HC Deb 13 May 1930 vol 238 cc1771-91

I beg to move, in page 7, line 37, at the end, to insert the words: Provided that—

  1. (a) section six of the Lunacy Act, 1890, shall apply to all pauper patients;
  2. (b) any person appointed by the patient to be present at the consideration of the petition under sub-section (3) of section six of the Lunacy Act, 1890, shall have the right to make representations on behalf of the patient."
This Amendment will, I think, command the sympathy of Members on all sides. I notice that when the Bill was introduced in another place it was stated by the Noble Lord who moved it that some useful Amendments might be suggested, and that, if that were so, he need hardly say that they would welcome them. I suggest that this is one of the Amendments which should be accepted by the Front Bench. Its purpose is really a very simple one, to give to any rate-aided patient exactly the same privileges as are at present enjoyed by any private patient; in other words, it is an Amendment to secure the emancipation of the poor in the sense that they are given privileges which are at present enjoyed principally by the rich. The first words of the principal Act are: Subject to the exceptions in this Act mentioned, a person, not being a pauper or a lunatic, shall, etc., and a pauper or a lunatic is expressly exempted from the provisions of Section 6 of that Act. Those provisions are designed to safeguard the interests of the patient. The judicial authority, for example, shall consider whether the statement or allegation in the petition calls for his personal investigation, and he can, if he thinks fit, give to the petitioner notice of the time and the place for the consideration of the petition. It also enables him to visit, if he so desires, the alleged lunatic in order to discover for himself the state of mind of the patient, and it provides that any person, other than the doctor, who might be called the patient's "friend" can be present at the consideration of the petition. Obviously, these provisions were inserted in the principal Act to safeguard the liberties of people whom it might be designed to place in lunatic asylums for ulterior motives, and sometimes for financial gain. It has been argued against this suggestion that if there be no financial element at stake and no ulterior object to be served in the case of rate-aided patients, as may be the case with private patients detained in such institutions, there is no need to extend this provision.

I profoundly disagree. I can imagine circumstances in which a rate-aided patient may, for reasons of selfishness on the part of his relatives and friends, have steps taken against him for his incarceration in a mental hospital. There might be some financial advantage to them in obtaining the removal of a weak-willed person, and in common justice the privileges which are enjoyed by the well-to-do should be enjoyed by the poor.

It will be argued that this may be outside the scope of the Bill. It is not likely, however, that in this House for many years we shall have such an opportunity of dealing with this question, and if there be any rights which we can confer upon poor persons without injuring the general framework of the Bill, and without disturbing the equanimity of people who seem to take the attitude we must have the Bill, the whole Bill and nothing but the Bill, we should confer them. Frankly, I cannot congratulate those who have been responsible for this Bill on their tenderness of heart in making concessions, and in view of the concern of Members on all sides that this Bill shall confer as much protection as possible upon the people who are likely to come under it, I have confidence in asking the House to support the Amendment, and in asking the Minister to accept it.

The second part of the Amendment says that the patient's "friends" shall have the right to make representation on behalf of the patient. That is the only safeguard that we are able to get in this Bill at all. We are asking a small thing, but it is not so small but that it might possibly be refused. If we asked for a bigger thing, we might get something conceded to us. This is an attempt to use the opportunity now before the House to confer upon the poor the privileges enjoyed by the well-to-do. I trust that no Members of a Labour Government will resist this, whatever may be the attitude of Members in other parts of the House. I urge on the Front Bench that this simple request should be conceded.


I beg to second the Amendment.

I do so for the sake of common fairness. Some hon. Members opposite have been so grossly maltreated by the Minister that it is right that on this occasion their point of view should be adequately and properly represented. I do not mean to say that the hon Member has not moved the Amendment adequately. I mean that we were singularly unfortunate in the fact that on the Committee we had only one hon. Member opposite who played a gallant part, and that many of them were unable to take a part in this fight for the liberty of the subject. The Amendment deals in the main with the poorest section of the community, and we ought to do everything we can to give those people a chance to get out of these places if they recover their health. A second point I would like to make is that all through this Bill we have been in the unfortunate position of having to deal with a main Act some 40 years of age. If the Minister would realise the position in regard to this Amendment, and would do what the Mover of it asked him to do, that is, look at the position from the human point point of view, he would see that it is one which could be easily accepted and would confer a benefit on the section of the people least able to look after themselves.


