HC Deb 02 March 1936 vol 309 cc1143-58

Order for the Third Reading read.


I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

We have had a good deal of discussion on this Bill, but if hon. Members opposite require further explanation or information, my right hon. Friend will be pre pared to give it.

11.18 p.m.


I beg to move, to leave out the word "now," and, at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months."

We agree with right hon. Gentleman that there has been considerable discussion on this Bill during the past fortnight, but we regard the principle embodied in the Measure as of such great importance that we are compelled again to direct the attention of the House to its provisions before it leaves for another place. Since the last discussion there has been during the past fortnight a most remarkable outburst of correspondence in the columns of the "Times" on the subject of nutrition and the scarcity principle underlying the Bill. Such men as Mr. Julian Huxley, Sir Henry Hadow, Sir Gowland Hopkins, Sir Arthur Salter, and Professor Frankland all join with the professors we quoted in the last Debate in denouncing the creation of an artificial scarcity in an absolutely essential commodity. Nobody has denied in the course of that correspondence that there is at least 10 per cent. of our population living below the British Medical Association's minimum standard. Sir John Orr went much further in his broadcast speech last week, declaring that almost half the population in our industrial areas are not getting enough to eat, and he specially mentioned milk, so rich in vitamins, as one of the commodities which ought to be better and more widely distributed than it is to-day. We may dispute about the precise proportion of the population which is under-nourished and which is badly nourished—two very different things —but the Minister of Agriculture does not dispute that there is anything from a tenth to a third of the population which is under-nourished to-day, and certainly under-nourished so far as milk is concerned. Yet at the same time that he admits that the Minister comes forward to continue a policy for spending public money raised by national taxation, on the destruction of liquid milk and its conversion into dried milk, cheese or, as I ventured to say in the last Debate, umbrella handles. He converts this 27 per cent. of liquid milk into dried milk or submits it to some other process, and it does not, as Sir John Orr says, get into the bellies of the people who need it.

What does the Minister say in defence of it? He says, "It may be true that more of our people do not get sufficient liquid milk. It may be true that we are spending money in processing it, but at any rate one result of our policy is that we have been getting cheap butter and cheap cheese." I think that is the basis of his argument, but I do not understand it. He said in a previous Debate that there had been a saving of £100,000,000 on butter prices and of £23,000,000 on cheese prices as a result of his policy and his subsidising of the processing of milk. What are the facts? I have looked up the wholesale prices of cheese and find that Australian cheese was selling at 175s. in 1929, and had fallen to 87s. in 1933. In six years the price had dropped by one half. The next year the Minister came along with his Milk Bill, providing a subsidy, and instead of the price falling as a result of his subsidy it began to rise; not because of the subsidy, but because of world conditions that we need not discuss here to-night. Between 1933 and to-day, cheese has risen, as a matter of fact, from 87s. to 120s. per cwt. It is therefore not the case that, as the result of the right hon. Gentleman's policy of subsidising and scarcity in liquid milk, we have achieved other benefits in price reduction in the butter and cheese market.

The right hon. Gentleman has given most alarming figures in this House. He has proved beyond all doubt that in countries like Norway and Sweden, where the price of liquid milk is less than half what it is here per pint, they drink double the quantity, and the infantile mortality rate is less than half what it is with us.

I have tried, at Question Time and otherwise, to get from the Ministry of Health, the cost of disease to this nation, but the figures have never been collated. Nobody has ever gathered them together. I venture to say that, when they are gathered together, they will astound Members of every part of this House. Let us see what official figures we have been able to get. I do not pretend that they are complete, or accurate to the last hundred pounds, but it cannot be disputed that on public health departments, hospitals, treatment of disease and maternity and child welfare, we are spending £16⅓ million every year.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain Bourne)

I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that we are considering the Third Reading of the Bill, and that the Debate is limited to what is in the Bill, and not to what might be in it.


