical of my Division and, I believe, of a good deal of the county of Durham. It is really a speech delivered by the Chairman of the Poor Law Conference at Keswick on the 14th June last, and it is well worth remembering. He said:
Percent working Roddymoor Colliery … 70 Bowden Close Colliery … 75 Steel House Colliery … 50 Sunnybrow Colliery … None Wooley Colliery … None Cold Knob Colliery … None Craig Lee Colliery … None McNeil Colliery … None Cabin House Colliery … NoneIt is a matter of grave consequence that there should be the large number of applications to guardians for out-relief from unemployed men.That is rather an important statement, and I would like to repeat it to the Minister of Labour. This gentleman, who is not connected with a colliery district, said that it is a matter of grave consequence that there should be the large number of applications to guardians for out-relief from unemployed men. It is our experience in the North of England that unemployed men, instead of receiving sympathy from the Ministry of Labour and being relieved out of the Unemployment Fund, in view of the condition in which they are, are being forced to the guardians and compelled to receive relief from the guardians. The gentle- man whom I have been quoting gives as an instance the Gateshead Union. He says:The present weekly expenditure on outdoor relief alone in Gateshead Union represents a total rate of 6s. 3d. in the £per annum, made up as follows: Ordinary recipients, 1s. 7d.; unemployed cases, 4s. 8d.He concluded his speech with these words, which the Minister ought to remember:In industrial areas out-relief has been much swollen by guardians having to take on and maintain unemployed persons and their dependants, where no other provision is made for them. The position seems to be that, when the man's unemployment relief stops, he is generally obliged to go to the guardians, so that, while the number of unemployed is reported by the Labour Exchanges to be decreasing, the number of unemployed relieved by the guardians is increasing.It is easy for the Minister of Labour to keep showing every month that the numbers of unemployed are decreasing. They may be, but they are simply pushed from the Unemployment Fund on to the guardians, and we believe that that is the last place to which they ought to be 1362 forced to go. There are two other aspects of this matter that I want the Minister to keep in mind. One is with regard to the young men. The policy of the Ministry is not to relieve young men where there is anyone else in the house who is working. I have a case of a young man living in my own Division, at Spennymoor, whose father is an aged miner, drawing the aged miner's benefit. That is all that the father has. There are two other brothers in the house, and, because they are working, this young man has only had three months' benefit. I submit to the Minister that there is no hope of the young men in our mining areas obtaining employment. It is no use their going round to other collieries, as they are continually doing, because it is impossible for them to find employment at the other collieries; and, seeing that it is so difficult for them to find employment at other collieries, the Minister ought to relax that rule, and endeavour to give unemployment benefit to young men as long as it is possible to do so.
There is another ease that I have had only recently, in connection with another class of workmen. In our collieries we have men in regard to whom, when work was good, there was very little trouble, that is to say, men who have been injured in the pits, who have partially recovered, and are certified as being able to do light work. We find that these men are not able to obtain employment at the present time. If a man has been injured and is merely certified as able to do light work, it is useless for him to seek other employment, and we find that these men who are only able to do light work are, like our other people, being cut off from unemployment benefit, so that there is nothing for them except Poor Law relief. I have here the case of a man, 54 years of age, an ex-service man, who had an accident in May, 1922. He received compensation until December, 1923. Then he was certified as able to do light work, and, so long as the colliery concerned was employing its full complement of men, he had light work to do. He was then receiving light work compensation amounting to 3s. 2d. a week. Now the colliery cannot employ him. He has been able to get his light work compensation raised to 17s. 6d. a week, but that man, an ex-service man with a wife 1363 and family, who has to pay 6s. 6d. a week for rent, finds it impossible to get any unemployment benefit.
There was a time, when this Government first came into office, when, if we sent cases like this to the Minister of Labour, we used to meet with some sympathy, and not infrequently we had the cases put right. This particular case I sent to the Ministry of Labour a few weeks ago, and received the reply that, as there was no possibility of the man finding employment, the Ministry could not see their way to give him extended benefit. I submit that the Minister should not treat the dark spots in our mining areas as he would, perhaps, treat other areas. There is no possibility of these men getting work and, therefore, he ought to take the special conditions of those areas into consideration, and see if it is not possible to do something for them in the peculiar circumstances in which they are placed.
I listened to the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to hear whether there was any hope that during the coming winter they would be doing something to help this mass of unemployed. The only remedies he seemed to suggest for the present deplorable condition of affairs were these. He said men would not be allowed to enter the mines unless they were over 18 and had formerly been miners. That is a good thing as far as it goes, but it is a very small step. It is a good thing because it would prevent strangers going into the mines. But, on the other hand, no practical colliery manager, when he can get skilled miners who have been used to the work and understand it, will take strangers, so that it is really a very small step and, all said and done, means very little. It is no solution of this problem. It is a mere flea-bite. It will not do anything towards solving the problem of unemployment in the mines.
The hon. Gentleman laid stress upon another remedy. He said they had been training single men at Brandon and Claydon for the purpose of sending them overseas. That again may be a good thing as far as it goes, but in our opinion these young men should be trained for agriculture in this country and not sent overseas. But it is only young men, and that again is a very small step. You 1364 might double the number, but still it would be a very small step towards solving the problem of unemployment in the mines. I was surprised to hear the hon. Gentleman say wages were relatively as high as in 1921. I think he meant generally for all trades. Certainly it is not correct in connection with the coal mines. Wages are not relatively as high to-day as they were in 1921. The wages paid in March of that year were £21,250,000. In March of this year they were only £9,000,000, and our men have had an hour a day added to their time. So it cannot be argued that wages are relatively as high as in 1921. I think the hon. Gentleman made rather a mistake in that.
