§ Again considered in Committee.
§ [Captain BOURNE in the Chair.]
Question again proposed,
That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again,
§ 5.4 p.m.
§ Mr. MAXTON
I merely wish to conclude what I was saying when the business of the Committee was interrupted. I think that the Committee would be guilty of an act of gross carelessness if it allowed the Government to proceed with this proposal to-day in the absence of the Dominions Secretary, who is the responsible Minister of the Crown. When we were discussing this matter on the last occasion, the Secretary of State for the Dominions talked in terms of the £150,000 that he required for this purpose. Now, on the Paper to-day, he is asking for £400.000. I want the Com- 1520 mittee to realise what, in his absence, he is asking through the mouth of his Under-Secretary, who has put the case plainly and simply, but has not attempted to lay before the Committee the full facts. Listen to what you are doing. According to the White Paper you are agreeing to enable the Newfoundland Government to meet interest payments due by Newfoundland on 1st July to private investors who are scattered in every quarter of the globe.
I must remind the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) and the Committee that the Motion is, that I do report Progress. It does not appear to me that discussing the Vote has any bearing on the Motion to report Progress.
§ Mr. MAXTON
I will, of course, be careful to keep within the limits of the Motion before the Committee, but I am making the point that the Secretary of State himself must be here. That is the reason why we are asking to report Progress. The thing he is asking us to do is not a minor Departmental issue; it is not a routine operation of the Department which is normally handed to the Under-Secretary or a junior Minister; it is high Government policy. I am merely quoting from the White Paper to indicate what we are being asked to do. The terms of the loan to which we are to agree to-day will be determined in the light of the report of the Royal Commission which is now in Newfounland. We are to agree to-day to a Vote of £400,000 of the taxpayers' money to support Newfoundland, the terms and conditions to be arranged afterwards, when a Commission has reported that has been unable to report after nearly four months on the job. The Dominions Secretary knows full well—as my hon. Friend the Member for the Gorbals Division (Mr. Buchanan) said—that you cannot set up precedents of this kind in one part of the Empire and not find them having repercussions in other parts of the Empire—Crown Colonies, Protectorates and Dominions. The right hon. Gentleman regards the matter as of such trivial importance that he absents himself from the House and leaves the matter to the Under-Secretary.
The Dominions Secretary must admit that no serious obstacles have been put in his way, either in the arrangement or in the carrying through of business. This Government has had an easier time 1521 than usual in getting progress with the various proposals that it has had before the House. It comes before us with this business on its own arrangement and, by arrangement with the Opposition, or by request of the Opposition, or by the consent of the House, chooses the day and the time of day when the responsible Minister can be here, and fixes a day within practically 48 hours of a decision having to be taken by this Committee. It is gross disrespect to this House of Commons. Further, it is gross disrespect to the Parliamentary institution. It may be that forces in this country will develop, as forces in other countries have developed, to destroy our Parliamentary institution. I have seen speeches by the Lord President of the Council and by the Prime Minister praising the Parliamentary institution and asserting their determination to stand for it. If that be so, let them give evidence themselves to this House and to the nation that they, the principal figures in Parliament, have some respect for that institution, and not allow one of the responsible Ministers of the Crown to say: "The House of Commons does not matter; any social engagement or outside conference, or even any entertainment, is sufficient to take me away from my responsible duties."
We are not going to stand for it. If this House of Commons goes, well and good; we shall know how to face up to the situation and how to put our point of view in the altered circumstances. But while the institution is here we are going to insist that it be worked, and that the people who are sent here to represent the people of the country are going to have all the rights that have been customary in this place since the days when it still enjoyed a certain measure of respect in the eyes of the people. We ask others in this House who have some regard for their own dignity and some respect for the constituencies and constituents which they represent, to support us in the Motion to adjourn this Committee until such time as the responsible Minister of the Crown comes here and tells us in a respectful and intelligent manner precisely to what we are being committed.
§ 5.14 p.m.
§ Sir FRANCIS ACLAND
I should like the Under-Secretary, in reply to the Motion, to answer three points that I desire to put, and which indeed I ought 1522 to put, and which will decide, at any rate, my vote upon the Motion. I do not take the point that an indignity is being done to the House by the absence of the Secretary of State. I think that the Under-Secretary has brought the matter forward with quite as great a feeling of responsibility and quite as well as, possibly even better than, the Secretary of State would have done. Having been an Under-Secretary myself, I naturally feel a little inclined to stand up for the rights of Under-Secretaries and allow those who are as fully informed on their job, and who do it as well as the hon. Member does it, to put forward matters for which, to my mind, they are responsible to the House of Commons.
My three points are these. Why, if this matter is so urgent and has to be got through before Saturday, was not this item of Government business in the original programme for the week? Why was it only put in along with other minor matters when it was found that the President of the Board of Trade would be unable to be here to-day for the discussion of the Vote for his Department? Secondly, is it a fact—as my hon. Friend who spoke from this Bench has stated—that whereas in the previous guarantee the Government of Canada was standing in with us, it has now withdrawn? If that re really so, unless we can get that matter satisfactorily explained, I think that there are some grounds for not going forward with this stage to-day. Thirdly, although I know that the Under-Secretary is not able at this stage to put before us anything in the nature of a White Paper or an Interim Report by the Commission now sitting in Newfoundland, would he be able—because these gentlemen must be at the end of a telegraph or even a telephone line—to put before us by the Report stage anything in the shape of a report from them on whether they think they will be in a position to make such suggestions in their final report as would justify us in lending more money to Newfoundland? If the Under-Secretary is able to cover those three points in his reply, I shall be very much obliged.
§ 5.15 p.m.
Mr. M. MacDONALD
I rise willingly, to do my best to reply to the various questions which have been put to me. First, I would like to make it clear that 1523 the Secretary of State does not regard this as a trivial matter. That is not the reason why he is absent. I would also like to make it clear that this Supplementary Estimate was not put down as the first Order to-day with the knowledge in our minds that my right hon. Friend would not be here himself to deal with the question. As a matter of fact when this Order was put down my right hon. Friend fully intended to be here and to take it himself as the first Order to-day. A third point which I wish to make clear is that it is not a social engagement which has prevented my right hon. Friend from being here. As I said, he fully intended to deal with this Supplementary Estimate himself as the first Order to-day, but only this morning a very important meeting in connection with the World Economic Conference was fixed, and he was bound to be present at that meeting. It was not with any idea of this being a trivial matter or any idea of being discourteous to this Committee that my right hon. Friend absented himself from this discussion.