During the discussions on the Second Reading of the Bill I said that had it been possible I should have been very glad to do what is asked in this Amendment, because it is a complete assimilation of procedure in all its forms covering the lunacy laws of the various classes of mental patients; but I explained that it was not possible to do so because I wanted to achieve the maximum of accomplishment with the minimum of controversy. If this is the minimum of controversy, I tremble to think what I should have had to face if I had done otherwise. In this Bill we have put together all the least controversial matters and left out the things which would have meant controversy and a Bill of undue length and perplexity. It is because it would have raised opposition such as we have never seen in the course of this Bill that we left it out and concentrated on some of the major questions of assimilation. What have we done for the kind of persons my hon. Friend has in mind? We have succeeded in getting rid of the pauper stigma. Is that nothing? That is one of the big things this Bill has done. The next big thing is to make it possible for people who have hitherto had no other form of treatment than that which followed certification to get the same treatment as the well-to-do are receiving. Is it not something to have done that? [An HON. MEMBER: "Why not go further?]" I am trying to explain why. The reason we cannot go further is because this kind of simple Amendment would not meet the situation. The Bill would not be this length but three times this length, or even longer, and it would be dealing with a large number of things upon which public opinion is not in agreement to the extent that it is on the matters now dealt with in the Bill. I am not opposed to this Amendment but my objection to it is that if it were adopted with all the necessary consequential Amendments which would flow from it this Bill would never emerge from this House on its Third Reading. It is for the House to decide whether it proposes to kill the Bill by these Amendments or whether we should acept the most we can get and allow the Bill to go through all its stages.


The speech of the Minister of Health has left us in a, state of confusion. I want to know who is against this particular Amendment? The right hon. Gentleman said that if he accepted this Amendment the Bill would be more controversial than it is at the present time but I do not believe that that is possible. In any case there must be somebody in the House who can give reasons against this Amendment. If the right hon. Gentleman honestly thinks that these Amendments would help these people and that there is a strong feeling in this House against them I think he is right in the first assumption and mistaken in the second. What is the difficulty in the way of accepting this Amendment and allowing Section 6 of the Lunacy Act, 1890, to apply to all pauper patients? The right hon. Gentleman said this Amendment would arouse opposition but my opinion is that the only opposition which it would arouse would be in the Board of Control and not in this House. Take paragraph (b) of the Amendment which provides that any person appointed by the patient to be present at the consideration of the petition under sub-section (3) of section six of the Lunacy Act, 1890, shall have the right to make representations on behalf of the patient. Just look at what this Bill does. Clause 5 provides for temporary treatment without certification. Therefore the ternporary patient has inadequate safeguards. Under Sub-section (14) of Clause 5 the Board of Control may at any time order that steps shall be taken to deal with him under the principal Act as a person of unsound mind. That means that the Board of Control may have a temporary patient certified at any time. Surely we are right in saying that a person who is certified by the Board of Control with a certain amount of official backing should have the same right as an ordinary certified patient and should have someone to represent him. I cannot see why the patient should not have that right. The patient may originally be a voluntary patient and he may become a temporary patient, and all this time there is no legal right to prevent the action of the doctors. Surely under those circumstances we ought to give the Minister some control. I believe the right hon. Gentleman wants to have those powers and I believe that everybody in the House desires him to have those powers. I understand that the only objection which has been raised is that some persons, some vested interest is against that course but I do not think that the reply of the right hon. Gentleman on the point is complete and he ought to tell us not only who are the persons who are against these Amendments, but also the reasons why they are against them.


After the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, I hope the House will take him at his word and bestow this measure of kindness upon the Bill, because, if there is such a great deal in the matter of safeguarding the rights of these people, I feel that it is the duty of the Minister and of this House to drag that dark and obscure body of people who want to deny these people their rights into the limelight and expose them in this House. After the Minister's very able explanation, if the House does agree to this Amendment, I take it that there are no Members in any part of the House who would be capable, after voting for the Amendment, of opposing any alterations consequential on the carrying of the Amendment that were found to be necessary for its working. I know that, in cases where there is hot party feeling, all kinds of measures are taken to kill Bills, but I cannot believe that any group of Members would take that attitude on this Bill. I do not think that even the high medical authorities who corrected me on the last Amendment would descend to that kind of opposition. The position is that as the Bill stands, in order to obtain the undoubted advantages which my right hon. Friend has said are given by the Bill, and for which ample credit is due to him and all who have taken part in drafting it, it is necessary to observe a set of conditions which are, in the opinion of many of us, worse than the existing law on the subject. The stigma of being called a pauper is removed, but the fact of being made a prisoner will remain.

I do not think it is of any use putting forward the argument that advantages of this kind are of no use to people because they cannot get the benefit of them. I have here a copy of the evidence given before the Royal Commission by a very distinguished medical officer, who said: I do not think it is true of the insane that they have no sense. It is very rare to find that there is not one of them who will make it his business to investigate how the home is run. Further, after giving instances of the sense of these patients, he went on to say: That is the curious thing about these cases, that you cannot tell what will get them well in the way you can with the others, and that is why you want freedom for them more than for sane people. That, I think, expresses in very well chosen language what would, perhaps, be the medical interpretation of the uneasy feeling that has been obvious in this Debate among the lay members of the House and therefore I would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to allow us to vote freely upon this Amendment, with the knowledge that, if Members vote for it, they will certainly be prepared to support him in any difficulties which he may find in later stages of the Bill.


I beg to move "That the Debate be now adjourned."

I wish to ask the Government a question, namely, how far they intend to go on this Bill to-night? It is now approaching midnight, and we are engaged on a very highly complicated and technical piece of legislation. Nobody wants to kill the Bill, but I do not think it is fair to the House of Commons to ask the House, at this time of night, to legislate on this very complicated Measure: and it is far more unfair to those unfortunate people for whom we are trying to legislate.

