Commons Sitting of 10 May 1939

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

OLD AGE PENSIONS.
Mr. Marshall: It is my privilege to present to this honourable House a petition from old age pensioners. It reads as follows:
"To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in Parliament assembled:
The humble petition of old age pensioners in Sheffield and district showeth that much hardship and dire poverty is prevalent among your petitioners, owing to the inadequacy of the present old age pensions causing many of your petitioners to have to apply for public assistance and others to become an expense and burden on their sons and daughters.
Wherefore, your petitioners pray that your honourable House will as soon as possible bring relief to your petitioners by increasing the amount of the present old age pensions; and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc."
The petition has been signed by 16,865 old age pensioners in Sheffield and district.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Bristol Waterworks Bill (King's Consent signified),
Bill read the Third time, and passed.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  JEWISH EMIGRATION.
  Mr. Manderasked the Prime Minister whether, during the visits of the Polish and Rumanian foreign ministers to this country, any discussions took place with regard to increased facilities for Jewish emigration from these countries, in relation in particular to Palestine; and with what results?
  The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Butler): As regards the discussions with Monsieur Beck on
  446
  this subject, I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the communique issued on 6th April. Similar conversations took place with Monsieur Gafencu, but in neither case did the discussions cover Jewish emigration to Palestine.
  Mr. Mander: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether an assurance was given to these foreign Ministers that facilities would be granted for increasing Jewish emigration to Palestine or elsewhere?
  Mr. Butler: The discussions did not cover Jewish emigration, but in general Colonel Beck was assured that His Majesty's Government fully appreciated the difficulties and that they would be ready to examine with the Polish and Rumanian Governments proposals for a solution of the particular problems arising in those two countries.
  Captain Cazalet: Can my right hon. Friend say whether the application of Polish Jews for admission to Palestine has been considered, or not?
  Mr. Butler: I cannot answer as to that.
  Mr. McGovern: Is it not the case that Jews are treated just as brutally in Poland and Rumania as in Germany?
  Mr. Hannah: Does not British Guiana offer better scope than Palestine?
  Following is the copy referred to:
  Communiqué on question of emigration of Jews from Poland issued on 6th April, 1939.
  "In the course of the recent conversations in London Monsieur Beck expressed the desire that any international effort for the treatment of the Jewish problem should be extended to that of the Jews in Poland, and that Jewish emigrants from Poland should have their due share in any opportunity of settlement which may be found. Monsieur Beck at the same time, at the request of the Rumanian Government, drew attention to the similar problem existing in Rumania.
  Monsieur Beck was assured that His Majesty's Government fully appreciated the difficulties to which he had referred, and would at any time be ready to examine with the Polish and Rumanian Governments proposals for a solution of the particular problems arising in Poland and Rumania which are part of a larger problem."
  Mr. Hepworthasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of Hungary's intention to expel 300,000 Jews in the near future, he can state whether any Power, including ourselves, has evolved

  447
  a policy for wholesale settlement anywhere on Tel-Aviv lines?
  Mr. Butler: My Noble Friend has not received any information to the effect that the Hungarian Government intend to expel 300,000 Jews. Commissions of inquiry appointed by refugee organisations in this country, in the United States of America and in Holland have examined or are now examining the possibility of settling refugees in British Guiana, Northern Rhodesia, the Philippines, San Domingo and Surinam.

  BRITISH CONSUL, MOSUL (MURDER).
  Mr. Noel-Bakerasked the Prime Minister whether he has made inquiries to ascertain whether the recent murder of the British consul at Mosul was the result of subversive propaganda by the agents of the Government of another European country?
  Mr. Butler: I understand that no connection has been established between the individuals arrested and sentenced for Mr. Monck Mason's murder and the agents of any foreign Power. Both the Iraqi Government and His Majesty's Government are, however, watching the question with close concern.
  Mr. Stokes: As I was present in the district at the time this murder took place, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that, following on the regrettable death of King Ghazi, rumours were spread wide in Iraq and places as far distant as Beyrout and Basra, that the death had been caused by the machination of British agents, and that the murder of the Consul at Mosul was the direct result of these propaganda statements, which were in every case attributed to the agents of the German Government?
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Is it not a fact that the Iraq Government have expelled the agents of a foreign Power who were responsible for spreading these rumours?
  Mr. Butler: I do not think the matter is quite as stated by the hon. Member. As a result of inquiries made I have given the House the information in our posses-
  448
  sion, that no connection has been established between the individuals responsible for the murder and the agents of any foreign Power.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that immediately following the death of the King the broadcasting stations of two foreign Powers broadcast statements attributing the fatality to the machinations of British agents?
  Mr. Butler: I have not actual personal knowledge of that, but if the hon. and gallant Member will put the facts before me I will consult my noble Friend.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: I shall be glad to do so.

  SPAIN.
  Mr. Dayasked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement according to his latest information concerning the present position of the withdrawal of foreign troops from Spain; and are there any British subjects in the hands of the Spanish authorities serving sentences passed upon them for offences during the recent civil war?
  Mr. Butler: The Spanish Government have given an assurance that all foreign troops will be withdrawn immediately after the victory parade, which is to be held at Madrid in the near future. Certain withdrawals of troops have in fact already taken place. Three British subjects are reported to be detained in Spain as civil prisoners. My Noble Friend is making urgent inquiries to obtain further details.
  Mr. Day: May we be informed whether the troops that have already been withdrawn have now returned to Spain?
  Mr. Butler: No, Sir.
  Mr. Boothby: Has the right hon. Gentleman any idea when the victory parade will take place?
  Mr. Butler: I should not like to give an exact date.
  Mr. Mander: Is it not to be on 30th May? How many times has it been postponed?

  CHINA AND JAPAN.
  Mr. Sorensenasked the Prime Minister, in view of the recent decision of the Japanese Government not to enter into a fuller alliance with Germany and Italy for military and other purposes, whether he will take immediate steps to propose to the Japanese Government a cessation of its aggressive action in China and the withdrawal of her troops, and the immediate holding of a Far Eastern conference between all Powers affected, with a view to securing an agreement of non-aggression and of equitable economic co-operation?
  Mr. Butler: My Noble Friend has only seen newspaper reports of such a decision. The views of His Majesty's Government were fully set out in their Note of 14th January to the Japanese Government.
  Mr. Sorensen: Has the right hon. Gentleman taken any steps to ascertain the facts, to see whether they really relate to the newspaper reports to which he has referred?
  Mr. Butler: I think the initiative in this matter lies with Japan.
  Mr. Sorensen: Would it not be desirable that we should have the information, and has not the right hon. Gentleman the means of securing the information?
  Mr. Gallacher: Would it not be better to assist the Chinese to drive the aggressors out of China?
  Mr. R. Morganasked the Prime Minister whether he will make it plain to the Japanese Government that His Majesty's Government will decline to consider any change in the constitution of the Shanghai Municipal Council in favour of the Japanese until the Japanese authorities have demonstrated their ability to maintain order in the districts under their control surrounding the International Settlement?
  Mr. Butler: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on Monday last to my hon. Friends the Members for Kidderminster (Sir J. Wardlaw-Milne) and Preston (Mr. Moreing) to which I have at present nothing to add.
  Mr. David Adamsasked the Prime Minister whether he has received any reports on the results of the recent Japanese bombing of Chungking, especially with
  450
  regard to the loss of life among civilian non-combatants?
  Mr. Jaggerasked the Prime Minister whether, with a view to its publication, he will ask the British representatives at Chungking for a full report on the recent air raid on the city, the number of civilians killed and wounded, and the amount of actual damage to Chinese military equipment?
  Mr. Butler: During the course of an air raid on Chungking on 4th May explosive and incendiary bombs were dropped in various parts of the city. One explosive bomb dropped in the native staff quarter of the British Consulate General and I much regret to say that two Chinese members of the staff were killed and 11 wounded. My noble Friend is now awaiting a fuller report on the general results of the raid. His Majesty's Ambassador in Tokyo has been instructed to protest vigorously to the Japanese Government.
  Mr. T. Williams: Has the right hon. Gentleman made any protest against the adverse effect on British nationals or against the bombing?
  Mr. Butler: The first consideration was the making of a protest, but I can assure the hon. Member that the effect on British nationals will also be discussed.

  EUROPEAN SITUATION.
  Mr. Sorensenasked the Prime Minister whether, in the interests of peace, he will consider proposing to the German Government an arrangement with the German and British Press by which official reasoned statements of the respective policies of the German and the British Governments should be published simultaneously and recurrently in the Press of both countries, or whether he has considered, or will consider, alternative means of securing mutual popular consideration of governmental and national policies?
  Mr. Butler: Official German statements already receive full publicity in the British Press, and His Majesty's Government would naturally welcome arrangements for adequate publicity to be given in the German Press to official British statements. His Majesty's Government are ready to consider any practical suggestions, but I doubt whether any useful purpose would be served by acting on the hon. Member's proposal.
  Mr. Sorensen: Will the right hon. Gentleman at least consider its advisability? Although it may be a novel idea, will he consider it sympathetically? If this arrangement could be adopted, would it not be a valuable means of obtaining publicity in the German Press of our pacific intentions in this country?
  Mr. Butler: I appreciate the value of the suggestion, and it will continue to receive our close consideration.
  Mr. Bellenger: Is it not much more important that the German Government should consider this?
  Mr. Butler: That is precisely one of the difficulties.
  Mr. Thurtle: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the German Government has no intention of allowing its people to know the truth?
  Mr. Butler: No, Sir, I could not generally accept that.
  Mr. Arthur Hendersonasked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement on the recent negotiations between His Majesty's Government and the Turkish Government?
  The Prime Minister (Mr. Chamberlain): I hope to be able to make a statement very shortly, but at present I cannot add anything to my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for East Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby) on 3rd May.
  Mr. Henderson: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to delay making a statement about these negotiations with Turkey until the discussions with the Russian Government have been concluded?
  The Prime Minister: No, Sir.
  Mr. Manderasked the Prime Minister what reply has been received from Germany to the British Government's offer to guarantee Germany against aggression; and whether the offer has been conveyed through diplomatic channels?
  The Prime Minister: What I said in my reply to the hon. Member for Kingswinford (Mr. A. Henderson) on 3rd May was that His Majesty's Government would certainly be ready to consider proposals for an exchange of reciprocal assurances with the German Government. This offer has not been conveyed through the diplo-
  452
  matic channel and His Majesty's Government have not received any communications from the German Government on the subject.
  Mr. Mander: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the territorial boundary which the British Government would be prepared to consider guaranteeing would include or not the new Czecho-Slovakian areas recently seized by Germany?
  The Prime Minister: That is a hypothetical question.

  SUDAN AND ITALIAN EAST AFRICA.
  Mr. Noel-Bakerasked the Prime Minister whether any agreement has yet been made with the Italian Government for the demarcation of the frontier between Abyssinia and the Sudan in the region of Gambela and in the valleys of Akob and Sobat?
  Mr. Butler: No, Sir. I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of 29th March to the hon. and learned Member for Kingswinford (Mr. A. Henderson) to which I have nothing to add at present.
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the necessity of protecting the people in this area if it should be ceded?
  Mr. Butler: I think we had better await the consideration of the joint memorandum of the British and Egyptian Governments, which the Italian Government is now considering.

  GREAT BRITAIN AND RUSSIA.
  Miss Rathboneasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the recent strong manifestation of public opinion as tested by the Institute of Public Opinion in favour of a military alliance between Great Britain, France, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, he will reconsider the instructions given to the British Ambassador at Moscow?
  Mr. Butler: The answer is in the negative, but I would ask the hon. Lady to await a reply which the Prime Minister is giving at the end of Questions.
  Miss Rathbone: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this important and scientific test 87 per cent. answered "Yes" to the question; 6 per cent. were

  453
  against and 7 per cent. gave no answer at all? Has he any reason for doubting the value of this test?
  Mr. Butler: No, Sir. I am always interested in any scientific test. When I have applied it in my constituency I have always been returned.
  Brigadier-General Sir Henry Croft: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that whilst there is general unity on the subject of co-operation against aggression, any idea of a permanent commitment of our people in a military alliance other than that with France would be regarded with the greatest disquiet?
  Mr. Boothby: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the observations just made are entirely without foundation?
  Mr. Gallacher: Does not the hon. and gallant Member speak for the people of the Fifth Column?
  Mr. Attlee(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement issued in Moscow regarding the proposals of the British Government and whether, in view of this, he will now state the nature of the proposals made by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and of the reply of His Majesty's Government.
  The Prime Minister: I have seen the statement to which the right hon. Gentleman refers and which seems to be based upon some misunderstanding of the suggestions actually put forward by His Majesty's Government to the Soviet Government. Though conversations are still in progress and the House will not, therefore, expect me to discuss these matters in detail, I think it right, in view of this statement, to place the House in possession of the general line on which the conversations have been hitherto proceeding.
  As the House is aware, His Majesty's Government recently accepted a definite obligation in respect of certain Eastern European States. They did this in pursuance of their declared policy of assisting those States to resist any attempt, if such were made, to threaten their independence. His Majesty's Government undertook these obligations without inviting the Soviet Government to participate directly in them, in view of certain difficulties to which, as the House is well
  454
  aware, any such suggestion would inevitably give rise. His Majesty's Government accordingly suggested to the Soviet Government that they should make, on their own behalf, a declaration of similar effect to that already made by His Majesty's Government, in the sense that, in the event of Great Britain and France being involved in hostilities in discharge of their own obligations thus accepted, the Soviet Government, on their side, would express their readiness also to lend assistance, if desired. Such a declaration, if the Soviet Government feel able to make it, seems to His Majesty's Government to be in accord with the recent pronouncement of M. Stalin, that it is the policy of the Soviet Government to support countries which might be victims of aggression and which were prepared to defend their own independence.
  Almost simultaneously the Soviet Government suggested a scheme at once more comprehensive and more rigid which, whatever other advantages it might present, must in the view of His Majesty's Government inevitably raise the very difficulties which their own proposals had been designed to avoid. His Majesty's Government accordingly pointed out to the Soviet Government the existence of these difficulties. At the same time they made certain modifications in their original proposals. In particular, they made it plain that it was no part of their intention that the Soviet Government should commit themselves to intervene, irrespective of whether Great Britain and France had already, in discharge of their obligations, done so. His Majesty's Government added that, if the Soviet Government wished to make their own intervention contingent on that of Great Britain and France, His Majesty's Government for their part would have no objection.
  My Noble Friend yesterday saw the Soviet Ambassador, who explained to him that the Soviet Government were still not clear whether under the proposal of His Majesty's Government circumstances might not arise in which the Soviet Government would be committed to intervention unsupported by His Majesty's Government or France. My Noble Friend assured the Ambassador that this was definitely not the intention of the proposal, made by His Majesty's Government and that, if there were any room for doubt

  455
  on this point, my Noble Friend anticipated that it could without difficulty be removed. He accordingly invited the Soviet Ambassador to place His Majesty's Government in possession of the precise grounds on which these doubts of his Government were based, if they still existed, and this the Soviet Ambassador readily agreed to do.
  I should add that the British Ambassador in Moscow had an interview two days ago with M. Molotov, at the conclusion of which M. Molotov promised that the Soviet Government would give careful consideration to our proposals, and we are now awaiting their reply.
  Mr. Dalton: Would it not be a good thing, in order to speed up these very slow negotiations, the slowness of which is causing grave apprehension in the country, that Lord Halifax should proceed to Moscow and have a straightforward discussion with M. Molotov?
  The Prime Minister: I think we had better await the reply of the Soviet Government and then we shall see what further steps are required.
  Mr. Mander: The Prime Minister has been good enough to explain to the House the policy put forward by His Majesty's Government to Russia, and will he be good enough at the same time to explain the so-called rigid proposals of the Russian Government which the British Government have been unable to accept?
  The Prime Minister: I do not think it is necessary for me to add anything to the statement I have made.
  Mr. Attlee: May I take it from the Prime Minister that in these negotiations we are keeping in the closest touch with the French Government, in order that the views of all three Governments may be clear before the making, as we hope, of a firm agreement against aggression?
  The Prime Minister: Yes, Sir, we are keeping in the closest touch with the French Government continuously.
  Mr. Thurtle: Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the Government regard the conclusion of these negotiations as a matter of real urgency?
  The Prime Minister: We regard it as of the greatest importance and of real urgency.
  Mr. A. Henderson: Can the House take it that His Majesty's Government have not finally closed their minds to, if circumstances necessitate, the conclusion of a military alliance with Russia?
  The Prime Minister: I cannot answer a hypothetical question. Discussions are going on on certain lines, and we are very hopeful that they will soon come to a satisfactory issue.
  Mr. Benjamin Smith: Could the Prime Minister tell us whether the terms set out would include, if Great Britain found herself attacked by an aggressor, assistance by Russia to this country?
  The Prime Minister: I made a careful and full statement, and I think it is very much better that I should not add to it.
  Sir Archibald Sinclair: Do the Government's proposals contemplate only the contingency of war? Do they not also contemplate the contingency of peaceful negotiations, and is there any assurance to Russia that, if peaceful negotiations are entered into, Russia will be a party to those negotiations?
  The Prime Minister: What the negotiations are contemplating is an act of aggression.
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Can the Prime Minister confirm the point that the guarantee given to Poland does not in any way preclude an alliance with Russia, and that Colonel Beck gave express assurances on that point?
  The Prime Minister: Does the hon. Member mean an alliance between this country and Russia?
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Yes.
  The Prime Minister: No, that is not excluded.
  Mr. Noel-Baker: And did Colonel Beck raise no objection?
  The Prime Minister: I did not say that at all. The question which the hon. Member asked me was whether the arrangement with Poland excluded the possibility of an alliance between this country and Russia, and to that I said "No."

  LEAGUE OF NATIONS (COUNCIL MEETING).
  Mr. Noel-Bakerasked the Prime Minister who will represent His Majesty's Government at the forthcoming meeting of the Council of the League of Nations?
  Mr. Butler: The United Kingdom representative will be my Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

  CIVIL AVIATION.

    EMPIRE AIRPORT.
    Rear-Admiral Sir Murray Sueterasked the Secretary of State for Air whether any alternative sites to Langstone Harbour and Southampton for development as an Empire airport have been inspected and with what result?
    The Under-Secretary of State for Air (Captain Harold Balfour): Yes, Sir. In all, nine suggested alternatives have been examined at various times, but after consideration of the many factors that must be taken into account in arriving at a decision, including cost, operational convenience, time involved in construction and the future of the flying boat in the Empire Air Mail Scheme, it has been decided that, in present circumstances, the marine base should remain at Southampton.

    SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS.
    Mr. Dayasked the Secretary of State for Air whether he has any information and can state the country or countries of origin of the aircraft now used in operation by the South African Airways on the Johannesburg to Cape Town air service?
    Captain Balfour: The choice of aircraft equipment used by South African Airways is not a matter for the Air Ministry, but I understand that for the fast service from Johannesburg to Cape Town Ju.86 aircraft are used, and for the slower service over the same route Ju.52 aircraft are used. Both types are of German construction.
    Mr. Day: Can the Under-Secretary say how many of these aircraft are used on this service?
    Captain Balfour: No, Sir. If the hon. Member wants any further information he should put a question to the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs.
    Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Can the hon. and gallant Member say whether British aircraft manufacturers had any opportunity of tendering for aircraft for use on this service?
    Captain Balfour: Not without notice.

    ISLES OF LEWIS AND SOUTH UIST.
    Mr. Malcolm MacMillanasked the Secretary of State for Air what progress has been made with preparation of the ground for the air service to the Isle of Lewis; and whether he is now able to state at what date it is proposed to begin a regular service?
    Captain Balfour: I understand that the operating company began work on the proposed aerodrome at Stornoway, Isle of Lewis, in March last and that it is expected that the work will be completed during the autumn of this year. I am informed that the company has applied to the Air Transport Licensing Authority for a licence for a regular service which they propose to start next spring.
    Mr. MacMillanasked the Secretary of State for Air what proposals he has received for restoring the regular air services to the Isle of South Uist; and what early action he proposes?
    Captain Balfour: No proposals have been received in regard to the restoration of the regular air services to the Isle of South Uist. The restoration or initiation of a regular air service is a matter for the operating company concerned, subject to the granting of a licence by the Air Transport Licensing Authority, and it is not, therefore, possible for my Department to take any action in regard to the restoration of the service in question. I understand, however, that there is a service available on demand on charter terms, but that the operating company do not consider that the institution of a regular service is practicable in view of the small amount of traffic operating to and from the Island. Further, on account of the unsatisfactory condition of the aerodrome, it has been necessary to stipulate that services may not operate from South Uist with more than 60 per cent. load.

  ROYAL AIR FORCE.

    CARRIER-PIGEON SERVICE.
    Sir Thomas Cookasked the Secretary of State for Air whether he has any statement to make with regard to the organisation of the carrier-pigeon service and the registration of suitable staff and pigeons in the event of emergency?
    The Secretary of State for Air (Sir Kingsley Wood): Yes, Sir. A comprehensive scheme has now been approved

    459
    for making full use of homing pigeon services in peace and war. The work of organisation on behalf of the Air Ministry is being undertaken by a committee representing the various bodies concerned, and will include the preparation of a register of owners in suitable localities who are willing to offer their services. A large number of applications from such owners has already been received. Full details of the scheme, which provides for annual grants to owners whose pigeons are accepted for the service of the Air Ministry, are being published to-day in a communiqué of which I will send my hon. Friend a copy.
    Mr. Charles Brown: Are pigeons to be conscripted from the various lofts?

    CIVIL AIR GUARD.
    Wing-Commander Jamesasked the Secretary of State for Air whether, having regard to the fresh sources of unskilled personnel that will shortly become available for training with the Royal Air Force, consequent upon the introduction of conscription, he will take steps to effect economy and efficiency by the abolition or drastic modification of the Civil Air Guard scheme?
    Captain Balfour: The question whether the provisions of the Military Training Bill will necessitate any modifications of the Civil Air Guard scheme is being considered; but in view of the wide age limits under this scheme my right hon. Friend does not anticipate any drastic changes. The main purpose of the Civil Air Guard scheme is not affected by the Bill.
    Wing-Commander James: Can the Under-Secretary tell me what is the expenditure to date on this scheme, and how many first-line pilots have been produced?
    Captain Balfour: If the hon. and gallant Member will put that question down I will do my best to give him an answer.

    DECEASED AIRMEN (FUNERAL EXPENSES).
    Mr. George Hallasked the Secretary of State for Air whether his attention has been called to the inadequate sum paid towards the funeral expenses of deceased airmen, killed in the Service, where the body is removed by relatives for burial; and whether steps have been taken to increase the amount of £7 108.?
    Sir K. Wood: This matter has been under review and my Department will, in certain cases, increase the grant to a maximum of £10.
    Mr. Hall: Is there any possibility of a further increase seeing that the amount already agreed to would in many cases fall below the expenses allowed for a single person who has died as the result of an industrial accident?
    Sir K. Wood: I think we had better wait until we have had some more experience.

  PROPOSED STEEL WORKS, EDALE.
  Mr. Keelingasked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that Brown Bayley's Steel Works, Limited, propose to acquire 50 acres of land at Edale, the heart of the Peak District, in order to manufacture steel for the construction of aeroplanes; and whether he will make it clear that he will withhold contracts from them unless they put their factory on a site where it will not destroy the amenities of one of the most beautiful parts of the country?
  Sir K. Wood: My hon. Friend will appreciate that the requirements for steel supplies for Royal Air Force purposes must govern the placing of orders with manufacturers by my Department. The site proposed for these works was not selected by my Department but by the firm concerned and I understand that the proposal to establish the works at Edale has been approved by the development authority under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1932. I am, however, looking further into this matter in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, and I propose to see representatives of the firm forthwith.
  Mr. Keeling: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether I shall be right in assuming that the prospect of such an offence to public opinion being committed in the name of air defence makes him uncomfortable?
  Mr. T. Smith: Will not the right hon. Gentleman use his influence with Brown Bayley to get these steel works erected on some of the sites available in the West Riding of Yorkshire and not spoil the beautiful district of Edale?
  Sir K. Wood: I propose to represent to the firm what I have discovered are the feelings of the House and to discuss with them the possibility of an alternative site.
  Mr. T. Williams: Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain the views of the Minister of Agriculture in view of the splendid agricultural land in this area?
  Miss Wilkinson: Will the Minister, as a matter of general policy, apart from individual sites, see that these works are put down in the distressed areas where social services already exist?
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Will the right hon. Gentleman represent to the firm that there is a storm of strong indignation in the Midlands against this vandalistic proposal?
  Mr. Marshall: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the proposed factory is one in respect of which a substantial Government grant is proposed, and if that is the case will he undertake to see that public money is not used to destroy one of the most beautiful places in this country?

  KENYA.

    JUVENILE EMPLOYMENT.
    Mr. Gallacherasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, with a view to the eventual elimination of the evil of child labour in the Colonies, he will advise 14 years as the age for all classes of child labour in the pending legislation in Kenya Colony?
    The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Malcolm MacDonald): I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Creech Jones) on 14th December last, to which I have nothing to add.
    Mr. Gallacher: Would it be permissible for me to refer the Minister to the answer which he gave me about two weeks ago, in which he showed that only a certain class of children are required to have the 14 limit in Kenya, and will he not take steps to put an end to the disgrace of employing children under 14 years of age in Kenya Colony?
    Mr. MacDonald: The answer to which I referred covers the point of the different types of employment which children take on in Kenya.
    Mr. Gallacher: The answer to which I referred relates to these types, and I want to have no type employed under 14.

    SCHOOLS (FEES).
    Mr. Palingasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many native children in Kenya are attending grant-aided schools, and what fees are charged?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: 124,005 African children attended grant-aided schools in Kenya in 1938. Elementary school fees are fixed on a district basis and are related to economic conditions. A typical scale is: for boys, 50 cents—that is sixpence—a term rising to three shillings a term in the fifth year; and for girls, free tuition on entry, rising to two shillings a term in the fifth year.
    Mr. Palingasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many children have been turned out of the elementary schools in Kenya because of inability to continue to pay fees?
    Mr. MacDonald: The Governor informs me that no cases have been brought to his notice of children being turned out of elementary schools owing to inability to pay fees. Government and mission schools reduce fees for poor pupils.
    Mr. Paling: If I bring some cases to the right hon. Gentleman's notice, will he inquire into the matter?
    Mr. MacDonald: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Palingasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many elementary schools provided for the education of native children in Kenya receive a grant-in-aid from public funds; and whether such a grant is dependent upon fees being charged?
    Mr. MacDonald: 367 elementary schools received grants-in-aid in 1938. Grants are not dependent upon fees being charged, but aided schools are advised to charge fees.
    Mr. Paling: Is it desirable to charge fees to children attending those schools when those fees have to be paid by parents who are, in the main, earning about 8s. a month?
    Mr. MacDonald: There is a good deal of elasticity in the matter of fees. It has been found that in cases where fees can be charged, it enables the benefits of education to be spread over a wider population.
    Mr. Paling: Is it really necessary when only about 16 per cent. of the children get any education at all, and when the parents are earning only 8s. a month, that they should have to pay these fees, in addition to heavy direct taxation?
    Mr. MacDonald: Wages vary from district to district and, as my previous answer indicated, an allowance is made for poor parents.
    Miss Wilkinson: Would not the Minister's answer do away with all free elementary education, if applied to this country; and if we give free elementary education here where wages are high, surely we can do something for these poorly-paid labourers in our own Empire?
    Mr. MacDonald: It has not done away with free elementary education in Kenya.
    Miss Wilkinson: Very nearly.

  PALESTINE.

    MUFTI OF JERUSALEM.
    Mr. Manderasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will consider the advisability of taking action to prevent the ex-Mufti from continuing his anti-British activities by staying in Syria and organising outrages in Palestine?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: His Majesty's Government are in close touch with the French Government on this matter.
    Mr. Mander: Is there the slightest doubt that the ex-Mufti has been carrying on his propaganda for a long time encouraging outrages in Palestine? Can the Minister say nothing more than that he is in close touch with the French Government? Are they not going to do anything about it?
    Mr. MacDonald: We have made it perfectly clear from time to time what is our view of the activities carried on by the Mufti of Jerusalem, and we have not altered our opinion with regard to that matter.
    Mr. Mander: What is the good of the Government having an opinion unless they do something about it? Are they not prepared to bring pressure upon our friend and ally France to put an end to these activities of the ex-Mufti?
    Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: For how many years have the Colonial Office been
    464
    in close touch with France on this subject? Have they received a direct refusal from the French Government to take any action in the matter?
    Mr. MacDonald: Our information is that in recent times the surveillance over the activities of the Mufti of Jerusalem has been stricter than it was some time ago.
    Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Has it checked them?
    Mr. T. Williams: Will the right hon. Gentleman say that in no circumstances will the Government allow the Mufti to return to Palestine, where so many murders have been committed at his command?

    POLICY.
    Lieut.-Commander Fletcherasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is now in a position to make a statement on the outcome of the recent Palestinian Conference held in London?
    Mr. David Adamsasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any statement to make as to the progress of negotiations for a basis of settlement in the Palestine controversy?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: A statement regarding future policy in Palestine will be presented to Parliament as a Command Paper in the near future.
    Sir Percy Harris: Will it be before Whitsun? Can the right hon. Gentleman give some indication as to when it will be?
    Mr. MacDonald: I cannot at present add to the statement I have made regarding the near future.
    Mr. Mander: Is it not the case that this conference was, in fact, completely dominated by the ex-Mufti in the background?
    Mr. MacDonald: No, Sir.