My right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition has asked me some questions. First, he asked whether we really required this Vote by 1st July. The answer is that we do. The payments are due on that date, and therefore it is necessary that we should get this Vote by that date. Secondly, he asked would there be a Report stage. There will, of course, be a Report stage, but I cannot say at what time of the day it will be taken. He asked, thirdly, whether I could promise the Committee that my right hon. Friend would be present during the Report stage. I have no hestation in saying that he will be here in order to deal with any points which hon. Members raise.
Then three questions were put to me by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Cornwall (Sir F. Acland). He asked, first, why, if this matter was so urgent, it was not put down in the original programme of Business for this week. The fact is that discussions with the Canadian Government were still going on and we were not in a position to know exactly what form the Estimate would have to take. Secondly, he asked why the 1524 Canadian Government; on this occasion have not agreed to join with us in making this advance to Newfoundland. The question has also been asked whether that decision was owing to any special information which the commissioners had sent us as a result of their inquiries. I assure hon. Members that the commissioners have not sent us any information which we did not expect or which could not have been foreseen months ago when this question first arose. The only information which they have sent us is information as to the present position in Newfoundland, and I indicated that in my earlier speech when I said that it showed that there would be a considerable deficit in the Budget of Newfoundland again this year. But there are no new facts which have altered the Canadian Government's decision in this matter. I cannot say exactly what is in the minds of the Canadian authorities in reaching a different decision this time, but I presume that it is for reasons of their own possibly because of Canadian conditions—
I think the Under-Secretary is now getting rather wide of the Motion to report Progress. I understood the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Cornwall (Sir F. Acland) to ask whether any information could be obtained on that point before the Report stage, and while the hon. Gentleman is in order in referring to it, he cannot on this Motion go into the merits of the Canadian Government's action.
I do not wish to get out of order, and perhaps I have answered the right hon. Gentleman's question more fully than I ought to have done. At any rate, I hope that I have answered it to the satisfaction of hon. Members. His third question was whether we could get into communication with the Commissioners, to see whether they could answer the questions which have been raised. Of course I cannot answer that question straightaway. All I can say is that we will get into communication with the Commissioners and give any information we can at the earliest possible moment.
§ Mr. LANSBURY
I wish to be clear on the point as to when the Report stage will be taken. None of us when we started this Debate expected to find the 1525 Secretary of State absent from his place, and we would prefer that he should be present during the discussion of this question. While I accept the statement of the Under-Secretary, I think the Government ought to give us a guarantee that we shall have the right hon. Gentleman here during the Report stage, and that it will be taken at a reasonable time so that we can discuss these matters with him.
§ 5.22 p.m.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Captain Margesson)
In view of the short time available before this Vote must be passed, it will be necessary to take the Report stage tomorrow. To-morrow is a Supply Day and the Vote for the Department of Mines has been put down for discussion. If the Opposition were to negotiate through the usual channels, it might be found possible to take the Report stage of this Supplementary Estimate before 11 o'clock, but if some arrangement cannot be made, I am afraid it will be necessary to take it after 11 o'clock.
§ Mr. LANSBURY
We cannot very well conduct negotiation on a matter of that kind across the Floor of the House. I would ask the right hon. Gentleman, however, whether it would not be time
§ enough to take this on Friday. Friday is only a half day in Committee of Supply and I should have thought that it would be possible to alter the programme and to give Friday for this purpose. This is a very important matter, and I think, in the circumstances, the natural thing to do is to accept the explanation which has been offered but to ask for reasonable time for the Report stage.
§ Captain MARGESSON
Obviously it would not be possible to negotiate on this matter across the Floor of the House, but if the right hon. Gentleman will allow me to do my best to arrange the business with the parties interested, I will see what can be done. At the moment I do not see exactly how we can do it.
I think the hon. and gallant Member had better raise that question when we get back to the Estimate.
§ Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 36; Noes, 247.1527
|Division No. 247.]||AYES.||[5.25 p.m.|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan)||Mainwaring, William Henry|
|Banfield, John William||Grundy, Thomas W.||Maxton, James|
|Batey, Joseph||Hall, George H. (Merthyr Tydvll)||Parkinson, John Allen|
|Bevan, Aneurln (Ebbw Vale)||Hamilton, Sir R. W.(Orkney & Zetl'nd)||Smith, Tom (Normanton)|
|Brawn, C. W. E. (Notts., Mansfield)||Hirst, George Henry||Thorne, William James|
|Cape, Thomas||Jenkins, Sir William||Tinker, John Joseph|
|Cocks, Frederick Seymour||Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)||White, Henry Graham|
|Cove, William G.||Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George||Williams, David (Swansea, East)|
|Cripps, Sir Stafford||Lawton, John James||Williams, Dr. John H. (Llanelly)|
|Daggar, George||Leonard, William||Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley)|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Llewellyn-Jones, Frederick|
|Edwards,, Charles||Logan, David Gilbert||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|George, Megan A. Lloyd (Anglesea)||Lunn, William||Mr. Buchanan and Mr. John.|
|Acland, Rt. Hon. sir Francis Dyke||Beaumont, M. W. (Bucks., Aylesbury)||Castlereagh, Viscount|
|Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel||Benn, Sir Arthur Shirley||Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)|
|Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.)||Bennett, Capt. Sir Ernest Nathaniel||Chapman, Col. R.(Houghton-le-Spring)|
|Agnew, Lieut.-Com. p. G.||Bernays, Robert||Chapman, Sir Samuel (Edinburgh, S.)|
|Albery, Irving James||Bird, Ernest Roy (Yorks., Skipton)||Christie, James Archibald|
|Allen, Sir J.Sandeman (Llverp'l, W.)||Bower, Lieut.-Com. Robert Tatton||Clarry, Reginald George|
|Allen, William (Stoke-on-Trent)||Bralthwaite, Maj. A. N. (Yorks, E. R.)||Clydesdale, Marquess of|
|Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. s.||Brocklebank, C. E. R.||Colfox, Major William Philip|
|Anstruther-Gray, W. J.||Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)||Collins, Rt. Hon. Sir Godfrey|
|Applin, Lieut.-Col. Reginald V. K.||Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks., Newb'y)||Colvllie, Lieut.-Colonel J.|
|Apsley, Lord||Browne, Captain A. C.||Conant, R. J. E.|
|Aske, Sir Robert William||Burghley, Lord||Cooke, Douglas|
|Atholl, Duchess of||Burnett, John George||Cooper, A. Duff|
|Bailey, Eric Alfred George||Cadogan, Hon. Edward||Courthope, Colonel Sir George L.|
|Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley||Calne, G. R. Hall-||Cowan, D. M.|
|Balfour, Capt. Harold (I. of Thanet)||Campbell-Johnston, Malcolm||Craven-Ellis, William|
|Barclay-Harvey, C. M.||Caporn, Arthur Cecil||Crooke, J. Smedley|
|Beauchamp, Sir Brograve Campbell||Carver, Major William H.||Crookshank, Capt. H. C. (Galnsb'ro)|
|Cruddas, Lieut-Colonel Bernard||Joel, Dudley J. Barnato||Ruggles-Brise, Colonel E. A.|
|Curry, A. C.||Johnstone, Harcourt (S. Shields)||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)|
|Dalkeith. Earl of||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||Rutherford, Sir John Hugo (Llverp'l)|
|Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. C. C.||Jones, Lewis (Swansea, West)||Salmon, Sir Isldore|
|Davies, Maj.Geo. F. (Somerset.Yeovil)||Kerr, Lieut.-Col. Charles (Montrose)||Samuel, Sir Arthur Michael (F'nham)|
|Denville. Alfred||Kerr, Hamilton W.||Sandeman, Sir A. N. Stewart|
|Dickie, john P.||Kimball, Lawrence||Sanderson, Sir Frank Barnard|
|Doran, Edward||Law, Richard K. (Hull, S.W.)||Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.|
|Drewe, Cedric||Lees-Jones, John||Selley, Harry R.|
|Duggan, Hubert John||Leighton, Major B. E. P.||Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.|
|Duncan, James A. L. (Kensington, N.)||Lloyd, Geoffrey||Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwell)|
|Dunglass, Lord||Lockwood, Capt. J. H. (Shipley)||Shaw, Captain William T. (Forfar)|
|Edmondson, Major A. J.||Mabane, William||Shepperson, Sir Ernest W.|
|Elliot, Major Rt. Hon. Walter E.||MacAndrew, Lieut.-Col. C. G. (Partick)||Simmonds, Oliver Edwin|
|Emmott, Charles E. G. C.||MacAndrew, Capt. J. O. (Ayr)||Skelton, Archibald Noel|
|Emrys-Evans, P. V.||Mac Donald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)||Slater, John|
|Entwistle, Cyril Fullard||Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)||Smiles, Lieut.-Col. Sir Walter D.|
|Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)||McEwen, Captain J. H. F.||Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)|
|Evans, David Owen (Cardigan)||McKie, John Hamilton||Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine.C.)|
|Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)||McLean, Dr. W. H. (Tradeston)||Smith-Carington, Neville W.|
|Evans, R. T. (Carmarthen)||Macquisten, Frederick Alexander||Somerset, Thomas|
|Falle, Sir Bertram G.||Makins, Brigadier-General Ernest||Somervell, Donald Bradley|
|Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst||Malialieu, Edward Lancelot||Somerville, Annesey A. (Windsor)|
|Foot, Dingle (Dundee)||Mander, Geoffrey le M.||Sotheron-Estcourt, Captain T. E.|
|Foot, Isaac (Cornwall, Bodmin)||Manningham-Buller, Lt.-Col. Sir M.||Spencer, Captain Richard A.|
|Forestier-Waiker, Sir Leolin||Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.||Spender-Clay, Rt. Hon. Herbert H.|
|Fremantle, Sir Francis||Marsden, Commander Arthur||Stanley, Lord (Lancaster, Fyldel|
|Galbraith, James Francis Wallace||Mayhew, Lieut.-Colonel John||Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westmorland)|
|Ganzonl, Sir John||Merriman, Sir F. Boyd||Stewart. J. H. (Fife, E.)|
|Gibson, Charles Granville||Mills, Sir Frederick (Leyton, E.)||Strauss, Edward A.|
|Gillett, Sir George Masterman||Milne, Charles||Strickland, Captain W. F.|
|Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John||Molson, A. Hugh Elsdale||Stuart, Lord C Crichton-|
|Gluckstein, Louis Halls||Moore, Lt.-Col. Thomas C. R. (Ayr)||Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)|
|Goodman, Colonel Albert W.||Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid Hart|
|Gower, Sir Robert||Morrison, William Shepherd||Summersby, Charles H.|
|Grattan-Doyle, Sir Nicholas||Mulrhead, Major A. J.||Sutcliffe, Harold|
|Graves, Marjorle||Munro, Patrick||Tate, Mavis Constance|
|Greene, William P. C.||Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H.||Templeton, William P.|
|Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John||Normand, Wilfrid Guild||Thomas, James P. L. (Hereford)|
|Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro', W.)||Ormiston, Thomas||Thompson, Luke|
|Grimston, R. V.||Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William G.A.||Thomson, Sir Frederick Charles|
|Gritten, W. G. Howard||Palmer, Francis Noel||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of|
|Guinness, Thomas L. E. B.||Patrick, Colin M.||Train, John|
|Guy, J. C. Morrison||Pearson, William G.||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement|
|Hanbury, Cecil||Petherick, M.||Vaughan-M organ, Sir Kenyon|
|Hanley, Dennis A.||Petc, Geoffrey K. (W'verh'pt'n, Bilst'n)||Ward, Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)|
|Hannon, Patrick Joseph Hent||Pickering, Ernest H.||Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wailsend)|
|Harbord, Arthur||Pownall, Sir Assheton||Ward, Sarah Adelaide (Cannock)|
|Harris, Sir Percy||Procter, Major Henry Adam||Wardlaw-Milne. Sir John S.|
|Hartland, George A.||Pybus, Percy John||Warrender, Sir Victor A. G.|
|Headlam, Lieut.-Col. Cuthbert M.||Ramsay, Alexander (W. Bromwich)||Waterhouse, Captain Charles|
|Hellgers, Captain F. F. A.||Ramsay, Capt. A. H. M. (Midlothian)||Watt, Captain George Steven H.|
|Henderson, Sir Vivian L. (Chelmsford)||Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles)||Wedderburn,Henry James Scrymgeour-|
|Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur p.||Ramsden, Sir Eugene||Wells, Sydney Richard|
|Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller||Rankin, Robert||Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)|
|Hope, Sydney (Chester, Stalybridge)||Rathbone, Eleanor||Wills, Wilfrid D.|
|Hore-Bellsha, Leslie||Rawson, Sir Cooper||Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertf'd)|
|Horobin, Ian M.||Rea, Walter Russell||Wise, Alfred R-|
|Horsbrugh, Florence||Reid, James S. C. (Stirling)||Womersley, Walter James|
|Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)||Reid, William Allan (Derby)||Wood, Rt, Hon. Sir H. Kingsley|
|Hudson, Robert Spear (Southport)||Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.||Worthington, Or. John V.|
|Hume, Sir George Hopwood||Renwick, Major Gustav A.|
|Hurd, Sir Percy||Rhys, Hon. Charles Arthur U.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Hurst, Sir Gerald B.||Roberts, Aled (Wrexham)||Sir George Penny and Commander|
|Jackson, Sir Henry (Wandsworth, C.)||Rosbotham, Sir Thomas||Southby.|
|James, Wing.-Com. A. W. H.||Ross, Ronald D.|
§ Question again proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £539,000, be granted for the said Service."