I am endeavouring to prove that the whole policy of the Bill, that of organised scarcity, is against the public interest, that it is costing this nation £111,000,000, and that instead of endeavouring to wipe out that cost and to stop disease, we are spending public money on limiting the supply of the necessary commodity to the people on whose behalf we have to spend this money. I beg you to allow me to state what has never been stated in this House before, so far as I know, what the disease figures amount to in cost. There are £16⅓ million on our public health services, £36,000,000 on our National Health Insurance—

Viscountess ASTOR

You mean money spent?


Yes, money spent; cold cash per annum. There are: £15,000,000 on our voluntary hospitals, £10,000,000 as a minimum of expenditure on our general medical practitioners and consultants, apart altogether from the National Health Insurance population. On Acts relating to the relief of the poor there is a total expenditure of £46,000,000. What proportion of it is spent on attempts to cure disease I cannot tell, but, putting it at one-third as a mini mum, we get another £15,000,000, bringing the total up to £93,000,000 already. In connection with our Education Acts we spend £101,500,000 per annum, and some proportion—unknown to me—of this amount is spent on medical inspection and the treatment of disease in our schools. I will put it at £3,000,000. In connection with the Lunacy and Mental Treatment Acts the amount is, say, £6,000,000; and a proportion—say £10,000,000—of the expenditure under our Widows' and Old Age Pensions Acts arises from sickness and ill-health. At any rate, there is a total expenditure due to disease, apart altogether from infirmaries and so on, as to which I cannot get the figures, of at least £111,000,000.

In face of that expenditure; in face of the fact that in Cardiff 26 per cent. and in Newcastle 10 per cent. of the working classes get no liquid milk at all; in face of the fact that at least 10 per cent. of the working-class population is under the British Medical Association's minimum standard; in face of the fact that 50 per cent. of recruits for the Army are rejected on physical grounds, and that, of those who are accepted physically, another 30 per cent. are re fused on medical grounds—in face of all this appalling expenditure, this waste of public money, the right hon. Gentleman and his friends are asking the House to continue the organisation of scarcity for another 18 months, for that is what the Bill means. For another 18 months, the right hon. Gentleman says, he must have an organised scheme to limit the amount of milk that is to go down the bellies of the needy. Professor Julian Huxley, Professor Frankland, and the others in the "Times" every day are begging you to go further than you have gone—they are pleading now for free milk for all school children and for every child from one to five. That may not be an im- mediately practicable policy; I do not know; but I do know that the policy of organising scarcity is wrong, and the right hon. Gentleman and his friends, in perpetuating this idea that we are living in an age of scarcity, are groping in the twilight of an epoch that is passing away.


Where is the scarcity? The milk is there; it is the surplus that causes the difficulty.


There can be no surplus until every human being in this land has had enough. It is a farce to talk about a surplus.


The surplus for liquid consumption is then if anyone requires it for the purpose at a price. [Interruption.] I do not know any producer who is prepared to prod ice at a price less than the cost of production.


No one knows better than the hon. Member that they are taking 27 per cent. of the liquid milk supply from the fanner at 6d. a gallon and turning it into dried milk, or cheese, or umbrella handles.


There is such a thing as the quality of the milk. That which is turned into manufactured milk is of such a quality that you could not possibly give it to children. It has a low butter fat content.


Of course, it has after they have destroyed it. The point is that they are wasting the milk. If, instead of turning it into dried milk and selling it to Czechoslovakia, the right hon. Gentleman will give it to the hospitals, infirmaries and public health authorities at the same price that the farmers are getting now, he will save money for the State and millions of our people will be able to consume liquid milk which is denied to them now, and it will be a first class investment to do it. The "Times," which is not a Socialist paper, writes a leading article pleading with you to do it. Here we are told that if this milk is offered to the poor they will not drink it. Fortunately in another place along the Lobby there may be a better hearing for our plea. because notice has been given to ask the Government to take steps to extend still further the provision already made to supply liquid milk to school children and to initiate a scheme on similar lines for expectant and nursing mothers. This is not moved by a Bolshevik. This is moved by the Bishop of Winchester. I saw that the other day my right hon. Friend the Member for South Hackney (Mr. H. Morrison) said that there were some matters which should be moved out of the area of public controversy altogether. Surely, here is one of them. Let us lift this question of the nutrition of our people out of the sordid scramble and stupid arrangement for private profit which is going on. Let us face the fact that the most costly thing we have in this nation to-night is that of disease, on which the sum of £111,000,000 is being spent.