    REFUGEES.
    Mr. Wedgwoodasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has inquired into the killing of a refugee and the wounding of two others on board the Greek ship "Aghios Nicolaos" which was carrying refugees to Palestine; whether motor-boats employed by the Palestinian Government were involved; how many refugees were landed from the this ship; and what has happened to this ship?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: I apologise for the length of the reply. I have inquired into the action taken by the Palestine Government with regard to this ship, and the facts are as follow:
    On 31st March at 11.30 p.m. a ship was observed by a police launch within Palestine territorial waters, steaming slowly without lights. When a quarter of a mile off the coast the ship stopped, whereupon she was challenged by the police launch which had approached within 50 yards. On sighting the launch the ship immediately started moving, and failed to respond to a signal to heave to. The police launch then fired a white Verey light for illumination, and as the vessel still showed no signs of stopping, the commander fired his revolver across the bows of the vessel and subsequently into the ship itself, which was drawing rapidly away. The launch followed the ship until sight of her was lost outside the territorial limits. During the encounter no passengers were seen on the ship, but on deck in front of the bridge was a large pile of wooden cases believed to contain arms which had been reported as in transit to Palestine. The action taken by the police launch was in accordance with Section 170 of the Palestine Customs Ordinance, 1929. No passengers were landed from the ship. But the Palestine authorities later received a report that a ship called the "Aghios Nicolaos" arrived at the port of Kandia in Crete on 4th April with 687 Jews from Rumania on board, and that when fired upon by a coastguard vessel off Palestine a few days previously two passengers had been wounded, one of whom had subsequently died. I have no other information confirming this report. If it is true I regret that the illegal activity of this ship should have resulted in the death of an individual.
    Colonel Wedgwood: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will have inquiry made at the port where the ship was entering into these casualties, and if they are found to be correct, will he take action as regards the firing on this ship? I understand there is no martial law in Palestine, and, therefore, I request that the right hon. Gentleman should have a strict inquiry made into this action, which is typical—[Interruption]. I beg to give notice that I intend to ask for leave to move the Adjournment of the
    466
    House on this matter at the end of Questions.
    Mr. David Adamsasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the hardship and suffering from which many of the original party died during their voyage to Palestine, it is intended to permit the remaining 182 refugees now in quarantine in Haifa to remain in the country?
    Mr. MacDonald: The case of these people is still under consideration, and I am not yet in a position to say what decision will be taken in regard to them. As the hon. Member is aware, they are now in quarantine.
    Mr. Crossley: If these people are allowed to remain in Palestine will their numbers be set against the number of legal immigrants in the future?
    Mr. MacDonald: Yes, Sir, that is the policy of the Government.
    Mr. T. Williams: Are not these so-called illegal immigrants actually less illegal than the action of His Majesty's Government who have set aside the original "economic absorptive capacity" policy?
    Mr. MacDonald: This immigration in Palestine is definitely illegal. As regards policy, that is a matter of opinion, but I cannot agree to the implication in the hon. Gentleman's question.
    Mr. Crossley: Has not the economic absorptive capacity already been exceeded?
    Mr. David Adams: When does the Minister anticipate that a decision will be arrived at?
    Mr. MacDonald: I expect at an early date.

  NIGERIA (MINE WORKERS).
  Mr. Ammonasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the average monthly number of workers employed in the gold, tin, and coal mines of Nigeria, respectively?
  Mr. M. MacDonald: The latest figures immediately available are for the year 1937, and show that during that year the average numbers of African workers employed in the gold, tin, and coal mines were 9,902, 36,142 and 1,634 respectively.
  Mr. Riley: Are any women or girls employed in the tin mines in Nigeria?
  Mr. MacDonald: I should require notice of that question, but I imagine that men are employed underground, at any rate.

  BRITISH GUIANA (REFUGEES).
  Mr. Edmund Harveyasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether arrangements have been made for the publication at an early date of the report of the Commission of Inquiry with regard to the settlement of refugees in British Guiana; and whether any decision has been reached with regard to the recommendations of the Commission?
  Mr. Rileyasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now received the report of the British Government representatives who recently visited British Guiana to investigate the advisability of settling refugees in that territory; and, if so, will he consider placing a copy of the report in the Library of the House of Commons?
  Mr. M. MacDonald: The report has been printed as a White Paper and copies will be available in the Vote Office for Members this evening. It is addressed to the United States President's Advisory Committee on Political Refugees, and is being carefully considered by the refugee organisations here and in America. His Majesty's Government, who are in touch with the refugee organisation in this country, are also giving the report active consideration, and expect to be in a position to make a statement at a very early date.
  Mr. Harvey: Will the right hon. Gentleman be able to issue a further White Paper when the Government's decision has been reached?
  Mr. MacDonald: I doubt whether a White Paper would be necessary. I think a statement at this Box would be all that would be required.
  Mr. T. Williams: May I ask whether, side by side with the publication of the report, the memoranda provided by the experts will also be published, and is it not the case that the experts expressed very grave doubts about the possibility of large-scale immigration into British Guiana owing to the climatic conditions, lack of fertility of the soil, and lack of communications there?
  Mr. MacDonald: Various reports by experts were considered, in conjunction with the experts, by the Commission in drawing up their final report, and the report which will be published as a White Paper this afternoon will contain the views of the Commission after carefully examining those individual reports. With regard to the reports of the experts, we anticipate publishing them in a separate document as early as possible afterwards.
  Mr. T. Williams: Before the Government make up their mind on the report, will copies of the experts' memoranda be made available to Members of the House?
  Mr. Hannah: Do not experts always damp down enthusiasm?
  Mr. Crossley: Is it not surprising that so many representatives of the refugees should run down the efforts of the British Government to settle refugees in British Guiana?
  Mr. MacDonald: In considering their policy the Government will, of course, take careful account of the experts' reports. These will be published as soon as it is physically possible to produce them. With regard to the general question, His Majesty's Government have considerable hopes of the settlement possibilities in British Guiana.

  HONG KONG (BRITISH EMPLOYÉS).
  Mr. Dayasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give any information as to the number of British persons employed at the present time in Hong Kong?
  Mr. M. MacDonald: I have not this information, but will ask the Governor for an estimate of the number.
  Mr. Day: Will the right hon. Gentleman also ask whether these persons are employed by British interests?
  Mr. MacDonald: I will seek that information.

  SIERRA LEONE.
  Mr. Sorensenasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what expenses were incurred by the Government of Sierra Leone in respect of the recent strikes; how the Government propose to meet this extra

  469
  expenditure; and how the financial responsibility in connection with the War Department strike has been allocated?
  Mr. M. MacDonald: I have not the material for which the hon. Member asks; but am making inquiries of the Governor.
  Mr. Sorensen: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he is likely to receive information regarding this matter?
  Mr. MacDonald: I am asking for it by dispatch, and I will let the hon. Member have the information as soon as I receive it.

  INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY PANEL.
  Mr. Ellis Smithasked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement or issue a report dealing with the work and reports of the Advisory Panel on Rearmament since 2nd February, 1939; and, in particular, what has been done by the panel with regard to future work since that date?
  The Prime Minister: As I stated in the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart) on 2nd February, it was not my intention that the Advisory Panel of Industrialists should themselves make reports, neither do I consider it desirable that a detailed report on their work should be given. I should wish, however, to place on record my strong sense of the zeal and devotion with which the panel have carried out the duties falling to them under their terms of reference. I think that the following particulars may be of general interest to the House. Since their formation during the latter part of December, the panel have held 44 meetings, apart from such meetings as have been held by the sub-committees which they have set up. In addition to carrying out the survey of the rearmament programme to which reference was made in the statement published in the proceedings of the House for 2nd February, they have carried out a comprehensive examination of the arrangements which are being made to establish a war potential in this country and also of numerous matters affecting the position of industry in war. They have further been able to offer helpful advice on a number of specific problems referred to them by Government Departments and they have
  470
  also dealt with such matters as have been put to them by industrial associations or by individual firms. I understand that, in addition to holding themselves at disposal to deal with specific references to them, the panel have it in mind after a reasonable interval to survey again, especially, progress made with the rearmament programme.
  Mr. Smith: Is it the intention of the Prime Minister to merge this Advisory Panel into the Ministry of Supply, and, if so, would it not be advisable that a statement should be made of a similar character to that which was made on 2nd February, in order that the House may have an opportunity of "checking up"?
  The Prime Minister: That is not my intention.
  Mr. Henderson Stewart: Can my right hon. Friend confirm the impression which exists that the continuance of this panel would prove of great value to the new Ministry of Supply?
  The Prime Minister: Yes, I think it would.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Will the Prime Minister give some indication how far small firms which have found difficulty in obtaining orders in connection with the rearmament programme, have availed themselves of the services of this panel?
  The Prime Minister: I could not say at the moment, but if the hon. and gallant Member puts down a question, I will try to give him the information.
  Mr. Hicks: The Prime Minister mentioned that the panel had had under consideration the question of industry in war time. Does the panel have for consideration such questions as that of the reserved occupations list?
  The Prime Minister: No, Sir, that does not come within its purview.

  FOOD DEFENCE PLANS.
  Mr. Shinwellasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he can state the total cost to the Government of the wheat reserve in carrying charges and through loss of weight and also of allowances charged by millers for deterioration of wheat in store?
  The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. W. S. Morrison): Carrying charges including rent, handling and supervision, work out at an average rate of approximately 18s. per ton per annum. Loss of wheat in store and in transit has amounted up to date to 7 of 1 per cent. of the total weight of wheat disposed of to the millers, and allowances for deterioration to 2 of 1 per cent. of the value of the wheat so disposed.
  Mr. Shinwell: Are not these charges excessive, particularly as regards deterioration; and is it desirable that a monoply operating on behalf of the Government should determine the terms of the remuneration which is to be received?
  Mr. Morrison: The rates for deterioration are designed, in the first instance, by the independent chairman of the Advisory Committee. In regard to the actual figures, I think that claims amounting to less than one-fifth of 1 per cent are not excessive.
  Mr. Shinwell: May I ask whether this independent chairman is an expert in the grain trade?
  Mr. Morrison: Yes, Sir, he is an independent miller—independent of the three big milling combines—and I do not think it is disadvantageous to have someone who has a knowledge of the milling side of the industry.
  Mr. Shinwell: Would it not also be desirable to have somebody from: the grain side?
  Mr. Morrison: If the hon. Member will suggest to me some person whom he has in view, I will gladly consider that.
  Lieut.-Colonel Heneage: Is there a heavy charge for deterioration owing to loss caused by rats?
  Mr. Morrison: I could not answer that question without notice.
  Captain Heilgers: Is it not the case that there is a constant turn-over?
  Mr. Morrison: There is a constant turnover, and every step is taken to prevent deterioration as far as possible, but some deterioration is inevitable.
  Mr. Shinwellasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster the conditions which determine payments to millers on account of deterioration of wheat held
  472
  under the wheat reserve; and whether, before payment is made, the Government will consult independent opinion in the grain trade to ensure that charges are not excessive?
  Mr. Morrison: Claims in respect of deterioration of the Government reserves are referred to the chairman of the Advisory Committee appointed to assist the Food (Defence Plans) Department in the administration of the wheat storage scheme. The chairman is an independent miller of recognised standing in the trade. It is open to the milling concern or the Department to appeal to arbitration under the rules of the London Corn Trade Association.
  Mr. Shinwell: In a matter of such importance affecting the country as a whole, and particularly affecting the Imperial Exchequer, why should the determination of these payments be left to those associated with the milling trade, even under an independent chairman? Why not consult outside assistance?
  Mr. Morrison: It is not a case of this matter being left to them. The final word is with the Department. If any claim is considered excessive, there is always the method of arbitration in the way I have suggested. I may say that the chairman to whom I have referred, has shown no inclination to pass claims which could be considered excessive.
  Mr. Vyvyan Adamsasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether the Government are aware of a wheat-preserving process by which wheat can be preserved in the form of cakes for an indefinite period without any deterioration in its food value; and, if so, whether use is being made of this process for the purpose of food storage?
  Mr. Morrison: One process for the preservation of wheat in compressed form has been brought to the notice of the Food (Defence Plans) Department and has been fully investigated. The Department is, however, advised that it does not satisfy the necessary conditions for long-term storage.
  Mr. Adams: Is my right hon. Friend aware that two years ago a cake was analysed and found, after a period of 30 years, to have undergone no deterioration?
  Mr. Morrison: I am not sure whether the process which my hon. Friend has

  473
  in mind is the same process as the one which we have examined, but if he will be good enough to give me particulars of his process, I shall be glad to look into the matter.
  Mr. Adams: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the process to which I refer is the one invented by the late Lord Masham?
  Mr. Malcolm MacMillan: Will the right hon. Gentleman give a guarantee that in the event of war, if our people are not able to get bread, they will be able to eat cake?
  Captain Peter Macdonaldasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will consider the desirability of encouraging co-operation at the earliest opportunity between British producers of meat, fruit, and vegetables and the British canning industry with a view to increasing the supplies of British canned foodstuffs so that adequate amounts are available in the event of an emergency?
  Mr. Morrison: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Cardiff, South (Captain A. Evans) on 27th April.
  Captain Macdonaldasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1) whether he is aware that, in consequence of improved methods of distribution introduced during recent years, householders and retailers maintain far smaller reserves of foodstuffs; and whether, in view of the need for reducing all non-essential demands on transport in the event of an emergency, he will take early steps to urge householders and retailers to increase such reserves wherever possible;
  (2) whether, in drawing up further plans and instructions for local authorities in connection with the Government evacuation scheme, he will consider the desirability of including advice to retailers of foodstuffs in reception areas to increase their normal reserves, in particular of non-perishable foodstuffs and tinned meats, fish, vegetables and fruit?
  Mr. Morrison: As regards storage by householders, I would refer to the reply which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Gillingham (Sir R. Gower). While I feel sure that all food traders have in mind the desirability of maintaining as
  474
  high a level of stocks as their circumstances permit, the Food (Defence Plans) Department are enlisting the assistance of wholesale and retail traders in making arrangements for increasing the supplies in retail shops in the country generally, and in reception areas in particular, in the event of evacuation.
  Mr. T. Johnston: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether any steps are being taken to encourage persons with gardens in the reception areas to grow green vegetables, this year in particular, as they might find four or five times the normal population thrown at them with only a very small reserve of foodstuffs?
  Mr. Morrison: That is a different question, but if the right hon. Gentleman will put it down, I will give it consideration.
  Mr. De la Bèreasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether, as an emergency measure and in view of the assured heavy crop of plums this season, he will introduce legislation to authorise agents of the Food Defence Plans Department to purchase surplus plums at a minimum price to be fixed in consultation with the growers with a view to pulping these plums and keeping them for emergency purposes in a similar way to wheat and other essential commodities which are now being stored?
  Mr. Morrison: No, Sir. Powers are available in the Essential Commodities Reserves Act, but having regard to the necessity for obtaining the best food value possible for the money expended on emergency reserves, I should not propose to use those powers in this case.
  Mr. De la Bére: Does my right hon. Friend realise that this question not only affects Pershore and Evesham, but a great many constituents in his own division; and will be he kind enough to have a talk with me afterwards on the question?
  Mr. Morrison: I am well aware of those considerations, but my responsibility is to secure the best food value for the money that is expended.

  MOTOR CAR MANUFACTURE (SKILLED LABOUR).
  Mr. Keelingasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether the

  475
  Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence will enter into negotiations with motor car manufacturers with a view to ensuring that they should suspend the introduction of new models in order not to divert skilled labour from armament manufacture?
  Mr. W. S. Morrison: My Noble Friend would naturally be anxious to take any steps that might be necessary or desirable to prevent the diversion of labour from armament manufacture, but he is not aware of the grounds upon which my hon. Friend bases his suggestion that the introduction of new models in the motor industry has this effect.
  Mr. Poole: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the recent operations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer have gone a considerable way towards doing what the hon. Member desires, that is, killing the motor car industry?

  JAMAICA.

    FRANCHISE.
    Mr. Rileyasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has under consideration the widening of the franchise in Jamaica; and when will he be able to make a statement?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: I understand that the Legislative Council is considering proposals by certain of its members for constitutional reform, and I shall await their conclusions together with the Governor's comments. I should also wish to await any observations that the Royal Commission may have to make on this subject.
    Mr. Riley: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the widespread feeling there is on this question in Jamaica?
    Mr. MacDonald: I am sure that the feelings of the Jamaica people will be expressed in the discussions which are now taking place in the Legislative Council, and that I shall be fully aware of them.

    LABOUR ADVISER.
    Mr. Rileyasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has yet appointed a labour officer for Jamaica; and, if so, what are the scope of his functions?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: Yes, Sir. Mr. F. A. Norman, an Assistant Secretary at the Ministry of Labour, has been selected as Labour Adviser to the Government of Jamaica. He will organise a Labour Department in the Colony, and his duties will cover all customary questions connected with labour.
    Mr. Riley: Has he already gone out?
    Mr. MacDonald: No, Sir. I think he is sailing on 22nd May.
    Sir Joseph Nall: Has the officer concerned ever been to Jamaica or had any experience there?
    Mr. MacDonald: This officer has a very considerable experience of labour questions and of labour conciliation, but I do not think he has got actual first-hand experience of conditions in Jamaica.
    Sir J. Nall: Was his experience in this country or in the Colonies?
    Mr. MacDonald: His experience has been for the greater part at any rate, in this country. It is very difficult, when we are establishing this labour service throughout the Colonies, to find a sufficient number of qualified officers with Colonial experience in the first instance.

  TRANSPORT.

    ROAD BRIDGES, MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL.
    Mr. E. Smithasked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the urgent need for road bridges to be constructed over the Manchester Ship Canal, between Eccles and Trafford bridge, and between Barton and Irlam; what proposals have been considered; is it intended to take any action; and can he make a statement on this question?
    The Minister of Transport (Captain Euan Wallace): Two schemes for the construction of road bridges over the Manchester Ship Canal have been considered by the local authorities concerned and by the Manchester and District Regional Planning Committee:

    (1) between Mosley Road, Stretford, and Lancaster Road, Salford;

    (2) at a site three-quarters of a mile west of Barton Swing Bridge.

    I shall, of course, be prepared to consider the proposals of the responsible local authorities as soon as they are in a position to submit them.
    Mr. Smithasked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the delay and congestion caused by the closing of the Manchester Ship Canal Barton Road bridge, and, in particular, the effect between the hours of 7 a.m. to 8 a.m., and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.; and will he take suitable action with a view of minimising the need to close the bridge between the hours stated?
    Captain Wallace: I have no power to regulate the passage of ships on the Manchester Ship Canal, but I have been in communication with the Ship Canal Company regarding the swinging of the Barton Road bridge. The company state that the complaints they have received relate principally to delay alleged to be caused to pedestrians and cyclists going to work at Trafford Park in the morning, and that they are taking a census of such traffic with a view to considering whether it may be desirable to revise the times at which the swinging of the bridge should, so far as possible, be avoided.
    Mr. Crossley: Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that when this bridge is up to allow for the passage of three or four ships, I sometimes have to go 15 miles round to get to my meetings?
    Captain Wallace: My hon. Friend will see that we are inquiring into the matter.
    Mr. E. Smith: Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation of Members of this House who are interested, in order that they may place evidence before him?
    Captain Wallace: I am always delighted to receive hon. Members.

    ROAD IMPROVEMENT, NEWPORT, MON.—BRECON.
    Mr. A. Jenkinsasked the Minister of Transport when the work of improving the road between Newport, Mon., and Brecon will be commenced?
    Captain Wallace: Negotiations for the acquisition of the necessary land for the improvement of the trunk road at Croes-y-Ceiliog are in hand, and the constructional work will be commenced as soon as these negotiations can be completed. I understand that the county council do not propose to proceed at present with the improvement of the section of county road at Llanhamlach.

    ROAD TRANSPORT OPERATORS (RECORDS).
    Mr. Benjamin Smithasked the Minister of Transport whether he will give the number of cases in which road transport operators have been convicted on more than one occasion for failing to keep in proper form the records of hours, journeys, loads, etc., required by Section 16 of the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933?
    Captain Wallace: To obtain the information desired by the hon. Member would involve the examination of the records of some 230,000 road transport operators by the staffs of the Traffic Commissioners, who, in addition to their ordinary duties, have at present heavy additional responsibilities in connection with civil defence. I regret that in the circumstances I do not feel justified in asking for this research.
    Mr. Smith: Is not that information already there, except for dissecting it, in the reports already issued by the Traffic Commissioners?
    Captain Wallace: If the hon. Member will look at my answer again, he will see the amount of the dissection required.

    RAIL AND ROAD GOODS TRANSPORT.
    Mr. Benjamin Smithasked the Minister of Transport (1) whether he will issue a White Paper on the subject of new road and rail legislation; and when does he expect this legislation to be introduced?
    (2) whether he will make a statement respecting the agreements so far made between the railways and road interests and between both of these and the traders; and whether, with a view to clarifying the position, he will now authorise the publication of the report of the Transport Advisory Council on the railway companies claims?
    Captain Wallace: The report of the Transport Advisory Council which contains as appendices the full text of agreements reached between the railway companies and certain other interests is being printed and should be available towards the end of next week. I regret that I; am not yet in a position to make a statement of policy regarding this report.
    Mr. Smith: I take it that it will be in the Vote Office early next week?
    Captain Wallace: I said, "towards the end of next week."

    ROAD WIDENING SCHEME, WREXHAM.
    Mr. Richardsasked the Minister of Transport why his Department has been bringing pressure to bear on the Wrexham Borough Council as the town planning authority to withdraw its opposition to the removal of the licence of the Town Hall vaults to the Garden Village, Wrexham?
    Captain Wallace: I am unable to agree with the hon. Member's interpretation of the correspondence between my Department and the Wrexham Town Council on the subject of the transfer of the licence from the Town Hall vaults. The correspondence indicated the relation of the transfer of the licence to the scheme for widening and improving Town Hill—a scheme in which both the town council and I, as highway authority for the Trunk Road, are interested. There was not, of course, and could not be, any interference with the council's exercise of their duties as town planning authority.
    Mr. Richards: Did not the Ministry in the first instance bring pressure to bear on the Wrexham Town Council to widen the road at this point and to dispose of the old Town Hall against their wishes, and then, having bought the Town Hall and pulled it down, are not the Ministry now trying to recover some of the grant by making the council change one of their by-laws with regard to the removal of the licence?
    Captain Wallace: From what I understand this is a thing they are not willing to do, and I have not the slightest intention of trying to influence the council's decision in the matter.

    ISLE OF HARRIS.
    Mr. Malcolm MacMillanasked the Minister of Transport whether he has had any recent request from the county council of Inverness-shire for assistance to complete the Strond road; and whether, in view of severe unemployment locally and the desirability of continuing the road to link up the other communities with the main road, he proposes to take any action?
    Captain Wallace: I have received no such request from the Inverness-shire County Council, and the position remains as stated in the replies given to the hon. Member's questions of 15th February and 7th December last.
    Mr. MacMillan: Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, when implementing the promise of his predecessor to visit the Western Isles this summer and examine personally the second-class and unclassified roads, undertake to cover the distance of the proposed road at Strond in bare feet and come back in a white sheet and confess the injustice of the refusal of this road?
    Captain Wallace: No, I think my feet are probably more tender than my predecessor's.

  ELECTRICITY SUPPLY (RURAL AREAS).
  Mr. De la Bèreasked the Minister of Transport whether he will draw the attention of the electric power company concerned to the absence of a supply of electricity in the village of Stoulton, Worcestershire, with a view to remedying this defect?
  Captain Wallace: The Electricity Commissioners have taken the matter up with the company concerned, who have intimated that, as a result of a survey of the village, they do not consider that the prospective demand is sufficient to justify an extension of their mains at the present time without some substantial guarantee of revenue, or contribution to the cost, by the consumers.
  Mr. De la Bère: Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that this is a public utility company and that, as such, it is liable to the consumer and has privileges, and will he look into the matter further and urge that these public utility companies should not be allowed to make huge trading profits?
  Captain Wallace: It is not a question of huge trading profits, but of a reasonable guarantee.
  Mr. Gallacher: Is it not a scandal that villages in this country should be left without adequate lighting because some people cannot make profits?
  Mr. Hannah: Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that there are villages in the Bilston Division without electric light?
  Mr. De la Bèreasked the Minister of Transport whether he will take steps, in consultation with the electricity supply

  481
  companies which are public utility companies, to secure the necessary facilities to consumers, and would-be consumers, in the rural areas, for a supply of electricity, since the Government legislation dealing with these matters has now been postponed for over a year?
  Captain Wallace: While in circumstances which my hon. Friend will appreciate general legislation has had to be postponed, the Electricity Commissioners are always ready to investigate complaints of lack of facilities in rural areas which may be brought to their notice.
  Mr. De la Bère: What is it that really prevents the progress of this legislation? Is not my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that this took place long before the crisis? Is not the reason really that certain vested interests are deliberately obstructing this legislation?
  Captain Wallace: I know that my hon. Friend has received a lot of answers which he considers very unsatisfactory. May I suggest that if he will go and see the Chairman of the Electricity Commissioners, who will be glad to see him, he may come to some better understanding?
  Mr. De la Bère: Is not my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that it is perfectly useless going to see these people unless the Members of this House support their fellow Members and their own friends? Something must be done in this matter, for it is the greatest scandal in the country.
  Mr. Gallacher: Is the Minister aware that in many villages in Scotland and England the people have to get light from paraffin lamps, and is it not time that modern facilities were provided?

  MESSRS. MacBRAYNES (TRADE UNION RECOGNITION).
  Mr. Simpsonasked the Minister of Transport whether he can now say what is the result of the representations promised in regard to trade union recognition by Messrs. MacBraynes?
  Captain Wallace: I understand that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour proposes to invite the managing director of Messrs. MacBraynes and a representative of the Railway Clerks' Association to a meeting at the Ministry of Labour for the discussion of this matter.

  HIS MAJESTY'S SHIP "ENDEAVOUR."
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcherasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what is the complement of His Majesty's Ship "Endeavour"; and how many of the complement have been punished by warrant for major offences since the ship commissioned?
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. Shakespeare): The total complement of His Majesty's Ship "Endeavour" is 134. The total number of men punished by warrant for all offences up to the latest available date was 32.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Is it not the case that officers are allowed to volunteer for this arduous and irksome duty of surveying, whereas ratings are drafted to the service without their opinions being consulted in any way? Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that it would be as well to allow the ratings the same provilege of volunteering? Does he not think it advisable to pay this ship off at once and put an end to a state of affairs which is bringing discredit on the Navy?
  Mr. Shakespeare: I am not aware that the hon. and gallant Member's first assumption is true, but I will make inquiries. There is a question later on the second point.
  Mr. T. Smith: Is it not a fact that one-fifth of this ship's company have been punished in some form or another?
  Commander Marsden: How many of this ship's company were good conduct men when the ship was commissioned?
  Mr. Shakespeare: I cannot say without notice, but the circumstances are such as to justify the most urgent inquiry.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: As the question to which the hon. Gentleman has referred may not be reached, may I ask him to give an answer to my second question—whether he will consider paying this ship off?

  ANGLO-GERMAN NAVAL AGREEMENT.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcherasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether, under the terms of the

  483
  Anglo-German Naval Agreement details of the designs of all our new ships, including capital ships building and projected and of new anti-submarine craft have been given to the German authorities; and whether similar information concerning all German ships building and projected has been received by the Admiralty?
  Mr. Shakespeare: The reciprocal exchange of information allowed for under the Anglo-German Agreement of 1937 has hitherto been carried out by both Governments.
  Lieut.-Commander Fletcher: Have we received particulars of all the latest German ships building and projected?
  Mr. Shakespeare: That is so.

  NAVAL BRIGADES (HAMPSTEAD AND SLOUGH).
  Major-General Sir Alfred Knoxasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will consider the granting of full official status together with an adequate per capita allowance to the Hampstead and Slough naval brigades which have trained themselves at their own expense for several years?
  Mr. Shakespeare: My hon. and gallant Friend will appreciate that the policy in regard to naval brigades will need to be re-examined in relation to the provisions of the Military Training Bill now before the House and the formation of the Royal Naval Special Reserve. I am not in a position at present to say how these naval brigades will be affected, but my hon. and gallant Friend may be assured that the conditions which he has mentioned will be borne in mind before a final decision is taken.
  Sir A. Knox: Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the Hampstead Brigade, which is now 140 strong, has trained several hundred men, and that the Slough Brigade has had to turn away 187 men owing to lack of Government support; and will the hon. Gentleman avoid any decision that would damp down the splendid patriotic enthusiasm of these local brigades?
  Mr. Duff Cooper: In considering this question will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is most important, while we
  484
  are introducing a limited measure of compulsion, that nothing is done to frustrate the efforts of these admirable naval brigades, which are an excellent example of what can be done at the same time by the voluntary principle?
  Mr. Shakespeare: That is the principle which has been accepted by the Government. As regards the first question, the Admiralty are aware of the very fine work that has been done by these brigades in stimulating the enthusiasm of those interested in naval matters.
  Sir A. Knox: Will the hon. Gentleman undertake to keep these organisations in being?
  Mr. Shakespeare: I have pointed out that that question is now under consideration.

  RAILWAY ACCIDENT, MOTHERWELL.
  Mr. Walker(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Transport whether he had any statement to make about the serious railway accident at Motherwell the previous night?
  Captain Wallace: At 11.19 p.m. last night the 10.50 p.m. passenger train, Glasgow to Carluke, came to a stop in Motherwell station. A light engine, unattended, ran out of the engine sheds, and collided with the rear of the passenger train. The last coach of the passenger train was de-railed, and also the light engine. Both main lines were blocked. One passenger and the guard of the passenger train have been detained in hospital suffering from slight injuries and shock. Seventeen other passengers suffered injuries of a minor nature.

