HC Deb 17 November 1927 vol 210 cc1220-31

Amendments made:

In page 19, leave out lines 14 and 15.

Leave out lines 28 and 29.—[Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister.]

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."—[Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister.]

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER

We have now come to the last stage of the discussion of a Bill which has occupied Parliament in various forms since last 'March, and, in spite of the concessions which have been made only during the last stages of the discussion of the Bill, it is my duty to-night to ask Parliament to reject the Motion made by the President for the Third Reading of the Bill. We ask the House to reject the Bill because it is clearly a protectionist Measure, and in my judgment a protectionist Measure of the worst type. It is a protectionist Measure of what I may call the back-stairs type. At the last General Election, we had a pledge from the Prime Minister that if he were given the con- fidence of the country on no account would he introduce a Measure of Protection. It is true he made a slight reference to the uses which could be got out of the Safeguarding duties, but this particular Bill is in every respect a protectionist Measure of the worst kind:

Sir B. CHADWICK

Hear, hear.

Mr. ALEXANDER

The hon. Gentleman may be hilarious in his cheering, but I cannot for the life of me reconcile the attitude of the President of the Board of Trade on this Bill with what must have been his instructions to the representative of the Board of Trade at the recent Economic Conference at Geneva. The ink is hardly dry on the latest agreement entered into at Geneva and to which this country was a party, under which arrangements were made between the various nations in regard to prohibitions and licences operating against various constituent nations of the League, and at the very moment that we are hoping that this country will ratify that agreement, we are actually passing through this House a Bill which cuts rights across the principles embodied in agreement.

We ask the House to reject the Bill for another reason, and that is that perhaps for the first time in the history of British legislation, we are asking Parliament in this Bill to lay it down that men, and perhaps women also, may be declared to be criminals and to have very severe penalties applied to them for their so-called crime simply because they may refuse to sell something which they do not want to sell. That seems to me to be a very grave departure in the history of legislation in this country. First of all, as regards exhibitors. They are to be made criminals unless they agree that they will—whether they desire to show them or not, or even whether the public desire or not to see the films—have a quota of British films put on in their cinema houses, whether they think these films may bring them a commercial return or not. If they offend against that, they are to be classed as criminals and by the Amendments which have been carried—in such a way that the Government did not quite adhere to the position which it had taken up in Committee—there is the right to take away the licence from the cinema theatre, which apparently is to have no right to live at all. For that reason also, we ask the House to reject the Measure.

Let me take another brief glimpse at this quota principle. I want to know whether the Government may be expected to try to apply the principle of an enforced quota on any other industry as well as the film industry. I remember the discussions we have had from time to time with regard to the preference for Empire goods. If it can be shown that a preferential duty operating in favour of Australian currants or raisins or sultanas has failed to bring quite the desired results to the producers of those fruits, I wonder whether we may expect a Measure from the Government compelling the British distributors of fruit to take a quota of Australian fruit? That is just the kind of thing that one may expect after the production of such a Measure as this. The whole structure of the quota Clauses of the Bill seems to me to be entirely against the basis of freedom and equity of contract which in the past has been the pride of British business. For that reason alone we should feel entirely justified in asking the House to reject the Bill.

But we ask the House to reject the Bill also because of the first Part of the Bill. The first Part, we have been told, was designed to prevent what was known as blind and block booking. It was said that because those who have to book films for show at the cinemas had sometimes been asked to take other films that they did not want before they could get exactly what they wanted, it was an interference with the actual trade in the industry. There would be something to be said for that if the Government were prepared to adopt the same principle of interfering with any attempt to corner a free market, but to single out one particular industry and to ask the House to put legislative restriction on, one industry only, is entirely foreign to what has always been the policy of this House in legislation. How is it, for example, when there is blind and block booking of any of the commodities required by the people of the country, and that actually inures to the hardship of the people in increased prices—in tea, in rubber, in sugar and all kinds of commodities—how is it that we cannot get the same kind of legislative restriction against that sort of male- factor? When you come to deal with a Protectionist Measure of this kind, one special industry is to be interfered with in this way.