I think that the right hon. Gentleman is getting far away from the Third Reading of the Bill.


If it is forbidden to discuss a question of this kind, I beg formally to move the rejection of this Measure.

11.41 p.m.


Before the Third Reading of the Bill is carried, can the House be given an assurance on one point? I cannot speak for all my hon. Friends who should be on this bench, but some have taken the line that any Bill which contains a subsidy must be opposed in all its stages. If I can be given an assurance upon one point, I will endeavour to secure support for the Third Reading of the Bill. The Bill is a stop-gap policy to gain time, and I should like to know how this time is to be used administratively? May we have an assurance that it will be used in preparation for a more efficient milk products industry, or is it to be used in preparation for a further application for more subsidies or analogous Measures? The most essential part of an efficient butter or cheese industry depends upon the existence of graders of butter, who must be as skilled in the performance of their task as the most expert wine tasters in their particular task. I ask the Minister, Do such men exist. in this country to-day, and can they be found if they are wanted?

My anxiety is that, when, in the course of 18 months, we come to the working out of a long-term policy, those of us who will then be pressing for a more efficient. industry will not be met by the answer that an efficient milk-using industry depends upon the existence of a corps of butter graders, and that it is practically impossible to produce those butter graders in the twinkling of an eye. Of course, it is impossible, and everybody who studies the problem knows that it is. Can we have an assurance, therefore-;' that the Minister will forthwith survey the possibility of finding in this country a sufficient staff of really skilled butter graders to cope at the start, say, with 75 per cent. of butter output in this country? If these men do not exist or cannot be found, will he make contact with those who are so qualified in Australia, New Zealand, Denmark and other countries, and see to it that, when the present Measure expires, at any rate the foundations have been laid to secure the prerequisites for securing efficiency in this industry?

I am well aware that the Minister has behind him so many Members who will automatically support any proposal which he makes, that the question of support or otherwise from these benches is a matter of complete indifference; but I would suggest that the time may come when the inhabitants of our towns will revolt against this policy of monopoly without any guarantee of efficiency in the industry. What will be the position of the farmers and their representatives if that revolt takes place? I am afraid that may take place unless the assurance for which I have asked can be given. Perhaps I or someone else might put down a question with the possibility of getting an answer showing that something is being done along those lines, in anticipation of the long term policy 18 months from now. If we could have that assurance, I should give my support to the Third Reading of the Bill.

11.47 p.m.


I can assure the hon. Member that I do not wish to avoid support from any quarter, especially from a quarter which was increased by 300 per cent. during the hon. Member's speech. I want general support for the agricultural policy of the Government and I give the hon. Member all the assurance in my power that from the point of view of efficiency and quality what he has said will not be lost sight of in preparing the long-term policy during the interim period. The speech of the right hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Johnston) was moderate in tone and succeeded to a considerable extent in getting round the rulings of the Chair, and bringing in many points of the utmost importance, which he would not wish me to deal with now. We all recognise the great importance of fresh food and milk in the avoidance of disease, and there will be common agreement on the desirability of raising to a much greater height than at present the consumption of liquid milk. I fully appreciate the non-party spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman approached this question, on the Second Reading and to-night, with a, desire to keep it out of the realm of party controversy and in an atmosphere where full consideration for the good of the nation as a whole may be given.

My only point of difference with the right hon. Gentleman is where he said that we are organising scarcity. I would point out that the production of milk has gone up in recent years in this country. The effect of the Amendment which he has moved would be to produce the scarcity of which he complains. It would bring to an end the milk in schools scheme. The milk in schools scheme will be financed by this Bill. Although the right hon. Gentleman wishes to extend the steps that are being taken in that direction, this Amendment would bring them to an end. I quarrel with his suggestion that we are organising a scarcity. They are steps to organise a supply, to organise plenty, to extend and cheapen and improve milk, butter and cheese supplied to the people of this country. They are steps from which every man, woman and child has received great benefit.