  PALESTINE (REFUGEES).
  At the end of Questions—
  Colonel Wedgwood: I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the action of the Palestine Government in opening fire on unarmed Jewish refugees on board a Greek ship killing one and wounding two, and the approval of this conduct expressed by the Secretary of State.
  Mr. Speaker: I think the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will see that none of the conditions of the Standing Order under which he is asking leave to move the Adjournment of the House is fulfilled. The matter has to be definite and urgent, and I do not think it fulfils either of those conditions.
  Colonel Wedgwood: May I put the matter to you in this way, Mr. Speaker? I suggest that the matter is certainly urgent because there are many of these ships which are liable to meet the same fate. There are quite a number of ships off the coast of Palestine trying to get people ashore and running the same risk. As to its being definite, I do not think there can be anything more definite than what the Secretary of State said in answer to my question?
  Mr. Speaker: As to the question of urgency, I understand that these events took place on 1st March, and the information which the right hon. Gentleman received on this question is by no means definite.
  Colonel Wedgwood: I beg to give notice that I will raise this horrible, scandalous matter on the Adjournment at the first possible opportunity?

  INDIA AND BURMA (MISCELLANEOUS (AMENDMENTS) BILL [Lords].
  Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 132.]
  SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

    STANDING COMMITTEE B.
    Colonel Gretton reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee B: Mr. De la Bere, and had appointed in substitution Mr. Fyfe.
    Report to lie upon the Table.

  SHEFFIELD CORPORATION BILL.
  Reported, with Amendments [Title amended], from the Committee on Group D of Private Bills.
  Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

MILITARY TRAINING BILL AND RESERVE AND AUXILIARY FORCES BILL (ALLOCATION OF TIME).
Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That the proceedings of the Committee stage, Report stage and Third Reading of the Military Training Bill and Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill and the Report stage of the Financial Resolution relating to the last mentioned Bill shall be proceeded with as follows:

MILITARY TRAINING BILL AND RESERVE AND AUXILIARY FORCES BILL (ALLOCATION OF TIME).

  A.—MILITARY TRAINING BILL.
  (1) Committee Stage.
  Five allotted days shall be given to the proceedings on any instructions relating to the Bill and to the Committee stage of the Bill, and the proceedings on each allotted day shall be as shown in the second column of the following table, and those proceedings shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at the time shown in the third column for that day:

  TABLE.

  Allotted Day

  Proceedings.

  Time for bringing Proceedings to a conclusion.

  First

  Proceedings on Instructions, and Clause I.

  10.0 p.m.

  Clause 2

  12.0 midnight.

  Second

  Clause 3

  8.30 p.m.

  Clause 4

  12.0 midnight.

  Third

  Clause 5

  7.30 p.m.

  Clause 6

  —

  Fourth

  Clause 6

  7.30 p.m.

  Clauses 7 to 17

  12.0 midnight.

  Fifth

  New Clauses

  7.30 p.m.

  Schedule, new Schedules, and any other matter necessary to bring the Committee Stage to a conclusion.

  12.0 midnight.

  (2) Report stage and Third Reading.
  One allotted day (not being a Friday) shall be given to the Report stage and Third Reading of the Bill and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at 11 p.m. on that day.

  B.—RESERVE AND AUXILIARY FORCES BILL.
  (1) The Report stage of the Financial Resolution and Committee stage of the Bill.
  One allotted day shall be given to the Report, stage of the Financial Resolution, to the proceedings on any instructions relating to the Bill and to the Committee stage of the Bill, and those proceedings shall, if not
  504
  previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at 7.30 p.m. on that day.
  (2) Report stage and Third Reading of the Bill.
  If on the day allotted under this Order to the Report stage and Third Reading of the Military Training Bill, the Committee stage of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill has been concluded and the Report stage of the last mentioned Bill is set down as the next Order of the Day after the Order relating to the Military Training Bill, the Report stage of the Reserve and Military Forces Bill shall be proceeded with on that day immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings on the Military Training Bill, and the proceedings on the Report stage and Third Reading of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion one hour after the conclusion of the proceedings on the Military Training Bill.

  C.—GENERAL.
  On the conclusion of the Committee stage of each of the Bills aforesaid, the Chairman shall report the Bill to the House without Question put.
  Any day including the day on which this Order is passed on which the Military Training Bill is put down as the First Order of the Day shall be considered a day allotted to that Bill for the purposes of this Order and any day on which the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill is put down as the First Order of the Day shall be considered a day allotted to that Bill for the purposes of this Order:
  Provided that, where a day so allotted is a Friday, this Order shall have effect as if for references to 7.30 p.m. or 8.30 p.m. and 10 p.m. there were respectively substituted references to 1 p.m. and 3 p.m., and as if for references to 12 midnight there were substituted references to 3.30 p.m.
  For the purpose of bringing to a conclusion any proceedings which are to be brought to a conclusion at a time appointed by this Order, and. which have not previously been brought to a conclusion, the Chairman or Mr. Speaker shall, at the time so appointed, put forthwith the Question on any Amendment or Motion already proposed from the Chair, and, in the case of a new Clause which has been read a Second time, also the Question that the Clause be added to the Bill, and shall next proceed to put forthwith the Question on any Amendments, new Clauses, or Schedules moved by the Government of which notice has been given (but no other Amendments, new Clauses, or Schedules), and any Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded and, in the case of Government Amendments or Government new Clauses or Schedules, he shall put only the Question that the Amendments be made, or that the Clauses or Schedules be added to the Bill, as the case may be.
  Any Private Business which has been set down for consideration at 7.30 p.m., and any Motion for Adjournment under Standing Order No. 8, on any day allotted to the Military Training Bill shall on that day, instead of being taken as provided by the

  505
  Standing Orders, be taken on the conclusion of the proceedings on that Bill or under this Order for that day, or, if the Order for the Report stage of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill is set down as the next Order of the Day after the Military Training Bill on that day, on the conclusion of the proceedings on the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill, or under this Order for that day, and any Private Business or Motion for Adjournment so taken may be proceeded with, though opposed, notwithstanding any Standing Order relating to the Sittings of the House.
  On a day on which proceedings are to be brought to a conclusion under this Order, those proceedings shall be exempted from the operation of Standing Order No. 1 notwithstanding anything in that Standing Order.
  Notwithstanding anything in the Standing Orders of the House relating to the precedence of business, the Military Training Bill may be set down as the First Order of the Day on any Friday and if so set down shall have precedence of any other business.
  On a day on which any proceedings are to be brought to a conclusion under this Order no dilatory Motion with respect to proceedings on either of the Bills aforesaid or under this Order, nor Motion that the Chairman do report Progress or do leave the Chair, nor Motion to postpone a Clause, or to recommit the Bill, shall be received unless moved by the Government, and the Question on such Motion, if moved by the Government, shall be put forthwith without any Debate.
  Nothing in this Order shall—

  (a) prevent any proceedings which under this Order are to be concluded on any particular day being concluded on any other day, or necessitate any particular day or part of a particular day being given to any such proceedings if those proceedings have been otherwise disposed of; or

  (b) prevent any other business being proceeded with on any particular day, or part of a particular day, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the House, if any proceedings to be concluded under this Order on that particular day, or part of a particular day, have been disposed of."—[The Prime Minister.]

  3.58 p.m.
  The Prime Minister (Mr. Chamberlain): I informed the House yesterday of the intention of the Government to put on the Order Paper a Motion for a Time-table in respect of the two Bills, the Military Training Bill and the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill. I said that in our opinion it was of the greatest importance that these two Bills should receive the Royal Assent before the Whitsun Recess, and in order to do that it is necessary that they should pass through all their stages in this House by the 18th of this month. I think that the reasons for the urgency of this matter are self-apparent. It is common knowledge that our proceedings in this matter are being watched with
  506
  close attention in other quarters, and anything which appears to be in the nature of dilatory proceedings would certainly have a very discouraging effect upon our friends in Europe. But there are other good reasons why we are anxious to get these Bills on the Statute Book at the earliest possible moment, because after they have become law quite a considerable period of time must necessarily elapse before they can be put into operation.
  I am not quite sure whether hon. Members have in mind the various steps which have to be taken before a Militiaman can be called up for training, before the first batch can be called up. But there are five successive steps which take up a considerable period of time. First of all, notice must be given before registration is required. That may not be very long, but it must be a matter of several days. Then those who have been registered will have to attend to be examined by medical boards, and once again there will have to be adequate notice of the time at which that attendance is needed. The process of medical examination of these considerable numbers of men will be a lengthy one, and it will probably be at least a fortnight before the medical boards can pass a sufficient number of men for the first calling up by the War Office. When their work has been concluded upon this first batch, the results will have to be examined by the War Office, and they will have to decide what are the proper units to which to allocate the men. That, which is the fourth step, will again take anything from a week to a fortnight.
  Then, finally, there will be the posting of notices to those who are called up, and that, I expect, will require another fortnight. So, even if these Bills get through according to the Time-table which appears in the Motion, it is apparent that the first batch of Militiamen cannot be expected to enter upon their training before the beginning of July, and if the Bills were delayed until after Whitsuntide they would not be able to begin their training before August. I am sure that everyone will agree, whether they agree with the Bill or not, that if we are to pass a Measure of this kind the sooner we can put it into operation the better.
  The Motion, which deals with two Bills, looks rather formidable on the Paper, but I do not think it is really as

  507
  serious as it might appear. It will be seen that for the Military Training Bill we have allotted four days and one Friday for the Committee stage, and one day for the Report and Third Reading. For the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill, which is practically a non-contentious Bill—[HON. MEMBERS:
  "NO!"]—then I will say not so contentious as the other BUI, we have allotted half a day for Committee and a short time for Report and Third Reading. But I would remind hon. Members that there are a certain number of Clauses which are common to both Bills, and I do not anticipate that it will be necessary to debate those same Clauses twice over. Therefore, it will be sufficient probably to discuss them on the Military Training Bill, and any Amendments which are made in accordance with the discussions can be and will be transferred to the corresponding Clauses in the Reserve Forces Bill.
  Originally we had proposed three days and a Friday for the Committee stage of the Military Training Bill, but we have now decided to give extra time to-day for that purpose, and accordingly we have postponed the discussion which was to have taken place to-day on the Civil Defence Bill. Under the present proposals, therefore, when we have disposed of this Motion for the Time-table, it will be possible at once to begin the Committee stage of the Military Training Bill. I much regret that owing to the exigencies of this Bill it has been necessary to take private Members' time on Friday. Two at any rate of the Bills which were to have been discussed on Friday are of a non-contentious character, I think, and I hope it may be possible for them to obtain their later stages in spite of the fact that they cannot be taken on Friday. Practically the whole of the time of the House from now to 18th May is to be given to these Bills, although in view of the very congested legislative programme that the House has before it we can ill spare this amount of time.
  I shall not discuss any further the allocation of time suggested in the Motion. We quite recognise that there are a number of important points on which the House will desire to express its views, but we hope that in the allocation which we have made, which has taken
  508
  account of the number and the importance of the Amendments which have already been handed in, we shall give hon. Members a reasonable opportunity of raising and discussing all the matters which they wish to put before the House.
  Mr. Gallacher: On a point of Order. I am not very clear on one point and I would like to get a Ruling on it. Can we discuss this Motion and discuss the proposal to continue sitting till 12 o'clock to-night against the Standing Orders of the House?
  Mr. Speaker: This Motion proposes to suspend several Standing Orders, so of course hon. Members can discuss that point.
  Captain Sir Derrick Gunston: If we get on to-night with this Measure will to-day's discussion and to-morrow's relate only to Clause I?
  The Prime Minister: My hon. and gallant Friend will see from the Motion that that is not so.
  4.7 p.m.
  Mr. Arthur Greenwood: I rise on behalf of my party to enter a most emphatic protest against this procedure. We have no desire to prolong unnecessarily this part of the Debate, because we are very anxious to get on with the Bill as early as possible, and I see no point, in view of the massed forces opposite, in doing more than make our protest against the procedure. I might as well say now the one relatively kind word I am likely to say, by stating that I appreciate that the Government have given us rather more time than they originally intended. But that in no way satisfies us; we regard the time as totally inadequate, in view of the departure from the long-established British tradition of voluntary service, and in view of the far-reaching implications of the Bill, of which so far the Government do not seem to be aware.
  The Bill has been described as a limited Measure of conscription. It has been described as a temporary Bill. We suspect that there are a large number of Members on the Government side of the House who would like to make it a permanent Measure, and who, whether it be peace or war, would shackle conscription on the country. Though the Measure is limited with regard to the age group it is in fact universal compulsory service,

  509
  because every man who reaches the age of 20 will become a conscript, and, therefore, what we are doing now is not just making a little breach in the system of voluntary service: we are destroying its foundations. A Bill of that kind is one which requires very full consideration from Members of the House. Pledges these days, according to a Continental custom which has now invaded this country, have become like piecrust, made to be broken.
  We are told that the Bill is to be temporary. Who knows? We were told by the Secretary of State for War the week before last, when he followed me in the Debate on the question of compulsory service, that there was to be no industrial conscription. Who knows? No one in this House knows what may be the ultimate outcome of this Bill, and it ought not therefore to be thrust through the House at this unseemly speed. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister said that the urgency was self-apparent. He talked about "discouraging effects on our friends in Europe." The right hon. Gentleman, against our will, got his way on the question of principle. Therefore, now there can be no discouragement to our friends in Europe, and no one is going to pretend that if the worst were to befall this country in Europe, 18th May is the critical day which will result in the calling up within a reasonable period of time of conscripts who will be ready to take the field. That is sheer nonsense, and even if it be that we cannot get the first batch of men until early July, that is not going to settle the question of Britain's safety, obviously. Therefore, the urgency which the Prime Minister pleads is not in our view real urgency. Yet this Bill is to be forced through the House at the point of a sword. The Prime Minister has his levies behind him and can enforce his will, but a Bill of this character is a Bill that ought to receive the detailed consideration of the House.
  Here is a Bill which was not mentioned in the King's Speech. It is a habit of the Government in these days never to fulfil the obligations in the King's Speech, but as time goes by to introduce Measures that no one ever thought of, but which appear to arise as a matter of urgency. But it is not merely that this Bill was not mentioned in the King's Speech. Since the re-assembly of the House there have been repeated pledges made,
  510
  reinforcing earlier pledges, that there would be no conscription in this country, at least in time of peace. Those pledges were made not only by the Prime Minister but by the Minister of Labour and the Lord Privy Seal. Prior to this sudden change in policy the Secretary of State for War declared his pride in the voluntary system and his faith in its success.
  On 29th March, the Prime Minister made a further pledge to this House, to which he referred when this decision of the Government was first communicated to us nearly a fortnight ago. His excuse, not for asking the House to relieve him of his pledge but for coming to the House and saying, "I have changed my mind," was that there had been a change in the international situation and that new commitments had been entered into. When he made that statement a fortnight ago there had been no fundamental change in the international situation from that which obtained on 29th March. Besides, the right hon. Gentleman had no business to enter into new commitments if he felt at the time that he was not in a position to fulfil them. I do not agree with the views of the right hon. Gentleman upon international affairs, but had he come to this House and said, "I have come to an agreement with Poland but I cannot fulfil it until I have the assistance of boys of 20 years of age," my attitude would have been entirely different. I would gladly make this arrangement with Poland, but no Government should enter into prospective commitments unless they can see their way to fulfil them. At the time, nobody dreamt, not even the Prime Minister, of forcing compulsory military service on the country.
  The decision of the Government was a panic decision forced upon them, as the right hon. Gentleman has implied this afternoon, by the clamour of friendly foreign Powers who do not appear to appreciate the contribution which Britain can make in the event of a general war. It does not appear to be appreciated that the Royal Navy is to-day the greatest fighting machine in the world, that our growing Air Force is the largest among the friendly Powers of the world, and that an expeditionary force on some scale not yet disclosed is contemplated. We have our problems of home defence, and we have the problem of production here

  511
  on a scale htiherto unknown. The right hon. Gentleman has no right to trot out, as he did the other day, the gibe about fighting to the last Frenchman. Among the big States of Europe we are entitled to say where our greatest contribution can be made and how it can be made.
  We disagree with the right hon. Gentleman for changing the fundamental basis of our national policy because of arguments which have been put up to him, and which miss the point, regarding the contribution that we can make. I do not want to develop this point, but I must on this occasion just refer to it. We still believe that it is idle to embody more men when our supplies of equipment and reserves are not up to the desired standard. I still assert that our most important contribution is not man-power but material power. By this Bill the right hon. Gentleman will impair that position. I go further. This Measure will not yield any substantial addition to our effective fighting Services. It is being forced upon the House of Commons, or at least forced upon this Opposition, as a Measure—
  Mr. Speaker: The right hon. Gentleman appears to be making a speech against the Bill itself. I do not want to interrupt him, but I must remember that if I allow him to set an example every other Member who takes part in the Debate will consider he is entitled also to make a speech which would be appropriate, not to this Motion, but to the Second Reading of the Bill.
  Mr. Greenwood: I was trying to show that the Bill is of such a far-reaching character and involves so many changes in the structure of our society, our industrial system and our habits and customs, that the time provided for discussing it is inadequate. The Government have led the country to believe that they must rely upon the spirit of voluntary service. We are now facing an entirely new situation, the circumstances of which will have to be discussed again and again, not only by people in this House but by people outside. It was on the understanding of a continuation of the former policy that the trade union movement undertook responsibility. No one can question its wholehearted co-operation in Voluntary Service and in the production of supply necessary for defence, but the
  512
  trade union movement finds itself tricked. It has not been consulted. The Bill is to be forced through the House by 18th May. The trade union movement was not informed until the Government's decision had been taken of what the fundamental change in our national policy was to be.
  The trade unions are pledged to adequate National Defence and to all the necessary steps to fulfil our international obligations, but they have been put into an impossible position now. That position ought to be cleared before the Bill goes on to the Statute Book. They are against dictatorships and all that these imply with regard to liberty, free association and negotiation; now, by the violation of the Government's pledges they are placed in a position in which no responsible organisation ought to be put. They are faced with a conflict of loyalties which ought to be resolved by the Prime Minister and his colleagues before the Bill is on the Statute Book, a conflict between their solemn obligations regarding defence and their permanent responsibilities towards the economic interests of the people for whom they speak. That conflict has not been resolved at the present time, and it would be a crime against the trade union movement if the Government insist upon forcing the Bill on to the Statute Book before they have made peace with agencies upon whose co-operation they must in the last resort depend.
  If I speak strongly on this matter I do it in the national interest. No one can deny the important part which the trade union movement plays in our national life, and I have no reason to believe that it will shirk its responsibilities, but I say that in the area which is still left outside the sphere of compulsory service, voluntary service which is unwillingly and reluctantly given because of dissatisfaction is not nearly so productive as is voluntary service given with a full heart.
  Sir William Davison: On a point of Order. Is this discussion of the attitude of the trade unions relevant to the Motion before the House?
  Mr. Speaker: The right hon. Gentleman is arguing that more time ought to have been given to the discussion of this matter with the trade unions.
  Mr. Greenwood: If the hon. Member had done me the honour of listening to

  513
  me he would have understood my argument that there are interests and organisations outside this House whose views ought to be fully considered before irrevocable steps are taken to put upon the Statute Book a Bill which affects not only organised labour but the public interest. I was suggesting to the Prime Minister that if he wants to keep, as indeed he must, the maximum amount of co-operation for production for the Defence Services he will not do it by this method of forcing a Bill through the House of Commons without proper consultation. Unless the right hon. Gentleman takes a little more time in this matter and desists from this feverish activity of his, one result will be to create deeper hostility and resentment and to give rise to disunity in the country. I hope it will not be so, because nobody desires that to happen on this issue. Clear-sighted statesmanship would have avoided this possibility.
  A further argument for longer consideration of the Bill is that it brings new complications into an industrial, economic and commercial system which has hitherto been unaccustomed to conscription, and that it will not be easy to readjust that system to conscription. I doubt whether that aspect of the matter has been fully considered with the people who are responsible for the administration of our economic life. The Bill will create innumerable hardships of a hundred different kinds. This problem needs to be carefully probed. Nothing in the Bill indicates that the Government have visualised the varied types of hardship which may occur. Then, of course, there are—and this brings me back to the industrial and trade union movement—grave and difficult problems connected with reinstatement, not only after but before conscription begins.
  I wonder how far the Ministry of Labour have considered the cases of boys of 17, 18 and 19, getting older and coming nearer to the conscription age, who fall out of work. What chance have they of getting a job? And if they do not get a job before they are 20, there is no reinstatement when they come back. Has that matter been thought about? Have we considered the possibility of employers—because the Bill does not make any provision for it—dismissing boys who are just about the age of 20 and will have to go up for service, and for
  514
  whom they would have to take responsibility on their return? These issues affect a very large number of people. We are going to disturb the lives of all these young men of 20 and 21 or thereabouts, and it is tremendously important that adequate consideration should be given to all the circumstances that may arise both before and afterwards. We are to have a little more than half a day in which to raise the whole of that big issue. Again, the Bill raises the issue of conscientious objectors. This is a new problem to-day. It is not a
  problem—
  Sir Irving Albery: On a point of Order. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether the speech which is now being made does in fact relate to the Timetable to be set up, and whether you will be good enough to give the House a little more definite guidance as to what is really in order?
  Mr. Speaker: The House will realise that it is always difficult, on an occasion of this kind, to give a definite Ruling on what is in order and what is not in order; but it is quite clear that a speech made entirely against the Bill, and in no way dealing with the Motion for a Time-table, cannot really be in order. It would be in order to object, with regard to various details of the Bill, that insufficient time is being allowed for their discussion, but the right hon. Gentleman must confine himself to that, and not deal with the merits of the Bill.
  Mr. Greenwood: I would not transgress your Ruling, but, with all respect, I think I have spent the greater part of my time in trying, not to deal with the merits of the Bill, but to show that issues are being raised for which adequate time is not being provided. That, really, is the whole of my case. It is my case with regard to conscientious objectors. Only half a day is to be allowed for the discussion of that question. I am not myself a conscientious objector, but that does not mean that it is not an issue of some importance, and I doubt very much whether the questions which are bound to arise in the new situation can be adequately dealt with in the space of half a day. This problem, in our view on this side of the House, has a greater importance than it had in the days of the last Great War. We feel it to be our duty to defend the privileges, and, indeed, the rights, of conscientious

  515
  objectors, as part of our defence of freedom against dictatorship and the treatment of minorities in the totalitarian States. Do the Government know what work of national importance means? It is not in the Bill. I could discuss that one issue alone for half a day. The Government have not thought it out, and we shall have to help them think it out; and yet we are expected to deal with Clause 3 in the short space of half a day. That Clause is most sketchy, leaving out of account all the very difficult issues which are either slurred over or ignored.
  It is clear that this Bill is one of a very far-reaching character, and it is equally clear to me that not only is it ill conceived but ill thought-out. A great many practical issues have been ignored. We have put down a large number of Amendments, not one of them frivolous, but every one of them directed to a constructive point, and I say that the time that is being allotted is completely inadequate for the consideration of a Bill of this kind. It will need all the thought of this House, in all quarters, to make the Bill, much as I dislike it, a workable Measure, and I do not believe it can be done in the time at our disposal. It is our duty as an Opposition, while not abating our opposition to the principle of the Bill, to bend our minds to minimising its inconveniences, avoiding injustices, and so on, by amendment in Committee, and, therefore, we feel that, without impeding such military value as the Bill may have when it gets on to the Statute Book, the House will be well advised to give it a little fuller consideration here before it goes to another place, rather than to attempt by the use of force to put it on the Statute Book at the earliest possible date. I have made my protest on behalf of my hon. and right hon. Friends and myself, and, so far as we are concerned on this side of the House, we shall be only too glad to join issue with the Government at the earliest opportunity on the substance of the Bill.
  4.37 p.m.
  Sir Archibald Sinclair: The few remarks which I shall offer to the House will be made under a sense of the urgency of the situation with which we are confronted, and of the need, which I have frequently preached, for tremendous exertions if we are to stop the march of
  516
  aggression abroad and defend the interests of the country. I believe that this House will support, and that the country will applaud, all necessary vigour and speed of action on the part of the Government at the present time. At the same time I agree with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood), and I think Members in all parts of the House must have agreed with him, that this matter does touch the lives and interests of everybody in the country, and touches them in a peculiarly intimate way. We are most of us, I suppose, the recipients of large numbers of letters when the Finance Bill comes before Parliament, or when large Measures of social reform are under discussion; but never have I received so many representations—representations on practical points—as I have received since this Bill was introduced. Therefore, I feel sure that the Government and their supporters will agree with us that we ought to have adequate time for the discussion of the Measure.
  In saying that, I want to make it clear that my hon. Friends and I certainly do not wish to adopt an attitude of obstruction. We have certain Amendments down, and we want to have the opportunity of discussing them. They all touch questions of vital interest to the people, and it would I think be a great disservice to this House and to our Parliamentary institutions if adequate time for the discussion of these Amendments were not given. I do not believe that there is any wish in any part of the House to obstruct the Bill. One of the most striking things that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wakefield said was that nobody desires disunity on this particular question; and, that being the opinion officially expressed by hon. Members above the Gangway—an opinion with which my hon. Friends and I desire to associate ourselves—I cannot believe that there is the necessity for clamping this rigid machinery upon the discussion of the Bill. Take, for example, the business on Monday, when from half-past seven in the evening until 12 we shall be discussing all the Clauses from Clause 7 to Clause 17, including one to which my hon. Friends and I attach particular importance, namely, the Clause which limits the duration of the Bill. That seems to be a glaring illustration of the inadequacy

  517
  of the discussion which we may have on important points of the Bill.
  I remember that the last occasion on which a Motion of this kind was introduced was in relation to the Unemployment Bill of 1934, and on that occasion it was necessary to recommit the Bill because it had been found impossible to give adequate discussion to certain Clauses. I wish that at any rate the alternative of a Kangaroo Closure had been considered. The House will remember that our Committee on Procedure recommended that the Kangaroo was preferable to the Guillotine, and they also suggested that, in cases where a Guillotine was set up, there should be a Committee of the House to allocate the time. I cannot help wishing that that procedure had been followed in his case, if, indeed, a Guillotine was to be set up. The worst of the Guillotine method is that too often the time is spent on the Amendment which happens to be first called, and which may raise an issue of comparatively minor importance, and that then there is no time left for the discussion of some much more important Amendment, which may not receive any discussion at all. It seems to me that we are running a very serious risk of that happening on this occasion.
  The Prime Minister has rightly said, and I agree with him, that we must move swiftly in the discussion of this Measure, on account of the seriousness of the emergency with which the country is faced. But Mr. Asquith, when he was Leader of the House and introduced a Measure of conscription during the War, while the War was actually going on, did not think it necessary to impose a Guillotine for the discussion of that Measure in the Committee stage. If it was not necessary to do that when a war was actually raging, surely the case for a Guillotine now can hardly be held to be proved. I could have hoped that the Government would at any rate have started the discussion without the Guillotine. We might have tried it; we might have seen if in fact there was any effort at obstruction, and if we could not get through with a sufficient measure of speed. I should have thought that, having regard to the seriousness of the discussions we shall have to have, and the urgency of getting the Bill through, we might have sat on Saturday, and that we might if necessary have had
  518
  some late sittings; but I cannot believe it is necessary so rigidly to confine the discussion of the Measure as will be the case if this Guillotine Motion is passed, and, therefore, I shall feel bound to vote against it.
  4.45 P.m.
  Mr. Maxton: I feel bound to express my opposition to this Time-table method of proceeding with a Measure of this importance. The whole procedure, from the first announcement of conscription, seems to me to have been almost hysterical. From the time when we were being told that no measure of compulsory service was in contemplation, there seemed only a moment or two until we were told that a Measure of military compulsion was going to be introduced. Then we had the Resolution before the House a couple of days later, and the Government got a very strong mandate, admittedly, from this House—something like two to one. If the importance of this thing lay in impressing people in other lands, friend and foe, the carrying of the Resolution by the House achieved that object. As the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood) pointed out, any military value that is expected to accrue from this lies a long distance ahead—at least, it is not a matter of days and hours. Then we had scarcely passed the Resolution before we had tumbled into the Second Reading; and again, the Government got a very great mandate from the House for the Second Reading—which, mark you, could quite easily have commanded more than the two days allotted to it here. Even in the closing stages of the Debate, Mr. Speaker was having to choose between about 20 Members who presented themselves. Here, again, we are rushing through Committee on a Time-table.
  As the right hon. Member for Wakefield said, if this had been a Measure affecting in some little pettifogging way the business interests of the country, the Government would have said, "We must leave time between the Second Reading and the Committee stage for the diverse interests concerned to see how they will be affected." Does this leave time for the interests affected even to make up their minds about it? The Cotton industry Bill or any of the agricultural Measures do not affect more than 200,000 human beings, and these 200,000 fellows who are