Moreover, we believe that the Bill as it now is will not even secure the end which the President of the Board of Trade desires in Part I; we believe that the blind and block booking Clauses as they stand will not prevent the existing practices from continuing. Let me tell the House what has been happening this week. The President, during the progress of the Bill, has always informed us that he based his case for the Bill upon his continuous consultations with the industry, and when we have informed him that a certain part of the industry at any rate did not agree with him, he has said that the Cinematograph Exhibitors' Association formed the majority and that he relied upon it for advice.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. The Government based their decision to introduce the Bill upon the considered judgment of the Imperial Conference and its endorsement.

Mr. ALEXANDER

And the President of the Board of Trade has referred again and again, throughout the discussions of the Bill, on Second Reading, in Committee and on detailed Amendments on the Report stage, to his consultations with the trade, and he has told us repeatedly that if the trade did not know what they wanted who really did? Therefore, he said, the trade having asked for this or that, "We think we are on sound ground in making the Bill to meet the situation." This week the Cinematograph Exhibitors' Association have met and they have devised a scheme under which the blind and block booking Clauses will not he worth the paper on which they are printed. I understand that an agreement which was first made by the committee yesterday has actually been ratified to-day by the council of the association, and that under it one huge renting; combine will be formed by the association, and they will, therefore, be able to book ahead as many films as they like, block book and blind hook. They will be acting as renters and they will proceed to make their own arrangements afterwards to parcel out what they have thus booked, amongst the various constituent members of the association. So the very association upon whom the President of the Board of Trade seems to have relied during the discussion of the Bill for his opposition to the Amendments that we have suggested, has now been responsible for setting up just the form of combine which will defeat completely the object of the first part of the Bill.

We have said all the way through that we thought the Clauses of the Bill would not work successfully, and we believe that what has taken place this week, in connection with this new combine, makes that doubly certain. We have been disappointed with the attitude towards the Bill of the bulk of the Members of the Liberal party. We should have imagined, from speeches in the country, that the passage of this Bill would have been really anathema to the party which has always claimed to be regarded as the guardian of Free Trade. Instead of that, whilst a number of them voted against the Bill on Second Reading and have assisted us on a few occasions since with our Amendments, during most of our work we have had no assistance from them.

Dr. VERNON DAVIES

Because it is not a Protectionist Measure.

Mr. ALEXANDER

I have already proved conclusively that the Bill is a Protectionist Measure. If the hon. Member is not quite certain about it, perhaps he will read the leading articles in the "Times" of this week, which makes it quite clear that the leading paper supporting the Government is in no state of uncertainty as to whether or not the Bill is a Protectionist Measure. I felt it was incumbent upon me in brief terms to state these grounds, on which we ask the House to reject the Third Reading of the Bill.

Mr. HARRIS

I have been challenged by my hon. Friend who has just spoken, amidst the plaudits of hon. Members opposite, because perhaps there has not been such support as he desired from this party, of himself and his colleagues. The blame is entirely mine. I ought to have been here, but unfortunately I was indisposed. I have had influenza, or I should have been actively co-operating with the hon. Gentleman in opposition to the Bill. I do not feel the same objection as he does to the Clauses dealing with blind and block booking. Anything that interferes with freedom of contract is unsatisfactory, and if by legislation it is possible to enable the public to get the best films available, I do not take very great exception. That is one point. Another thing quite different is to try to force the public to see films that they do not wish to see. If good British films are available the makers can be sure of the support of the public, but to try to force on the public such legislation as will make them see films that they do not want to see, is against the interests of art and of the public, is bad in principle, and so far as I and those associated with me are concerned, we are prepared to vote against the Third Reading of the Bill. We are satisfied that as soon as the British film manufacturers produce good stuff so soon will the public give them support. This Bill is going to encourage bad workmanship instead of stimulating this country to produce good films. By guaranteeing the purchase of bad films the quota system will tend to weaken the industry and prevent it from going ahead as it would if it had to face healthy, free competition.