Another reason is that we have not the advantage of the presence of either of the Law Officers. I am not making any great complaint about that, because I know that these gentlemen are extremely busy, but the discussion on this Amendment does show that the House needs here the assistance of a Law Officer. For these reasons I would beg the Leader of the House to assent to the Motion.


The Prime Minister announced earlier that it was his intention to take the first four Orders. This is the third. I hope the House will complete the Bill before we rise. There was not a voice raised against the Second Reading. It was regarded as in principle a Bill on which all parties could agree. It took us unfortunately 11 days to get it through Committee. We had one day on Report, when we did not complete one Clause. It is obvious that at this leisurely progress the Bill, which was warmly welcomed in all quarters of the House on Second Reading, is not going to be put on the Statute Book this Session. We have already reached a time when we must go forward, having gone so far, and do our best to complete the remaining stages.


The Bill had long consideration in another place before it came here. It was read a Second time in this House without a Division. We spent a very considerable time upon it upstairs, very much longer than the Government thought would have been taken over it. There is a general feeling that we have to shape it in conformity with the wishes and desires of the House. Many of the Amendments that have been moved to-night have been due to misapprehensions in regard to some of the Clauses. I think the right hon. Gentleman might have saved a little time if he had accepted the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman above the Gangway earlier. We feel that the Bill ought to be given facilities to be made an Act of Parliament as soon as possible.


I should like to make it clear that I spoke against the Bill on Second Reading, but I do not want anyone to think I am not trying to make something of it which will be of benefit to those for whom we are legislating. I want to dissociate myself from anything like obstructionist tactics. On no occasion have I been so impressed with the general absence of anything like party feeling or anger. It is in that sense that I rise to say that, if the Minister wishes to go on, I am prepared to go on on the understanding that he will try to accommodate us in our sincere desire to improve the Bill.


I should like to re-echo the remarks of my hon. Friend who has just sat down, because there has been a sincere desire in all parts of the House to make the best of this Bill. The Minister referred to the length of time taken upstairs in Committee, but the one idea was to make the Bill a good one. It is a very difficult and controversial Bill—not from the party point of view. It seems to me unfortunate that at this hour of the night we should be asked to carry on with a measure which so vitally concerns so many people. This is a Bill which requires a calm and deliberate consideration, and it is greatly to be regretted that the Minister has thought fit earlier on to apply the Closure to other Amendments upon which many Members on the other side were really seriously concerned. Instead of continuing the discussion in a calm, dispassionate atmosphere, he put on the party whips and herded them into the Division Lobby. If on so vitally important a Bill, Members are to be dragooned from Division to Division, it is not a course which is for the benefit of the people or of this House. I strongly support the Motion for the Adjournment, because I am sure it will be in the interests of the Bill itself.


With regard to the length of time taken in Committee, there has been no delay on the part of anybody who is anxious to improve the Bill. Hon. Members opposite did not take the opportunity of moving many of these Amendments in Committee, and therefore we are now discussing many new points which were not brought out in Committee. I dissociate myself from the remarks made by the hon. Member below me (Dr. Morris-Jones). The fact that these points were not discussed in Committee is all the more argument for continuing the discussion on another day.


I desire to support this Motion and to ask the Government whether in the interests of the Bill itself it would not be much better to adjourn the Debate. I am glad to see the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury is here, although the presence of one of the Law Officers was so fleeting. It has been pointed out that many of these points were not discussed in Committee at all. We have just now found an entirely new point which involves an important new element, and on which an Amendment was moved by an hon. Member opposite. For the sake of getting it discussed, I willingly seconded the Amendment. That is a position which shows there is a vast amount of goodwill in every quarter of the House in favour of the Bill as a whole. No one wants to see the Bill destroyed, but we all want to see certain things put into it. There is a genuine feeling among the rank and file in all quarters that certain things should be put in which are not in the Bill. Only just now the Minister himself referred to somebody who was opposed to the Bill, but it was not apparently anyone in the House itself. I have tried to be patient throughout the whole Debate and have listened to some personal abuse from the Minister and other people, but all through I have worked systematically to endeavour to make the Bill a better one. Many of those on this side and on the other side of the House, in their heart of hearts, agree with what I say.

The Leader of the right hon. Gentleman has said over and over again, that it is impossible at this hour of the night to make really good legislation, and surely under these circumstances, for the sake of the honour of his own Leader, the right hon. Gentleman ought to give way in order to enable us to take this Bill earlier in the day. It would be to the advantage of the right hon. Gentleman to allow us to have the adjournment now. He has not had a very long Parliamentary experience. I have rather a longer experience, and I would respectfully say to the Minister, who is a junior as far as his experience of this House is concerned, that if he forces the House to sit late into the night on a Bill, against certain of the provisions of which some of his supporters have very strong feelings, he will, sooner or later, bitterly regret his hard-hearted attitude.