The Parliamentary Secretary pleaded for better industrial relations, and he said the state of trade was more satisfactory. That may be true so far as some trades are concerned, but it is certainly not true of the coal industry. Since the Government came into office the coal industry is immensely worse, and therefore they ought to face the responsibility. They ought to realise that they are partly responsible, and they should think, not merely of these summer months, if we can call them summer months, but they should think of the winter that is coming. With the winter that is facing us in the North of England the outlook is extremely black. I should like the Minister to hold out some hope of something we can expect from the Government towards solving this problem of the unemployed miners. The Parliamentary Secretary admitted that there is a large number of unemployed miners who will not be able to find employment again at or in the coal mines. That may be partially due to the Government, and they ought seriously to consider some steps to find work for these men. With the prospects looking so extremely black, as they do at present, we take this opportunity, as we are bound to take every opportunity, of calling attention to the condition of affairs in connection with the mines. I hope the Minister after he has had a holiday—I hope his holiday will not be too long—will try to fathom the question and to find some solution in order to help our unemployed miners.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
The Debate to-day has ranged over a very wide 1365 number of questions. Anyone who listens to hon. Members who speak for the mining districts knows quite well the hard times the miners are going through, not in all the mining districts but in many of them, and in some there are peculiarly hard conditions. Parts of Scotland form one snob district, Durham another and part of South Wales a third. Though there are difficulties in the mining industry generally, there are peculiar difficulties in some districts more than in others. I hope to deal with that subject later on. What I should like to recall to the House at present is the general state of the country. It is quite natural that anyone dealing with this subject should lay stress upon the hardships that are suffered where unemployment exists. I am equally clear that it would give a wrong impression and it would be a pity if we did not take into real consideration the broad view of the country as a whole. It does not mean that so far as any palliatives or remedies can be applied to particular cases or particular places they should not be applied, but it would be a pity if a mistaken view were entertained with regard to the country as a whole.
Many of the speeches that have dealt with unemployment and with the darker side of the question, if taken by themselves, would, I am certain, give an entirely erroneous impression of the state of the country as a whole. I say without any hesitation—and I am ready to prove my words up to the hilt—that, broadly speaking, the level of living in this country at this time is as good as it was in 1924, or as it was before the War, or in 1900, or at any period. I say that advisedly and I am ready to give the reasons. If anyone wishes to try and ascertain the level of living in the country, he has to take into account three or four factors acting together. One of those factors is the rate of wages, another is the degree of unemployment, and a third is the cost of living. Before this Debate took place, I asked for figures to be got out for me with some care as to the position of the country both in previous years and now, with regard to these different factors.
There is a very general tendency to compare the present state of affairs, apart From 1924, with the 1366 year just before the War, 1914, or with 1900. Strictly speaking, it is not quite a legitimate comparison, for of the two years in which the standard of living reached its peak, one was 1900 and the other 1914. If anyone wants to make a fair comparison, he should compare the present day with the average of the period rather than with "peak" years. But, even so, the present period, which is a period in which there is a slow improvement, and the country is slowly moving on the upgrade, stands comparison with the best years in the country's history. I have taken the figures for, first of all, the rate of wages, then a series of figures of the amount of employment and unemployment for all those years, and then a third series of the cost of living. If you try and combine those into a single composite table you begin to get somewhat far removed from actualities, but at the same time it is what any real student would do if trying to ascertain the real situation. The result, by combining in one view the rates of wages, the unemployment situation, and the cost of living, is that the present time is at least as good as 1924 and certainly as good as 1914 or 1900, and from another point of view it is better.
There is a fourth factor that also ought to be borne in mind when considering the question carefully. The rates of wages do not tell the whole story. Employment shows you how far those rates of wages are earned day by day, but there is another thing which comes in, and it is not merely time rates, it is the actual earnings. The tendency from earlier years has been, and still is, for an increasing proportion of work to be done on piece work rates, and when improvements are made in an industry, as in the cotton industry, for example, the basis on which the percentage is calculated itself improves. From that point of view also, it is quite clear that there has on the whole been an improvement.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
Yes, I have taken into account as far as I can the increase in rates and taxes per capita, which are more than off-set at the present time, from the point of view of the 1367 insured population, by the insurance systems which have been introduced. That is the broad situation so far as the actual figures of unemployment are concerned. I would like to reinforce once again a fact which has been stated by my hon. Friend earlier this afternoon. We look at the figure of the live register when it is published every Wednesday, and we are too apt to forget the total of which this is the unemployed portion. Since 1924, the total of insured persons has increased by nearly half a million, and, therefore, when the figure of the live register remains approximately the same, it is the same number out of a considerable addition to the total, and from that point of view, again, an improvement is shown.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
Yes, the actual total at work, I think, is 554,000 more—I will look it up and give the hon. Member the exact figures—that is, over half-a-million on a total of over ten and a half millions.