§ 5.33 p.m.
§ Mr. A. BEVAN
Since I have been a Member the House of Commons has been asked to make provision for balancing the Budgets of several countries, some inside and some outside the British Empire, and the last occasion when an application of this kind was before the House it was, if my memory serves me correctly, in respect 1528 of Austria. A number of interesting Debates were staged at that time, in which an attempt was made, on the part of some of us, to get the House to face up to the implications of this sort of legislation. Austria was in difficulties, largely imposed upon her under the Treaty, and she found it necessary to secure financial assistance from France and Great Britain. We rushed to her help—of course, in terms of the Debate, to the help of the Austrian Government—but actually it was 1529 to the help of those who lent the money to Austria in order to secure the moneylenders against Austria defaulting. Whenever a country's debt is in danger and she is likely to become insolvent, immediately other nations go to her rescue, and Great Britain has occupied that place in recent years more than any other country. I understand that a similar arrangement is being made with the Argentine, and now the Committee is being asked to consider supplying £400,000 to support the Newfoundland Government against a possible default on her debts.
The wages of the men whom I represent in this House, the miners of South Wales, are, on an average, £2 3s. 6d. a week, and about 40 to 50 per cent. of the coalfield are unemployed. Unemployment insurance benefit (has been reduced because the world is passing through a crisis, and world commerce has been reduced in volume and nations are defaulting as a consequence. My miners and my unemployed constituents are asked to make a reduction in their standard of consumption because of what is called the economic blizzard, but why not the moneylender? Why should it always be considered that nations must rush to his rescue whenever the is in difficulty? Everybody must go to the wall, but the man who does nothing but abstain from spending the money for himself, and lends it to somebody else, is the man to whose rescue nations come at moments like this.
It is conduct of this sort that is bringing the whole financial system into disrepute. I have had put into my hands in the last week or two a document written by a learned Spanish economist, setting out the point of view of the debtor nations and arguing that there is arising a real conflict of interest between what he calls the Colonial Empire and the old world, based largely upon one or two assumptions, which indeed stand investigation, that the older industrial countries advanced over the last century large sums of money for the development of the Colonial world. These sums of money aggregate colossal amounts, and he estimates that, taking total intergovernmental and commercial indebtedness, a sum of money in the region of £12,000,000,000—
The hon. Member is getting rather far from the Estimate, which relates strictly to Newfoundland and Bechuanaland.
§ Mr. BEVAN
I am entitled to argue, Captain Bourne, that this is put forward as part of a general policy by the Government. I am entitled to say that they are seeking to give a credit of £400,000 to the Government of Newfoundland for precisely the same reasons, because of the same underlying assumptions, that have led the Government to the rescue of a number of Crown Colonies and Protectorates and nations outside the Empire, and I question whether the financial considerations leading up to this policy are valid and indeed whether the financial system can continually support a policy of this kind. I suggest that these systems of inter-governmental indebtedness are the principal cause, not of the beginning but of the aggravation, of the crisis through which the world is passing, that the industrial system of the world would have revealed much greater buoyancy and would have recovered from its difficulties much more easily if indebtedness had not taken the governmental form that it has in the modern world. When the debt is between individuals, the debtor goes bankrupt, the creditor fails to get his money, and a large amount of dead wood is cut out.
Bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, compositions between creditors and debtors were recognised in the pre-war world as the ordinary medicine for indebtedness and the financial crisis of 1907 in America did not have the overwhelming catastrophic consequences of the modern crisis because largely the debt was between private individuals and subject to that form of cancellation or writing down, but the modern crisis is entirely different, because vast State enterprises or semi-State enterprises or corporations become involved in the debts, large insurance companies lend money on semi-State assurances and are able to exercise pressure upon the Government, the Government coming to their rescue either by the extension of credits or by various diplomatic means and thus keeping the debtor artificially alive, without providing him with a means of ultimately liquidating his debt. It is now being regarded by economists of great standing that if the modern system of 1531 indebtedness did not take that corporative or governmental form, we should have emerged from this crisis some time ago, and there are people in the Colonial world who are contending—I have heard representatives from Australia contending in a Committee Room of this House—that it is no use the industrial nations like France, Great Britain, and America attempting to shore up the colossal system of debts in the Colonial world. It cannot be done, and it would be far better for the whole debt structure to collapse than to attempt to maintain it by methods of this kind.
Is not the World Economic Conference which is sitting to-day a remarkable example of the futility of the policy that the hon. Member is asking this House to approve in the case of Newfoundland? That Conference is fundamentally concerned with how we can best make it possible for people to whom we have lent money in the last 100 years to pay it back. I suggest that in equity as well as in sound finance it is a good proposition for this House to tell the moneylender, whether he starts with governmental or with private security, that he must take his medicine like the rest. There is no justification in equity for this House to cause Englishmen, Scotsmen, or Welshmen to condemn their own people to barbarous standards of consumption in order to maintain creditors, who lend money at their own risk to other nations, in order to preserve their standard of consumption at a time like this. The other day we had a discussion staged in this House, a packed House, with the Ministry of Health involved, and 150 Conservative Members bringing pressure to bear on the Government to come to the assistance of the distressed districts. At last, after many conferences and meetings, the Minister of Health graciously consented to distribute £500,000 among two-thirds of the population of this country, and that was only after great pressure and great agitation.