Colonel DAY

I oppose the Third Reading because I think the Bill is a particularly bad Bill. We have been met throughout with the cynical opposition of some hon. Members opposite, but we have not heard any of their criticism either in Committee or on the Floor of the House. This Bill will not only penalise exhibitors and renters, but it will go a lot further and penalise the public. I have given the House the reasons why I think the Bill will penalise the exhibitors, and I am now going to try to emphasise those facts further by asking the House to reject the Bill and giving the House reasons why the Bill will eventually penalise the general public. To-day I received a letter which was more or less a criticism of the remarks I made on the exhibitors' quota when I read a letter I had received from Sir Walter Gibbons. I want to explain that if an exhibitor has to pay a huge sum for his pictures he must get a return from the public, otherwise he would be bankrupt. The letter I have received is dated 17th November, and it says: The original proposal that we submitted to Sir Walter Gibbons was that we should receive a percentage of the receipts. How- ever, our proposal was rejected, and that left us no alternative but to suggest a hiring fee of £2,000 for a three weeks' run— That is for a British picture—

I fail to understand why Sir Walter Gibbons should be so perturbed about paying £2,000 for a British picture. I only quote a portion of the letter, as the writer particularly asked me to do, because I am convinced that if the West End theatres are forced into the position by this Bill, if it passes into law, as I suppose it will, of having to pay the sum of £2,000 for a three weeks' run of a British picture, or almost any picture, there is only one end to it, and that will be the ruination of the majority of picture houses not only in the West End but throughout England. If the right hon. Gentleman had only considered some of the suggestions which we have made, and modified his Clauses, there would not have been nearly so much opposition from those who sit on this side of the House, right through the passage of this Bill. We are convinced, and that is the reason we have taken up the position we have on this Bill, that this is one of the greatest errors that has been made amongst the many bad errors which this Government have made. I am sure that before the President of the Board of Trade has had an opportunity of working this Bill very long he will regret that ever the Bill was introduced.

The right hon. Gentleman has mentioned two or three times not only in the House but in Committee that the suggestions contained in the Bill were given to him in consultation with his officers by the representatives of the cinema trade, but he has not gone quite far enough. He has not explained to the House that he told the cinema trade, when they could not come to an agreement, that they had to come to some agreement and come forward with some proposals, because the Government had made up their mind that they were going to introduce a Bill to control this industry. To my mind it is a very serious blunder to try to hinder and hamper a trade in the manner in which this trade will be hampered by this Bill, and I sincerely hope that hon. Members, in their wise judgment, will have the courage of their convictions, as they have expressed them privately, and vote against the Third Reading.

Colonel WEDGWOOD

Many bad Bills have been passed by this House, but most of them have not been proved defective until they have been put into operation. I think the House can congratulate itself that this particularly bad Bill has been found out long before the end. When I reflect on the halo of glory which centred around the head of the President of the Board of Trade only nine short months ago when he introduced this Bill with the acclamation of the entire Empire; I reflect now that there is hardly one to do him reverence, and that the Bill goes to another place "unwept, unhonoured and unsung." I remember that his colleagues have said: "We fear that Bill of yours is not going very well," and the temperature has gone down and compromises have become essential because they could not persuade the Chief Whip to give an all-night sitting. I think we can draw a valuable lesson from what has happened, how easy it is at a street corner or in an Imperial Conference to pledge your country, your soul and your honour to a great cause, which is good enough for the street corner, but how difficult it becomes when you have to put those high aspirations into an Act of Parliament. First there is the draftsman, then the interests——

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

Then the obstruction.

