CLAUSE 21.—(Interpretation.) (Hansard, 31 March 1936)

§ Mr. PETHERICK
I beg to move, in page 17, line 20, to leave out lines 20 to 26.
It may be convenient to consider at the same time with the three Amendments which follow this on the Paper—in line 23, to leave out "or artificial fibre"; in line 24, to leave out "comprising" and insert "containing" and in line 24, to 1907 leave out from "fibre" to the end of line 26. This is admittedly an extreme Amendment and I have put it down in the hope of being allowed to raise a point which is very similar to a point of Order. The Preamble describes the Bill as a Bill to provide for the elimination of redundant spinning machinery in cotton mills. The interpretation Clause, as at present drafted, describes a cotton mill as any premises used for the production of cotton yarn or artificial yarn. Is it in order to say, in the long Title that a Bill is to deal with a specific industry and then in the interpretation Clause to widen the range of the Bill and make it apply, not only to the specific industry but to other industries?

§ Mr. SPEAKER
It appears to me that according to the Preamble the Bill is meant to deal with the cotton industry, but I understand that artificial silk is made of cotton and, therefore, that artificial fibre is included in the description contained in the Preamble to the Bill.

§ Mr. MARKHAM
Does it also cover the use of wool and mixtures of cotton wool? Would they also be included in the Bill?

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I should think that they also would be included.

§ Mr. PETHERICK
I will proceed with my Amendment for the purpose of having a general discussion on the matter. Only yesterday a number of organisations which have not previously taken a great interest in this Bill, because it was referred to as a Cotton Spinning Industry Bill, suddenly began to fear that their interests would be directly affected by it. I was asked by an hon. Friend to put down these Amendments, the object of which is to confine the interpretation of "cotton mills" to the cotton spinning industry and if the Parliamentary Secretary can give us an assurance that the Bill applies only to the cotton spinning industry and not, for instance, to artificial silk factories the alarm felt by those organisations will be somewhat allayed. As it is, it seems to me that, unless these Amendments are accepted, the expression "cotton mill" applies not only to the production of single yarn cotton fibre but also to the production of artificial fibre 1908 which may have no cotton in it. I hope the hon. Gentleman will either accept the Amendments or give us such an assurance as I have indicated.

§ Mr. SPENS
I beg to second the Amendment.
The definition of "cotton mill" in the Bill reads: Premises used or appropriated for use for the production of single yarn from cotton fibre or artificial fibre. I pause there for a moment. It has been my fortune or misfortune to try to give in courts of law a proper definition of the manufacture of artificial silk and I know of no more apt group of words for that purpose than: the production of single yarn from artificial fibre. That is a definition of what is done in every artificial silk factory in this country. Artificial silk, in many cases, is made from wood pulp and no cotton of any sort enters into it. The pulp comes out of a jet in the form of a glutinous fibre and is spun into what is called artificial silk or thread. It is true that in many artificial silk factories there is machinery capable of being used to spin cotton fibre and machinery capable of being used to spin a mixture partly of cotton, partly of artificial fibre and partly of worsted. If any artificial silk factory does spin cotton or a mixture in which cotton forms a part, it is obvious that such a factory should be within the Bill but most of them have nothing to gain by spinning and as far as I know at present never dream of spinning anythig except pure artificial fibre.
I cannot believe that so long as these factories confine themselves to spinning what I may call, rather inaccurately and loosely, pure artificial silk, that is pure artificial fibre, it was ever intended that they should come within the Bill. None the less, attention having been called to the matter, it seems to me that this definition of "cotton mill" would include artificial silk works which are doing nothing but spinning the pure artificial fibre. Those engaged in what I may call the pure artificial silk trade are surprised that this should be so and believe that it is not intended. If the Amendments are accepted, every factory which spins pure artificial silk and nothing but artificial silk will be ex- 1909 cluded, but any factory which combines with the spinning of artificial silk any cotton or worsted or other mixture will come within the Bill. From the moment it introduces into its artificial silk spinning any cotton or worsted mixture, it will come within the provisions of the Bill and will have to pay the levy. Owing to the haste in which the Amendments have to be prepared they may not be drawn in the most artistic possible manner but they have been put down in order to draw the attention of the Government to this point.

§ Mr. MARKHAM
I support the Amendments, not in the hope that they will be accepted, but in the hope of getting a statement from the Minister as to the scope of the Bill. The Mover of the Amendment has pointed out that it was understood that the Bill was originally designed to meet the need of the Lancashire cotton trade, but under this Clause, and particularly under the part of the Clause covered by the Amendments, it is feared that firms will be affected which do not in any way compete in the cotton yarn market, and that it may include any mixture of cotton and wool. I have in mind a factory which is not in my constituency, and therefore I cannot be accused of log-rolling by mentioning it. I refer to Messrs. Hollins, in Nottingham, who produce the Viyella fabric. The majority of the output of the spindles of this firm is pure wool, and yet, although it is a pure wool product, it would come under the scope of the Bill, and they would have to pay the levy. Of the remainder of the product of this firm, which I am quoting only as an example, two-thirds of the output consists of more than 50 per cent. of pure wool. I understand that under this Clause all those firms will come under the scope of the Bill, and I submit that what is really needed is a definition of a cotton mill that will exclude those mills spinning with yarns that include wool.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I want first to deal with the question of artificial silk, because I gather that these Amendments have been put down, not for any assumed virtue in their words, but rather to raise the question, in order that hon. Members may obtain from the Government some definition of what is intended to be covered 1910 by the definition of a cotton mill. Taking the Amendments by themselves, the proposal to leave out the definition of a cotton mill is one which would lead to confusion. I would like rather to deal with the broad question. Is artificial silk included within the ambit of the Bill at all? Let me say to the hon. and learned Member for Ashford (Mr. Spens), in regard to his new definition of pure artificial silk, that pure artificial silk is outside the Bill altogether, because it is not spun on mule or ring spindles.