§ Mr. PALING
That is not quite what I have in mind. The right hon. Gentleman gave the comparative figures of the cost of living, wages, and unemployment, as between 1914 and 1926, but he did not quote the figures. I wonder if he could.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
The number of insured persons increased from 11,664,000 in 1924 to about 12,150,000 at the present time, whereas the total on the register remains the same. As regards the other figures, I would never pin myself to a composite figure for the total, but you have to take these different factors together. Broadly speaking, the rates of wages, taking 1880 as 100, ran from 118 in 1900 to 129 in 1914 and 221 in 1924, and for this month—and I say at once a midsummer month is unduly favourable for comparison so you have to make allowance for that—the figure is 227. From the point of view of employment, taking 1880 as 100, the figures are 103 for 1900, 103 for 1914, 95 for 1924, and 96 for April of 1927.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
They had to he, perfectly obviously, before the un 1368 employment insurance scheme was introduced, but they have now to be based on unemployment insurance figures. Finally, for the cost of living, again taking 1880 m 100, the figure was round about 82 in 1900, 90 pre-War, 157 in 1924 and 148 in April this year. Those are the different tables which are taken together and viewed together for comparison.
§ Mr. T. WILLIAMS
Does the right hon. Gentleman include in the cost of living figures any sort of reference to the changes in the rents which are payable all over the country?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
The cost of-living figure is taken on the same basis as previously. There has been a question as to whether it should be recalculated or not, but at present the balance of opinion on all sides is for waiting a little longer.
Let me give just one or two other figures. The hon. Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey), following the suggestion of his predecessors, said that the reduction in unemployment had been caused by taking the people off the unemployment insurance system and putting them on to the rates. I can say categorically that, as far as the present unemployment insurance system is concerned, it is an unemployment insurance system and not a relief system. I have definitely safeguarded that fact. But, at the same time, while keeping it within its nature as an unemployment insurance system and not as a relief system, it is administered with a good deal of discretion and of compassion in those districts where the hardship is greatest. On the other hand, there is nothing to show, as far as the statistics are concerned, that people are driven from insurance on to the rates. [Interruption.] Hon. Members may laugh, but I am now giving the facts. I have had a calculation made which I published as a White Paper, and no one has ventured to criticise or disprove it. I have had it recalculated up to date, and the same result is precisely true at the present time.
We have had an examination of a number of test cases of men who have been disallowed benefit over a period of 14 months. Of the total disallowed, 21 per cent. did not again get insurable employment during the period. This percentage 1369 included all those who died or had emigrated and those who went into some non-insurable employment. The result went to show that the comparative number of those who, because their claims had been disallowed, had to have recourse to the rates was small. I had another test case taken to assure myself on this point. Of those who were disallowed, 9.3 per cent., were having some relief from the rates before and only 3 and a half per cent., because of the disallowance, had to have an increase in the help that was given to them from the rates. Of the remaining 90 per cent. and more who had not been in receipt of poor relief before, 8 per cent., and no more, had recourse within the next fortnight to the rates. Broadly speaking, it means that of the disallowances in these test cases over 88 per cent. never went and received any more relief from the rates. [Interruption.]
§ Mr. MACKINDER
Would the right hon. Gentleman say how it is that when figures are asked for here as to the number of persons who have gone for relief after having been turned off from unemployment benefit, we have not been able to get them? Yet the right hon. Gentleman can quote them to-night.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
I give this test case which we had for our own information. [Interruption.] I will gladly give hon. Members, and the hon. Member who asked the question, all the information I have about it. It is precisely the kind of information that I ought to get from my Department, and I will gladly and freely give it to hon. Members opposite.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
I may have received it though I do not remember it. [Interruption.] I give the facts as I have them, and apply them. It is perfectly obvious that every board of guardians, naturally, would like to have those who are in receipt of relief taken off its shoulders and given State relief out of State funds. But the un-employment 1370 insurance scheme is not a State relief scheme.
The fact, as I say, is that, broadly speaking, the level of living in this country is at this moment at least as high as it was in 1924, and at least as high as in any of the best years preceding the War.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Preston (Mr. T. Shaw) put a question at the opening of the Debate, and it amounts to this: "Even if it is so, why has there not been a greater improvement since 1924?" The hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. Mac-Laren) I think, tried to supply the answer. He said, "What are the principles of Conservatism? Can you expect any action to be taken?" We do not take our definition of the principles of Conservatism from the hon. Member for Burslem however pleasantly he puts it. The principles of Conservatism are these: We differ from the old Liberalism in that we do not allow things simply to take their own course, and we differ from modern Socialism in that we do not want the State to undertake managerial functions. What we want is to lay down minimum standards of proper behaviour and of the proper conduct of industry, standards which should advance by degrees; to lay down those minimum standards and, except in exceptional cases, to allow private enterprise to have free play. This is a policy which is different in kind from the policies of the other two parties. Where there are quite exceptional cases we are prepared, without hesitation, to deal with them.