Colonel WEDGWOOD

Then the reason well applied from this side, and the great aspiration withers and you get the spectacle that we have to-night. Never have I had greater satisfaction than in opposing this Bill and voting against the Third Reading. I have only one regret in connection with the Bill and that is that we could so easily have defeated it. We could have defeated it with the support of the Cinematograph Exhibitors' Association, but they have supported the Government, in spite of the fact that every one of their constituent elements resent the Bill and will resent it at the next General Election. In spite of that fact, we find the right hon. Gentleman with the cinema exhibitors in his pocket, and a rather uncomfortable pocket it is. We could have defeated the Bill if it had

not been, I will not say for the Liberals, but if it had not been for the mentor of the Liberals. The Manchester Guardian ' went wrong. For years the whole Liberal party has wisely taken the lead from the "Manchester Guardian," and I am not at all certain that they would not do well always to leave the "Guardian" to do the thinking for the Liberal party; but in this horrible instance the "Guardian" went wrong, and the mere Liberals took no interest in a protective Measure which was so colossal in its impudence that even in the 'Conservative party it has now few lovers.

It is not only the Liberal party and the cinema exhibitors who have let us down on this Bill, but also members of the Conservative party. How many members of the Conservative party actually spoke against the Bill on Second Reading? They appeared in Committee a few times, and then wilted away. Where is the hon. Member for Chatham (Lieut.-Colonel Moore Brabazon)? Where is the hon. Member for Balham and Tooting (Sir Alfred Butt)? Where is the hon. Member for Yarmouth (Sir Frank Meyer)? He has wisely gone off to South Africa. [HON. MEMBERS: "He is here!"] Is he here? Then he is silent. These hon. Members are silent in the House, but they are not silent in the smoking room. What Conservative Members think about this Measure does not bear repeating in the House of Commons; it has to be said elsewhere. If those hon. Members had only had the courage to speak out, or if we had had a ballot vote of this House I think this Measure would have met an early doom. It is no longer popular, it no longer has the plaudits of the multitude behind it. When it has become law its supporters will be not the right hon. Gentleman, for he will live to curse it; the only supporters of the Bill will be the big business in the film world, who will use it to collar the trade.

Question put, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

The House divided: Ayes, 223; Noes, 125.