I think that our views on the question of the Adjournment would be much clearer if we could settle one little point which arose after Question time to-day. When the Prime Minister moved the suspension of the Eleven o'clock Rule he said, in reply to questions from the right hon. Gentleman opposite, that some agreement had been come to on this Bill. Nearly all the Amendments which are to come on later in the Bill have been put down by hon. Members on the opposite side of the House. I should like to know whether the Prime Minister meant that an agreement had been reached on the doctors' Amendments which are to come, or whether he is under a misapprehension that the right hon. Gentleman had come to an agreement with us on this side? I do not gather that we have obtained any concessions at all. If there is agreement with the doctors, we need not adjourn and can go on with the Debate, but if there is not an agreement, we have a very long night before us.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE

I should like to call the attention of the Minister to the similarity between the present situation and the situation which obtained on the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Pensions Bill. I should have thought that the experience both of the Minister and of the Parliamentary Secretary on that occasion would have been sufficient to have enabled the Government to meet us on this point. The whole of this evening has been occupied mostly by Amendments moved from the opposite side of the House, and it appears to be the intention of the Government that our Amendments should be taken at a very late hour. Therefore we feel that an in- justice is being done to the Opposition. We have been very patient indeed while hon. Members opposite, some of whom were not on the Standing Committee upstairs, where many of us sat silently, have been bringing forward their Amendments, and we feel that we shall not receive justice if our Amendments are taken at this late hour.

12 m.

I hope the Minister of Health is going to give us some indication of his intentions with regard to the Bill, especially in view of the appeal made by the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood). If he does not intend to do so, I can assure him that Member after Member will rise to continue the Debate; and he knows, he has had plenty of experience, what we can do on this side in the way of opposition. If he meets the House in a proper spirit, in a pleasant and suave manner, not in a contentious and overbearing manner, we shall get on, but if the Parliamentary Secretary gets up in her schoolmistress way and says that we are to do exactly what the Government intends, I can promise her a rough passage. The Government is bringing this upon themselves. The hon. Lady has much more experience in these matters than I have, and I think it is up to her to set an example and present a ladylike spirit and that pleasant touch which is so necessary in the House of Commons. As one of the opposite sex I appeal to her—it is no use appealing to the Minister of Health—to show a nice ladylike manner and a desire to meet us in a proper spirit.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE

I do not know whether the Liberal party is in favour of the Motion for adjourning the Debate, but I should like to support it. The Prime Minister, when referring to the business, said that the first two Orders would take little time. As a matter of fact they were not completed until after eight o'clock and we are asked to take this stage of this important Bill at this late hour of the evening. On a former occasion the Prime Minister suggested that the House of Commons should act as a Council of State. On this Bill Amendments have been moved from both sides of the House and supported on both sides. No one has suggested that there has been any obstruction and I appeal to the Minister to accept the Motion for the Adjournment.

Several HON. MEMBERS rose

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


This is a very special Bill which deals with a class of persons who are the least able to look after themselves. In view of that fact it is advisable that the House should be in a judicial, calm and non-party frame of mind to deal with the Bill. Since the last Division two Amendments have been before the House; the Minister accepted one and he showed considerable sympathy with the other. Therefore, our efforts have not been useless or destructive, but designed to improve the Bill. By our decision to-night we may be inflicting very great hardship and injustice on persons who are helpless and unable to look after themselves. In view of these considerations, I support the Motion.


The attitude of the Minister of Health is putting the House in some difficulty. If the Prime Minister's pronouncement was made on the assumption that the first two Orders would take a very short time, that assumption was wrong. If his announcement was made on the assumption that there was any agreement between Members on this side of the House and the Government that assumption was wrong. The position at the present time is that there are some important Amendments yet to be moved, which will be pressed from this side, and when the present stage of the Bill is completed if the Minister seeks to go beyond, we shall have the Third Reading, on which the whole principle of the Bill can be debated. I suggest that it is not right at this time of night that the Government should force the Bill through in this way. I press for an announcement, from whoever is leading the House, whether it is intended to sit through the night.


It may be true that I am putting certain people in the House in a difficulty, but certain people have put me in a difficulty, and a large number of other Members will have to share the difficulty with me. I must press again the point that I made, that on the Second Reading it went through virtually as an agreed Bill, with a general chorus of praise, and it has had a substantial Committee stage. It is not true to say that many new points have been raised. There have been new Amendments but they relate to the old points that were thrashed to death in Committee. I must ask the House to consider the position in which we are placed. We are in the middle of May and we are dealing with a Bill which is substantially non-controversial, and which ought to have been through all its stages by now. I have no guarantee that if we were to give way to-night we should be in any different position later. I understand that the Prime Minister was quite clear about the four Orders, and in these circumstances I am prepared to sit through the night.

Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE

I want to make one point. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will realise that we have not yet taken a single Amendment from this side of the House. Each of the three Amendments which we have hitherto taken have been from the other side of the House, therefore, what the right hon. Gentleman proposes doing is to start the case of the Opposition at some time after ten minutes past twelve o'clock. We from this side have tried throughout the Committee stage to help the Bill through, because it was founded in the time of his predecessor, and we have met him on the Committee stage, but we have got certain points which we are still bound to make on the Report stage, and it is inconceivable that any Government should try to press through on the same night the Report stage and Third Reading when we only began the Opposition point of view at 12.30. I think that is a fresh consideration, and if the right hon. Gentleman and those who think with him will take that into account, they will see that it is a reasonable request to ask for an adjournment.


I regard this as a non-party Measure. Members on this side have supported it as whole- heartedly as any Member on the other side, so we are entitled to say that. It is on this ground that we claim to turn out the best possible Bill that can be turned out, and, for this reason, we support the Motion for the Adjournment. The Minister has said that the Bill occupied eleven days in Committee, and now he is trying to force it through the House in a few minutes. When we also remember that the Parliamentary Secretary has opposed an Amendment which the Minister, a few minutes later, accepted, we claim that we are making a reasonable request in asking for an adjournment, in order that we may be able to turn out a Measure that will be useful and lasting.


The Minister, when he spoke just now, referred to the Prime Minister's announcement after Questions to-day that he wanted the first four Orders on the Paper. As we are on the Motion for the Adjournment of the Debate I presume that I shall be in order if I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury to tell me, assuming that this Motion is lost, if he intends to proceed with the Overseas Trade Bill as well? The Prime Minister, at the end of Questions, said that the Overseas Trade Bill had no Amendment down to it, but since then I have had brought to my notice a point to cover which I shall have to put down an Amendment. I hope, if I hand it in, and give the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury a copy of it, he will tell me which Minister is in charge so as to allow me to send it to him. I have been in the House for six years and have tried to take an interest in its proceedings. I am jealous for the dignity of the House, and when a Motion for the Adjournment is moved by the chief Opposition Whip, at least some more responsible Minister should be here to take charge of the Debate.

Several HON. MEMBERS rose

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

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

The House divided: Ayes, 210; Noes, 73.