Does the right hon. Gentleman say that raising the price of milk to the sick children's hospitals, to the infirmaries and the Poor Law institutions, has done anything to increase consumption?


Does the hon. Member suggest that one single child in one single hospital has received one single pint less because of any steps taken by the Milk Marketing Board?


The Royal Hospital for Sick Children in Glasgow, I think in the right hon. Gentleman's constituency, is being compelled to pay £500 per annum more for its milk supply, and there is a dread by some of the managers that they will be compelled to depart from T.T. milk and go on to a lower grade as a result of the high prices policy.


The right hon. Gentleman was challenged by me to say one single hospital where one single child has had one drink of milk the less. He was unable to do so, and merely said that in future in some hospital a lower grade of milk might be used. I do not think he has substantiated his challenge. If all the assistance devoted to the butter and cheese industry were devoted to the liquid milk industry it would not amount to a reduction of more than one-quarter of one farthing per pint in the price of liquid milk, and no one would suggest that would lead to as: increased consumption. It is only by organised marketing that we shall remove the difference between the price of milk for butter and cheese and the price of liquid milk. It is a difficulty which grew up under the previous system, and which only organisation can remove. We have given a breathing space to the industry for which we do not apologise. We have given cheap milk to the schools, for which we do not apologise. This Bill is to continue these things, and if it is rejected these things will come to an end. There fore I ask for a unanimous vote in favour of the Third Reading.

11.53 p.m.


What the right hon. Gentleman will not see is any policy other than that which le is pursuing. My right hon. Friend intended to point out that the policy contained in this Bill will not have the effect of providing more liquid milk for that section of the community who need it. Nothing in the Bill is calculated to do that. It can be clearly demonstrated that liquid milk prices have increased during the marketing arrangements and the period of the Milk Act. As long ai we subsidise manufactured milk we are bound, with the continued increase in output, to increase the price of liquid milk automatically if the pool price is to remain. What real effect has the cheap milk for school children had in the past 18 months? There are 301,000,000 gallons of milk going to manufacture as against an addition of 12,000,000 gallons going to school children. If the excess of milk going to schools had increased from 22,000,000 gallons to 122,000,000 gallons there would have been some point in the right hon. Gentleman's statement. We do not accept his statement that if we oppose the Bill there will be less milk available for school children. What would the milk producers do with their milk? We recognise that but for the Marketing Board the milk industry would have gone crash, and also that some temporary scheme had to be produced. We submit that the continual policy of subsidising manufacturing milk will not solve the milk problem. The surplus milk is there, but the spending power is not available and, therefore, the milk will not be purchased in liquid form. Unless the Government do one of two things the milk industry will suffer a severe blow. The Government should put up money so that liquid milk can be sent to hospitals, schools and nurseries. The right hon. Gentleman's policy is that the Government should put up a less sum of money in order that the milk should go

to the factories. That is the distinction between us.

While we are ready to make a non-party question of anything which affects the health of the people it passes my comprehension why the right hon. Gentleman cannot see that the longer this policy is pursued the worse it will be for the producer. It is because the policy has not reduced the price of liquid milk but rather tended to increase it, that only a. small quantity is available for schools and that it has had little effect on the surplus problem, that we insist that the Bill will not only not solve the problem but that at the end of the period the position will be infinitely worse than at the commencement. In order to keep the pool price reasonable, liquid milk producers are demanding bigger prices. We feel obliged to vote against the Measure, not to prevent milk being sent to school children but against a policy which keeps the milk industry in a tangle, and which shows no sign of a lasting solution.

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

The House divided: Ayes, 242; Noes, 110.

