CLAUSE 1.—(Schemes regulating production, supply and sale of coal.)

HC Deb 05 March 1930 vol 236 cc467-610

The CHAIRMAN

I call upon the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers) to move the third Amendment on the Order Paper.

Mr. SMITHERS

I beg to move, in page 1, line 16, to leave out the word "regulating" and to insert instead thereof the words "to increase."

I move this Amendment in order to draw attention to what I consider is a false principle in this Bill. This Clause seeks to regulate the supply of coal and. therefore, to regulate the supply of work. I understand, although I was not pre sent in the House yesterday, that one hon. Member pleaded for the policy of the production in abundance of the gifts of nature. It is on that ground that I attack the principle contained in this Clause, the regulation of the supply of work. The President of the Board of Trade, in his Second Reading speech said that the industry had got to a stage at which it was static. For any man, any business or any country to get to a point where you can neither move forward nor backwards, is a very dangerous position. If the promoters of the Bill and if the miners' Members had thought less about hours and wages and had concentrated on the production of coal, and the cheap production of coal, it would have been far better. In the coal industry, as in any other industry, cheap production is necessary for the prosperity of the industry and for the welfare of the workers employed in the industry.

I am fully aware of the difference of methods of production in America and in this country, and I am fully aware of the difference in the seams in America, and the easier way in which coal is won there. I would, however, call attention to two remarkable sets of figures. In 1878, the British miner produced per year 275 tons, while the American miner produced 327 tons. The production of the British miner per year has gone down to about 225 tons, while the. American production has gone up to 665 tons. I do not say that we can approach that figure, but I would emphasise the fact that while we in this country have been wrangling about wages and hours and all kinds of things in which political influence has been brought to bear, in America they have concentrated on the production of coal, because they know that the coal industry cannot hope to prosper unless more coal is produced at a price at which it can be sold.

It may be that the coal industry is being adversely affected by oil, petrol, electricity, and water power, and that it is not going to be of the same dimensions in the futunre as it has been in the past. Before the War 1,200,000 men were employed in the industry, to-day it employs, roughly, 900,000 men. If that, is the case, if the industry is not going to be so large in output, then for heaven's sake let us find the present economic basis of the industry. The industry, so to speak, is in deep water, and it is important that those employed in it should touch bottom and know their economic level. No Measure brought forward with the idea of putting it into a hothouse can succeed. It may put off the evil day, but the ultimate fate of the industry will be worse. It is much better to know the true economic basis of the industry without all consideration of quotas and standards. It is no good pretending that the economic factor is not there and has not to be considered.

Mr. BATEY

What has this to do with the Amendment?

Mr. SMITHERS

My Amendment is to leave out the word "regulating" and to insert instead the words "to increase."

Mr. TOM SMITH

May we know exactly which Amendment the hon. Member is moving?

The CHAIRMAN

If the hon. Member had paid attention, he would know that I called on the hon. Member to move the third Amendment on the Order Paper.

Mr. SMITHERS

I want to say one word about our export trade. I understand from experts in the coal trade that the total coal exporting capacity of this country is between 75,000,000 to 80,000,000 tons per year. Our present export of coal is about 50,000,000 tons a year. The only reason why we cannot export coal up to capacity is because we are exporting it at the wrong price. There is no other reason; and the export coal is made difficult because of the provision made by the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) when he was Prime Minister for reparations to be paid in kind.

The CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member is getting far from his Amendment, which, I understand, is to increase the production of coal.

Mr. SMITHERS

I am only giving that as an illustration.

The CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member is going into past history which has nothing to do with the present Amendment.

Mr. SMITHERS

If we could export coal abroad at a price which people could pay, the industry would be in a much better condition. I am moving this Amendment because, although I am not an expert in the coal trade, I have been in business since I was 18 years of age, and I have had to face business facts. There are certain principles in this Bill which are fundamentally wrong, and the Amendment is moved for the purpose of calling attention to the fact that to restrict the output of wealth is wrong and can in the end do no good to the workers in the industry.

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham)

The hon. Member will not for a moment expect the Government to accept this Amendment. He must realise that the regulation of the output of coal has been decided by the Committee and the introduction of these words would make that regulation utterly impossible. I can perhaps briefly explain away some of the difficulties in the hon. Member's mind. Under this Bill there is no restriction of the output of coal in the ordinary sense of the term. If there is any increased demand for coal at an economic price there are definite provisions in the national and district schemes for an immediate response to that demand, but it is altogether different when we pass to the consideration of the output of coal which cannot be sold at an economic level. The Amendment, if it were adopted, would mean that there would be in every district a scheme not for regulating the output of coal but for increasing the output, and the only effect of that, in existing conditions, would be to increase the quantity of coal raised and placed upon the market which could not be sold at an economic level, thus further depressing the whole industry and doing grave injustice to every interest connected with the industry. I think I have said sufficient to show that it is impossible for the Government to accept the Amendment and I hope the hon. Member will not press it.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. SKELTON

I beg to move, in page 1, line 20, at the end, to insert the words: Provided that all coal supplied to the British iron and steel industries shall be excluded from the provisions of Part I of this Act.

Sir PHILIP CUNLIFFE-LISTER

On a point of Order. This Amendment proposes to exclude all coal for steel works from the purview of Part I of the Bill. There is an Amendment to Clause 3 in the name of some of my right hon. Friends to insert the following proviso: Provided that in determining the quota with respect to a coal mine which is owned or controlled by a manufacturing or industrial company or undertaking, the coal which is supplied, whether as coal or coke, by that coal mine to that company or undertaking for consumption in the works of that company or undertaking shall not be included in either the standard tonnage or the quota of that mine. This Amendment to Clause 3 seeks to provide that coal got by a subsidiary undertaking, that is, an undertaking owned by a manufacturing undertaking, and which is used for the purpose of the principal manufacturing concern, shall not be included in the quota for the district. I desire to ask your Ruling, Mr. Chairman, as to whether if we consider the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton), we shall be in any way prejudiced when we come to deal with this Amendment to Clause 3?

The CHAIRMAN

I will not rule that out at this moment.

Mr. SKELTON

The exclusion from Part I of the Bill of coal used in the iron and steel industries raises a point of vast industrial importance be this country. As we have now decided on the general principle of Part I—namely, that there shall be a scheme for the production, supply and sale of coal, it will be agreed that it becomes of vast importance to see whether we are sufficiently considering the interests of other vital British industries. Let us assume, although it is not my private opinion, that it is vital to the interests of the coal industry to have a scheme for the production supply and sale of coal is it not also an assumption of equal importance that we should in this Committee take the most meticulous care to make perfectly certain that we are not jeopardising the interests of any other British industry? It is with that view that I have put down this Amendment. If you are turning your eyes to consider what industries may be most affected by this Bill you must at once fix the iron and steel industries as being to a far greater extent and in a far more direct way than any other industries dependent upon an adequate supply of cheap coal of the proper quality. Therefore, I propose that from the provisions of Part I coal used in these industries should be excluded. It is clear, and I would not deny it for a moment, that such a suggestion makes a considerable inroad into the general framework of the Bill, but I hope I shall be able to convince the Committee that whatever inroad you may make by this Amendment it is an absolutely necessary inroad for the sake of the iron and steel industries. If you do not take this means of securing to these vital industries a proper supply of coal there are no other means in the Bill whereby you can give them the same security which this Amendment would give.

I need not emphasise the vital importance of the iron and steel industries or recall to the Committee the large number of men employed directly in iron and steel; the considerable number of coal miners whose work consists in getting coal for the use of these industries, the considerable number of men employed in the iron ore mining industry, and the vast number of men employed in the engineering and shipbuilding industries, which ultimately depend on cheap steel and iron, which in turn depends on a proper supply of the right kind of coal. Therefore, the vital importance of this question cannot surely be dented. May I say, as a brother Scot, how delighted one is to see the President of the Board of Trade here conducting this Bill again, and how very much one respects and admires the ability which he has shown up to date in the conduct of this most difficult Measure?

I do not think my right hon. Friend needs to be reminded of the very serious condition of the iron and steel industry at the present time. If I went into that matter fully I should be trespassing beyond the bounds of order, but this I will say: It is admitted that the provisions of the Bill as a whole will increase the price of coal. Various figures have been given. I shall select the right hon. Gentleman's own figure, and put the increase at 1s. 6d. per ton. I do not think it will be disputed that three tons of coal are required to products a ton of steel. [HON. MEMBERS: "Four tons!"] Then I will say between three and four tons. In these cases I always prefer to take the lower figure. Assume that I am right in saying that three tons of coal are required, and we get a figure of 4s. 6d. added to the price of a ton of steel. That is at a time when we are fighting in the world markets with the most cut-throat competition to maintain a market for our steel. At this particular time it seems clear that, with the world purchasing power, the world demand, considerably reduced, and therefore a greatly increased competition from abroad, the pressure upon our iron and steel industry from foreign competitors is likely to grow greater and not less.

During January last the imports of iron and steel from abroad have been greater than in any month since October, 1927. That being so, it surely is a matter of vital importance for this Committee, representing the nation as a whole, to see that there is put upon the iron and steel industry no burden which to any extent may interfere with its chance of successful competition in the world market. I shall not expand that point, because I am sure that the Committee, without exception of party, realises the truth of the proposition that I have laid down. It may be said that there are other methods of protecting the iron and steel industry against a possible rise of price. I turn back to the speech of the President of the Board of Trade on the Second Reading of the Bill and to his declaration of Government policy in the matter. Let me quote a sentence or two from that declaration. The right hon. Gentleman said: But as regards homo consumers and other classes, and more particularly the heavy industries, the definite desire is to give them coal on the best possible terms, whether that is done by the ordinary differential price without any contribution"— I assume that means a levy— or is done in terms of that contribution. Then the right hon. Gentleman went on to say: The Samuel Commission showed that unless these heavy industries recovered there would not be restored the domestic demand for British coal. The right hon. Gentleman then asked: Is the coal industry, which is bound up with iron and steel, going to cut its own throat by penalising those industries? A mere statement of the case is sufficient."—[OFFICIAL. REPORT, 17th December, 1929; col. 1268, Vol. 233.] In this vital matter I suggest that a mere statement of the case is not sufficient. If my Amendment is not adopted this Committee must examine what alternative methods there are of securing that the industry shall not suffer a danger which the right hon. Gentleman's words clearly indicated that he had in mind. I say frankly that it seems to me that no provision that can be made in this Bill will give adequate security. The right hon. Gentleman talked about differential price, but he surely meant, by that, that if you raise the whole scale of coal prices by this Bill the iron and steel coal would still remain at a differential advantage with the other, but that that would not mean that the iron and steel industry would not suffer an increased price. I take it that the industry would suffer to the extent of 1s. 6d. a ton, just as the rest of the consumers would suffer. The idea that it is possible to secure by a levy the result that we desire to reach appears to me to be out of the question. Who is to pay the levy for the iron and steel coal? Are the other consumers to pay it? If so that should be made clear by the right hon. Gentleman. If that be the intention it will be a load above the burden of which we already know. If no levy is to be put on to help the 20,000,000 tons of coal used for iron and steel in this country, that will be a load above the burden.

But, even so, that kind of legislative machinery cannot give iron and steel coal the same security as it would get if left out of Part I and out of the quota, for that is practically what it comes to. I say that for this reason: I do not believe that you will ever be able to get a levy in favour of the iron and steel coal. I believe that the price you would have to put on other domestic coal would be so high as to be intolerable. I am clearly of the opinion that if you include iron and steel coal under Part I, the tendency will be for the iron and steel coal to approximate in price to the rest of the coal. The only possible way to give the complete security which this iron and steel industry must have if its competition in the world market is to be maintained, is to cut the 20,000,000 tons of coal used in the iron and steel industry out of the Bill altogether.

I frankly said earlier that it might be alleged that my proposal will cut too much into the structure of the Bill. I think I am right in saying that the total amount of coal used in the iron and steel industry is 12 to 13 per cent. of the total coal raised in this country. If you exclude that 12 to 13 per cent., if you allow the iron and steel industries to get their coal at the cheapest possible price, that does not cut into the general provisions of the Bill to such an extent as to destroy the quota system of the scheme for the production, supply and sale of coal. It only means that this Committee has realised that it must not consider one industry alone, and that while hoping to help the coal industry it has not forgotten steel and iron. I do not believe that the President of the Board of Trade, with all his dialectical skill and knowledge of this problem, will be able to convince the Committee that the exclusion of 12.6 per cent. of total coal production from this scheme would destroy the general scheme of the Bill for the quota and the regulation of price.

I urge the right hon. Gentleman not to be content with the point of view which he exhibited in his Second Reading speech—that a mere statement of the case is sufficient. In view of the general opinion held of coalowners by hon. Members opposite, surely they cannot now say that they rely upon the coal industry not to cut its own throat, because what they have been saying for 10 years is that the coal industry does nothing but cut its own throat. I say, and say with force, that if that be their view, it is doubly necessary to see that the coal industry does not cut the throat of the iron and steel industry. That is why I insist on the importance of this Amendment and on the vital need of this Committee taking heed of the iron and steel industry as well as of the coal industry.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) made a very proper intervention just now with regard to a future Amendment. It is right that I should say that my Amendment does not merely deal with coal supplied to the iron and steel industry in a vertical combine. It applies to all coal used in the industry. Forty per cent. of the coal used for iron and steel is not vertical combine coal, but is coal purchased outside. Further, very often the feeling has been expressed on the other side against vertical combines. I do not agree with that feeling, but that is neither here nor there. An hon. Member who represents one of the Yorkshire Divisions expressed the view, when amalgamations were being discussed, that one of the things that would be struck at was just that vertical combine. It is perfectly clear, if amalgamations go on, that the proportion of coal used in the iron and steel industry, not from vertical combines but purchased from outside, may be increased from the present 40 per cent. to a much larger total.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS

The point I was making was that when steel combines had their own collieries they could sell coal to themselves at a price that would leave the colliery without profit and the mine workers with low wages, and that the parent company could make fairly fabulous profits. I was not opposing the vertical combine.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. SKELTON

Then I misunderstood the hon. Gentleman. I did form the impression that he indicated, as one of the advantages of amalgamation, that vertical combines must be broken up. It is clear that, even without that coming into operation, the fact that you have 40 per cent. of the coal which is used in the iron and steel industries outwith the scope of my right hon. Friend's Amendment, which is to be discussed later, shows the vast importance of the Amendment which we are now discussing. The issue is a simple one. Is the Committee going to look after the iron and steel trade as well as the coal trade? I feel sure the Committee will say "Yes." If that be true, the other issue is: Is there any alternative method under this Bill of giving a like security to this vital basic industry, which has to compete in the world market against constantly increasing competition. Is there any method by which that industry can be given security such as would be given it by the Amendment? If I am told, first, that the Committee does care for this industry, and, secondly, that no other like security can be given to it, then I think I have established a sound case for asking the Committee and the Government to agree to the Amendment.

Colonel CLIFTON BROWN

I know many of the steelworkers in the County of Durham, and many of the coalowners, too, and I would like to please them both, but I believe that this Amendment will do more harm to the coal industry than good to the steelworkers. Durham is a county which has more steelworks than any othr county and we produce in Durham 37,000,000 tons a year of vendable coal. Out of that figure, the steelworks produce 6,000,000 tons, which is a proportion of 16 per cent. We have to consider how these figures would work out in relation to the quota. We anticipate that in Durham the quota which will come into operation will be 85 per cent. applying to all coal produced in the county. If 16 per cent. is taken off that—that is to say the coal produced by the steelworks—then the quota as regards the other coal mines in Durham would be affected, and the difference would be something like 3 per cent. on the quota for the county. Instead of being 85 per cent. it would be 82 per cent. The other coal mines would all have to bear an extra burden because the steelworks would bear no burden at all in this respect. That is the first general effect which the Amendment would have in Durham generally.

The second effect would be this: The steel works sell a certain amount of their coal. They consume roughly 75 per cent. of their produce but the other 25 per- cent., which they sell, will become subject to the quota and, I presume, the same quota as the rest of the county. If we work out the figures we find that the steel works will be selling their surplus coal, under this proposal, with a quota applied to only 25 per cent. of their production and assuming a quota for the whole county of 85 per cent. that would mean a quota for the steel works of 96 per cent., which would mean very little difference at all in their production. They will be producing on a quota of 96 per cent. while their competitors, who are engaged in selling coal, will be producing on a quota of 82 per cent. That will be a considerable handicap to the other collieries; and I am informed that these figures would represent a difference of between 9d. and 1s. 3d. per ton. If the Deputy-Chairman were here, I might remind him that that would be very nice for his constituency of Consett. I observe my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) in his place. There are no steel works in his constituency and I do not think that this proposal would be so nice for his constituents who are selling coal, if the cost of production in their case was made from 9d. to 1s. 2d. a ton dearer. I have taken for the purpose of this calculation a quota of 85 per cent., but supposing we get a period of great depression and the quota is decreased to 80 per cent. or 70 per cent. what will then be the difference between the coal produced by the steel works and the coal produced by the ordinary collieries?

Mr. SKELTON

Is the hon. and gallant Member discussing the Amendment which is now before the Committee? Does he think that my Amendment deals solely with coal produced by steel works, because all his figures relate to that matter but that is not the subject of my Amendment.

Colonel BROWN

I am dealing, first of all, with the case of coal produced by steel works. The other point in the hon. Member's speech I shall come to later. I was about to take the case of a quota as low as 70 per cent. That would mean that in the case of coal produced by the steel works the quota would really be 92½ per cent., while the ordinary collieries would be working on a quota of 64 per cent., which would make a difference in the cost of production of 2s. to 2s. 6d. a ton—an inequality which was never contemplated in the drafting of this Bill. I now come to the point of which the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) has reminded me. He has pointed out that this Amendment seeks to deal with all coal supplied to the iron and steel industry and that 40 per cent. of that is outside the vertical combines. This 40 per cent. outside the vertical combines means that the comparison would be 40 per cent. worse for the coal mines selling their coal abroad against our competitors. It is going to be all the worse for the remaining collieries under this proposal, and I think it would be found that in the case of Durham the proportion, instead of being 16 per cent., as I mentioned before, would be nearer 20 per cent. All the other figures which I have given would be so much the worse in consequence, and the matter would be so much the more serious for Durham as a whole.

Those are the considerations which I have been asked to put before the Committee on this matter and, much as I would like to help the steel industry, this Bill is, according to the Title, a Bill to deal with the production, supply and sale of coal and is not a Bill for the relief or aid of the steel industry. We must deal with the steel industry in some other way. In order to be fair to all the great industries, we must confine ourselves as regards this Bill to the coal industry and that alone, and leave the other industries to find other remedies in other ways.

Mr. CLEMENT DAVIES

I only intervene because, when the Committee was considering whether or not we should include production in this Bill, I mentioned the position of the steel and iron industry, and I desire to repeat what I said on that occasion. Without doubt this Bill will increase the price of steel and iron. Without doubt it will also increase the price of tinplate and of all articles which are made from steel and iron and tinplate. But what is the proposal of the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton)? It is that steel and iron, now that the quota has been accepted by the Committee, should receive a benefit from the other industries; that the other industries should pay for the quota, and that they themselves should then help the iron and steel industry. As I warned the Committee before, that is the trouble which the President of the Board of Trade has brought upon himself by adopting the quota system. All these industries are bound to suffer in trying to help the coal industry. But let us be fair. As far as I am concerned, and I think my hon. Friends on these benches agree, my view is that all industries must suffer alike. We cannot pick and choose as between steel and iron on one hand and cotton or the industries in the West Riding, or even agriculture, on the other. If the quota is to be forced upon us, we must all suffer and we must bear the burden alike.

Major THOMAS

I support the Amendment, because it deals with an industry which is bound up with the coal industry. We cannot discuss the coal industry without discussing the iron and steel industry also. Wherever coal has been found, iron and steel have been produced as the natural sequel, and we cannot deal with the manufacture of iron and steel as a matter quite separate and apart from the coal industry. I hope I shall not be out of order in saying something on the present position of the iron and steel industry, because it has a very important effect upon this proposal. This industry is now suffering from great unemployment. The latest figure avail able shows 23 per cent. of unemployment, and last year we imported 3,000,000 tons of steel. Had those 3,000,000 tons of steel been manufactured in this country, it would have meant the consumption of between 12,000,000 and 15,000,000 tons of coal and, therefore, to suggest that we must deal separately with the coal industry and with the steel industry, is, to my mind, perfectly futile. Why are we importing this large tonnage of steel? The price of imported steel bars to-day in Swansea is £5 4s. a ton, and the price of manufactured British steel bars in South Wales is round about £5 10s. The Committee may ask themselves why we produce steel at all in these circum stances. We do so because we have the plant to do it and because the margin is—

Mr. T. GRIFFITHS

On a point of Order. Are we to be allowed to reply to these statements?

The CHAIRMAN

I understand that the hon. and gallant Member is pointing out the effect of the Amendment on the steel industry. We do not want any controversy about the steel industry itself, except in relation to the Amendment before the Committee.

Major THOMAS

I was pointing out that the difference in price at the moment is a very small one, but if the cost of the raw material of the industry increases, the difference will not be a small one. It will be such that the steel manufacturers will shut down, and once they shut down they will shut down for ever. What will be the effect on the steel trade if this Amendment is not accepted? First of all, it may be more difficult for the steel industry to get the fuel that it requires; and there have been cases during the last 18 months where it has been difficult for a steel works to obtain the coal that it wants. Further, the steel industry will have to pay towards a levy which will go towards paying for the coal for the foreign steel maker who is competing with this country. The President of the Board of Trade, in his speech last Thursday, drew attention to the importance of this matter, and I would like to quote from what he said on that occasion. He said: Let us take the case of the iron and steel industry. That is one of the classes, or may be one of the classes of coal, under this Bill. If it is felt desirable that there should he a 100 per cent. quota applied to that basic tonnage for the purposes of serving the iron and steel industry, this scheme provides for it. If there is any other class of demand in a similar position, for which it is felt that there should be a special quota, hat also can be provided in the district scheme."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th February, 1930; col. 2512; Vol. 235.] I do not think that that is quite satisfactory or quite clear, because, after all, this is a Coal Bill, drafted for the benefit of the coalowners and the coal miners, and there is no question but that if we are to rely upon the Bill as it stands the iron and steel industry is not going to get that consideration which is absolutely vital to it if it is going to exist at all.

The chief argument that will be brought against this Amendment is that it is applied to one industry only. We have had to accept Part I of the Bill, and we are now trying to turn it into something better than it is at the present moment. It is a striking fact that under the five counties scheme, upon which this Bill has been drafted to a very great extent, fuel for metallurgical purposes was practically excluded. That was a very important admission on the part of those responsible for the five counties scheme, and I think that if there were as many Members on the other side of the House representing the steel industry as there are representing the coal industry, this Amendment would be accepted at once.

I ask the Committee to look upon this matter, not from the point of view of one industry or one part of an industry, because if you look upon it from the point of view of the coal industry, you are only looking upon it from the point of view of one part of the steel industry. You cannot separate the one from the other, and I ask the Committee to examine this Amendment in the spirit in which it is put forward, which is in no spirit of obstruction, but in the spirit of making this Bill a more useful one than it can possibly be in its present form; and I ask the President of the Board of Trade to give us his assurance that he will accept this Amendment.

Mr. WRIGHT

The question is asked as to how this country is to compete with other nations in the production of iron and steel. In my division there happen to be a good many iron and steel workers and coalminers, and it is one of the distressed areas of the country. There are various methods whereby the owners themselves might make very considerable improvements. Coal has been, to the iron and steel manufacturers in days gone by, much too cheap, with the consequence that the men whom they employ use it in a very wasteful manner. We know that, in the course of the evolution of industry, many improvements have been introduced from time to time, whereby much higher results can be obtained from the same quantity of coal consumed.

While this Debate was in progress, it occurred to me that there was a passage in one of the books in the Library which might be of interest. I have not had time to master it, and, therefore, I would ask permission to read a short quotation from it. It is a book by Lord Brassey, called "Work and Wages." The quotation is to be found on page 46, and it has reference to this particular question of the methods introduced by the Bessemer process: Thus a further saving is effected in the fuel consumed for a given work. The rapidity with which Bessemer steel is coming into use will be appreciated when it is stated that the report of the jury at the London International Exhibition showed that the entire production of steel in Great Britain, prior to Bessemer's invention, amounted to 51,000 tons per annum; while the quantity of Bessemer steel made in Great Britain during the 12 months ending June, 1873, amounted to 481,000 tons, or nearly 10 times the amount of production prior to the invention. Had this quantity of steel been made by the old Sheffield process, it would have consumed, according to the foregoing figures, 4,401,000 tons more coal than was actually employed in its production.

Mr. HASLAM

Will the hon. Member give the date at which that was written?

Mr. WRIGHT

I gave it in my opening remarks. I am quoting from a work by Lord Brassey, who was an eminent authority upon these problems, called "Papers and Addresses," with a subtitle, "Work and Wages," from page 46.

Mr. HASLAM

But I asked the date.

Mr. WRIGHT

I have given the date already—1873. This question of the consumption of coal has a very great, bearing on this question. I am sorry I am not perfectly prepared for this Debate to day, otherwise I should have had some very important evidence to submit to the Committee. Sir Robert Hadfield, who is a very large employer of labour in Sheffield, interested in iron and steel and, I believe, in the coal mining industry too, stated not very long ago—I am quoting from memory—that by the method of instructing their employés in the use of coal there was a saving of, I believe, four tons out of five, though I am not quite sure of the proportion. It is a well known fact that in the mining industry, and probably in some of the iron and steel trades, although I know less about them, a great deal of the plant is entirely out of date, perfectly obsolete, and should have been scrapped long ago, and if some of those vast fortunes which have been made and consumed by individuals on their own self-gratification had been put into the industry—

The CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member is getting rather wide of the Amendment. He seems to be entering upon a general discussion, and we cannot have that. The question is as to whether coal used for iron and steel production should be excluded.

Mr. WRIGHT

Some of the questions raised on the other side were as to how the iron and steel trade could survive against foreign competition, and the county of Durham in particular was mentioned. I am particularly interested in the coal mining industry and its allied industries. Here is one of the answers to this very question, so far as the county of Durham is concerned. Here is a quotation from the Report of the Samuel Com mission, beginning: "Coalowners pro test"—

The CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member must remember that we are in Committee of the House, and that we are not discussing this as a general question on Second Reading. We must apply ourselves as closely as possible to the Amendment before us. If it were possible to show that the Amendment would increase the cost of coal and injure the iron and steel industry, the hon. Member would be in order in doing so.

Mr. WRIGHT

If you had allowed me another moment before calling me to order, I was going to reply to the observations made on the other side in regard to the county of Durham. The Consett Iron Company, in the 17 years ended 1924, made a profit of £6,820,081—

The CHAIRMAN

Really, the hon. Member must know that that does not enter into this question of leaving this particular industry outside the Bill so far as coal is concerned.

Mr. WRIGHT

With due deference to you, Mr. Young, that is the kind of treatment you have usually meted out to me in days gone by.

The CHAIRMAN

Order! That remark cannot be allowed. I am trying to do my duty by the Committee, and Members on both sides have found at times that they have not been able to discuss what they would like to have done. I am here for the purpose of trying to keep Members to the Amendment before the Committee.

Mr. WRIGHT

I have no wish to be out of order, and it is a matter of opinion, but I am satisfied that the coal, iron, and steel industries have great possibilities. Although you rule these figures out while you have allowed statements to be made on the other side, I fail to see the justice of the Ruling.

HON. MEMBERS

Order!

Mr. WRIGHT

You may call "Order" if you like, but I have the opportunity of speaking for the time being, and I shall use it. There is no doubt that there are vast possibilities of economy in these industries, without the plea which has been put forward from the other benches, and although I have not got the opportunity now, the first time that I do get it I shall not forget to give this House the benefit of the statements that I desire to make.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

There is no doubt that this Amendment raises a very important subject, but I hope to be able to give the Committee certain information which I think will remove a great deal of doubt. What is proposed in the Amendment is that coal supplied to iron and steel undertakings in Great Britain should be placed outside the regulation of Part I; and, of course, we clearly distinguish between a comprehensive Amendment of that kind and a later Amendment relating to ancillary undertakings which admittedly constitute a separate issue. The Committee has passed the principle of the quota and regulation of output, and whatever view hon. Members may hold in that controversy, we have got now to face what is an ordinary and straightforward business proposition. I should state it in these terms, that it is quite impossible to have a quota at all unless it is to be a quota on the most comprehensive basis and is to apply to all ancillary undertakings and all pits. If we start, as it is now proposed by the Amendment, to leave out important sections of demand from all quota regulation, the whole basis of Part I of the Bill would be undermined.

I do not differ in one iota from what my hon. Friends have said with regard to the plight of the iron and steel industry, but it is not impossible to add to this depressed industry other depressed industries; and if we make an exception with one, we shall have to concede it to others. At a glance, hon. Members will see that this is quite an impossible proposition. If this were conceded and applied to one or other depressed industries, what would be the effect? The only effect would be, as regards a large range of colliery undertakings in this country, which do not happen to administer to this class or that class of industrial demand, that the quota regulation would be required to be very much more drastic and the problem of overhead charges would be correspondingly increased. So we fall back on what has always been our simple proposition in, this matter, that if the quota is to be applied at all—and the Committee have now decided in that sense—it must include all undertakings and be applicable to every case. That is the first part of the case which we put in opposition to this proposal.