With regard to what can be done, there are two distinct lines of action. Of one of these I heartily approve, and of the other I heartily disapprove. The line of action of which I would approve is to try to see how far we can help to retain people in industry. It is for that reason we started training centres. My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary has announced an increase in the training centres to about double their present size. I would gladly see them increased much further. On the other hand, for reasons which I hope to explain briefly, I would not do that until the public finance is in a, better state than at the present time, because the balance of loss is greater than the gain. In the same way 1371 in the case of juvenile unemployment centres, I would gladly see them maintained and, where needed, increased; but I do not think that you can expect to have instruction in them of the type That you would get at a continuation school, nor must you treat them merely as a boys' club. What you can expect to get in them, as has been done in the voluntary centres in which I helped in times past, is, that you can help to maintain and to increase the boys' and girls' interest in industry and their capacity for it. I am sure, however, that it is not possible to give them a long system of instruction, for the very reason that in so far as they are unemployment centres you want to get the juveniles back into industry as soon as possible, and prolonged instruction is not, therefore, possible.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
Let them go back to work, when they are of age, as soon as employment offers.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
Maintain them in those districts where there is any considerable degree of unemployment. The hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) asked about settlement upon the land. I am afraid that I cannot deal with that question, because I am not the Minister of Agriculture; but I can say this, that the hon. Member is quite mistaken if he thinks that there is no liaison at the present time between the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Agriculture. As far as harvest work is concerned, we are in touch with them, and as far as work is required in regard to beet sugar we are in touch with them, and if and when there are schemes which are required for absorbing any section of the population in agriculture we are in touch with them for dealing with a matter of that kind. As far as placing is concerned, everyone knows the difficulties we had last year. Every inducement is given at the present time and every encouragement in every Exchange, to see that the task of placing men in work is developed on the best lines. That, I candidly say, is far and away the best of any tests for genuinely seeking work. It is for that reason that 1372 we are bending our efforts in that direction.
On the other hand, there is a type of policy to which I do not subscribe, and that is the policy of relief schemes for work. There may be one or two schemes which are worth doing, but they are the exceptions and not the rule. The hon. Member for Dundee made an interesting speech on that subject this afternoon. Where there may be an exception and where it can be proved to be worth it, where the facts and figures will warrant it, then I would support it gladly, but it would have to be borne out absolutely by the facts and the figures, otherwise I am quite clear in my own mind that relief works do more harm than good.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
They cost the country money and they cost the country employment in other ways. The essence of the business is this: it is an easy thing to see the men who are employed, say, on making a road or levelling a park or doing a piece of work which is not really much anticipated; it is easy to see a certain number of men being given employment on work of that kind but it means that work of a much healthier kind is curtailed in other directions, and that is why I am against it. There is, I will not say a fixed quantum of credit in this country, but there is credit which if it is used to-day for relief works, which are not the best economic kind of work for any set of men, will not be available to be spent in the expansion of industry which is of a much more useful kind. The amount of credit available in the country at this moment is smaller than before the dispute of last year and, therefore, the need is greater that an undue amount should not be spent on relief work which diminishes employment of a natural kind in other directions.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
The right hon. Member for Preston said why not bet out-of-work schemes in order to make up to 1924. My answer is that it would make the position worse and not better. In considering why the figures to-day are not better than those for 1924, the right hon. Gentleman did not mention the coal dispute of last year. If there is responsibility to be fixed anywhere for the lack of improvement between 1924 and now, the responsibility began with the absolutely mistaken influence of the Government of 1924 in asking for an increase in the coal industry, when a plain view of the facts showed that it was absolutely unwarranted and would be calamitous to the industry.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
The right hon. Gentleman's figures were misleading. He quoted the increase in wages in the first half of 1924.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
They were figures supplied to the right hon. Gentleman the gist of which he has not fully understood. He quoted figures of increase in the first six months of 1924 to compare the present day with the same day in 1924. What he did not realise was that the great bulk of that increase in wages in 1924 came in the coal industry and that the coal industry, with a month's ascertainments and a month afterwards before the wages were paid, had a lag of two months.
Is the right hon. Gentleman correct when he says that the increase for the first six months in 1924 was in the coal trade, when it did not operate before the 1st April?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND
In 1924, there was an increase in weekly wages in the mining industry of £302,000 in the first six months. Those were the figures which the right hon. Gentleman gave. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Yes. In 1924 the whole of that increase was given as in the first six months by the right hon. Gentleman, who used the figures to show that there was an up-grade through the first half of 1924. There was nothing of the kind. The coal industry had passed the peak of 1374 its prosperity by the middle of 1924. The figures which he gave had a lag of two months. The figures for June related to April, the figures for July related to May. If he had taken the state of the industry in June, reflected in the returns for August, he would have found that the industry had passed its peak of prosperity and was on the down grade again. That is a matter of common knowledge to everyone who knows the industry. It was existing on a basis of artificial prosperity up to the end of the Ruhr occupation. When that occupation came to an end it meant the prosperity of the industry lasted for a few months later owing to the contracts which had been made, but it was plain that a hard time was in store which would not unlikely result in trouble in the future. It was the perfectly calamitous mistake of the Labour Government of 1924 which started the trouble which has existed from then until now, and the responsibility lies on the Government of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member. There is, however, this real difference in the state of affairs between now and three years ago. There are 170,000 more miners out of work now than there were three years ago, and there are 170,000 fewer out of work in the other trades of the country. That is the fundamental difference.