  519
  affected by this Bill, although, they are young men, are just as important as any cotton manufacturer or farmer. These fellows are having, perhaps, their whole lives denned by this Measure. Apart from war at all, this will make a difference in such a man's whole outlook of life. His attitude to his fellows, his relations with his home, and his possible profession are all going to be affected by this Measure, which will impose on him six months' military training, taking him away from the environment in which he has been brought up, taking him away from his workmates, taking him away from his early political associations, from trade union influences, from social influences, and jamming him into a military environment under the old sergeant-majors and drill sergeants, who have been dragged out from all sorts of places. We have no real say as to whether these fellows are competent, not merely to look after the forming fours and shouldering arms, but to look after the general intellectual and moral welfare of the young men they are controlling and training. When I was in the teaching profession I did a lot of educational work among young fellows of 18 to 21, and I do not believe that there is in the whole range of educational work more important and difficult work than that of building the development of men's minds at the stage when they are becoming men and are conscious that they are men. We are handing these 200,000 fellows over to men who, without being unkind, are not educationists.
  Mr. Speaker: I must remind the hon. Member of the Ruling I gave to the right hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood). I allowed him far too much scope in discussing the merits of the Bill. Since then I have refreshed my memory, and I find that it is explicitly laid down that on a Motion prescribing procedure for concluding the consideration of stages of a Bill, the Bill itself cannot be discussed. I want to make it very clear that hon. Members ought to confine themselves to the Timetable, and not discuss the merits of the Bill.
  Mr. Maxton: I was trying to deal with the attitude of the Government on the matter of time. I came to the point that, normally, his House gives time for
  520
  the interests concerned to adjust themselves to the question; and I was pointing out that the interests here, 200,000 young fellows, want more time, in my view, to weigh this thing up than sophisticated old cotton operatives in Lancashire. The Cotton Industry Bill comes to my mind because, if I am not wrong, the President of the Board of Trade allowed 12 months to pass between the announcement of his Measure and the actual introduction, as the interests involved were so important and it was considered proper that all the conflicting interests should be conciliated. In this case, 200,000 men: important men in our national life, important men for the future, are not to be consulted at all. These 200,000 fellows whose destinies we are going to decide are much more important for the future of this country and of civilisation than we are, because we made the mess—or, at least, we are responsible for the mess—and these are the fellows who will have to clean it up. It is very important that they should have more training in the handling of affairs than we have had.
  This imposition of a Time-table on us is, in essence, the same spirit of conscripting the House of Commons; the same attitude; the same sort of thing that comes to the Reichstag. This liberty is taken away, then the next liberty is taken away, and soon there is so little liberty left that it is said, "What is the use of this institution at all? It has no powers." They will just call the Members here on the Prime Minister's summons. Then we shall hold up our hands and say, "Hail, Chamberlain!" and draw our salaries and go away until the next summons. [Interruption.] My hon. Friend the Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) points out that the power behind the throne is more important than the throne itself. He points out that the shout should be "Hail, Margesson!" and not "Hail, Chamberlain!" The Government are taking away from us the right of examining this Measure in detail and of, without going to the length of obstruction, taking all the time that is necessary for the minute and meticulous examination which has always been one of the great powers of the House.
  The delaying power is a power which right hon. and hon. Gentlemen above the

  521
  Gangway, since they have been the official Opposition, have never used in any vexatious way. It used to be the regular method of right hon. Gentlemen who are sitting on the Government Front Bench, in the days of Conservative and Liberal Oppositions, to indulge in obstruction—and silly obstruction. In some of the Debates when Conservative Oppositions were fighting Liberal Governments, the way in which those Oppositions wasted time called for—I was going to say admiration; for amazement and wonder that grown up men could waste so much time about trivial points, and frequently about no point at all. But there was a sound principle. The methods by which they wasted the time may have been trivial, but, in view of the fact that they were preventing a Government from doing something which was profoundly objectionable to them, it was good Parliamentary fighting. Now, when democratic government is somewhat démodé—is that the term?—not gone, but just a little old-fashioned we say, "No, there is something in this dictatorship method. We are not going to have all this talking, but the hard, firm hand." This is one of the ways in which we are put under discipline. I have raised my protest in the strongest possible fashion. I would have the profoundest objection to having my life put under a sergeant-major, as these fellows are, and I am not going to have my life as a Member of Parliament put on the sergeant-major basis by either the Patronage Secretary or the Minister for War.
  4.59 p.m.
  Mr. Dingle Foot: May I raise a point of Order arising out of the entry on page 2510 of the Order Paper? I think it is germane to the Motion. The first Order appears in these words:
  "Military Training Bill [1st Allotted Day]…"
  In my submission, this is not a 1st Allotted Day. It cannot be an allotted day, unless and until this Time-table Motion is passed. Is it in order, or, at any rate, in keeping with the traditions of this House that the Government should anticipate what the decision of the House may be on the Time-table Motion by placing these words on the Order Paper?
  Mr. Speaker: In reply to the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Foot) on the point he has raised, the words proposed were
  522
  put down contingent on the passing of this Motion. He will see, if he looks at the Motion, that the first Order of the Day is contingent on this Motion being accepted by the House. He will also see that the "1st Allotted Day" is in italics, and, obviously, if this Motion is accepted by the House, this will be the first allotted day, and if it is not accepted it will not be the allotted day.
  Mr. Foot: I thank you for your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, but is it not the fact that, in putting a matter on the Order Paper, the Government have no greater rights than private Members, and is it in order for private Members to put a matter on the Order Paper in italics?
  Mr. Speaker: I cannot give a general ruling on that. It would depend on the particular question brought before me at the time, and in this particular case it is in order.
  Mr. Mander: With regard to the words being in italics, may I draw attention to the fact that there are a number of other words lower down on the Paper, such as "(in the Standing Committee)," in italics which do not refer to anything at all hypothetical or contingent. Therefore, I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that, putting the 1st allotted day in italics really does not meet the point.
  Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member will see that other words are put in italics in the Orders of the Day. In regard to the "Air Ministry (Heston and Kenley Aerodromes Extension) Bill—Second Reading," the words "to be reported on by the Select Committee on Standing Orders "are in italics, and the matter is contingent on the Second Reading, and in this case the matter is made contingent.
  5.3 p.m.
  Mr. Gallacher: As one who would like the opportunity of obstructing the passage of this Bill, I want to make a few remarks about the Time-table which has been presented. I consider that the Bill has been introduced and the Time-table presented before us as a consequence of a series of swindles on the part of the Prime Minister, and the first swindle—
  Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member is accusing the Prime Minister of a series of swindles, and he must withdraw that statement at once.
  Mr. Gallacher: I will withdraw that statement, Mr. Speaker, and will deal with the actual facts. The Prime Minister came before this House and informed us that he was going to introduce legislation dealing with compulsory military service. He had to introduce it in a hurry because Herr Hitler was going to make a speech on the following Friday. That was the only reason for the hurrying forward with this legislation, and he told us that if they did not hurry it forward and present it before Herr Hitler spoke, then, if it were brought in after Herr Hitler had spoken, there would be all sorts of suggestions that it was an action arising out of something or other that Herr Hitler had said. Therefore, the Prime Minister persuaded this House that the only reason for rushing this legislation was the date of Herr Hitler's speech.
  Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member must abide by the last Ruling which I gave. He cannot discuss on a Motion dealing with a Time-table the merits or demerits of the Bill.
  Mr. Gallacher: There is now no reason whatever for rushing this Bill, if we are to take the statement which the Prime Minister then made as being the genuine reason for presenting the Bill. There is no reason for any hurry, and if there is no reason for any hurry why have the guillotine? I need not attempt to go into the arguments which have already been presented about the impossibility of discussing the serious questions which confront the young men, and their mothers and fathers in this country, owing to the short time that is being given to this matter. This is not simply a question of young men being affected. There is scarcely a family in the country which will not be affected, and we have a situation in which we shall not be allowed time to discuss the question. The young men who are affected have not the vote, and the representatives of those who have the vote are put in a position where they will not be allowed to discuss the character of the Bill or in any way try to amend the Bill, or prevent it passing into law.
  This is simply applying the guillotine by bringing the Government majority to bear upon the question. The vital question, according to the Prime Minister, was to get the principle established before Herr Hitler made his speech, and then to decide upon the character of the Bill
  524
  to be introduced. I am of opinion that there was something that was not genuine about that reason. The fact that there was something that was not genuine is seen by the character of this Time-table. I oppose the Time-table because I am concerned about the effect of the Bill on the mass of the people of the country and about the necessity of having the fullest possible opportunity of discussing it. No Clause in the Bill can be adequately discussed on the basis of this Time-table. The story that was told us as the reason for the introduction of the Bill, and the fact that this Time-table has been introduced should arouse in this country the resistance which was aroused in Ireland in such a way that not only the Time-table, but the Bill will have to be withdrawn from this House of Commons.
  5.10 p.m.
  Mr. Silverman: I want to make one small point arising out of the question which I addressed to the Prime Minister at the close of Questions yesterday. The Time-table apparently still leaves no opportunity to the House to discuss the questions of pay and of allowances before the Bill reaches the Statute Book. I want, before we vote upon this Motion, to ask the Prime Minister whether he can now make any statement with regard to the matter, and whether he has found any method whereby we may consider those questions before instead of after the Bill passes, if it ever passes the House of Commons.
  5.11 p.m.
  Mr. Foot: There are two points I want to put to whatever Minister may be going to reply. We are taking a Time-table Motion, and as soon as that Motion is passed we are to go on to the first allotted day under the Motion. Am I right in thinking that there is no precedent for the procedure of taking the first allotted day under a Time-table Motion on the same day as the Motion itself? We appreciate that these are very abnormal circumstances and that the Government may have to do things they would not do at other times owing to the pressure of events. If there is no precedent, is this to be taken as a precedent? It obviously puts the House in a real difficulty. If we discuss the Time-table Motion at great length, and hon. Members want to express themselves fully upon it, they will be

  525
  cutting into the amount of time available for discussing the Bill. Is there any precedent, and if not will the Government undertake not to regard this as a precedent in more normal circumstances?
  The second point that I make—and I make it on behalf of my hon. Friends as well as myself—is that the particular objection that we have to this Time-table is that Clauses 7 to 17, the last ten Clauses of the Bill, have all to be taken in the last half-day of the Committee stage. My hon. Friends and I attach particular importance to Clause 16, which contains a provision that the Act shall continue for three years, and there is provision for procedure to continue it by means of an Order in Council. If this Measure is to be accepted we are very anxious that it should be accepted as a temporary Measure, and we attach the greatest importance to the Amendment which we have placed on the Order Paper cutting out the machinery for extension by Order in Council, so that, if the Government of the day three years hence wish to extend the Measure they will have to offer fresh legislation, and the whole matter can then be further considered by Parliament. It may be that under the Time-table Clause 16 will not be discussed at all. That is almost inevitable if there are many Amendments on the three or four Clauses that come before it.
  On behalf of my hon. Friends and myself I make the request to the Patronage Secretary that if at the end of the last day on the Committee stage it has not been possible to deal with Clause 16, and with the points that we are very anxious to raise on that Clause, he will consider the advisability of putting down a Motion to recommit that Clause, after midnight, if necessary, on the last night, so that the Committee may have an opportunity of discussing the duration of the Bill. I think that there are Members in other parts of the House who would like to discuss the matter as well, and it would
  go some way towards meeting Members of the Opposition if the Government could see their way to adopt that particular course.
  5.14 p.m.
  The Prime Minister: With the leave of the House I would like to reply to the questions addressed to me by the right hon. Member. I would inform him that there is a precedent for the procedure which is being adopted, to-day under which the first allotted day begins immediately after the passing of the Motion. If he would like the reference, it is the Military Service Bill of 1918. After the Motion setting up the Time-table was passed the House proceeded at once to consider the Committee stage of the Bill on the Orders of the Day.
  Mr. Wedgwood Benn: That was during the War.
  The Prime Minister: I was asked whether there is a precedent. With regard to the second point, I understand that various hon. Members in the House may think that they are not getting enough time to discuss Amendments in which they are most interested, but if you have a Time-table you have to do the best you can with the time at disposal. The point which the right hon. Member made about the particular clause in question—Clause 16—is one to which the Government will give attention. I cannot commit myself to any definite promise, but if the Clause has not received sufficient attention, I shall be prepared to consider what can be done.
  Mr. Silverman: Can the right hon. Gentleman say anything in regard to the question that I raised?
  The Prime Minister: We will consider it.
  Question put.
  The House divided: Ayes, 283, Noes, 133.

  Division No. 103.]

  AYES.

  [5.16 p.m.

  Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

  Balniel, Lord

  Brass, Sir W.

  Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

  Barrie, Sir C. C.

  Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

  Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

  Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

  Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

  Albery, Sir Irving

  Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

  Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

  Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

  Beechman, N. A.

  Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

  Allen, U.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

  Bennett, Sir E. N.

  Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

  Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

  Bernays, R. H.

  Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

  Apsley, Lord

  Bird, Sir R. B.

  Bull, B. B.

  Aske, Sir R. W.

  Blair, Sir R.

  Bullock, Capt. M.

  Assheton, R.

  Boothby, R. J. G.

  Burton, Col. H. W.

  Astor, Viscountees (Plymouth, Sutton)

  Boulton, W. W.

  Butcher, H. W.

  Baillie, Sir A. W. M.

  Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

  Cartland, J. R. H.

  Carver, Major W. H.

  Hoare, Rt. Hon. Sir S.

  Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

  Cary, R. A.

  Holmes, J. S.

  Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

  Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

  Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

  Horsbrugh, Florence

  Ropner, Colonel L.

  Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

  Howitt, Dr. A. B.

  Rosbotham, Sir T.

  Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

  Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

  Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

  Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)

  Hume, Sir G. H.

  Rowlands, G.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. N. (Edgb't'n)

  Hunter, T.

  Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

  Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

  Hutchinson, G. C.

  Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

  Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)

  Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir T. W. H.

  Russell, Sir Alexander

  Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

  Jarvis, Sir J. J.

  Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

  Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston)

  Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

  Colville, Rt. Hon. John

  Jonas, L. (Swansea W.)

  Salmon, Sir I.

  Conant, Captain R. J. E.

  Keeling, E. H.

  Salt, E. W.

  Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.)

  Kerr, Colonel G. I. (Montrose

  Samuel, M. R. A.

  Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S)

  Kerr, H. W (Oldham)

  Sandeman, Sir N. S.

  Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

  Kimball, L.

  Sanders, W. S.

  Cox, H. B. Trevor

  Lamb, Sir J. Q.

  Schuster, Sir G. E.

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Lancaster, Captain C. G.

  Scott, Lord William

  Craven-Ellis, W.

  Latham, Sir P.

  Shakespeare, G. H.

  Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

  Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

  Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

  Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.

  Leech, Sir J. W.

  Shepperson, Sir E. W.

  Crossley, A. C.

  Leighton, Major B. E. P.

  Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

  Crowder, J. F. E.

  Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

  Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A.

  Cruddas, Col. B.

  Levy, T.

  Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

  Culverwell, C. T.

  Lewis, O.

  Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

  Davison, Sir W. H.

  Liddall, W. S.

  Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Lindsay, K. M.

  Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

  Denville, Alfred

  Lipson, D. L.

  Smithers, Sir W

  Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.

  Lloyd, G. W.

  Snadden, W. McN.

  Doland, G. F.

  Loftus, P. C.

  Somerset, T.

  Donner, P. W.

  Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

  Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

  Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

  MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.

  Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

  Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

  M'Connell, Sir J.

  Spears, Brigadier-General E. L.

  Duncan, J. A. L.

  Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)

  Spens, W. P.

  Dunglass, Lord

  McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

  Eastwood, J. F.

  McKie, J. H.

  Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

  Eckersley, P. T.

  Macnamara, Lieut.-Colonel J. R. J.

  Stewart, William J. (Belfast, S.)

  Eden, Rt. Hon. A.

  Macquisten, F. A.

  Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

  Edmondson, Major Sir J.

  Magnay, T.

  Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

  Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

  Maitland, Sir Adam

  Strickland, Captain W. F.

  Ellis, Sir G.

  Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

  Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

  Elliston, Capt. G. S.

  Manningham-Buller, Sir M.

  Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

  Emery, J. F.

  Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

  Sutcliffe, H.

  Emmott, C. E. G. C.

  Markham, S. F.

  Tasker, Sir R. I.

  Emrys-Evans, P. V.

  Marsden, Commander A.

  Tale, Mavis C.

  Erskine-Hill, A. G.

  Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

  Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

  Findlay, Sir E.

  Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

  Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

  Fleming, E. L.

  Medlicott, F.

  Thomas, J. P. L.

  Fox, Sir G. W. G.

  Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

  Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

  Fremantle, Sir F. E.

  Mills, Sir F. (Leyton, E.)

  Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

  Furness, S. N.

  Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

  Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

  Fyfe, D. P. M.

  Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

  Titchfield, Marquess of

  Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

  Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)

  Touche, G. C.

  Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Moore, Lieut.-Col. Sir T. C. R.

  Tree, A. R. L. F.

  Gledhill, G.

  Moreing, A. C.

  Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.

  Gluckstein, L. H.

  Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

  Tufnell, Lieut. -Commander R. L.

  Goldie, N. B.

  Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

  Turton, R. H.

  Gower, Sir R. V.

  Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

  Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

  Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral)

  Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.

  Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

  Grant-Ferris, Flight-Lieutenant R.

  Nall, Sir J.

  Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

  Grattan-Doyle, Sir N

  Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

  Warrender, Sir V.

  Gretton, Col. Rt. Hon. J.

  Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

  Waterhouse, Captain C.

  Gridley, Sir A. B.

  Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

  Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

  Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

  O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

  Wells, Sir Sydney

  Grimston, R. V.

  O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

  Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

  Gritten, W. G. Howard

  Orr-Ewing, I. L.

  Williams, C. (Torquay)

  Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

  Palmer, G. E. H.

  Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

  Guest, Hon. I. (Brecon and Radnor)

  Patrick, C. M.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Guinness, T. L. E. B.

  Peake, O.

  Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)

  Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.

  Perkins, W. R. D.

  Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

  Hambro, A. V.

  Petherick, M.

  Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

  Hannah, I. C.

  Pickthorn, K. W. M.

  Wise, A. R.

  Harmon, Sir P. J. H.

  Ponsonby, Col. C. E.

  Womersley, Sir W. J.

  Harbord, A.

  Porritt, R. W.

  Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley

  Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

  Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton

  Wragg, H.

  Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

  Raikes, H. V. A. M.

  Wright, Wing-Commander a. A. C.

  Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

  Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.

  York, C.

  Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.

  Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

  Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

  Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

  Rawson, Sir Cooper

  Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

  Rayner, Major R. H.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Hepworth, J.

  Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

  Captain Dugdale and Lieut.-Colonel Herbert.

  Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

  Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

  Higgs, W. F.

  Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

  528

  529

  NOES.

  Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)

  Groves, T. E.

  Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

  Adams, D. (Consett)

  Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

  Poole, C. C.

  Adams, O. M. (Poplar, S.)

  Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

  Pritt, D. N.

  Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

  Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

  Quibell, D. J. K.

  Adamson, W. M.

  Hardie, Agnes

  Richards, R. (Wrexham)

  Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

  Harris, Sir P. A.

  Ridley, G.

  Ammon, C. G.

  Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

  Riley, B.

  Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

  Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

  Ritson, J,

  Banfield, J. W.

  Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

  Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

  Barr, J.

  Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

  Rothschild, J. A. de

  Bartlett, C. V. 0.

  Hills, A. (Pontefract)

  Salter, Dr. A. (Bermondsey)

  Batey, J.

  Hollins, A.

  Sanders, W. S.

  Bellenger, F. J.

  Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

  Seely, Sir H. M.

  Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

  Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

  Sexton, T. M.

  Benson, G.

  Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

  Shinwell, E.

  Bromfield, W.

  Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

  Silverman, S. S.

  Brown, C. (Mansfield)

  Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

  Simpson, F. B.

  Buchanan, G.

  Kirby, B. V.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)

  Cape, T.

  Kirkwood, D.

  Sloan, A.

  Chater, D.

  Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

  Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

  Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

  Lathan, G.

  Smith, E. (Stoke)

  Cocks, F. S.

  Lawson, J. J.

  Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly)

  Collindridge, F.

  Leach, W.

  Smith, T. (Normanton)

  Cove, W. G.

  Logan, D. G.

  Sorensen, R. W.

  Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

  Lunn, W.

  Stephen, C.

  Daggar, G.

  Macdonald, G. (Ince)

  Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

  Dalton, H.

  McEntee, V. La. T.

  Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)

  Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

  McGhee, H. G.

  Summerskill, Dr. Edith

  Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)

  McGovern, J.

  Thorne, W.

  Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

  MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

  Thurtle, E.

  Dobbie, W.

  Mander, G. le M.

  Tinker, J. J.

  Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

  Marshall, F.

  Tomlinson, G.

  Ede, J. C.

  Mathers, G.

  Viant, S. P.

  Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)

  Maxton, J.

  Walker, J.

  Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

  Messer, F.

  Watkins, F. C.

  Evans, E. (Univ. of Wales)

  Milner, Major J.

  Watson, W. Met.

  Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

  Montague, F.

  Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. J. C.

  Foot, D. M.

  Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

  Welsh, J. C.

  Gallacher, W.

  Naylor, T. E.

  Westwood, J.

  Gardner, B. W.

  Noel-Baker, P. J.

  White, H. Graham

  Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

  Owen, Major G.

  Williams, T. (Don Valley)

  Green, W. H. (Deptford)

  Paling, W.

  Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

  Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

  Parker, J.

  Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

  Grenfell, D. R.

  Parkinson, J. A.

  Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

  Pearson, A.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Charleton.

  Ordered,
  That the proceedings on the Committee stage, Report stage and Third Reading of the Military Training Bill and Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill and the Report stage of the Financial Resolution relating to the last mentioned Bill shall be proceeded with as follows:—

  A.—MILITARY TRAINING BILL.
  (1) Committee Stage..
  Five allotted days shall be given to the proceedings on any instructions relating to the Bill and to the Committee stage of the Bill, and the proceedings on each allotted day shall be as shown in the second column of the following table, and those proceedings shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at the time shown in the third column for that day:
  530

  Allotted Day

  Proceedings.

  Time for bringing Proceedings to a conclusion.

  First-

  Proceedings on Instructions, and Clause I.

  10.0 p.m.

  Clause 2

  12.0 midnight.

  Second-

  Clause 3

  8.30 p.m.

  Clause 4

  12.0 midnight.

  Third-

  Clause 5

  7.30 p.m.

  Clause 6

  —

  Fourth-

  Clause 6

  7.30 p.m.

  Clauses 7 to 17

  12.0 midnight.

  Fifth-

  New Clauses

  7.30 p.m.

  Schedule, new Schedules, and any other matter necessary to bring the Committee Stage to a conclusion.

  12.0 midnight.

  (2) Report stage and Third Reading.
  One allotted day (not being a Friday) shall be given to the Report stage and Third Reading of the Bill and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at 11 p.m. on that day.

  B.—RESERVE AND AUXILIARY FORCES BILL.
  (1) The Report stage of the Financial Resolution and Committee stage of the Bill.
  One allotted day shall be given to the Report stage of the Financial Resolution, to the proceedings on any instructions relating to the Bill and to the Committee stage of the Bill, and those proceedings shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion at 7.30 p.m. on that day.
  (2) Report stage and Third Reading of the Bill.
  If on the day allotted under this Order to the Report stage and Third Reading of the Military Training Bill, the Committee stage of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill has been concluded and the Report stage of the last mentioned Bill is set down as the next Order of the Day after the Order relating to the Military Training Bill, the Report stage of the Reserve and Military Forces Bill shall be proceeded with on that day immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings on the Military Training Bill, and the proceedings on the Report stage and Third Reading of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion one hour after the conclusion of the Proceedings on the Military. Training Bill.

  C.—GENERAL.
  On the conclusion of the Committee stage of each of the Bills aforesaid, the Chairman shall report the Bill to the House without question put.
  Any day including the day on which this Order is passed on which the Military Training Bill is put down as the First Order of the Day shall be considered a day allotted to that Bill for the purposes of this Order and any day on which the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill is put down as the First Order of the Day shall be considered a day allotted to that Bill for the purposes of this Order:
  Provided that, where a day so allotted is a Friday, this Order shall have effect as if for references to 7.30 p.m. or 8.30 p.m. and 10 p.m. there were respectively substituted references to 1.0 p.m. and 3.0 p.m., and as if for references to 12 midnight there were substituted references to 3.30 p.m.
  For the purpose of bringing to a conclusion any proceedings which are to be brought to a conclusion at a time appointed by this Order, and which have not previously been brought to a conclusion, the Chairman or Mr. Speaker shall, at the time so appointed, put forthwith the Question on any Amendment or Motion already proposed from the Chair, and, in the
  532
  case of a new Clause which has been read a Second time, also the Question that the Clause be added to the Bill, and shall next proceed to put forthwith the Question on any Amendments, new Clauses, or Schedules moved by the Government of which notice has been given (but no other Amendments, new Clauses, or Schedules), and any Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded and, in the case of Government Amendments or Government new Clauses or Schedules, he shall put only the Question that the Amendments be made, or that the Clauses or Schedules be added to the Bill, as the case may be.
  Any Private Business which has been set down for consideration at 7.30 p.m., and any Motion for Adjournment under Standing Order No. 8, on any day allotted to the Military Training Bill shall on that day, instead of being taken as provided by the Standing Orders, be taken on the conclusion of the proceedings on that Bill or under this Order for that day, or, if the Order for the Report stage of the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill is set down as the next Order of the Day after the Military Training Bill on that day, on the conclusion of the proceedings on the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Bill, or under this Order for that day, and any Private Business or Motion for Adjournment so taken may be proceeded with, though opposed, notwithstanding any Standing Order relating to the Sittings of the House.
  On a day on which proceedings are to be brought to a conclusion under this Order, those proceedings shall be exempted from the operation of Standing Order No. 1 notwithstanding anything in that Standing Order.
  Notwithstanding anything in the Standing Orders of the House relating to the precedence of business, the Military Training Bill may be set down as the First Order of the Day on any Friday and if so set down shall have precedence of any other business.
  On a day on which any proceedings are to be brought to a conclusion under this Order no dilatory Motion with respect to proceedings on either of the Bills aforesaid or under this Order, nor Motion that the Chairman do report Progress or do leave the Chair, nor Motion to postpone a Clause, or to re-commit the Bill, shall be received unless moved by the Government, and the Question on such Motion, if moved by the Government, shall be put forthwith without any Debate.
  Nothing in this Order shall—

  (a) prevent any proceedings which under this Order are to be concluded on any particular day being concluded on any other day, or necessitate any particular day or part of a particular day being given to any such proceedings if those proceedings have been otherwise disposed of; or

  (b) prevent any other business being proceeded with on any particular day, or part of a particular day, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the House, if any proceedings to be concluded under this Order on that particular day, or part of a particular day, have been disposed of."

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  MILITARY TRAINING BILL.
  [1ST ALLOTTED DAY.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Sir DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair.]

  MILITARY TRAINING BILL.

    CLAUSE I.—(Classes of persons liable to be registered and called up for military training.)
    5.27 p.m.
    Mr. Shinwell: On a point of Order. Before the Home Secretary moves the Government Amendment which stands in the name of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, may I ask whether you would consider our discussing at the same time as that Amendment the two Amendments which stand in my name and the names of several of my hon. Friends? Our Amendments bear on the same point as the Government Amendment.
    The Chairman: With regard to the first Amendment that stands in the name of the hon. Member—in page I, line 9, to leave out, "the United Kingdom," and to insert "Great Britain"—I do not think we could deal with that.
    Mr. Shinwell: I do not propose to move that Amendment, but the second Amendment—in page I, line 14, leave out "the United Kingdom," and insert "Great Britain."
    The Chairman: In regard to the second Amendment, it is perfectly true that it deals with a cognate matter, but it is not one which I should have been prepared to allow to be discussed with this Amendment in ordinary circumstances, but as we are working under a Time-table, if it will save time and be a convenience to the Committee, I am prepared to assent to the Amendment being discussed at the same time as the Government Amendment, provided that that course receives the general approval of the Committee in all parts of the House. That will mean that when we come to the hon. Member's Amendment in line 14, it will simply be called and put, if necessary, without any discussion. If that course has the assent of the Committee, we can proceed on those lines.
    Mr. Maxton: Do I understand that in the first batch of Amendments you are
    534
    calling only the Government Amendments?
    The Chairman: That is so on the first page.
    Mr. Maxton: In that case you are passing over the first three Amendments in the name of myself and my hon. Friends, all of which contain important points of principle.
    The Chairman: I am not selecting them.
    Mr. Stephen: I do not know whether I ought to raise the point now or afterwards, but there is an Amendment to insert the words "two years after the passing of this Act."
    The Chairman: I am not selecting that Amendment, and I must ask hon. Members to accept my Ruling.
    Mr. Maxton: May I put this representation to you? I do not challenge the fact that the power is in your hands, but already we have been put under the Guillotine with a substantial loss of our liberty. Do you not think that in those circumstances a little more generosity from the Chair is called upon in the matter of selecting Amendments? It is unfortunate that out of about 20 Amendments the only one that is called is a Government Amendment.
    The Chairman: Strictly speaking I think the attitude I should adopt is to say that I have power to select Amendments and that my discretion should not be questioned, but I do not want to press that too far. I can tell hon. Members that I have tried my very best in making my selection to do so in such a way that the most important points shall be raised in one or other of the Amendments, and also I have had regard to the interest of different groups and parties concerned. I may say that I have paid special attention to the interests of the hon. Member's group and that I am proposing to call the Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) at the end of line 21 to insert a proviso.
    5.34 p.m.
    The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir Samuel Hoare): I beg to move, in page 1, line 7, to leave out from "subject," to "shall," in line 12, and to insert" ordinarily resident in Great Britain."