I should like to say, in passing, that while I agree that these industries are depressed, the coal industry is also depressed, and there is no doubt through all this controversy in regard to the Bill that the weak position of the coal industry is largely due to the fact that coal continues to subsidise certain more profitable industries. But that does not rid us of the duty or obligation of trying to find some cure for the coal industry itself. The remedy is that which we have, in spite of all the controversy, put in Part I of this Measure. I do not want to leave it on that note, because there are, of course, provisions under this part of the Bill which seek to recognise the difficulty to which my hon. Friends have referred. On Thursday I tried to explain that the classes of coal, as defined later in the Bill, are not only classes of demand relating to grades or qualities of coal, but to coal supplied to the iron and steel or any other industry which, for the time being, is in a position of difficulty, which, in the opinion of the coal industry, entitles it to special consideration.

The Report of the Royal Commission on the Coal Industry, over which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) presided, made it perfectly clear that unless there could be a recovery of the heavy industries in this country, and more particularly of iron and steel, there is no prospect of that restoration of the home demand for coal which must be one of the important contributing factors to the return of prosperity in the coal trade. The industry to-day takes exactly that view, and, accordingly, the statement which I made on Second Reading and repeated on Thursday stands, namely that the coal industry would be cutting its own throat if it adopted any policy of price regulation or diffentiation which penalised iron and steel, and which retarded their recovery. The Amendment puts that class of demand permanently outside the Bill. What do we seek to do in distinction to a drastic and painful course of that kind? We seek to provide under Part I a standard tonnage and a quota which may be fixed on the basis of 100 per cent. for the time being for certain classes of demand. That class might be the export trade or certain divisions of the export trade, or it might be iron and steel or any other industry. Accordingly, where a special demand for one industry may be established, or where it is already known to the coal industry, the quota may be applied on the basis of 100 per cent. for the time being, and therefore there is provision under Part I for meeting the difficulties of special demands for particular industries; and I would remind the Committee that if an industry thinks that it is unfairly treated, there is a new reference to independent arbitrators which I propose to introduce later, and this reference may be as to price or quota or any other condition in this Bill.

That does not mean that these regulations or these classes of demand are to be taken permanently outside Part I. That does not follow at all. The object of this provision is to secure that, for the time being, in these difficult circumstances, and until the recovery of that class of demand, there may be a certain necessary elasticity in the quota regulations. I submit that, having provided for the independent arbitration as to price or as to whatever else is the difficulty, and having made the arbitration decision final and binding, the Government have provided all the safeguards that are necessary without undermining, as this Amendment would, the whole structure of Part I of the Bill.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

The Committee find themselves in a genuine difficulty over this provision. On the one hand, we are faced with a very strong claim put forward by my hon. Friend who moved the Amendment on behalf of the iron and steel trade. That trade is admittedly the best customer which the coal trade has got. It is admittedly the trade which can, I suppose, be more adversely affected than any other by any undue increase in the price of coal. Indeed, the President of the Board of Trade has been at pains to explain how-unwise it would be of the coal trade itself, even if it be given the wide monopolistic powers which he seeks to confer by this Bill upon the coalowners, to use these powers in any way which would be detrimental to the iron and steel industry. The Committee have that on the one hand. The natural answer to that is, "Well, take the iron and steel trade out, so that it should run no risk." Then the President says, "I cannot do that, because, once I have established the quota, every industry must come inside the quota pen and take its chance." That shows plainly what a tangled web we weave once we begin to pass a Bill of this kind.

I appreciate the difficulty of the President of the Board of Trade. It is difficult, if you once establish the principle of a quota, to make a whole succession of inroads upon it, though there may well be cases where the danger to another industry is so great that you have got to take the risk of making these inroads in order to give a fair measure of security to the industry. I am not really satisfied, without further information, as to what else may be done for the iron and steel trade, and I am not quite satisfied that it is not practically possible to except iron and steel coal from the quota pro visions, and that it may not be necessary to do it. I am not quite sure that it is impracticable, because I think that it would be possible. It would certainly be possible when you come to deal with those coal mines which are owned by a manufacturing undertaking. It would obviously be possible to exempt them altogether, and to say that they shall have two standards of production, as is in fact done in Germany, that they shall have to declare one figure as the amount which they are going to produce—

Major GEORGE DAVIES

On a point of Order. Will you, Mr. Young, ask the Liberal party to settle outside how they are going to vote on this Amendment?

The CHAIRMAN

I have not noticed any disturbance in the Committee.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

As a matter of fact, we were not discussing this Amendment, but I apologise to my right hon. Friend if we interrupted him.

Sir P. CUNLIFE-LISTER

I was saying that I am sure, in the case of collieries which are run by manufacturing companies, that it will be practicable to invite them to declare two standards of production, the one standard which they propose to supply to their own undertaking, and another standard which they propose to suply in the open market. That is the common German practice. If that is a practice which holds in other countries where the quota system is in force, it must be equally practicable to invite colliery undertakings generally to have two standards of output, and say, "I declare I am going to produce x thousands of tons a year for the purpose of supplying the steel works of the country, and the balance of my production is to be sold in the ordinary market to the other industries and buyers." Therefore, I do not think that it is true to say that it is impossible or impracticable either to exclude iron and steel coal altogether, or to exclude it in effect while yet bringing it into the general ambit of the quota scheme. Having regard to the fact that this industry is admittedly by far the biggest buyer of coal, and which is more likely than any other to be adversely affected if prices are raised unduly against it, I think the Committee would be unwilling to part with this safeguard merely on the ground that it is said to be impracticable. I do not think it is impracticable, however inconvenient it may be vis-a-vis the coalowners, and I do not think the Committee will forego the safeguard unless we have more guidance from the President of the Board of Trade as to what other safeguards, he is going to propose in the interests of this industry. I appreciate that we cannot discuss the merits of Amendments which stand later on the Paper, but I think we should be in order in asking him at this stage to let us know what concessions, if any, he proposes to make in regard to those Amendments which may afford a safeguard to this industry, so that, if we are not to have any concessions, we may be the better able to make up our minds on the necessity of taking this Amendment to a Division and carrying it, if we can.

Let me give one example of what I mean. What is in my hon. Friend's mind is that the price may be unduly raised against the steel industry. I think that is a point which the President of the Board of Trade was trying to meet when he said that no body of coalowners, even if they were in complete control themselves, would raise prices aginst the steel industry. We have to consider in this compulsory all-embracing scheme not what a reasonable man would do but the powers with which we are endowing these men. I am not going to argue the merits of price now, because that is a vital question to be discussed by itself, beyond saying this: With control, all the difficulties such as my hon. Friend has raised will come upon us with increased force. It all really comes down to price. If the President of the Board of Trade could say, "I am going to give up the control of price under this Bill, though keeping the control of production; I am not going to say to people that they are to sell at compulsory prices to every undertaking in this country," these industries would feel that they had got such a measure of security as we can still give to them.

If the President of the Board of Trade can say either that he is going to give way—well, I will not say "give way"—either that he realises that the control of prices ought not to be a necessary part of his scheme, or, even if he can say with regard to the iron and steel industry, which he acknowledges ought to have primary consideration in the matter of supply and price, that he is willing to exclude iron and steel from a compulsory fixed price, he will go a very long way to meet the difficulty raised by my hon. Friend and the difficulty which he himself recognises we are in and which he has been trying to meet; or if he still insists on controlling the price as regards iron and steel, but says that iron and steel are always to get coal at the cheapest price, that, after all, would be some safeguard. But if he is able to do nothing, then I am bound to say that I feel the position of the iron and steel industry is so important that, on the whole, and, in spite of the difficulties, I think I should vote for this Amendment.

Sir SAMUEL ROBERTS

I should like to take this matter a little bit further than my right hon. Friend the ex-President of the Board of Trade has done, and to say that, in my view, it would be quite feasible to take the coal supplied to the iron and steel trade out of the quota if it were also taken out of the standard, which is what has been done under the five counties scheme. Take it out of the standard and apply a quota only to the balance. If I am producing 10,000 tons now, and have a quota for 10,000 tons, and 4,000 tons of that is going to be standard, I could still send my 4,000 tons to the steel works, and my quota would apply to the 6,000 balance. I think that is a perfectly feasible way. I may take the opportunity, in passing, to say, as regards price-fixing, that I think the solution with regard to the iron and steel industry would be a sliding scale of prices such as is now in force, very largely, in the sale of coke to blast furnaces. But that is only in passing. This Amendment would take this matter out of Part I, and would not allow the question of the standard to come in at all. I have tried to visualise what would happen if the Bill passed with the Amendment in it. Every steel buyer would be bombarded from morning to night for a week by every colliery salesman, who would want to sell 100 per cent. of his output, or as much as possible, so as to have a full order book and be able to reduce his costs. Some people would be successful in that race and others would not, and that would produce a great deal of unfairness. If there was one man with his order book 100 per cent. full, a man not quite so successful in the race would have to have his quota and his standard reduced, because that amount of coal had been sold. I hope my hon. Friend who has moved this Amendment will see the distinction between this coal coming out of standard and out of Part I of the Bill, coming out of the standard and coming out of the quota; but I think he will see from what I have said that his Amendment would lead to some confusion.

Mr. MACQUISTEN

I am of the opinion that this is one of the Amendments which ought to be passed. The coal trade may have had a bad time, but the iron trade has been having a far, far worse time. I do not believe that a ton of pig iron has been smelted at a profit in this country for a considerable number of years. It is only those firms manufacturing steel of special kinds, or those firms which had the prescience to acquire their own raw material, their own coal and iron mines, which have been able to keep their heads above water, setting the loss they have incurred on the smelting of pig iron against the gains they have made by the sale of their ore and other raw materials. This Bill is bound more or less to increase the price of coal. It is no use saying that we cannot calculate the increase and that nobody can prophecy about it; we know well enough that if there are staffs of officials, committees and others at work all over the country, the price of coal will be increased against iron and steel, and it will be increased against the rest of the community, for which, I have no doubt, the Government will receive their due meed of gratitude when the people find out what has happened.

It has to be remembered that the iron and steel trade has been very hard hit, and that it is exposed to foreign competition. We heard from the other side yesterday an eloquent speech telling us how the coal trade was not exposed to foreign competition but had, nevertheless, suffered, and that therefore tariffs were no remedy for the coal trade; but the iron and steel trade is one which is particularly exposed to foreign competition. Already 3,000,000 tons of iron and steel are imported every year, and if we are to raise the price of coal, and with it the price of coke, against the makers of iron and steel, we shall have 6,000,000, 9,000,000 or 10,000,000 tons of steel coming in, and there will be no manufacture of iron and steel in this country at all. This is an industry which employs a body of fine stalwart men, just as the miners are a splendid body of men. Are we to allow it to be crushed? Coal mining is already a sheltered trade; it is only in regard to its exports that it is not sheltered. The iron and steel trade is not sheltered. There is no commodity which makes better freight for ships than iron and steel.

In the manufacture of iron and steel we are competing against Belgian workmen. The Belgian is not only an iron worker or a steel worker, but, because the Belgians were later in coming into industrial life than was this country, every Belgian working man is a smallholder, so that he grows his own food, and his wages are just more or less pocket money. [Laughter.] Hon. Member opposite may laugh, but that is the fact, and the Belgians can produce iron and steel at prices with which we have no hope of competing. What is to happen to these iron and steel works? Many of them have their own pits and use practically the whole output, not selling any coal at all to outside people. As far as I can understand the Bill, some one will come along and fix the quota for those pits.

Mr. BATEY

They will fix it themselves.

Mr. MACQUISTEN

The output of their coal will be cut down, and probably they will produce less iron and steel. In short, this Bill may be a charter for the coal miner—though I do not believe it is, because I think it will do the miners a great deal more injury than any other Measure has done—but it will produce shackles and chains for the iron workers and the steel workers. We shall be setting one body of workmen against another.

Mr. WALLHEAD

Is it not a fact that most of the steel works owners are coal-owners as well?

HON. MEMBERS

No!

Mr. MACQUISTEN

I am told there are 40 per cent. who buy from outside.

Mr. WALLHEAD

They are in South Wales.

6.0 p.m.

Mr. MACQUISTEN

That is not so everywhere. They buy coke and coal. Coke ovens are very expensive things to erect. Many concerns have been hard hit since the War. They were encouraged by the Government of the day to undertake great developments during the War, but the Excess Profits Duty took away all their profits, and they are now saddled with a heavy equipment and are not in a position to make full use of it. There was an attempt in the City to get the iron and steel trade into a trust, in order to see if a remedy could not be found in that way, but fortunately it did not succeed, because it would have been killed by Belgian importation. That is the position of the iron and steel trade to-day, and if we put iron and steel workers into bondage to the miners we shall do great damage to one of our basic trades, a trade in which Britain was for many years supreme in the world. I beseech the President of the Board of Trade to accept an Amendment in these terms and to leave the iron and steel trade free to get coal at the lowest possible price. I was pleased to hear from the last speaker that, in his opinion, if this Amendment is accepted, then as soon as this Measure had been got through the iron and steel manufacturers would be bombarded by colliery salesmen. If iron and steel manufacturers can get their coal a little cheaper, then they may have some chance of getting something to make up the losses which they have suffered during recent years. Whatever bad times the coal trade has experienced in the past, I can assure hon. Members that the iron and steel trade has had a much worse time, and unless you accept an Amendment of this kind you will only be robbing Peter to pay Paul, and I understand that Paul was just as good a disciple as Peter.

Major COLVILLE

There is an Amendment on the Paper dealing with composite undertakings, and I agree with the late President of the Board of Trade that some indication should be given to us by the Government as to the manner in which they intend to receive that Amendment, because that might have the effect of altering our attitude towards the Amendment which we are discussing. The President of the Board of Trade has admitted that this is a very difficult problem to deal with, but I cannot allow this Amendment to pass without adding a word in regard to what has been said about the iron and steel industry. I make no apology for voicing the views of iron and steel manufacturers in this House, because of the great effect which any rise in the price of coal or any limitation of the supplies of coal will have on that great industry. The two industries of iron and steel and coal are very closely bound together. This is especially the case in Germany and that is, in a great measure, the reason why Germany has been so successful in the iron and steel trade. In this country, we have before us a Measure for dealing with the coal trade alone, and the repercussions which that Measure is bound to have on the iron and steel trade are, in my view, very considerable.

I am in agreement with what was said by the hon. Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts) in regard to this Amendment, namely, that as it was originally moved it is not practical, but it can be amended to make it practical by limiting the standard tonnage and the quota. I believe that is quite possible, and I hope the Government will take seriously into consideration a proposal which we think is practical, and which we believe will assist this great industry. The Government are already facing difficulties in regard to this Bill. Already the ship is giving trouble before she has reached the water. The repercussions which have been caused in other great undertakings are very considerable, and they are finding great difficulty in meeting them.

The Coal Bill is making an exception of an industry, and the Government are doing what has never been done before, that is they are giving Parliamentary sanction to a quota and price-fixing arrangement under this Bill. The iron and steel trade has been going through very hard times, and I hope the Government will consider this industry at the same time as they are considering the coal trade. I do not think that I need to enlarge upon the hard times through which the iron and steel trade has passed in recent years. Perhaps I may be allowed to mention that there are 250,000 registered employés in that trade, and 70,000 of them are unemployed. I think that fact speaks for itself. This state of things exists at a time when we are importing large quantities of foreign steel. In January this year we imported from abroad at the rate of 3,600,000 tons per annum. Why did we do that? Is it because we have to rely on foreign material, or is it because of our difficulty in competing with foreign steel in price? I ask the President of the Board of Trade to consider seriously the difficulties of this great industry.

In the course of a speech in this House the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ogmore (Mr. Hartshorn) said that the miners had made great sacrifices, that the price of coal had been reduced in consequence of the eight-hours' day, and that there had been a drop in wages. The miners have made sacrifices no doubt, but the other consuming industries have also suffered to a very great extent. Like the kine in Pharaoh's dream some of them swallowed up the other kine, and they did not show much of it on the surface. If the right hon. Member can tell the iron and steel trade how they can sell their products at higher prices than those which operate to-day, I am sure that there is a princely job awaiting him in the iron and steel industry. The price at which the Royal Commission estimated that coal would remain has proved to be entirely wrong. In the case of Scotland it was 14s. a ton, but there has been a drop of over 2s. per ton. If it had not been so the unemployment in the steel industry would have been far greater. I say with all earnestness that in anything we do for the coal industry we must have due regard to the effect it will have on the other great consuming industries.

I intend to speak on a later Amendment dealing with composite undertakings, and I will reserve my fire until that Amendment is reached. I think we ought to see that manufacturers have a plentiful supply of the particular class of coal they require for their undertakings at a reasonable price, and I could not let this opportunity pass without saying a word about the great industry with which we are immediately concerned. For these reasons, I ask the President of the Board of Trade to tread warily in this direction, because, if his proposals damage the coal industry, at the same time they will damage one of the best customers of the coal industry.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

I would like at this stage to deal with two or three points which have been put to me. When the Committee debated the quota, we committed ourselves on business lines to a comprehensive arrangement, and I cannot press too strongly that, if we start to make any inroad upon that comprehensive arrangement, the whole, or a very large part of the first part of this Measure, will break down. I say that with all the greater emphasis, because, in my judgment, there are adequate safeguards under this part of the Bill for the kind of difficulties which have been described. Hon. Members have asked me in anticipation two or three questions as to what I propose to do at the later stages of this Bill. The first question which has been asked is with regard to the mixed undertakings of iron and steel and coal together. I must again repeat that we have put in the quota regulations on a comprehensive basis, and we must bear clearly in mind the relationship of the iron and steel part of a mixed undertaking to the iron and steel undertaking outside, which is not a mixed proposition at all. It would be manifestly unfair if there were any arrangement which enabled one iron and steel plant to get coal from one business in what is a regulated industry on terms advantageous as compared with another undertaking independent of an iron and steel concern; but, as there are these mixed undertakings, I say that we can meet part of the difficulty in the new arrangement we have for standard tonnage as governed by a quota which is applicable to certain classes of coal. When we come to that part later on, there is a safeguard within limits, but, I admit, not up to the point which several hon. Members would desire.

The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) has asked me what I can say at this stage as to price regulation, and he indicated that any departure from that, so far as the Government were concerned, might alter the attitude of hon. Members opposite towards this Amendment. On this point, I may be trangressing the rules of order, but, perhaps, I may be allowed to say that it can be met to some extent under the quota which we have already passed and under the comprehensive Regulations, assuming that the standard tonnage is scientifically fixed. I think you will get by that arrangement the most effective price regulation that you can possibly secure. That might appear to be arguable on the surface of this scheme, but, unfortunately, that is far from the complete reply. I am advised by very high authority that, even in that state of affairs, there would still be an opportunity in certain districts for weak sellers to undermine price regulations entirely. When we come to that part of the scheme, I shall endeavour to explain why it is necessary for the Government to retain these provisions.

Another point raised by the hon. Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts) relates to the regulation of standard tonnage and the application of the quota to that tonnage. It is provided later in this Bill—and here, Mr. Dunnico, I am compelled to anticipate in order to explain this point—that the quota may be varied from time to time as related to classes of coal, but I have already explained that the classification of coal relates not only to quality, but also to its destination, which may be export, or iron and steel, or whatever the case may be. Later on, when we come to deal with this question, it will be seen that there is provision for that variation of standard tonnage. There is also a provision for the variation according to grade, and, in point of fact, for this class of demand. Assuming that you have depressed conditions in the industry, it is intended—as I am satisfied the coal industry would—to ease the price for iron and steel. There would be an arrangement in regard to basic tonnage, and the application of the 100 per cent. quota, at all events for a period, as would meet the difficulties which have been raised in the Debate. I submit that it can be done quite reasonably in that way. This Amendment, however, raises an altogether different question. It takes permanently outside the regulations the coal going to the iron and steel industry. If I accepted that proposal, I could not possibly resist other demands, and therefore I must resist the Amendment, but later on I shall be able to show the safeguards which exist, and which I suggest, when once the quota is adopted, are the only practicable safeguards in a scheme of this kind.

Major GEORGE DAVIES

It is difficult to resist anything that comes from the President of the Board of Trade particularly when the object is to shorten the Debate, and I do not intend that the remarks I desire to make shall be unduly prolonged, but I have sat throughout the whole Debate without so far taking any part in it. I feel that I share the disappointment of everyone on this side of the House at the position which the right hon. Gentleman has felt compelled to take up. Indeed, I am sure that it is against his own instincts, because this Amendment is practically a provision which in certain circumstances appeals to hon. Members opposite, that is to say, it is a provision for contracting out. The right hon. Gentleman has said that the Committee has decided on the principle of the quota, and that, if this exception were made, the quota arrangement would fall to the ground, and that therefore all those provisions of the Bill which are built upon it would become impracticable and useless. But behind that there is something which alarms us on this side, and that is that the very provision of the quota, which, as the right hon. Gentleman rightly says, has been approved, implies almost inevitably a raising of the price of coal to someone. Otherwise there is no point in the scheme.

Hon. Members opposite have admitted all along when they dug their toes in, as it were, in regard to Part I, as against the amalgamation Clauses, that the point of Part I was the quota selling, and that that was a necessary provision in order to balance the loss due to the alteration in hours, so that it was vital to the scheme because it was going to raise the price of coal to someone. When we come to consider to whom the price is to be raised, the right hon. Gentleman asks how a line can be drawn at iron and steel. I take an entirely different view of the responsibilities of the House of Commons or of this Committee from an hon. Member who, in speaking against this Amendment, said that we are only concerned with coal, and are not considering steel and iron at the moment. What a confession of bankruptcy of statesmanship! We are legislating in this Committee, as has been said by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for North Midlothian (Major Colville), in a way that is quite new as regards legislation in this country. Parliament is interfering in vital respects with one of our great industries, and we are told that we are to deal with that in a watertight compartment, and leave out of consideration other industries, such as the cotton industry, the shipbuilding industry, and, indeed, agriculture also, because the arguments are precisely the same in each case.

Would any hon. Member opposite dare to suggest that the rates of wages paid to agricultural workers do not justify those of us who represent agricultural constituencies in coming here and saying that we want legislation to put up the price of bread, meat, and other products of agriculture to the consumers because the wages of agricultural workers are only 30s. or 35s. a week? That is precisely the argument which has been brought forward in regard to this matter, and the only reason why the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues on the Front Bench have brought it forward is because of the large body of members behind them who represent, not agriculture, but coal. But even if the right hon. Gentleman is compelled from a Parliamentary point of view to give way to such pressure, that does not take from us the responsibility of seeing what are the implications of the proposal.

It has been said, and I think it is probably right, that the actual Amendment as it has been moved would not achieve the desired object, but the Amendment which has been suggested to the proposed Amendment might cover the point. I do not pretend, although I have made a considerable study of the Bill, to be expert in these details of administration of the coal industry, but I take the position of one of industrial experience in other ways who tries to bring what experience and ability God has given him to bear on this matter, and I can foresee a national disaster unless the right hon. Gentleman can give us a better defence than he has made to-day against this Amendment. He divided his defence into two. His first defence was that if you undermine the quota and make an exception in the case of the iron and steel industry, which, as has been so eloquently pointed out already, will be faced with disaster if the cost of its raw materials is going to be put up under Part I of the Bill, the whole scheme for putting up the price of coal to a remunerative level will fail. The second half of his defence is that he trusts to the common sense of those who have to put these provisions into operation, not to do anything so foolish as to put up the price of coal to the iron and steel industry. Do hon. Members opposite trust the coalowners to that extent, for that is what they are being asked to do?

I hold no brief for the coalowners or any other body of owners in this country, but I say that it is bad legislation which puts such powers into the hands of any body of men, however honourable and able they may be, merely with the expression of a hope that they will not be shortsighted. We want the President of the Board of Trade to give an assurance that, under this Amendment or the later one which is foreshadowed, he will put into the Measure guarantees that the rest of the industries of the country are not going to be held by the throat as though they were attacked by a lot of highwaymen who happen to come under the provisions of this Bill, and who merely voice the interests of one industry, although a very important one. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that, in spite of the violent pressure to which he is subjected, and in spite of the able and eloquent way in which he has been piloting the Bill, he must, having regard to the position of responsibility which he holds in relation to this great new piece of experimental legislation, provide better safeguards, not only from the point of view of those of us who bring forward these fears from these benches, but from the point of view of the whole industrial community of this country.

Commodore DOUGLAS KING

I want to make one further appeal to the President of the Board of Trade. I do not think that I am unfairly pressing him, hut it is in reply to his statement that any such concession on his part would strike at the root of the Bill. We have heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts) that already under a voluntary scheme, the Five Counties Scheme, they have excluded coal used for iron and steel making from the quota part of their standard tonnage. I put it to the President of the Board of Trade that when under this voluntary scheme, which has been mainly working from the point of view of the coalowners themselves and of the coal industry in this particular district, it has been found possible and has been seen to be desirable to give this special concession with respect to iron and steel, surely, when the Government are seeking to interfere and force a compulsory scheme on the country, they should be not less statesmanlike in dealing with this matter, and should adopt a similar principle to that which has been carried out under the Central Collieries Commercial Association. After the proportion of the standard tonnage that is used for the purposes of the iron and steel industry has been removed from the quota, the remainder is subject to the quota.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that, in spite of the statement made by the hon. Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts) in the first year of the activities of the Central Collieries Association the collieries produced 3,000,000 tons less than the amount after the quota had been applied, so that there is nothing in that argument at all?

Commodore KING

That interruption is not so much to the point as many of the hon. Member's interruptions are. I am dealing now entirely with the amount that is used for the purposes of iron and steel—[Interruption]. The hon. Member is not suggesting that the amount which is not subject to the quota under the Five Counties Scheme was produced in excess. Over the whole quota system under the Five Counties Scheme there may have been an excess, but the President of the Board of Trade says that to make such a concession would strike at the root of Part I of the Bill, and I do not think that he can maintain that argument when we have the experience of a voluntary scheme which has been in existence for two years and under which it has been found possible to give this special concession to coal used for iron and steel. I would urge the right hon. Gentleman to consider the wording which has been suggested, but not formally moved, so that, instead of providing that all coal supplied to British iron and steel industries shall be excluded from the pro visions of Part I of the Bill, it will provide that such coal shall be excluded from the standard tonnage and quota. That would meet the case. That case has been met under the voluntary scheme during the last two years, and no Government scheme ought to be less generous or statesmanlike than that voluntary scheme which is now in operation.

Mr. ALBERY

I only want to ask one question, which perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will answer when he replies to my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Paddington (Commodore King). When the right hon. Gentleman was explaining his reasons for resisting this Amendment, I understood him to say that it was not proposed that the price of coal used for steel making should be raised. Are we to understand that it is the effect of the Bill and the intention of the Government that coal used by all kinds of different industries in this country will be sold at varying prices according to the prosperity or otherwise of the industry in question? That is what I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say. I rather gathered that, if an industry is doing well, it is intended to put up the price of coal to that industry, while if an industry is having a rather bad time, it is proposed that the price of coal shall be varied downwards, and that such an industry shall be allowed to have its coal more cheaply. That seems to me to raise a most important question, and if, indeed, it be the case, it is something that I have not understood up to the present. Does it mean that this organisation which is being set up is going to be an entirely autocratic price maker, which will dictate the price to be paid for coal by all the different industries in this country?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Mr. Ben Turner)

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put," but the CHAIRMAN withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.

Mr. SKELTON

I should like to say that I would gladly withdraw my Amendment, and my hon. and gallant Friend who is supporting me agrees, if even at this late hour the President of the Board of Trade would give us some assurance that one of the proposals—not necessarily the exact words of my Amendment—which have been suggested from this side of the Committee, will find acceptance, that is to say, either removal from the standard tonnage or from the quota. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, with a view to withdrawing my own Amendment, to give us that concession as the result of the vital arguments that have been adduced in this Debate.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

I cannot give the hon. Member an assurance in these terms. The assurance I have given is a description of the steps that may be taken under this part of the Bill to deal with certain classes of coal. In my view, the safeguards are ample. Indeed, they are complete, and beyond those safeguards I could not possibly go.

Mr. TURNER

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 302; Noes, 164.