As regards the miners, the collapse in employment in the coal industry was absolutely bound to come after the artificial prosperity due to the Ruhr occupation. Every hon. Member who represents a mining constituency knows that perfectly well. The hon. Member for Spennymoor says that our policy of limited recruitment and training is only a small thing. He knows that it is not a small thing. It affects 20,000 to 30,000 people, and even as regards the number of men employed in the mining industry that is not a small figure. The pity of it is that we have not been able to get it until now; and the hon. Member knows the reason why. If the hon. Member asks whether it is possible to employ 150,000 men on relief work, I say that it is not possible, but what is possible is to do what we can to alleviate the situation and deal with it by limitation of recruitment and by training, recognising that it does not meet the whole of the difficulty. At the same time we must try and get the 1375 absorptive power of other industries working as well. Take the shale mining industry, which has been very hard hit. Half the men that were out have been absorbed. If we could get the absorptive power of industry all round to work, it would absorb bigger numbers than any amount of artificial help that could be given. While there has been trouble in the coal mining industry, cheaper fuel and cheaper transport have been largely responsible for the improvement in other industries I am sorry
§ that I am not able to develop this point further this evening owing to the exigencies of time.
§ It being Ten of the Clock, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution under consideration.
§ Question put, "That '£7,303,564' stand part of the Resolution."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 302; Noes, 142.1379
|Division No. 296.]||AYES.||[10.0 p.m.|
|Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel||Cope, Major William||Hartington, Marquess of|
|Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.||Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.||Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)|
|Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)||Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.||Haslam. Henry c.|
|Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)||Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.||Hawke, John Anthony|
|Applin, Colonel R. V, K.||Crooke. J. Smedley (Deritend)||Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.|
|Apsley, Lord||Crookshank. Cpt. H. (Lindsey. Gainsbro)||Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)|
|Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.||Curzon, Captain Viscount||Henderson. Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)|
|Astor, Viscountess||Dalkeith, Earl of||Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.|
|Atkinson, C.||Davidson. J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)||Henn, Sir Sydney H.|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Davidson, Major-General sir J. H||Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)|
|Balniel, Lord||Davies. Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset. Yeovil)||Hills, Major John Waller|
|Barclay-Harvey, C. M.||Davies, Dr. Vernon||Hilton, Cecil|
|Barnett, Major Sir Richard||Dean, Arthur Wellesley||Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.|
|Barnston, Major Sir Harry||Dixey, A. C.||Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)|
|Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.||Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert||Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard|
|Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)||Drewe, C.||Hope, Sir Harry (Forlar)|
|Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.||Edmondson, MajorA. J.||Hopkins, J. W. W.|
|Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)||Elliot, Major Walter E.||Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)|
|Berry, Sir George||Ellis, R. G.||Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.|
|Bethel, A.||Elveden. Viscount||Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.|
|Betterton, Henry B.||England, Colonel A.||Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)|
|Birchall, Major J. Dearman||Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. -M.)||Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)|
|Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)||Everard, W. Lindsay||Hume, Sir G. H.|
|Blades, Sir George Rowland||Fairfax, Captain J. G.||Huntingfield, Lord|
|Bourne, Captain Robert Croft||Falle, Sir Bertram G.||Hurd, Percy A.|
|Bowyer, Captain G. E. W||Falls, Sir Charles F.||Hurst, Gerald B.|
|Braithwaite, Major A. N.||Fanshawe, Captain G. D.||Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.|
|Briscoe, Richard George||Fermoy, Lord||Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)|
|Brittain, Sir Harry||Finburgh, S.||Jephcott, A. R.|
|Brocklebank, C. E. R.||Ford. Sir P. J.||Jones, G W. H. (Stoke Newington)|
|Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.||Forestier-Walker, Sir L.||Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)|
|Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Henham)||Forrest, W.||Kindersley, Major G. M.|
|Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newo'y)||Foster, sir Harry S.||Kinloch-Cooke. Sir Clement|
|Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James||Foxcroft, Captain C. T.||Knox, Sir Alfred|
|Bullock. Captain M.||Fraser, Captain Ian||Lamb, J. Q.|
|Burman, J. B.||Fremantle. Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.||Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.|
|Burton, Colonel H. W.||Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony||Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip|
|Butler, Sir Geoffrey||Galbraith, J. F. W.||Little, Dr. E. Graham|
|Butt. Sir Alfred||Ganzonl, Sir John||Lloyd. Cyril E. (Dudley)|
|Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward||Gates, Percy||Locker-Lampson. G. (Wood Green)|
|Caine, Gordon Hall||Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton||Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)|
|Campbell. E. T.||Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John||Loder. J. de V.|
|Cassels, J. D.||Glyn, Major R. G. C.||Long, Major Eric|
|Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)||Goff. Sir Park||Looker, Herbert William|
|Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. H. (Prtsmth. S.)||Gower, Sir Robert||Lougher. Lewis|
|Cazalet, Captain Victor A.||Grace, John||Lowe, Sir Francis William|
|Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)||Grant, Sir J. A.||Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hush Vere|
|Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton||Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.||Luce, Maj. -Gen. Sir Richard Harman|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)||Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter||Lumley. L. R.|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Greene, W. P. Crawford||MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen|
|Charteris, Brigadier-General J.||Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)||Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)|
|Chilcott, Sir Warden||Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John||Macintyre, Ian|
|Christie, J. A.||Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristrol, N.)||McLean, Major A.|
|Churchman, Sir Arthur C.||Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.||McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John|
|Clarry, Reginald George||Gunston, Captain D. W.||Macquisten, F. A.|
|Clayton, G. C||Hacking, Captain Douglas H.||MacRobert, Alexander M.|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Hail, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)||Maitland. Sir Arthur D. Steel-|
|Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.||Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)||Makins, Brigadier-General E.|
|Cohen, Major J. Brunel||Hanbury, C.||Malone. Major P. B.|
|Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips||Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry||Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn|
|Colman, N. C. D.||Harland, A.||Margesson, Captain D.|