    535
    If this Amendment is carried the Clause will read in this way:
    "Subject to the provisions of this Act every male British subject ordinarily resident in Great Britain shall, while he is between the ages of 20 years and 21 years, be registered for military training in the United Kingdom."
    The Amendment carries out the decision which was announced by the Prime Minister on the Second Reading of the Bill. In a sentence it excludes Northern Ireland from the scope of the Bill, while leaving Northern Ireland as a training ground for the young men who may be called up in England. There are a number of units of the British Army in Northern Ireland, and it is proposed that they should be used for the training of a certain number of young men who may be called up.
    I move this Amendment with mixed feelings. During all the years I have been in the House I have been in very close contact with hon. Members who represent Northern Ireland constituencies, and as Home Secretary I am the Minister responsible, in the main, for their interests in this House. I tell my hon. Friends from Northern Ireland that I have given the most deep and careful consideration to the difficult issues that are raised by this question. On the one hand, there is the fervent desire of the majority in Northern Ireland to be treated as an integral part of the United Kingdom, there is a fervent desire to undertake the same responsibilities as are undertaken by any other part of the United Kingdom, and they object most strongly to any differentiation between them and the citizens of Great Britain. On the other hand, there is an exceptionally deep division of opinion, regrettable as it is, which does exist in Northern Ireland on a question of this kind. It is the duty of the Government to weigh up the considerations on both sides and take the decision which they think wisest in the international crisis through which we are passing.
    As hon. Members are aware, Lord Craigavon, the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, came over last week to discuss this difficult question with members of the Government of the United Kingdom. Lord Craigavon made his own position and the position of his Government perfectly clear. He made it clear that they wished to be included in the
    536
    Bill just like any other part of the United Kingdom, and that their preference was strongly against any differentiation between them and Scotland and Wales. From the point of view of the United Kingdom, however, he made it clear that as it was a question of defence, it was a United Kingdom responsibility and that the decision must be made by the Government of the United Kingdom; the responsibility was upon our shoulders. He further stated in the Northern Ireland House of Commons that
    "the loyalty of Northern Ireland was not conditional in any way, and that the people of Northern Ireland could best contribute in these difficult times to assist the Mother Country by an unquestioning acceptance of whatever decision the Imperial Government might find it necessary to take."
    I claim that that is the statement of a very wise statesman who has during all these difficult years held his high place of responsibility longer than any other public man in Europe. It is the statement of a man of very wide and balanced judgment, and, speaking for the Government of the United Kingdom, I can say that we were most grateful to Lord Craigavon for his wise and statesmanlike attitude. We felt we were then free to take a decision which was our responsibility, and that weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of any given course of action, we could adopt what we thought was best in the interest of the Empire in these difficult times.
    There were three alternatives. The first was to include Northern Ireland in the Bill; the second was to include Northern Ireland in the Bill, with certain compromises as to the manner in which the Bill should be applied in Northern Ireland; and the third alternative was to exclude Northern Ireland altogether. We have taken the view that in the present state of the world, and looking at the exceptional division which divides the population of Northern Ireland on a question of this kind, the wisest course is to exclude Northern Ireland. We came down against compromise for the reason that we thought any compromise would not remove the feeling of grievance on either side, and would, in fact, mean the worst of both worlds. On that account we now propose by the Amendment to exclude Northern Ireland altogether, and we propose later on, in Clause 15, which provides that Orders in Council may be

    537
    applied to Northern Ireland, to move the deletion of that provision from the Bill.
    I know that a decision of this kind will cause great searchings of heart amongst my hon. Friends in Northern Ireland, but I must say that we took the wisest decision we thought possible in the very difficult circumstances with which we were faced, and we took that decision without any reference to so-called ultimatums or threats from any other part of Ireland. We took the decision with no intention of altering the fact that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom, and we took the decision without wishing it to be thought in any quarter of the Empire that we have changed in the least from the position we have stated over and over again, that Northern Ireland can never be coerced to separate from the United Kingdom against the wishes of the majority of its people. I make this last observation lest it should be thought that we have arrived at this decision as a result of any pressure from outside. We considered the question upon its merits, and without any reservations I strongly press this course of action upon the Committee.
    Mr. Sandys: In order to dissipate all uncertainty about the Government's reason for this attitude will the right hon. Gentleman explain briefly why it is that the Government have changed the terms of the Bill from those which were originally printed and presented to the House?
    Sir S. Hoare: The Bill was drafted with great speed, it was urgent, and the question was left open under the original draft. Ulster was included under Clause I, but under the provisions of a subsequent Clause there was to be a delay in its application. In the rush of time we had no other course open to us. That was the reason why we changed the terms. The hon. Member will appreciate the wider reasons in the Empire and in the world why we have arrived at this decision.
    5.45 P.m.
    Mr. Shinwell: The right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary has dealt with this dilemma with rare delicacy. He has emphasised the loyalty of Ulster and sought to justify the exclusion of Ulster from the scope of the Bill. It seems to me that he anticipated something in the
    538
    nature of a revolt from the Ulster Members of the House. If so, he might well have saved his breath to cool his porridge. There will be no revolt. There may be a few indignant utterances, but there will be no more than that. I would say to the Ulster Members that if they are disposed to engage in anything like a revolt, they had better undertake a course of training in the Labour and trade union movement. There is likely to be more of a revolt on the details of the Bill from this side of the Committee than there will be from the other side.
    I do not propose to intervene in the dispute between the Home Secretary and the Ulster Members. Nor do I question the loyalty of Ulster. I accept the view that has been expressed by the Prime Minister and by other right hon. Gentlemen opposite that Ulster is prepared to make its contribution to National Defence. But when the right hon. Gentleman seeks to justify the exclusion of Ulster on the ground of there being a deep division of opinion in Ulster on this matter, I venture to remind him that there is also a deep division of opinion in Great Britain. So far, I have not heard from the lips of any right hon. Gentleman opposite any attempt to justify the exclusion of Scotland or Wales or England or Durham or Yorkshire, as the case may be.
    Hon. Members on this side are more concerned about vital Amendments that will arise at a later stage, which seek to safeguard the interests of the men and their dependants, and therefore, I do not propose to say anything further on the main issue at this stage; but I think it is proper to say to the Home Secretary that if the Government are disposed to make concessions to Northern Ireland for this, that or the other reason, they ought to be, at a later stage, when the Committee is considering vital Amendments, equally disposed to make concessions to the trade union movement. I hope they will be as liberal and generous in their favours when we come to those Amendments as they are in regard to this matter. Hon. Members on this side are primarily concerned with an Amendment in my name, and the names of my hon. Friends, in page 1, line 14. The Amendment which appears on the Paper in my name to page 1, line 9, will not be moved. The Amendment to page 1, line 14, proposes to leave out the words "the United Kingdom" and to insert "Great Britain," which is

    539
    precisely what the right hon. Gentleman has moved in another connection.
    I noticed that the right hon. Gentleman said that, although Ulster is to be excluded from the scope of the Bill as regards conscription, Ulster might be an appropriate place to select as a training ground for men who are to be conscripted in Great Britain. That seems to me to be a monstrous proposition. Neither Southern nor Northern Ireland will furnish any conscripts, but conscripts compelled to serve on this side of the Irish Sea may be sent to train with Regular forces in Northern Ireland. Surely, that is a most invidious proposal. If there are to be no conscripts in Ireland, let there be no conscripts there. The Government, in determining their opinion on the Ulster issue, ought also to have decided that no conscripts would be sent to Northern Ireland. At a later stage, I shall formally move the Amendment in my name, but I put that view before the Committee as representing the opinion of hon. Members on this side. If Ulster is to be excluded from the scope of the Bill, equally no conscripts from Great Britain should be sent to Northern Ireland for military training. I do not know what is the Home Secretary's view on this matter, but it appears to me that all the training that might be regarded as essential could be undertaken in Great Britain itself, and I hope the Government will be prepared to accept my Amendment when it is moved.
    5.53 p.m.
    Mr. Stephen: The Home Secretary has given the Committee the views of the Government with regard to the alteration which this Amendment makes in the Bill. I shall be very interested to see how hon. Members representing Northern Ireland act in connection with this Amendment. In the Second Reading Debate, their spokesmen told us that they intended to divide against such a proposal, and I shall be interested to see whether they carry out the promise that was then given. I do not think the Home Secretary's explanation was sufficient. He told us of various considerations that have led the Government to take the decision to exclude Northern Ireland, but what he did not say was whether the Poles have agreed to the decision. As I understand the matter, conscription is being forced upon the people of this country in deference to the
    540
    views of the Poles. The Poles insisted that the young men of Britain should be conscripted. Have the Poles been consulted as to the exclusion of Northern Ireland? [Interruption.] Hon. Members may laugh, but it has been made plain that the Poles are responsible for it. They are responsible not only for the breaking of the pledge with regard to conscription, but for our ordinary Parliamentary arrangements, as they have fixed the Guillotine on us because they say there is no need for a full discussion. I want to ask the Home Secretary whether the foreign interests which have been responsible for the breaking of the pledge and the introduction of conscription have been consulted with regard to the exclusion of Northern Ireland.
    I want also to say that, so far, I have seen no very desperate fight on the part of the hon. Members from Northern Ireland, who talk so much about loyalty and all the rest of it, to put Northern Ireland under the Bill. I know that two of them made a certain amount of protestation. I would describe it as very mild protestation. I am sure that if they had been anxious that Northern Ireland should come under the Bill, it would have come under the Bill all right. They had only to appeal to the Poles and the French to insist that Northern Ireland should be kept within the scope of the Bill and the Government would have had to give way. But I am confident that, although they make mild protestations, they are really thankful that Mr. de Valera has kept the whole of Ireland outside the scope of the Bill. The exclusion of Northern Ireland in this respect is justified in the sense that it provides another substantial argument for bringing to an end the present partition of Ireland. I hope that, Mr. de Valera having done this great service to Northern Ireland, hon. Members representing Northern Ireland in the House, Lord Craigavon and the rest of them, will now agree to make an end of partition and leave a united Ireland.
    5.57 p.m.
    Mr. Mander: The Home Secretary, in replying at short notice to the question as to why a sudden change had been made, did so with remarkable agility; but let us be frank about the real reasons for this change. We know that certain representations were made, quite properly, by one of the British Dominions—Eire—to the British Government, and that very

    541
    strong pressure indeed was exercised in order that the Bill should not apply to Ireland. The Government accepted the advice tendered to them, and I think they were quite right to do so. It was the only course open to them if they were to avoid a very great controversy. But when they did that, it seems to me that they knocked the bottom out of the whole Bill, for if it is possible to rely upon the patriotism of Ulster to supply all the men that could be obtained by conscription, it is a very grave reflection indeed on the rest of the United Kingdom. I am absolutely convinced that if the same opportunity were given to the people of this country as it is proposed to give to Ulster under this Clause, the same result, if not greater results, would be obtained. My only regret is not that Ireland is excluded, but that England is not excluded as well. There is no moral or political case left for the Bill after this concession has been made.
    The Chairman: The hon. Member must not deal with the general principle of the Bill, but must confine himself to the Amendment.
    Mr. Mander: I think it would be in order for me to refer to the reasons for the exclusion of Ulster. One of the reasons is that representations were made. Whatever one may think about this, one thing stands out clearly: it is that there has been a definite score by Eire in the direction of making a claim for an undivided Ireland.
    The Chairman: The hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) who preceded the hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) in this Debate, made a reference to this matter at the end of his speech. Had he pursued the subject, I should have been compelled to tell him that we could not on this occasion discuss the question of the partition or otherwise of Ireland. That is not part of this Bill and I must ask the hon. Member not to go into questions of that sort, which are not strictly applicable to the particular matter before the Committee.
    Mr. Mander: I respond at once, Sir Dennis, to your Ruling, and I conclude by saying again that, in the circumstances of the case, the Government I believe are right in taking the action which they have taken and that we support them so far as that action is concerned.
    6.2 p.m.
    Mr. Somerset: I rise to accept the challenge which has been thrown across the Floor of the House as to whether my hon. Friends from Northern Ireland and I are prepared to support in the Division Lobby the declarations which have been made on our behalf in regard to this matter. We shall certainly vote against the proposal to exclude Northern Ireland from the scope of the Measure. That was made plain by the chairman of our party, my right hon. Friend the Member for Antrim (Sir H. O'Neill) in his speech last week. He protested then, as I protest now, and as we have all protested all along, against the proposal to omit Northern Ireland from the Bill. Long before conscription was talked of in this House of Commons, the representatives of Northern Ireland repeatedly stated that, when the time came, the people of Northern Ireland would be very willing to undertake service in the Army, and other forms of service and to do all they could for the country in any emergency which might arise. I would like to remind the Committee of this fact—that during the last War, under the voluntary system the recruiting in Ireland as a whole and Northern Ireland in particular established a very high record. Under a system of voluntary recruitment we raised some wonderfully good regiments and sent some very fine fighting men into the Services. Men of that kind are still available and willing to serve but what we strongly object to—I think with every justification—is that we should be requested in the present circumstances to go on with the voluntary system to send or young men into the Army and to leave their jobs to be taken by other people who will come into Northern Ireland, as they have come in often and often before, under similar conditions, to take up the work of those who are serving in the Forces.
    The circumstances of the exclusion of Ulster from this Measure are such as to make us think that we have been humiliated. I think there can be no question about that fact. It is humiliating that Ulster, one of the most loyal provinces in the Empire and the most loyal part of Ireland, should be told, "No, you cannot come into this," simply because one section and a very small section at that, wants to be excluded. There is no doubt about the fact that the Govern-

    543
    ment intended that Northern Ireland should be in his Bill. The right hon. Gentleman has practically admitted as much. What we want to know now, is what really happened to cause the Government to change their minds. It is all very well to talk vaguely about certain things that might happen but the Government have not yet stated precisely why they made this change. I spoke in this House last year on the agreement between this country and Eire. It was then said on behalf of the Government that everything was about to be settled between the two countries. Everything—land annuities and all the rest—was to be conceded, in the hope of getting a satisfactory settlement, but before the ink was dry on that agreement Mr. de Valera went back to Dublin and said that all that he wanted now was Ulster. He wants the whole country.
    That is the position with which we in Northern Ireland are faced. We are always faced with that position. That is what is hanging over our heads all the time and we are scared stiff lest weakness on the part of the Government in this country should encourage the people in Southern Ireland to think that Northern Ireland is about to be given over to them. The settlement that was made then meant that the Government in Southern Ireland got practically everything else they wanted. It was not a settlement; it was a surrender, and I fear that the leaving out of Northern Ireland from this Measure is a further surrender to certain forces that are at work in Ireland and over here as well. I would remind hon. Members of the fact that, following on that agreement, Mr. Sean T. O'Kelly declared that "John Bull had been whipped again." I, for my part, protest in the strongest manner against Northern Ireland being left out of the Bill and I intend to vote against its exclusion.
    6.7 p.m.
    Mr. Anstruther-Gray: I shall not pursue the Irish question. I rise to ask the Government one question, namely, what is the definition of the words "ordinarily resident." This is a matter which affects many of my constituents. Young men in North Lanark to whom I have spoken have expressed a general willingness to serve, but on one condition, that nobody of the same age as themselves should get
    544
    away without doing his share. They are insistent that no class should be excepted. They are also anxious that people should not be allowed to come into the country at the age of 20, to take employment and then go away again without having done their service. I wish particularly to inquire about the case of the young man who has lived all his life in Southern Ireland and who, at the age of 20, comes over to Glasgow and proceeds to take employment which may have been vacated by one of these lads who has been called up as a militiaman. It is clear that such a man cannot keep the job for more than six months. It must then be given back to the militiaman, but it seems a pity that an Irishman should be permitted to get such a job even for six months, unless he does his period of military training along with the rest. The question which I put is, at what time will such a man become "ordinarily resident" in this country? I hope the Minister when he replies will give us an assurance—
    Mr. Buchanan: Why does the hon. Member pick out Glasgow? Why does he not confine himself to his own place?
    Mr. Anstruther-Gray: Only because I happen to represent about 10,000 Glasgow municipal voters, as the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) knows perfectly well. He has done his best to shift me and maybe he will one day, but he has not succeeded yet, and he will allow me therefore to speak for those 10,000 of my constituents, The point which I raise is perfectly simple. Can the Government give us an assurance that these people of the age 20 to 21 will not be allowed to come over here and take employment without doing their period of service. I would ask further whether my right hon. Friend will give his attention to the question of people of that age coming in from any of the Dominions and stepping into jobs here, without have previously done some service, not necessarily here but in their own Dominion.
    6.10 p.m.
    Mr. Logan: I am not anxious to accentuate differences between nationalities in regard to this Measure. I have a full sense of responsibility in addressing a mixed assembly of this kind, having regard to the critical position in which

    545
    we are at the present time. Therefore, I shall not attempt to define what is meant by ordinary citizenship in this country, on which the previous speaker was anxious to be informed. He spoke of having 10,000 constituents who were Glasgow municipal voters, and I do not require to be reminded that in the division which I represent there are large sections of population whose views I have to consider in this matter. I feel that I am part and parcel of the British Empire, whatever my nationality may be, and I must assume my share of responsibility in regard to the question which is now before the Committee. It is because of that sense of my duty that I feel bound to participate in this discussion. The whole of my life has been taken up with the Irish movement, but I am not going to enter into an Irish discussion in this Committee. A few moments ago an hon. Member from Northern Ireland spoke of accepting a challenge. As a rule that is the way in which every Irishman approaches a subject. He wants to meet you in the most amicable fashion but he throws off his coat first. There was a time when Irishmen met in this House to settle their difficulties, but I do not intend on this occasion to arouse the ire of any hon. Member who comes from Ireland.
    The gravity of the situation compels me to acknowledge the reasonableness of the suggestion contained in the Minister's Amendment. I do not think any hon. Member wants to revive old prejudices. This is an occasion which calls for unity among all the peoples concerned, whether we happen to be from Northern Ireland or from Southern Ireland or from any other part of the British Isles. I am convinced that in all lands, what we want to-day is unity, and I am not willing to arouse any animosity in regard to the question of the loyalty that may be found either in the North or in the South of Ireland. There is a history attaching to this question for both parties, but no question of old traditions going back for 700 years can be fought out on this Amendment of the Minister. This Amendment may do something towards mitigating that ferocity which Irishmen, now and again, show. Both sides should realise that on an occasion of this kind there is wisdom in the attitude indicated by the Minister. I am aware as much as
    546
    anybody of the differences which exist, but Ireland, as far as I am concerned, will be able to work out its own destinies. I feel that if internecine troubles were to be created at the present time and if the proposal which is being made here today, were not accepted, it would seriously add to the difficulties of the situation and I consider that the best line that could have been adopted has been adopted. I think that Irish, Scottish, Welsh, all the peoples in these islands, will be able to recognise their responsibilities without compulsion.
    The Irish race has given Britain some of the best of its sons on many occasions in the past and such opportunities can still be offered to the youth of Ireland, but political difficulties have called for this wise step on the part of the Government. I am convinced that the voluntary system is the only system. I am against compulsion. If a man thinks that his land is worth fighting for he should not require compulsion. I am not young enough myself, but if I wanted to fight for any land, I should take my stand for it. I should not want to be compelled to fight for the land in which I lived. I think this Parliament of all Parliaments, united in a British status, ought to recognise that we should be very careful, in the language we use in putting our own point of view, that it does not cause differences of opinion. I therefore agree with the Minister on this occasion that this is a very wise Amendment. It leaves the opportunity to the British people to co-operate and give their assistance if they so desire. As I shall have no chance of speaking to the Amendment in my name, I have ventured to join in this discussion now. I want to say to Northern Ireland that, on another and more fitting occasion, when this matter might have to be debated, I should take my part in regard to the rest of Ireland that has always proclaimed Ireland a nation.
    The Chairman: The hon. Member is getting out of order.
    Mr. Logan: That is only in passing, Sir Dennis, and in reply to the challenge of my hon. Friends from Northern Ireland who said that they must take off their coats on entering into this discussion. It is only a temporary indication that to-night is not the occasion for us to debate the destiny of Ireland. The question is as to the destiny of the British

    547
    Empire, and I feel that it is necessary at this crisis that the question of Ireland and its difficulties should not be considered on this Amendment, and that we have to agree with the Minister that this is the best possible thing for us on this occasion.
    6.18 p.m.
    Lieut.-Colonel Sir William Allen: We all desire the good of Ireland and when my right hon. Friend, in moving the Amendment, said he did so with mixed feelings, I did not wonder at it. He has helped us on many different occasions, and we hope we shall have his good will and friendship on still further occasions, but while he spoke with mixed feelings, our feelings on this Amendment are perfectly indescribable. We are grateful to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War and his predecessor for what they have done with regard to recruiting in Ireland. We appreciate all the arrangements that they have made, and we are pleased with the opportunities that he has given us for voluntary enlistment. I understand that all the units that he had arranged for in Northern Ireland are practically full, and we are grateful to him for that. But I doubt very much whether this Amendment has his cordial approval.
    My right hon. Friend told us something of our Prime Minister and said that he was called over here. He was not called over to be consulted; he was called over by the Government to tell him that the Government had made up their mind. That is what he came over for. His opinion was not asked concerning this Amendment. Originally the Bill undoubtedly included Northern Ireland in its scope. My right hon. Friend said that there was no pressure brought to bear on the Government, but he will find it very difficult to persuade the people of Northern Ireland that that is true. If there was no pressure brought to bear for this change, why was the change made at all? Why did not the Government manfully and pluckily stick to their original intention? The original intention was, as I say, that Ireland should be included, and that is the way in which the Bill was drafted originally. Then pressure was brought to bear. No one will persuade me out of that. Clause 15 was then in the Bill, and the operation with regard to Ireland was that it should
    548
    be admitted into fellowship with Great Britain at some future date by Order in Council.
    Then another change took place, when the Government decided on the final exclusion of Northern Ireland, and our Prime Minister was sent for. They had made up their mind that Ireland was to be excluded. Would it not have been fair to our Prime Minister to have told him the decision at which they had arrived? When our Prime Minister came over and had an interview with the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister here, the latter did not tell him of the final exclusion of Northern Ireland. Was that fair? Was that an honourable thing to do? What position did our Prime Minister take up? In his magnificent and patriotic stand for the unity of Northern Ireland and this country, he once for all decided that he would leave the matter in the hands of the Government here. I wonder what position he would have taken up had he known that the Government intended to exclude Northern Ireland entirely. Let us remember that our Prime Minister had the first draft of the Bill, in which Ireland was included, and when he came over here he knew it was only a matter of postponement for the inclusion of Northern Ireland, but he never was told that the Government had again changed their mind.
    We in Northern Ireland feel very bitterly on this question. The right hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair) told the House the other day that the difficulties in which this country had landed itself were entirely due to its policy. I am afraid that the difficulties in which we find ourselves at this stage in Northern Ireland are largely due to his former leader. I will not go into details of everything that has happened since 1920—that would take too long, and it would not be in order—but I feel that what we call the sickening policy of conciliation in Ireland has brought the Government into their present position. That policy has been followed since 1920, and here in this Amendment we have another example of that sickening policy of appeasement and conciliation. My right hon. Friend said there was no pressure brought to bear. I have been wondering for the last 10 days whether this has been conceded in order to satisfy the cheers of the Irish in New

    549
    York. My hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Sir R. Ross) reminded the House of the position that President Abraham Lincoln took up in 1863.
    Mr. Logan: On a point of Order. Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman think he is doing his cause any good by bringing in the history of Ireland on this occasion?
    Sir W. Allen: The history of America.
    Mr. Logan: What is the use of referring to the American people?
    Sir W. Allen: I was not talking about the history of Ireland at all when I referred to Abraham Lincoln. I was referring to the position that he took up with reference to conscription, and that position was that conscription was necessary; and in spite of all importunity he had the "guts" to carry it through, although there was a great riot in New York, in which 5,000 took part. I only wish the Government had made up their mind originally to do a certain thing and to stick to it. It is no pleasure to me or to my friends to be against the Government in this matter—not the slightest. We have had too many examples of their kindness to us in the past, but we feel bitterly disappointed that the Prime Minister of this country has seen fit once again to placate England's enemies at the expense of her friends.
    Mr. Logan: On a point of Order. Is it right that any Member of this House should describe a friendly Power as enemies? I consider that that is an insult to a friendly Power.
    The Chairman: Of course, it is not in order to say anything inimical to a friendly Power, but I did not gather that from the hon. and gallant Member.
    Sir W. Allen: We feel so bitterly about the matter.
    Mr. Logan: Further to the point of Order. I do not wish to embitter the position, but I am certainly asking you for a Ruling, and you having given it, with all due respect I ask the hon. and gallant Member kindly to withdraw that remark about a friendly Power.
    The Chairman: Perhaps the hon. Member will say what it is that he complains of.
    Sir Ronald Ross: Further to that point of Order. Are the Irish Republican Army a friendly Power?
    The Chairman: I would ask the hon. Member who first raised the point to assist me by telling me the words that he complains of.
    Mr. Logan: The hon. and gallant Member said, "enemies of this country," and it was in reference to Mr. de Valera as being the power that brought pressure on this country.
    The Chairman: Now, I am afraid, the hon. Member is putting a different case altogether. The words he referred to were references to certain individuals, and that is not the same thing as a reference to a friendly Government.
    Mr. Logan: With all due respect, Sir Dennis, I do not wish to carry it on, but in speaking of the authority of Ireland, the only authority that can be in Eire is Mr. de Valera, and he is not an enemy of this country.
    The Chairman: There is no point of Order here.
    Mr. Benjamin Smith: I think that the hon. and gallant Gentleman will agree that what he said was that the Government, in order to placate their friends, had given way to their enemies.
    Sir W. Allen: We are constantly in that position. If the hon. Member for the Scotland Division (Mr. Logan) will say what Mr. de Valera has done for Northern Ireland we shall be delighted to listen to him.
    Mr. Logan: Were William Redmond and John Redmond enemies of this country?
    Sir W. Allen: It is a matter of history and of fact that never at any time did Mr. de Valera show any friendliness to this country or to Northern Ireland.
    Mr. Buchanan: On a point of Order. Is it in order to refer to the head of a friendly State in the manner in which the hon. and gallant Gentleman is referring to the head of the Irish Free State?
    The Chairman: The Parliamentary rule with regard to this is perfectly clear. References to individuals may be in order which would not be so if they referred to a Government.
    Mr. Buchanan: May I submit that a Ruling was given in the House recently, in regard to the head of the German State, that it was not in order to make certain references to him. Would you not apply the same Ruling here?
    The Chairman: I do not know the details of that Ruling at the moment, but may I on this occasion appeal to Members on all sides to remember that they are working to a Time-table? I would ask the hon. and gallant Member who is speaking to do his best not to rouse feelings in the Committee.
    Sir W. Allen: Mr. de Valera was not mentioned by me until it was mentioned by the hon. Member opposite. At any rate, he is not the head of that particular State. The right hon. Gentleman has not convinced the Committee that pressure was not brought to bear on the Government. We know that pressure has been brought to bear in order that the Government should change their minds and in order that Ireland should be excluded. An appeal has been made for measured terms to be used with regard to the future unity of Ireland. That has nothing to do with this question. In our opinion, the breach has been widened between north and south as the result of the pressure that has been put on the British' Government. I heartily disapprove of what has been done. I approve of the action of my right hon. Friend the Member for County Antrim (Sir H. O'Neill) in the speech that he made and of the action of my hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Sir R. Ross), and it is fully my intention to vote against the Government on the exclusion of Northern Ireland and on the Government's refusal to allow its people to play their part in the raising of troops, whether voluntarily or by conscription.
    6.35 p.m.
    Lieut.-Commander Agnew: I do not want to speak of the reasons that have actuated the Government in excluding Northern Ireland from the Bill, but I want to refer to the effect of their decision to alter the material words in the Bill which describe the class of British subjects to whom the Bill applies, that is to say, the class of person who is under an obligation to register. It is clear, as the Bill is printed, that a person whose home is in a British Dominion, such as South Africa or Australia, would not have to register if
    552
    he was in this country for a short stay, but under the Amendment there will be an onus of proof upon any person who is in this country from a British Dominion to show that he is not ordinarily resident in this country. That has given some apprehension to certain persons who come over from a British Dominion for, say, a professional course of instruction in such a thing as a mining school, and then proceed, when they have obtained their diplomas, to some other country to take up their appointments. Will that class of person who comes over here for a three years' course be obliged to register for military training? In asking the question I want to make it clear that all those people whom I have met do not desire in any way to shirk any of the obligations which rest upon them through being British subjects.
    6.37 p.m.
    Mr. C. S. Taylor: There is also the case of a young Englishman who might be abroad, for instance, in the Argentine, and who under Argentinian law is liable to be called up for service in the army of that country. That person is still an Englishman and he may come over here for educational purposes or to represent an Argentine firm. Would such a person be exempt if he is liable to be called up to serve in the Argentine Army?
    6.38 p.m.
    Mr. McGovern: I am interested in the decision of the Northern Ireland Members to carry their opposition into the Division Lobby. I am glad to see that they will carry their point of view to its logical conclusion. While opposed to them, I will try and aid them by the power of my voice to ensure that they get a Division. While the reasons given by the Home Secretary may satisfy him and Members of the Government, they will not be accepted by the mass of the people as the reasons for the dropping of Northern Ireland. It is seldom that I agree with the hon. Members who come from Northern Ireland, but I agree with them that the voice and the power behind the scenes were the voice and power of Mr. de Valera. I do not invite the hon. Gentleman to repudiate that because, even if he does, I am not prepared to accept it. The fact is that Northern Ireland was included in the Bill and has been dropped out. In view of the fact that the head

