HC Deb 28 June 1927 vol 208 cc329-53
Mr. MOSLEY

I beg to move, in page 4, line 4, after the word "twenty-seven," to insert the words "until the twelfth day of April, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight."

During a previous stage of this Measure, hon. and right hon. Friends of mine argued with very great force, and their arguments were never answered, that this new Tobacco Duty constitutes a very clear instance of that class and discriminating taxation which the present Government, throughout its tenure of office, has seen fit to impose. Figures produced by the Colwyn Committee were adduced in those Debates to show that the Tobacco Duty was in fact levied in almost exactly inverse proportion to the ability to pay, and, with this wealth of new facts and new figures in support of those contentions, the Government spokesmen found it somewhat difficult to answer those broad considerations. On a limited Amendment of the character of that which I am now moving, it will, perhaps, be more appropriate if I deal with the precise operation of this tax as experience has shown its development to date, and as we may anticipate its future operation for the rest of this year.

At a previous stage of this Measure, I drew the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the possibility, and, indeed, as it seemed to be, the fact, that the great tobacco companies, in respect at least of pipe tobacco, were actually making additional profits on the excuse of handing on taxation to the consumer. That argument was based upon the fact that, after tobacco has entered this country, extra moisture is added to the tobacco during the process of manufacture. That is not an illegitimate operation in itself; it is a necessary operation to render the tobacco fit for smoking. But it appears from this fact that, when extra moisture is added during the process of manufacture, the tobacco has increased in bulk when it is handed over the counter for sale to the consumer. Tobacco is imported into this country with a moisture content of some 10 per cent. on an average. During the process of manufacture, an extra 20 per cent. of moisture, in the low-grade tobaccos, is added. It is thus apparent that, for 16 ounces of tobacco which enter the country, and on which the great companies pay tax to the Exchequer, they actually sell 19 ounces of tobacco over the counter to the consumer, and from this consideration arises the substantial point that if, in respect of each ounce of tobacco which they sell, the big companies are handing on the ½d. of taxation per ounce which they pay to the Exchequer in respect of the original tobacco which they introduce, they are, in fact, handing on to the consumer even more, than the amount which they have paid to the Exchequer.

The right hon. Gentleman challenged the whole basis of my argument by telling me that I laboured under entire ignorance of the facts, and that I was under a misapprehensian as to the whole process of the manufacture of tobacco. But, unfortunately for the right hon. Gentleman, an authority of the very highest character saw fit to animadvert upon his observations in a letter to the "Times." Sir Arthur Tedder wrote a letter to the "Times" which entirely destroyed the fabric of the right hon. Gentleman's argument, and, to my great surprise, I found that I was quite right and the right bon. Gentleman was quite wrong. Sir Arthur Tedder is an authority on this subject. He was Chief Inspector of Excise and Customs, from 1906 to 1911, and a Commissioner of Customs and Excise from 1911 to 1918; and, as he entered the Inland Revenue Department originally in the year 1871, his knowledge and authority on these subjects are probably second to none in the country. It might be worth while reading this very brief letter of comment on the right hon. Gentleman's remarks. He wrote to the "Times" in the following terms: In your report of the Debate upon the Budget Resolutions on Wednesday, Mr. McNeill, replying for the Government, is stated to have made the following remarks on the subject of the Tobacco Duty: 'The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mosley) spoke about moisture being added. There was never any addition of moisture. Tobacco leaf naturally contained moisture. It was a question, not so much of adding moisture as of eliminating it.' Sir Arthur proceeds to comment on the statement of the right hon. Gentleman: It is a pity that the Minister should have been so ignorant of the facts. Civil servants are accustomed to the use of euphemistic language, and he proceeds to, suggest to the Minister that he might look at the article on tobacco in the "Encyclopædia Britannica" for some elementary information on the subject. Sir Arthur proceeds Added moisture is an absolute necessity in the manufacture of tobacco; it is not added simply for the purpose of profit; the law, however, steps in to safeguard the consumer by limiting the percentage of moisture which may remain in the tobacco when ready for sale. In another letter Sir Arthur points out that when the tobacco enters the country it contains about 10 per cent. while in the process of manufacture some further 20 per cent. is added, making a moisture content of 30 per cent. Let us observe the actual effect of this process. We are told, and it was generally admitted in the Debate on the Budget Resolutions, that in respect of pipe tobacco, anyhow, the full extra tax of 8d. a lb or a halfpenny per ounce had been handed on to the consumer. The right hon. Gentleman did not make any excuse or attempt to defend the position of the Government in this matter. He said it was perfectly right that indirect taxation should be handed on to the consumer, and that was what indirect taxation was for. It is true that in another portion of his speech he tried to pooh-pooh that, saying that in respect of cigarettes it had not been handed on but had been paid by the companies. But in trying to have the best of both worlds, he admitted that it was probable and just that the taxation had been handed on. In relation to pipe tobacco, at any rate, it was universally admitted that the whole tax of one halfpenny per ounce had been handed on to the consumer.

If that be so, it means that these companies are making large extra profits, because the Treasury have seen fit to tax tobacco. See how it works out. The tobacco comes in at the port, and a tax of 8d. per lb. is imposed on it when it contains only 10 per cent. of moisture. During the process of manufacture, that 16 ounces is transformed into 19 ounces. If that 19 ounces is then handed over to the consumer with an extras charge of one halfpenny per ounce, the company is getting back from the consumer 9½d. in respect of that 19 ounces for every 8d. which it has paid out in respect of the original 16 ounces imported. Thus, on every pound of tobacco, as a result of this taxation, if my argument be correct, the companies are making an extra 1½d. profit. It is very easy by a simple calculation to show how greatly augmented the profits of the companies must be on this basis. Every penny of this taxation brings in £425,000, that is to say, each penny per lb. Therefore, the extra 1½d. per lb. would bring in an extra profit of £637,000.