Division No. 201.]	AYES.	[3.51 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Gould, F.	MacLuren, Andrew
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	McShane, John James
Alpass, J. H.	Granville, E.	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Ammon, Charles George	Gray, Milner	Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Angell, Norman	Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	Mansfield, W.
Arnott, John	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	March, S.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Marcus, M.
Ayles, Walter	Groves, Thomas E.	Markham, S. F.
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Grundy, Thomas W.	Marley, J.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Marshall, Fred
Barnes, Alfred John	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Mathers, George
Batey, Joseph	Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Matters, L. W.
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)	Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Maxton, James
Bellamy, Albert	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Middleton, G.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hardie, George D.	Millar, J. D.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Milner, J.
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Haycock, A. W.	Montague, Frederick
Benson, G.	Hayday, Arthur	Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Hayes, John Henry	Morley, Ralph
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Blindell, James	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Mort, D. L.
Bowen, J. W.	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Moses, J. J. H.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Herriotts, J.	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Broad, Francis Alfred	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Brockway, A. Fenner	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Muff, G.
Bromfield, William	Hoffman, P. C.	Muggeridge, H. T
Bromley, J.	Hollins, A.	Murnin, Hugh
Brooke, W.	Hopkin, Daniel	Nathan, Major H. L.
Brothers, M.	Horrabin, J. F.	Naylor, T. E.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Noel Baker, P. J.
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Oldfield, J. R.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Isaacs, George	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Buchanan, G.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Burgess, F. G.	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Johnston, Thomas	Palin, John Henry.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Paling, Wilfrid
Cameron, A. G.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Palmer, E. T.
Cape, Thomas	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Perry, S. F.
Charleton, H. C.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Chater, Daniel	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Clarke, J. S.	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Cluse, W. S.	Kelly, W. T.	Picton-Tubervill, Edith
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Kennedy, Thomas	Pole, Major D. G.
Cocks, Frederick Seymour.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Potts, John S.
Compton, Joseph	Kinley, J.	Price, M. P.
Cove, William G.	Knight, Holford	Quibell, D. J. K.
Daggar, George	Lang, Gordon	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Dallas, George	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Rathbone, Eleanor
Dalton, Hugh	Lathan, G.	Raynes, W. R.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Richards, R.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lawrence, Susan	Richardson, R, (Houghton-le-Spring)
Day, Harry	Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Lawson, John James	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Dukes, C.	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Ritson, J.
Duncan, Charles	Leach, W.	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Ede, James Chuter	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Romeril, H. G.
Edmunds, J. E.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Lees, J.	Rowson, Guy
Egan, W. H.	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Elmley, Viscount	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
England, Colonel A.	Longbottom, A. W.	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Foot, Isaac	Longden, F.	Samuel Rt. Ron. Sir H. (Darwen)
Freeman, Peter	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Lowth, Thomas	Sanders, W. S.
George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)	Lunn, William	Sandham, E.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sawyer, G. F.
Gibbins, Joseph	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Scott, James
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Scurr, John
Gill, T. H.	McElwee, A.	Sexton, James
Gillett, George M.	McEntee, V. L.	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Glassey, A. E.	Mackinder, W.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gossling, A. G.	McKinlay, A.	Sherwood, G. H.
Shield, George William	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond	Strauss, G. R.	Wellock, Wilfred
Shillaker, J. F.	Sullivan, J.	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Sutton, J. E.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Simmons, C. J.	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)	West, F. R.
Sinkinson, George	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk. S. W.)	White, H. G.
Sitch, Charles H.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)	Thurtle, Ernest	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)	Tillett, Ben	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)	Tinker, John Joseph	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)	Toole, Joseph	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)	Tout, W. J.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)	Townend, A. E.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Snell, Harry	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Wise, E. F.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip	Turner, B.	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)	Vaughan, D. J.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Sorensen, R.	Viant, S. P.
Stamford, Thomas W.	Walker, J.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Stephen, Campbell	Wallhead, Richard C.	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)	Watkins, F. C.
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Peake, Captain Osbert
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Fermoy, Lord	Penny, Sir George
Albery, Irving James	Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Ganzonl, Sir John	Power, Sir John Cecil
Astor, Viscountess	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Pownall, Sir Assheton
Atholl, Duchess of	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Atkinson, C.	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Ramsbotham, H.
Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)	Gower, Sir Robert	Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Balniel, Lord	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Beaumont, M. W.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Berry, Sir George	Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Bird, Ernest Roy	Hammersley, S. S.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Hanbury, C.	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Hartington, Marquess of	Savery, S. S.
Bracken, B.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Brass, Captain Sir William	Haslam, Henry C.	Simms, Major-General J.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Skelton, A. N.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Smithers, Waldron
Butler, R. A.	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Carver, Major W. H.	Hurd, Percy A.	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Cayzer, Sir C (Chester, City)	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Thomson, Sir F.
Christie, J. A.	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Train, J.
Colman, N. C. D.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Colville, Major D. J.	Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L	Long, Major Eric	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Macquisten, F. A.	Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Wells, Sydney R.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Womersley, W. J.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Muirhead, A. J.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavist'k)
Eden, Captain Anthony	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Elliot, Major Walter E.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William	Sir George Hennessy and Captain Margesson.

Question put, and agreed to.

Division No. 202.]	AYES.	[6 30 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	McShane, John James
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Granville, E.	Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Gray, Milner	Mansfield, W.
Alpass, J. H.	Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	March, S.
Ammon, Charles George	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Marcus, M.
Angell, Norman	Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Marley, J.
Arnott, John	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Marshall, Fred
Aske, Sir Robert	Groves, Thomas E.	Mathers, George
Attlee, Clement Richard	Grundy, Thomas W.	Matters, L. W.
Ayles, Walter	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Maxton, James
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Melville, Sir James
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Messer, Fred
Barnes, Alfred John	Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Middleton, G.
Batey, Joseph	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Millar, J. D.
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)	Hardie, George D.	Mills, J. E.
Bellamy, Albert	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Montague, Frederick
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Haycock, A. W.	Morley, Ralph
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Hayday, Arthur	Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Benson, G.	Hayes, John Henry	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Mort, D. L.
Birkett, W. Norman	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Moses, J. J. H.
Bilndell, James	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Herriotts, J.	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Bowen, J. W.	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Muff, G.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Muggeridge, H. T.
Broad, Francis Alfred	Hoffman, P. C.	Murnin, Hugh
Brockway, A. Fenner	Hollins, A.	Nathan, Major H. L.
Bromfield, William	Hopkin, Daniel	Naylor, T. E.
Bromley, J.	Horrabin, J. F.	Noel Baker, P. J.
Brooke, W.	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Oldfield, J. R.
Brothers, M.	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)	Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Oliver, P. M. (Man. Blackley)
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Isaacs, George	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Palin, John Henry
Buchanan, G.	Johnston, Thomas	Paling, Wilfrid
Burgess, F. G.	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Palmer, E. T.
Burgin, Dr. E. L.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Perry, S F.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Cameron, A. G.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Cape, Thomas	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Phillips, Dr. Marion
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Charleton, H. C.	Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)	Pole, Major D. G.
Chater, Daniel	Kelly, W. T.	Potts, John S.
Church, Major A. G.	Kennedy, Thomas	Price, M. P.
Clarke, J. S.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Pybus, Percy John
Cluse, W. S.	Kinley, J.	Quibell, D. J. K.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Knight, Holford	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Rathbone, Eleanor
Compton, Joseph	Lang, Gordon	Raynes, W. R.
Cove, William G.	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Richards, R.
Daggar, George	Lathan, G.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Dallas, George	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Riley, Ben (Dewshury)
Dalton, Hugh	Lawrence, Susan	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Lawrie Hugh Hartiev (Stalybridge)	Ritson, J.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lawson, John James	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Day, Harry	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Romeril, H. G.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Leach, W.	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Dudgcon, Major C. R.	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Rowson, Guy
Dukes, C.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Duncan, Charles	Lees, J.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Ede, James Chuter	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Edmunds, J. E.	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Logan, David Gilbert	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Egan, W. H.	Longbottom, A. W.	Sanders, W. S.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Longden, F.	Sandham, E.
Foot, Isaac	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sawyer, G. F.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	Lowth, Thomas	Scott, James
Freeman, Peter	Lunn, William	Scurr, John
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sexton, James
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gibbins, Joseph	McElwee, A.	Sherwood, G. H.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)	McEntee, V. L.	Shield, George William
Gill, T. H.	Mackinder, W.	Shields, Dr. Drummond
Gillett, George M.	McKinlay, A	Shillaker, J. F.
Glassey, A. E.	MacLaren, Andrew	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Gossling, A. G.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Simmons, C. J.
Gould, F.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Sinkinson, George

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

The Committee divided: Ayes, 161; Noes, 269.

Division No. 202.]	AYES.	[6 30 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	McShane, John James
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Granville, E.	Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Gray, Milner	Mansfield, W.
Alpass, J. H.	Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	March, S.
Ammon, Charles George	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Marcus, M.
Angell, Norman	Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Marley, J.
Arnott, John	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Marshall, Fred
Aske, Sir Robert	Groves, Thomas E.	Mathers, George
Attlee, Clement Richard	Grundy, Thomas W.	Matters, L. W.
Ayles, Walter	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Maxton, James
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Melville, Sir James
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Messer, Fred
Barnes, Alfred John	Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Middleton, G.
Batey, Joseph	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Millar, J. D.
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)	Hardie, George D.	Mills, J. E.
Bellamy, Albert	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Montague, Frederick
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Haycock, A. W.	Morley, Ralph
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Hayday, Arthur	Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Benson, G.	Hayes, John Henry	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Mort, D. L.
Birkett, W. Norman	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Moses, J. J. H.
Bilndell, James	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Herriotts, J.	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Bowen, J. W.	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Muff, G.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Muggeridge, H. T.
Broad, Francis Alfred	Hoffman, P. C.	Murnin, Hugh
Brockway, A. Fenner	Hollins, A.	Nathan, Major H. L.
Bromfield, William	Hopkin, Daniel	Naylor, T. E.
Bromley, J.	Horrabin, J. F.	Noel Baker, P. J.
Brooke, W.	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Oldfield, J. R.
Brothers, M.	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)	Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Oliver, P. M. (Man. Blackley)
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Isaacs, George	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Palin, John Henry
Buchanan, G.	Johnston, Thomas	Paling, Wilfrid
Burgess, F. G.	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Palmer, E. T.
Burgin, Dr. E. L.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Perry, S F.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Cameron, A. G.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Cape, Thomas	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Phillips, Dr. Marion
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Charleton, H. C.	Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)	Pole, Major D. G.
Chater, Daniel	Kelly, W. T.	Potts, John S.
Church, Major A. G.	Kennedy, Thomas	Price, M. P.
Clarke, J. S.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Pybus, Percy John
Cluse, W. S.	Kinley, J.	Quibell, D. J. K.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Knight, Holford	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Rathbone, Eleanor
Compton, Joseph	Lang, Gordon	Raynes, W. R.
Cove, William G.	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Richards, R.
Daggar, George	Lathan, G.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Dallas, George	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Riley, Ben (Dewshury)
Dalton, Hugh	Lawrence, Susan	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Lawrie Hugh Hartiev (Stalybridge)	Ritson, J.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lawson, John James	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Day, Harry	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Romeril, H. G.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Leach, W.	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Dudgcon, Major C. R.	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Rowson, Guy
Dukes, C.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Duncan, Charles	Lees, J.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Ede, James Chuter	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Edmunds, J. E.	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Logan, David Gilbert	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Egan, W. H.	Longbottom, A. W.	Sanders, W. S.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Longden, F.	Sandham, E.
Foot, Isaac	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sawyer, G. F.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	Lowth, Thomas	Scott, James
Freeman, Peter	Lunn, William	Scurr, John
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sexton, James
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gibbins, Joseph	McElwee, A.	Sherwood, G. H.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)	McEntee, V. L.	Shield, George William
Gill, T. H.	Mackinder, W.	Shields, Dr. Drummond
Gillett, George M.	McKinlay, A	Shillaker, J. F.
Glassey, A. E.	MacLaren, Andrew	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Gossling, A. G.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Simmons, C. J.
Gould, F.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Sinkinson, George
Sitch, Charles H.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)	West, F. R.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)	Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)	Westwood, Joseph
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)	Thurtle, Ernest	White, H. G.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)	Tillett, Ben	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)	Tinker, John Joseph	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)	Toole, Joseph	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)	Tout, W. J.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Snell, Harry	Townend, A. E.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)	Turner, B.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Sorensen, R.	Vaughan, D. J.	Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)
Stamford, Thomas W.	Viant, S. P.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Stephen, Campbell	Walker, J.	Wise, E. F
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)	Wallhead, Richard C.	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe	Watkins, F. C.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Strauss, G. R.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Sullivan, J.	Wellock, Wilfred	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Sutton, J. E.	Welsh, James (Paisley)	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. B. Smith.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Ganzonl, Sir John	Peake, Capt. Osbert
Albery, Irving James	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Ramsbotham, H.
Astor, Viscountess	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Atholl, Duchess of	Gower, Sir Robert	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Atkinson, C.	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Balniel, Lord	Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Berry, Sir George	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Ross, Major Ronald D
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Boothby, R. J. G.	Hammersley, S. S.	Salmon, Major I.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Hartington, Marquess of	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Haslam, Henry C.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Braithwaite, Major A. N.	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Sassoon, Rt. Ron. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Brass, Captain Sir William	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Savery, S. S.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Simms, Major-General J.
Buchan, John	Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Skelton, A. N.
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hurd, Percy A.	Smithers, Waldron
Cautley, Sir Henry S.	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Cayzer, Sir C (Chester, City)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Chapman, Sir S.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Christie, J. A.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Thomson, Sir F.
Colman, N. C. D.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Colville, Major D. J.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Train, J.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Long, Major Erie	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol. West)	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Macquisten, F. A.	Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Dalkeith, Earl of	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Wayland, Sir William A.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Wells, Sydney R.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Meller, R. J.	Withers, Sir John James
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Merriman, Sir F. Boyd	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Eden, Captain Anthony	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Womersley, W. J.
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Mond, Hon. Henry	Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley
Elliot, Major Walter E.	Monseil, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)	Moore, Sir Newton J, (Richmond)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Everard, W. Lindsay	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Muirhead, A. J.
Fermoy, Lord	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Ford, Sir P. J.	Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert	Marquess of Titchfield and Sir George Penny.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	O'Neill, Sir H.

Division No. 203.]	AYES.	[6.42 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Ganzonl, Sir John	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Peake, Captain Osbert
Albery, living James	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Ramsbotham, H.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Gower, Sir Robert	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Astor, Viscountess	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Atholl, Duchess of	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.
Atkinson, C.	Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)	Reynolds, Col, Sir James
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)	Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Balniel, Lord	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Ross, Major Ronald D
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Berry, Sir George	Hammersley, S. S.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Hartington, Marquess of	Salmon, Major I.
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Haslam, Henry C.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Saesoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Braithwaite, Major A. N.	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Savery, S. S.
Brass, Captain Sir William	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Simms, Major-General J.
Buchan, John	Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Skelton, A. N.
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hurd, Percy A.	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Smithers, Waldron
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Chapman, Sir S.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Christie, J. A.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Thomson, Sir F.
Colman, N. C. D.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Colville, Major D. J.	Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)	Train, J.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Long, Major Eric	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Croft, Brigadier General Sir H.	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Macquisten, F. A.	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Cunliffe-Lister. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Wayland, Sir William A.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Wells, Sydney R.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Meller, R. J.	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Merrlman, Sir F. Boyd	Withers, Sir John James
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Eden, Captain Anthony	Mond, Hon. Henry	Womersley, W. J.
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Everard, W. Lindsay	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavist'k)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Fermoy, Lord	Muirhead, A. J.
Ford, Sir P. J.	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrst'ld)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert	Sir Geroge Penny and Marquess of Titchfield.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	O'Neill, Sir H.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Broad, Francis Alfred	Compton, Joseph
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Brockway, A. Fenner	Cove, William G.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Bromfieid, William	Daggar, George
Alpass, J. H.	Bromley, J.	Dallas, George
Ammon, Charles George	Brooke, W.	Dalton, Hugh
Angell, Norman	Brothers, M.	Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Arnott, John	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Day, Harry
Attlee, Clement Richard	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th;'l'd., Hexham)	Denman, Hon. R. D.
Ayles, Walter	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Dukes, C.
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton. West)	Duncan, Charles
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Buchanan, G.	Ede, James Chuter
Barnes, Alfred John	Burgess, F. G.	Edmunds, J. E.
Batey, Joseph	Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Beckett, John (Camberwell, peckham)	Caine, Derwent Hall-	Egan, W. H.
Bellamy, Albert	Cameron, A. G.	Forgan, Dr. Robert
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Cape, Thomas	Freeman, Peter
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Charleton, H. C.	Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Benson, G.	Chater, Daniel	Gibbins, Joseph
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Church, Major A. G.	Gibson, H. M. (Lance, Mossley)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Clarke, J. S.	Gill, T. H.
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Cluse, W. S.	Gillett, George M.
Bowen, J. W.	Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Gossling, A. G.

Gould, F.	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Sawyer, G. F.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	McElwee, A.	Scurr, John
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	McEntee, V. L.	Sexton, James
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).	Mackinder, W.	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Grenfell, D. B. (Glamorgan)	McKinlay, A.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	MacLaren, Andrew	Sherwood, G. H.
Groves, Thomas E.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Shield, George William
Grundy, Thomas W.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	McShane, John James	Shillaker, J. F.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Mansfield, W.	Simmons, C. J.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	March, S.	Sinkinson, George
Hardie, George D.	Marcus, M.	Sitch, Charles H.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Marley, J.	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Marshall, Fred	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Haycock, A. W.	Mathers, George	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Hayday, Arthur	Matters, L. W.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Hayes, John Henry	Maxton, James	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Melville, Sir James	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Messer, Fred	Snell, Harry
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Middleton, G.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mills, J. E.	Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Herriotts, J.	Milner, J.	Sorensen, R.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Montague, Frederick	Stamford, Thomas W.
Hirst, W. (Bradtord, South)	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Stephen, Campbell
Hoffman, P. C.	Morley, Ralph	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Hollins, A.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Hopkin, Daniel	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham. N.)	Strauss, G. R.
Horrabin, J. F.	Mort, D. L.	Sullivan, J.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Moses, J. J. H.	Sutton, J. E
Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Isaacs, George	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Muff, G.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Muggeridge, H. T.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Platstow)
Johnston, Thomas	Murnin, Hugh	Thurtle, Ernest
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Naylor, T. E.	Tillett, Ben
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Tinker, John Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Noel Baker, P. J.	Toole, Joseph
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Oldfield, J. R.	Tout, W. J.
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Townend, A. E.
Kelly, W. T.	Palin, John Henry	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Kennedy, Thomas	Paling, Wilfrid	Turner, B.
Kenworthy Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Palmer, E. T.	Vaughan, D. J.
Kinley, J.	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Viant, S. P.
Knight, Holford	Perry, S. F.	Walker, J.
Lang, Gordon	Pethick- Lawrence, F. W.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Phillips, Dr. Marlon	Watkins, F. C.
Lathan, G.	Picton-Turbervill, Edith	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Law, A. (Rosendale)	Pole, Major D. G.	Wellock, Wilfred
Lawrence, Susan	Potts, John S.	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Price, M. P.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Lawson, John James	Quibell, D. J. K.	West, F. R.
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Rathbone, Eleanor	Westwood, Joseph
Leach, W.	Raynes, W. R.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Lady wood)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Richards, R.	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Lees, J.	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Lloyd, C. Ellis	Ritson, J.	Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)
Logan, David Gilbert	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Longbottom, A. W.	Romeril, H. G.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Longden, F.	Rosbotham, D. S. T.	Winter-ton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Rowson, Guy	Wise, E. F.
Lowth, Thomas	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Lunn, William	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sanders, W. S.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Sandham, E.	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. B. Smith.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Dunnico)

The next Amendment in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Midlothian and Peebles (Major Colville)—in page 1, line 21, at the beginning to insert the words "Without prejudice to any provision hereinafter contained" contains a principle which is raised by an Amendment on the Paper to Clause 3, and I think that the question might be raised there. I do not propose to call the next Amendment at the top of page 832 standing in the name of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Clement Davies) and other hon. Members—in page 1, line 22, to leave out the words "Board of Trade," and to insert instead thereof the word "Commission established under this Act," but the second Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for East Leicester (Mr. Wise).

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

With regard to the Amendment standing in the name of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Midlothian and Peebles (Major Colville), I understood you to say, Mr. Dunnico, that the principle of it would arise on Clause 3. It arises both on Clause 2 and on Clause 3. It is a sort of preliminary Amendment, as I understand it, and the real point of substance is where the central scheme and the district schemes and the variations thereof have to be laid before Parliament, and the proper place to raise the matter will be both on Clause 2 and on Clause 3 wherever this arises.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I think the right hon. Gentleman has Amendments in his own name, which relate to this question.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

Yes, Sir.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

With regard to the Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for East Leicester, I have serious doubt as to whether it is strictly in order or not, but I intend to call upon him. I must rule quite definitely that I cannot permit any reference, directly or indirectly, to the merits or demerits of public ownership or supply. The Debate must be kept strictly to the terms of the first part of the Amendment.

Mr. WISE

I take it that I may refer to the possibility of that happening at some time or other?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member may refer to the possibility, but he must not discuss either the wisdom or otherwise of the possibility arising.

Major DAVIES

Neither wise nor otherwise.

Mr. WISE

I beg to move, in page 1, line 23, at the end, to insert the words: Provided that the Board of Trade shall not approve or make any scheme if it appears to the Board that its operation is likely to hamper or delay the transfer of the ownership of coal mines, or mineral rights, or the production, supply, and sale of coal to a public authority which may subsequently be constituted by Parliament for this purpose. The purpose of this Amendment is to draw attention to what we on these benches believe to be a real danger. This Bill gives the coalowners very wide, and, as many hon. Members on both sides of the Committee believe, very dangerous powers. Since these powers are to be exercised under the control and, to some extent, under the authority not only of this House but of the Board of Trade, we are very anxious that there should be no doubt as to the possibility of these powers being used to prevent other measures which many people in this Committee believe some day may be inevitable. In deference to your Ruling, Mr. Dunnico, I am not going to argue the point when that is likely to happen, or on the merits of it when it does happen, but I think that everybody in this Committee is agreed that this Bill provides merely a temporary solution of a very urgent problem. Indeed, the Government have already accepted a proposition made from the Liberal benches that the Bill shall last, anyway, only for a short period of years, and there is nothing in the Bill to provide, nor does the Bill hold out any real hope that it will provide, a permanent solution of the real difficulties of the coal industry. We are bound, therefore, to consider, in regard to the temporary administration which will have to be discharged under the operation of this Clause, whether it is likely that there may be proposals put before the Board of Trade which may hinder or hamper the power and discretion of Parliament in the future.

On this side of the Committee there have been a number of speeches which indicate not only the view of the Ministers who introduced the Bill but of the miners who will be called upon to work it, that the only way out is ultimately in the direction indicated in the last phrase of this Amendment. On the other side of the Committee the right hon. Member for St. George's (Sir L. Worthington-Evans), in a speech a few days ago, said what many of us feel, that the Bill may impose such difficulties on some coal-owners as to make the coalowners at some early stage try themselves to bring about the sort of solution which some of us desire. Indeed in his evidence before the Sankey Commission, I remember that the chief leader of the coalowners said that there were only two possible ways—he said very much what the right hon. Member for St. George's said—of dealing finally and permanently with the problem of the coal industry. The one was to leave it to the coalowners, and the other was to bring it under some form of public ownership.

This Bill balances itself, very insecurely I suggest, between those two solutions. I think, therefore, we are bound to secure that the solution which we regard as very quickly inevitable shall not be prejudiced. Under the scheme which will have to be submitted to the Board of Trade under this Bill very considerable and important organisations will be set up. We know that it is contemplated to set up a joint selling scheme in each of the districts for the sale of export coal. It is quite within the scope of the powers which the Bill confers upon these district executive bodies to set up corresponding organisations to deal with the sale of coal on the home market. Moreover, in regard to amalgamation Clauses and the Clauses dealing with the application of the quota, it is quite evident that a whole new series of contractual relations will be established as between the coalowners and the new bodies which the coalowners are to constitute for selling and other purposes, and as between these bodies and the coalowners and the persons whom they employ. All these contracts and agreements will be made under powers specifically approved and, in a sense, authorised by the Board of Trade, and it is perfectly evident that constantly the question will arise under what sort of security or guarantee the new selling agencies, the persons whom they employ, the agencies which they will set up and the coalowners who will buy quotas from their associates, will operate. There will be a constant tendency on the part of everybody, quite natural and in a sense proper, to create relations of semi-permanence between themselves and the public under the shelter more or less of the Board of Trade and this Bill.

7.0 p.m.

There is another danger. Some of us remember what happened before the War in the case of the National Telephone Company. For some two or three years it was quite evident that the National Telephone Company would be bought out and taken over as a public enterprise, and everybody who is familiar with the history of that transaction knows that, whether by design or negligence, or a combination of both, the course of the development of the telephone in this country for a period of years, at any rate on the financial side, was held up by the action or lack of action of the National Telephone Company when they were manœuvring for the day when they would sell out their enterprise to the public authorities. That ought to be a warning and a lesson to this House. I do not for a moment suggest that the coalowners will adopt the particular course which the National Telephone Company adopted, but there are a dozen other methods, which it would not need much ingenuity on the part of hon. Members on the other side or on this side of the Committee to think out, by which the whole possibility of getting a clear sweep for a scheme of nationalisation might be prejudiced under the schemes which will be set up. We desire by this Amendment to secure that the Board of Trade shall have full discretion and authority, in considering the schemes which are proposed to it, to safeguard the public interest in this matter and to safeguard the rights of this House.

It is perfectly easy to reply that the power of Parliament is paramount, but we know perfectly well how, when it is proposed to legislate in this and that direction, dozens of vested interests of various kinds arise in order to claim special treatment, generally at the public expense, and in order to put forward special reasons why their particular interest should not be touched or should be given special treatment. That is all the more certain to happen when the interests are created under powers granted by this House, special, novel and very dangerous powers given to a body of employers who have not been very remarkable for their exercise of the public and private powers they have possessed in the past. It is all the more dangerous when those powers are likely to be constituted under the power or authority of this House. We want to put clearly as the immediate object of the Bill that, in protecting the, public interest in this matter when schemes are put forward, the Board of Trade is acting within its power. We want to have it clear that, in the framing and details of the schemes, the Board of Trade, the Amalgamation Commissioners, and the other bodies concerned will bear in mind that it is the desired intention of this House to say that this Act, dealing as it does with a very urgent and temporary situation in regard to hours and wages, should not hold up or be used for holding up that transition to public ownership which we on these benches believe will alone provide a solution for the problems of the coal industry.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN

Shall I be in order in moving an Amendment to the Amendment, in line 3, to leave out the words "coal mines, or"?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

Yes, if within the Ruling given.

Mr. BROWN

It will then read: the transfer of the ownership of mineral rights or the production, supply, and sale of coal to a public authority. I presume the hon. Member means "by a public authority." Would I be in order in moving to leave out those words?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

Yes.

Mr. BROWN

Then I will move that. May I suggest, at this point, that, if I am allowed to move it, we shall be enabled to discuss the whole merits of the question of nationalisation?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I ruled quite distinctly, in admitting this Amendment, that I could not permit any discussion whatever of the merits or demerits of public ownership.

Mr. BROWN

Then, in that case, surely, the whole thing must be out of order, because, if I am allowed to move to leave out the words "coal mines or," I must make a distinction between the different purposes.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member has no right to ask me whether an Amendment to the proposed Amendment is in order, until it is put before me. I can say at once that any Amendment which is going to raise the merits or demerits of public ownership is out of order.

Mr. BROWN

Then, in fairness to the Committee, you should consider this further point of Order, that, if a Member is not allowed to raise this issue, then the Committee is hampered in discussion within the narrow limits of your Ruling. There are four separate propositions in this Amendment. If I move to leave out one, the major one, surely we will be in order in discussing the reasons for leaving that out. Otherwise, the discussion should not be allowed to proceed.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I could not accept an Amendment to the proposed Amendment for that purpose. I ruled that the discussion must be confined to the first two lines referring to anything Parliament may or may not do in the future. I have grave doubts as to whether I ought to have allowed the discussion at all, but so long as the Debate was confined to that point I could not rule it out of order. I cannot allow a Debate on the merits or demerits of public ownership.

Sir HERBERT SAMUEL

We recognise that you desire to meet the wishes of the Committee, but the Committee is in grave difficulty on this Amendment, because it is almost impossible to consider a proposal of this nature without considering whether or not these particular objects are in themselves desirable. We are saying that a scheme must not be made which will preclude certain things. Obviously, that is because, in the opinion of the Committee, they are desirable. Then, surely, we should discuss whether they are desirable or not. Some of us think some of this things are desirable, and some are not, and we ought, therefore, to be allowed to amend this Amendment by leaving out the words "coal mines or." If we are prevented from arguing that nationalisation of mines ought not to be included, then we ought not to discuss the Amendment at all.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

The only point on which I can possibly allow discussion is on the narrow principle whether this Bill can possibly safeguard any possible or conceivable future action of Parliament. I ruled very rigidly with regard to the hon. Member who moved the Amendment. I called the Amendment strictly on the understanding that there would not be a general discussion as to the desirability, or otherwise, of such a contingency arising.

Sir LAMING WORTHINGTON-EVANS

Does not this Amendment amount to this, that the scheme shall not hamper or delay something which Parlia- ment may or may not desire to do in the future? It is a futile Amendment surely, and I should have thought it was out of order.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS

This Amendment seems to me to be a purely futile Amendment, because you forbid the Board of Trade doing anything to delay a great national policy which we cannot discuss, and—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I agree that the Amendment appears to be quite futile. The only question raised is that the Board of Trade should take some steps to safeguard the liberty and freedom of this House in the future in a particular direction.

Mr. E. BROWN

Surely the Amendment raises more than that. It raises certain definite specific issues. About these great issues there may be a wide divergence of opinion. Some Members may be in favour of one, and others of another. Surely, we cannot proceed in the discussion of this Amendment unless Members are allowed to discuss its principles.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I think I will settle the points raised by ruling the Amendment out of order.

Mr. WISE

May I suggest another way out? Might you not widen the discussion?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

That cannot be permitted.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS

Might we not be allowed to show that it would have a very hampering effect on the Board of Trade?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I am afraid at this stage we must end the discussion. I suggest that we may take the following two Amendments together, as they cover the same point.