    553
    of the Government of Northern Ireland pressed for its inclusion, the reasons given in the Committee for the dropping of Northern Ireland are not substantial reasons which can be accepted by any intelligent person. It is obvious to me that Mr. de Valera has laid down that not only would there be a revolt of Southern Irishmen, but a revolt of those people in Northern Ireland who owe allegiance more to Southern Ireland than to Northern Ireland.
    In view of the fact that the inclusion of Northern Ireland would lead to the alienation of Irish opinion throughout the world, the Government have wisely decided to withdraw Northern Ireland. I welcome that decision because I detest the Bill. Taking out Northern Ireland will weaken the Bill, and in so far as it weakens it and causes dissension and discontent in this country against the Measure, I welcome it and hope that it will be wrecked before it is carried into effect. The hon. Member for North Lanarkshire (Mr. Anstruther-Gray) was concerned for Irishmen who come over to Great Britain for employment. These Irishmen, however, do not come here because they are invited by Labour, but because they are cheap labour to the farmers and landlords, of whom the hon. Member is one. While he represents North Lanarkshire in this House and claims to represent 10,000 municipal voters in his area who come from Glasgow, he has substantial land interests in North Lanark and he speaks as a landlord. One can, therefore, understand his desire to get the youth of this country under a Bill to defend his landed interests. If I were fighting him I would fight him as a landlord. He has never been fought properly in his constituency or he would never have been in this House. We had a little song during the War, a verse of which was:
    "Fight for the land sharks, toilers, they own the land.
    Fight for your kind employer, you are his hand.
    Slay for your pious landlord till your life is spent.
    Whilst you raise your deadly rifle he will raise your rent."
    The Chairman: I think I ought to invite the hon. Member to show what application this has to the subject under discussion. I hope he will bear in mind the Amendment.
    Mr. McGovern: I was only replying to the hon. Gentleman in a friendly way. It has been said that Northern Ireland should be included in the Bill, and some hot words have been spoken—well, to Irishmen they are not hot words, but very mild, though to others they may appear hot—regarding the ability and loyalty of Northern Irishmen. My father was an Irishman and my mother was a Scotswoman, so I have a foot in both countries, and although it may be claimed that I am an Irishman I do not think a better man ever came to this House—in my opinion, and the only opinion I value in this House is my own—and I resent these suggestions about either the ability or the loyalty or disloyalty of any section. Everybody is loyal according to his own point of view. Some people put loyalty in a different camp from others. I am opposed to the inclusion of Northern Ireland in the Measure just as I am opposed to the inclusion of Scotland or England or Wales, and if I had the power that some people have in the trade union movement I would smash the Measure to-morrow without a moment's hesitation. In so far as it leaves out Northern Ireland I am in agreement with the right hon. Gentleman although not agreeing with his excuses for leaving it out. I say in reply to him that in so far as this action will cause discontent in this country and will weaken the Measure and create antagonism I welcome it, in the hope that that discontent can be mobilised ultimately, and that every other part of the country will demand equal treatment with Northern Ireland.
    6.48 p.m.
    Sir R. Ross: I should like, first, to make a mild protest on a question of procedure which affects fairly intimately those whose constituencies are furthest away from this House. To bring on this Amendment to-day when notice of it had been given only after the boats had left for Ireland last night, is a little hard on us, though I am quite sure it was done with no such intention.
    Mr. Stephen: Did you vote for the Time-Table?
    Sir R. Ross: No, I was not in time for the Time-Table. We had an amusing speech from the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen). He has said that we could stop this Amendment from being accepted. We are going to vote

    555
    against our own party and I do not know what more we could do. He can never vote against his own party, because it could not supply two sets of tellers. An important question with which I hope the Minister will deal is what is to be done to prevent people going to Northern Ireland, if it is exempted, to avoid conscription here. It is a most important point and will have a grave effect upon the question of employment in Northern Ireland.
    The principles of democracy are, I trust, not yet dead. Every Member from Ulster who has been returned to this House has been in favour of our bearing the same burdens as everyone else, and if Northern Ireland is excluded I, for one, do not feel that I can properly take part in voting to impose the obligations of this Bill upon the constituents of other people. I cannot go on voting for something which is not to apply to me. Further, as regards democracy, we have had a by election in County Down to return a Member to Westminster. South Down is claimed particularly as being an area which is hostile to our ideas, and yet I see to-day that the candidate standing as a Unionist for County Down was elected unopposed. There was not an anti-conscriptionist with the courage to face him. If any evidence were required as to the feeling in Northern Ireland that election ought to supply it.
    6.47 p.m.
    Mr. Sandys: I think the sentence which this Amendment will change is the most important sentence in the whole of this Bill, because it lays down who are the people to whom the Bill applies, and I would ask my right hon. Friend when he replies to elucidate a little more clearly the Government's intentions. As my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Camborne (Lieut.-Commander Agnew) pointed out in his speech, this Amendment deals with matters which far transcend the Irish question. The Clause as originally drafted imposed the obligations of military service upon British subjects resident abroad, resident, that is to say, in foreign countries, but not upon British subjects resident in other parts of His Majesty's Dominions. It has been pointetd out to me that the Government propose to move at a later stage a new Clause which will give them power to extend the provisions
    556
    of the Bill to British subjects resident abroad, with certain other classes of British subjects. As the Clause originally stood they were automatically included. If the new Clause is accepted the Government will have power, if they so desire, to include them, and while I am not suggesting that that is an improper way of dealing with the question I feel that we are right in asking the Government to explain the reasons for the change.
    The other matter on which I seek elucidation—it has been referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Camborne and my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. C. S. Taylor)—is exactly how the Government interpret the words "ordinarily resident." It is vital to the application of this Bill, and what creates some uncertainty about it in my mind is that when I come to look at this new Clause which the Government propose to move, the Clause entitled
    "Power to apply Act to British subjects ordinarily resident outside Great Britain"
    I see that the phrase used is,
    "male British subjects who are, while between the ages of twenty years and twenty-one years ordinarily resident outside Great Britain."
    In Clause 1, as it is now to be amended, the phrase will read,
    "every male subject ordinarily resident in Great Britain."
    I think it would be well to know at this stage what is the difference between those two definitions, and, in general, what the Government do mean by "ordinarily resident in Great Britain."
    6.55 p.m.
    Sir S. Hoare: Everybody wishes to get on to other Amendments, and therefore I will be as brief as I can in answering the questions which have been put to me. Let me begin with the specific question just asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Norwood (Mr. Sandys). The reason for the change is a drafting reason. We feel that it is better to deal with the definition of a person residing in Great Britain under the interpretation Clause—Clause 14—and under the new Clause in the name of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and I suggest that the proper place to discuss the question is on those Clauses. My hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Sir R. Ross) asked what action

    557
    will be taken against young men who are liable for service here but go to Northern Ireland to escape. I can tell him that there have been official discussions between the representatives of the Departments of Northern Ireland and the Departments in Whitehall, and I am assured that it will be easy to deal with cases of that kind. A warrant would be issued and the young man would be brought back to do his military service, if he were liable.
    Mr. Garro Jones: On what authority would the warrant be issued?
    Sir S. Hoare: It would be a warrant under the Act.
    Mr. Garro Jones: Questions of very great importance are involved here. What would be the position of a British subject who went to live in Northern Ireland, and had resided there for say six months, supposing he had left this country at the age of 17 years? Would there be any power or any warrant to bring him back then?
    Sir S. Hoare: It would be a case for the legal authorities to decide. The case would have to be taken on its merits. That is obviously the answer. After an Act of Parliament is passed it is for the courts to interpret it.
    Mr. Buchanan: Would what the right hon. Gentleman has just said apply in the case of Southern Ireland?
    Sir S. Hoare: In that case the position would be different. Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom, and the writ of the United Kingdom would obviously run in any part of the United Kingdom. The most important of the other questions, if I may say so, were raised by my hon. Friends who represent Northern Ireland, and there is one misunderstanding that I should like to remove, and to remove as definitely as I can. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Armagh (Sir W. Allen) suggested that we had already taken our decision upon this question and that it was unfair to Lord Craigavon to ask him to come over after we had already made up our minds. I can assure the Committee—and I hope they will take my word for it—that that was not the case. We had come to no decision before Lord Craigavon arrived. We were very careful
    558
    to hear his opinion, and I made his opinion quite clear in the speech with which I introduced this Amendment. He left the decision in our hands, and the decision at which we arrived is the decision in respect of which I am proposing this Amendment. Further, let me say that we took our decision—though the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) will not believe me, none the less it is the fact—not as a result of any pressure from anybody but upon the merits of the case. I ask hon. Members on all sides of the Committee to accept that as a fact.
    Mr. McGovern: I might be prepared to accept the word of the right hon. Gentleman on that point if he means when he says they took their decision on the merits of the case that they believed that the inclusion of Northern Ireland would produce civil war in Ireland and so decided not to include it.
    Sir S. Hoare: I made the position perfectly clear in my opening statement. It is a fact, and well known to every hon. Member, that the inclusion of Ulster would have made a very deep division in a part of the United Kingdom, and that division would have had reactions in other parts of the world. There is the answer to the question in a single sentence.
    Mr. Stephen: We ought to be told whether the Government are accepting the Amendment to which reference was made by the hon. Member above the Gangway on this side.
    Sir S. Hoare: I made it clear that it was proposed to use places in Northern Ireland as centres of training.
    Mr. Shinwell: How is the Government justified in excluding Ulster from the scope of the Bill and yet sending Militiamen from this side to Ulster for training purposes?
    7.0 p.m.
    The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Hore-Belisha): When a young man is allocated to a unit to be trained he will in the first instance exercise his preference. It is not Northern Ireland that is going to train him, but a unit of the British Army which happens to be stationed in Northern Ireland. Suppose he wishes to join the Welch Regiment and a battalion

    559
    of the Welch Regiment was stationed in Northern Ireland, it would be very unfair to the man who had been allocated by his own preference to the Welch Regiment if he could not be trained with the regiment of his choice, and, therefore, it is reasonable that he should be trained wherever the battalion may be in the United Kingdom.
    Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
    The Chairman collected the voices.
    Sir R. Ross: Did not the Ayes have it?
    The Chairman: Certainly not. The Ayes have not got it till I say so.
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 21, Noes 261.

    Division No. 104.]

    AYES.

    [7.4 p. m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Mills, Sir F. (Leyton, E.)

    Stewart, William J. (Belfast, S.)

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Moreing, A. C.

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Nall, Sir J.

    Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Wayland, Sir W. A

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. J. C.

    Gretton, Col. Rt. Hon. J.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Macquisten, F. A.

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Markham, S. F.

    Somerset, T.

    Sir Ronald Ross and and Sir J. McConnell.

    NOES.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Higgs, W. F.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Hoare, Rt. Hon. Sir S.

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Denville, Alfred

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Doland, G. F.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Donner, P. W.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

    Horsbrugh Florence

    Assheton, R.

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Astor, Viscountess (Plymouth, Sutton)

    Dugdale, Captain T. L.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Balniel, Lord

    Dunglass, Lord

    Hunter, T.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Bartlett, C. V. O.

    Eckersley P. T.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Baxter, A. Beverley

    Ede, J. C.

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Eden, Rt. Hon. A.

    Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth)

    Beaumont Hon R E B (Portsm'h)

    Elliot Rt. Hon W. E.

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Beechman, N. A.

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Blair, Sir R.

    Emery, J. F.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Boulton, W. W.

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Lambert, Rt. Hon. G.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Broad, F. A.

    Fleming, E. L.

    Lathan, G.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Foot, D. M.

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Leach, W.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Furness, S. N.

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Fyfe, D. P. M.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Gallacher, W.

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Buchanan, G.

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Leonard, W.

    Bull, B. B.

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Levy, T.

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J.

    Lewis, O.

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Gledhill, G.

    Liddall, W. S.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Butler, Rt. Hon. R. A.

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Lipson, D. L.

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Cary, R. A.

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Lloyd, G. W.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Loftus, P. C.-

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Lunn, W.

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Groves, T. E.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

    MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G

    Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    McCorquodale, M. S.

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Guinness, T. L. E. B.

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Hambro, A. V.

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Conant, Captain R. J. E.

    Hannah, I. C.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk N.)

    Hannon, Sir P. J. H.

    McGhee, H. G.

    Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)

    Harbord, A.

    McGovern, J.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Harris, Sir P. A.

    Magnay, T.

    Cove, W. G.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Mander, G. le M.

    Craven-Ellis, W.

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Manningham-Buller, Sir M.

    Crooke, Sir J. Smedley

    Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Cross, R. H.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Mathers, G.

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A P.

    Maxton, J.

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Daggar, G.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Messer, F.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Salt, E. W.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Samuel, M. R. A.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Morris-Janet, Sir Henry

    Schuster, Sir G. E.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Seely, Sir H. M.

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Touche, G. C.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Tree, A. R. L. F.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Silverman, S. S.

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Turton, R. H.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)

    Viant, S. P.

    Parker, J.

    Sloan, A.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton

    Smithere, Sir W.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Radford, E. A.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

    Watkins, F. C.

    Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)

    Spens, W. P.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'ld)

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Rawson, Sir Cooper

    Stephen, C.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    White, H. Graham

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Stokes, R. R.

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Storey, S.

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Wragg, H.

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Rowlands, G.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    York, C.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Tasker, Sir R. I.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Russell, Sir Alexander

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Mr. Grimston and Major Sir James Edmondson.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Proposed words there inserted.
    7.14 p.m.
    Mr. Shinwell: I beg to move, in page I, line 14, to leave out "the United Kingdom," and to insert "Great Britain."
    Question put, "That the words proposed to be left stand part of the Clause."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 248; Noes, 131.

    Division No. 105.]

    AYES.

    [7.15 p.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Conant, Captain R. J. E.

    Gledhill, G.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk N.)

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Agnew, Lieut. -Comdr. P. G.

    Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Craven-Ellis, W.

    Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Crooke, Sir J. Smedley

    Guinness, T. L. E. B.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Cross, R. H.

    Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.

    Astor, Viscountess (Plymouth, Sulton)

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Balfour, G. (Hampstead)

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Hannah, I. C.

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Hannon, Sir P. J. H.

    Baxter, A. Beverley

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Harris, Sir P. A.

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Denville, Alfred

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Doland, G. F.

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Beechman, N. A.

    Donner, P. W.

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A

    Bernays, R. H.

    Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

    Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Blair, Sir R.

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Boulton, W. W.

    Dunglass, Lord.

    Hepworth, J.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Eckersley, P. T.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Eden, Rt. Hon. A.

    Higgs, W. F.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Edmondson, Major Sir J.

    Hoare, Rt. Hon. Sir S.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Emery, J. F.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Bull, B. B.

    Emmott, C. E. G. C.

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Erskine-Hill, A. G.

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Butler, Rt. Hon. R. A.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Hunter, T.

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir T. W. H.

    Cary, R. A.

    Fleming, E. L.

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Foot, D. M.

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Jonos, L. (Swansea W.)

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Furness, S. N.

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Fyfe, D. P. M.

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J.

    Lambert, Rt. Hon. G.

    Latham, Sir P.

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Petherick, M.

    Stewart, William J. (Belfast, S.)

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Storey, S.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Radford, E. A.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Levy, T.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Lewis, O.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Liddall, W. S.

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Lipton, D. L.

    Rawson, Sir Cooper

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Tasker, Sir R. I.

    Lloyd, G. W.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

    MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.

    Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)

    Thomas, J. P. L.

    MeCorquodale, M. S.

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    MacDonald, Rt. Hon. M. (Ross)

    Rowlands, G.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    McKie, J. H.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Magnay, T.

    Russell, Sir Alexander

    Touche, G. C.

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Tree, A. R. L. F.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

    Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.

    Mander, G. le M.

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.

    Manningham-Buller, Sir M.

    Salt, E. W.

    Turton, R. H.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Samuel, M. R. A.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Markham, S. F.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Maxwell, Hon. S A.

    Schuster, Sir G. E.

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Seely, Sir H. M.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Mills, Sir F. (Leyton, E.)

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Wayland, Sir W. A.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Moreing, A. C.

    Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A.

    White, H. Graham

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Smithers, Sir VV.

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Wragg, H.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Somerset, T.

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    York, C.

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Spears, Brigadier-General E. L.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    Spens, W. P.

    Mr. Grimston and Captain Dugdale.

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

    NOES.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Frankel, D.

    McGovern, J.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Gallacher, W.

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Gardner, B. W.

    Marshall, F.

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Maxton, J.

    Ammon, C. G.

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Messer, F.

    Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Milner, Major J.

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    Montague, F.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Grenfell, D. R.

    Morgan, J. (York, W. R., Doncaster)

    Barr, J.

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)

    Bartlett, C. V. O.

    Groves, T. E.

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Bellenger, F. J.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Oliver, G. H.

    Benson, G.

    Hardie, Agnes

    Paling, W.

    Broad, F. A.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Parker, J.

    Bromfield, W.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Pearson, A.

    Buchanan, G.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Peathick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Cape, T.

    Hicks, E G.

    Poole, C. C.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Pritt, D. N.

    Chater, D.

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Ridley, G.

    Cocks, F. S.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Riley, B.

    Collindridge, F.

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Ritson, J.

    Cove, W. G.

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Kirby, B. V.

    Sanders, W. S.

    Daggar, G.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Sexton, T. M.

    Dalton, H.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Shinwell, E.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Lathan, G.

    Silkin, L.

    Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)

    Lawson, J. J.

    Silverman, S. S.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Leach, W.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Day, H.

    Leonard, W.

    Sloan, A.

    Dobbie, W.

    Leslie, J. R.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    Logan, D. G.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Ede, J. C.

    Lunn, W.

    Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly)

    Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    McGhee, H. G.

    Stephen, C.

    564

    565

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ghtn-le-Sp'ng)

    Walkden, A. G.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)

    Walker, J.

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Watkins, F. C.

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Thorne, W.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Thurtle, E.

    Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. J. C.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Welsh, J. C.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Tomlinson, G.

    Westwood, J.

    Mr. Mathers and Mr. Adamson.

    Viant, S. P.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    7.25 p.m.
    Mr. Garro Jones: On a point of Order. During the progress of the last Division I sought to raise a point of Order, but you declined to hear me, on the ground presumably that a Division was in progress and that a point of Order could be raised at such a time only if the Member raising it were seated and covered. I wish to point out that I raised that point of Order before you had gathered the Voices.
    The Chairman: The hon. Member sought to raise his point of Order while I was in course of collecting the Voices. It is generally understood that when the Voices are being collected by the Chair there cannot be an interruption by the raising of a point of Order.
    Mr. Garro Jones: I submit to you, with great respect, that the only time during which a point of Order may not be raised is after the Chairman has collected both the Ayes and the Noes. You had begun to collect only the Ayes.
    The Chairman: I think the hon. Member is wrong: a point of Order can be raised after the Voices have been collected, but no question of Order can be raised to interrupt the collecting of the Voices by the Chair when it has begun. There is nothing to prevent a Member raising a point of Order after the Division has been called.
    7.27 p.m.
    Mr. Stephen: I beg to move, in page I, line 21, at the end, to insert:
    "Provided that all persons who are unemployed, or have had at any time their allowance reduced or refused owing to the means test, or have been unemployed for a continuous period of one month at least in the preceding three years, or are the sons of men who died or were totally or partially disabled in the last War, shall only be so registered with their own consent given in writing."
    This Amendment proposes to give to the individuals concerned an option and a choice to become a part of the conscript force. A great deal of discussion has taken place as to the enthusiasm of people
    566
    in various parts of the country for this conscription scheme. I hope that those who take the view that the young men are so enthusiastic will support me in pressing this Amendment upon the Government. If the public are in such a state of mind there should be no difficulty about it. The class of person concerned should be excluded from the privilege of giving this service to the State. I hope no hon. Member will say that it reflects upon the patriotism or the loyalty of this section of the community or that we are seeking to put these people into a less worthy position than that of other young men in the community. We merely wish to allow them to contract in. Hon. Members on the other side of the House said, when the Trade Union Act was going through this House and the political levy was being discussed, that the proper way for it to be applied was by contracting in. I hope they will show themselves as enthusiastic for contracting in to-day as they were in regard to the political levy. The class to which my Amendment relates comprises a very large proportion of those who come under this part of the Bill. I do not try to belittle the number of people affected by my Amendment. I believe it will be the majority of those who are within the ambit of the Measure, and I make no apology for proposing to give an option to so large a number of people.
    The question may be asked: Why give to these people this option? I shall be told that they are citizens, and that they should have the responsibilities and duties of citizens. As I have listened to the proceedings on this Measure hitherto, I have been appalled by the way in which the representatives of wealth and privilege are going to put such people as are included in my Amendment into compulsory service in order to protect them in their privileges and in their wealth. I have heard an hon. Member in this Chamber say that, like everyone else, he is prepared to defend the land in which he lives. All the people included in my Amendment, as well as myself, are prepared to defend the land in which

    567
    we live; but we are not prepared to defend the landlords of the land in which we live. I want to give to the people included in the Measure who are in this position, which lays them open to exploitation by the landowning and wealth-owning classes in the community, the option to say whether they will undertake this training to be used as cannon fodder in the interests of their exploiters.
    I want to draw the attention of the Committee to the individuals who would come within the scope of my Amendment. There are those who are unemployed and are subject to the means test, and those who have been unemployed for a continuous period of a month in the last three years—those people who have not been able to get employment in this land, in this community, in this nation; those people for whom this nation has had so little respect that it has not been able to provide them with employment. If the nation has subjected them to the cruelty and hardships of the means test, it should not be in a position to say to them: "In spite of the fact that we have treated you in this harsh, cruel way, we are now going to compel you to fight." Then there are the sons of men who died or were totally or partially disabled in the last War. I think it is only right that those whose fathers made such great sacrifices in the last War should now be given the choice whether they themselves are going to be taken off and trained for this new war of the future.
    Two reasons weighed with me in drawing attention to this latter class. One was the bad treatment that has been meted out to the men who were disabled or partially disabled in the last War, and to the widows and dependants of those who were killed in the last War. Since I came into the House, my experience of the treatment of these people, as revealed by the appeals that have been made for pensions and have been refused, has convinced me that the country was very ungrateful to these men for the service they gave in the last War, and consequently I think that the sons of these men who have been so badly treated should not now be compelled to give this service unless of their own free choice they decide to come in and take their part. My second reason for including this class was that it seems to me that, since those who were killed or totally or partially
    568
    disabled in the last War were soldiers who carried their arms to a successful issue and won the War which was to end war, it is shameful now to take for military training the sons of fathers who won the War to end war. The fathers were victorious in the conflict which was waged to end war. They won; they got the victory. Consequently, there can be no more war, since they got the victory in a war that was to end war, and to me it is an absurdity that their sons should be compelled to undergo training, since their fathers, according to hon. Members opposite, died in order to be victorious in the War to end war which was waged from 1914 to 1918.
    I think I have made out my case for the exclusion of this section of those whom the Government are intending to conscript. I think that these people, in view of the way in which they have been treated by Governments in the past, have no obligation to give this service, and I want statutory provision made so that, if they do intend to give service, they shall give it of their own free will, that they shall not be compelled to protect the landlords in the land where they themselves are denied employment and where they themselves have never received decent treatment, in spite of the services which were given by their fathers in the last War.
    7.40 p.m.
    Mr. Maxton: In supporting the Amendment, I do not propose, in view of the limitations of time, to add to what my hon. Friend has already said, beyond mentioning one or two points. I am glad to see that the Minister of Labour is in charge at the moment, and I thank you, Sir Dennis, for selecting this particular Amendment. I should have been even more grateful if you had selected a few more of the Amendments that my hon. Friends and I have put down, but, if you had to reduce our quota somewhat, I am glad indeed that you did not cut out this one. Over a fairly extended period in the House, we have year after year made demands of Government after Government for fair treatment for the unemployed. During a period of 17 years—practically the whole interval of time since the last War—Governments have never been able to find niches in the ordinary civil industrial structure for an average of something like 2,000,000 people, a

    569
    large proportion of them young people. Successive Governments could never fit them in in any way, could never find a public use for them. Successive Ministers of Labour have come to that Box with various devices, trying this and trying that, but always their devices left 2,000,000 men who could not be fitted in; and not only that, but who could never be treated with a decent generosity, could never be provided with weekly allowances that would maintain them in decent physical efficiency, let alone providing for them the pleasures and enjoyments of life, for which the young men particularly have a strong desire, and to which they have a right.
    Now, inside a matter of days, because of the exigencies of international affairs, because of the pressure of Governments outside this country, compulsion is to be fitted into the military machine and is to be applied to all those young men between 20 and 21 years of age whom over a period of 17 years successive Governments have been unable to fit into the civil, industrial and economic life of the nation. While I think that compulsory military service on anybody is a terrifying power for any State to take into its hands, while I think it is a terrifying power for any group of men to assume over their fellow-men to say to 200,000 of them: "We are determined that your lives shall be used to these military ends, that an important part of your early manhood shall be devoted to shaping you as human beings into the form and type that is useful to us for war purposes," it is to my mind particularly wrong and cruel—another word that comes to my mind is "caddish," but perhaps that does not fully indicate my feeling of revulsion—it is, I say, particularly wicked to say to those to whom you have never been able to give a decent chance of life and pleasure, "Now that we need you for this purpose, all the difficulties disappear. We are going to take you now and find non-productive employment for you for the next six months. We are going to make you march up and down the barrack yard; we are going to break you into barrack room routine and mould you into the mental and physical form required for the soldier. We have never been able to do anything effective for you that would fit you into the normal peaceful avocations for building up the civilised state."
    570
    To accept the Amendment is the least the Government can do for these fellows: to say, "We are passing a conscription Act. The young men who have had normal social advantages, who have been decently housed and decently fed and have had decent pleasures we shall take without any qualifications; but for you, the young men who have suffered the most, the young men whose fathers were killed or broken in the last War, we make this difference: that you shall be taken only if you are willing to go." We think the Amendment is reasonable, and we ask the Minister to accept it.
    7.47 p.m.
    Mr. S. O. Davies: I thank my hon. Friends for putting this Amendment on the Paper. It shows how completely devoid of any sense of shame the Government are that they should now be wanting to conscript the bodies and souls of these youngsters who have been so scurvily treated. I am glad the Minister of Labour is here to answer the case for the Amendment. I suppose he will attempt to explain away the justice of the Amendment and the protest that it makes against the way so many of these youngsters have been treated; and that we shall have from him another exhibition of brazen effrontery in trying to explain away the tragedies to which the Amendment refers. If the House had even a sense of proportion, let alone an enlightened sense of justice, it would immediately accept this Amendment. The Amendment refers largely to the young men who have been made victims of that vast and costly instrument which cost this country last year £4,500,000 to keep going.
    To say that these young men should be called on to defend the wealth of the propertied classes indicates an absence of the very rudiments of fair play. What have these young men to defend? The highest price that the right hon. Gentleman has placed on 90 per cent. of them is 10s. a week; but this Amendment refers to those who have had less than 10s. a week, and have been abandoned, as far as the Minister is concerned, without a sou to assist them. Thousands of these young men have been hounded from the little homes in which they live, where they thought they had a stake and might have had something to fight for. Now, having ruined these homes, and uprooted these youngsters by tens of thousands, and placed a stigma on them by saying that

    571
    10s. a week is the highest price at which he values them with brazen effrontery, he calls upon them to defend their country.
    We shall be told that many of these young men have volunteered for the armed forces of the country. Yes; and we have said from these benches for some years that the best recruiting sergeant we have in this country has been the poverty wantonly imposed upon these young men: the hounding of them by the means test. I am no pacifist; I am not squeamish when it comes to putting up a fight; but I support the Amendment as a protest against the ill-treatment that these young men have had to undergo, and because it gives us an opportunity of putting the right hon. Gentleman in the dock, and calling upon him to show what justification he has for conscripting into the Army these young men whom he has so cruelly ill-used.
    7.54 p.m.
    Mr. Cove: I would like the Minister to give his reasons for conscripting these young men, particularly those who have been subject to the means test. I understand that the principle of the means test is that the State has divested itself of responsibility for the maintenance of these young men. The State has taken deliberate action, and has erected a large machine which has inquired into the personal circumstances of these young men and their families, in order to throw the burden of their maintenance largely on their families and relatives.
    Mr. Maxwell: Surely the State is maintaining them by the means test.
    Mr. Cove: No. The principle of the means test is that they must be maintained by their families. The State says, "We will not, as a State, take the responsibility of keeping you alive." How can the Government take the responsibility of conscripting men who have been outlawed by the State? What interest have these people in defending the State? What stake have they in this nation? There they are, left to be maintained by others than the State, and the State says, "We will conscript them to maintain the State." Therefore, I strongly support the Amendment, and particularly that part which deals with those who are on the means test.
    572
    I take it that we would all defend this country because we have an interest in it. It provides us with various means of living: with opportunities of education, cultural development and other amenities; but these men are denied almost all of those services. They are stranded; they are the outcasts of society. The only reason I have heard for including these men—and it is a callous one—is that they will be better fed in the barracks than they are at home. The Minister of Labour has refused to feed these men who are subject to the means test. The means test has been used to drive them out of their homes and to scatter them over the country, without any roots in the nation. These men have every reason for saying, "It is not worth our while serving a nation which has treated us so badly. No nation is worth defending after it has turned us adrift and is indifferent even to our physical needs." Until the Minister has removed the means test he has no justification for calling on these men to render service to the State. Perhaps the Minister would show us why these men should render service to a State which has been so callous towards them.
    7.59 p.m.
    Mr. Denville: I do not know whether hon. Members opposite realise what the effect of the Amendment would be. My hon. Friend the Member for Merthyr (Mr. S. O. Davies) suggested that the Minister of Labour ought to be put in the dock. If the Minister were put in the dock I wonder what the sentence would be on this occasion. If hon. Members would take the trouble to read this Amendment very carefully they would find that it leaves no one to be conscripted. [HON. MEMBERS: "The more the shame!"] You will see, if you examine the Amendment, how many are to be exempted. I mean those who have been unemployed for a continuous period of one month in the last three years. I am one of those fellows, and I know a good many more who have been continuously unemployed for one month during the last three years. I am in favour of the voluntary principle and always have been. I believe that one volunteer is worth a dozen pressed men, and the greatest battles in our history have been marked by the part played by the volunteer. It was so during the late War. But here it is a case of having to swallow our opinions and give up our traditions and those of our fathers and

