§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI beg to move, in page 1, line 7, to leave out the word "fourteenth," and to insert instead thereof the word "first."
The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Lieut.-Colonel Sir Vivian Henderson)It may 1670 save the time of the Committee if I explain that I am prepared to accept broadly this Amendment and the one that follows it.
§ Major HILLSI think 14th March is too early a date. It could be put a good deal later than that.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThe hon. and gallant Gentleman is mistaken. The consumption of the egg is all the year round. This is only the consumption of the carcase.
§ Major HILLSI understand the hon. and gallant Gentleman now wants to protect the bird for the whole year round.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThe position is this. The egg is protected all the year round. That is the Government's own Measure. The Bill says 14th March and the Amendment is to make it 1st March. There are two reasons for that. One is the natural reason and the other is because it is difficult to remember all these odd dates.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: In page 1, line 8, leave out the word "eleventh," and insert instead thereof the word "thirty-first."—[Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy.]
§ Sir V. HENDERSONI beg to move, in page one, line 19, at the end, to add the words:
(3) In this Act the expression 'lapwing' means the bird commonly called the lapwing, green plover, or peewit.This is a definition Clause which my right hon. Friend said he would try and introduce on the Committee stage.
§ Mr. MAXTONDo I understand the hon. Gentleman is moving "That the Clause stand part of the Bill"? My point comes before that.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Gentleman is now moving the Amendment which stands in his name. Perhaps he might be allowed to do that, and then the Debate can proceed upon it.
§ Sir V. HENDERSONThis is the Amendment which my right hon. Friend promised to put down on the Paper, and it includes the three terms which are commonly used throughout the country 1671 to define the bird, lapwing—lapwing, green plover or peewit. Perhaps I should explain, as it may save time later on, that the terms "Kentish plover" and "little ringed plover" are outside the Bill altogether, because they are not lapwings, and scientifically they are not of the same family. Therefore, it will not be in order to accept the suggestion made by three hon. Members opposite in a later Amendment as far as terms are concerned. As far as the other two—peesweep and wype—are concerned, these are purely local terms with a local application. If you are going to include terms of that kind, you would be entitled to include the happinch, lappinch, hornpic, horniewink and tieves nicket. It will be quite impossible and will only lead to confusion to include a large number of local names of that kind which have only a local meaning and are not understood in other parts of the country. It is better to include three terms commonly used throughout the country and which are well known, and which will not lead to the same confusion as would result from putting in a large number of purely dialectal terms. Therefore, while I appreciate what the hon. Members suggest, I am afraid I cannot accept a suggestion of that kind. I think that all that is necessary to cover this point is to include the three terms which are defined in this Amendment.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI put in my Amendment the two words which are rejected. Peesweep is not a local term; it is a Scottish word. It is used over a great part of Scotland. Wype is an old English term, and I do not think it is quite accurate to call "wype" a local or parochial term at all. It is a national word. However, I do not want to press that point. With regard to the Kentish plover and the little ringed plover, these are, I admit, different kinds of plovers. They are very rare birds. and I was hoping to get them finally protected. It is always a good thing to prevent a bird from becoming extinct. The Kentish plover is only a cousin of the lapwing, but I should have thought the Under-Secretary would have been prepared to safeguard this very rare bird.
§ Sir V. HENDERSONI should be delighted to do so, but it is outside the purview of the Bill.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThe other species, the little ringed plover is——
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. and gallant Member had better leave the description of these birds to some other occasion. They are not included in this Bill.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI thought that perhaps you might have turned a blind eye to that point, for the sake of preventing these very rare birds from being exterminated. Perhaps we can hope for another Birds' Protection Bill later.
§ Mr. MAXTONI do not think the Under-Secretary is giving an adequate definition by using the three names mentioned in his Amendment. I can see no real objection to accepting our Amendment. If this Bill is to serve any real purpose, the fact that the titles in our Amendment are mere localisms is all the more reason why they should be used. Nobody in my part of the country knows the bird by any other name than that of peesweep. Admittedly that is a corruption of peewit, or perhaps peewit is a corruption of peesweep. I am not sufficiently well informed in the history of the words to know that. If the Bill is to serve as a useful piece of legislation and to be a real check on the depredations amongst these birds and their eggs, and the sale of them, then ordinary persons living in the localities ought to know exactly what is prohibited. To add the names green plover and peewit to that of lapwing is not sufficient. Seeing that the Minister is prepared to go to that extent in extending his definition, I can see no solid reason why he should not add the other localisms which we suggest. I press him to do so.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIf the hon. Member wishes to move an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, he can do so.
§ Mr. BUCHANANOn a point of Order. Is it not possible to ask the Minister to broaden his Amendment, without our moving an Amendment to the Amendment? The hon. Member for 1673 Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) would be satisfied if the name "Peesweep" were put in the definition.
§ Mr. BUCHANANThe name Peesweep is Scottish; it is universal in Scotland. I should have thought the hon. and gallant Member would have recognised, that fact, from his knowledge of Scotland.
§ Mr. BARRI never knew this bird by any other name than peesweep, although in Aberdeen one writer of a poem called it the peewit. In my young days we had no other name for it. The Government, I think, might meet us on this point.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, after the word "plover." to insert the word "peesweep."
§ Sir V. HENDERSONI fully appreciate Scottish sentiment in this matter as I am a Scotsman myself, but it is quite contrary to precedent to put into a Bill what are merely dialectical terms, and if you once start making precedents of this kind you will have to go much further than you desire. Acts of Parliament are printed in one language, English, and if you begin putting in Scottish terms or Welsh terms or Irish terms you will get into difficulties. I do not see any great objection to putting in the word "peesweep," but the other two suggestions are out of order. As to the word "wype," I do not see why we should start printing Acts of Parliament in old English.
§ Amendment to the proposed Amendment agreed to.
§ Proposed words, as amended, there added.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. MAXTONI had hoped that the Under-Secretary would have given us some explanation of paragraph (b). What is going to happen to an innocent bird nester who might be found with plovers' eggs in his possession but with no intention of using them for commercial purposes. I do not know whether he has discussed this point with the 1674 Secretary of State and whether it is impossible to meet this point. I could not overcome the difficulty myself to the extent of tabling an Amendment.
§ Sir V. HENDERSONI think I can explain the position. The point has been discussed with the Home Secretary, and the objections are legal. If you take out the words "found in his possession" and leave the Clause "for sale or offer for sale," it cuts out the wholesale trade, which is a serious matter. In the second place, I understand that legally it would mean that if an inspector went to a retail tradesman and found a case of eggs downstairs he could not take action unless he found the man in the process of selling or offering these eggs for sale. It would enable a coach and four to be driven through the Bill. With regard to the boy, let me draw the attention of the hon. Member to the fact that the Act of 1894 makes it illegal, if the Secretary of State makes an Order, for anybody to take or destroy wild birds' eggs, and in 43 counties an Order is already in force making it illegal to take eggs. The boy would be dealt with, not under this Bill, but under the Act of 1894, and the onus of proof is on the police officer, who would have to prove his case. Unless it was a case where the boy was obviously doing wrong he would get off. The hon. Member is wrong in thinking that this paragraph is attacking the boy or creating a new offence. If we adopted his suggestion we should practically destroy the Bill.