That is a most extraordinary situation. It really is a most extraordinary condition of affairs if the imposition of the tax, which the right hon. Gentleman suggests the consumer should properly pay, is made the subject of extra profits for the great companies at the expense of the unfortunate consumer by whom the additional tax has already been paid, and the Government have no remedy or device to deal with profiteering of this kind. This actual consideration of the operation of the tax seems most appropriate to this Amendment, and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to deal in detail with it and, after consulting the Encyclopædia Britannica, with rather more information than was in his possession last time, and that he may be able to tell us whether, in his opinion, this profiteering is actually taking place and what measures he can suggest to arrest its progress. I am sorry that we have had in regard to this Debate to summon to our aid in the public Press the weight and authority of ex-civil servants to correct the information of the right hon. Gentleman, and I trust that after perusing that letter, and after consulting with his expert advisers, he is now in a position to correct his previous misapprehension, and to inform the Committee upon the subject which is committed to his charge.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

The Committee will realise that the actual Amendment is a somewhat narrow point as to whether the tax should be an annual one instead of a permanent one, but I have allowed the hon. Member to speak on the whole Clause, as it may meet the wishes of the Committee to discuss it on this Amendment rather than on Clause 7 standing part of the Bill.

Mr. MOSLEY

On a point of Order. I endeavoured specifically to confine my observations to the operation of the tax with a view to suggesting, that it should have a limited period of trial, as suggested in the Amendment. I was very careful not to deal with any broad question of principle, which I thought would be raised by other of my hon. Friends on the question of the Clause as a whole, and I merely dealt with the operation of the tax on administrative grounds.

Mr. STEPHEN MITCHELL

It is not often that I intervene in these Debates, but I feel compelled to-night to speak on this Clause dealing with tobacco, and I do so for two reasons, first, because it is probably well known to some hon. Members that by birth, and formerly by occupation, I am not unconnected with the tobacco trade, and, secondly, because wish to correct some rather inaccurate statements, doubtless unintentional, but foolish, made in the Debate on the Budget dealing with the tobacco question. I wish to be perfectly fair, and to say that these inaccuracies to which I refer were not confined by any manner of means to any one side of the Committee. They were doubtless made partly through ignorance and partly through Members not taking the trouble to confirm the information they had received or the rumours which they had heard. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has given a gigantic bill for the tobacco world to face. This bill, undoubtedly, could, quite honestly and logically, have been passed on to the consumer, but I am glad to say that to the very large extent of some 75 per cent. this bill is being footed by tobacco manuafcturers, and the pocket of the consumer is being saved to this extent.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has imposed an additional tax of some 8d. per pound, bringing the total duty on tobacco up to 8s. 10d. Now we see at a glance that this works out at about 6½d. per ounce of duty, and this has got to be paid long before the tobacco can be brought into the factories in order to be manufactured. I wonder if the Committee realises how much this duty amounts to in the case of the popular brands of cigarettes sold at 10 for 6d. I think it might interest them if I told them. For example, on the popular brands of cigarettes sold at 10 for 6d., the amount of duty is very nearly 3d. per packet, and in the case of the cigarettes sold at 10 for 4d. the duty amounts to approximately 2d. per packet. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, when dealing with the question of the Tobacco Duty, made two predictions. With the first I agree, but with the second I strongly disagree. The first prediction was this. He said: I may add that I have no reason to believe that the whole increase of this tax will be passed on to the consumer."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 11th April, 1927; col. 93, Vol. 205.] The right hon. Gentleman's hopes have been fully realised, and our large manufacturers of cigarettes, generally speaking, have made no alteration whatever in the price or size or quality of their cigarettes, and they have stated so frankly and boldly in the Press. The cigarette trade of this country is approximately 75 per cent. of the total tobacco trade, and I estimate that this piece of generosity or, shall I say, patriotism, on the part of the tobacco manufacturers is undoubtedly going to cost the tobacco trade some millions of pounds per annum.

The second prediction which the Chancellor of the Exchequer made was this, that this increase of 8d. per lb. on raw tobacco would bring him in an additional income of £3,400,000 per annum. I disagree with that entirely, and I think that this additional tax will produce in a full year in the neighbourhood of £4,400,000 per annum, that is, if there is no reduction made in the consumption. I do not think the Chancellor of the Exchequer can anticipate a reduction in the consumption. I cannot conceive that any Chancellor of the Exchequer would impose an additional duty with a view to stifling consumption. Unfortunately, it has been necessary to increase the cost of pipe tobacco, for reasons which are very obvious and into which I will not go. It is extremely hard lines on the pipe smoker and on the man who is, unfortunately, earning a very low rate of wage, but I think the tobacco manufacturers can be exonerated from all blame. They have shouldered this additional burden of taxation which the Chancellor is imposing to the extent of some 75 per cent., and they are leaving only some 25 per cent. to be borne by the public.