    573
    their fathers before them. We have to adopt conscription and we have to make the system as fair as possible. It has been said that under the Trade Union Act we objected to contracting out, but that is no analogy at all. The Trade Union Act did not conscript labour but allowed a man to join a trade union or to stay outside.
    The Deputy-Chairman (Colonel Clifton Brown): The hon. Gentleman is getting a little wide in his argument and I would ask him to speak strictly to the Amendment.
    Mr. Denville: You come from a constituency quite close to mine, and I know that you would be down on me before any one else.
    Mr. Davidson: May I ask you, Colonel Clifton Brown, whether, while it may be said in a jocular spirit, it is in accordance with the traditions of this House that an hon. Member should suggest that the Chairman of the Committee is "down" on any one?
    The Deputy-Chairman: I am quite certain that the hon. Member did not mean it in any offensive fashion.
    Mr. Denville: I can assure you, Colonel Clifton Brown, that I should be the last man in the world to be guilty of any rudeness to you, and I am sorry that the hon. Member opposite is suffering from a severe lack of humour. I would like hon. Members on all sides of the Committee to look at this matter of conscription as being something that we have to swallow whether we like it or not. If there is to be conscription, it must be for all. That is how I view it, and that is why I am going to vote against this Amendment.
    8.3 p.m.
    Mr. Tomlinson: I would like to say a few words on behalf of the individuals referred to in the last part of the Amendment, and of the evil effects of what we are proposing to do now. The individuals upon whom we are calling at this stage ought to have been sacrificed, if sacrifice was to have been made, last of all. The sons of those men who fought in the late War in order that their sons would never need to fight again, are the individuals who ought, first of all, to be protected against this system which we
    574
    are introducing. Yet it is upon these men that we rely to obtain the numbers that will make the Act worth while.
    The Prime Minister in his statement the other day referred to the increasing number of men due to the bulge in the population relating to the age group to which these men belong. If the voluntary system is to be used at all it should be used with regard to that section of the community. During the 20 years that these young fellows have been growing up it has been considered the duty of the State to do everything possible for them so that they should not suffer in consequence of what their parents had to go through. Education authorities throughout the country considered it their duty to grant extra facilities to ease this bulge in the population and to give this section of the population an adequate share of the good things provided by the educational system. That was one of the main reasons for the reorganisation of our schools and for the increase in the number of scholarships. The sons of men who fought in the late War should not be called upon to suffer in this connection.
    We are asking in this Amendment that these men should have the opportunity of saying whether or not they should be called upon for military service. If they are willing, all well and good, but surely they are entitled, in the name of their fathers, who gave their all to the State in some instances, to decide for themselves whether or not they should be conscripted. I am prepared to defend all that has been said about the men who have suffered as a result of the means test and to argue that they ought to be excluded also. Surely these members of the community ought to be protected, and it is for that reason that I support the Amendment.
    8.6 p.m.
    Mr. MacLaren: I consider that the wording of this Amendment goes to the root of the whole problem which is facing the State at this time. Whenever a war breaks out in a State it is always noticeable that those who before were poor, unwanted and unrecognised, suddenly become people with a new status. This is no new thing. It can be recalled today in the words of Gracchus:

    575
    "Ye Romans that conquered enemies
    Within and beyond the confines of the Roman Empire,
    You come back to Rome with your banners emblazoned
    With the names of your victories,
    Only to find that you must live in hovels that the Roman nobility would refuse to keep horses in."
    It is only when a war breaks out that those people suddenly have a country. I heard the Minister of Labour the other night make a speech, and, both in form and in manner, it portended rather bad signs. I remember reading, "That preaching democracy is the pastime of autocrats." As I listened to him that night I seemed to see in him the foreshadowing of a veritable Hitler. He said at that Box that six months' training in the Army was a good thing for these fellows; he had been in it, and knew what good it did to him. Frankly, I think that the military experience of the right hon. Gentleman has rather given a tinge to his general demeanour which is resented in this House. He has the military tinge. I never listen to him speak but I see the quartermaster-sergeant, and I would advise him to forget the barracks and to remember that he is speaking to his equals in this House. If there is anything which this House resents, it is the army sergeant form of address.
    He said that six months in the Army would be a good thing for these fellows. What is the implication behind that remark? It is that there are a lot of young fellows knocking about in this country demoralised, shilly-shallying and becoming the victims of rather immoral practices, and that a good strapping in the Army would set them up. That is what he means, otherwise he would not have made that statement the other night. Who is it that is responsible for the condition of society of that kind? Who is it that creates a society where there is a constant floating population, living under such unmoral and unfair economic conditions as make them the victims of vicious practices? It would be far better if the right hon. Gentleman remembered his many liberal speeches which he used to deliver in this House.
    The Deputy-Chairman: I would remind the hon. Member that the speech which was made some time ago by the Minister of Labour is not the question that we are discussing on this Amendment.
    Mr. MacLaren: I agree, but the Amendment with which we are dealing now is one relating to the substratum of society. The poor, dejected, the unwanted, the persons who inhabit the benches on the Thames Embankment, who are to become conscripts under this Bill. I am only using this argument so as to bring Members opposite back to a realisation of what the Amendment means. The Amendment is calling for some better and more humane treatment of those who have been the victims of the vicious economic system. To me it means more than that. It means the pointing of a moral. These people who have been considered as a sort of embarrassment to the social structure of society suddenly become people who are wanted in time of war. It is their country when a war breaks out, but it is not their country when a war is over. It is still the country of the landowners—I wish sometimes that the landowners could be conscripted and then, if war came, it would not last long. You are calling upon the poorest of the poor under this Bill to stand forthright against all possible dangers of a war to defend, what? The land of Great Britain.
    The Deputy-Chairman The Deputy-Chairman rose—
    Mr. MacLaren: I am not going to transgress further because I have this advantage over the Chairman, or even Mr. Speaker of this House, that, even if I did not mention it, the House would know what I meant. I am merely pointing the moral. This Amendment will not stand a chance in this Committee, but it is as well that it has been put upon the Paper as a strong indictment of what is going on in this Committee to-night. If we had not landlords on the one hand and people suffering from social degeneracy on the other—
    The Deputy-Chairman: I think that the hon. Member has gone far enough in that direction. We all know where his politics lead him.
    Mr. MacLaren: I submit that this is a relevant matter on this Amendment. If the people in this country were not in the position in which they are now, there would be no necessity for this Bill at all. It is the very fact that the people are not the common owners of the heritage of this country that we have to conscript them. That is my point.
    The Deputy-Chairman: The hon. Member is out of order.
    Mr. MacLaren: On a point of Order. I submit that I was not out of order in what I said.
    The Deputy-Chairman: The hon. Member is going very wide of the Amendment we are now discussing and he should not pursue that subject any more.
    Mr. MacLaren: This is an Amendment dealing with people who are in a very poor economic state of life in this country, and it is asking that such people as have suffered in this way shall not be subject to the full stringency of conscription under this Bill.
    The Deputy-Chairman The Deputy-Chairman rose—
    Mr. MacLaren: I am still speaking to the point of Order. I have not finished. Do not be so impetuous. I submit that I am bound to point the moral, that these people are suffering in this way, and also that, if they were not suffering in this way, this conscription would not be necessary.
    The Deputy-Chairman: The hon. Member is going beyond the Amendment. It provides that certain classes, because they are poor, should be exempt, but the hon. Member is going into wider reasons why they should be exempt, far beyond the Amendment that we are discussing.
    8.15 p.m.
    Mr. T. Smith: I should like the Minister of Labour to give us some information. Can he give us a rough estimate of the number of unemployed men who are likely to be affected, say, in the first batch called up? Secondly, when these young men are unemployed and they are called up for six months military training and on being called up they are on the means test, can he tell us whether, when they have finished their six months' military training and have returned to civilian life, they will be expected to return to the means test basis, or whether, recognising that they have had six months' training, with presumably regular and good meals, he will not expect them to live on the miserable allowance they get now?
    I should like the hon. Member for Central Newcastle (Mr. Denville) and other hon. Members opposite to know, apart from the merits of this Amendment,
    578
    that in the minds of some of these young, unemployed men, there is a good deal of hostility, not merely towards this conscription Bill, but towards the Government for the way they have been treated. The Minister of Labour said, in reply to a question, that he was not aware that the means test was causing a good deal of hardship in many homes. I know of nothing passed by this House for years that has caused so much hardship and is causing so much hardship as the means test. Many young men when they are working hard in the pit on piece work rates are faced with the fact that the more money they earn the less their father will get if he happens to be unemployed. This affects a good many families. Will the right hon. Gentleman give us an estimate of the unemployed who are likely to be affected, and will he tell us whether these young, unemployed men when they have done their six months' military training are to be expected to return to the means test, if they are still unemployed in civil life?
    Mr. Denville: Will the hon. Member say how the Government will find means to provide work for these men at end of their training?
    Mr. Smith: I do not want to get away from the Amendment, but nothing would give me greater pleasure than to deal with the question which the hon. Member has raised. When we come to the Clause which deals with the reinstatement of the men who have been called up, possibly we may be able to discuss that point. Some of us have not forgotten our experience just after the Armistice when many men were demobilised and it was our duty to get them back to work. If I were to discuss that question now I should be ruled out of order. It would be wise on the part of the Minister of Labour if while these men are doing their six months' training he would make efforts to see that instead of coming back to the means test they are fitted somewhere into industry.
    8.18 p.m.
    Mr. J. J. Davidson: I think every hon. Member who represents an industrial constituency owes a debt to the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) and his friends for placing this Amendment on the Order Paper. We who know the industrial conditions have had experience of huge numbers of young men who are

    579
    unemployed through no fault of their own, who are desiring employment and appealing to the Ministry of Labour continually for some assistance, and who are living in continual poverty because of the Ministry's ineffectiveness in obtaining employment for them. We consider that this class ought to receive the consideration which the Amendment asks. I listened to the slogan of the hon. Member for Central Newcastle when he used that very popular cry the Government are using to-day. He said that there must be equal sacrifice and equal service. We hear of the rich boy and the poor boy who will be shoulder to shoulder serving equally in the interests of the nation.
    Mr. Denville: The words that I used were "All, or none." I did not refer to any class of society.
    Mr. Davidson: The hon. Member said that there must be equal service and sacrifice, and if he looks at the OFFICIAL REPORT he will see that I am accurate. Hon. Members are demanding this sacrifice and service from the unemployed, the means test recipients, the sons of the soldiers who were killed and wounded in the last War, and demanding equal conditions in a conscript army. When the means test was imposed, why did hon. Members opposite not ask for equal conditions then? When the allowances of the ex-service men were reduced why did they not ask for equal sacrifice then? The hon. Member for Central Newcastle voted for reduced allowances and he voted for the means test.
    Mr. Denville Mr. Denville indicated dissent.
    Mr. Davidson: The hon. Member and his friends voted in support of the present Government when they imposed conditions affecting detrimentally the class who are covered in this Amendment. It is the duty of any Government which desires the support of the people to give to the people the best possible conditions in accordance with productive power of the country and in accordance with the nation's wellbeing. Is there anyone who will say that the conditions of the unemployed to-day are the best that this country could have given to them during the eight years since this Government have been in Office? Are the allowances the
    580
    highest that can be afforded. While this House was engaged in reducing the allowances of these young men and the class to which they belong, hon. Members on the other side were voting for the granting of millions of pounds to industries run by people who had sons at Eton, Cambridge and other public schools and universities, living on the best that the nation can give them. The hon. Member for Central Newcastle may laugh—
    Mr. Denville: I wish the hon. Member would not pick on me. I was smiling at an hon. Member opposite, without any reference whatever to the speech that we are now listening to. The hon. Member said that I voted for the means test. That is a complete error.
    Mr. Davidson: The hon. Member has constantly supported the Government in the Division Lobby against every Measure that we have brought forward on behalf of the people referred to in this Amendment. When the hon. Member says that service should be equal we say that it should have been equal many years ago, and that if the Government want these young men to respond to the call for national service they should give these young men the best possible national service they can. I have visited training camps where many young men have gone to be trained. I can take hon. Members to one which has been carefully established 18 miles from the nearest town so that they may be segregated from ordinary life. It was started by the Minister of Labour, who is now asking them to defend their freedom and liberties. They are only allowed one pass-out, and there is only one conveyance to take them to the nearest town, and the blankets are not—
    The Deputy-Chairman: I think that what takes place in a training camp does not come under this Amendment. It is rather far away from the purpose of the Amendment.
    Mr. Davidson: I was only indicating some of the conditions which some of these young men have to endure whom the Minister of Labour is now asking to respond to the call for national service. Apart from these young men who have to live under conditions where the blankets are changed only once in three months, I want to deal with other sections who

    581
    are affected by the Clause. Take those who are affected by the means test. I have always maintained that it is the right and duty of any young citizen of the country who is receiving good conditions and who has his freedom and liberty, to defend them. I have always maintained that any Government which gives to its people and its country good conditions with freedom and liberty, is a Government worth defending, but the basis of the Amendment is that the Government have failed to give the classes referred to in the Clause a reasonable standard of life, have failed to give them ordinary, decent conditions, have neglected these people, have been callous and created starvation among the parents of these young men. The Minister of Labour knows that in Glasgow there are suffering from malnutrition 8,000 children, the relations of these young men. Many of them are now reaching 19 and 20 and 21 years of age, and one of the difficulties of the Secretary of State for War is the physical defects of young people due to the Government's conduct in regard to the working classes. The Secretary of State for War in his recruiting campaign has had to reject in many areas 50 per cent. of the young men because the Minister of Labour and the Government in their callousness have reduced them to semi-starvation standards.
    Look at the promises which were made so glibly to those who returned from the last War, which was a war to end war, to the promises which were so glibly made to those who returned without limbs, to widows whose husbands had died, to mothers whose sons had died in France, to those who are now in Richmond Hospital and in hospitals near to Glasgow, and to the fathers of boys, who are now 20 and 21 years of age, who have never been able to work and whose pensions have been constantly reduced by this Government. Hon. Members on this side and a few hon. Members on the other who have tried to do something for then-constituents know that their time is taken up by pensioners of the last War who want their pensions increased and who also want to be defended against reductions in their pensions by the Government. I can instance many cases of reduction. A man receiving 24s. a week is now receiving 8s. These are the fathers of young men you are now calling
    582
    up to defend democracy and their freedom.
    When the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Gorton (Mr. Benn) was speaking he was interrupted by the hon. Member for North Lanark (Mr. Anstruther-Gray) who asked, "Is not France free, and France has conscription?" I say that as we have not conscription our freedom is more full. I say that as far as the unemployed in this country are concerned, with their poverty-stricken conditions, their lack of education because of the carelessness of the Government, as far as the widow of a soldier who died during the last War who has now a miserable pittance is concerned, the freedom of these people is much more limited than the freedom of the sons of the wealthy in this country. It is right that those who have had the good things of life from this Government, the sons of shipping firms, the Runciman shipping firm, and those who have re ceived thousands of pounds from the Government—
    The Deputy-Chairman: The hon. Member is now arguing that certain classes should be included. The Amendment deals with the exclusion of certain classes.
    Mr. Davidson: I thought it was within Parliamentary tactics to make what must be an obvious and very definite contrast. However, I accept your Ruling, and say that as far as we are concerned we are pleased to have this opportunity of saying to the Government that they have no right to ask people whom they have allowed to live in poverty-stricken conditions, no right to ask young men who are unemployed through no ineptitude of their own to defend these conditions. Employment is a responsibility of the Government. There is no hon. Member who will deny that with their majority, with their economic power, with their power over the employers, the Government could not have materially improved the conditions of the unemployed. They do not desire to do so as long as the nation can jog along and they are undisturbed in their security. Now that they are in danger they are asking these people to come to their assistance. They have no right to force them to do so. If any class of men have the right to decide whether they are entitled now to

    583
    different conditions from those which they have had for many years, it is the class of unemployed and the poverty-stricken people of the country.
    8.34 p.m.
    Mr. Batey: Any hon. Member who comes from a district where there has been a large amount of unemployment will naturally be interested in the Amendment and wish it success. A colleague of mine asked the Minister whether certain things would be done for the unemployed after their six months' training had expired. I want to ask the Minister of Labour whether the unemployed will have stamps put upon their cards during this period of six months, so that at the end of the six months they will come back not to the means test but to the Unemployment Insurance Fund? I am glad this question has been raised in the Amendment. The unemployed have suffered for long years, and when we are considering giving certain exemptions under the Bill, it is not difficult to make out a case for the unemployed claiming some exemption. One of the strange things in the Bill—and it is a thing which makes it essential that some provision should be inserted in order to protect the unemployed—is that the machinery for bringing the young men into military training is to be the machinery of unemployment insurance. When the Voluntary Register was first set up, I said that its first purpose was to bring the unemployed into the Army. Under this Bill, the whole machinery of unemployment insurance—
    The Deputy-Chairman: I suggest to the hon. Member that the machinery of unemployment insurance properly comes under Clause 12. At this point it is not in order.
    Mr. Batey: In a moment or two I think you will see what I am driving at, Colonel Clifton Brown. In the past, these young men have had to go to the court of referees when there has been any dispute in connection with their unemployment pay, and in future they are to go to the same court of referees. What I am arguing is that it is necessary to agree to this Amendment in order to provide some protection for these unemployed men in future. As soon as the Bill is passed and the time comes, there will be innumerable applications from different people that their sons should be exempted from
    584
    military training, and in some cases exemptions will be given; but unless some alteration is made in the Bill, as soon as the hardship committees begin to deal with the cases, they will say that the unemployed men have no claim and that they ought to go into the Army straight away. Before this Bill was introduced, I heard it said that there ought to be conscription in order to force the unemployed who stood at the street corners into the Army. That was in the minds of a large number of people, and in my opinion, unless this Amendment is accepted, the unemployed men between 20 and 21 will be expected to go for their military training straight away, and will be given no consideration.
    I think it is a pity that the Ministry of Labour is brought into this matter. The fact that the Ministry of Labour is connected with this Bill will leave a bad impression in the minds of the unemployed. I am sorry that it has been done. One of my hon. Friends spoke about the means test and said that men who have been on the means test ought to be exempted from military service. Those of us who know how some people have suffered under the means test, and know the harshness of it, can wholeheartedly support this Amendment. I believe that not only those who have suffered under the means test, but those who have gone through the terrible experience of being unemployed, need consideration under this Bill just as much as any other people do. I shall vote for the Amendment.
    8.41 p.m.
    Mr. Emmott: I think it might be perhaps a little unfair if the whole burden of offering reasons against this Amendment were to rest upon my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, and therefore, I should like to come to his assistance. I refer first to a remark made by the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren), whom I regret not to see in his place, although I do not complain of that. He observed incidentally that preaching democracy is the pastime of autocrats. Well, if that be so, there is a remarkable number of autocrats occupying the benches above the Gangway. The hon. Member suggested that this Amendment only calls for more humane treatment of those who are the victims of economic circumstances. He suggested that that was the whole principle of the

    585
    Amendment. But it is nothing of the sort. The purpose of the Amendment is not to ensure more humane treatment of those who are victims of economic circumstances; its purpose is to enable certain categories of persons, which I agree on the whole are intended to include those who have suffered some economic misfortune, to evade the obligations that rest upon every citizen. The hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen), who moved the Amendment, and to whose remarks I listened with great care and interest, warned hon. Members not to argue in relation to this Amendment that it would permit the categories of men who are included in it to exempt themselves from the obligation of military service. He said repeatedly that no hon. Member must say that this Amendment permits the men mentioned in it to be exempted from this obligation, because it merely lays down that they shall be registered only if they give their consent in writing. But that argument is quite fallacious. The Amendment states that these categories of men shall only be registered with their own consent given in writing. But what will happen if they refuse to give their consent in writing? Then they will be exempted. That is the purpose of the Amendment. And no reason need be given for their refusal to undertake the obligation of military service.
    Much has been said upon the economic argument in this short Debate, but I must say that I regretted to hear the hon. Member for Camlachie talking about the representatives of wealth and privilege subjecting other men to military service in order to protect their own wealth. I was sorry to hear any hon. Member of this House employing such an argument. Surely he knows that the only thing with which every hon. Member of this House is concerned is the assurance of the safety of the State, and the defence of the Realm. The argument about the protection of the wealth of individuals is irrelevant. Apart from anything else, how much of their wealth are wealthy men in this country to-day permitted to keep? Not so very much. I think the hon. Member does a great injustice to other hon. Members of this House and to those outside this House who may be described as the wealthier members of the community in imputing to them such motives.
    586
    I have tried to discover what is the principle of this Amendment. I assume that there is one. But I find it impossible to discover underlying it any principle except a thoroughly vicious one.
    Mr. Silverman: May I put the principle to the hon. Member in this way? If there are in any State individuals for whom the Constitution and the practice of that State have resulted in destitution and misery, there is no right in that State to compel those people without their consent to fight for the continuance of that State. Is not that a principle?
    Mr. Emmott: Yes, it is a principle, but I do not accept it. I will come immediately to a brief examination of the argument which the hon. Member has just stated to the Committee in such very clear terms. The whole argument upon this Amendment so far has proceeded upon economic grounds. It is argued that where men think they have a grievance against the State they have a right to evade the obligations of the citizen—that where, in fact, men think they have been badly treated they have a right to be exempted from the obligations of the citizen. Surely, that principle is inadmissible. I observe in passing that if the principle that economic hardship and distress, in a particular degree, entitle men to be exempted from the obligation of service is to be accepted, then this Amendment is too narrow, and it ought to be made much wider. There are many other individuals and categories of persons besides those mentioned in the Amendment who might with equal justice consider that they have suffered economic hardship; but the Amendment only mentions those whose allowance has been reduced, and those who are unemployed and those who have been unemployed, even if only for a month. Then it puts in the same category with these, those who are the sons of men who died or were wholly or partially disabled in the last War.
    The only ground upon which Parliament can admit the right of exemption from the obligations of the citizen is the ground of true religious conviction. No other principle can be admitted. But another principle is asserted by the Amendment: that is economic misfortune. Nothing could be more vague or more uncertain. The hon. Member for Maryhill (Mr. Davidson) said the basis of the

    587
    Amendment was the refusal by the Government to ensure a reasonable standard of living to the unemployed. But that is obviously a matter of opinion. How can such a principle be admitted? Nothing could be more vague or uncertain than the principle upon which the Amendment is founded. It is uncertain and therefore it is impossible; it is not only impossible and impracticable: it is wrong; because, I repeat, no ground for exemption from the obligations of the citizen can be recognised except that of true religious conviction. The ground of economic distress and hardship—if indeed that were a complete description of this highly arbitrary Amendment, and it is not—is inadmissible as a ground for exemption from the obligation of universal military service.
    8.52 p.m.
    Mr. Gallacher: The discussion on this Amendment has shown the evil character of the Guillotine procedure on such an important occasion as this. The hon. Member who has just spoken is t o be congratulated on his intellectual achievement in recognising that this Amendment is intended to exempt certain people from service. That is an achievement which should be recorded for all time. I do not know where he got the spark of genius which illuminated his mind so suddenly, but it came as a revelation to hon. Members on these benches. He said, however, that the mere fact of people not having got fair play, did not entitle them to exemption from the Bill. But the Government have exempted Northern Ireland because the Irish people consider that they have not got fair play. If Northern Ireland is to be exempted because the Irish people believe they have not got fair play, why not exempt the unemployed, those who are on the means test, those who have suffered so much already?
    It is not only because they have not got fair play that we make this claim for them. When the Prime Minister introduced the Bill I drew attention to the fact that those who were to be called up were those who had no votes. We have since been told that when they go into the Army, they will get votes, even at 20 years of age. I put this to the Minister of Labour. Is it not the case that the unemployed, once they are off unemployment insurance, have no standing in the
    588
    State and no statutory right? Has the unemployed man under the Unemployment Assistance Board any statutory right to the benefit which he gets? He has not. The Board has power to hand out to him as much as will keep him, but those who come under the Board, including the men who are to be forced under pains and penalties to give service to the State, have no statutory rights to a living within the State. Is the Minister prepared to say that the unemployed men and women of this country will be given a statutory right to unemployment assistance benefit? If they are not prepared to give them that statutory right, they have no claim whatever upon these men for military service. I fully endorse every argument that has been put up by various Members in favour of this Amendment, and I demand of the Minister that he either support the Amendment or make a statement at that Box that complete and full statutory rights will be given to the unemployed men and women of this country.
    8.56 p.m.
    The Minister of Labour (Mr. Ernest Brown): I can understand the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) and his friends taking every Parliamentary opportunity to call attention to the position of unemployment or of the unemployed in this country. I always admire the persistent ingenuity with which they succeed in doing these things when others do not think about them, and I congratulate them on having achieved their object once more. One is never surprised at that; but when I read this Amendment I was very sorry not to see one name attached to it—the name of the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan). He knows why.
    Mr. Maxton: He has been waiting for the right hon. Gentleman.
    Mr. Brown: He knows what I have in mind. I have listened to him on many occasions when he was sitting on the Front Bench below the Gangway putting up a very powerful plea for unemployed people, and I know that the last thing that he wants, under any Act, order, regulation, or rule for the unemployed, is to have them segregated from their fellow citizens. He has delivered, as the records of this House will prove, hundreds of speeches, in which he has rarely failed to make that plea, with an eloquence that

    589
    I can envy, but that I cannot always emulate. His late colleagues have, now that he is no longer in the group, forgotten the true doctrine, they have departed from the orthodox creed, and they have said, "In this particular case, we want the unemployed to be put in a position"—
    Mr. Dunn: Has the right hon. Gentleman forgotten his own record?
    Mr. Brown: I am quite prepared at any time to defend my own record. It is extraordinary that hon. Members opposite, who know that one of the duties of the Minister of Labour is to listen to hard things, not only about the policy of the Government but about himself, and to take it with good temper, know also that the moment he begins to put an argument and it becomes a little uncomfortable, the trail is always said to be obscured. But it cannot be obscured here, because it goes to the root of the Amendment. The real principle underneath the Amendment is not the other issue that that young Parliamentarian, the hon. Member for Maryhill (Mr. Davidson) let out when he admitted to the Chair that he was not quite sure as to the Parliamentary tactics of the Amendment. I am not concerned with the Parliamentary tactics, but I am concerned with the principle, and the principle is this, that these men should not be segregated from all other citizens for this particular purpose. I have often thought hon. Members below the Gangway and opposite make one mistake, among others, about the unemployed people of this country. [An HON. MEMBER: "You are omniscient!"] Not at all. If I thought I was, the Members opposite would lose no opportunity of snowing that I was not. In fact, they do not think that, as their faces show at the present time. I have been in charge of the Ministry of Labour now for nearly four years, and I will let my record speak for itself, but even if good temper was not one of the qualities necessary for any Minister of Labour, let me say this, that the Members opposite make one mistake, among others, about the unemployed. The great majority of the unemployed do not share the prejudices or thoughts or ideas expressed on their behalf by hon. Members opposite, and I believe that to be the case in this particular instance.
    Mr. Stephen: Accept the Amendment.
    Mr. Brown: No, I cannot. The hon. Member for Camlachie showed complete confidence except in one passage of his speech, and there he was uneasy. I took his words down, and he said that this Amendment was not intended as a reflection upon the patriotism and the loyalty of the classes of citizens included in it. If he had not felt that they might have thought that, he would not have said it. He was uneasy, and he was right to be uneasy, because, as a matter of fact, these men will not want the choice that he wants them to have. They will not want to be segregated from their fellows. They will want to stand with other citizens. I am not going to enter into a great discussion about the old, age-long pre-capitalist strife between wealth and poverty here on this Amendment, except to say—
    Mr. Logan: Can the right hon. Gentleman turn from "The Three Musketeers" and deal with the position as it is?
    Mr. Brown: What I am saying about the unemployed is, first, that they will not want segregation; secondly, that they are as patriotic as any other section of the community and, therefore, will not desire this Amendment; and, thirdly, that in spite of what hon. Members opposite say about destitution and so on, there is not another country in the world—and they know it—which treats its unemployed citizens better than does this country. I was charged just now with having a brazen effrontery, but it is brazen effrontery on their part to talk about it, for at this very moment it is a fact that in 1938 with 125,000 fewer unemployed on the register than there were when hon. Members opposite were responsible for them, we were paying £9,000,000 more a year than when they were in office. There is a reference in the Amendment to the means test, and the hon. Member for Normanton (Mr. T. Smith) asked whether, when these men have done their service, they will come back to the means test. The answer is "No." During the six months they are in training their cards will be stamped and contributions will be paid on their behalf. The result is that they will not come back to the means test but to benefit inside the scheme.
    9.6 p.m.
    Mr. Buchanan: I had no intention of making from my new position my first speech on this subject, but the Minister

    591
    of Labour devoted his speech to me instead of the Amendment. It is true, as the Minister said, that when a man is serving for the six months his card will be stamped, but the Minister must know that a man must work for further stamps in order to qualify for benefit, because the Act says that it must be 30 stamps in two years, and I have yet to learn that six months in training will accumulate 30 stamps. Therefore, when the right hon. Gentleman is lecturing us about being accurate, it is well that he above everybody else should state what is accurate, because he receives much more than I do for knowing the law. I hoped that the Minister would say something in the way of making concessions on this Amendment. We are dealing with terribly poor people, many of them in my division living in single-apartment dwellings. It was said of such men by a member of the first Coalition Government, whose name, I think, was Long, that if a man fought in the War and came back to live in those conditions it made his fighting a thing that was of no avail.
    We are dealing with men living in poverty and I would have thought that the Minister would say, "I am not accepting the Amendment but I am going some way to modify the conditions that give rise to it." I hoped he would say that the Government would abolish the means test and take away its worse forms. Instead of that he makes some
    cheap patter about me. All of us have a past, and he himself has a past which, if anybody cared to dissect it, would not always redound to his credit. Whatever past I have had I have not tried to cloak it with religion during the period I have been here. I should have thought that the Minister, instead of making cheap jokes and gibes, would have applied his mind to the Amendment and have announced some concessions like the abolition of the means test, or, if not its abolition, at least a raising of the standard of comfort of the man when he comes out of the Army and of those dependent on him. It is a terrible thing that the moment you get a man into the Army you abolish malnutrition for six months for him. I thought at least the Minister might have announced a policy that would have abolished malnutrition for him after he left the Army and that, while he was in the Army, if he had a wife or a mother or a sister dependent on him, malnutrition would have been abolished for them, too. The Minister has done none of these things, and has not, in fact, applied his mind to the Amendment at all. As a protest against the Minister not in any way meeting the problems which the Amendment raises, I hope the Committee will go into the Division Lobby against the Government.
    Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 126; Noes, 199.