Commodore KING

I beg to move in page 2, line 1, to leave out from the word "before" to the word "or," in line 2, and to insert instead thereof the words: such date not being earlier than three months after the passing of this Act as the Board of Trade shall appoint. I feel that in this Amendment I come closer to the President of the Board of Trade than I have yet managed to do in the whole course of this Bill. Perhaps it is only a verbal agreement, because in his next Amendment he seeks to leave out almost the identical words which I am moving to leave out. It is a case of so near, and yet so far. When he comes to inserting words, however, he wants to insert a period of only four weeks, while I want to prevail on him to accept a time limit of three months. The object of the Sub-section is, of course, to lay down for what period these schemes shall be submitted to the Board of Trade. I do not wish to suggest that the right hon. Gentleman was unduly optimistic, but the words I am seeking to leave out are the first day of January, 1930. and yet here we are getting on into March and not through the Committee stage of the Bill. With regard to the actual working of this Sub-section, it lays down this date before which voluntary schemes may be worked out and put before the Board of Trade. It requires a certain amount of time to enable district schemes and the central scheme to be worked out. The strongest part of this Sub-section is in the last words, because, although the major portion of the Sub-section lays down what schemes may be submitted to the Board of Trade, it goes on to say: and in default of such a central or district scheme being so submitted as aforesaid, the Board shall themselves make the scheme. My object in moving the Amendment is to see that both the central council and the district council boards may have an adequate amount of time to consider and work out such schemes as they wish to put forward. The President of the Board of Trade seems to think that four weeks is sufficient for the purpose, but I hope that he will be able to change his mind and that I may convince him that, for the amount of work that has to be done, the period of three months is by no means too long.

When he introduced the Bill, he was probably under the impression that he had the general support of the great bulk of coalowners throughout the country,' that they were willing and ready to work out their schemes and that they probably had already, more or less, draft schemes that they were willing to put forward, but, as he has told us, during the progress of this Bill there has been a change of opinion or a change of front amongst the coalowners. He obtained their consent to the change in hours on condition that they received Part I of the Bill, but he told us last Thursday that, so far from that general assent holding now, the further conditions and the new Clauses which have been passed have changed the view and attitude of coalowners towards the whole Bill. Therefore, I submit to him that, although they may have been perfectly willing to put forward schemes or may have considered schemes previously which they might have submitted to the Board of Trade, it is by no means certain that he will find that all the districts are as willing or as able to put forward schemes as they were some few months ago.

The promoters of the district schemes have to arrange, amongst their other duties, for the fixation of quotas, the fixation of the minimum price and they also have to arrange how coal is to be classified, class by class, throughout the whole range of the coal industry. Apart from these three main duties, there are 12 or 13 other headings laid down in Clause 3. The President of the Board of Trade will have in mind the functions which are laid upon the district executive boards, and he must realise, as probably no one else can realise, the enormous amount of work that will be involved in getting people to agree and to arrange as to how these duties are to be carried out. Agreement as to how those duties are to be carried out must be come to before the schemes can be submitted. That is in regard to the d strict schemes. They have to come to an agreement. We know that in some cases there is no sign of agreement. We find that even some of the districts that have previously worked in with the five county scheme have either intimated their intention to withdraw or have fallen away from that scheme. Therefore, new schemes have to be developed in these particular districts. I know from past experience what has been the difficulty, for instance, in getting the Counties of Northumberland and Durham to agree amongst themselves on any particular scheme. When they have such a mass of detail to arrange before they can submit any scheme, I do say that three months is by no means too long a period to allow them to formulate and to submit their district schemes.

When we come to the central scheme, it can only be started, so far as I read the Bill, when the district schemes, or a majority of them, have been approved. The district executive board has to be elected, and until those elections have taken place you cannot form the representative body to consider the central scheme. It is provided that The central scheme shall constitute the central council which shall, subject as hereinafter provided, be composed of representatives of all the owners of coal nines in the several districts. Until those districts have decided on their own schemes and their own representatives it is impossible for a properly formulated central scheme to be considered, because you cannot get the central council together until the districts have sent their representatives who are to deal with the central scheme. Therefore, it is futile to suggest that a period of four weeks will be sufficient in which to get the district schemes thought-out, the district representatives appointed, and then to get the districts to appoint their representatives to the central board and to have a properly thought-out central scheme produced. I do not think that the President of the Board of Trade will maintain for one moment that four weeks is adequate time for these schemes to be brought forward.

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree that, with all the compulsion that is contained in the Bill, he would not wish in the initial schemes, on which the whole of the Bill is going to rest, to have compulsory schemes originated and brought into being by the Board of Trade. He will wish as far as possible to get the greatest amount of voluntary effort and voluntary suggestions with regard to all these schemes, whether district or central schemes, and it is only by providing a sufficient amount of time that he can get those voluntary schemes. It would be most regrettable, if he tries to compress all this work into one month, if we should find that the Board of Trade are, failing the completion of the schemes, bringing forward schemes themselves. We realise that strong compulsion is being exercised in most parts of the Bill, but when we come to the initial stage of the formulation of the schemes, I submit that it is desirable that a sufficient time should be given, and that three months is not one day too long for that purpose.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

I think that I can explain, quite briefly, the reasons for the proposed change which is contained in the Government Amendment which stands in my name, namely, to insert the words expiration of the period of four weeks from the passing of this Act or such further period. you have indicated, Mr. Dunnico, that we can take the two Amendments together. There is no secret about this matter. When the Bill was originally framed we hoped that it would be possible to have introduced it in the Autumn Session, and to have got it through, and that the schemes would be launched from the first day of January, 1930, which is the date included in the Bill, but it was possible to get the Second Reading only before the Christmas Recess, and we had to take the Committee stage when we resumed. Accordingly, we have placed the Amendment on the Order Paper, altering the words "first day of January, 1930," to a period of four weeks from the passing of the Act.

My right hon. and gallant Friend suggests that that period is too short for the preparation and submission of schemes to the Board of Trade, but I would explain, as I have explained on previous occasions, that schemes in outline have been prepared for a large number of the 21 districts in this country. I think I have previously informed the House that of these schemes that relating to South Wales, which covers about 86 per cent. of the output, is the most conclusive and effective in character, and will probably prove to be model, subject to certain final adjustments, for schemes in other districts. I have seen the outline of perhaps 15 or 16 schemes—I cannot pledge myself to the exact number—and only in the case of Scotland is there the absence of a scheme at the present time. It is true that there are difficulties in Northumberland and Durham, which we hope to overcome, and I believe that even my fellow countrymen in Scotland will, in due course, when this Measure becomes an Act of Parliament, come into line, because it is true of our race that the moment material advantages are on the horizon they come in I have not the least doubt that that will be true in this as in other cases.

There is no reason why we should allow more than four weeks. If the period of four weeks proves to be too short either for the central scheme, which we have seen in outline, or for the district schemes, the Board of Trade has power to extend it to such further period as may be necessary. With that elasticity and that speed which are combined in our methods, there is no reason for allowing a lengthy period. A period of three months could only afford an excuse for delay in the presentation of schemes, which are very largely ready. On these grounds, I hope that my right hon. and gallant Friend will not press his Amendment. Whatever view he takes of the Bill, I should think that, from his experience of the Department, he would not wish to incur unnecessary administrative delay.

Sir NAIRNE STEWART SANDEMAN

From the fact that the Scotsmen have not come into this scheme we may be perfectly certain that they will require at least three months to make up their minds. They may be very slow but they want to be exact and they want to be correct. I cannot see any reason why, if all the other schemes are ready, there should be any objection to giving the Scotsmen three months in which to settle what their scheme shall be. Let the right hon. Gentleman go on with the schemes which are ready, and time will not be wasted in allowing three months for other schemes. With regard to the schemes which we are told have been prepared in outline, I should like to know whether those schemes were agreed to by the mineowners or whether they originated in the Board of Trade and have been suggested to the mineowners by the Board of Trade.

There is another reason why I think three months is not too long. Anything that is difficult and intricate and of great national importance must take a long time to put in black and white, and I think the coal trade should be given three months in which to arrange these schemes. The Government will not lose anything by extending the period. If the Board of Trade has power to extend the time, why not give them this extension, and stick to it? Three months would be enough time for Scotland to prepare a scheme. If you hurry anything it is always the case of more hurry less speed. There will have to be meetings here and there, and in Scotland they will all want to talk, or at least a great many of them will. You must get agreement on this matter, and if the people in Scotland are not satisfied I shall be very sorry for the President of the Board of Trade and his Bill.

Major LLEWELLIN

There seems to be really little between the two sides of the Committee on this Amendment, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in this case he cannot give a rather longer period. It will help him in his administration of the Bill if the coalowners know that they have a reasonably long time in which to prepare schemes under the Measure. If they are given too short a time, and four weeks is too short, district after district will ask the President of the Board of Trade for an extension. The right hon. Gentleman, of course, knows Scotland better than I do. As yet no scheme has been prepared there, but he says that when the Measure becomes law they will come in. It is quite a proper attitude for any district to adopt to say that they will not prepare a scheme so long as the Bill is merely a Bill. At any moment its fate may be decided; and it may not become an Act of Parliament. The zero hour for making a scheme is not when the Bill gets into print, but the time when it becomes an Act of Parliament and receives the Royal Assent. Amendments yet may be carried which will alter these district schemes; and the only basis on which you can make a scheme must be the Bill as it finally becomes law. It is no use considering what has been done up to date by some coal districts of the country. You will have to consider that they started when the Bill became law.

Why should any district try to find an excuse for not bringing; a scheme forward if they are going to have the effect which the right hon. Gentleman thinks they will? Part II comes into force three months after the passing of the Bill. They have to face then their fresh liabilities: and if Part I is going to bring the benefits which the right hon. Gentleman has held out no coal district will want to put forward any excuse for not bringing its scheme forward under Part I. To say that they will not bring forward schemes rather suggests a lack of faith on his part as to the beneficent effects of Part I of the Bill. In my submission it is only fair to allow them reasonable time to make a scheme for themselves; and that seems to be much nearer three months than four weeks as suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. It is better for the coal industry as a whole and the success of this Measure that these schemes should be voluntarily thought out in advance and should not have to be ultimately thrust upon the districts by the Board of Trade. For these reasons I ask the right hon. Gentleman to accept the Amendment.

Mr. POTTS

I hope the President of the Board of Trade will not move one inch towards accepting the Amendment. What is its object? Its object is to delay the coming into operation of shorter hours in the coal mines. For anyone to talk about Scotland, or any other district, not being able to settle upon a scheme within three months is simply absurd. I know as much about Scotland as any part of the country, and it will not take Scotland a month after this Bill comes into operation to settle upon a scheme.

Major COLVILLE

Coercion.

Mr. POTTS

What happened in the case of the minimum wage? It did not take a month to settle it. I was a member of that authority, and it was settled in three weeks; and I say that in Scotland, which is the only dark spot at the moment with which the Minister will have to deal, judging from my experience in the past that it is only a matter of coming together after the Bill is passed and making the arrangements, which can be done in a fortnight and certainly inside a month. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will resist the Amendment.

Major COLVILLE

I should not have risen but for the observation of the hon. Member of Scotland as a "dark spot." The effect of resisting this Amendment will be to shorten the time during which districts can draw up their schemes; and that has a particular application to Scotland, as the right hon. Gentleman knows. Scotland has stood out against this Bill because they see, wisely I think, that it is not going to bring any good to them. I shall not be allowed to extend that argument at the moment, but the reason why Scotland has stood out is because they see that this is a Bill, de signed and framed to suit certain districts in this country, not all, is one which will not suit Scotland. The hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Potts) has referred to Scotland as a dark spot. May I remind him that the coal trade in Scot land has considerably improved during the last year, and if left alone—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

We cannot develop along those lines.

Major COLVILLE

I accept your Ruling, but I was answering an allegation which you allowed to be made in regard to Scotland.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I cannot prevent an allegation being made, but I can prevent a reply to it.

Major COLVILLE

May I ask the hon. Member to remember what is often said in this House, that Scotland is constantly being dragged at the heels of England in legislation. To resist this Amendment only means that Scotland will be dragged into line with England in this matter. We ask that they shall have ample time to prepare these very intricate schemes, which are to last not for a day or a week or a month, but for a very long period, and which will have far-reaching effects on the coal trade and all other trades connected with that industry. I hope the Committee will treat this matter with the greatest care and attention.

Mr. REID

I should like to point out to the President of the Board of Trade that there is really a point of substance between the two Amendments. The right hon. Gentleman says that if four weeks is not sufficient time the Board of Trade can extend it. If a scheme is not prepared the Board of Trade can, at any moment after the first period, make a scheme. If he allows adequate time for a voluntary scheme to be prepared, and a scheme is prepared in compliance with the requirements of the Act, the Board of Trade have to confirm it. In that case the coalowners have an opportunity of doing something for themselves. If they do not do it within the period the Board of Trade has power to impose a scheme upon them. By giving them ample and reasonable time to prepare a scheme it increases their powers, and limits the powers of the Board of Trade. The right hon. Gentleman, by keeping the time so short, is thrusting the whole power of making schemes into the hands of the Board of Trade; and I submit that there is a serious point of substance involved in the difference between the two Amendments. I submit that this Amendment is really more in compliance with the right hon. Gentleman's own Clause.

Mr. CULVERWELL

An hon. Member opposite suggested that we had some sinister motive in moving this Amendment; that it was designed to interfere with the coming into operation of Part II of the Bill; that is the shortening of hours. That has nothing to do with the Amendment at all. The shortening of hours has been passed; and we are left to find the money to pay for it afterwards. That comes into action automatically, three months after the passing of the Bill. The Amendment has no sinister motive behind it; it deals entirely with the district and central schemes. I do not think that anyone on this side of the Committee was impressed with the arguments of the President of the Board of Trade, because all that they amounted to was that most of the schemes were already in his pigeon-holes, and that, therefore, presumably, they would be coming into action within the three months, or within the four weeks that he desires. If those schemes are so admirable, and if the Bill is going to assist the coalowners as the right hon. Gentleman expects, there will be no reason whatever for the owners delaying the putting into action of the schemes.

I cannot see why on earth the right hon. Gentleman should hesitate to accept the Amendment. He must think that the owners are reluctant to prepare schemes under the onerous conditions of the Bill, and that the Bill, therefore, instead of assisting the coalowners and the industry as a whole, will do a great deal of harm. Foolish as some hon. Members opposite imagine the coalowners to be, I for one do not believe that they are so foolish as to delay putting schemes before the Board of Trade if those schemes are likely to benefit themselves and the industry. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to accept the Amendment, because it is obvious that the greatest chance of success for Part I of the Bill is that the schemes shall be voluntary and not compulsory, and the longer the time the owners have to get together and to draw up schemes the more likely is it that differences will be settled amicably and that the schemes will be as much a success as is possible under such an absurdly unworkable Bill.

The right hon. Gentleman seems very grudging at times to the poor coalowners. When the present Government came into office we expected schemes for this, that and the other. One scheme was to mean the immediate resurrection and restoration of the whole coal industry. We have waited nine months. Hon. Gentlemen opposite have been negotiating with Members of the Liberal party, with the coalowners and with the Miners' Federation, and even now they are in such hopeless confusion that I believe the President of the Board of Trade would be very pleased to see the Bill thrown out on Third Reading. If he has got himself into such a muddle over a perfectly simple matter, surely it is not asking too much to suggest that he should allow the owners to have a little more time than four weeks in which to produce their schemes. The right hon. Gentleman tells us that he has received no scheme for Scotland. That should be an excuse for accepting the Amendment. Although I am not a Scotsman I do say that Scotland cannot be shoved on one side in this way. Let the owners have time to produce schemes that would satisfy the right hon. Gentleman and promote the prosperity of the industry as a whole.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

We are very much behindhand with our work, and much ground remains still to be covered. I appeal to the Committee, therefore, to come to a decision.

Captain CAZALET

This is an important Amendment, and the speeches already made from this side show that it has been moved in a spirit of sincerity. We move the Amendment because we sincerely believe that it will not postpone the harmonious operation of the Bill, but

will go a long way to assist in putting all the schemes in operation together. We may dislike the Bill and we shall oppose many parts of it, but if it is to be passed we hope and trust that such Amendments and contributions as we make will help to make the Bill as reasonable a Measure as it is possible for it to be in the circumstances. The President of the Board of Trade has said that 16 schemes have already been put on paper. We do not know what those schemes are, but surely it is better that when Part I is put into operation in this country the schemes of the 21 districts should come into operation at the same time. Four weeks is not sufficient time to allow the 21 districts to get their schemes into a satisfactory condition. There are many different circumstances to be taken into account in each district.

I am not a Scot, but I have very great respect for that nation, and for no individual in it more than for the President of the Board of Trade. I am certain that if Scotland has delayed in coming to a conclusion in regard to the schemes she has some very good reasons for the delay. How do we know that these schemes may not have to be altered by Amendments which we may move and which may be accepted by the Committee in the course of the next few days? We anticipate that with the help of the Liberals we may be able to carry some very beneficial Amendments at a later stage, in regard to price fixing and other things of that nature. As a result of what happened yesterday we believe that our hopes in this respect are well founded. That being the case, surely the President of the Board of Trade will accept the Amendment.

Mr. T. HENDERSON (Controller of the Household)

rose in his place, and claimed to move. "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 305; Noes, 121.

Division No. 204.]	AYES.	[7.54 p.m.
Adamson, Bt. Hon. W. (Fife, west)	Angell, Norman	Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Arnott, John	Barnes, Alfred John
Addison Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Aske, Sir Robert	Batey, Joseph
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Attlee, Clement Richard	Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Alpass, J. H.	Ayles, Walter	Bellamy, Albert
Ammon, Charles George	Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Bonn, Rt. Hon Wedgwood
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Haycock, A. W.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Benson, G.	Hayday, Arthur	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Mort, D. L.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Moses, J. J. H.
Birkett, W. Norman	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Blindell, James	Herriotts, J.	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Muff, G.
Bowen, J. W.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Muggeridge, H. T.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hoffman, P. C.	Murnin, Hugh
Broad, Francis Alfred	Hollins, A.	Nathan, Major H. L.
Brockway, A. Fenner	Hopkin, Daniel	Noel Baker. P. J.
Bromfield, William	Hore-Bellsha, Leslie	Oldfield, J. R.
Bromley, J.	Horrabin, J. F.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Brooke, W.	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Brothers, M.	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)	Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Palin, John Henry
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Isaacs, George	Paling, Wilfrid
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Palmer, E. T.
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Buchanan, G.	Johnston, Thomas	Perry, S. F.
Burgess, F. G.	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Cameron, A. G.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Picton-Tubervill, Edith
Cape, Thomas	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Pole, Major D. G.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Potts, John S.
Charleton, H. C.	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Price, M. P.
Chater, Daniel	Kelly, W. T	Pybus, Percy John
Church, Major A. G.	Kennedy, Thomas	Quibell, D. J. K.
Clarke, J. S.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Cluse, W. S.	Kinley, J.	Rathbone, Eleanor
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Knight, Holford	Raynes, W. R.
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lang, Gordon	Richards, R.
Compton, Joseph	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Cove, William G.	Lathan, G.	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Daggar, George	Law, Albert (Bolton)	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Dallas, George	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Ritson, J.
Dalton, Hugh	Lawrence, Susan	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Romeril, H. G.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lawson, John James	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Day, Harry	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Rowson, Guy
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Leach, W.	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Dukes, C.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Duncan, Charles	Lees, J.	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Ede, James Chuter	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Edmunds, J. E.	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Sanders, W. S.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)	Logan, David Gilbert	Sandham, E.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Longbottom, A. W.	Sawyer, G. F.
Egan, W. H.	Longden, F.	Scott, James
England, Colonel A.	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Scurr, John
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Lowth, Thomas	Sexton, James
Foot, Isaac	Lunn, William	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Freeman, Peter	MacDonaid Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Sherwood, G. H.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	McElwee, A.	Shield, George William
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	McEntee, V. L.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)	Mackinder, W.	Shillaker, J. F.
Gibbins, Joseph	McKinlay, A.	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)	MacLaren Andrew	Simmons, C. J.
Gill, T. H.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Sinkinson, George
Gillett, Geroge M.		Sitch, Charles H.
Glassey, A. E.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Gossling, A. G.	McShane, John James	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Gould, F.	Malone, C. L. Estrange (N' thampton)	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Mansfield, W.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Granville, E.	March, S.	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Gray, Milner	Marcus, M.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Coine).	Markham, S. F.	Snell, Harry
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Marley, J.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Marshall, Fred	Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Mathers, George	Sorensen, R.
Groves, Thomas E.	Matters, L. W.	Stamford, Thomas W.
Grundy, Thomas W.	Melville, Sir James	Stephen, Campbell
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Messer, Fred	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Middleton, G.	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Millar, J. D.	Strauss, G. R.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Mills, J. E.	Sullivan, J.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Milner, J.	Sutton, J. E.
Hardie, George D.	Montague, Frederick	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Harris, Percy A.	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Morley, Ralph	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)

Thurtle, Ernest	Watkins, F. C.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Tillett, Ben	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Tinker, John Joseph	Wellock, Wilfred	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercllffe)
Toole, Joseph	Welsh, James (Paisley)	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Tout, W. J.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)	Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)
Townend, A. E.	West, F. R.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Westwood, Joseph	Wise, E. P.
Turner, B.	White, H. G.	Wood, Major McKeizle (Banff)
Vaughan, D. J.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Viant, S. P.	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Walker, J.	Wilkinson, Ellen C.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Wallhead, Richard C.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)	Mr. Hayes and Mr. V. Henderson.
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Ganzonl, Sir John	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Gault, Lieut. Col. Andrew Hamilton	Peake, Captain Osbert
Atholl, Duchess of	Gower, Sir Robert	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Atkinson, C.	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Pownall, Sir Assheton
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Ramsbotham, H.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Bird, Ernest Roy	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Richardson, Sir P. W (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Boothby, R. J. G.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Ross, Major Ronald O.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Haslam, Henry C.	Ruggles-Brise. Lieut. Colonel E. A.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Salmon, Major I.
Brass, Captain Sir William	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Butler, R. A.	Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Castle Stewart. Earl of	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Simms, Major-General J.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Hurd, Percy A.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Smithers, Waldron
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Somerville, O. G. (Willesden, East)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn, Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Chapman, Sir S.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Christie, J. A.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Thomson, Sir F.
Colville, Major D. J.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Crichton, Stuart, Lord C.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Train, J.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)	Ward, Lieut. Col. Sir A. Lambert
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Wells, Sydney R.
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Macquisten, F. A.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Davies, Dr. Vernon	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Windsor-Cine. Lieut.-Colonel George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Withers, Sir John James
Dixey, A. C.	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Womersley, W. J.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Meller, R. J.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Everard, W. Lindsay	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Falie, Sir Bertram G.	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Fermoy, Lord	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Ford, Sir P. J.	Muirhead, A. J.	Captain Wallace and Sir Victor Warrender.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	O'Neill, Sir H.

Question put accordingly, "That the word the stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 265; Noes, 125.

Division No. 205.]	AYES.	[8.6 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Benson, G.	Cameron, A. G.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Cape, Thomas
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Charleton, H. C.
Alpass, J. H.	Bowen, J. W.	Chater, Daniel
Ammon, Charles George	Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Church, Major A. G.
Angell, Norman	Broad, Francis Alfred	Clarke, J. S.
Arnott, John	Brockway, A. Fenner	Cluse, W. S.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Bromfield, William	Cocks, Frederick Seymour.
Ayles, Walter	Bromley, J.	Compton, Joseph
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Brooke, W.	Cove, William G.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Brothers, M.	Daggar, George
Barnes, Alfred John	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Dallas, George
Batey, Joseph	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Dalton, Hugh
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Bellamy, Albert	Buchanan, G.	Day, Harry
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Burgess, F. G.	Denman, Hon. R. D.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Dukes, C.
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Caine, Derwent Hall-	Duncan, Charles
Ede, James Chuter	Logan, David Gilbert	Sanders, W. S.
Edmunds, J. E.	Longbottom, A. W.	Sandham, E.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)	Longden, F.	Sawyer, G. F.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Scurr, John
Egan, W. H.	Lowth, Thomas	Sexton, James
Freeman, Peter	Lunn, William	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Sherwood, G. H.
Gibbins, Joseph	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Shield, George William
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)	McElwee, A.	Shlois, Dr. Drummond
Gill, T. H.	McEntee, V. L.	Shillaker, J. F.
Gillett, George M.	Mackinder, W.	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Gossling, A. G.	McKinlay, A.	Simmons, C. J.
Gould, F.	MacLaren, Andrew	Sinkinson, George
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Sitch, Charles H.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	McShane, John James	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Mansfield, W.	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	March, S.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Groves, Thomas E.	Marcus, M.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Grundy, Thomas W.	Markham, S. F.	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Marley, J.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Marshall, Fred	Snell, Harry
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Mathers, George	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Matters, L. W.	Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Hardie, George D.	Melville, Sir James	Sorensen, R.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Messer, Fred	Stamford, Thomas W.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Middleton, G.	Stephen, Campbell
Haycock, A. W.	Mills, J. E.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Hayday, Arthur	Milner, J.	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Montague, Frederick	Strauss, G. R.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Sullivan, J.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Morley, Ralph	Sutton, J. E.
Herriotts, J.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Mort, D. L.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Hoffman, P. C.	Moses, J. J. H.	Thurtle, Ernest
Hollins, A.	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Tillett, Ben
Hopkin, Daniel	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Tinker, John Joseph
Hore-Belisha, Leslie.	Muff, G.	Toole, Joseph
Horrabin, J. F.	Muggeridge, H. T.	Tout, W. J.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Murnin, Hugh	Townend, A. E.
Isaacs, George	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Noel Baker, P. J.	Turner, B.
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Oldfield, J. R.	Vaughan, D. J.
Johnston, Thomas	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Viant, S. P.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Palin, John Henry.	Walker, J.
	Paling, Wilfrid	Wallhead, Richard C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Palmer, E. T.	Watkins, F. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Perry, S. F.	Wellock, Wilfred
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Kelly, W. T.	Phillips, Dr. Marion	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Kennedy, Thomas	Picton-Turbervill, Edith	West, F. R.
Kinley, J.	Pole, Major D. G.	Westwood, Joseph
Knight, Holford	Potts, John S.	Whltetey, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Lang, Gordon	Price, M. P.	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Quibell, D. J. K.	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Lathan, G.	Rathbone, Eleanor	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Law, Albert (Bolton)	Raynes, W. R.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Law, A. (Rosendale)	Richards, R.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Lawrence, Susan	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Lawson, John James	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Ritson, J.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Leach, W.	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwish)	Wise, E. F.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Romeril, H. G.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Lees, J.	Rowson, Guy	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Mr. Hayes and Mr. T. Henderson.
Lloyd, C. Ellis	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Atholl, Duchess of	Brass, Captain Sir William	Chapman, Sir S.
Atkinson, C.	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l d'., Hexham)	Christie, J. A.
Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)	Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Colville, Major D. J.
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Butler, R. A.	Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Castle Stewart, Earl of	Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Bird, Ernest Roy	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)	Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Boothby, R. J. C.	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

Dalkeith, Earl of	Hurd, Percy A.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut. Colonel E. A.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Salmon, Major I.
Dixey, A. C.	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
England, Colonel A.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston S.-M.)	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Everard, W. Lindsay	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Simms, Major-General J.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Fermoy, Lord	Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Fison, F. G. Clavering	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Smithers, Waldron
Ford, Sir P. J.	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Macquisten, F. A.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Ganzoni, Sir John	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Thomson, Sir F.
Gauit, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Meller, R. J.	Train, J.
Gower, Sir Robert	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Wardlaw-Mline. J. S
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Warrender, Sir Victor
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Wells, Sydney R.
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Muirhead, A. J.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Windsor-Clive, Lieut. Colonel George
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	O'Neill. Sir H.	Withers, Sir John James
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnet)	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William	Womersley, W. J.
Haslam, Henry C.	Peake, Captain Osbert	Worthington-Evans, St. Hon. Sir L.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. V. D. (Tavist'k)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Pownall, Sir Assheton	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Ramsbotham, H.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Rawson, Sir Cooper	Captain Wallace and the Marquess of Titchfield.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N)	Reid, David D. (County Down)

Amendment made: In page 2, line 1, leave out from the word "the," to the word "as," in line 2, and insert instead thereof the words: expiration of the period of four "weeks from the passing of this Act or such further period."—[Mr. B. Turner.]

Mr. C. DAVIES

I beg to move, in page 2, line 6, after the word "a," to insert the word "three-fourths."

We have been told that the necessity for the quota system has arisen because of the lowering of the hours, and that the owners have said that they could not consent to work the mines unless they could have the quota system. What we understand by that is that the majority of the coalowners in this country have come to the Government and said they would have to have the quota system in order to maintain the wages at the minimum level at which we all desire they should be maintained, and that they could not maintain them at that level if the hours were reduced; but we now know that a great number of owners in this country object to the quota and feel that the result of putting it into operation will be to close down their own individual mines. The Government have said that the scheme is to be a voluntary scheme, a scheme put into force in a district by the owners within that district as a voluntary scheme. But it then becomes a compulsory scheme.

The point of my Amendment is that it would be unfair to impose upon a minority such a scheme where the majority is merely a bare majority. Supposing there are 100 mineowners and the voting is very close, with 51 in favour of a scheme and 49 against, then the 49 will have to fall in with the wishes of the 51. That with a voluntary scheme which is to be considered, would not be working fairly to my mind, towards the large majority; but if the mineowners can provide for the decreased half-hour, or the decreased hour, as I hope it will be some day, and at the same time maintain an increased wage without this quota, they should be allowed to do so, and if a district by a majority decides in favour of carrying out the present system, working in its own individual way, without being compelled to agree merely because it happens to be beaten by a bare majority, it should be allowed to do so.