With all due respect to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on this occasion as far as tobacco is concerned, I do not think he has been guided by very expert or skilful advisers. A different decision on his part would have saved the pipe smoker from sharing the burden with the tobacco manufacturer. I am not a very old man, but I well remember the day when the rate of the Tobacco Duty was 3s. per lb., or 2¼d. per ounce, whereas to-day it is 8s. 10d. per lb., or approximately 6½d. per ounce. I think the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to realize what has happened in the past, and that following over-taxation on whiskey and on expensive wines and expensive cigars, there is no doubt that the consumption of these articles has been greatly retarded. I think the right hon. Gentleman took a very bold line when he increased the Tobacco Duty. It could quite well have been passed on by the tobacco manufacturers to the consumer, but on this occasion the tobacco manufacturers have seen him through. But I wish, with all due respect, to warn the Chancellor that tobacco is not like the widow's cruse of oil; it has its limits. For many years the Tobacco Duty has been the goose which has laid many a golden egg for the Treasury. In these days, we hear much about the intensive system of egg production, but I hope that in the future the Chancellor of the Exchequer will not overstrain the vitality of that goose, and I warn him that the most prolific goose we know in the tobacco world, namely, the Gold Flake goose, may even succumb to the great strain which he is placing on her reproductive powers.

I would like now to deal with one or two statements which have been made by hon. Members, which, I think, are somewhat inaccurate. The hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie), speaking on 27th April, said: I was talking to my tobacconist this morning, and he told me that they were reducing not only the length but the circumference of the cigarettes, and were adding more moisture. He told me that there had been a big addition of moisture to cigarettes."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th April, 1927; col. 905, Vol. 205.] That statement is absolutely absurd. Many days prior to that date practically all the large tobacco manufacturers had broadcast through the Press that there would be absolutely no alteration in the quality, size, or price of any of their cigarettes. As far as cigarettes are concerned, the character of their manufacture absolutely prohibits the possibility of adding increased moisture consistent with good smoking qualities. I would have thought it was perfectly obvious to most hon. Members that if you were to add excessive moisture to cigarettes, the delicate paper of which they are manufactured would be badly stained and the paste would not adhere. The hon. Member for Springburn asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why he did not fix a percentage of moisture in sales. I can assure the Committee that for generations past there has always been a limit set for the moisture at which tobacco may be sold, and any party exceeding that moisture limit is heavily fined. I can assure the Committee that the Excise officers are very vigilant in looking after the interests of the Treasury most carefully in this respect. I wish to refer to a matter which has already been raised by the hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Mosley) in regard to a statement which was made by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. The right hon. Gentleman made the following statement: He (Mr. Mosley) spoke about moisture in certain proportions being added. As far as I understand, there was never any addition of moisture, though I will not say it is never done; but the main thing is that the tobacco leaf has natural moisture in it. Hon. Members do not seem to be aware of that fact."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th April, 1927; cols. 910–911, Vol. 205.] With all due respect to my right hon. Friend, I think that is a somewhat misleading statement. I know quite well that it is purely an error, but I wish to refer to it, because moisture is always added to tobacco in the process of manufacture. It always has been, and it always will be. Tobacco, generally speaking, imported into this country contains moisture of between 10.5 to 11 per cent. If you attempted to manufacture tobacco in that state, it would simply crumble up into atoms. Even if it were possible to manufacture it, the tobacco would not smoke; it would simply burn out in no time. As far as I can see, there are very few Members of this House who seem to have much knowledge in regard to moisture. They do not seem to realise that practically every material contains moisture, and that material which one would consider absolutely bone dry contains a considerable amount of moisture. Take, for example, the massive oak box on the Treasury Bench. It would surprise hon. Members to know that that box, made of well-seasoned wood, probably contains moisture to the extent of 8 per cent. The right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Snowden), the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the 27th April, said: I shall show in a moment that it is not correct or true that the great bulk of this increased duty on tobacco is not being passed on to the consumer."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th April, 1927; col. 861, Vol. 205.] The right hon. Gentleman was Chancellor of the-Exchequer for nine or ten months and he, obviously, has a knowledge of the various sources of taxation. He ought to know that the cigarette trade of this country is in the neighbourhood of 75 per cent. of the total tobacco trade. Days before he made that statement he must have seen in the newspapers a statement broadcast by practically all the tobacco manufacturers that there was to be no alteration in the size, quality or price of their cigarettes. There may be some isolated cases, perhaps in some of the more expensive lines, or there may be an isolated case of a small tobacco manufacturer making a slight alteration, but I can assure the Committee that that is only a bagatelle, and may be discounted. The right hon. Gentleman produced in this House two cigarettes presumably of the same brand, one which we presume was manufactured before the Budget and one after, and he stated that the cigarette manufactured after the Budget was about one-eighth of an inch shorter than the one manufactured before the Budget. After the clear and frank statement which was made in the Press by important and leading tobacco manufacturers in this country it was a little unjust on the part of the right hon. Gentleman not to state in this House what brand of cigarette it was or the firm that manufactured it. My further comment is, that if an alteration has been made in any popular brand of cigarettes such as the right hon. Gentleman suggests, then its doom is sealed. But it may have been a cigarette of one of the more expensive brands which is generally smoked by the class of people known to the right hon. Gentleman as the idle rich.