Division No. 291.] AYES. [10.33 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West) Bowen, J. W. Colfox, Major William Philip
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock) Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Altchison, Rt. Hon. Cralgle M. Broad, Francis Alfred Daggar, George
Alpass, J. H. Bromfield, William Dallas, George
Ammon, Charles George Bromley, J. Dalton, Hugh
Arnott, John Brothers, M. Davies, Dr. Vernon
Attlee, Clement Richard Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield) Dawson, Sir Philip
Ayles, Walter Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire) Denman, Hon. R. D.
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston) Burgess, F. G. Dickson, T.
Barnes, Alfred John Burgin, Dr. E. L. Dukes, C.
Barr, James Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland) Duncan, Charles
Batey, Joseph Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.) Ede, James Chuter
Bellamy, Albert Cameron, A. G. Edge, Sir William
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wodgwood Cape, Thomas Edmunds, J. E.
Bennett, Capt. E. N. (Cardiff, Central) Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.) Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Benson, G. Charleton, H. C. Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel Church, Major A. G. Elliot, Major Walter E.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale) Clarke, J. S. Elmley, Viscount
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret Cluse, W. S. Foot, Isaac
Forestier-Walker, Sir L. Lindley, Fred W. Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Freeman, Peter Lloyd, C. Ellis Rowson, Guy
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E. Logan, David Gilbert Salter, Dr. Alfred
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton) Longbottom, A. W. Sanders, W. S.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.) Lowth, Thomas Sawyer, G. F.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Lunn, William Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Gibbins, Joseph Macdonald, Gordon (Ince) Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley) McElwee, A. Sherwood, G. H.
Gill, T. H. McEntee, V. L. Shield, George William
Gillett, George M. McKinlay, A. Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Glassey, A. E. Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.) Shillaker, J. F.
Gossling, A. G. Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan) Shinwell, E.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) MacNeill-Weir, L. Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.) Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton) Simmons, C. J.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne). Mansfield, W. Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) March, S. Sinkinson, George
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.) Markham, S. F. Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool) Marley, J. Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Groves, Thomas E. Marshall, Fred Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Grundy, Thomas W. Mathers, George Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Gunston, Captain D. W. Matters, L. W. Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H. Merriman, Sir F. Boyd Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) Messer, Fred Snell, Harry
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Middleton, G. Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Millar, J. D. Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.) Mills, J. E. Sorensen, R.
Hardie, George D. Milner, Major J. Stamford, Thomas W.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon Montague, Frederick Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville Morgan, Dr. H. B. Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Haycock, A. W. Morley, Ralph Strauss, G. R.
Hayday, Arthur Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh) Sullivan, J.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.) Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.) Sutton, J. E.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow) Mort, D. L. Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield) Moses, J. J. H. Thomson, Sir F.
Herriotts, J. Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent) Tinker, John Joseph
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick) Tout, W. J.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth) Muff, G. Townend, A. E.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Muggeridge, H. T. Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Hoffman, P. C. Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) Vaughan, D. J.
Hopkin, Daniel Oldfield, J. R. Viant, S. P.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston) Walkden, A. G.
Isaacs, George Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon) Walker, J.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Palin, John Henry Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
John, William (Rhondda, West) Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) Wallace, H. W.
Johnston, Thomas Penny, Sir George Watkins, F. C.
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint) Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings) Wellock, Wilfred
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Perry, S. F. Welsh, James (Paisley)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Phillips, Dr. Marion Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. Picton-Turbervill, Edith West, F. R.
Kennedy, Thomas Pole, Major D. G. White. H. G.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton) Potts, John S. Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George Price, M. P. Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Lathan, G. Pybus, Percy John Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Law, Albert (Bolton) Quibell, D. J. K. Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Law, A. (Rosendale) Raynes, W. R. Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Lawrence, Susan Richards, R. Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Lawson, John James Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring) Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle) Riley, Ben (Dewsbury) Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)
Leach, W. Ritson, J. Womersley, W. J.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.) Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich) Young, R. S. (Islington, North)
Lees, J. Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Lewis, T. (Southampton) Romeril, H. G. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Paling.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel. Castle Stewart, Earl of Forgan, Dr. Robert
Albery, Irving James Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Aske, Sir Robert Chapman, Sir S. Gould, F.
Atkinson, C. Cocks, Frederick Seymour Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley) Colman, N. C. D. Gray, Milner
Balniel, Lord Colville, Major D. J. Greene, W. P. Crawford
Beaumont, M. W. Courtauld, Major J. S. Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham) Cranborne, Viscount Harris, Percy A.
Betterton, Sir Henry B. Crichton-Stuart, Lord C. Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Bird, Ernest Roy Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro) Haslam, Henry C.
Birkett, W. Norman Croom-Johnson, R. P. Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Blindell, James Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey Hurd, Percy A.
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W. Davies, E. C. (Montgomery) Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Braithwaite, Major A. N. Duckworth, G. A. V. Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Brown, Ernest (Leith) Edmondson, Major A. J. Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) England, Colonel A. Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West) Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.) Kinley, J.
Carver, Major W. H. Everard, W. Lindsay Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern) Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley) Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Leighton, Major B. E. P. Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple) Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Llewellin, Major J. J. Ramsay, T. B. Wilson Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Longden, F. Ramsbotham, H. Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Lovat-Fraser, J. A. Reid, David D. (County Down) Tinne, J. A.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness) Remer, John R. Todd, Capt. A. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall) Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M. Rothschild, J. de Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