The hon. Member comes to the Box today, and because Newfoundland is outside Great Britain—remoteness seems to have some special quality—he asks for £400,000 for Newfoundland, in a House that is almost empty and with the Minister not here. We find £4,000,000 for Austria, £10,000,000 security for the Argentine, and £400,000 for Newfound- 1532 land. So long as the man who wants the money is in some other part of the world, it is high finance, it is sound policy, it is the only way in which the Empire is carried on. When somebody wants it in Rhondda or Lanarkshire or on the Northeast coast or in London, it is ruinous extravagance and the nation cannot afford it. As long as it is somewhere else, in other words, as long as you are able to conceal the identity of the persons who are being helped behind a State form, and say that Newfoundland wants it or Austria or the Argentine wants it, you can conceal the actual transaction. Some of us are rapidly coming to the conclusion—a conclusion that a large nation has already reached with consequences painful for the masses of the population—that the system of usury, which is a natural development of other property forms in the course of the last century, is appearing in the modern world in as immoral a guise as it did in the Middle Ages, except that now the moneylender is in the pew, whereas then he was not permitted inside the church.
The moneylender is strangling civilisation. The Colonial Empire, unable to make these vast payments to the industrial world, protect themselves by all sorts of fiscal means against the industrial world, strangling our commerce and making the situation more and more difficult; and His Majesty's Government, with no policy at all, with no way out of the difficulty, can only suggest giving a credit of £400,000 to Newfoundland, £10,000,000 to the Argentine and £4,000,000 to Austria. Their attitude is to keep it up somehow, and that then perhaps somewhere somebody in some way will bring rescue and the crazy old system can be started over again.
The point of view which we take in this party is that a system of usury is simply another phase of the private property system. It is a vicious system because in these circumstances the moneylender is always able to exact a higher tribute as prices fall. He is in a strongly favoured position, and representatives of the Colonial world are saying that the system of usury should be subject to the same sliding scale circumstances as other claims of property. I want to know from the Under-Secretary if it is true that Newfoundland finds itself faced with an unbalanced Budget as a consequence of 1533 circumstances similar to those in other countries in the new world, namely, fall in price, growing unemployment, increasing failure to sell their products abroad, and so on.
Are the circumstances which cause a deficit peculiar to Newfoundland? I am sorry that the Secretary of State, who has just come in, has not had the benefit of the remarks that I am making. I was asking whether the deficit which has occurred in the Budget of Newfoundland is a consequence of circumstances similar to those which prevail elsewhere, or are they peculiar to Newfoundland? If it is the first case, what conditions are you attaching to this credit? Are the creditors of Newfoundland to be paid a reduced interest or the same interest? If we have to find £400,000 for a creditor, are we making any reduction in his claim? Is he receiving the same interest payment as before? Is he receiving his 4, 5 or 6 per cent. without any reduction in respect of the causes that render Newfoundland insolvent? Is he taking his 4, 5 or 6 per cent. in terms of the present prices of commodities, or are you reducing the percentage pari passu with the fall in the value of commodities? Are we finding this £400,000 or any money for any of these nations in order to pay a higher tribute to the moneylender, and reducing the standard of life of our own population at one and the same time? If my miners in South Wales have to go with £2 3s. 6d. because times are bad, the moneylender must go with his 1 or 2 per cent. instead of 6 per cent. because times are bad. There is no justification either in economics or equity for lending this money without imposing conditions of that kind.
When we required money from America and France it was said at that Box on the right hon. Gentleman's behalf that that was a fair proposition. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, "We need money from America and France, and they are entitled to lay down conditions under which they lend it. If we do not agree with the conditions, we can reject them." The right hon. Gentleman was one of those who said that he agreed with the conditions for we had to have the money. America and France said, "We will not lend you the money unless you balance the Budget, and in order to balance the Budget you must make a reduction of 10 per cent. in unemploy- 1534 ment pay." As a nation we accepted the dictatorship of the creditor. We said, "We want your money very badly; we cannot get it from anybody else, and we will accept your terms." We are the creditor nation now, and we are lending £400,000. We have lent some before, and we shall probably nave to lend some more again.
We have lent large sums of money to other nations. Is it not reasonable that we should lay down conditions too? Is it not reasonable for us to say, "If you want this money from us to balance your Budget, we shall lend it only if you reduce your payments to those who have lent you money"? They say, "We cannot do that because we have lent so much money abroad, and if we say to a debtor that we are going to help him only if he reduces the rate of interest on his internal loans, other nations will say the same." What is the answer to that? It is that my poor people in South Wales, and the right hon. Gentleman's constituents in Derby, and the constituents of the right hon. Member for Darwen (Sir H Samuel) have to put up with lower standards of life in order to support the rentier consumption of people in other parts of Great Britain. The same thing is happening in Great Britain as is happening in the world. The Colonial Empire is being sacrificed to the older industrial Empire, and is gradually coming down in ruins and dragging us with it.
It is as true to-day as ever it was that the moneylender is the solvent of all State systems. He corrodes and poisons the system and ultimately destroys the system. You are this evening standing in the guise of a barefaced supporter of a moneylending system, and the moneylender will do to the modern States what he did to many other States in mediaeval times. He destroys and corrupts the State and he disorganises the State, and merely because the form of disorganisation takes on a new phase and new means and a new expression, you cannot see the disorganisation which is taking place as a consequence of it. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that he should state in simple terms why the moneylender should always be supported and the man who produces the wealth of the world should have to put up with lower standards of life.
§ 5.55 p.m.
The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. J. H. Thomas)
I will not apologise to the Committee for my absence, but I will explain the circumstances. I am sure that the explanation will be satisfactory to all parties. In the Conference which is now taking place, with its numerous committees, one essential to all delegates ought to be an arrangement whereby everyone keeps in touch with all the committees. The result is that as early as 10 o'clock in the morning the British delegation meets and goes through the programme. In addition, every Dominion is represented here, and whatever may be the views of anyone in this House, the country would blame any Government and any Secretary of State for the Dominions who did not take every step to keep the Dominions in touch with each other and with ourselves, not for the purpose of forming a bloc and interfering with their independent action, but with the sole purpose in a conference of this kind of enabling the great British Commonwealth to speak with a unanimous voice if they can do so. I arranged to take this Debate and put off the Dominions meeting until 6 o'clock. I had clearly in my mind that I would be able to take this Supplementary Estimate this afternoon and to attend the Dominions meeting, which is now being held, at 6 o'clock. Unfortunately, another very important meeting was summoned for 3.30. Therefore, I do not apologise. That is the explanation for my absence.