I wish further to refer to a statement made by the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen). I am sorry that he is not in his place. He said, with regard to the Chancellor of the Exchequer: He tries to tell us that this tax is not going to the consumer. He knows it is going to the consumer, and the probability is that not only will there be a large tax on the consumer but the Imperial Tobacco Company will take advantage of the shortening of the cigarette just to take a little bit of commission on the tax."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th April, 1927; col. 884, Vol. 205.] I can assure the Committee and the hon. Gentleman, if he will read the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow, that not only have the Imperial Tobacco Company not increased the price but that they have not shortened the cigarette. In this ease, and possibly in many other cases, the hon. Member for Camlachie has proved himself to be a false prophet. During the Debate we have heard a good many complaints that the rich man's smoke has not had additional duty passed on to it; that it has not been passed on to the consumer of the Havanna cigar. I would remind the Committee that the increased duty on tobacco amounts to 8d. per pound, while the increased duty on Havana cigars has been made to the extent of 1s. 3d. a pound. Whether or not it has been passed on to the consumer I cannot say. Another complaint has been made that a good deal of money has been made by tobacco manufacturers clearing tobacco out of bond prior to the Budget. That is not the case. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is much too wise to allow that, and the Customs authorities rationed the amount of tobacco which could be drawn out of bond for many weeks prior to the Budget. Another complaint is that the price of cigarettes is at the same figure as in War time. I would remind the Committee that the duty at the present time is 8d. higher than in War time and that, nevertheless, the prices of the popular brands of cigarettes remain the same and the same size.

I should like to congratulate the Chancellor of the Exchequer on continuing and increasing the preferential rate given to tobacco grown in the Empire. Tobacco grown within the Empire and manufactured in this country for the year ending October amounted to the very large quantity of approximately 18,000,000 pounds, an increase on last year of about 5,000,000 pounds. That is approximately one-seventh of the total amount of tobacco consumed in this country in any one year. That means that at the present time we are purchasing 18,000,000 pounds weight of tobacco from the Empire which would otherwise be purchased from foreign countries. I would have preferred had the Chancellor of the Exchequer left the duty where it was, and I have no doubt that the pipe smoker would have preferred that but the Chancellor of the Exchequer has a difficult job. He has to make arrangements to pay for the general strike and he has to make arrangements to pay for the strike in the coal industry. But in order to meet abnormal conditions, this Clause is going to have my full support. One thing to which I would like to refer is the statement made by the hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Mosley) who said that tobacco manufacturers were making abnormal profits over the moisture. I grant you, and I said it in the House, that there is a certain amount of moisture added to tobacco, which is bound to increase its weight. The hon. Member must remember this—when you manufacture a pound of tobacco you do not sell 16 ounces. You have to take the stem out of the tobacco which is approximately 18 per cent. You have a certain amount of natural dust and sand in the tobacco, and when you sell it you have a certain amount of the "turn of the scale." So that you cannot sell 16 ounces out of one pound of tobacco. I grant that if you take out the stem, sand and dust, you get a rebate for that, but you make a loss. I am sorry I have detained the House so long.

Mr. McNEILL

I confess I have some doubt as to whether I ought to attempt to reply to the Amendment that is on the Order Paper, and which has been formally moved, or to say anything about either of the speeches which have been delivered—either that of my hon. Friend the Member for Lanark (Mr. S. Mitchell) or that of the hon. Member who moved the Amendment, neither of which had any relation to the Amendment. My best plan will be to do a little of both. First of all, may I point out the disadvantage that would occur if the Amendment itself were accepted—the Amendment to which the Mover did not refer at all? The increase of the duty which we hope to gain by this Clause is estimated at rather over £3,000,000 in the current year, but I think it must be clear that if, as the Amendment proposes, it were decided to make that only for one year, we should certainly not raise within a considerable margin the amount we estimated to receive—for this very obvious reason, that an expectation would be held out that possibly next year an alteration might be made that this additional duty would not be continued. The consequence would be that there would be, probably, a very large holding up of tobacco shortly before the end of the financial year. Considering that every 1,000,000 pounds weight would reduce this year's revenue by very nearly £500,000—£420,000—and the weekly clearances of unmanufactured tobacco amount, approximately, to 2,500,000 pounds, it would be quite possible that the postponement that would be encouraged by this Amendment, if it were carried out, would amount to a very considerable sum.

10.0 p. m.

Further, I think it is quite clear that we cannot accept the Amendment, and I do not think the Committee should have any hesitation about rejecting it, seeing that the Mover has not thought it necessary to say a word in its favour. The reason the hon. Member could not find time to say anything about his own Amendment was that he was enjoying himself so much over pointing out what he believed to be a mistake that had been made by me on a former occasion. That evidently caused him a great deal of enjoyment. He pointed out that a great authority on these subjects wrote a letter to the "Times" saying that an observation of mine in the Debate on the Budget Resolution was a mistake. If I recollect rightly, the observation I made, to which he dissented, was that I said moisture had to be extracted from tobacco, not added to it. Well, my hon. Friend the Member for Lanark has also pointed out that this is an error. But I regret to say I am not young enough to be ashamed of making a mistake. I wish I were. It is only the youngest of us who are infallible, and I can very well comfort myself with a very familiar story about a gentleman I might introduce to his notice called Dr. Johnson. He, on one occasion, was asked by somebody how he came to have made such a mistaken statement, and he replied, "Sheer ignorance, Madam, sheer ignorance." I do not want to diminish in the smallest, degree the satisfaction of the hon. Gentleman with which he has convicted me of being sheerly ignorant on the question of the manufacture of tobacco. It was quite apparent I was, and I stand here in a white sheet. I now confess that moisture is added to tobacco and not taken from tobacco, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will feel he has had a real, comfortable parliamentary triumph this evening.