McShane, John James Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A. Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Mander, Geoffrey le M. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth) Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Marjoribanks, E. C. Russell, Richard John (Eddlsbury) Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Meller, R. J. Salmon, Major I. Wise, E. F.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B. Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham) Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester) Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Muirhead, A. J. Scrymgeour, E. Colonel Wedgwood and Mr. Ernest Winterton.
Nathan, Major H. L. Simms, Major-General J.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge) Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Division No. 292.] AYES. [12.18 a.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West) Hayday, Arthur Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Altchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M. Hayes, John Henry Oldfield, J. R.
Alpass, J. H. Henderson, Arthur, Junr, (Cardiff, S.) Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Ammon, Charles George Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow) Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Arnott, John Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield) Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Aske, Sir Robert Herriotts, J. Paling, Wilfrid
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley) Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth) Perry, S. F.
Barnes, Alfred John Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Barr, James Hoffman, P. C. Potts, John S.
Batey, Joseph Hollins, A. Price, M. P.
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham) Hopkin, Daniel Pybus, Percy John
Bellamy, Albert Horrabin, J. F. Quibell, D. J. K.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood Hunter, Dr. Joseph Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Benson, G. Isaacs, George Rathbone, Eleanor
Bentham, Dr. Ethel Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Raynes, W. R.
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale) John, William (Rhondda, West) Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Birkett, W. Norman Johnston, Thomas Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Blindell, James Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne) Romeril, H. G.
Bowen, J. W. Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Broad, Francis Alfred Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Rothschild, J. de
Bromfield, William Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W. Rowson, Guy
Bromley, J. Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Brothers, M. Kennedy, Thomas Salter, Dr. Alfred
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield) Kinley, J. Sanders, W. S.
Brown, Ernest (Leith) Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton) Sandham, E.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire) Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George Sawyer, G. F.
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West) Lathan, G. Scrymgeour, E.
Burgess, F. G. Law, Albert (Bolton) Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Burgin, Dr. E. L. Law, A. (Rosendale) Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Cameron, A. G. Lawrence, Susan Sherwood, G. H.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.) Lawson, John James Shield, George William
Charleton, H. C. Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle) Shillaker, J. F.
Church, Major A. G. Leach, W. Simmons, C. J.
Clarke, J. S. Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.) Sinkinson, George
Cocks, Frederick Seymour Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern) Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Daggar, George Lees, J. Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Dallas, George Lewis, T. (Southampton) Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Dalton, Hugh Lindley, Fred W. Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery) Lloyd, C. Ellis Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Denman, Hon. R. D. Logan, David Gilbert Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Dickson, T. Longbottom A. W. Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Dukes, C. Longden, F. Sorensen, R.
Duncan, Charles Lovat-Fraser, J. A. Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Ede, James Chuter Lunn, William Strauss, G. R.
Edmunds, J. E. Macdonald, Gordon (Ince) Sullivan, J.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth) McElwee, A. Sutton, J. E.
Elmley, Viscount McEntee, V. L. Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Foot, Isaac McKinlay, A. Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton) McShane, John James Tinker, John Joseph
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.) Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton) Tout, W. J.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Mansfield, W. Townend, A. E.
Gibbins, Joseph Markham, S. F. Vaughan, D. J.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley) Marley, J. Viant, S. P.
Gill, T. H. Marshall, Fred Wallace, H. W.
Gillett, George M. Mathers, George Wellock, Wilfred
Glassey, A. E. Matters, L. W. Welsh, James (Paisley)
Gossling, A. G. Messer, Fred Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
Gould, F. Middleton, G. White, H. G.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) Mills, J. E. Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
Gray, Milner Milner, Major J. Whiteley, William (Blaydon)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne). Morgan, Dr. H. B. Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh) Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.) Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South) Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool) Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.) Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Groves, Thomas E. Mort, D. L. Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Grundy, Thomas W. Moses, J. J. H. Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent) Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick) Young, R. S. (Islington, North)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.) Muff, G.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville Nathan, Major H. L. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Haycock, A. W. Naylor, T. E. Mr. Parkinson and Mr. Charles Edwards.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel. Bracken, B. Courtauld, Major J. S.
Albery, Irving James Brass, Captain Sir William Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Balniel, Lord Brown, Brig,-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) Cranborne, Viscount
Beaumont, M. W. Carver, Major W. H. Crockshank, Capt. H. C.
Betterton, Sir Henry B. Castle Stewart, Earl of Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Bird, Ernest Roy Colman, N. C. D. Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Colville, Major D. J. Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford) Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P. Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Davies, Dr. Vernon Lamb, Sir J. Q. Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Dawson, Sir Philip Llewellin, Major J. J. Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Duckworth, G. A. V. Lymington, Viscount Smithers, Waldron
Elliot, Major Walter E. Marjoribanks, E. C. Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Ferguson, Sir John Merriman, Sir F. Boyd Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Ford, Sir P. J. Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B. Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Forestler-Walker, Sir L. Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester) Thomson, Sir F.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E. Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Muirhead, A. J. Todd, Capt. A. J.
Glyn, Major R. G. C. Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge) Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Gower, Sir Robert Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple) Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Greene, W. P. Crawford Ramsbotham, H. Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Gunston, Captain D. W. Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall) Womersley, W. J.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H. Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth) TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford) Salmon, Major I. Sir George Penny and Captain
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham) Euan Wallace.
Haslam, Henry C. Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)