My proposal is that the majority should be a substantial majority, namely, one of three-fourths, before it becomes a compulsory scheme in a district. We have been told by the President of the Board of Trade that already schemes have been prepared in 15 or 16 out of the 21 districts. One is tempted to ask by whom they were prepared, whether they were prepared in the districts themselves by mineowners in those districts, whether they were prepared by somebody outside the districts, and whether the majorities within the districts have been consulted at all as to whether or not such schemes will work. One has a very shrewd feeling that the scheme which we all know is the basis for this Bill is the one which has been proposed also to the places outside, and what I want to ensure is that, if a scheme is to be put into force and be accepted by a minority, if they have to obey the dictates of a majority, it shall be at any rate a substantial majority within a district, and not only that, but a substantial majority also in the country, because the majority mentioned in this Sub-section is one which will deal, not only with district schemes, but also with the central scheme, and it would be wrong if the quota system were imposed upon a substantial minority throughout the country, whether in Scotland, in England, or in Wales, which I know best. If it is a substantial majority and a small minority, then, if this Committee thinks it ought to be imposed upon the minority, be it so, and the minority will have to accept it, but I do ask the Attorney-General to accept this Amendment, in fairness to the minority in the country.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I have some sympathy with part of the observations that have fallen from the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. C. Davies), but I am not sure that the result of carrying this Amendment would really be what he anticipates. As I read this Clause, what would happen would be this: First of all, the owners in a district have the opportunity of submitting a scheme. If a majority of the owners do not submit a scheme, then the Board of Trade make one. It is not a question, as the hon. and learned Member put it, of its being left to the owners to decide whether or not they will have a scheme. That is not the choice. The choice before them is, Are they to have a scheme prepared by themselves, or one prepared by the Board of Trade?

Mr. E. BROWN

We propose later to alter "shall" to "may."

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I am not at all sure whether that would make very much difference. The Attorney-General will probably tell me that, when we have passed an Act of Parliament which gives the general direction to the Board of Trade to see that a scheme of rationalisation is carried out by merely putting in "may," would not relieve the Board of Trade of the duty of carrying out that scheme.

Mr. C. DAVIES

An Amendment which I have down later proposes to leave out the power of the Board of Trade to make a scheme at all; if the owners cannot make one voluntarily, the Board of Trade will not make one.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I do not know where the hon. and learned Gentleman is getting to, because you do not require an Act of Parliament to tell the owners that they may make a voluntary scheme if they want to do so. We must deal with realities in this matter. I am as much against the quota, or against any of these schemes of compulsion as the hon. and learned Gentleman, but we have passed that stage now. Having got the quota, however, I would rather have a scheme which on the whole commands the consent of the majority of the trade, than a scheme thrust upon it by the Board of Trade. While I am not sure that a bare majority is the best thing, I am rather doubtful whether 75 per cent. may not be too big. I should have thought that the right thing would have been to have more than a bare majority, because, if you had more than a bare majority, the majority of owners in a district who wanted a scheme would have to consider the rights of a minority. Therefore, I think that something more than a bare majority is desirable, but I rather doubt whether 75 per cent. is the right figure. It is a very large proportion, and I should have thought that two-thirds would have been a more reasonable proposal. Therefore, on the whole, if I am right in my construction of the Clause, I should like to get it into a form which gives more than a bare majority, but does not give so much as 75 per cent. If we could agree to something of that kind, I wonder if this is the right place in which to put it. I rather doubt whether the right place is not Sub-section (4), where a majority is defined. That is a question upon which the Attorney-General will no doubt advise the Committee.

Mr. E. BROWN

The Committee will have listened with interest to the right hon. Gentleman, but we are not worried about the three-quarters, although we have a precedent for it. In the Lewis Committee's Report, on page 25, is this passage: We recommend legislation to adapt and apply Part I of the Mining Industry Act, 1926, so that a minority of, say, 25 per cent. or less, calculated on a tonnage basis, can be compelled to come into a scheme for a district marketing organisation, backed by a 75 per cent. majority, and proved to the satisfaction of a tribunal to be a scheme for the more efficient marketing of coal, consistent with the national interest, and fair and equitable to all its members. This Amendment has its origin in that passage. Not only does this apply to the power of initiative in the districts, but also to the central scheme. We have one of two alternatives under this Clause. Either the Board of Trade must make the central scheme and the district scheme, or, alternatively, by voluntary action on the part of those responsible, namely, the coalowners, there may be prepared either a central scheme or a district scheme or both.' We can conceive grave reasons for Sub-section (3). We think that it may be very much to the advantage of the Board of Trade to have these schemes prepared in the districts, and, if it can be agreed among the owners there that a scheme is workable for their district, they are far more likely to draw up a practical working scheme than the Board of Trade. We believe that, if there be a difference of opinion in some cases, as there are in many parts of the country, the scheme voluntarily prepared by the initiative of a district body of coalowners which is opposed by a strong minority should not, just because there is a bare majority, become the scheme under which all are compelled to work. There is a powerful case for saying that if the modus operandi be that of initiative by the district owners, such a scheme ought to have much more than a bare majority. I think, perhaps, that two-thirds may be a better number from the point of view of its being workable. We do not want to put forward this Amendment in any wrecking sense, but we know that there are strong minorities in many of the coalfields, and if there are to be schemes, surely they ought to be the schemes which carry the greatest amount of local good will, if they are to work efficiently. There is a powerful case, for altering the terms of the Sub-section from bare majority in favour to two-thirds or three- quarters, but the Lewis Committee recommend three-quarters, and that is our Amendment.

The ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir William Jowitt)

The speech of the hon. and learned Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. C. Davies) might have conveyed the impression to those who know him less well than I do that he was under a misapprehension as to the effect of this Clause. I am sure that he was not, because he knows his subject so well, but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) is under the same impression as I was as to the effect of his speech. I would point out to him that the choice under Sub-section (3) is not between a scheme propounded by the coalowners and no scheme at all. Were that the position, I fully agree that it would be reasonable to ask for a majority of 75 per cent., or two-thirds, or what you will, but we have got to this stage of this Measure. Clause 1 has provided that there shall be a scheme. Therefore, when we start with Sub-section (3), we have to start from the point of view that there has to be a scheme, and then consider how is the scheme to be propounded. The choice may be one between evils or benefits; I am not concerned to argue that, but let us assume that it is a choice of evils. Then it is either a scheme propounded by a certain number of coalowners, or a scheme propounded by the Board of Trade without the approval or the consent or the instigation of any owners at all.

The Government feel that for the successful working of this plan, it is very desirable to retain as far as we possibly can the willing co-operation and support of the coalowners of the various districts. I should like the Committee to consider this. Suppose that you get in a particular district a bare majority, 51 per cent. of the coalowners, taking sufficient interest in the matter to propound a scheme. The mere fact that they propound it does not make it binding on anybody. It has to be submitted to the Board of Trade, who have to look at it from various points of view, have to see that it is in compliance with the Act, to see that it is a satisfactory scheme from their point of view; and, if they are satisfied on all these points, surely the Committee will agree that even in an extreme case where the scheme commands the support of only 51 per cent. of the owners it is better that the Board of Trade should approve it rather than propound their own scheme off their own bat, which may command no assent at all. The position the Government take up is this: Having regard to the fact that there has to be a scheme anyhow, and that the scheme has to be considered before it is passed, it is better, other things being equal, that before the Board of Trade propound their own scheme they should see if they cannot get a majority of the coalowners in the district on their side.

Mr. E. BROWN

There is another alternative, in addition to those two. Suppose there are two schemes, one supported by a bare majority of 51 per cent. and the other a scheme put forward by a minority of 49 per cent.; and suppose, for the sake of argument, that the scheme of the 49 per cent. is better than that of the 51 per cent., but that the 51 per cent., for reasons other than the merits of the scheme—and there may be other reasons—prefer their own scheme. In that case, will not the Board of Trade be in a great difficulty if they turn down the majority scheme, although in actual practice it would prove the worse scheme of the two?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

The Bill empowers the Board of Trade to accept a scheme submitted by 51 per cent. of the owners, but they are under no obligation to accept it. It would be most unlikely in actual practice that rival schemes supported respectively by 51 per cent. and 49 per cent. of the owners would be submitted; but if they were, and the Board came to the conclusion that the scheme of the 49 per cent. was the better scheme, I should imagine the Board would not accept the scheme propounded by the 51 per cent., but would themselves propound a scheme very much on the lines, probably, of that submitted by the 49 per cent. There is no compulsion on the Board of Trade to accept a scheme, even though it is propounded by 51 per cent. of the coalowners in the district who will have to work it, but the Board may if they like accept it; and we feel strongly that even though the majority be a bare majority it will be a better and a happier position if we are able to accept such a scheme rather than have to propound a scheme off our own bat. For these reasons I regret to say the Government cannot accept the Amendment, and I hope the hon. and learned Member will not press it.

Colonel LANE FOX

The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) has quoted the Lewis Committee in support of this proposal, but when the Lewis Committee suggested that 25 per cent. minority might be overridden by a 75 per cent. majority they never contemplated the idea of a scheme propounded by the Board of Trade and agreed to by nobody. That is a system which was only suggested by the present Government, in this Bill; it never occurred to the Lewis Committee, a very practical and businesslike body, that it would be conceivable that any Government would suggest a scheme to which no support was given by the owners concerned and which was entirely the Government's creation. In the case of a Government itself, a bare majority is not regarded as sufficient to warrant coercion of the minority; and I think that in the German system a 75 per cent. majority was required. I quite agree with the learned Attorney-General that if, as is the case under this Bill, we are to choose between alternatives, between a scheme which is agreed by none of the owners concerned and a scheme which has even no more than a bare majority in favour of it, it is far better to have the latter scheme, and therefore I do not think the Amendment will help us very much. I think the whole idea of a scheme proposed by the Government and not emanating from the owners is a foolish one, which is not likely to have any great measure of success. When the choice is between a scheme supported by the owners, even though to a limited extent, and one which has no support from them at all, we can have very little doubt as to which is the more likely to succeed.

Mr. KINGSLEY GRIFFITH

I do not think the Attorney-General has completely appreciated the point which has been put forward. He has dealt with a situation, which was suggested to him, in which there is a 51 per cent. majority for a rather inferior scheme and a 49 per cent. minority for a superior scheme, and he has imagined the Board as having complete liberty to say: "We do not like the 51 per cent. scheme and we are going to switch straight over to the 49 per cent. scheme." But that, I submit, is not what the Clause, as at present drafted, says. The Clause provides that the Board of Trade, in default of a central or district scheme being submitted, may themselves make a scheme. I would point out that the Clause does not say that the scheme must be "submitted and approved," but only that the scheme must be submitted, and the 51 per cent. scheme having been submitted, it holds the field, and there is no power on the part of the Board to choose the 49 per cent. scheme. They may say that the 51 per cent. scheme does not comply with the requirements of the Act and turn everything down and do nothing at all—that is possible; but is that really the result at which the Attorney-General wishes to arrive? Although it may be possible to find some fault with the Amendment as put forward, there is clearly something wrong with the drafting of the Clause, as revealed by the argument of the Attorney-General himself, because it is quite clear in the circumstances with which he has been dealing that he would not have the power, which he imagines he would have, to turn down the 51 per cent. scheme and choose the better scheme. I suggest there is something wrong somewhere, and that the Government had better look into the question.

Captain AUSTIN HUDSON

Much to my surprise I find myself rather in agreement with the Attorney-General as to this Amendment, except in one respect. He seemed to infer that this offered a choice of two good things; I think it is a choice of two evils. Either you have to make up a voluntary scheme yourself or a scheme will be evolved for you by the Board of Trade, or some other body—it says the Board of Trade in the Bill as it stands. A majority may not want a scheme of any kind, but they have no choice; a scheme they must have, one evolved by themselves or one prepared by the Board of Trade Though the point does not arise on the Amendment, I must say that I dislike this Clause altogether; but, having arrived at the stage when we have got to have Part I of the Bill, we ought to see that as far as possible the schemes evolved are put forward voluntarily rather than applied compulsorily. Therefore, I cannot see why hon. Members of the liberal party want to make it a 75 per cent. agreed scheme instead of 51 per cent. If you have 51 per cent. agreed, they can make up their own scheme.

I do not think the last speaker was quite right in his contention, because the Clause says that the Board have got to be satisfied with the scheme and see that it complies with the requirements of the Act, with or without modifcation. It seems to me that it would be very much better that a bare majority should form a scheme voluntarily than that the Board of Trade should be brought in. We do not want any compulsion whatever, but certainly, in my view, of the choice of the two evils, it will be better to leave in the word "majority," and not put in 75 per cent. as suggested by the Amendment. For these reasons, if a Division is taken, I am prepared to support the Government.

Sir H. SAMUEL

Perhaps I may be allowed, by way of personal explanation, to express a word of regret for some aspersions which I think did some injustice to the Attorney-General in the observations that I made on a question of procedure last Thursday evening. On that occasion, I endorsed complaints that had been made that Law Officers had not, on certain occasions, been on the Treasury Bench when the Committee desired their attendance for the purpose of the discussions of this Bill. I am informed that, as a matter of fact, the Attorney-General has been in attendance at the House continuously during the discussions on this Bill, and was ready to come in on any occasion when the Minister in charge of the Bill desired his presence; and his absence on the particular evening in question, when the President of the Board of Trade unfortunately was indisposed and the House adjourned in consequence, was due to a civic engagement, and therefore he had a good excuse. In those circumstances, I regret the words that I used upon that occasion, and I take this, the earliest opportunity, to make this explanation.

Turning to the Amendment; before the Committee there is much move substance in it than would appear from the Debate. The real reason why there should be a 60, 70, or 75 per cent. majority in favour of any scheme is that, if it were stated in the Act that such a majority was requisite, those promoting the scheme in the district would take great pains to get a consensus of opinion, and they would endeavour to reassure those who had doubts as to certain provisions. That is the point which the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) and the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. C. Davies) have in view. If we had a higher figure than 50 per cent. the coalowners in any district would say "If you do not meet our wishes, we shall not have a scheme at all, and the Board of Trade will make a scheme for us." There would be an objection to that course, and there would be a real effort to secure agreement among the coalowners. I think, if there is to be a scheme, it had better be one which commands a substantial majority, and that is why we think there is substance in this Amendment. If a majority is not obtained, the matter would be relegated to the Board of Trade which might be a worse alternative than the first.

With regard to the observations of the learned Attorney-General, I do not think the point is fully met by the Bill as it stands. As was pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for West Middlesbrough (Mr. K. Griffith), the Bill only says: And in default of such a central or district scheme being so submitted as aforesaid, the Board shall themselves make the scheme. The same Sub-section also provides that The Board may, if they are satisfied that the scheme complies with the requirements of this Act, approve the scheme with or without modifications. Obviously, you need the words "so submitted and approved." It may have been submitted as aforesaid, and it may comply with the provisions of the Act, but the Board of Trade may wish to amend it, but, if the Clause merely reads "so submitted as aforesaid," the Board cannot themselves make the scheme. It is purely a drafting point, because we are all at one in regard to this question, and there is no disagreement. It would certainly make the meaning clearer if the Amendment put down to add the words "and approved" were accepted, and I hope that the Government will do that. I hope that they will not close their minds to the suggestion that there should be some figure representing a majority of more than 50 per cent., and we are prepared to assent to the proposal that it should be a majority of two-thirds.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I should like to say, in the first place, that I accept unreservedly the explanation which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) has been good enough to make, and I am much obliged to him. We are quite prepared to accept the Amendment to include the words "and approved" after the word "submitted." I have spoken before on this point, and I was under the impression that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen knew that. That is the position, and therefore the right hon. Gentleman will see by the word which I suggested that what I stated was perfectly accurate with regard to the 51 per cent. and the 49 per cent. They would say, "If we do not accept the scheme put forward by the 51 per cent., we are entitled to propound our own scheme," and, in doing that, we may borrow a leaf from the book of the scheme propounded by the 51 per cent. I follow what the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen has said. The right hon. Gentleman points out that the coalowners of the district, being anxious not to have a scheme imposed on them from above, and being anxious to propound their own scheme, will get together so far as they can, and will get as many of their constituent members in that district as they can to fall in with the scheme.

May I point out that, although the provision is for a bare majority, notwithstanding that I could well understand the coalowners desiring to get the support of 100 per cent. After all, when they have propounded their scheme, it has to be passed by the Board of Trade, and it would be strongly in their favour if they could go to the Board of Trade and say "We have the support of 90 per cent., or 100 per cent." No doubt that fact would have much influence in inducing the Board of Trade to approve the scheme; but, even supposing that they could not get more than 51 per cent., is it not better to pass a scheme propounded by 51 per cent. rather than by one half. That is the real choice here. That being so, I hope the Committee will not press us on this matter, because the Government do not desire to accept this Amendment.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

With regard to the central scheme, that has to be settled, not by a majority of coal-owners in one district, but of the coal-owners in a large number of districts. When you come down to the scheme in a particular district, which is a scheme that is going to work out, and to affect every single pit and coalowner in the district, there is a much stronger case in favour of something above a bare majority. The Attorney-General and myself are dealing with exactly the same point. I would put it from my own business experience. If you know that by a ban; majority you can ride roughshod over 49 per cent., you are rather inclined to take your way and say, "Well, anyway I have a majority of votes on this scheme; I think it is good business; this is the way that I should like to run the undertaking, and I am going to carry it through." That may be all right when you are conducting a business for which you are entirely responsible, of your own company, or a company in which you control the majority of the shares. But that is not the position here.

Here you are putting up a scheme, not for one company in which your own money is invested, but under which you are going to combine a large number of dissentient owners who have no interest in it, and who, indeed, may be your keen competitors, and I do think that in a case like that the people who are propounding the scheme will give more careful consideration to the views of a minority, and perhaps a not unreasonable minority, if more than a bare majority is required. Once the Hill goes through, people are going to accept it. They will have to accept it, and they are not the sort of people who world say that they object to it on any terms. I am thinking of people who may have a genuine and reasonable objection to the scheme which 51 per cent. of the coalowners in a district may put up. We all know how these things work in business. You get a strong side consisting of a certain number of strong people, and they will be more cautious and more likely to give consideration to a minority if they have even a two-thirds majority. Therefore, while I should be disused to accept a bare majority for the central scheme, I should press for the consideration of a two-thirds majority for the district scheme.

The Board of Trade will not thereby be prejudiced in regard to getting opinions. If a two-thirds majority is not obtained, the Mines Department would not be in the dark as to what 51 per cent. or 55 per cent. of the coalowners are thinking. That is not the way in which the Department works. They know exactly what the opinion is in the districts, and they will know that, while there is not a two-thirds majority, 50 or 60 per cent. favour a particular scheme. Therefore, they have the whole of the facts before them, and they will not come down and propound a scheme in the dark and out of their own heads. They will certainly not be lacking full advice from districts where there may not be a two-thirds majority, but I think they will probably get a fairer and more practicable scheme, which will give them less trouble, if they agree to a two-thirds majority in the case of the district scheme. I suggest that that is not an unreasonable compromise, and I hope that the Attorney-General will be able to agree to that now. If he cannot agree to it now, as the President, of the Board of Trade is not here at the moment—I see that be is returning jus; now—if we can do a deal on that basis now, so much the better, but I hope the Attorney-General will not decline to consider it, and will, perhaps, agree that either he or we shall put down an Amendment in that form on Report.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I will certainly do this for the right hon. Gentleman—I will tell the President of the Board of Trade what he has said, and. coming from him, it will no doubt receive careful consideration. At the same time, I would point out that I really do not think there is any chance of our accepting this Amendment or the compromise which the right hon. Gentleman has suggested, and I still venture to think, if I may say so, that it is really a fallacy to speak of a majority of 51 per cent. riding roughshod over a minority of 49 per cent. The scheme does not become a scheme merely by virtue of the fact that 51 per cent. agree to it. It has to be passed by the Board of Trade, and they may approve of it with or without modification. As the right hon. Gentleman says, the Board of Trade would know quite well what is going on, and. if there were really a case of a bare majority riding roughshod over a substan- tial number of coalowners in the district, I am sure we may rely upon the Board of Trade to take proper steps to stop it. Personally, although I have no such knowledge of the subject as would compare with that of the right hon. Gentleman, I should have thought it plain that it was better to have a scheme propounded by a majority, albeit a bare majority, than one imposed upon a body of coalowners by the Board of Trade which might not have the approval of any one of them. That being so, I am afraid I can hold out no hope of my right hon. Friend being able to accept this Amendment, although I shall tell him what has taken place.

Mr. E. BROWN

I am sorry to hear the reply of the Attorney-General. He has not met the point that is in our minds, but has argued against a position

that we have not taken up. He says that a bare majority do not settle the matter, and that is so, but the bare majority settle which scheme shall go forward. The Attorney-General knows very well that the man who commands a Committee is, in 999 cases out of 1,000, the man who prepares the agenda for the Committee. They are preparing the agenda for these schemes. There may be five schemes in a district, but the one which can get a bare majority is the one which will get the major consideration from the Board of Trade and will have the power of initiative. I regret the adamantine attitude of the Attorney-General, and we shall be compelled to go to a Division on the matter.

Question put, "That the word 'three-fourths' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 155: Noes, 263.

[Division No. 206.]	AYES.	[9.2 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Muirhead, A. J.
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Nathan, Major H. L.
Aske, Sir Robert	Ganzonl, Sir John	Oliver. P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Atholl, Duchess of	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Atkinson, C.	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Ottey)	O'Neill, Sir H.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Glassey, A. E	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Peake, Captain Osbert
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Granville, E.	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Gray, Milner	Pownall, Sir Assheton
Bird, Ernest Roy	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Birkett, W. Norman	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Pybus, Percy John
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Ramsbotham, H.
Brass, Captain Sir William	Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Brown, Col. D. C (N'th'I'd., Hexham)	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Buchan, John	Haslam, Henry C.	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Butler, R. A.	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Butt, Sir Alfred	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Salmon, Major I.
Castle Stewart. Earl of	Hore-Bellsha, Leslie	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Cayzer, Sir C (Chester, City)	Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.	Samuel Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Hurd, Percy A.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Chapman, Sir S	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Savery, S. S.
Christie, J. A.	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Scott, James
Colville, Major D. J.	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'nton)	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Shopperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Simms, Major-General J.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Knox, Sir Alfred	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Smithers, Waldron
Dalkeith, Earl of	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Thomson, Sir F.
Dlxey, A. C.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Macquisten, F. A.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Train, J.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
England, Colonel A.	Marqusson, Captain H. D.	Ward, Lieut. Col. Sir A. Lambert
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Meller, R. J.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Everard, W. Lindsay	Millar, J. D.	Wells, Sydney R.
Fermoy, Lord	Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	White, H. G.
Fison, F. G. Clavering	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Foot, Isaac	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Ford, Sir P. J.	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Withers, Sir John James
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Womersley, W. J.	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)	Major Owen and Dr. Hunter.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
NOES.
Adamson, Bt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Grundy, Thomas W.	Milner, J.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Montague, Frederick
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Morley, Ralph
Alpass, J. H.	Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Ammon, Charles George	Hardie, George D.	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Angell, Norman	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Mort, D. L.
Arnott, John	Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Moses, J. J. H.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Haycock, A. W.	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Ayles, Walter	Hayday, Arthur	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Muff, G.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Muggeridge, H. T.
Barnes, Alfred John	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Murnin, Hugh
Batey, Joseph	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Naylor, T. E.
Beckett, John (Camberwetl, Peckham)	Herriotts, J.	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Bellamy, Albert	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Noel Baker, P. J.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Oldfield, J. R.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff. Central)	Hoffman, P. C.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Hollins, A.	Palin, John Henry
Benson, G.	Hopkin, Daniel	Paling, Wilfrid
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Horrabin, J. F.	Palmer, E. T.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret	Isaacs, George	Perry, S. F.
Bowen, J. W.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Pethick-Lawrcnce. F W.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Phillips, Dr. Marion
Broad, Francis Alfred	Johnston, Thomas	Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Brockway, A. Fenner	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Pole, Major D. G.
Bromfield, William	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Potts, John S.
Bromley, J.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Price, M. P.
Brooke, W.	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Quibell, D. J. K.
Brothers, M.	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Raynes, W. R.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)	Kelly, W. T.	Richards, R.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Kennedy, Thomas	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
	Kinley, J.	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Buchanan, G.	Knight, Holford	Ritson, J.
Burgess, F. G.	Lang, Gordon	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Romeril, H. G.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Lathan, G.	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Cameron, A. G.	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Rowson, Guy
Cape, Thomas	Lawrence, Susan	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Charleton, H. C.	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Sanders, W. S.
Chater, Daniel	Leach, W.	Sandham, E.
Church, Major A. G.	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Sawyer, G. F.
Clarke, J. S.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Scurr, John
Cluse, W. S.	Lees, J.	Sexton, James
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Compton, Joseph	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Cove, William G.	Logan, David Gilbert	Sherwood, G. H.
Daggar, George	Longbottom, A. W.	Shield, George William
Dallas, George	Longden, F.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Dalton, Hugh	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Shillaker, J. F.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lowth, Thomas	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Day, Harry	Lunn, William	Simmons, C. J.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sinkinson, George
Dukes, C.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Sitch, Charles H.
Duncan, Charles	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Ede, James Chuter	McElwee, A.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Edmunds, J. E.	McEntee, V. L.	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)	Mackinder, W.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	McKinlay, A.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Egan, W. H.	MacLaren, Andrew	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Freeman, Peter	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	McShane, John James	Snell, Harry
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Gibbins, Joseph	Mansfield, W.	Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)	March, S.	Stamford, Thomas W.
Gill, T. H.	Marcus, M.	Stephen, Campbell
Gillett, George M.	Markham, S. F.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Gossling, A. G.	Marley, J.	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Gould, F.	Marshall, Fred	Strauss, G. R.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Mathers, George	Sullivan, J.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Matters, L. W.	Sutton, J. E.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).	Melville, Sir James	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Messer, Fred	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Middleton, G.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Groves, Thomas E.	Mills, J. E.	Thurtle, Ernest

Tillett, Ben	Wallhead, Richard C.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Tinker, John Joseph	Watkins, F. C.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Toole, Joseph	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Tout, W. J.	Wellock, Wilfred	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Townend, A. E.	Welsh, James (Paisley)	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Turner, B.	West, F. B.	Wise, E. F.
Vaughan, D. J.	Westwood, Joseph	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Viant, S. P.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Walker, J.	Wilkinson, Ellen C.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Wallace, H. W.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)	Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whiteley.

Captain BOURNE

I beg to move, in page 2, line 10, to leave out the words "with or without modifications."

When I first read these words, I rather imagined that they were intended merely to enable the Board of Trade to make any slight alteration in the scheme to make it more workable, but, after listening to the speech of the Attorney-General on the last Amendment, I have an extraordinary suspicion as to the intention underlying these words. As I understand it, the Board of Trade wish drastically to alter a scheme which may be put up by a majority, perhaps even a large majority, in an area. There is no provision that any such modification should be referred back to the promoters for their opinion, and it would appear that, under these comparatively harmless looking words, the Board of Trade are really taking power to set up any scheme they like, regardless as to whether or not it is the scheme originally submitted to them. The Attorney-General told us that we had a majority and a minority both putting their opinions to the Board of Trade, the majority putting up the scheme and the minority dissenting, and the Board of Trade could incorporate a large portion of the scheme put up by the minority into the scheme put up by the majority, and this, apparently, without consulting the majority and without doing anything but their own pleasure. It seems to me that this is conferring a far too drastic power on any Government Department.

We have had protests in the House time after time against giving very great powers to Government Departments, and, if my interpretation of these words is correct, we must enter a most emphatic protest. Originally, I thought it was only for the purpose of making very slight alterations, and I quite agree that slight alterations may be required in many cases, but I now feel very doubtful on the point. I hope we shall have an assurance that the Board do not intend to make any substantial modifications in the scheme without reference to and without the consent of those who promoted it. The owners who put up the scheme really understand the circumstances of the area far better than the Board of Trade can possibly do, and I feel that for the Board to be given power to modify a scheme, perhaps out of all recognition, without any necessity of referring it back to the promoters or to anyone else is a dangerous power which should not be given to any Government Department.

The ATTORNEY - GENERAL

This covers very much the same ground as the last Amendment. Indeed, I cannot help thinking the hon. and gallant Gentleman would be most effectively answered by quoting some of the speeches made from his own side with regard to that Amendment. May I point out what the position under the Clause is. This is a Clause where the Board of Trade are taking power in certain events to propound a scheme entirely of their own, which they could do, as a matter of law, without consulting anybody, though I have no doubt, as a matter of practice, they would take the best advice they possibly could. That is the position. As an alternative, before they do that, they give the majority of the coalowners in a district the opportunity of submitting a scheme and they may approve that scheme. They may approve it "with or without modifications." I would suggest to the hon. Member that really that is quite unobjectionable in this particular case, when you consider that unless they approve the scheme with or without modifications they have power to make their own scheme. Otherwise, I should quite follow his point.

These schemes have to provide for and deal with all sorts of matters. Let me give an illustration. Take, for instance, the case of a district scheme. It has to provide for the determination at such times and for such purposes as may be decided with regard to standard tonnage. Supposing the scheme is, in the opinion of the President of the Board of Trade, a perfectly good scheme and he is quite satisfied with it, but he does not think that this particular question of determination of standard tonnage is satisfactory. What is the effect if you strike out the words "with or without modifications"? Should the Board of Trade have to propound their own schemes, or would it not be far better that the Board of Trade should have the option of saying, "We will take the substance of the scheme upon which the coal-owners voluntarily agree rather than propound our own scheme and force it upon the coalowners without their consent at all"? I have no authority, of course, to give assurances with regard to what will be done, but I can assure the hon. Member that he may rest satisfied that those who will administer the scheme will administer it with the ordinary dictates of common sense. It seems to me quite incredible that schemes and substantial modifications would be made without deputations and conferences at the Board of Trade, and so on. I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend and his officials at the Board of Trade will be only too glad to avail themselves of the local and business knowledge of the coalowners of a district. I suggest to the hon. Member whether he really does not consider that this course, after all, is better than any scheme that could be propounded by the Board of Trade, and I hope that in view of that explanation he will see fit to withdraw the Amendment.