But my satisfaction does not quite end there. The hon. Member took his cue from the gentleman who wrote to the "Times"—a gentleman who said, it is perfectly true, that it was a pity that the Financial Secretary was so ignorant. I quite agree. Then this gentleman went on, and the hon. Member endorsed it, by saying I could not do better than gain some information about the process of the manufacture of tobacco by reading the eleventh edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica. That gives me great satisfaction, because several years have passed since I was one of the editors of that book. I am bound to admit that although I took part in editing that great work of reference, I cannot pretend in any way to have assimilated the whole of the knowledge contained in that work. But I am delighted to find that, although many years have passed, the book is still of such commanding authority that it is quoted in Parliament by the hon. Member. The only other observation with which the hon. Member has honoured me was a reference to what he called my inconsistency with regard to the passing of the duty to the consumer. As a matter of fact, on this occasion I was perfectly correct. The proposition is a simple one—and I notice a reference to this also in a letter to the "Times" by another gentleman—that the natural incidence of indirect taxation is that it is passed on to the consumer.

I said, perfectly consistently, when discussing this Budget Resolution, that, so far as our anticipations went, so far as tobacco was concerned, or, at any rate, the larger part of it in its most popular form, it would not in consequence of the duty be passed on to the consumer. Both these things have actually happened. As my hon. Friend the Member for Lanark, with his great authority on these matters, has said, up to this time, in the price, quality and size of the cigarettes, which account for some 70 per cent or more of the total amount of tobacco smoked, there has been no alteration. On the other hand, it is quite true that there has been a small addition in the price of pipe tobacco. But it remains true, as I said that the popularly-smoked tobacco has not been affected by the duty. The hon. Member made an elaborate calculation which, to his own satisfaction, proved that very large sums were being made, in consequence of the duty, as additional profit by the manufacturers, his argument being based upon the assumption that 16 ounces of unmanufactured tobacco would, by the addition of moisture, produce 19 ounces of finished tobacco.

I do not think there is anything inaccurate in his calculation if his data were correct; but if his calculation, which he worked out as showing an extra profit of £637,000 a year, were correct, the manufacturers would be selling in the year about 128,000,000 lb. of tobacco at an increased price of 1½d. an ounce, and containing 15 per cent. of added water. But that state of things does not occur. The total consumption of tobacco is, approximately, 140,000,000 lbs. a year, and it is estimated that about 70 per cent, of this consists of cigarettes which, if my information be correct, on the average do not contain even as much as 5 per cent. of added moisture over the natural moisture of the raw leaf. Of the remainder of the tobacco consumed, some 40,000,000 lbs., it is only some of the inferior varieties which contain as much added water as the 15 per cent. which the hon. Member made the basis of his calculations. It is, therefore, perfectly clear that nothing approaching 128,000,000 lbs. of tobacco is sold which contains 15 per cent, of added moisture. The quantity is much smaller Consequently, the figure of £637,000 a year of added profit has little or no relation to the facts. I do not know if it is necessary for me to follow my hon. Friend in his very interesting and very authoritative exposition of the tobacco position. I do not know whether I shall be called upon to discuss it at any future stage. We have had a very exhaustive examination of the whole position on this Amendment, the actual purpose of which is merely to make this an annual tax. At the present time, I must merely content myself with pointing out that we cannot possibly accept the Amendment as it stands, and that the strictures which have been passed upon my own conduct and observations in the past, although correct up to a certain point, really have nothing to do with the business before the House.

Mr. HARRIS

We have just heard a very interesting confession from the right hon. Gentleman, and I congratulate him upon it. May I say that I would like to congratulate the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. S. Mitchell) on his very excellent and informative speech. Most of the facts which he stated to the Committee are those which he has of his own knowledge and they can be accepted. It is quite clear that, in the case of the cheap cigarettes, the extra duty has not been passed on. The hon. Member, with a certain amount of justification, claimed credit for various tobacco manufacturers for their patriotic action. But I think we want to dig a little deeper. I am afraid that we cannot quite give all this credit to the unselfishness of the great tobacco trade. It is common knowledge, and I have taken the trouble to confirm these statements, that there has been a tobacco war. The big combine, or trust, bought up most of the big tobacco factories and are waging war on one or two of the other firms. Some tobacco firms announced in the newspapers that they were to bear the whole of the burden and not pass it on to the public, and the big combine was forced to follow suit. I am not certain that it was all altruism. I am informed and I think my information is correct, that there is a great desire on the part of the combine to take advantage of this opportunity to drive out of existence some of the small manufacturers who have been striving in the last few years to keep their heads above water. While some of the big combines are making big profits, some of these factories have a hard struggle. I am not sure, if this tax is kept on, that, when some of these people have been knocked out, in duo course this tax will be passed on to the public either by increased price or short weight. But it was not of cigarettes that I wanted to speak. It is very unfortunate that the chief burden of this tax has to be borne, as usual, by the people who are least able to bear it. In every case, these new taxes have been born by the poorest people in the community, the men with the lowest wages, the agricultural labourers, the men with large families, the men who smoke the cheap tobacco.