My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will have explained the circumstances of this Vote to the Committee, but I ought in fairness to say that I myself, in order to give effect to a pledge which I gave on the last occasion, was responsible for having the Vote to-day. The Committee will remember that, when dealing with the situation six months ago, I said that before any further commitment was made I would take the opportunity of consulting the House. It is in accordance with that pledge that the Estimate is put down to-day. The circumstances and the answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. A. Bevan) as to what we intend to do is this: Over three years ago, when Newfoundland found herself in financial difficulties owing to the economic depression, she at 1536 once applied to the Government and asked for advice—not for financial assistance—but for advice and help, knowing the ability of our Civil Service. The result was that we lent to Newfoundland a very distinguished Civil Servant. He went carefully into the finance, and it is fair to Newfoundland to say that all the suggestions that he was able to make for retrenchment of every sort were carried out by Newfoundland.
No. The hon. Member has perhaps forgotten that I spoke about three years ago, when the rate of interest in this country and in the Dominions was on a different basis from what it is now, since our conversion scheme. He knows perfectly well that to have assumed a reduction of interest by a Dominion like Newfoundland before we ourselves were prepared to launch our conversion scheme would have been sheer madness. The facts stand out, because only a few weeks ago Australia was herself able to convert.
Again the hon. Member is very much out of date, because so far from its not being voluntary he ought to know that the issue was underwritten and accepted. Six months ago, notwithstanding all their retrenchments, notwithstanding all their economies, and notwithstanding a real hardship, as real and genuine as any hardship suffered by our people here, the Newfoundland Government found themselves in the position of being unable to meet their obligations in December. I hope the House will not treat too lightly the idea that a Dominion can repudiate obligations, and default, never mind what the circumstances may be. No one can challenge the statement that a default by a Dominion, seeing that Dominion issues have been given the status of a trustee security, would have repercussions far more serious than anyone cares to contemplate. That was the position last December. The position then was such that the first effects of the repercussion would have been seen in Canada. Mr. Bennett happened to be in London last December, and we discussed the whole situation, and as a result an agreement was made whereby Canada and ourselves met the interest 1537 required for that particular payment; but that was conditional upon the appointment of a Commission, with one representative of Canada, one representative of Newfoundland and a chairman representing this country, which was to go to Newfoundland to investigate all the circumstances on the spot and report as to the whole future position of the Dominions.
I do not hesitate to say that anyone with a knowledge of Newfoundland would doubt very seriously whether it is wise to have Dominion Government, with all its expense, for a population such as they have. That was one of the matters for the Commission to report upon—not only to examine that side, but themselves to say what was to be the future of Newfoundland: its relationship, possibly, to Canada, or whether it should be a Crown Colony, or whether it should remain a Dominion, and on what terms. The terms of reference were so broadly drawn that it was the duty of this Commission to investigate all those things. The next difficulty was to select the personnel of the Commission. Lord Amulree, with great public spirit and sacrifice, agreed to act as chairman, and took the risk of going to Newfoundland in the winter to sit there with his Commission. He is still there, and his report is not yet to hand. He had to go to Canada in order to obtain information there. As his report is not yet ready, we were faced with this difficulty. As I have said, we were agreed that it would be a bad thing for default to take place last December, but we did not give the money to Newfoundland free and unfettered. We said, "We admit that there is an obligation," and we gave it on the conditions I have explained and pending the full report of the Commission. For the reasons I have given the Commission have not yet reported, but we hope their report will not be long delayed; in fact, I understand Lord Amulree is likely to leave within the next fortnight.
Now the second payment by Newfoundland is due. I put it to the Committee that this is the position: Knowing nothing of the Report, but keeping in mind the position of this Dominion, the state of its fishing industry and all the terrible hardships it has gone through, if it was right for us to help them last December, what could be more absurd, 1538 now that interest is again due—as it was a few days ago—than to say, "We cannot meet the interest now, as we have not yet had the report"? We felt there was no alternative but to meet the situation. The circumstances have been explained, and I assure the House that immediately we get the report it will be examined. I do not want to prejudice the situation in advance, but every one who has given any consideration to this subject will know perfectly well that there is a very grave and serious position in Newfoundland. I ask the House to believe me when I say that our decision was not lightly taken. I have explained all the circumstances, and can only say that we felt that on balance, and without prejudicing the report, there was no other course before us than the one we have taken. I am sure the Committee will accept my explanation of my inability to be here earlier, and I ask the Committee to agree to the Estimate.
We asked Canada to share in this liability as she did before. That she does not do so is not out of disregard to Newfoundland—I am sure my right hon. Friend will appreciate my anxiety not to say anything which will be misunderstood with regard to Canada's position. There is a change in the financial situation in Canada. Canada had to meet all manner of obligations to certain of her states, and the result was that the Canadian Government found themselves unable on this occasion to share with us as they did in December.
§ 6.8 p.m.
§ Mr. LANSBURY
The right hon. Gentleman has explained why he was not here earlier, and I am quite sure that everybody accepts the explanation. We are bound to accept his statement that it was public business and only public business which prevented him from attending. I am very glad indeed that he has been able to come now, though I am not sure that we are very much wiser than before, if I may say so with respect. We had hoped that we might learn something of what was in the minds of the Commission. It is not unusual for the chairman of such a Commission, when the work they are engaged upon is not finished at the time expected, to give some explana- 1539 tion to the Government as to the position of the problem they were sent to investigate.
The Commission is not purely a British Commission. There are a Canadian and a Newfoundland member. Further, they had to make certain inquiries in Canada, because of the close proximity of Newfoundland to Canada and its bearing on the situation. I myself was hoping that perhaps I would be in a position to indicate in some broad, general way what was the Commission's view, but for the reasons I have given I am not in that position, or I would have no hesitation in telling the Committee.