Major DAVIES

There is a certain adjective, the word "specious," which seems to have been coined especially for arguments used by the learned Attorney-General. He has tried to explain to the Committee that this Amendment has been covered by the previous one and suggests that the Amendment to leave out the words "with or without modifications" is unnecessary because, in any event, the President of the Board of Trade, under this Measure, is given the power to enforce a completely new home-made article upon a district whether that district or any one individual in that district wants it or not. That is the position which is covered by a later Amendment on this Clause which seeks not only as this Amendment does to limit the expression giving power to the President of the Board of Trade to act on his own free will, but still further to limit his powers. It is very attractive, no doubt, to the learned Attorney-General to suggest that these powers and matters should be left to tae common sense of the President of the Board of Trade, because that is the only security he is offering. I agree with everyone else that anything left to the common sense of the present President of the Board of Trade might quite safely be left to him, but with all his appearance of recovery of health, the right hon. Gentleman will not always be President of the Board of Trade. Let hon. Members consider for a moment a change in conditions, and that I was the President of the Board of Trade. Is the right hon. Gentleman ready to leave that matter to my common sense? Not for a moment. Why should he then put this provision into a proposed Act of Parliament? The whole provision is on a par with the-general dislike of this Measure.

I have always had an opinion of the President of the Board of Trade which is so flattering that I am not going to give expression to it, but I believe he has concealed the fact that his real name is Mussolini. What his godfathers at his baptism were doing I do not know, but it is coming out now. These powers are being given over to him. This is the point which I want to impress upon The Committee. When a measure is brought forward by a district, as the learned Attorney-General has said, the common sense of the President of the Board of Trade may wash it out and put in one which has been evolved out of his own mind. But when a measure comes forward officially from a district, passed by a bare majority which, we hope, may be altered on the Report stage after reconsideration, the President of the Board of Trade decides that he does not like it, and there is nobody to say him nay, and he can strike out or put in. That is absolutely inconsistent with all our ideas of democratic government. It is part of the whole charge which I have to make against this Measure. It is all very well if you are making an ad hoc provision, if you are already possessed of an individual in whom we have confidence, but we are legislating presumably for continuity. Men and conditions pass away, but Acts of Parliament are liable to stick with us, and even if we have hopes of them passing away, they come up in the Expiring Laws (Continuance) Act. Here we are putting a Measure of first importance on the Statute Book, and side by side we are giving absolutely unlimited powers to one individual in the Cabinet.

The reason why I regard the whole Measure with such distrust, even though it may not be in the minds of hon. Members opposite, is that it is potentially the first step towards getting, first, the coal industry and many others in its train into a position of being subject to the dictation of a Government Department. This is not the time, nor would it be in order, to develop that theme, but it is one of the themes which alarms us. We have reason to believe that the evidence bears it out to the fullest extent in the way that this Measure is seeking to give these great powers of dictation to the holder of an office, and, though he may change, the permanent officials do not change. It does not alter the fact that the permanent officials will be able to dictate in these matters to the trades and industries of this country. It is not enough to pass this off and say, "Well, why cavil at the power of the President of the Board of Trade to put in modifications of a scheme because he has power under the Measure to evolve his own schemes? We want to stop that, too. I believe that if the learned Attorney-General were not having to put forward specious arguments on behalf of the brief presented to him, he could not support for a moment this as a desirable state of affairs to be put upon the Statute Book of the country. I hope we shall press this Amendment to a Division and that we shall carry it, and also the further Amendment which will still further clip the wings of that otherwise rather attractive individual the present holder of the Presidency of the Board of Trade.

Mr. ALBERY

I want to draw the attention of the Attorney-General to one other consideration. If these words "with or without modifications" are left out, it seems to me he will still have all that was intended by this Bill. The idea is that there is to be a voluntary scheme or a compulsory scheme. If the coalowners come with a voluntary scheme which the President of the Board of Trade thinks needs certain modifications, when those words have been omitted there will still be nothing whatever to prevent the coalowners modifying their scheme as he may desire them to do, provided they are willing to do it. It then still remains a voluntary scheme, if it gets sanction and passes into law, but if, on the other hand, they do not wish to agree to modifications which the President wish to impose on them, then they are entitled to say, "No. That is not a voluntary scheme, and we do not agree with what the President of the Board of Trade wants to do. If he likes to take the responsibility on his shoulders and do this thing of which we disapprove, the responsibility is his, and we wash our hands of it." On the other hand, if these words are left in, there is no voluntary scheme. It is a compulsory scheme if he makes it, and it is if he does not, because it is a voluntary scheme which he has power to alter. If these words are taken out, it does not in any way defeat the intention of the Bill. You then have what was the Bill's intention, a voluntary scheme and a compulsory scheme, and there is still ample room for modifications to be made with the assent and approval of the President of the Board of Trade.

Mr. DIXEY

This is a very important and almost vital point, as I understand it, unless the Attorney-General is going to assent later on to an Amendment which, I understand, is to be moved to substitute the word "shall" for "may" after the word "Board." If he is going to assent to some alteration to make it compulsory on the Board of Trade, if a scheme is submitted by a clear majority to consent to that scheme, then I should withdraw my opposition to the particular words "with or without modifications." Supposing a certain number of colliery owners in any given area submit a scheme by a majority and certain of the miners in that area, for example, are out of sympathy with the owners who are responsible for that scheme. It is quite' common. You might have a perfectly good scheme, submitted by a substantial majority, defeated entirely because representations were made behind the scenes by political people to the Government of the day in order to get them to refuse the scheme. [HON. MEMBER: "No!"] With the greatest possible respect, that might apply even to a Conservative Government or any other Government. It is bad to put power to prevent schemes or not in the hands of a Government Department which is likely to be swayed at any time by the adherents of the particular party in power. I should like to ask the Attorney-General if he is prepared to make the word "shall" instead of "may"? If he is not prepared, and is going to insist on an arbitrary control of the Department over all these schemes, whether good or bad, then I shall support the Amendment.

Lieut. - Colonel Sir A. LAMBERT WARD

There is only one point I wish to raise. Supposing a scheme were put forward with the unanimous approval of all owners. You may say such a thing is impossible, but I do not agree. As a result of the deliberations which are going on at present, it is not at all impossible that you might have a scheme submitted, to all intents and purpose, unanimously. In those circumstances, I do not think it right that the Board of Trade should have the power to approve a scheme with or without modifications. I think it should be approved as it stands at the moment. For the Board of Trade to alter it would be to assume that its officials have a better knowledge of working conditions in the district that the owners, which I do not think is at all likely to be the real state of affairs. In the case where a scheme is submitted by a clear majority, it is quite likely that the Board might accept the view of the minority by introducing a certain number of modifications, but where a scheme is unanimous, or practically so, it is, in my opinion, a very doubtful advantage that these words should be retained.

Captain PEAKE

I put my name to this Amendment because I wanted to find out from the Attorney-General a little

more as to the meaning of the words "with or without modifications." As I read the Sub-section, the power of the Board to make a scheme only arises in default of a scheme being submitted by the owners. I do not know if the Attorney-General agrees with that construction, but it appears that the Board may only themselves make a scheme in default of a district or central scheme being submitted by the owners. It, therefore, appears to me that the owners by submitting a scheme—

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I do not know whether the hon. and gallant Member was here when the last Amendment was discussed, but I pointed cut that we were accepting an Amendment which comes later on in the Paper to insert the words "and approved" after the word "submitted." I think that meets the point.

Captain PEAKE

I am much obliged. It takes the matter further, and gets over the difficulty of the position that there might be no scheme at all which the Board of Trade could approve or was bound to modify. As regards the words "with or without modifications," how far do they go? Can the Board re-write a scheme from beginning to end, or only alter it in detail, or alter some of the major points? I am not at all sure how far those words carry us, and I should like to have a little more information.

Mr. PARKINSON (Lord of the Treasury)

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 298; Noes, 126.

Division No. 207.]	AYES.	[9.33 p.m.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Benson, G.	Buchanan, G.
Alpass, J. H.	Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Burgess, F. G.
Ammon, Charles George	Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Buxton, C R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Angell, Norman	Birkett, W. Norman	Caine, Derwent Hall-
Arnott, John	Blindell, James	Cameron, A. G.
Aske, Sir Robert	Bowen, J. W.	Cape, Thomas
Attlee, Clement Richard	Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Carter, W. (St. Pancras. S. W.)
Ayles, Walter	Broad, Francis Alfred	Charleton, H. C.
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Brockway, A. Fenner	Chater, Daniel
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Bromfield, William	Church, Major A. G.
Barnes, Alfred John	Bromley, J.	Clarke, J. S.
Batey, Joseph	Brooke, W.	Cluse, W. S.
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)	Brothers, M.	Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Bellamy, Albert	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Compton, Joseph
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Cove, William G.
Daggar, George	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Dallas, George	Lathan, G.	Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Dalton, Hugh	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Ritson, J.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Lawrence, Susan	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O, (W. Bromwich)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Romeril, H. G.
Day, Harry	Lawson, John James	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Rowson, Guy
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	Leach, W.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Dukes, C.	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Duncan, Charles	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Samuel Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Ede, James Chuter	Lees, J.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Edmunds, J. E.	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Sanders, W. S.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Sandham, E.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Logan, David Gilbert	Sawyer, G. F.
Egan, W. H.	Longbottom, A. W.	Scott, James
England, Colonel A.	Longden, F.	Scurr, John
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer)	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sexton, James
Foot, Isaac	Lowth, Thomas	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Freeman, Peter	Lunn, William	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Sherwood, G. H.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Shield, George William
Gibbins, Joseph	McElwee, A.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)	McEntee, V. L.	Shillaker, J. F.
Gill, T. H.	Mackinder, W.	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Gillett, George M.	McKinlay, A.	Simmons, C. J.
Glassey, A. E.	MacLaren, Andrew	Sinkinson, George
Gossling, A. G.	Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall. N.)	Sitch, Charles H.
Gould, F.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	McShane, John James	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Granville, E.	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Gray, Milner	Mansfield, W.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	March, S.	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Grentell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Marcus, M.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Markham, S. F.	Snell, Harry
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Marley, J.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Groves, Thomas E.	Marshall, Fred	Stamford, Thomas W.
Grundy, Thomas W.	Mathers, George	Stephen, Campbell
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Matters, L. W.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Melville, Sir James	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Messer, Fred	Strauss, G. R.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Middleton, G.	Sullivan, J.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Millar, J. D.	Sutton, J. E.
Hardie, George D.	Mills, J. E.	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Milner, J.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Montague, Frederick	Thorne, W. (West Ham. Plaistow)
Haycock, A. W.	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Thurtle, Ernest
Hayday, Arthur	Morley, Ralph	Tillett, Ben
Hayes, John Henry	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Tinker, John Joseph
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham. N.)	Toole, Joseph
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Mort, D. L.	Tout, W. J.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Moses, J. J. H.	Townend, A. E.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Herriotts, J.	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Turner, B.
Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R., Wentworth)	Muff, G.	Vaughan, D. J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Muggeridge, H. T.	Viant, S. P.
Hoffman, P. C.	Murnin, Hugh	Walker, J.
Hollins, A.	Nathan, Major H. L.	Wallace, H. W.
Hopkin, Daniel	Naylor, T. E.	Wallhead, Richard C
Hore-Bellsha. Leslie	Noel Baker, P. J.	Watkins, F. C.
Horrabin, J. F.	Oldfield, J. R.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Wellock, Wilfred
Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Isaacs, George	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)	West, F. R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Palin, John Henry	Westwood, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Palmer, E. T.	White, H. G.
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Perry, S. F.	Whitetey, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Peters, Dr. Sidney John	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Phillips, Dr. Marlon	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Picton-Tubervill, Edith	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Pole, Major D. G.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Potts, John S.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent. Ashford)	Price, M. P.	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Kelly, W. T.	Pybus, Percy John	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Kennedy, Thomas	Quibell, D. J. K.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Louqhb'gh)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson	Wise, E. F.
Kinley, J.	Rathbone, Eleanor	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Knight, Holford	Raynes, W. R.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Richards, R.
Lang, Gordon	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
		Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Paling.

NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Ford, Sir P. J.	Penny, Sir George
Albery, Irving James	Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Pownall, Sir Assheton
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Fremantle, Lieut-Colonel Francis E.	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Ganzont, Sir John	Ramsbotham, H.
Astor, Viscountess	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Atholl, Duchess of	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Atkinson, C.	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Roberts, Sir Samuel Ecclesall)
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Bird, Ernest Roy	Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Salmon, Major I.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Brass, Captain Sir William	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Haslam, Henry C.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newh'y)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Savery, S. S.
Butler, R. A.	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Butt, Sir Alfred	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Simms, Major-General J.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield. Hallam)
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hurst, Sir Gerald B.	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Smithers, Waldron
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmtt. S.)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Chapman, Sir S.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Christie, J. A.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Thomson, Sir F.
Colville, Major D. J.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Train, J.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Wallace, Capt. C. E. (Hornsey)
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Ward, Lieut.-Col Sir A. Lambert
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Warrender, Sir Victor
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Wells, Sydney R.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Macquisten, F. A.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Davies, Dr. Vernon	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovii)	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Withers, Sir John James
Dlxey, A. C.	Meller, R. J.	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Womersley, W. J.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Worthington-Evans. Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-S.-M.)	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Everard, W. Lindsay	Muirhead, A. J.	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Ferguson, Sir John	O'Neill, Sir H.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Fison, F. G. Clavering	Peake, Captain Osbert	Captin Margesson and the Maraqess of Titchfield.

Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 296; Noes, 128.

Division No. 208.]	AYES.	[9.45 p.m.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Brooke, W.	Ede, James Chuter
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Brothers, M.	Edmunds, J. E.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)	Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Alpass, J. H.	Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Ammon, Charles George	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Egan, W. H.
Angell, Norman	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	England, Colonel A.
Arnott, John	Buchanan, G.	Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Aske, Sir Robert	Burgess, F. G.	Foot, Isaac
Attlee, Clement Richard	Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R- Elland)	Freeman, Peter
Ayles, Walter	Caine, Derwent Hall-	Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Cameron, A. G.	Cardner, J. P. (Hammersmith. N.)
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Cape, Thomas	George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Barnes, Alfred John	Carter, W. (St. Pancras. S. W.)	Gibbins, Joseph
Batey, Joseph	Charicton, H. C.	Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)
Beckett, John (Camberwell. Peckham)	Chater, Daniel	Gill, T. H.
Bellamy, Albert	Church, Major A. G.	Gillett, George M.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Clarke, J. S.	Glassey, A. E.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Cluse, W. S.	Gossling, A. G.
Benpett, William (Battersea, South)	Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Gould, F.
Benson, G.	Compton, Joseph	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Cove, William G.	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Daggar, George	Gray, Milner
Birkett, W. Norman	Dallas, George	Greenwood Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Blindell, James	Dalton, Hugh	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Bowen, J. W.	Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Day, Harry	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Broad, Francis Alfred	Denman, Hon. ft. D.	Groves, Thomas E.
Brockway, A. Fenner	Dudgeon, Major C. R.	Grundy, Thomas W.
Bromfield, William	Dukes, C.	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Bromley, J.	Duncan, Charles	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	McShane, John James	Scurr, John
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Malone, C. L'Ettranga (N'thampton)	Sexton, James
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Hardie, George D.	Mansfield, W.	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	March, S.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Marcus, M.	Sherwood, G. H.
Haycock, A. W.	Markham, S. F.	Shield, George William
Hayday, Arthur	Marley, J.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Hayes, John Henry	Marshall, Fred	Shillaker, J. F.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Mathers, George	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Matters, L. W.	Simmons, C. J.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Melville, Sir James	Sinkinson, George
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Messer, Fred	Sitch, Charles H.
Herriotts, J.	Middleton, G.	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Millar, J. D.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Mills, J. E.	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Hoffman, P. C.	Milner, J.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Hollins, A.	Montague, Frederick	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Hopkin, Daniel	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Morley, Ralph	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Horrabin, J. F.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Snell, Harry
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Mort, D. L.	Stamford, Thomas W.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir B.	Moses, J. J. H.	Stephen, Campbell
Isaacs, George	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Muff, G.	Strauss, G. R.
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Muggeridge, H. T.	Sullivan, J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Murnin, Hugh	Sutton, J. E.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Nathan, Major H. L.	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Naylor, T. E.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Noel Baker, P. J.	Thurtle, Ernest
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Oldficld, J. R.	Tillett, Ben
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Tinker, John Joseph
Kelly, W. T.	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	Toole, Joseph
Kennedy, Thomas	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)	Tout, W. J.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)	Townend, A. E.
Kinley, J.	Palin, John Henry.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Palmer, E. T.	Turner, B.
Lang, Gordon	Perry, S. F.	Vaughan, D. J.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Peters, Dr. Sidney John	Viant, S. P.
Lathan, G.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Walker, J.
Law, A. (Rosendale)	Phillips, Dr. Marlon	Wallace, H. W.
Lawrence, Susan	Picton-Tubervill, Edith	Wallhead, Richard C.
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Pole, Major D. G.	Watkins, F. C
Lawson, John James	Potts, John S.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Price, M. P.	Wellock, Wilfred
Leach, W.	Pybus, Percy John	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Quibell, D. J. K.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson	West, F. R.
Lees, J.	Rathbone, Eleanor	Westwood, Joseph
Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Raynes, W. R.	White, H. G.
Lloyd, C. Ellis	Richards, R.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Logan, David Gilbert	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Longbottom, A. W.	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Longden, F.	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)	Williams, David (Swansea. East)
Loval-Fraser, J. A.	Ritson, J.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Lowth, Thomas	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)	Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)
Lunn, William	Romeril, H. G.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Rowson, Guy	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Louflhb'gh)
McElwee, A.	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Wise, E. F.
McEntee, V. L.	Samuel Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Mackinder, W.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
McKinlay, A.	Sanders, W. S.
MacLaren, Andrew	Sandham, E.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall. N.)	Sawyer, G. F.	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Paling.
MacNeill-Weir, L.	Scott, James
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester. City)
Albery, Irving James	Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l. W.)	Brass, Captain Sir William	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrld W.	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l D., Hexham)	Chapman, Sir S.
Astor, Viscountess	Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Christie, J. A.
Atholl, Duchess of	Buchan, John	Colville, Major D. J.
Atkinson, C.	Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Butler, R. A.	Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Butt, Sir Alfred	Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol. West)
Bird, Ernest Roy	Castle Stewart, Earl of	Cunlltte-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

Dalkeith, Earl of	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Davies, Dr. Vernon	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Knox, Sir Alfred	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Dixey, A. C.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Savery, S. S.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-S.-M.)	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Simms, Major-General J.
Everard, W. Lindsay	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Ferguson, Sir John	Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Smith-Carington. Neville W.
Fison, F. G. Clavering	Macquisten, F. A.	Smithers, Waldron
Ford, Sir P. J.	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Meller, R. J.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Ganzonl, Sir John	Mond, Hon. Henry	Thomson, Sir F.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Train, J.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Muirhead, A. J.	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Greene, W. P. Crawford	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	O'Neill, Sir H.	Wells, Sydney R.
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Peake, Captain Osbert	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Penny, Sir George	Windsor-Clive, Lieut. Colonel George
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Pownall, Sir Assheton	Withers, Sir John James
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Haslam, Henry C.	Ramsbotham, H.	Womersley, W. J.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Rawson, Sir Cooper	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Reid, David D. (County Down)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Richaldson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Ross, Major Ronald D.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hurd, Percy A.	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.	Captain Marftesson and Captain Wallace.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Salmon, Major I.

Mr. EVANS

I beg to move, in page 2, line 12, after the word "submitted," to insert the words "and approved."

A few nights ago the Secretary for Mines—

HON. MEMBERS

Agreed, agreed! Amendment agreed to.

Mr. E. BROWN

I beg to move, in page 2, line 13, at the end, to insert the words: and before approving or formulating a scheme the Board of Trade shall take into consideration any proposals or representations made to them by any association of traders, manufacturers, or workmen who may appear to the Board of Trade to be interested. This is the last of a series of Amendments. The preliminary one was knocked out by a decision on Thursday last. The Amendment raises a very important point of principle. We are now dealing with schemes which will affect the whole of the coal mines of Great Britain, and will affect principally two classes of the community—first the workmen in the industry, and, secondly, the consuming public. If we are to have schemes prepared to regulate production and that production is limited by the quota, as the scheme is prepared so the interests of the workmen will be affected should the scheme close down this or that pit. It is equally true that the schemes will make a difference to the consuming public. There will be other opportunities during the Committee stage to argue various cases, such as that of the shipping interests and of the public utility companies, and I do not need to argue them in detail now, although they are germane to this Amendment. It is important that before a scheme is approved by the Board of Trade, or alternatively is made by the Board of Trade, associations of traders and manufacturers and the consuming public or of the miners, if they desire to be heard against a particular scheme or in favour of another one, should have a right to be heard.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

When my hon. Friend put this Amendment on the Paper the circumstances were rather different. It was then thought that it would be appropriate to send representations regarding the approval of schemes to the new Commission that was to be set up. That is no longer the proposition in the Amendment, and my hon. Friend now proposes that it should be a part of the duty of the Board of Trade to receive these representations before schemes are approved. We have to look at schemes which are put up by the owners in the different districts of the country, and it is the duty of the Board of Trade to approve those schemes, provided that we are satisfied that they conform to provisions in a later part of the Bill. In ordinary practice, of course, the Board of Trade will receive all kinds of representations regarding this Bill and the schemes, and these will be carefully considered; but it would be an altogether different thing to make it obligatory in an Act of Parliament, before a scheme is approved, to hear all these parties, because the only effect would be very seriously to delay the preparation or introduction of the schemes. All along we have made it clear that the schemes must come into operation at the earliest possible moment. What my hon. Friend has in mind is the manner in which the schemes will operate. In operation not only may the subsequent committees of investigation direct attention to the structure of a scheme or any act arising under a scheme, but there are rights of arbitration, and in the last resort there is the power of the Board of Trade to revoke a scheme. Later in the Bill those safeguards will be described.

10.0 p.m.

Mr. EVANS

The statement of the right hon. Gentleman goes some way to meet our difficulty. What we ask is that in regard to all these schemes there shall be a right on the part of associations of traders, manufacturers and the domestic consumer to have their cases stated. We are anxious that every one of these classes should have the right to put its case forward before schemes are definitely accepted by the Board of Trade.

Mr. WALLHEAD

The domestic consumer is not mentioned at all in the Amendment.

Mr. EVANS

That is true, but the case of the domestic consumer is one that we want to safeguard also. All the people who are included should have an opportunity of putting their case before these schemes are put into operation. I understand from the President of the Board of Trade that he has no objection to that being done. Frankly, I am not sure whether the terms of the Bill are such that that right will be ensured. If it is, I and my friends would agree to the withdrawal of the Amendment. At the moment we must ask for a more definite assurance from the Minister.

Mr. DIXEY

It is very seldom that I find myself in agreement with an Amendment moved from the Liberal benches, but this Amendment appears to raise an important point of principle and the reply of the President of the Board of Trade was not quite clear. Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to mean that later in the Bill provision will be made for adequate safeguards to meet the point of the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown). Unless there are such safeguards I am inclined to vote for the Amendment which seems a reasonable one. Indeed I am surprised that hon. Gentlemen opposite, who represent the workers or who say that they represent the workers, have failed to appreciate that this Amendment has the purpose of giving adequate representation not only to traders but also to the consumers who are going to be most vitally affected. I see the hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Bromley) in his place. One knows his great interest in the railway workers and how lucky the railway workers are to have him as their representative here; and I should have thought that this proposal would have had his support. We should have some statement from the Government that the classes of the community who are not directly interested in the matter of hours and wages in the coalfield, and who have their own lives to live, should have some sort of guarantee against what I call the uncontrolled power of the Board of Trade and the Commission in this matter.

Commodore KING

I am surprised at the ease with which the Mover of the Amendment and his supporter have accepted the assurance of the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. E. BROWN

I have not done so.

Commodore KING

I understood from the hon. Member for the University of Wales (Mr. Evans) that he and the Mover were willing to withdraw the Amendment, more or less on the assurances of the right hon. Gentleman, and I was surprised, because the right hon. Gentleman gave no assurances beyond saying that the Government were in constant touch with the industry and were always receiving deputations and representations from those connected with the industry. That may be so, but there is nothing which compels them to have consultations or to receive deputations. I am sure that in his desire to get information, the right hon. Gentleman receives representations on various points, but the object of the Amendment is to make it a statutory obligation cm the Government to receive such representations. That is a very different thing from merely receiving deputations out of one's goodness of heart and out of a desire to serve. The President of the Board of Trade in many of his arguments against Amendments has put the matter as if the main question before this Committee were the earliest date at which the Measure should operate. It is always a question of time with the right hon. Gentleman; and he says that to go into the question of representations from traders, manufacturers, workers and others, will prolong the period which must elapse before the Measure can become law. I maintain that it is the duty of the Committee to see that every possible precaution is taken and that every opportunity is given for making representations before the Measure becomes operative.

Particularly in cases where the Board of Trade are formulating a scheme it is most desirable that these different interests should be represented. Under the compulsory Clauses the Government are waving aside the experience of the industry itself. If they will not accept the verdict of dissentient persons in the coal industry itself in regard to these schemes, it is very necessary that they should hear the representatives of all other interests, whether traders, manufacturers or workmen. I should have thought that this Amendment would have received support from hon. Members opposite, because I assume that the hon. Member for Leith intends that the mine-workers themselves should have an opportunity of being heard. We are always hearing from hon. Members opposite that the mineowners do not know how to carry on the industry and do not realise the great benefits which hon. Members opposite expect to accrue under this Measure. Surely the miners themselves are the very persons whom they would like to see consulted on these subjects. Therefore, as I say, especially as regards cases where schemes are being formulated, the Committee will want a more definite assurance than we have yet received from the Government in regard to this Amendment.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS

This Amendment is superficially attractive. Where schemes are to be introduced which may be more or less of a compulsory nature in certain cases, it sounds extraordinarily generous to lay it down that people like traders, manufacturers and workers are to be consulted. It has been asked "Why should not the miners themselves be consulted as to any scheme of amalgamation." I would like to see the views of the miners considered and I have said so for a good many years, but this Amendment is so wide that there would be absolutely no limit to the people who would have to be consulted. Every trader in the country could claim to have an interest in the mining industry and all the co-operative societies could come in under the Amendment. All sorts of people can be brought in. I could also, if I wished, go into the position of manufacturers, but I will not do so now.

I hope this Amendment will not tempt some of my innocent friends in front of me, because, after all, what does it really mean? I do not know which of the hon. Members below the Gangway have been laying the trap, but it means that you are going to give some wretched Government Department more power limitlessly to increase the cost of their inquiries, and that you are going to take up an enormous amount of time. If amalgamations are good, as they are, you do not want to have limitless inquiries into them, and you do not want endless people coming in and interfering with these schemes. I could give whole lists of people who are concerned, such as the Admiralty, for instance. I know the President of the Board of Trade is a little innocent, and I do not rely on him to oppose this Amendment, but in the Minister of Mines you have someone of iron determination, and I hope he will put his foot down, once and for all, and say that this Amendment would lay so many burdens on his Department and on the Board of Trade that it is utterly and hopelessly impossible, and that it will not be accepted.

Mr. E. BROWN

The hon. Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams) referred to innocence, but I think he might himself read the cycle of songs called "Songs of Innocence," in connection with this Amendment. He himself had better understand what the Amendment is and to what it applies. He talked about amalgamations, but there is nothing about amalgamations in the Amendment. We are dealing with Part I of the Bill, if I may inform the hon. Member, which has nothing to do with amalgamations. Those who followed closely the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the President will have noticed that he was strong in the second part of his speech. It is true that there are safeguards after the operation of the scheme, but if hon. Members followed the right hon. Gentleman closely, they would find that the emphasis in the first part of his speech was very different from that in the second part. I agree that his explanation is adequate about the schemes after they have been prepared, but that is not the real point of the Amendment, which deals with the schemes before they are operating, before the mischief, if mischief there be, is done to associations of traders and manufacturers.

I should have thought that here I might have had the support of the hon. Member for Torquay. I shall remember his speech on some subsequent occasion, because, if I may enlighten his innocence a little, or nullify it a little, may I point out that the schemes apply in two different ways? They apply, first of all, nation-wide for the central scheme, and secondly they apply in the districts. I have never understood the hon. Member to find any difficulty in other matters in getting associations of manufacturers and traders to speak for the whole of an industry. I have never found him lacking in assurance that he himself, when he was quoting a resolution of such a body, represented the whole of the industry concerned. His speech was not merely innocent, but singularly futile in connection with this Amendment, and he might consider reading "Essays in Futility" as well as "Songs of Innocence."

The preparation of these schemes is, for good or evil—we think for evil—going to have very weighty effects upon great masses of the consuming public with regard to coal. Every industry in the land is to be hit. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Brigg (Mr. Quibell) interjects something. I did not quite follow his interjection, and I do not know whether I could translate it, but I would refer him to the speech delivered by the hon. Member for North Bradford (Mr. Angell), who pointed out the danger of the bad qualities of this proposal on an Amendment of his own, when he was speaking for the "High life and plenty" party. I am told that it was not the hon. Member for Brigg, but a near neighbour of his who made the interjection, and so it is his remarks that I might be unable to translate.