I find in my own constituency, and I think it will be the usual in the East End of London, that a popular tobacco is one which is known as British Oak. It is manufactured by one of the component parts of the Tobacco Trust, Lambert and Butler, and it used to be sold at 4¼d. a packet. It still can be bought at some places at 4¾d., which means that the 8d. per lb. increase is passed on to the consumer. I have the label. I should like the right hon. Gentleman to see it. It is an interesting exhibit. We are getting accustomed to making exhibits. We are constantly having articles taxed, and we have to produce evidence in illustration of our arguments. In most cases what has happened is that the old price of 4¼d. a packet has been retained. The "ounce" has been marked out in ink and above the "4¼d. an ounce" have been put the words "1/34th of a lb." In other words, the quantity has been reduced; the price has been retained, and short weight has been given. There is no deception. It is quite plain what is being done, though the ordinary working man does not notice the "1/34th of a lb." That means that instead of the consumer paying8d. a pound he is actually paying 9d. a pound. The Committee ought to realise that that sort of thing is going on. It would be a great pity to think that the ordinary working man who buys cheap tobacco is not feeling the burden of the duty. To think that would be misleading both the tobacco consumer and the Committee.

I wanted, for a moment, to support what the hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Mosley) said about the amount of moisture in tobacco. I have taken the trouble to inquire into the subject, and I find that what is really happening is that, as the Financial Secretary pointed out, 10 per cent. of moisture is allowed by the Customs on the importation of tobacco. I am informed that in the case of the higher qualities it is impossible to add much moisture because the tobacco would go mouldy, but the cheap tobacco, the very tobacco in this package, the homely shag of the ordinary working man, will stand moisture without deterioration, and in almost every case something like 22 per cent. of moisture is added. So in the cheap tobaccos not only is the consumer paying, but it is true to say, as the hon. Member said, that the big tobacco manufacturers are not only making their ordinary profit but are making some extra profit on the duty, in the fact that the moisture is added and the price remains the same. For that reason, I think it is very unfortunate that, as in the case of all the new taxes, the brunt of the burden is being borne, not by the well-to-do, but by the poorest of the community.

Mr. GROTRIAN

I should like to suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he can get more revenue by decreasing the duty. I, of course, refer to Havana cigars. In 1899, when the duty was 5s. a lb., the revenue obtained was £604,000. In 1916, when the duty had gone up to 10s. 9d. a lb., the amount of revenue obtained had fallen to £453,000. In 1921, when the duty had been again raised to 15s. 7d. a lb., the revenue had fallen still further to £322,700. Those figures show conclusively that of revenue goes down. The reason is obvious. When the rate of duty was not more than 10s. 6d. a lb. the bulk of the Havana cigars sold in this country were retailed at 6d. a piece. Now when you have a duty of 15s. 7d., the duty on each cigar amounts to 2.4d. which, of course, renders it quite impossible to sell it at 6d. It is a curious thing that you do

Division No. 223.] AYES. [10.23 p.m.
Adamson, W. M. (Staft., Cannock) Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Ritson, J,
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro') Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland) Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Ammon, Charles George Harris, Percy A. Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Baker, J. (Wolverhamton, Bilston) Hayday, Arthur Rose, Frank H.
Baker, Walter Hayes, John Henry Salter, Dr. Alfred
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery) Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley) Scurr, John
Barnes, A. Henderson, T. (Glasgow) Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Batey, Joseph Hirst, G. H. Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Bondfield, Margaret Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Hore-Belisha, Leslie Sitch, Charles H.
Briant, Frank Hudson, J. H Huddersfield Smillie, Robert
Broad, F. A. Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose) Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Brown, Ernest (Leith) Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute) John, William (Rhondda, West) Snell, Harry
Buchanan, G. Johnston, Thomas (Dundee) Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel Jones, Henry Haydn (Merloneth) Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Charleton, H. C. Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown) Stamford, T. W.
Clowes, S. Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Stephen, Campbell
Cluse, W. S. Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R. Kelly, W. T. Strauss, E. A.
Connolly, M. Kennedy, T. Sullivan, Joseph
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities) Kirkwood, D. Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Crawfurd, H. E. Lansbury, George Thurtle, Ernest
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) Lawrence, Susan Townend, A. E.
Day, Colonel Harry Lawson, John James Varley, Frank B.
Dennison, R. Lee, F. Viant, S. P.
Duckworth, John Lindley, F. W. Watson. W. M. (Dunfermline)
Dunnico, H. Lowth, T. Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) Lunn, William Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
England, Colonel A. Mackinder, W. Wellock, Wilfred
Fenby, T. D. MacLaren, Andrew Welsh, J. C.
Forrest W. Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan) Wiggins, William Martin
Gardner, J. P. March, S. Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. Morris, H. H. Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Gibbins Joseph Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Gillett George M. Mosley, Oswald Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)
Gosling Harry Murnin, H. Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercilffe)
Graham, D. M (Lanark, Hamilton) Naylor, T. E. Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.) Palin, John Henry Windsor, Walter
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W. Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Grentell, D. R. (Glamorgan) Ponsonby, Arthur
Groves, T. Potts, John S. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Grundy, T. W. Rees, Sir Beddoe Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Riley, Ben Whiteley.
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel Applin, Colonel R. V. K. Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T. Apsley, Lord Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Albery, Irving James Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W. Balniel, Lord
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton) Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W. Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Alexander Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l) Atholl, Duchess of Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S. Atkinson, C. Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.

not get an increase in the British-made cigar as you drive the Havana cigar out of the market, because, for some reason or other, they seem to rise and fall together. When one goes down, the other goes down. I do not know why that is, but the figures show that it is so. Instead of endeavouring to get more revenue by trying to drive people on to pipe smoking—in spite of certain show eminent examples of that virtue or habit—I think we ought to try and get more revenue out of the poor Havana cigar smoker, and the only way to make him disgorge more revenue is by putting down the rate of duty.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 128; Noes, 264.

Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake) Grotrian, H. Brent O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Bennett, A. J. Guinness, Rt. Hon. Waiter E. Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Beery, Sir George Gunston, Captain D. W. Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Betterton, Henry B. Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) Pennefather, Sir John
Birchall, Major J. Dearman Hammersley, S. S. Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Boothby, R. J. G. Hanbury, C. Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Harland, A. Perring, Sir William George
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W. Harrison, G. J. C. Plicher, G.
Braithwaite, Major A. N. Hartington, Marquess of Pownall, Sir Assheton
Brass, Captain W. Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Preston, William
Briscoe, Richard George Haslam, Henry C. Price, Major C. W. M.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Hawke, John Anthony Raciford, E. A.
Brooke, Brigadler-Gneral C. R. I. Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M. Raine, Sir Walter
Broun-Lindsay, Major H. Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle) Rawson, Sir Cooper
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P. Reid. D. D. (County Down)
Buchan, John Henn, Sir Sydney H. Remer, J. R.
Buckingham, Sir H. Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. Rentoul, G. S.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford) Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Bullock, Captain M. Hills. Major John Waller Rice, Sir Frederick
Burman, J. B. Hilton, Cecil Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Burton, Colonel H. W. Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G. Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey Hogg, Rt. Hon Sir D. (St. Marylebone) Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)
Butt, Sir Alfred Holt, Captain H. P. Ropner, Major L.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.) Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Campbell, E. T. Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar) Rye, F. G.
Cassels, J. D. Hopkins, J. W. W. Salmon, Major I.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.) Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K. Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton Hudson, Capt. A. U. M (Hlckney. N). Sandeman, N. Stewart
Chapman, Sir S. Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'and, Whlteh'n) Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J. Hume, Sir G. H. Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Chilcott, Sir Warden Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer Savery, S. S.
Christie, J. A. Huntingfield, Lord Shaw. R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Churchman, Sir Arthur C. Jackson, Sir H. (Wandtworth, Cen'l) Shepperson, E. W.
Clarry, Reginald George Jacob, A. E. Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Clayton, G. C. James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belf'st.)
Cobb, Sir Cyril Jephcott, A. R. Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips Jones. G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Conway, Sir W. Martin Kidd. J. (Linlithgow) Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cooper, A. Duff King, Commodore Henry Douglas Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Cope, Major William Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Couper, J. B. Knox, Sir Alfred Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. Lamb, J. Q. Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H. Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R. Starry-Deans, R.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend) Leigh, Sir John (Clapham) Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Crookshank,Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro) Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert Little, Dr. E. Graham Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Dalkeith, Earl of Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green) Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H. Long, Major Eric Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovll) Looker, Herbert William Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Davies, Dr. Vernon Lougher, Lewis Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Dawson, Sir Philip Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman Thomson, Ht. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Dean, Arthur Wellesley Lumley, L. R. Tinne, J. A.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert Lynn, Sir R. J. Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Drewe, C. Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Eden, Captain Anthony Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart) Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Edmondson, Major A. J. McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus Wallace, Captain D. E.
Ellis, R. G. McLean, Major A. Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Elveden, Viscount Macmillan Captain H. Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South) Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Everard, W. Lindsay McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Fairfax, Captain J. G. Making, Brigadier-General E. Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Falle, Sir Bertram G. Malone, Major P. B. Wells, S. R.
Fermoy, Lord Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn Wheler, Major Sir Granvllie C. H.
Fielden, E. B. Margesson, Capt. D. Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Finburgh, S. Marriott, Sir J. A. R. Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torqusy)
Ford, Sir P. J. Meller, R. J. Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L. Meyer, Sir Frank Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Foxcroft, Captain C. T. Milne, J. S. Wardlaw- Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Fraser, Captain Ian Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark) Wise, Sir Fredric
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Weldon) Wither, John James
Ganzonl, Sir John Moosell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M. Womersley, W. J.
Gates, Percy Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr) Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Moore, Sir Newton J. Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham Morden, Colonel Walter Grant Wood, Sir Kingtley (Woolwich, W.).
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John Moreing, Captain A. H. Worthington-Evans. Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Glyn, Major R. G. C. Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Gower, Sir Robert Murchison, Sir Kenneth Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)
Grace, John Nelson, Sir Frank
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Neville, Sir Reginald J. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N. Newman, Sir Rt. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) Captain Viscount Curzon and Mr.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge) Penny.
Greene, W. P. Crawford Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsl'ld.)
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London) O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford Luton)