Division No. 81.] AYES. [12.0 m.
Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple) Marry, Sir R. G. Emmott, C. E. G. C.
Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J. Colfox, Major W. P. Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Albery, I. J. Colman, N. C. D. Errington, E.
Allen, Lt.-Col. J. Sandeman (B'kn'hd) Colville, Lt.-Col. D. J. Everard, W. L.
Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.) Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff(W'st.r S.G'gs) Findlay, Sir E.
Anstruther-Gray, W. J. Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'burgh, W.) Fleming, E. L.
Apsley, Lord Courthope, Cot. Sir G. L. Fraser, Capt. Sir I.
Assheton, R. Cranborne, Viscount Fremantle, Sir F. E.
Astor, Visc'tess (Plymouth, Sutton) Craven-Ellis, W. Ganzonl, Sir J.
Astor. Hon. W. W. (Fulham, E.) Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Baldwin-Webb, Col. J. Crooke, J. S. Gledhill, G.
Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet) Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C. Goldie, N. B.
Balniel, Lord Croom-Johnson, R. P. Goodman, Col. A. W.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M. Cross, R. H. Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral)
Baxter, A. Beverley Crossley, A. C. Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)
Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h) Crowder, J. F. E. Gridley, Sir A. B.
Beit, Sir A. L. Cruddas, Col. B. Grimston, R. V.
Bernays, R. H. Culverwell, C. T. Gritten, W. G. Howard
Blair, Sir R. Davidson, Rt. Hon. Sir J. C. C. Guest, Maj. Hon. O.(C'mb'rw'll, N. W.)
Blaker, Sir R. Davies, C. (Montgomery) Gunston, Capt. D. W.
Borodale, Viscount Davies, Major G. F. (Yeovil) Guy, J. C. M.
Bossom, A. C. Dawson, Sir P. Hacking, Rt. Hon. D. H.
Boulton, W. W. De Chair, S. S. Hamilton, Sir G. C.
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart De la Bère, R. Hanbury, Sir C.
Bowyer, Capt. Sir G. E. W. Donner, P. W. Hannah, I. C.
Briscoe, Capt. R. G. Dorman-Smith, Major R. H. Hannon, Sir P. J. H.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Dower, Capt. A. V. G. Harbord, A.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury) Drewe, C. Harvey, G.
Bull, B. B. Duckworth, G. A. V. (Salop) Heligers, Captain F. F. A.
Bullock, Capt. M. Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side) Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)
Burghley, Lord Dugdale, Major T. L. Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.
Campbell, Sir E. T. Duggan, H. J. Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-
Cartland, J. R. H. Duncan, J. A. L. Hepworth, J.
Carver, Major W. H. Dunglass, Lord Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth)
Cary, R. A. Dunne, P. R. R. Holmes, J. S.
Castlereagh, Viscount Eastwood, J. F. Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J.
Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham) Eckersley, P. T. Hopkin, D.
Channon, H. Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E. Horsbrugh, Florence
Choriton, A. E. L. Ellis, Sir G. Howitt, Dr. A. B.
Christie, J. A. Elmley, Viscount Hulbert, N. J.
Hunter, T, Munro, P. M. Shepperson, Sir E. W.
Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir T. W. H. Nall, Sir J. Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.
James, Wing-Commander A. W. Nicolson, Hon. H. G. Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A.
Jarvis, Sir J. J. Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. W. G. Smiles, Lieut. -Colonel Sir W. D.
Joel, D. J. B. Orr-Ewing, I. L. Smith, L. W. (Hallam)
Keeling, E. H. Palmer, G. E. H. Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)
Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose) Patrick, C. M. Somervell, Sir D. B. (Crewe)
Kerr, J. Graham (Scottish Univs.) Peake, O. Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Kimball, L. Penny, Sir G. Southby, Comdr. A. R. J.
Lamb, Sir J. O. Percy, Rt. Hon. Lord E. Spears, Brig.-Gen. E. L.
Latham, Sir P. Perkins, W. R. D. Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Fylde)
Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.) Petherick, M. Stanley, Rt Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)
Leckie, J. A. Pickthorn, K. W. M. Strauss, E. A. (Southwark, N.)
Leech, Dr. J. W. Pilkington, R. Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)
Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L. Plugge, L. F. Strickland, Captain W. F.
Levy, T. Ponsonby, Col. C. E. Stuart, Lord C. Ctichton- (N'thw'h)
Lewis, O. Porritt, R. W. Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.
Liddell, W. S. Power, Sir J. C. Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford)