We understood from the Second Reading speech of the President of the Board of Trade that there is an idea that the public utility companies may be more easily able to bear the increase than other manufacturers. The Edinburgh Corporation, as a gas manufacturing organisation, are opposed to that idea. This is an important Amendment, and the President has not met the argument in its favour. He has not met the argument that there ought to be a statutory right for associations of consumers of coal, or for miners, who may think that they will be shut out of their work because of the operation of the quota, to be heard. We ought to have far greater assurances from the Minister, and I hope that he will be able to give us an assurance that these interests will be able to be heard in the preparation of the scheme.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

Let me add one or two words in further explanation. The Committee are under some misapprehension as to the exact proposal in this part of the Bill. After all, what we are doing is to enable the Board of Trade to consider schemes that are sent up from the districts. The schemes include all kind of proposals for regulating output of coal under the terms of the quota, and other proposals for fixing prices and many details of that kind. In other words, there is a great mass of technical material which has to be prepared to submit to representatives of traders or manufacturers and others. It is the structure of the scheme for regulating output which the Board of Trade has to consider, but it is quite proper that these interests and any other interests should make representations, not upon technical details of that kind, but upon the particular purpose of this part of the legislation.

The Bill was produced in December of last year, and, since that time, all kinds of representations have been made, and continue to be made. To take the illustration of the public utility companies, they under expert advice have considered not only the Board's proposal, but also much of the technical details, and they have put up their case to the Board of Trade and their representatives have been interviewed. All that form of representation is safeguarded, and the ordinary practice of the Board will be continued until the scheme has been approved. That is all the material which we are called upon to cover. If a Clause of this kind were inserted in the Bill, I should be under a statutory obligation to hear the representations of all parties not only on the broad proposition, which I submit has already been heard, but on the technical details of the schemes, and I think the Committee will agree that if once we embarked on a course of that kind there would be great delay in getting these schemes into operation and the administrative work of my Department and the Mines Department would be greatly increased. I assure hon. Members opposite that the position is fully safeguarded and I am afraid I cannot accept the Amendment.

Sir WALTER GREAVES-LORD

I wonder if there is any precedent at all, even in the most revolutionary of modern legislation, for allowing the Board of Trade or any other Government Department to formulate and put into force as law a scheme which vitally affects the interests of thousands, of millions, of people, without the smallest inquiry as to the people who are concerned? May I give one illustration of what I mean? The Board of Trade have power under a number of statutes to fix rates of pay; for example, the pilotage rates. The fixing of pilotage rates affects very seriously the remuneration of the pilots. It is certainly provided in all those cases that before the Board of Trade do anything of the kind they shall hold an inquiry at which all the interests can fully state their case. I will take another illustration from coal mining itself. Would the Miners' Federation agree that the Board of Trade should have power to fix rates of pay in mines without an inquiry at which the miners were represented? We know perfectly well what a shout there would be from the benches opposite if the Board of Trade sought to arrogate to themselves any such power. Yet here they are taking power to fix a scheme which will enable them to shut down half-a-dozen or more mines and throw the whole of the men employed there out of work, without any regard for those men's interests; the only regard that is paid is being paid to the speculators in quotas, who make their profits by the purchase of quotas. It is idle for the President of the Board of Trade, particularly in a so-called Labour Government, to come here and say, "We are going to take to ourselves the power to make a scheme which may result in throwing thousands of men out of employment and are only going to allow you to have some sort of inquiry after it has been put into operation, after the pits are closed down and the men are thrown out of employment." I think the people who are masquerading under the name of "Labour" are doing Labour the worst service.

Mr. HASLAM

I think the further explanation of the President of the Board of Trade leaves the position of the Government weaker than it was before. As I understood it, he divides the representations which may be made into two lots. He says that there may be general representations from various associations and bodies, though I notice that he did not mention workmen, and representations on points of detail and technique in regard to the schemes. He admitted that it was just and right that general representations of the bodies mentioned in this Amendment should be heard, and, in point of fact, admitted that they had been made—he rejected this Amendment because a certain number of those general representations had been made. Admitting that general representations should be made, why should not the right to make representations be extended to all associations of traders, manufacturers, and workpeople? I can tell him that in the part of the country which I represent there are many companies which have not made any representations, and which desire to make representations. I do not think it is right for the President of the Board of Trade to assume that all the representations which might be made have been made. Coming so the second category, the right hon. Gentleman states that in any case they will not admit representations on technique and detail. I submit that representations on technique and detail may be very important to the persons concerned. It is all very well to say that these things should be left to the Board of Trade. I say that those associations have a right to make representations and that that right should be secured to them under this Bill. It is my intention to support this Amendment in the Division Lobby.

Mr. PARKINSON

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put," but the CHAIRMAN withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.

Sir H. SAMUEL

The speech of the President of the Board of Trade has caused me some anxiety in view of the procedure which he contemplates will be adopted if the Bill is passed into law. As I understand the matter, various schemes will be proposed to the Board of Trade, and the Board will proceed, as a Department and apparently behind closed doors, to consider those schemes. The public will not be aware of the character of those schemes, and, not only will no representations be invited, but there will be no opportunity even for representations to be put forward. It seems to me that that is a wrong conception of the whole of this scheme, which is not merely a matter between the Board and the coalowners affecting only the coal industry, but it is a matter affecting the whole nation. You are giving tremendous and unprecedented powers to these Committees to cut down by Act of Parliament the production of coal in the pits of the country and to fix prices below which no one may sell coal except under penalty. There are all kinds of subsidiary effects upon shipping and bunker coal exports, and all kinds of industries are affected.

Public utilities are specially affected, and, although there are all kinds of provisions in the Bill for arbitration and committees for investigating complaints by various bodies when the scheme is in force, there is no opportunity for anyone to know what the scheme is going to be until it receives the fiat of the Board of Trade which gives it the force of law.

I do not think that was contemplated in the early stapes of the Bill. It is true that the right hon. Gentleman might be put in a somewhat difficult position if there were a statutory obligation imposed upon him in this regard, but I think that that inconvenience would be less than the disadvantage of doing nothing. If the right hon. Gentleman will tell us that the schemes will be made public in draft so that we may know what is in them, and allow representations to be made and considered by the Board of Trade, if he will give a Parliamentary undertaking to that effect, then possibly my hon. Friends will not press for a statutory provision. I think this Committee would be doing less than its duty if it did not protect the public at large against the possibility of a private arrangement being made between the Department and the coalowners without the nation at large having an opportunity of making representations

Mr. W. GRAHAM

My right hon. Friend the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) has put the matter in a distinctly different position. A little later in the Bill there is a great deal of detail as to what the schemes are to contain, but, apart from that detail, these provisions are to be found set out in much fuller form in the schemes so far prepared, and, as a matter of fact, they are tolerably well known. I am speaking from recollection, but I think that in the case of the South Wales area practically all the later part of the scheme was published, and there is no question of the Board of Trade operating behind closed doors and considering proposals which are quite unknown to the general public. We in this House, in subsequent stages of this part of the Bill, will have to determine the ingredients of the schemes, and I shall be giving a good deal of explanation as those Sub-sections pass in Committee. After that, the full schemes will be submitted according to the terms of the Act of Parliament, and it will be those full schemes of which the Board of Trade will have to approve.

My right hon. Friend suggests that it may be difficult to give an undertaking in a statutory form such as is submitted in this Amendment, and that is just my difficulty. My right hon. Friend asks whether the schemes will he available in some published form, and will be available for the consideration of the public as a whole. That is a matter which must be taken into account, but I can assure my right hon. Friend that there can be no question of every interest not being very fully considered before the Board of Trade approves finally of any scheme. That most certainly will be done, and I am quite willing to see whether schemes can be circulated in some way by agreement with the Mining Association. If, however, what hon. Members are really seeking, as is quite possible, is a knowledge of the whole details of the scheme, that, of course, is quite different from a statutory undertaking in the Bill, and I am quite willing to leave it at that.

Lieut-Colonel HENEAGE rose—

Mr. PARKINSON

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 265; Noes, 157.

Division No. 209.]	AYES.	[10.37 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	McShane, John James
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).	Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Grentell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Mansfield, W.
Alpass, J. H.	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	March, S.
Ammon, Charles George	Groves, Thomas E.	Marcus, M.
Angell, Norman	Grundy, Thomas W.	Markham, S. F.
Arnott, John	Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Marley, J.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Marshall, Fred
Ayles, Walter	Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Mathers, George
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)	Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Matters, L. W.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hardie, George D.	Maxtor, James
Barnes, Alfred John	Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Melville, Sir James
Batey, Joseph	Haycock, A. W.	Messer, Fred
Bellamy, Albert	Hayday, Arthur	Middleton, G.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hayes, John Henry	Mills, J. E.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Milner, J.
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Montague, Frederick
Benson, G.	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield.	Morley, Ralph
Sevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Herriotts, J.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Bowen, J. W.	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Mort, D. L.
Broad, Francis Alfred	Hoffman, P. C.	Moses, J. J. H.
Brockway, A. Fenner	Hollins, A.	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Bromfield, William	Hopkin, Daniel	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Bromley, J.	Horrabin, J. F.	Muff, G.
Brooke, W.	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Muggeridge, H. T.
Brothers, M.	Isaacs, George	Murnin Hugh
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Naylor, T. E.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Noel Baker, P. J.
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Johnston, Thomas	Oldfield, J. R.
Buchanan, G.	Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Burgess, F. G.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Palin, John Henry.
Buxton, C. R- (Yorks. W. R. Elland)	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Paling, Wilfrid
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Palmer, E. T.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Cameron, A. G.	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Perry, S. F.
Cape, Thomas	Kelly, W. T.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Kennedy, Thomas	Phillips, Dr. Marion
Charleton, H. C.	Kinley, J.	Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Chater, Daniel	Knight, Holford	Pole, Major D. G.
Church, Major A. G.	Lang, Gordon	Potts, John S.
Clarke, J. S.	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Price, M. P.
Cluse, W. S.	Lathan, G.	Quibell, D. J. K.
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Law, A. (Rosendalc)	Rathbone, Eleanor
Compton, Joseph	Lawrence, Susan	Raynes, W. R.
Cove, William G.	Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Richards, R.
Daggar, George	Lawson, John James	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Dallas, George	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Dalton, Hugh	Leach, W.	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Ritson, J.
Day, Harry	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Roberts Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Lees, J.	Romeril, H. G.
Dukes, C.	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Duncan, Charles	Llcyd, C. Ellis	Rowson, Guy
Ede, James Chuter	Logan, David Gilbert	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Edmunds, J. E.	Longbottom, A. W.	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Longden, F.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Egan, W. H.	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sanders, W. S.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	Lowth, Thomas	Sandham, E.
Freeman, Peter	Lunn, William	Sawyer, G. F
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Scurr, John
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Sexton, James
Gibbins, Joseph	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)	McElwee, A.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Gill, T. H.	McEntee, V. L.	Sherwood, G. H.
Gillett, George M.	McKinlay, A.	Shield, George William
Gossling, A. G.	MacLaren, Andrew	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Gould, F.	MacNcill-Weir, L.	Shillaker, J. F.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Sullivan, J.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Simmons, C. J.	Sutton, J. E.	Wellock, Wilfred
Sinkinson, George	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Sitch, Charles H.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)	Thome, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)	West, F. R.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)	Thurtle, Ernest	Westwood, Joseph
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)	Tillett, Ben	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)	Tinker, John Joseph	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)	Toole, Joseph	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)	Tout, W. J.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)	Townend, A. E.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Snell, Harry	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Atterclifte)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip	Turner, B.	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Sorensen, R.	Vaughan, D. J.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Stamford, Thomas W.	Viant, S. P.	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Stephen, Campbell	Walker, J.	Wise, E. F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)	Wallace, H. W.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe	Wallhead, Richard C.
Strauss, G. R.	Watkins, F. C.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
		Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Whiteley.
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Fermoy, Lord	O'Neill, Sir H.
Albery, Irving James	Fison, F. G. Clavering	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l. W.)	Ford, Sir P. J.	Peake, Captain Osbert
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Astor, Viscountess	Ganzonl, Sir John	Power, Sir John Cecil
Atholl, Duchess of	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Pownall, Sir Assheton
Atkinson, C.	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Balniel, Lord	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Ramsbotham, H.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Gower, Sir Robert	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Bird, Ernest Roy	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Boyce, H. L.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Ruggles-Brise. Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Bracken, B.	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Brass, Captain Sir William	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Salmon, Major I.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Hanbury, C.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Buchan, John	Haslam, Henry C.	Sandcman, Sir N. Stewart
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd. Henley)	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Sutler, R. A.	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Savery, S. S.
Butt, Sir Alfred	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R- J.	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Simms, Major-General J.
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Chapman, Sir S.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Christie, J. A.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Thomas, Major L B. (King's Norton)
Colman, N. C. D.	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Thomson, Sir F.
Colville, Major D. J.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Titcfield, Major the Marquess of
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Train, J.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Ward. Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Cunliffe-Lister. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Long. Major Eric	Warrender, Sir Victor
Dalkeith, Earl of	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Wayland, Sir William A.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Wells, Sydney R.
Davies. Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Makins. Brigadier-General E.	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Dlxey, A. C.	Marqesson, Captain H. D.	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Marjoribanks. E. C.	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Duqdale. Capt. T. L.	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Womersley, W. J.
Eden, Captain Anthony	Merrlman, Sir F. Boyd	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Edmondson. Major A. J.	Mond, Hon. Henry	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Elliot, Major Walter E.	Monsell, Eyres. Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
England, Colonel A.	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Everard, W. Lindsay	Muirhead. A. J.	Captain Sir George Bowyer and Sir George Penny.
Falie. Sir Bertram G.	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Ferguson, Sir John	Oman. Sir Charles William C.

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

The Committee divided: Ayes, 194; Noes, 262.

Division No. 210.]	AYES.	[10.50 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Ford, Sir P. J.	O'Neill, Sir H.
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon William
Albery, Irving James	Ganzonl, Sir John	Owen, H. F. (Herefo'd)
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Peake, Captain Osbert
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)	Penny, Sir George
Aske, Sir Robert	Gibson. C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent, Dover)	Glassey, A. E.	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Astor, Viscountess	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Power, Sir John Cecil
Atholl, Duchess Of	Gower, Sir Robert	Pownall. Sir Assheton
Atkinson, C.	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland. N.)	Preston, Sir Walter Rueben
Balniel, Lord	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Pybus, Percy John
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Gray, Milner	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon	Greaves-Lord. Sir Walter	Ramsbotham, H.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Rathbone, Eleanor
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman	Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Rawson, Sir Cooper
Bird, Ernest Roy	Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Reid, David D. (County Down)
Birkett. W. Norman	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Richardson, Sir P. W (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Blindell, James	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Rodd. Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Ross. Major Ronald D.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut -Colonel E. A.
Boyce, H. L.	Hanbury, C.	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Bracken, B.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon. Totnes)	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Braithwaite, Major A. N.	Haslam, Henry C.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd. Honloy)	Salmon, Major I.
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C (Berks, Newb'y)	Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Samuel. Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Bullock, Captain Malcolm	Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Butler, R. A.	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Butt, Sir Alfred	Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Sassoon. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Hudson. Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Savery, S. S.
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Scott. James
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Wilttome
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Simms, Major-General J.
Chadwick. Sir Robert Burton	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Chapman, Sir S.	Kedward, R. M. (Kent. Ashford)	Smith. Louis W. (Sheffield. Hallam)
Christie, J. A.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Churchill. Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Knox, Sir Alfred	Smithers. Waldron
Colman, N. C. D.	Lamb. Sir J. Q.	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Colville, Major D. J.	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Lane Fox, Rt. Hon. George R.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Courthope. Colonel Sir G. L.	Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Little, Dr. E. Graham	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Llewellin, Major J. J.	Thomson, Sir F.
Cunliffe-Lister. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Locker-Lampson. Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Dalkeith, Earl of	Long, Major Eric	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Macdonald. Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Train, J.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Maclean. Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Davies, E. C, (Montgomery)	MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Davies. Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Ward, Lieut-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Dixey, A. C.	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Duckworth. G. A. V.	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Wayland. Sir William A.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Wells, Sydney R.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	White, H. G.
Eden, Captain Anthony	Merriman, Sir F. Boyd	Windsor-Clive. Lieut. -Colonel George
Edmondson. Major A. J.	Millar, J. D.	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Elliot. Major Walter E.	Mond, Hon. Henry	Womersley. W. J.
England, Colonel A.	Monsell. Eyres. Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Erskine. Lord (Somerset. Weston-S.-M.)	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Worthington. Evans. Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Evans, Cant. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Wright, Brig. Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Everard, W. Lindsay	Muirhead, A. J.	Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton
Falie, Sir Bertram G.	Nathan, Major H. L.
Ferguson. Sir John	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Fison, F. G. Clavering	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	Major-Gene-a Sir Robert Hutchison and Major Oxen.
Foot, Isaac	Oman, Sir Charles William C.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Batey, Joseph	Brooke, W.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Bellamy, Albert	Brothers, M.
Addison, Rt Hon. Dr. Christopher	Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Bennett. Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Alpass, J. H.	Bennett. William (Battertca. South)	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Ammon, Charles George	Benson, G.	Buchanan, G.
Angell, Norman	Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Burgess, F. G.
Arnott, John	Bevan, Aneurln (Ebbw Vale)	Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Bowen, J. W.	Buxton. Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Ayles, Walter	Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Calne, Derwent Hall.
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)	Broad, Francis Alfred	Cameron, A. G.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Bromfield, William	Cape, Thomas
Barnes, Alfred John	Bromley, J.	Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)

Charleton, H. C.	Lawrence, Susan	Romeril, H. G.
Chater, Daniel	Lawrle, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Church, Major A. G.	Lawson, John James	Rowson, Guy
Clarke, J. S.	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Salter, Dr. Alfred
Cluse, W. S.	Leach, W.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Sanders, W. S.
Compton, Joseph	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Sandham, E.
Cove, William G.	Lees, J.	Sawyer, G. F.
Daggar, George	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Scurr, John
Dallas, George	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Sexton, James
Dalton, Hugh	Logan, David Gilbert	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Longbottom, A. W.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Day, Harry	Longden, F.	Sherwood, G. H.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Shield, George William
Dukes, C.	Lowth, Thomas	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Duncan, Charles	Lunn, William	Shillaker, J. F.
Ede, James Chuter	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Edmunds, J. E.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Simmons, C. J.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Sinkinson, George
Egan, W. H.	McElwee. A.	Sitch, Charles H.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	McEntee, V. L.	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Freeman, Peter	McKinlay, A.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	MacLaren, Andrew	Smith. Frank (Nuneaton)
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Gibbins, Joseph	McShane, John James	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)	Malone. C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Gill. T. H.	Mansfield, W.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Gillett, George M.	March, S.	Snell, Harry
Gosillng, A. G.	Marcus, M.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Gould, F.	Markham, S. F.	Sorensen, R.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Marley, J.	Stamford, Thomas W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Marshall. Fred	Stephen, Campbell
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	Mathers, George	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Matters. L. W.	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Maxton, James	Strauss, G. R.
Groves, Thomas E.	Melville, Sir James	Sullivan, J.
Grundy, Thomas W.	Messer, Fred	Sutton, J. E.
Hall, F. (York. W. R., Normanton)	Middleton, G.	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Mills. J. E.	Taylor. W. B (Norfolk. S. W.)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Milner, J.	Thome, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn;	Monague, Frederick	Thurtle, Ernest
Hardie, George D.	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Tillett, Ben
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Morley, Ralph	Tinker, John Joseph
Haycock, A. W.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Toole, Joseph
Hayday, Arthur	Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)	Tout, W. J.
Hayes, John Henry	Mort, D. L.	Townend, A. E.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Moses, J. J. H.	Trevelyan. Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Henderson, Arthur. Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Turner, B.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Vauohan, D. J.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Muff, G.	Viant, S. P.
Herriotts, J.	Muggeridge, H. T.	Walker. J.
Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R., Wentworth)	Murnin, Hugh	Wallace, H. W.
Hirst. W. (Bradford. South)	Naylor. T. E.	Wallhead. Richard C.
Hoflman, P. C.	Newman. Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Watkins. F. C.
Hollins, A.	Noel Baker, P. J.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Hopkin, Daniel	Oldfield, J. R.	Wellock, Wilfred
Horrabin, J. F.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Welsh, James (Paislev)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Palin, John Henry	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Isaacs, George	Paling, Wilfrid	West. F. R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Palmer, E. T.	Westwood, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Whiteley. Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Johnston, Thomas	Perry, S. F.	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams, David (Swansea. East)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Phillips, Dr. Marlon	Williams', Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Picton-Turbervill, Edith	Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Pole, Major D. G.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Potts, John S.	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Kelly, W. T.	Price, M. P.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Kennedy, Thomas	Quibell, D. J. K.	Winterton. G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Raynes, W. R.	Wise. E. F.
Kinley, J.	Richards, R.	Wright, W. (Rutherglen)
Knight, Holford	Richardson, H. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Lang, Gordon	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Lansbury. Rt. Hon. George	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr Whiteley.
Lathan, G.	Ritson, J.
Law, A. (Rosendale)	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)

Mr. CULVERWELL

I beg to move. in page 2, line 18, to leave out the word "half," and to insert instead thereof the words "sixty per centum of."

I do so in the absence of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Harrow (Major Salmon). It is fairly obvious from the discussions this evening that the right hon. Gentleman is very anxious to get these schemes into operation at the earliest possible moment. So anxious indeed that he has refused already two Amendments which he thought might postpone the operation of these schemes. He refused an Amendment which sought to allow to the coalowners three months after the passing of the Bill to bring up schemes to the Board of Trade because he thought it was too long a period and would delay them. The last Amendment he has rejected for the same reason. He says that they cannot be held up whilst conversations are being carried on between the different interests affected by the schemes. Evidently the right hon. Gentleman is in a great hurry to see these schemes brought into operation. When we discussed an Amendment moved by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) to substitute three-quarters instead of a majority of coalowners, the Attorney-General said that whilst he was anxious that the schemes should be voluntary, it would make it more difficult if "a majority" was increased to "three-quarters." In other words that it would delay schemes under the Bill, because it would be more difficult to secure the cooperation of 75 per cent. of the coalowners than a bare majority of 51 per cent. We consider that owners controlling only half the output of Great Britain, that is a bare majority, is too small a margin to give satisfaction, and we are seeking to raise the figure to 60 per cent. The figure is an arbitrary one, but at any rate 60 per cent. is better than 51 per cent., because the Bill is much more likely to operate successfully in the interests of the industry and the community as a whole if you can secure the co-operation of as many coalowners as possible.

As the Bill stands it would be possible for a minority of large coalowners controlling a bare majority of the output of coal in the district or in the country to coerce the majority into a scheme to which they are opposed. Similarly, small owners by banding together might force their opinions on a minority of the large owners. We believe that it would give greater satisfaction if you could secure not a bare majority of 51 per cent. but something in the neighbourhood of 60 per cent. in favour of a given scheme. Obviously, a scheme which just commands a bare majority is not likely to command general confidence. It might mean that the formation of a scheme is made a little more difficult, but it would be worth it is order to secure the co-operation of a greater number of coalowners. One can see the idea that lies at the back of the right hon. Gentleman's mind in opposing any increase of the majority. He is anxious not only that the schemes should be brought in as early as possible, but that as many schemes as possible should be voluntary, and he is likely to secure more voluntary schemes if the majority is 51 per cent. than if the majority is 60 per cent. Obviously, if he can get schemes produced by the coalowners voluntarily, he can shift the onus of blame for any faulty working from the shoulders of the Board of Trade to those of the owners by saying, "Fifty-one per cent. of the owners produced this scheme. If you are dissatisfied with it, that is your fault. The Board of Trade had nothing to do with it." We want to guard against that sort of thing. It is an important point.

I have no wish to hamper the bringing into effect of the schemes. We have been coerced into giving our sanction to this part of the Bill, and we must put up with it. All that we can do is to make it work as smoothly as possible. To have made the majority 75 per cent. would not have provided enough elasticity, and would have resulted in delay in bringing in the schemes. The President of the Board of Trade has not accepted many of our Amendments and does not seem anxious that we should have any finger in the pie that he has cooked for us. I hope he will at least condescend favourably to consider this Amendment.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

My right hon. Friend is most anxious to meet hon. Members opposite as far as he can. Those who know him and have observed his conduct of this Bill surely know that, as far as he can meet hon. Members without giving away something that he believes to be essential to the Bill, he is the first person to meet them. We cannot accept this Amendment, which raises precisely the same point as one which we debated earlier this evening. The reasons which led us to oppose the earlier Amendment apply equally to this Amendment, and those reasons have not become any less strong than they were an hour ago. The Board of Trade is in this position: It has the power to impose its own scheme. The controversy is not between having a voluntary scheme and having no scheme at all, but between having a scheme proposed by the coalowners, or a scheme proposed by the Board of Trade. I should have thought that hon. Members opposite would be the first to agree that in all probability a scheme propounded by the coalowners would be better than a scheme propounded by the Board of Trade. I feel, at any rate, that, as the successful working of the schemes largely depends upon the degree of voluntary support and co-operation forthcoming, that reason, and that reason alone, makes it desirable, in so far as we can, to have these voluntary schemes, rather than schemes imposed by the Board of Trade. That being so, what is the point of hon. Members opposite moving an Amendment making it more difficult to propound voluntary schemes and enlarging the area which will necessarily have to be covered by the compulsory schemes propounded by the Board of Trade, and the Board of Trade alone?

I suggest that a scheme for which there is a majority, even a bare majority, even 51 per cent., is better than one which does not command any majority at all. The Board of Trade have power to apply modifications to any such scheme, and they are charged with seeing that the scheme is prepared in the interests of the consumer and of the public. The effect of striking out the word "half" and substituting "60 per cent.," relating back as it does to Sub-section (3), merely means that we make it more difficult for any scheme to classify as a voluntary scheme which may be accepted if the Board of Trade thinks fit and proper. Therefore, the reasons which led us to reject the Amendment on Sub-section (3) lead us also to reject this Amendment on Sub-section (4), because the point is precisely the same. In case hon. Members did not hear the previous discussion, I may repeat that it is quite manifest that the coalowners in any district would certainly try to get more than 50 per cent. or 60 per cent. or 70 per cent., because they would know quite well that the larger the backing they could bring up, when they put a scheme to the Board of Trade, the more likely would the Board of Trade be to accept that scheme, other things being equal. It is no question therefore of a bare majority riding roughshod over the others. The Board of Trade have to approve the scheme, and, for all these reasons, I hope that the Committee will adhere to the decision to which it came a little more than an hour ago.

Mr. E. BROWN

Although there is no change of attitude on the part of the right hon. and learned Gentleman, there is a change of emphasis, and it appears that the previous Debate has, at least, made some impression on his mind. At first it seemed as though he did not appreciate the point which we were arguing. I agree with the Amendment. Our own percentage is 75, but as far as I am concerned if the Attorney-General's view is unchanged, so is mine. I am sure that it would be fairer and better for all concerned in the production of voluntary schemes if it was understood that there must be an adequate majority. That is our point, and it is obvious that the Attorney-General sees that there was force in our argument. I am bound to say that in my judgment the case is very strong, and I regret that the compromise suggested by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hendon was not accepted by the President of the Board of Trade. I appreciate the difference between central and district schemes, but while it would be much harder to have a percentage majority in the case of a central scheme, it would be better for all concerned if an adequate majority were assured in the case of the district schemes.

Major G. DAVIES

The consistency of the Attorney-General has been in his failure to appreciate our point. The principle here is admitted and this is only a question of mathematical detail—otherwise the President of the Board of Trade would not have provided in the Bill for a majority. The principle, therefore, is admitted that more than 50 per cent. of the owners must agree, and the question is, How much should the more than half be? In spite of the fact that we think this is a bad Bill, those who back the Bill want as far as possible to get away from the element of force and have the element of voluntary co-operation. If your objective is to get as big a proportion of the coalowners, in a district particularly, in voluntary co- operation, to that extent are you achieving the probability that your scheme will be worked with good will?

Our view is that 51 per cent. is not enough to make people think you have really got voluntary co-operation in a district on a voluntary scheme. The difference between 51 and 49 per cent. is, according to the Government, the difference between compulsion and voluntarism, and we say that that margin is not enough. I would like more than 60 per cent., but 60 per cent. does give 10 per cent. over the exact half. The broad principle is that the bare majority is not enough to ensure the conviction in the country that we have really got a. voluntary scheme, and therefore 60 per cent. is suggested. I ask the Government to appreciate that it is no good saying they are consistent in repeating over and over again the same answer when they have not grasped our argument, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to realize that there is a good deal in our argument.

Mr. DIXEY

May I add a word of supplication to the President of the Board of Trade, not to the hard-hearted Attorney-General? Surely, if you have a voluntary scheme put up by only 51 per cent. of the owners in a district, it cannot be, of its very nature, a very satisfactory scheme. I think that probably, in the case of a scheme that is only backed in the proportion of 51 per cent., it might be far better if the Board of Trade were themselves to shoulder the responsibility for it. It seems to me, if I may say so without offence, rather a cowardly line of procedure to take to put the responsibility of forming a scheme in an area on a bare majority of one, when really it would be the Board's own scheme. Members of Parliament have certain rights, and we represent constituencies, and I appeal to the President of the Board of Trade to give us a concession here.

Mr. EVANS

The speech of the Attorney-General was rather remarkable. In the previous discussion on this point the President of the Board of Trade said that when this Bill is put upon the Statute Book, he felt sure that coal-owners all over the country would put forward schemes without any pressure from the Government. It is obvious to everybody that if this Bill, when it becomes an Act of Parliament, is to operate at all, its successful operation will depend very largely upon the cooperation of the coalowners all over the country. Therefore, I should have thought that the first thing which anybody who wants to see this Bill put into operation would do would be to try to secure in all the districts that coalowners should be encouraged to put forward schemes to the Board of Trade which the Board of Trade could approve.