§ Mr. LANSBURY
The only thing we can gather from that, though I do not want to stretch anything the right hon. Gentleman has said, is that it leaves the inference that the Canadian side of this bargain—the Canadians—do not think it good enough to take any further risk. I do not think, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman does not think, that the financial position of Canada is such that she could not share in this if she were quite sure if was a safe thing to do; and we who look on this as part of a world problem which concerns this country probably more than any other creditor country, must feel disturbed—I must say I am very disturbed—about the fact that on scarcely any evidence at all of any future ability on the part of Newfoundland to pay this money we are called upon to foot the bill. It seems to me that the right hon. Gentleman and our own Government are accepting a responsibility which, sooner or later, we shall as taxpayers, have to discharge without those who were partners with us on the first occasion taking their share.
The right hon. Gentleman and the Government always put us in a position where we have to take action at the moment, because there is no time to give any consideration to an alternative. I am sorry the right hon. Gentleman was not able to be here earlier, because if he had been he would have heard from my hon. Friend and other hon. Members that we feel that in this matter British credit is being used to bolster up a system of moneylending or usury which in our judgment cannot possibly be solvent. This is creating the sort of situation 1540 which occasionally faces business men in the East End of London. They renew bills in the hope that next time they fall due they will be able to pay; then they renew them again, and finally the snowball of debt gets so great that they just have to default. In our view that is the situation, as respects the debtor countries of the world, which Great Britain is being called upon to face up to, in a fashion which may ultimately land us in such a financial crisis that none of us can foresee the end. So far as we know, there is nothing in the policy of the Government either in regard to Newfoundland or the other debtor countries, and nothing in the policy of the other Governments, concerned, which points to a solution of the financial difficulties now facing the world.
We shall carry our Amendment to a Division because we see no end to the policy that the Government are embarking upon and carrying through, in regard to this Vote. I do not expect the right hon. Gentleman to deal with the general question, but we want him to understand, and we would like the Government to understand, that we believe the Government are nearing the end of this juggling with money, which is exactly what very poor people do in every part of the world and in our own country. They get themselves more and more entangled, and they are continually renewing and adding to their debt. This is increasing indebtedness. It is the same with the Argentine, and it may be the same in a few days with that payment about which the hon. Baronet the Member for Farnham (Sir A. M. Samuel) is continually asking, the German debt, as well as with other debts of a similar character. We feel that governments other than our own are playing with this question and that what they ought to consider is how to liquidate and wipe out the debts.
The word "default" is used in a very loose way. I hold the view that if the currency of the nation is depreciated and people do not get the value they expect for their dividends and repayments, that is default, call it deflation or whatever you like. If the British nation does not pay the American Government, that will be default on our part, however much you wrap it up, because we shall not have paid, and that is what default means. The world is in such a position that nations are bound to default, just as firms 1541 and individual men and women have to default.
§ Mr. LANSBURY
The hon. Baronet says that people should not borrow. He knows perfectly well that this nation has based its prosperity upon lending money abroad to finance the purchase of our manufactured articles. It is in the process of repaying that money without sending out goods that the crisis with
§ which the world is faced has been produced. I should not be allowed to enter into a discussion upon that aspect of things, but I mention it in order to explain why we oppose this Vote. We think that it is only adding to the financial confusion of Newfoundland and this country.
§ Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £539,000, be granted for the said Service."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 39; Noes, 247.1543
|Division No. 248.]||AYES.||[6.20. p.m.|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur||Malnwaring, William Henry|
|Banfield, John William||Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan)||Mander, Geoffrey le M.|
|Batey, Joseph||Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Maxton, James|
|Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)||Grundy, Thomas W.||Parkinson, John Allen|
|Brown, C. W. E. (Notts., Mansfield)||Hall, George H, (Merthyr Tydvll)||Salter, Dr. Alfred|
|Buchanan, George||Hicks, Ernest George||Smith, Tom (Normanton)|
|Cape, Thomas||Hirst, George Henry||Thorne, William James|
|Cocks, Frederick Seymour||Jenkins, Sir william||Williams, David (Swansea, East)|
|Cripps, Sir Stafford||Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)||Williams, Edward John (Ogmore)|
|Daggar, George||Lansbury, Rt. Hon, George||Williams, Dr. John H. (Llanelly)|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Lawson. John James||Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley)|
|Dobble, William||Leonard, William|
|Edwards, Charles||Logan, David Gilbert||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Evans, David Owen (Cardigan)||Lunn, William||Mr. Tinker and Mr. John.|
|Acland, Rt. Hon. Sir Francis Dyke||Colville, Lieut.-Colonel J.||Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E.|
|Acland-Troyte. Lieut.-Colonel||Conant, R. J. E.||Guinness, Thomas L. E. B.|
|Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.)||Cook, Thomas A.||Gunston, Captain D. W.|
|Agnew, Lieut.-Com. P.G.||Cooper, A. Duff||Guy, J. C. Morrison|
|Albery, Irving James||Cowan, D. M.||Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.|
|Allen, William (Stoke-on-Trent)||Craven-Eills, William||Hamilton, Sir R. W.(Orkney & Zetl'nd)|
|Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.||Crooks, J. Smedley||Hanbury, Cecil|
|Anstruther-Gray, W. J;||Crookshank, Capt. H. C. (Galnsb'ro)||Hanley, Dennis A.|
|Applin, Lieut.-Col. Reginald V. K.||Cross, R. H.||Harbord, Arthur|
|Aske, Sir Robert William||Cruddas, Lieut.-Colonel Bernard||Harris, Sir Percy|
|Bailey, Eric Alfred George||Dalkeith, Earl of||Headlam, Lieut.-Col. Cuthbert M.|
|Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley||Denman, Hon. R. D.||Heligers, Captain F. F. A.|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Dickie, John P.||Henderson, Sir Vivian L. (Chelmsford)|