Lindsay, K. M. Procter, Major H. A. Thomson, Sir J. D. W.
Liewellin, Lieut.-Col. J. J. Radford, E. A. Titchfield, Marquess of
Lloyd, G. W. Raikes, H. V. A. M. Touche, G. C.
Loder, Captain Hon. J. de V. Ramsay, Captain A. H. M. Tree, A. R. L. F.
Loftus, P. C. Ramsbotham, H. Tufnell, Lieut -Com. R. L.
Lyons, A. M. Rankin, R. Turton, R. H.
Methane, W. (Huddersfield) Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin) Wakefield, W. W.
MacAndrew, Lt.-Col. Sir C. G. Rayner, Major R. H. Walker-Smith, Sir J.
McCorquodale, M. S. Reed, A. C. (Exeter) Ward, Lieut-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)
McEwen, Capt. H. J. F. Rickards, G. W. (Skipton) Ward, Irene (Wallsend)
McKie, J. H. Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool) Wardlaw-Milne, Sir J. S.
Maclay, Hon. J. P. Ropner, Colonel L. Waterhouse. Captain C.
Macmillan, H. (Stockton-on-Tees) Ross, Major Sir R. D. (L'derry) Wayland, Sir W. A.
Macnamara, Capt. J. R. J. Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge) Wedderburn, H. J. S.
Maitland, A. Rowlands, G. Wells, S. R.
Manningham-Buller, Sir M. Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A. Wickham, Lt.-CoI. E. T. R.
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R. Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen) Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Maxwell, S. A. Salmon, Sir I. Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchln)
Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J. Salt, E. W Wise, A. R.
Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth) Samuel, M. R. A. (Putney) Wragg, H.
Mills, Sir F. (Leyton, E.) Sandys, E. D.
Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest) Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir P. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Morning, A. C. Scott, Lord William Mr. James Stuart and Dr. Morris-
Morgan, R. H. Shaw, Major P. S. (Wavertree) Jones.
Adams, D. (Consett) Gibbins, J. Milner, Major J.
Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.) Graham, D. M. (Hamilton) Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Ha'kn'y, S.)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.) Green, W. H. (Deptford) Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Ammon, C. G. Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. Oliver, G. H.
Anderson, F. (Whitehaven) Griffith, F. Kingsley (M'ddl'sbro, W.) Parker, H. J. H.
Attlee. Rt. Hon. C. R. Hall, G. H. (Aberdare) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Banfieid, J. W. Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel) Potts, J.
Barnes, A. J. Hardie, G. D. Price, M. P.
Barr, J. Henderson, A. (Kingswinford) Quibell, J. D.
Batey, J. Henderson, J. (Ardwick) Riley, B.
Bellenger, F. Hicks, E. G. Ritson, J.
Benson, G. Holdsworth, H. Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)
Bevan, A. Holland, A. Rowson, G.
Broad, F. A. Hollins, A. Sexton, T. M
Bromfield, W. Jagger, J. Silverman, S. S.
Brown, C. (Mansfield) Jenkins, A. (Pontypool) Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)
Buchanan, G. Jenkins, Sir W. (Heath) Smith, E. (Stoke)
Burke, W. A. Johnston, Rt. Hon. T. Smith, T. (Normanton)
Charleton, H. C. Jones, A. C. (Shipley) Sorensen, R. W.
Cocks, F. S. Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Stephen, C.
Compton, J. Kelly, W. T. Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford Kirby, B. V. Strauss, G R. (Lambeth, N.)
Daggar, G. Lathan, G. Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill) Leach, W. Thurtle, E
Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) Lee, F. Tinker, J. J.
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr) Leonard, W. Viant, S. P.
Day, H. Logan, D. G. Watson, W. McL.
Dobble, W. Lunn, W. Welsh, J. C.
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley) Macdonald, G. (Ince) White, H. Graham
Ede, J. C. McEntee, V. La T. Whiteley, W.
Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.) McGhee, H. G. Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty) Maclean, N. Williams, T. (Don Valley)
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H. Mainwaring, W. H. Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)
Frankel, D. Marklew, E. Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)
Gallacher, W. Marshall, F. Young, Sir R (Newton)
Gardner, B. W. Maxton, J.
Garro-Jones, G. M. Messer, F. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Mr. Paling and Mr. John.
Bill read the Third time, and passed.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

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

Adjourned at Ten Minutes after Twelve o'Clock.