Question put accordingly, "That the Debate be adjourned."

The House divided: Ayes, 73; Noes, 208.

Division No. 293.] AYES. [12.26 a.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel Elliot, Major Walter E. Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Albery, Irving James Ferguson, Sir John Ramsbotham, H.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley) Ford, Sir P. J. Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Balniel, Lord Forestier-Walker, Sir L. Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Beaumont, M. W. Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Betterton, Sir Henry B. Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Salmon, Major I.
Bird, Ernest Roy Glyn, Major R. G. C. Samuel. A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft Gower, Sir Robert Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Bracken, B. Greene, W. P. Crawford Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Brass, Captain Sir William Gunston, Captain D. W. Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y) Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H. Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Carver, Major W. H. Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) Smithers, Waldron
Castle Stewart, Earl of Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford) Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Colman, N. C. D. Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Colville, Major D. J. Haslam, Henry C. Thomson, Sir F.
Courtauld, Major J. S. Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P. Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. Lamb, Sir J. Q. Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Cranborne, Viscount Llewellin, Major J. J. Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Crookshank, Capt. H. C. Lymington, Viscount Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Croom-Johnson, R. P. Marjoribanks, E. C. Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West) Merriman, Sir F. Boyd Womersley, W. J.
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford) Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester) TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Davies, Dr. Vernon Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive Sir George Penny and Captain
Dawson, Sir Philip Muirhead, A. J. Euan Wallace.
Duckworth, G. A. V. Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West) Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.) Gray, Milner
Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M. Charleton, H. C. Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Alpass, J. H. Church, Major A. G. Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ammon, Charles George Clarke, J. S. Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Arnott, John Cocks, Frederick Seymour Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Aske, Sir Robert Daggar, George Groves, Thomas E.
Barnes, Alfred John Dallas, George Grundy, Thomas W.
Barr, James Dalton, Hugh Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Batey, Joseph Davies, E. C. (Montgomery) Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham) Denman, Hon. R. D. Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Bellamy, Albert Dickson, T. Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood Dukes, C. Haycock, A. W.
Benson, G. Duncan, Charles Hayday, Arthur
Bentham, Dr. Ethel Ede, James Chuter Hayes, John Henry
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale) Edmunds, J. E. Henderson, Arthur, Junr, (Cardiff, S.)
Birkett, W. Norman Edwards, E. (Morpeth) Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Blindell, James Elmley, Viscount Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Bowen, J. W. Foot, Isaac, Herriotts, J.
Broad, Francis Alfred Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton) Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Bromfield, William Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.) Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Bromley, J. George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Hoffman, P. C.
Brothers, M. Gibbins, Joseph Hollins, A.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield) Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley) Hopkin, Daniel
Brown, Ernest (Leith) Gill, T. H. Horrabin, J. F.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire) Gillett, George M. Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West) Glassey, A. E. Isaacs, George
Burgess, F. G. Gossling, A. G. Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Burgin, Dr. E. L. Gould, F. John, William (Rhondda, West)
Cameron, A. G. Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) Johnston, Thomas
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne) Morgan, Dr. H. B. Shield, George William
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh) Shillaker, J. F.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South) Simmons, C. J.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W. Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.) Sinkinson, George
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. Mort, D. L. Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Kennedy, Thomas Moses, J. J. H. Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Kinley, J. Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent) Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton) Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick) Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George Muff, G. Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Lathan, G. Nathan, Major H. L. Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Law, Albert (Bolton) Naylor, T. E. Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Law, A. (Rosendale) Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) Sorensen, R.
Lawrence, Susan Oldfield, J. R. Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Lawson, John James Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston) Strauss, G. R.
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle) Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley) Sullivan, J.
Leach, W. Owen, H. F. (Hereford) Sutton, J. E.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.) Paling, Wilfrid Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern) Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Lees, J. Perry, S. F. Tinker, John Joseph
Lewis, T. (Southampton) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W. Tout, W. J.
Lindley, Fred W. Potts, John S. Townend, A. E.
Lloyd, C. Ellis Price, M. P. Vaughan, D. J.
Logan, David Gilbert Pybus, Percy John Viant, S. P.
Longbottom, A. W. Quibell, D. J. K. Wallace, H. W.
Longden, F. Ramsay, T. B. Wilson Wellock, Wilfred
Lunn, William Rathbone, Eleanor Welsh, James (Paisley)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince) Raynes, W. R. Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)
McElwee, A. Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring) White, H. G.
McEntee, V. L. Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich) Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)
McKinlay, A. Romeril, H. G. Wilkinson, Ellen C.
McShane, John James Rosbotham, D. S. T. Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton) Rothschild, J. de Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Mansfield, W. Rowson, Guy Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Markham, S. F. Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury) Wilson, J. (Oldham)
Marley, J. Salter, Dr. Alfred Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)
Marshall, Fred Sanders, W. S. Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)
Mathers, George Sandham, E. Young, R. S. (Islington, North)
Matters, L. W. Sawyer, G. F.
Messer, Fred Scrymgeour, E. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Middleton, G. Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston) Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.
Mills, J. E. Shepherd, Arthur Lewis William Whiteley.
Milner, Major J. Sherwood, G. H.

Question again proposed, "That these words be there inserted in the Bill."

The ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir William Jowitt)

I submit that it is quite impossible for the Government to accept this Amendment, and I should like to tell the House what it would involve. So far as the substance of the Amendment is concerned, I, personally, feel that there is a great deal in it. I was a member of the Royal Commission on Lunacy, and from what I learned at that Commission, I certainly drew the conclusion that the present differentiation between these lunatics who are called by the somewhat offensive word "pauper" and those who are not paupers was a provision which it would be quite indefensible to think of in modern legislation. On the other hand, I must point out to the House that if you are going in this Bill to try to set right that wrong, instead of having a Bill of 23 clauses, you are going to add at least another 23 clauses and probably many more, and I am asked why. Because throughout the Lunacy Act, 1890, you will find that there are running side by side two completely different schemes—the scheme under which the ordinary paupers are dealt with and the scheme under which the non-paupers are dealt with. The very inception of the thing is altogether different. In the case of the non-pauper lunatic, the procedure starts by what is called a petition, whereas in the case of the pauper there is no petition. The section of the Lunacy Act, 1890, here referred to is the machinery Section, which sets out what the petition which applies only to the non-pauper lunatic has to contain, and you are assimilating by this Amendment the procedure all the way through.

I can tell the House this. I will not say that the draft of the other Bill has been prepared, because that would not be accurate, but departmental steps have been taken to get the thing into shape, and I am told that that which has been worked out roughly is between 20 and 30 clauses, and anyone who takes the trouble to examine the Lunacy Act, 1890, will see that section after section will have to be amended. I would suggest that this Bill, although it does not carry out all the recommendations of the Commission, and although there are still a good many other reforms of the Lunacy Law which may be usefully introduced, still at any rate does do something, and, if we are going now at this stage when the Bill has passed through another place and has reached the Report stage here to accept this Amendment which would involve the re-committal of the Bill and an addition of something quite as long and as comprehensive as the Measure is as it stands, it really means that the chance of the Bill has gone altogether. I suggest that it is much better to take the Bill as it is with the Amendments that we have been able to make. Although, as a member of the Royal Commission, I resent the distinction as one which could not be justified, at the same time I would urge the House to take what we can here and let us have this Bill substantially as it is and leave that topic for another occasion.


In view of the statement of the Attorney-General, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment and to thank him for the explanation and express the hope that we shall have an early opportunity of putting this matter right.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.