It is no good disguising the fact that in the different mining districts there is considerable difference of opinion between coalowners. There may be two or three exceptions, but apart from these, there are acute differences of opinion in regard to the merits of the proposals which are incorporated in the Bill. I should have thought that if the President really wanted to make this Bill an operative Measure he would have tried to meet the case of the owners in the different districts who do not approve of the principles in the Bill, and who may be compelled ultimately—[Interruption.]

Mr. E. BROWN

It is an owners' Bill.

Mr. EVANS

It does not matter whose Bill it is, the owners are very closely affected by it. In the actual. Title of the Bill it is described as A Bill to provide for regulating and facilitating the production, supply and sale of coal by owners of coal mines. Therefore, what you may think about it, they are surely entitled to have their point of view put forward I should have thought a Government of the com plexion of the present Government would have conceded the point of view which we have put forward, that in any district where there is an acute difference of opinion, it is not fair to say that one vote, and one vote only—[Interruption.]—shall decide in regard to the schemes which, under this Bill, can be put into operation by the Board of Trade. [An HON. MEMBER: "That is democracy!"] I could say a good deal about that in its place. We put down an Amendment that it should be a vote of 75 per cent., but the present Amendment asks for 60 per cent., and I am not going to quarrel about the figure; but, if the Bill is to work at all—and do not let the Government make any mistake about this—in every one of the districts they must get the cooperation of the owners as well as that of the men. If you put it down to one vote, that is, 51 per cent. as against 49 per cent.—[Interruption.] If you do that, you are from the point of view of the Government inviting difficulties which you can easily avoid. I take a different attitude. I say that it is not fair in any district to say that a decision of this sort should be arrived at by such a narrow majority. We know from the way in which voluntary schemes operate that there are certain owners who, though constituting a minority in a particular district, represent a very definite part of the industry, it may be a most important part of the industry, and it is not right to say that by a majority of one you should—[Interruption.]

Major DAVIES

Mr. Dunnico, will you ask hon. Members opposite to refrain from their tendency to interrupt?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

Will the hon. and gallant Member allow me to do my job?

Mr. EVANS

All I say is that it is not fair in any particular district to say that by that narrow margin there shall be imposed upon men who represent a very important part of the industry in a district the burden—I think it will be a burden in their case—of the obligations imposed in this Bill.

Captain CAZALET

The President of the Board of Trade told us this afternoon that already 16 out of the 21 districts had produced schemes. Can he tell us whether in those schemes 50 or 60 or

70 per cent. of the owners agree? If there is a majority of 60 or over he really has not to make a concession in agreeing to this Amendment, and if there is only a bare majority of 51, it is all the more reason for us to press this Amendment. The Liberal party asked for 75 per cent., and we are asking for only 60 per' cent., and as the Liberal party have agreed to support us in the matter I think the right hon. Gentleman might come forward and meet us.

Mr. ALBERY

I have one more point to put to the President of the Board of Trade. There is no virtue in a voluntary scheme if it is not to a large extent an agreed scheme, and I ask if the Committee can imagine any scheme which would be less an agreed scheme than one where there are 49 per cent. against it and 51 per cent. for it. Nothing would make less for good feeling and good work than forcing through such a scheme. If there were such a division in the district it would be better if the Board took upon their own shoulders the responsibility of preparing a scheme, because a scheme they enforce will be more readily worked than one over which there is an acute division of opinion. I can, however, understand the sensitiveness of the Government on the point, because when we remember the narrow majority with which the vital Clauses of the Bill have been thrown on the country, it is understandable that they should want to stick fast to a bare majority proposal.

Question put, "That the word 'half stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 236; Noes, 177.

Division No. 211.]	AYES.	[11.29 p.m.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Broad, Francis Alfred	Cocks, Frederick Seymour.
Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher	Brockway, A. Fenner	Compton, Joseph
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Bromfield, William	Daggar, George
Alpass, J. H.	Bromley, J.	Dallas, George
Ammon, Charles George	Brooke, W.	Dalton, Hugh
Angell, Norman.	Brothers, M.	Davies. Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Arnott, John	Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Minefield)	Day, Harry
Ayles, Walter	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Denman, Hon. R. D.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Dukes, C.
Barnes, Alfred John	Buchanan, G.	Duncan, Charles
Batey, Joseph	Burgess, F. G.	Ede, James Chuter
Bellamy, Albert	Caine, Derwent Hall-	Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedweiltyl
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Cameron, A. G.	Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff. Central)	Cape, Thomas	Egan, W. H.
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Forgan, Dr. Robert
Benson, G.	Charleton, H. C.	Freeman, Peter
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Chater, Daniel	Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Church, Major A. G.	Gurdner, J. P. (Hammersmith. N.)
Bowen, J. W.	Clarke, J. S.	Gibbins, Joseph
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Cluse, W. S.	Gibson. H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)
Gill, T. H.	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sanders, W. S.
Gillett, George M.	Lunn, William	Sandham, E.
Gossling, A. G.	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Sawyer, G. F.
Gould, F.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Scurr, John
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Sexton, James
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	McElwee, A.	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	McEntee, V. L.	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	McKinlay, A.	Sherwood, G. H.
Groves, Thomas E.	McShane, John James	Shield, George William
Grundy, Thomas W.	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thamptnn)	Shiels, Dr. Drummon
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Mansfield, W.	Shillaker, J. F.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Marcus, M.	Simmons, C. J.
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Markham, S. F.	Sinkinson, George
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Marley, J.	Sinkinson, George
Hardie, George D.	Marshall, Fred	Smith, Alfred (Sundorland)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Mathers, George	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Haycock, A. W.	Matters, L. W.	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Hayday, Arthur	Maxton, James	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Hayes, John Henry	Melville, Sir James	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Messer, Fred	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Middleton, G.	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Mills, J. E.	Sorensen, R.
Herriotts, J.	Milner, J.	Stamford. Thomas W.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Montague, Frederick	Stephen, Campbell
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Hoffman, P. C.	Morley, Ralph	Strauss, G. R.
Hollins, A.	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Sullivan, J.
Hopkin, Daniel	Mort, D. L.	Sutton, J. E.
Horrabin, J. F.	Moses, J. J. H.	Taylor R. A. (Lincoln)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Isaacs, George	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Thorne, W. (West Ham. Plaistow)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Muff, G.	Thurtle, Ernest
John, William (Rhondda, West)	Murnin, Hugh	Tinker. John Joseph
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Naylor, T. E.	Toole, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Townend, A. E.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Noel Baker, P. J.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.	Oldfield, J. R.	Turner, B.
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Vaughan, D. J.
Kelly, W. T.	Palin, John Henry.	Viant, S. P.
Kennedy, Thomas	Paling, Wilfrid	Wallace, H. W.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Kinley, J.	Perry, S. F.	Wellock, Wilfred
Lang, Gordon	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Phillips, Dr. Marion	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Lathan, G.	Potts, John S.	West, F. R.
Law, A. (Rosendale)	Price. M. P.	Westwood, Joseph
Lawrence, Susan	Quibell, D. J. K.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Rathbone. Eleanor	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Lawson, John James	Raynes. W. R.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Richards. R.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Leach, W.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Lees, J.	Ritson, J.	Wilson. R. J. (Jarrow)
Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Lloyd, C. Ellis	Romeril, H. G.	Wise, E. F.
Logan, David Gilbert	Rosbotham, D. S. T.	Wright, W. (Ruthcrglen)
Longbottom, A. W.	Rowson, Guy
Longden, F.	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
		Mr. Whiteley and Mr. T. Henderson.
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Cot. Charles	Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Davies, Dr. Vernon
Albery, Irving James	Brown, Brig. Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)	Butler, R. A.	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Ashley, Lt.-Col Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Carver, Major W. H.	Dixey, A. C.
Aske, Sir Robert	Castle Stewart, Earl of	Duckworth, G. A. V.
Atholl, Duchess of	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Balnlel, Lord	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Edmondson, Major A. J.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Elliot, Major Walter E.
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)	Christie, J. A.	England, Colonel A.
Bird. Ernest Roy	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Birkett, W. Norman	Colman, N- C. D.	Evans. Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Blindell, James	Colville. Major D. J.	Everard, W. Lindsay
Boothby, R. J. G.	Courtauld, Major J. S.	Falle, Sir Bertrim G.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.	Crichton-Stuart. Lord C.	Ferguson, Sir John
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Fison, F. G. Clavering
Boyce, H. L.	Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol. West)	Foot, Isaac.
Bracken, B.	Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Braithwaite, Major A. N.	Dalkeith, Earl of	Gault. Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Brass, Captain Sir William	Dalrymple-Whlte, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	George. Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)

Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (1. of W.)	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Glassey, A. E.	Mac Robert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Gower, Sir Robert	Mander, Geoffrey le M.	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N. J	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Savery, S. S.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Scott, James
Gray, M liner	Mason, Colonel Glyn K.	Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Greene, W. P. Crawford	Merriman, Sir F. Boyd	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Millar, J. D.	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Mond, Hon. Henry	Skelton, A. N.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Smithers, Waldron
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Morrison, W. S, (Glos., Cirencester)	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Muirhead, A. J.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland;	Nathan, Major H. L.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Hanbury, C.	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Hartington, Marquess of	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	O'Neill, Sir H.	Thomson, Sir F.
Haslam, Henry C.	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Henderson, Capl. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Owen, H. F. (Hereford)	Train, J.
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Peake, Capt. Osbert	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Peters, Dr. Sidney John	Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Power, Sir John Cecil	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Pybus, Percy John	Warrender, Sir Victor
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Ramsay, T. B. Wilton	Wayland, Sir William A.
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Ramsbotham, H.	Wells, Sydney R.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	White, H. G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent. Ashford)	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell	Windsor-dive, Lieut.-Colonel George
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Ross, Major Ronald O.	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.	Womersley, W. J.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Morton)	Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Russell. Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)
Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Liewellin, Major J. J.	Salmon, Major I.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Long, Major Erie	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Major Sir George Hennessy and Sir George Penny-

Mr. W. GRAHAM

I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

I wish to say a word as to the arrangements with regard to business. The position is one of some difficulty, and I should like to ask hon. Members opposite as to their views on the course to be pursued. The Government cannot devote more than another day to the Committee stage, or, alternatively, four days for the remainder of the Bill, by which I mean the completion of the Committee stage and Report and Third Reading. If we continue to-night the time will be occupied, of course, with Clause 1, and the remaining Clauses, raising large questions, will be begun on Tuesday, with probably a long sitting, to deal with important matters which, in my opinion, ought to be taken at a comparatively early hour. I would strongly urge hon. Members opposite to agree to such an arrangement which, I think, will be in the general interest in the hope that we shall complete the Committee stage on Tuesday, with perhaps not too long a sitting, but with a long sitting if that is absolutely unavoidable. That would leave us two days for the Report stage and one for the Third Reading.

I make this as an alternative suggestion, that if we could complete the Committee stage in another day, that is at one sitting, we should nevertheless have an understanding that, if additional time is required to complete the Committee stage, the aggregate time to be devoted to the remaining stages of the Bill should not exceed four days. That, I think, is a very fair offer, having regard to the long discussions which we have had in Committee. I have never complained of the course that these long discussions have taken. This is a very important Bill, and I do not suggest, apart from the inevitable incidents of Parliamentary warfare, that any time has been wasted. The Government have suspended the Eleven o'clock Rule on two or three occasions, but, in practice, we have never used it. We have risen at or about Eleven o'clock. That is the position frankly and bluntly, and I think that in the general interest, having regard to the very long time that we have devoted to the Bill, we might very well reach an agreement on the alternatives I now propose.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

The right hon. Gentleman has said with truth that he has been very reasonably met on this Bill hitherto. I am sure it will be the general desire of the Committee, and indeed it was the undertaking of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we should not enter upon important phases of the Bill at a time when they cannot be adequately debated and dealt with, and I am sure, however late we sat to-night, we could not effectively conclude the Committee stage, which is really the important stage of the Bill. If we are to deal even reasonably with the very important matters that still stand on the Order Paper, as well as with the right hon. Gentleman's proposals in detail, we certainly must have two full days for the remainder of the Committee stage. But it is very difficult, as I am sure he will realise when we are only on the first Clause, and when we do not in the least know how the Bill may emerge, what concessions may be made, and what Amendments may be carried, to make an agreement as to how long it will be necessary to occupy on Report. It would be very much easier if we were approaching the end of the Committee stage. It may be that the Bill will require more consideration on Report than would appear at present.

I do not think a proposal of merely two days for Report and Third Reading is reasonable. It would be a more generous proposal, as far as the Opposition is concerned, if we had two more days for the Committee stage, and were to be given two days and a half for the Report and Third Reading. We should then be in a position to take as much time as was required or the whole of the second day on Report. That certainly will be necessary. Until we see how the Bill emerges, it is very difficult for anyone to declare how much of the second day would be required for the Report stage. If we have two days more for Committee and two days and a half for the Report and Third Reading, there will be an opportunity of taking, if necessary, two days on Report, or one day and as much of the second day as is required, and then giving us the balance, whether it be a day, or half a day on one day and half a day on the next day for Third Reading. That would mean four days and a half altogether, and, if that meets with the approval of the Liberal party as well, I think the President of the Board of Trade will appreciate the fact that we are not asking for more time than should reasonably be given.

Sir H. SAMUEL

We on these benches are very anxious to facilitate business. At the same time, it is quite impossible, I think, that the Committee stage can be finished in one day. I entirely associate myself with what has just fallen from the lips of the right hon. Gentleman. There are still 13 pages of the Bill to be got through and 14 pages of Amendments after allowing for a number of Amendments which are to be taken off the Paper. There are several important matters still to be discussed, such as the powers to fix prices, the levy for the subsidy of exports, the question of bunker coal, the quota system, differentiating prices for gas, electricity and ancillary undertakings, and certain minor points. It is, I am sure, out of the question for the Committee to deal with all these matters in one day, and we must support the suggestion that two more days are essential for Committee. With regard to the remaining stages, the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman is a very fair and reasonable one, that there should be two days and a half to be divided between the Report and Third Reading as the necessities of the case may require. I trust that the Government may agree to that, and then, by general consent, the progress of business will be accelerated.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

In view of the statements which have been made by the two right hon. Gentlemen, I may now describe the position as follows: To-night we clear off almost immediately, or very shortly, the remainder of Clause 1. We must at least agree to that. As regards the other arrangements, the right hon. Gentleman has suggested two days instead of the one day which we had provided for the remainder of the Committee stage. I suggest that that proposal should be adopted, and that two days and a-half should be allowed for Report and Third Reading. The only difference in regard to my alternative is that there has been added half a day, that is, four days and a-half for all the remaining stages of the Bill instead of four days. On that basis, the Government are willing to meet the two sections of the Opposition. I therefore beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion and to suggest that without delay we should clear off the remainder of Clause 1 and proceed with the Committee stage and the Report and Third Reading on Tuesday.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Captain PEAKE

I beg to move, in page 2, line 23, after the second word "of," to insert the words "a substantial number of coal mines in."

It falls to my good fortune to propose this, the first of two Amendments standing in my name, the effect of which on the Bill is so slight, that I believe the right hon. Gentleman has seen his way to accept them. In the circumstances, I will not detain the Committee by giving a long explanation of what is a very small point.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 2, line 28, leave out the words "the district" and insert instead thereof the words "those coal mines."—[Captain Peake.]

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

There are a number of Amendments standing in the name of the President of the Board of Trade and other hon. Members which raise substantially the same issue. The first of them is in page 2, line 41, to leave out from the word "appoint," to the word "except" in line 43, and to insert instead thereof the word "being." I think it may be the wish of the Committee to have a general discussion on these Amendments which deal with substantially the same question.

Mr. W. GRAHAM

I beg to move, in page 2, line 41, to leave out from the word "appoint," to the word "(except," in line 43, and insert instead thereof the word "being."

This point deals with a change of dates due to the fact that last week we provided consequentially that schemes should come into force on a date not sooner than one month and not later than three months after the passing of the Act. That leaves a period of three months for the process of the Act coming into force.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

As the Committee defeated an Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for South Paddington (Commodore King) to give an increased time before the operation of a scheme, and as the original proposal of the President of the Board of Trade stands, I think this a consequential Amendment which the House will accept.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 3, line 2, leave from the word "scheme ") to the second word "and" in line 3, and insert instead thereof the words a date not less than one month nor more than three months after the passing of this Act."—[Mr. W. Graham.]

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER

I beg to move, in page 3, line 20, after the first word "any" to insert the word "central."

The object of this Amendment and other Amendments is to ensure that the schemes, the central scheme and the district schemes, shall be embodied in an Order, and that that Order shall be laid before the House. Our intention is that the central scheme, which is the main proposal, shall require a positive Resolution of the House, and that the district schemes shall be made in an Order which will have effect unless a Prayer has been carried in either House against it. There is a great precedent for having important Orders laid in this House so that the House may have an opportunity of considering the proposals and, if necessary, challenging them. In view of the fact that the Amendment moved by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown), asking that the schemes should be published and that the public should have an opportunity of lodging a complaint and being heard, was rejected, it is all the more important that the House should see these schemes before they are carried into effect.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I am sorry that we cannot accept this Amendment. This Bill provides in very great detail what the schemes shall contain. The provisions of the central scheme are set out in Clause 2, and the provisions that are to be contained in the district schemes are set out in Clause 3. These matters will be discussed, and we shall discuss what is and what is not to be contained in these schemes. We make provision in the Bill for laying before the House any departures from these schemes. If a scheme proposes to go outside the matters specifically enumerated in the Bill, it is to be laid before the House. The Government regret that they are unable to accept the Amendment but the Committee will appreciate the fact that great detail is provided when we come to discuss Clauses 2 and 3.

12.0 m.

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM

The Attorney-General has not satisfied me in the least, and I hope he has not satisfied any of the Committee. Here we have a central scheme for fixing the tonnage for the whole of Great Britain, but nobody knows any of the details, the amount of the tonnage, the amount of the levy, or anything else; and Parliament will never see it. It is monstrous that a scheme of this importance affecting such enormous interests should be given statutory effect without Parliament having the opportunity of seeing it or objecting to it. The same observations apply to the district schemes. Under a district scheme a man may be fined £100 by his fellows; and Parliament may never see the scheme. How the Attorney-General can say that these schemes are properly dealt with without Parliament having an opportunity of considering them passes my comprehension.

Captain HUDSON

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will press this Amendment. It is necessary to have some Parliamentary control. In the Amendment you have a positive proposal in connection with the central scheme and merely a negative proposal in connection with a district scheme. It takes away the bureaucratic control and substitutes Parliamentary control.

Sir H. SAMUEL

I do not propose to go into the general merits of the proposal, but to give one reason why we on these benches cannot vote for the Amendment. It is a point of considerable substance. The Amendment would give to the other House of Parliament a veto upon the administrative actions of the Board of Trade, and we cannot agree to that for various reasons. It is unnecessary to argue the large constitutional question, but I wish to say this in order to explain why we cannot in any case support the Amendment.

Question put, "That the word 'central' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 111; Noes, 235.

Division No. 212.]	AYES.	[12.3 a m.
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Albery, Irving James	Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Power, Sir John Cecil
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Ramsbotham, H.
Atholl. Duchess of	Gower, Sir Robert	Richardson. Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)
Balniel, Lord	Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Beamish. Bear-Admiral T. P. H.	Grattan-Doyle. Sir N.	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Renneil
Bird, Ernest Roy	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Boothby, R. J. G.	Gretton. Colonel Rt. Hon. John	Ruggles-Brise. Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Salmon, Major I.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Samuel. Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Boyce, H. L.	Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Bracken, B.	Hanbury, C.	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Braithwaite, Major A. H.	Hartington, Marquess of	Savery, S. S.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Haslam, Henry C.	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Skelton, A. N.
Butler, R. A.	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Carver, Major W. H.	Hills. Major Rt. Hon. John Waller	Smithers, Waldron
Castle Stewart, Earl of	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Colville, Major A. J.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Lare Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C	Leighton, Major B. E. P.	Thomson, Sir F.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.	Llewellin. Major J. J.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)	Long, Major Eric	Todd, Capt. A. J.
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Macdonald. Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Train, J.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Ward. Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)	Merriman, Sir F. Boyd	Warrender, Sir Victor
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Mond, Hon. Henry	Wayland. Sir William A.
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Wells, Sydney R.
Dugdale. Capt. T. L.	Moore. Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Morrison. W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Elliot, Major Walter E.	Muirhead. A. J.	Wolmer. Rt. Hon. Viscount
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-S. M.)	O'Neill. Sir H.	Womersley, W. J.
Everard. W. Lindsay	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Peake, Capt. Osbert	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Penny, Sir George	Major Sir George Hennessy and Captain Wallace.
NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayday, Arthur	Perry, S. F.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Hayes, John Henry	Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Alpass, J. H.	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Ammon, Charles George	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Potts, John S.
Angell, Norman	Herriotts, J.	Price, M. P.
Arnott, John	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Pybus, Percy John
Aske, Sir Robert	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Quibell. D. J. K.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hollins, A.	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Batey, Joseph	Hopkin. Daniel	Rathbone, Eleanor
Bellamy, Albert	Horrabin, J. F.	Raynes, W. R.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Richards, R.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Isaacs, George	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Benson, G.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tee")
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Ritson, J.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Johnston, Thomas	Romeril, H. G.
Bowen, J. W.	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Rowson, Guy
Brockway, A. Fenner	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Bromfield, William	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Bromley, J.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Brooke, W.	Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Sanders, W. S.
Brothers, M.	Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)	Sandham, E.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Kelly, W. T.	Sawyer, G. F.
Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Kennedy, Thomas	Scott, James
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Kinley, J.	Scurr, John
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton. West)	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Buchanan, G.	Lang, Gordon	Sherwood, G- H.
Burgess, F. G.	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Shield, George William
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Lathan, G.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Cape, Thomas	Law, A. (Rosendate)	Shillaker, J. F.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Lawrence, Susan	Simmons, C. J.
Charleton, H. C.	Lawne, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Sinkinson, George
Chater, Daniel	Lawson, John James	Sitch, Charles H.
Church, Major A. G.	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Clarke, J. S.	Leach, W.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Compton, Joseph	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Daggar, George	Lees, J.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Dallas, George	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Dalton, Hugh	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Logan, David Gilbert	Sorensen, R.
Day, Harry	Longden, F.	Stamford, Thomas W.
Denman, Hon. R. D.	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Stephen, Campbell
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Dukes, C.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Strauss, G. R.
Ede, James Chuter	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Sullivan, J.
Edmunds, J. E.	McKinlay, A.	Sutton, J. E.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	McShane. John James	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Egan, W. H.	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
England, Colonel A.	Mansfield, W.	Thurtie, Ernest
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Marcus, M.	Tinker, John Joseph
Foot, Isaac	Markham, S. F.	Tout, W. J.
Forgan, Dr. Robert	Marley, J.	Townend, A. E.
Freeman, Peter	Marshall, Fred	Turner, B.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Mathers, George	Vaughan, D. J.
Gibbins, Joseph	Matters, L. W.	Viant. S. P.
Gibson. H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)	Maxton, James	Wallace, H. W.
Gill, T. H.	Messer, Fred	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline).
Gillett, George M.	Millar, J. D.	Wellock, Wilfred
Glassey, A. E.	M liner, J.	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Gossling, A. G.	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Gould, F.	Morley, Ralph	Westwood, Joseph
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	White. H. G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Mort, D. L.	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Gray, Milner	Moses, J. J. H.	Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamoraan)	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	Muff, G.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Murnin, Hugh	Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Groves, Thomas E.	Nathan. Major H. L.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Grundy, Thomas W.	Newman. Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Noel Baker, P. J.	Wise, E. F.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Oldfield, J. R.	Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hardie, George D.	Palin, John Henry	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. A. Barnes.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville	Paling, Wilfrid
Haycock, A. W.	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)

Motion made, and Question put, That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 207; Noes, 137.

Division No. 213.]	AYES.	[12.13 a.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayes, John Henry	Perry, S. F.
Adamson. W. M. (Staff., Cannock)	Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')	Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)	Phillips, Dr. Marion
Alpass, J. H.	Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)	Potts, John S.
Ammon, Charles George	Herriotts, J.	Price, M. P.
Angell, Norman	Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)	Quibell, D. J. K.
Arnott, John	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Rathbone, Eleanor
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)	Hollins, A.	Raynes, W. R.
Barnes, Alfred John	Hopkin, Daniel	Richards, R.
Batey, Joseph	Horrabin, J. F.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Bellamy, Albert	Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)	Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Bonn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood	Isaacs, George	Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Ritson, J.
Benson, G.	John, William (Rhondda, West)	Romeril, H. G.
Bentham, Dr. Ethel	Johnston, Thomas	Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Rowson, Guy
Bowen, J. W.	Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)	Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Jowitt. Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.	Sarders, W. S.
Brockway, A. Former	Kelly, W. T.	Sandham, E.
Bromfield, William	Kennedy, Thomas	Sawyer, G. F.
Bromley, J.	Kinley, J.	Scurr, John
Brooke, W.	Lang, Gordon	Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Brothers, M.	Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George	Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)	Lathan, G.	Sherwood, G. H.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Law, A. (Rosendale)	Shield, George William
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)	Lawrence, Susan	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Buchanan, G.	Lawr'c, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)	Shillaker, J. F.
Burgess, F. G.	Lawson, John James	Simmons, C. J.
Caine, Derwent Hall-	Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)	Sinkinson, George
Cape, Thomas	Leach, W.	Sitch, Charles H.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)	Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)	Smith. Alfred (Sunderland)
Charleton, H. C.	Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rothtrhlthe
Chater, Daniel	Lees, J.	Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Church, Major A. G.	Lewis, T. (Southampton)	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Clarke, J. S.	Lloyd, C. Ellis	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour	Logan, David Gilbert	Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Compton, Joseph	Longden, F	Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Daggar, George	Lovat-Fraser, J. A.	Sorensen, R.
Dallas, George	Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)	Stamford, Thomas W.
Dalton, Hugh	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)	Stephen, Campbell
Day, Harry	MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)	Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Denman, Hon. R. D.	McKinlay, A.	Strauss, G. R.
Dukes, C.	McShane, John James	Sullivan, J.
Ede, James Chuter	Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)	Sutton, J. E.
Edmunds, J. E.	Mansfield, W.	Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)	Marcus, M.	Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Egan, W. H.	Markham, S. F.	Thurtle, Ernest
Freeman, Peter	Marley, J.	Tinker, John Joseph
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)	Marshall, Fred	Tout, W. J.
Gibbins, Joseph	Mathers, George	Townend, A. E.
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)	Matters, L. W.	Turner, B.
Gill, T. H.	Maxton, James	Vaughan, D. J.
Gillett, George M.	Messer, Fred	Viant. S. P.
Gossling, A. G.	Milner, J.	Wallace, H. W.
Gould, F.	Morgan, Dr. H. B.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline).
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Morley, Ralph	Wellock, Wilfred
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)	Welsh, James (Paisley)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)	Mort, D. L.	Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Moses, J. J. H.	Westwood, Joseph
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)	Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Groves, Thomas E.	Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)	Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Grundy, Thomas W.	Muff, G.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Murnin, Hugh	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Wilson. J. (Oldham)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)	Noel Baker, P. J.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)	Oldfield, J. R.	Winterton, G. E,(Leicester, Loughb'gh;
Hardie, George D.	Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)	Wise, E. F.
Hastings. Dr. Somerville	Palin, John Henry
Haycock, A. W.	Paling, Wilfrid	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Hayday, Arthur	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. William Whiteley.

NOES.
Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles	Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Albery, Irving James	Boyce, H. L.	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Bracken, B.	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Aske, Sir Robert	Braithwaite, Major A. N.	Colville, Major D. J.
Atholl, Duchess of	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th't'd., Hexham)	Courtauld, Major J. S.
Balniel, Lord	Brown, Ernest (Leith)	Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.	Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Crcom-Johnson, R. P.
Bird, Ernest Roy	Butler, R. A.	Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Boothby, R. J. G.	Carver, Major W. H.	Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft	Castle Stewart, Earl of	Dalkeith, Earl of

Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)	Hunter, Dr. Joseph	Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.	Ross, Major Ronald D.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)	Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)	Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)	Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Duckworth, G. A. V.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Salmon, Major I.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.	Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)	Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.	King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Edmondson. Major A. J.	Lamb, Sir J. Q.	Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Elliot, Major Walter E.	Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)	Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
England, Colonel A.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Savery, S. S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)	Lieweillin, Major J. J.	Scott, James
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Long, Major Eric	Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Everard, W. Lindsay	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Skelton, A. N.
Faile, Sir Bertram G.	Margesson, Captain H. D.	Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Foot, Isaac	Marjoribanks, E. C.	Smithers, Waldron
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Merriman, Sir F. Boyd	Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Millar, J. D.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)	Mond, Hon. Henry	Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Giassey, A. E.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.	Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Glyn, Major R. G. C.	Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)	Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Gower, Sir Robert	Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)	Muirhead, A. J.	Train, J.
Gray, Milner	Nathan, Major H. L.	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Greene, W. P. Crawford	Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)	Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Griffith. F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)	O'Neill, Sir H.	Warrender, Sir Victor
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William	Wayland, Sir William A.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.	Owen. H. F. (Hereford)	Wells, Sydney R.
Hammersley, S. S.	Peake, Capt. Osbert	White, H. G.
Hanbury, C.	Penny, Sir George	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Hartington, Marquess of	Peters, Dr. Sidney John	Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Haslam, Henry C.	Power, Sir John Cecil	Womersley, W. J.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Pybus, Percy John	Wood, Major McKenzle (Banff)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.	Ramsbotham. H.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Sir Frederick Thomson and Captain Wallace.

Resolved, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—[Mr. T. Kennedy.]

Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Tuesday next, 18th March.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Wednesday evening, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Twenty-three Minutes after Twelve o'Clock.