Motion Made, and Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Division No. 224.] AYES. [10.32 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel Elveden, Viscount Long, Major Eric
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T. Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South) Looker, Herbert William
Albery, Irving James Everard, W. Lindsay Lougher, Lewis
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton) Fairfax, Captain J. G. Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l) Falle, Sir Bertram G. Lumley, L. R.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S. Fermoy, Lord Lynn, Sir R. J.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K. Fielden, E. B. Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Apsley, Lord Finburgh, S. Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W. Ford, Sir P. J. McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W. Forestier-Walker, Sir L. McLean, Major A.
Atholl, Duchess of Foxcroft, Captain C. T. Macmillan Captain H.
Atkinson, C. Fraser, Captain Ian Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Balfour, George (Hampstead) Ganzonl, Sir John Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Balniel, Lord Gates, Percy Malone, Major P. B.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Barnston, Major Sir Harry Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham Margesson, Captain D.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake) Glyn, Major R. G. C. Meller, R. J.
Bennett, A. J. Gower, Sir Robert Meyer, Sir Frank
Betterton, Henry B. Grace, John Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Birchall, Major J. Dearman Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Boothby, R. J. G. Grattan-Doyle, Sir N. Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W. Greene, W. P. Crawford Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Braithwaite, Major A. N. Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London) Moore, Sir Newton J.
Brass, Captain W. Grotrian, H. Brent Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Briscoe, Richard George Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E. Moreing, Captain A. H.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Gunston, Captain D. W. Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I. Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Broun-Lindsay, Major H. Hammeraley, S. S. Nelson, Sir Frank
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) Hanbury, C. Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Buchan, John Harland, A. Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Buckingham, Sir H. Harrison, G. J. C. Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James Hartington, Marquess of Nicholson. Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Bullock, Captain M. Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Burman, J. B. Haslam, Henry C. O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Burton, Colonel H. W. Hawke, John Anthony Oman, Sir Chsrles William C.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M. Ormsby-Gore. Rt. Hon. William
Butt, Sir Alfred Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley) Pennefather, Sir John
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle) Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Campbell, E. T. Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P. Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Cassels, J. D. Henn, Sir Sydney H. Perring, Sir William George
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.) Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. Pilcher, G.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford) Preston, William
Chapman, Sir S. Hills, Major John Waller Price, Major C. W. M.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J. Hilton, Cecil Radford E. A.
Chilcott, Sir Warden Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G. Raine, Sir Walter
Christie, J. A. Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone) Rawson, Sir Cooper
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer Holt, Capt. H. P. Reid. D. D. (County Down)
Churchman, Sir Arthur C. Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.) Remer, J. R.
Clarry, Reginald George Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar) Rentoul, G. S.
Clayton, G. C. Hopkins, J. W. W. Rhys, Hon C. A. U.
Cobb, Sir Cyril Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K. Rice, Sir Frederick
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.) Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Colfox, Major William Phillips Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Wnlteh'n) Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Conway, Sir W. Martin Hume, Sir G. H. Robinson, Sir T (Lanes, Stretford)
Cooper, A. Duff Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer Ropner, Major L.
Cope, Major William Huntingfield. Lord Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Couper, J. B. Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. Rye. F. G.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l) Salmon, Major I.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H. Jacob, A. E. Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend) James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert Sandeman, N. Stewart
Crookshank, Cpt.H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro) Jephcott, A. R. Sanders Sir Robert A.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Dalkeith, Earl of Kidd, J. (Linlithgow) Savery, S. S.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H. Kindersley, Major G. M. Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) King, Commodore Henry Douglas Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Davies, Dr. Vernon Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Dawson, Sir Philip Knox, Sir Alfred Shepperson, E. W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley Lamb, J. Q. Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R. Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)
Drewe, C. Leigh, Sir John (Clapham) Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Eden, Captain Anthony Lister, Cunlifte, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Edmondson, Major A. J. Little, Dr. E. Graham Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Ellis, R. G. Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green) Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 265; Noes, 127.

Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F. Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P. Wise, Sir Fredric
Steel, Major Samuel Strang Wallace, Captain D. E. Withers, John James
Starry-Deans, R. Ward. Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull) Womersley, W. J
Streatfeild, Captain S. R. Warner, Brigadier-General W. W. Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn) Waterhouse, Captain Charles Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyds)
Sueter Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley) Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle) Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H. Wells, S. R Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland) Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H. Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South) Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell- Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay) TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Tinne, J. A. Williams, Herbert G. (Beading) Captain Viscount Curzon and Mr.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George Penny.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
NOES.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock) Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland) Roberts, Ht. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro') Harris, Percy A. Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Ammon, Charles George Hayday, Arthur Rose, Frank H.
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston) Hayes, John Henry Salter, Dr. Alfred
Baker, Walter Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burniey) Scurr, John
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery) Henderson, T. (Glasgow) Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Barnes, A. Hirst, G. H. Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Batey, Joseph Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Bondfield, Margaret Hore-Belisha, Leslie Sitch, Charles H.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield) Smillie, Robert
Briant, Frank Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose) Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Broad, F. A. Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Brown, Ernest (Leith) John, William (Rhondda, West) Snell, Harry
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute) Johnston, Thomas (Dundee) Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Buchanan, G. Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Cnarles
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown) Stamford, T. W.
Charleton, H. C. Jones, Morgan Caerphilly) Stephen, Campbell
Clowes, S. Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Stewart J. (St. Rollox)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R. Kelly, W. T. Strauss, E. A.
Connolly, M. Kennedy, T. Sullivan, J.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities) Kirkwood, D. Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Crawfurd, H. E. Lansbury, George Thurtie, Ernest
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) Lawrence, Susan Townend, A. E.
Day, Colonel Harry Lawson, John James Varley, Frank B.
Dennison, R. Lee, F. Viant, S. P.
Duckworth, John Lindley, F. W. Watson, W. M. (Dunfermllne)
Dunnico, H. Lowth, T. Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) Lunn, William Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
England, Colonel A. Mackinder, W. Wellock, Wilfred
Fenby, T. D. MacLaren, Andrew Welsh, J. C.
Forrest, W. Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan) Wiggins, William Martin
Gardner, J. P. March, S. Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. Morris, R. H. Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Gibbins, Joseph Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Gillett, George M. Mosley, Oswald Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)
Gosling, Harry Murnin, H. Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hampton) Naylor, T. E. Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.) Palin, John Henry Windsor, Walter
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W. Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) Ponsonby, Arthur
Groves, T. Potts, John S. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Grundy, T. R. Rees, Sir Beddoe Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Riley, Ben Whiteley.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Ritson, J.