|Balfour, Capt. Harold (I. of Thanet)||Doran, Edward||H engage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.|
|Barclay-Harvey, C. M.||Drewe, Cedric||Holdsworth, Herbert|
|Barrie, Sir Charles Coupar||Duckworth, George A. V.||Hope, Sydney (Chester, Stalybridge)|
|Beaumont, M. W. (Bucks., Aylesbury)||Duggan, Hubert John||Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.|
|Benn, Sir Arthur Shirley||Duncan, James A. L. (Kensington,N.)||Horobin, Ian M.|
|Bernays, Robert||Dunglass, Lord||Horsbrugh, Florence|
|Bird, Ernest Roy (Yorks., Skipton)||Edmondson, Major A. J.||Hudson,Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)|
|Bird, Sir Robert B. (Wolverh'pton W.)||Elliot, Major Rt. Hon. Walter E.||Hume, Sir George Hopwood|
|Bossom, A. C.||Emrys-Evans, p. V.||Hunt, Sir Gerald B.|
|Bower, Lieut.-Com. Robert Tatton||Entwlstle, Cyril Fuliard||Jackson, Sir Henry (Wandsworth, C.)|
|Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W.||Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)||James, Wing-Com. A. W. H.|
|Broadbent, Colonel John||Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)||Joel, Dudley J. Barnato|
|Brocklebank, C. E, R.||Evans, R. T. (Carmarthen)||Johnstone, Harcourt (S. Shields)|
|Brown, Col. D. c (N'th'ld., Hexham)||Fleiden, Edward Brocklehurst||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)|
|Brown, Brig.Gen.H.C.(Berks.,Newb'y)||Foot, Dingle (Dundee)||Jones, Lewls (Swansea, West)|
|Browne, Captain A. C.||Foot, Isaac (Cornwall, Bodmin)||Ker, J Campbell|
|Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.||Forestler-Walker, Sir Leolin||Kerr, Lieut.-Col. Charles (Montrose)|
|Burnett, John George||Gibson, Charles Granville||Kerr, Hamilton W.|
|Cadogan, Hon. Edward||Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John||Kimball, Lawrence|
|Caporn, Arthur Cecll||Gluckstein, Louis Halle||Law, Richard K. (Hull, S.W.)|
|Carver, Major William H.||Goff, Sir Park||Leighton, Major B. E. P.|
|Castlereagh, Viscount||Goodman, Colonel Albert W.||Little, Graham-, Sir Ernest|
|Cayzer, Sir Charles (Chester, City)||Gower, Sir Robert||Llewellyn-Jones, Frederick|
|Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)||Grattan-Doyle, Sir Nicholas||Lloyd, Geoffrey|
|Chapman, Col. R.(Houghton-le-Spring)||Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter||Lockwood, Capt. J. H. (Shipley)|
|Chapman, Sir Samuel (Edinburgh, S.)||Greene. William P. C.||Mabane, William|
|Christie, James Archibald||Grenfell, E. C. (City of London)||MacAndrew, Capt. J. O. (Ayr)|
|Clarry, Reginald George||Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John||Mac Donald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)|
|Clayton, Sir Christopher||Griffith, F. Kingsley (Mlddlesbro',W.)||Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Grigg, Sir Edward||McEwen, Captain J. H. F.|
|Coffox, Major William Philip||Grimston, R. V.||McKie, John Hamilton|
|McLean, Dr. W. H. (Tradeston)||Rea, Waiter Russell||Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-|
|Macmillan, Maurice Harold||Reid, William Allan (Derby)||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid Hart|
|Macquisten, Frederick Alexander||Renter, John R.||Summersby, Charles H.|
|Makins, Brigadier-General Ernest||Renwick, Major Gustav A.||Sutcllffe, Harold|
|Mallalieu, Edward Lancelot||Rhys, Hon. Charles Arthur U.||Tate, Mavis Constance|
|Manningham-Buller, Lt.-Col. Sir M.||Roberts, Aied (Wrexham)||Templeton, William P.|
|Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.||Robinson, John Roland||Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)|
|Marsden, Commander Arthur||Rosbotham, Sir Thomas||Thomas, James P. L. (Hereford)|
|Martin, Thomas B.||Ruggles-Brise, Colonel E. A.||Thompson, Luke|
|Mayhew, Lieut.-Colonel John||Runge, Norah Cecil||Thomson, Sir Frederick Charles|
|Merriman, Sir F. Boyd||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of|
|Mills, Sir Frederick (Leyton, E.)||Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)||Train, John|
|Mline, Charies||Rutherford. John (Edmonton)||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement|
|Molson, A. Hugh Elsdale||Samuel, Sir Arthur Michael (F'nham)||Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon|
|Morrison, William Shepherd||Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)||Wallace, Captain D. E. (Hornsey)|
|Muirhead, Major A. J.||Sandeman, Sir A. N. Stewart||Ward, Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)|
|Munro, Patrick||Sanderson, Sir Frank Barnard||Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wallsend)|
|Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H.||Scone, Lord||Ward, Sarah Adelaide (Cannock)|
|Newton, Sir Douglas George C.||Selley, Harry R.||Wardlaw-Milne, Sir John S.|
|Nicholson, Rt. Hn. W. G. (Petersf'ld)||Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.||Warrender, Sir Victor A. G.|
|Normand. Wilfrid Guild||Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwell)||Waterhouse, Captain Charles|
|Ormiston, Thomas||Shaw, Captain William T. (Forfar)||Watt, Captain George Steven H.|
|Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William G. A.||Simmonds, Oliver Edwin||Wedderburn, Henry James Scrymgeour.|
|Patrick, Colin M.||Skelton, Archibald Noel||Wells, Sydney Richard|
|Peake, Captain Osbert||Smiles, Lieut.-Col. Sir Walter D.||White, Henry Graham|
|Pearson, William G.||Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield. Hallam)||Whyte, Jardine Bell|
|Penny, Sir George||Smith, R. W. (Ab'rd'n & Kinc'dlne, C.)||Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)|
|Petherick, M.||Smith-Carington, Neville W.||Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S.)|
|Peto, Geoffrey K.(W'verh'pt'n,BIIston)||Smithers, Waldron||Wills, Wilfrid D.|
|Pickering, Ernest H.||Somerset, Thomas||Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertf'd)|
|Powell, Lieut.-Col. Evelyn G. H.||Somervell, Donald Bradley||Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George|
|Procter, Major Henry Adam||Somervilie, Annesley A. (Windsor)||Wise, Alfred R.|
|Raikes, Henry V. A. M.||Somervilie, D. G. (Wiliesden, East)||Withers, Sir John James|
|Ramsay, Alexander (W. Bromwich)||Sotheron-Estcourt, Captain T. E.||Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir H. Kingsley|
|Ramsay, Capt. A. H. M. (Midlothian)||Southby, Commander Archibald R. J.||Worthington, Dr. John V.|
|Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles)||Spencer, Captain Richard A.|
|Ramsden, Sir Eugene||Stanley, Lord (Lancaster, Fylde)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Rankin, Robert||Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westmorland)||Mr. Womersley and Major George|
|Rathbone, Eleanor||Stewart, J. H. (Fife, E.)||Davies.|
|Rawson, Sir Cooper||Strickland, Captain W. F.|
Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ Resolution to be reported To-morrow.
§ Committee to sit again To-morrow.