|Conway, Sir W. Martin||Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)||Marriott. Sir J. A. R|
|Cooper, A. Duff||Harrison, G. J. C.||Meller, R. J.|
|Merriman, F. B.||Remer, J. R.||Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)|
|Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)||Remnant, Sir James||Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)|
|Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)||Rentoul, G. S.||Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-|
|Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)||Rice, Sir Frederick||Tinne, J. A.|
|Moore, Sir Newton J.||Richardson, sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of|
|Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.||Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)||Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough|
|Moreing, Captain A. H.||Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)||Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.|
|Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)||Ropner, Major L.||Waddington, R.|
|Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph||Rye, F. G.||Wallace, Captain D. E.|
|Nelson, Sir Frank||Salmon, Major I.||Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)|
|Neville. Sir Reginald J.||Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)||Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.|
|Newman, Sir R. H. S, D. L. (Exeter)||Sandeman, N. Stewart||Warrender, Sir Victor|
|Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)||Sanders, Sir Robert A.||Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)|
|Nicholson, O. (Westminster)||Sanderson, Sir Frank||Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)|
|Nleid, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert||Sandon, Lord||Watts, Dr. T.|
|Nuttall, Ellis||Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.||Wells, S. R.|
|Oakley, T.||Savery, S. S.||White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple-|
|O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)||Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)||Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)|
|O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh||Sheffield, Sir Berkeley||Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)|
|Oman, Sir Charles William C.||Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)||Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)|
|Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William||Sinclair. Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst.)||Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)|
|Pennefather, Sir John||Skelton, A. N.||Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George|
|Penny, Frederick George||Slaney, Major P. Kenyan||Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl|
|Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)||Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dlne, c.)||Wise, Sir Fredric|
|Perkins, Colonel E. K.||Smith-Carington, Neville W.||Withers, John James|
|Perring, Sir William George||Smithers, Waldron||Wolmer, Viscount|
|Peto, sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)||Womersley, W. J.|
|Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)||Spender-Clay, Colonel H.||Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)|
|Philipson, Mabel||Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F||Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.),|
|Pilcher, G.||Stanley, Lord (Fylde)||Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)|
|Pilditch, Sir Philip||Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)||Woodcock, Colonel H. C.|
|Pownall, Sir Assheton||Steel, Major Samuel Strang||Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.|
|Preston, William||Storry-Deans, R.||Wragg, Herbert|
|Price. Major C. W. M.||Streatfeild, Captain S. R.||Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.|
|Radford, E. A.||Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.||Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)|
|Raine, Sir Walter||Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser|
|Ramsden. E.||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Rawson, Sir Cooper||Templeton, W. P||Commander B. Eyres Monsell and|
|Rees, Sir Beddoe||Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)||Major Sir George Hennessy|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)||Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)||Mosley, Oswald|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff, Cannock)||Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Murnin, H.|
|Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')||Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Naylor, T. E.|
|Ammon, Charles George||Groves, T.||Oliver, George Harold|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Grundy, T. W.||Palln, John Henry|
|Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)||Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)||Paling. W.|
|Baker, Walter||Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||Pethick-Lawrence, F. W|
|Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertlilery)||Hardle, George D.||Potts, John S.|
|Barnes, A.||Harris, Percy A.||Richardson, H. (Houghton-ie-Spring)|
|Batey, Joseph||Hayday, Arthur||Riley, Ben|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Henderson, T. (Glasgow)||Ritson, J.|
|Broad, F. A.||Hirst, G. H.||Rose, Frank H.|
|Bromfield, William||Hirst, W. (Bradford, south)||Salter, Dr. Alfred|
|Bromley, J.||Hore-Belisha, Leslie||Scrymgeour, E.|
|Brown, Ernest (Leith)||Hudson, J, H. (Huddersfield),||Scurr, John|
|Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)||Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)||Sexton, James|
|Buchanan, G.||Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)|
|Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel||John, William (Rhondda, West)||Shepherd, Arthur Lewis|
|Charleton, H. C.||Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)||Shiels, Dr. Drummond|
|Clowes, S.||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||Short, Alfred(Wednesbury)|
|Cluse, W. S.||Jones, J, J. (West Ham, Silvertown)||Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John|
|Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.||Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)||Sitch, Charles H.|
|Compton, Joseph||Kelly, W. T.||Smillie, Robert|
|Connolly, M.||Kennedy, T.||Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)|
|Cove, W. G.||Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.||Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)|
|Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)||Kirkwood, D||Smith, Rennie (Penistone)|
|Crawfurd, H. E.||Lansbury, George||Snell, Harry|
|Dalton, Hugh||Lawrence, Susan||Stamford, T. W.|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Lawson, John James||Stephen, Campbell|
|Day, Colonel Harry||Lee, F.||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)|
|Dennison, R.||Lindley, F. W.||Strauss, E. A.|
|Duncan, C.||Livingstone, A. M.||Sutton, J. E.|
|Dunnico, H.||Lowth, T.||Taylor, R. A.|
|Edge, Sir William||Lunn, William||Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)|
|Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)||Mackinder, W.||Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)|
|Fenby, T. D.||MacLaren, Andrew||Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)|
|Gardner, J. P.||Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)||Thurtle, Ernest|
|Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.||March, S.||Townend, A. E.|
|Gibbins, Joseph||Maxton, James||Trevelyan, Ht. Hon. C. P.|
|Gillett, George M.||Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)||Viant, S. P.|
|Gosling, Harry||Montague, Frederick||Wallhead, Richard C.|
|Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)||Morris, R. H.||Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen|
|Greenall, T.||Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)|
|Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)||Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)||Windsor, Walter|
|Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney||Williams, David (Swansea, E.)||Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)|
|Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah||Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)|
|Wellock, Wilfred||Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Westwood, J||Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)||Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whiteley.|
|Wilkinson, Ellen C.|
§ Question put,
§ "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."1380
§ The House divided: Ayes, 316; Noes, 140.1381
|Division No. 297.]||AYES.||[10. 12p.m.|
|Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel||Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)||Hilton, Cecil|
|Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.||Cunliffe, Sir Herbert||Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.|
|Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)||Curzon, Captain Viscount||Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)|
|Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)||Dalkeith, Earl of||Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard|
|Applin, Colonel R. V. K.||Davidson, J. (Hertf'd. Hemel Hempst'd)||Hopkins, J. W. W.|
|Apsley, Lord||Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.||Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)|
|Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.||Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovll)||Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.|
|Astor, Viscountess||Davies, Dr. Vernon||Howard-Bury, Lieut. Colonel C. K.|
|Atkinson, C.||Dean, Arthur Wellesley||Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney. N.)|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Dixey, A. C.||Hudson, R. S. (Cumbent'nd, Whiten'n)|
|Balniel, Lord||Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert||Hume, Sir G. H.|
|Banks, Reginald Mitchell||Drewe, C.||Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis|
|Barclay-Harvey, C. M.||Edmondson, Major A. J.||Huntingfield, Lord|
|Barnett, Major Sir Richard||Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)||Hurd, Percy A.|
|Barnston, Major Sir Harry||Elliot, Major Walter E.||Hurst, Gerald B.|
|Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.||Ellis, R. G.||Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.|
|Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)||Elveden, Viscount||Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)|
|Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.||England, Colonel A.||Jephcott, A. R.|
|Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)||Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)||Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)|
|Bennett, A. J.||Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)||Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)|
|Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-||Everard, W. Lindsay||Kindersley, Major G. M.|
|Berry, Sir George||Fairfax, Captain J. G.||Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement|
|Bethel, A.||Falle, Sir Bertram G.||Knox, Sir Alfred|
|Betterton, Henry B.||Falls, Sir Charles F.||Lamb, J. Q.|
|Birchall, Major J. Dearman||Fanshawe, Captain G. D.||Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.|
|Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)||Fermoy, Lord||Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip|
|Blades, Sir George Rowland||Finburgh, S.||Little, Dr. E. Graham|
|Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.||Ford, Sir P. J.||Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)|
|Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.||Forestier-Walker, Sir L.||Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)|
|Braithwaite, Major A. N.||Forrest, W.||Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)|
|Briscoe, Richard George||Foster, Sir Harry S.||Loder, J. de V.|
|Brittain, Sir Harry||Foxcroft, Captain C. T.||Long, Major Eric|
|Brocklebank, C. E. R.||Fraser, Captain Ian||Looker, Herbert William|
|Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.||Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.||Lougher, Lewis|
|Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)||Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony||Lowe, Sir Francis William|
|Brown, Brig. Gen. H.C (Berks, Newb'y)||Galbraith, J. F. W||Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere|
|Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James||Ganzonl, Sir John||Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman|
|Bullock, Captain M.||Gates, Percy||Lumley, L. R.|
|Burman, J. B.||Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton||MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen|
|Burton, Colonel H. W.||Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John||Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)|
|Butler, Sir Geoffrey||Glyn, Major R. G. C.||MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)|
|Butt, Sir Alfred||Goff, Sir Park||Macintyre, Ian|
|Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward||Gower, Sir Robert||McLean, Major A.|
|Calne, Gordon Hall||Grace, John||Macmillan, Captain H.|
|Campbell, E. T.||Grant, Sir J. A.||McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John|
|Cassels, J. D.||Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.||Macquisten, F. A.|
|Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)||Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter||MacRobert, Alexander M.|
|Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)||Greene, W. P. Crawford||Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel|
|Cazalet, Captain Victor A.||Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)||Makins, Brigadier-General E.|
|Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)||Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John||Malone, Major P. B.|
|Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton||Guest. Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)||Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)||Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.||Margesson, Captain D.|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Gunston, Captain D. W.||Marriott, Sir J. A. R.|
|Charteris, Brigadier-General J.||Hacking, Captain Douglas H.||Mason, Lieut-Col. Glyn K.|
|Chilcott, Sir Warden||Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)||Meller, R. J.|
|Christie, J. A.||Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)||Merriman, F. B.|
|Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer||Hanbury, C.||Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)|
|Churchman, Sir Arthur C.||Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry||Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)|
|Clarry, Reginald George||Harland, A.||Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)|
|Clayton, G. C.||Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)||Moore, Sir Newton J.|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Harrison, G. J. C.||Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.|
|Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.||Hartington, Marquess of||Morden, Colonel Walter Grant|
|Cohen, Major J. Brunel||Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)||Moreing, Captain A. H.|
|Colfox, Major Wm. Philips||Haslam, Henry C.||Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)|
|Colman, N. C. D.||Hawke, John Anthony||Murchison, Sir Kenneth|
|Conway, Sir W. Martin||Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.||Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph|
|Cooper, A. Duff||Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)||Nelson, Sir Frank|
|Cope, Major William||Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)||Neville, Sir Reginald J.|
|Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.||Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.||Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L, (Exeter)|
|Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)||Henn, Sir Sydney H.||Newton, sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)|
|Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.||Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)||Nicholson, O. (Westminster)|
|Crooke, J. Smedrey (Deritend)||Hills, Major John Waller||Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert|