Division No. 348.] AYES. [7.55 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel Applln, Colonel R. V. K. Balniel, Lord
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T. Ashley, Lt: Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W. Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Ainsworth, Major Charles Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W. Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton) Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Bellairs, Commander Carryon W. Greene, W. P. Crawford Pennefather, Sir John
Bennett, A. J. Grotrian, H. Brent Penny, Frederik George
Bethel, A. Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E. Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Betterton, Henry B. Gunston, Captain D. W. Perring, Sir William George
Birchall, Major J. Dearman Hacking, Captain Douglas H. Phllipson, Mabel
Blades, Sir George Rowland Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich Pilcher, G.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.) Pilditch, Sir Philip
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W. Hammersley, S. S. Power, Sir John Cecil
Braithwaite, Major A. N. Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry Price, Major C. W. M.
Brassey, Sir Leonard Harland, A. Raine, Sir Walter
Briscoe, Richard George Harrison, G. J. C. Ramer, J. R.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Hartington, Marquess of Remnant, Sir James
Brown-Lindsay, Major H. Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington) Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Brown, Brig .-Gen. H. C.(Barks, Newb'y) Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Buchan. John Haslam, Henry C. Ropner, Major L.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James Hawke, John Anthony Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Bullock, Captain M. Headlam, Lieut: Colonel C. M. Rye, F. G.
Burman, J. B. Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley) Salmon, Major I.
Burton, Colonel H. W. Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle) Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward Henn, Sir Sydney H. Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Cassels, J. D. Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. Sandeman, N. Stewart
Cautley, Sir Henry S. Hills, Major John Walter Sanderson, Sir Frank
Cazalet, Captain Victor A. Hilton, Cecil Sandon, Lord
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston) Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G. Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone) Savery, S. S.
Chapman, Sir S. Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.) Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Charteris, Brigadier-General J. Hopkins, J. W. W. Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. M c I. (Renfrew,W .)
Christle, J. A. Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N. Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Clarry, Reginald George Hume, Sir G. H. Shepperson, E. W.
Cobb, Sir Cyril Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. Huntingfield, Lord Skelton, A. N.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George Jephcott, A. R. Staney, Major P. Kenyon
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cope, Major William Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) Smithers, Waldron
Couper, J. B. King, Commodore Henry Douglas Sprot, Sir Alexander
Courtauld, Major J. S. Lamb, J. Q. Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend) Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R. Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro) Lister, Cunlifte-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Storry-Deans, R.
Dalkeith, Earl of Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green) Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester) Long, Major Eric Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Davies, Dr. Vernon Looker, Herbert William Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Dlxey, A. C. Luce, Major-Gen.Sir Richard Harman Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Drewe, C. Lumiey, L. R. Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Edmondson, Major A. J. Lynn, Sir R. J. Tasker, R. Inigo.
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Ellis, R. G. Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Tltchfield, Major the Marquess of
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.) Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart) Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Everard, W. Lindsay McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Fairfax, Captain J. G. MacIntyre, Ian Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Falle, Sir Bertram G. McLean, Major A. Watts, Dr. T.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D. MacMillan, Captain H. Wells. S. R.
Fermoy, Lord MacRobert. Alexander M. White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple
Fielden, E. B. Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel- Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Finburgh, S. Malone, Major P. B. Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L. Margesson, Captain D. Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Foster, Sir Harry S. Marriott, Sir J. A. R. Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T. Merriman, F. B. Winby, Colonel L. P.
Fraser, Captain Ian Meyer, Sir Frank Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Ganzoni, Sir John Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark) Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Waiden) Withers, John James
Gates, Percy Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham) Wormer, Viscount
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive Womersley, W. J.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John Nelson, Sir Frank Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Glyn, Major R. G. C. Neville, Sir Reginald J. Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).
Goff, Sir Park Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Gower, Sir Robert Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)
Grace, John Nuttall, Ellis TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Oakley, T. Commander B. Eyres Monsell and Mr. F. C. Thomson.
Grant, Sir J. A. O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N. Oman, Sir Charles William C.
NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West) Batey, Joseph Cove, W. G.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock) Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro') Bromley, J. Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Ammon, Charles George Brown, Ernest (Leith) Day, Colonel Harry
Attlee, Clement Richard Brown, James (Ayr and Bute) Dennison, R.
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston) Buchanan. G. Duncan, C.
Baker, Walter Charleton, H. C. Dunnico, H.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertllfery) Cluse, W. S. Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwelity)
Barnes, A. Connolly, M. Gardner, J. P.
Gibbins, Joseph Lindley, F.W. Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighiey)
Gillett, George M. Lowth, T. Smith, Rennle (Penistone)
Gosling, Harry Lunn, William Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) Mackinder, W. Stamford, T. W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.) MacLaren, Andrew Stephen, Campbell
Greenall, T. Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan) Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coine) March, S. Strauss, E. A.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) Maxton, James Sutton, J. E.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool) Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley) Thorne, W. (West Ham, Pialstow)
Groves, T. Morris, R. H. Thurtle, Ernest
Grundy, T. W. Morrison R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Tinker, John Joseph
Hail, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Murnin, H. Townerd, A. E.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Naylor, T. E. Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland) Oliver, George Harold Varley, Frank B.
Hardie, George D. Owen, Major G. Viant, S. P.
Harris, Percy A. Palln, John Henry Wallhead, Richard C.
Hayday, Arthur Paling, W. Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burniey) Parkinson, John Aiten (wigan) Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow) Ponsonby, Arthur Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Hirst, G. H. Potts, John S. Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Riley Ben Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield) Ritson, J. Weilock, Wilfred
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose) Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich) Welsh, J. C.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland) Westwood, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West) Scurr, John Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee) Sexton, James Williams, T. (York, Don Vailey)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown) Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston) Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Kelly, W. T. Shepherd, Arthur Lewis Windsor, Walter
Kennedy, T. Short, Alfred (Wednesbury) Wright, W.
Kirkwood, D. Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Lansbury, George Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Lawrence, Susan Sitch, Charles H. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Lawson, John James Smillie, Robert Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whiteley.
Lee, F. Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.