§ Mr. SPENS
But—

§ Dr. BURGIN
Let me give my explanation and then be cross-examined on it. Pure artificial silk is outside the Bill, because it is not spun on ring or mule spindles, but, of course, is normally the production of continuous filament rayon yarn by the process of extrusion. That is the normal process. As regards staple fibre, artificial silk companies will not come within the scope of the Bill unless, in addition to producing the fibre, they spin it into yarn on ordinary cotton spinning machinery. Immediately they do spin the fibre into yarn on ordinary cotton spinning machinery and enter on the operations which are undertaken by cotton spinners, they then come within the Bill. If artificial silk concerns engage in those operations which are normally undertaken by cotton spinners on ring or mule spindles, they will then be carrying out operations which will be the same as cotton spinners are conducting, and as cotton spinners will have to pay the levy, they also will pay the levy in respect of that machinery. I hope that that makes the matter clear. That is the explanation of what the Bill is intended to do, and I can only give that explanation to the House and ask them to resist the Amendments which were put down by the three hon. Members.
I will, of course, in view of the manner in which these Amendments have been moved, give consideration to the matter between now and the Bill reaching its final stages in another place. On the question raised by the hon. Member for South Nottingham (Mr. Markham) as to the machinery in Messrs. Hollins' factory, and as to the precise nature of Viyella yarn, that again is a matter on which I must make inquiries, because, as I apprehend it, the answer to his question will 1911 depend on the nature of the machinery that is used for the spinning process—not so much on the mixture itself as on the machinery upon which the operation is carried out. There again I would like to make inquiries, and I invite the House in the meantime to allow the Bill to proceed in its present form.

§ Mr. MARKHAM
It is agreed that the Hollins yarn is of cotton type, but it would have to be especially adapted to be used as cotton yarn, and I would like an assurance that firms of this kind shall have some impartial board, or perhaps a Minister himself, to go into these questions and to decide fairly and squarely whether these firms are under the Bill or not.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I can only speak again by leave of the House, but I will ask the hon. Member whether he knows whether the machinery in question is ring or mule spindle machinery. If it is, then I think his works come within the Bill as at present framed. If there is some difference in the machinery, then it is another matter, but I agree that the point which has been raised, rather late in the day, is one that may well be inquired into, and I undertake to make that inquiry and to look into the matter. In the meantime I ask that we may be allowed to proceed with the Bill.

§ Mr. CLYNES
I bring only the mind of a layman to these matters, but, as one who worked in a cotton mill for many years and who has kept more or less in touch with the industry since and has had a personal acquaintance with the different fibres and machines, mules and rings and so on, I can only say that, so far as language is capable of clearly laying down the difference as between one and the other, the Parliamentary Secretary has managed to do it. Again, I say, I speak only as a layman, and it may be that hereafter certain legal matters will have to be settled in the courts or in some other way, but in the meantime those of us who have only the layman's mind to bring to bear on these matters must accept the suggestion of the Parliamentary Secretary.

§ Mr. SPENS
Before leaving this subject, I would like to know what the 1912 expression "or artificial fibre" means in relation to cotton. I have never heard of a cotton yarn which is made solely from an artificial fibre. It may very well be my ignorance, but it is those words "or artificial fibre" in the definition Clause which have caused anxiety in the minds of those engaged in artificial silk which is partly made from an artificial fibre. If the Parliamentary Secretary would consider whether it is not possible to review those words before the Bill becomes law, I am sure it would make a great deal of difference in the minds of those engaged in artificial silk manufacture.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I think those words can be included in the review which I have promised to make. Beyond that, I would not like to go at this stage.

§ Mr. PETHERICK
Before asking leave to withdraw the Amendment, I would like to say that there was one thing that alarmed me in what the Parliamentary Secretary said. If I followed him through the maze of technicalities and legal language correctly, he indicated that it was not really the stuff that you were spinning, but the machinery, which was the governing factor. If, in fact, it was cotton-spinning machinery, then what that cotton-spinning machinery was spinning came under the Bill, but, on the other hand, if the converse was the case, it was not included in the definition. I hope he will consider that, because this Bill definitely deals with redundant cotton spindles, with too much machinery in the cotton-spinning industry, and is not intended to deal with artificial silk or other forms of produce. I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I beg to move, in page 17, line 24, to leave out from "or," to the end of line 26, and to insert: comprising staple rayon fibre or other artificial fibre, and 'cotton-spinning' means the production of single yarn as aforesaid. These are words intended to amplify the definition.
Amendment agreed to.