|Nuttall, Ellis||Sandeman, N. Stewart||Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough|
|Oakley, T.||Sanders, Sir Robert A.||Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.|
|O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton||Sanderson, Sir Frank||Waddington, R.|
|O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh||Sandon, Lord||Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)|
|Oman, Sir Charles William C.||Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D||Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.|
|Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William||Savery, S. S.||Warrender, Sir Victor|
|Pennefather, Sir John||Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)||Waterhouse, Captain Charles|
|Penny, Frederick George||Sheffield, Sir Berkeley||Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)|
|Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)||Shepperson, E. W.||Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)|
|Perkins, Colonel E. K.||Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)||Watts Dr. T.|
|Perring, Sir William George||Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)||Wells, S. R.|
|Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Burnstaple)||Skelton, A. N.||White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple-|
|Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)||Slaney, Major P. Kenyon||Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)|
|Philipson, Mabel||Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)||Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)|
|Pilcher, G.||Smith-Carington, Neville W.||Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)|
|Pilditch, Sir Philip||Smithers, Waldron||Wilson, R. R. Stafford, Lichfield|
|Pownall, Sir Assheton||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)||Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George|
|Preston, William||Spender-Clay, Colonel H.||Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl|
|Price, Major C. W. M.||Stanley, Lieut-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.||Wise, Sir Fredric|
|Radford, E. A.||Stanley, Lord (Fylde)||Withers, John James|
|Ralne, Sir Walter||Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)||Wolmer, Viscount|
|Ramsden, E.||Steel, Major Samuel Strang||Womersley, W. J.|
|Rawson, Sir Cooper||Storry-Deans, R.||Wood, E. (Chester, Staly'b'ge & Hyde)|
|Rees, Sir Beddoe||Streatfeild, Captain S. R.||Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W,)|
|Remer, J. R.||Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.||Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)|
|Remnant, Sir James||Sueter Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser||Woodcock, Colonel H. C.|
|Rentoul, G. S.||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid||Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.|
|Rice, Sir Frederick||Templeton, W. P.||Wragg, Herbert|
|Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)||Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)||Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.|
|Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)||Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)||Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)|
|Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)||Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)|
|Ropner, Major L.||Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W Mitchell-||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Rye F. G.||Tinne J. A.||Commander B. Eyres Monsell and|
|Salmon, Major I.||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of||Major sir George Hennessy|
|Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham]||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)||Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||Salter, Dr. Alfred|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)||Hardle, George D.||Scrymgeour, E.|
|Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')||Harris, Percy A.||Scurr, John|
|Ammon, Charles George||Hayday Arthur||Sexton, James|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Henderson, T. (Glasgow)||Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)|
|Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)||Hirst, G. H.||Shepherd, Arthur Lewis|
|Baker, Walter||Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)||Shiels, Dr. Drummond|
|Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)||Hore-Belisha, Leslie||Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)|
|Barnes, A.||Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)||Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John|
|Batey, Joseph||Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)||Sitch, Charles H.|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Smillie, Robert|
|Broad, F. A.||John, William (Rhondda, West)||Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)|
|Bromfield, William||Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)||Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)|
|Bromley, J.||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||Smith Rennie (Penistone)|
|Brown, Ernest (Leith)||Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)||Snell, Harry|
|Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)||Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)||Stamford,T. W.|
|Buchanan, G.||Kelly, W. T.||Stephen, Campbell|
|Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel||Kennedy, T.||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)|
|Charleton, H. C.||Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.||Strauss, E. A.|
|Clowes, S.||Kirkwood, D||Button, J. E.|
|Cluse, W. S.||Lansbury, George||Taylor, R. A.|
|Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.||Lawrence, Susan||Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)|
|Compton, Joseph||Lawson, John James||Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)|
|Connolly, M.||Lee, F.||Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)|
|Cove, W. G.||Lindley, F. W.||Thurtle, Ernest|
|Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)||Livingstone, A. M.||Townend, A. E.|
|Crawfurd, H. E.||Lowth, T.||Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Lunn, William||Viant, S. P.|
|Day, Colonel Harry||Mackinder, W.||Wallhead, Richard C.|
|Dennison, R.||Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)||Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen|
|Duncan, C.||March, S.||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Dunnico, H.||Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Palsley)||Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)|
|Edge, Sir William||Montague, Frederick||Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney|
|Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)||Morris, R. H.||Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah|
|Fenby, T. D.||Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)||Wellock, Wilfred|
|Gardner, J. P.||Mosley, Oswald||Westwood, J.|
|Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.||Murnin, H.||Wilkinson, Ellen C.|
|Gibbins, Joseph||Naylor, T. E.||Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)|
|Gillett, George M||Oliver, George Harold||Williams, David (Swansea, East)|
|Gosling, Harry||Palin, John Henry||Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)|
|Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)||Paling, W.||Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)|
|Greenall, T.||Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.||Wilson, R. J. Jarrow)|
|Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)||Potts, John S.||Windsor, Walter|
|Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)||Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)|
|Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Riley, Ben|
|Groves, T.||Ritson, J.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Grundy, T. W.||Rose, Frank H.||Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whitely.|
|Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)||Saklatvala, Shapurji|
then proceeded to put forth with the Questions, "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Classes I to IX of the Civil Estimates, and of the Navy Estimates, the Army Esimates, the Air Estimates, and the Revenue Departments Estimates.