    Division No. 106.]

    AYES.

    [9.13 p.m.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Dalton, H.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton

    Hopkin, D.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Day, H.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Ammon, C. G.

    Dobbie, W.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Ede, J. C.

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    Kirby, B. V.

    Barnes, A. J.

    Frankel, D.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Barr, J.

    Gallacher, W.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Batey, J.

    Gardner, B. W.

    Lathan, G.

    Beaumont, H. (Batley)

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Leach, W.

    Benson, G.

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Leonard, W.

    Broad, F. A.

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    Leslie, J. R.

    Bromfield, W.

    Grenfell, D. R.

    Logan, D. G.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    Lunn, W.

    Buchanan, G.

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Cape, T.

    Groves, T. E.

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    McGhee, H. G.

    Chater, D.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    MacLaren, A.

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Macmillan, H. (Stockton-on-Tees)

    Cocks, F. S.

    Hardie, Agnes

    Marshall, F.

    Collindridge, F.

    Hayday, A.

    Mathers, G.

    Cave, W. G.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Maxton, J.

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Milner, Major J.

    Daggar, G.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Montague, F.

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Viant, S. P.

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Sexton, T. M.

    Walkden, A. G.

    Naylor, T. E.

    Shinwell, E.

    Watkins, F. C.

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Silverman, S. S.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Oliver, G. H.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Paling, W.

    Sloan, A.

    Westwood, J.

    Parker, J,

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly)

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Pearson, A.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Poole, C. C.

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Pritt, D. N.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Ridley, G.

    Thurtle, E.

    Riley, B.

    Tinker, J. J.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Ritson, J.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Mr. McGovern and Mr. Stephen.

    NOES.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Hammersley, S. S.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Hannah, I. C.

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Rayner, Major R. H.

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury),

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Hepworth, J.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Baldwin-Webb, Col. J.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)

    Balfour, G. (Hampstead)

    Higgs, W. F.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Balniel, Lord

    Holmes, J. S.

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Rowlands, G.

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Blair, Sir R.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Bossom, A. C.

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Boulton, W. W.

    Hunter, T.

    Salt, E. W.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Salter, Sir J. Arthur (Oxford U.)

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Sandys, E. D.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Schuster, Sir G. E.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Kimball, L.

    Scott, Lord William

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Selley, H. R.

    Bull, B. B.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Latham, Sir P.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Cary, R. A.

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Levy, T.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Lewis, O.

    Somerset, T.

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Liddall, W. S.

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (Wm'l'd)

    Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)

    Lipson, D. L.

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

    Critchley, A.

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Crossley, A. C.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Lyons, A. M.

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Culverwell, C. T.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Magnay, T.

    Tasker, Sir R. I.

    Denville, Alfred

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Tale, Mavis C.

    Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Doland, G. F.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Donner, P. W.

    Markham, S. F.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Dugdale, Captain T. L.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Touche, G. C.

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Turton, R. H.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Elliston, Capt. G, S.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Emmott, C. E. G. C.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Wayland, Sir W. A

    Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon W. S. (Cirencester)

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Nall, Sir J.

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Fleming, E. L.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Furness, S. N.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Wragg, H.

    Gledhill, G.

    Owen, Major G.

    York, C.

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Peake, O.

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Grimston, R. V.

    Petherick, M.

    Mr. Munro and Major Sir James Edmondson.

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)

    Radford, E. A.

    9.21 p.m.
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Lennox-Boyd): I beg to move, in page 2, line 2, to leave out "from," and to insert "beginning with."
    This is merely a drafting Amendment to specify more exactly the starting point of the period of liability to be called up for military training. It will now include the actual day of registration.
    Amendment agreed to.
    9.22 p.m.
    Mr. Garro Jones: I beg to move, in page 2, line 7, after "register," to insert:
    "after he attains the age of eighteen years and."
    Mr. Foot: Is not the Amendment in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Sir P. Harris) to insert a new Sub-section (3) to be called? We understood that it was to be called.
    The Deputy-Chairman: That is so, but time is getting on, and it is not now selected.
    Mr. Garro Jones: As Sub-section (3) stands there is no age limit below which the Minister may not, on good cause, permit registration. That is obviously an illogical position, because even in the case of the Regular Army there is an age limit below which a recruit may not be accepted. That age limit used to be 18 years, but it has recently been reduced to 17½ years, and to 17 years if the recruit is able to show that he has obtained his parents' permission to enlist. Therefore, whether or not the Minister acquiesces in my proposal that the age under the Conscription Bill should be 18, he will, no doubt, find it possible to agree that there should be some limit below which he is not entitled to register a person under this Bill. I submit that the age limit should be not less than 18 years. It is true that under the pressure of obtaining recruits under the voluntary system it has been found necessary to reduce the age limit from 18 to 17½ and 17, but now that the voluntary system has been to a large extent abandoned I cannot feel that there is any necessity for retaining the lower age limits. In all the history of the legislation of conscription in all countries" 18 has almost invariably been the lower age limit below which recruits
    596
    might not be pressed into the service, and such small research as I have been able to make shows that we have to go back to the reign of Alfred the Great before we can find conscription Bills entitling boys below 18 to be called up, but under the general levy then the age limits were 16 to 60, and that is some indication of the pressure of circumstances which required the age limit to be below 18.
    In the history of our own compulsory recruiting, even in the desperate years around 1800, 18 was the lower age limit below which conscription did not apply, and therefore I suggest that there is no valid reason why it should be below 18 now. Even if we take countries where conscription has for hundreds of years been an integral part of the military system, we find that there has been no compulsory recruitment below the age of 18. Even in the case of the famous levée en masse under the French system just before the French Revolution, the age limits were 18 to 45, and a few years later—I think it was the year 1798—when there was introduced the prototype of all modern conscription legislation, the legislation which provided Napoleon with all his armies and enabled him to boast that he could expend 30,000 men a month, the age limits for compulsory service under that measure were 20 to 25. So I suggest that there is no good reason why we should go below that age for compulsory service.
    There is indeed in logic a reason at the present moment, and that is that any prospective recruit at the present time could evade all his obligations under this Bill by joining the Regular Army at 17, with his parents' permission, and 17½, without; but, in my submission as we in Committee to-day made it the principle that 18 is an age low enough, then the logical consequence of that would be that the Minister, under what are now I believe his administrative powers, would raise the age of voluntary recruitment to 18. When the age of 18 was fixed, under the stress of tremendous military pressure on this country and on Continental countries, the actual strength in numbers of the Army was an even more important factor than it is to-day. Then the strength of nations was to be measured by the strength of soldiers in the line; to-day the strength of a country is measured,

    597
    to a certain extent it is true by soldiers in the line, but to a far larger extent by numerous other economic and technical factors, which did not apply in the old days. And yet even in those old days 18 was thought to be right as the lowest age to adopt.
    Then there is an argument on which I shall not expatiate at undue length, because I know that the House wants to go on to other Amendments—there is what I call the psychological argument. Although I speak with no professional or medical authority, I am convinced that the best age for a soldier is certainly not the age of 18. But although I have no medical knowledge, I can speak with a considerable amount of practical experience of two or three different arms of the Service, and so far as my experience and recollection and present knowledge go, I would far rather have men over the age of 20 in battle; in fact, a man from the point of view of mental stamina and courage is far better after 20, let alone after 18. Indeed, from that point of view, I think a man progressively strengthens his mental and moral fibre up to the age of 40 and even 50. So from a purely mental point of view, I cannot think that there is any advantage in falling below this very low age of 18.
    There are hon. Members in the House who can speak with greater authority than I can on comparative physical strength, but I believe that in physical stamina and in powers of resistance a man after the age of 18 is a far better soldier. If there were any valid reason why we should go below 18, then one might be prepared to reconsider the matter, but I can see no reason—neither a physical reason nor a reason in respect of the numbers required, nor in respect of the shortage of men—why we should go below the age which I propose should be the limit. It is perfectly true that an argument of convenience might be advanced. It might be said that a prospective soldier, as he reaches the age of 17, might like to say, "If I can get done with my compulsory service within the next year it might be very much more convenient for me than if I leave it till I am 18." But that, I submit, is rather a fallacious argument, because if it is to be conclusive it applies equally well to every age at which a prospective soldier would be capable of taking the training.
    598
    Moreover, I do think we ought to give the prospective recruits this extra year of discretion. A man when he is 15, 16, 17 or even 18 has a much more romantic temperament. That is the age at which they run away to sea, or fall in love, or join the Conservative party. I think it is a very good thing, if we compel these men, to set the age of 18 before the Minister is entitled to register them. If the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, now that he is provided with this mighty instrument for strengthening the numbers in the British Army, feels that he can reduce the age to 18, I believe he will be taking a step that can be recommended on every ground.
    9.32 p.m.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I have listened with respect and enlightenment to the speech of the hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Garro Jones), illustrated as it was by a wealth of historical and factual analogies. We have now reached the place in this Bill where it has been clearly established that every male British subject ordinarily resident in Great Britain shall, while he is between the ages of 20 and 21 years, be registered for military training in the United Kingdom, and during that period the is liable to be called up. There is, however, a provision that the service may be postponed or ante-dated. Nothing in this Act, however, fixes the age to which his service may be ante-dated. It is to fill that gap, as I understand it, that the hon. Gentleman has moved this Amendment and has said that the Minister may ante-date his period of service to 18.
    We are not dealing here with any matter of compulsion; we are dealing here with a matter of convenience. This is to meet the situation of a young man who, for reasons concerned with his career, or for other reasons, wishes to do his period of service before he reaches the age of 20. Therefore it merely becomes a question at what age he may do this service in advance of the age of 20. I thought, when the hon. Gentleman moved his Amendment, that his intention was to fix the age at the same age as that which is fixed for the entry of recruits into the Regular Service, naval, military or air. The general age is 17½, and not 18, and therefore the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman would have some logical basis if

    599
    it fixed the age where I have stated it to be in the case of the Regular Services. Accordingly—because the Government wish not to be rigid in this matter but to lay themselves open to persuasion—I would willingly accept such an Amendment on such a logical basis, that the age should be iy£ to suit the convenience of these young men. Therefore if the hon. Gentleman wishes to accept it in that form—
    Hon. Members: No!
    Mr. Cove: This is conscription.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I am trying to be conciliatory and to meet the argument that was advanced. I am dealing here with the convenience of the young men concerned. The position is that the same young man entering the Regular Army could enlist there at the age of 17½.
    Mr. Davidson: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when a boy who joined for boy's service in the Regular Army is allowed to commence man's service under present conditions?
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: The age, as the hon. Gentleman is perhaps aware, was reduced to 17½. He would begin man's service at that age. I have reduced it to 17½ from 18 to meet arguments that were put to me by hon. Gentlemen opposite relating to certain difficulties in connection with the Army Act. I am willing to meet hon. Gentlemen opposite, if they so desire, by making the age logical throughout, that is to say, the age of 17½. I hope hon. Members will realise that I am meeting in a good spirit what has been proposed. If hon. Gentlemen do not desire that, they need not accept it.
    Mr. Gallacher: Would the right hon. Gentleman recommend the Government to give us that extra six months for discussing the Bill?
    9.37 p.m.
    Mr. Alan Herbert: The point raised in the Amendment is referred to in a letter I received last night from the Registrar of Oxford University. This letter makes me think that the Minister might be able to consider the Amendment even more favourably than he has yet done. The Registrar says:
    "As regards the 1,000 boys who come up in 1940 and who will, during their under-
    600
    graduate course, become liable for military service, 500 will be coming up under the age of 18½."
    Nowadays they come up to the University at a much younger age than they did in the days of myself and of my right hon. Friend:
    "If these boys are not given the option to postpone, they will have to begin their six months' training under the age of 18. This is regarded, I know, by many headmasters as extremely undesirable on various grounds and is regarded with anxiety by the Universities because of the serious risk that, at that age, a six months' break might be followed by reluctance to resume academic work as well as a serious loss of habits of intellectual application and of knowledge. These objections are slightly diminished as boys grow older and would not apply with equal force to those who would normally be coming up at 19½, though they could still not be disregarded. The numbers of boys coming up as old as 19½ is now quite small."
    I imagine that this point will be raised again upon the Report stage. Perhaps my right hon. Friend will be able to give it consideration in the meantime.
    9.39 p.m.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: If the argument that has been advanced by my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford University (Mr. A. Herbert) is as I apprehend it, the cases he referred to can be completely met under the Bill as it now stands. The Government are perfectly contented with the Bill as it stands. The Minister may, in order to suit the convenience of the applicant, ante-date or post-date the applicant's liability. The hon. Member opposite says: "Let the Minister ante-date his liability," but not to 17½, even though that age would suit the man and his parents better. I am anxious to meet the point of view of hon. Gentlemen but—
    Mr. Cove: Giving nothing away—
    Mr. Hore-Belisha:—if that is not hon. Gentlemen's apprehension of the matter, let us leave it as it is. Let us leave it in the complete discretion of the Minister, who has a full reply to the kind of case brought to our notice by the hon. Member for Oxford University (Mr. A. Herbert). The Minister naturally wishes to make his scheme a success and not to damage in any way the careers of these young men, and he will fix the date, after consultation, according to the best interests of the student. As for my desire to meet the point advanced by the

    601
    hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Garro Jones), if it does not meet with favour the Bill had better remain as it is.
    9.42 p.m.
    Mr. Garro Jones: I am not unappreciative of the conciliatory spirit which the right hon. Gentleman has shown, but I do not feel able to accept his concession for two reasons. First, I feel that he would be bound to give that concession in any case. Secondly, his logical mind being what it is, if he will take a little
    longer to consider the argument which I advanced in favour of the age of 18 we may find that by the time the Bill reaches the Report stage the right hon. Gentleman will be prepared to accept the age of 18. I do not regard him as estopped from accepting that age by anything that he has said to-night.
    Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 132; Noes, 215.

    Division No. 107.]

    AYES.

    [9.43 p.m.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    Paling, W.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Parker, J.

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Groves, T. E.

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    Pearson, A.

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Ammon, C. G.

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Poole, C. C.

    Atllee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Hardie, Agnes

    Price, M. P.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Pritt, D. N.

    Barnes, A. J.

    Hayday, A.

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Barr, J.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Batey, J.

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Ridley, G.

    Beaumont, H. (Batley)

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Riley, B.

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Ritson, J.

    Benson, G.

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Broad, F. A.

    Hollins, A.

    Sexton, T. M.

    Bromfield, W.

    Hopkin, D.

    Shinwell, E.

    Buchanan, G.

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Silkin, L.

    Cape, T.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Silverman, S. S.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Chater, D.

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Sloan, A.

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Cocks, F. S.

    Kirby, B. V.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Collindridge, F.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly)

    Cove, W. G.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Lathan, G.

    Scrensen, R. W.

    Daggar, G.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Dalton, H.

    Leach, W.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Leonard, W.

    Thurtle, E.

    Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)

    Leslie, J. R.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Logan, D. G.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Day, H.

    Lunn, W.

    Viant, S. P.

    Dobbie, W.

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Walkden, A. G.

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Watkins, F. C.

    Ede, J. C.

    McGhee, H. G.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)

    MacLaren, A.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Westwood, J.

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    Marshall, F.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Frankel, D.

    Milner, Major J.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Gallacher, W.

    Montague, F.

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Gardner, B. W.

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Graham, D H. (Hamilton)

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Naylor, T. E.

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Grenfell, D. R.

    Oliver, G. H.

    Mr. Anderson and Mr. Mathers.

    NOES.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Cary, R. A.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Blair, Sir R.

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Bossom, A. C.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Boulton, W. W.

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Brass, Sir W.

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Critchley, A.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Crossley, A. C.

    Astor, Viscountess (Plymouth, Sutton)

    Bull, B. B.

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Balniel, Lord

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Davies, C. (Montgomery)

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Denville, Alfred

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.

    Levy, T.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Doland, G. F.

    Lewis, O.

    Russell, Sir Alexander

    Donner, P. W.

    Liddall, W. S.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Lipson, D. L.

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Dugdale, Captain T. L.

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Salt, E. W

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Scott, Lord William

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Lyons, A. M.

    Selley, H. R.

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Emmott, C. E. G. C.

    McCorquodale, M. S.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    McKie, J. H.

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Magnay, T.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Smithers, Sir W.

    Fildes, Sir H.

    Mander, G. le M.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Somerset, T.

    Firming, E. L.

    Markham, S. F.

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    Foot, D. M.

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'ld)

    Furness, S. N.

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

    Gledhill, G.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Cower, Sir R. V.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Grimston, R. V.

    Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

    Tasker, Sir R. 1.

    Gritten, W. G Howard

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Tale, Mavis C.

    Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

    Hambro, A. V.

    Munro, P.

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Hammersley, S. S.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Hannah, I. C.

    Nevan-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Touche, G. C.

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Turton, R. H.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Hepworth, J.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Higgs, W. F.

    Owen, Major G.

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Peake, O.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Petherick, M.

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    White, H. Graham

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Radford, E. A.

    Whitelay, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Hunter, T.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Rayner, Major R. H

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Kimball, L.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Wragg, H.

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    York, C.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Latham, Sir P.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Major Sir James Edmondson and Lieut.-Colone Herbert.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Rowlands, G.

    9.50 pm.
    Mr. Greenwood: I beg to move, in page 2, line 8, to leave out from "years," to the second "the," in line 10, and to insert:
    "(4) The Minister shall permit any person so registered to postpone his liability to be called up for military training if he is satisfied that the person is undergoing a term of apprenticeship or is engaged in full-time education or otherwise studying for a professional examination or university degree.
    (5) The Minister, if satisfied that there is good cause for so doing, may permit any other person so registered to postpone his liability to be so called up.
    (6) In any case to which the foregoing sub-section is made applicable."
    While the Bill as it stands makes provision for the postponement of compulsory
    604
    service, the matter really lies, under Subsection (3), with the Minister, who may postpone the liability of persons to be registered for compulsory service. My Amendment would leave out the words which make this optional on the part of the Minister, and would insert compulsory words making it obligatory on the Minister, in the case of persons who are undergoing apprenticeship, or are engaged in full-time education, or are studying as external students for university degrees or professional examinations. I put forward this proposal in order to carry out what I said earlier was our intention, namely, to create the minimum of inconvenience in these circumstances.

    605
    We had hoped that it would have been possible to put the date of compulsory service earlier, at the age of 18, but we wish it to be obligatory on the Minister, where the conditions laid down in the Amendment are fulfilled, to allow persons in this position to postpone their military service. It is clear that, with boys who are apprenticed, it would be advantageous to them, and, indeed, to the nation, that they should, if they so wished, be entitled to postpone their period of military service until they have completed their trade training. That, of course, is especially important now, because, as I have tried to point out to the House and to the Committee on more than one occasion, the problem of production is becoming our really vital problem, and it would be against the national interest if persons apprenticed to skilled occupations could not complete their apprenticeship before they were called upon to fulfil their responsibilities under this Bill. It is possible now under the Bill to postpone the period of compulsory service, and I imagine that that will apply to persons engaged in university life and so on, and we should like a university student who chooses to postpone his period of service until after the end of his university career to be entitled to do so.
    I come now to the case of students at universities like London University, where most of the students are people working at other jobs and trying to carry on their studies for their own education or advantage professionally. They also ought to be enabled, by declaration that they are engaged on study of this kind, to postpone their period of training. Then there is the case of those who are not engaged in seeking university degrees, but who are trying while they are engaged in one occupation, to qualify themselves for another. I will mention, as an example, people who are engaged in industry and commerce and are studying to get in some branch of the Civil Service. If they are snatched out now, it may be that they will never get back. That will be a hardship. We believe that those persons, on proof that they are engaged on work which ought to be completed, should be given a specific right under the Bill to postpone—without the Minister saying whether they should or should not—their period of training. I hope the Minister
    606
    will be prepared to accept what is a reasonable and, in my view, a constructive Amendment.
    9.57 p.m.
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I am sorry to rise at this early stage in the Debate; but the Debate must end in two minutes time, and it will be in the interests of both sides if I give a brief statement of our intentions in regard to apprentices and university students. I cannot recommend the Committee to accept the Amendment, because it draws up two or three definite categories whose training must be automatically postponed. We feel that this must be left to the discretion of the Minister and the hardship committees, for reasons which I should be glad to explain at length if there were time. We want this scheme to work with the minimum of hardship. It is our intention to get into touch at an early date with the organisations concerned with regard to apprenticeship, and to seek their advice as to how this scheme should work. We are also in touch with the vice-chancellors of the various universities through the University Grants Committee, and the Members of Parliament for the universities, many of whom are here to-night. We are in consultation with the Board of Education about students at institutions such as training and technical colleges.
    With regard to university students whose examinations are due in June of this year, they will be able to go through their examinations without fear of being called up. It will not be possible to call up men for training before the end of June at the earliest. I hope that this will be a reassurance to such people. With regard to apprentices I think it should be pointed out that if their calling up is postponed until their period of apprenticeship is over, they will lose the protection of Clause 6, which is a very valuable protection. I would like to leave the Committee with the reassurance that any comments hon. Members may make to my right hon. Friend or myself, by correspondence or in conversation on a subject very near to their hearts, will be taken into full account by us, and we shall do all that is possible to work this scheme with a minimum of inconvenience to all concerned.
    It being Ten of the Clock, The CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House this Day, to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.
    Question put, "That the words proposed to be left6 out stand part of the Clause."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 243; Noes, 151.

    Division No. 108.]

    AYES.

    [10.2 p.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Moreing, A. C.

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Fleming, E. L.

    Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Munro, P.

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Gledhill, G.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Goldie, N. B.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Assheton, R.

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Astor, Viscountess (Plymouth, Sutton)

    Grant-Ferris, Flight-Lieutenant R.

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Baldwin-Webb, Col. J.

    Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    Balniel, Lord

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Patrick, C. M.

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Grimston, R. V.

    Peaks, O.

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N. W.)

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Petherick, M.

    Blair, Sir R.

    Hammersley, S. S.

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Bossom, A. C.

    Hannah, I. C.

    Pilkington, R.

    Boulton, W. W.

    Hannon, Sir P. J. H.

    Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton

    Bracken, B.

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Radford, E. A.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Raikes, H. V. A. M.

    Brass, Sir W.

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Hepworth, J.

    Rayner, Major R. H.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Higgs, W. F.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Bull, B. B.

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Bullock, Capt. M.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Richards, G. W. (Skipton)

    Burghley, Lord

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Rowlands, G.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Cory, R. A.

    Hunter, T.

    Russell, Sir Alexander

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Salt, E. W

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Kimball, L.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Schuster, Sir G. E.

    Colman, N. C. D.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Scott, Lord William

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Latham, Sir P.

    Selley, H. R.

    Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.)

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S. W.)

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs)

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Critchley, A.

    Levy, T.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

    Lewis, O.

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Crossley, A. C.

    Liddall, W. S.

    Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Lipson, D. L.

    Smithers, Sir W.

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Somerset, T.

    Denville, Alfred

    Lyons, A. M.

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

    Doland, G. F.

    MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

    Donner, P. W.

    McCorquodale, M. S.

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.

    Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    McKie, J. H.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Dugdale, Captain T. L.

    Magnay, T.

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Eckersley, P. T.

    Manningham-Buller, Sir M.

    Tasker, Sir R. I.

    Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Markham, S. F.

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

    Emmott, C. E. G. C.

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Erskine-Hill, A. G.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Touche, G. C.

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Walker-Smith, Sir J.

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Wragg, H.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    York, C.

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Mr. Furness and Major Sir James Edmondson.

    NOES.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Oliver, G. H.

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    Owen, Major G.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Paling, W.

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Parker, J.

    Ammon, C. G.

    Hardie, Agnes

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Harris, Sir P. A.

    Pearson, A.

    Allies, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Hayday, A.

    Poole, C. C.

    Barnes, A. J.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Price, M. P.

    Barr, J.

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Pritt, D. N.

    Bartlett, C. V. 0.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Batey, J.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)

    Beaumont, H. (Batley)

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Bellenger, F. J.

    Hollins, A.

    Ridley, G.

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Hopkin, D.

    Riley, B.

    Benson, G.

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Ritson, J.

    Broad, F. A.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Bromfield, W.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Sexton, T. M.

    Buchanan, G.

    Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth)

    Shinwell, E.

    Cape, T.

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Silkin, L.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Kirby, B. V.

    Silverman, S. S.

    Chater, D.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Sloan, A.

    Cocks, F. S.

    Lathan, G.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Collindridge, F.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Cove, W. G.

    Leach, W.

    Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly)

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Leonard, W.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Daggar, G

    Leslie, J. R.

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Dalton, H.

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Stephen, C.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Logan, D. G.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Lunn, W.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Day, H.

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Thurtle, E.

    Dobbie, W.

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    McGhee, H. G.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Ede, J. C.

    McGovern, J.

    Viant, S. P.

    Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)

    MacLaren, A.

    Walkden, A. G.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Watkins, F. C.

    Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)

    Mander, G. le M.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    Marshall, F.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Foot, D. M.

    Mathers, G.

    Westwood, J.

    Frankel, D.

    Maxton, J.

    White, H. Graham

    Gallacher, W.

    Milner, Major J.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Gardner, B. W.

    Montague, F.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Morgan, J. (York, W. R., Doncaster)

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    Nathan, Colonel H. L.

    Grenfell, D. R.

    Naylor, T. E.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Mr. Anderson and Mr. Groves.

    THE CHAIRMAN then proceeded successively to put forthwith the Questions on Amendments moved by the Government, of which notice had been given, and the Question necessary to dispose of the Business to be concluded at Ten of the Clock at this day's Sitting.
    Amendment made: In page 2, line 8, after "person," insert:
    "registered in that register, on application made by him within; the prescribed period after being."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]
    Mr. Gallacher: On a point of Order. I would like to know whether in view of the importance of some of these Amendments it would be possible to take some of the time allotted to some of the future Clauses and add it to the discussion of this Clause.
    The Chairman: No.
    Mr. Gallacher: Why not?
    The Chairman: Because the hon. Member, like myself, is bound by t he Orders of the House.

    611
    Further Amendments made:
    In page 2, line 18, leave out "whose decision shall be final."
    In line 18, at the end, insert:
    "(4) An applicant for such permission as aforesaid who is aggrieved by the determination of a Military Training (Hardship) Committee, and the Minister if he considers it necessary may, within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner, appeal to the umpire or any deputy umpire appointed by His Majesty for the purposes of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1935, whose decision shall be final; and the umpire or any deputy umpire shall, when hearing any such appeal, sit with two assessors appointed by the Minister:
    Provided that if the determination of the Committee with respect to any application was unanimous the applicant shall not be entitled to appeal to the umpire or any deputy umpire except with the leave of the Committee.
    (5) The Minister or any person authorised by him shall be entitled to be heard on any reference or appeal under this section."
    In line 34, at the end, insert:
    "Provided that no prosecution in respect of any such failure shall be instituted without the consent of the Minister."
    In line 38, after "him," insert:
    "and on furnishing the prescribed particulars about himself."
    In line 43, after "shall," insert:
    "furnish the prescribed particulars about himself and shall."—[Mr. W. S Morrison]
    Mr. Shinwell: On a point of Order. I observe, with great respect, that a considerable amount of time is being taken up by the reading of Government Amendments. On the other hand, we have no explanation from the Government as to the meaning of these Amendments. What is the purpose of your reading them if we are not to be furnished with an explanation?
    The Chairman: I am acting in accordance with the directions of the House.
    Mr. Wedgwood Benn: Is it in order for the Government to draw a Bill so badly that they must put in Amendments which take nearly a quarter of an hour to read?
    The Chairman: I cannot prevent the Government from drafting Bills as badly as they think fit.
    Mr. Shinwell: In view of the statement that you have just made, should I be in order in moving to report Progress?
    The Chairman: No, I would ask the hon. Member to read the Order under
    612
    which we are working, under which that cannot be done.
    Mr. Buchanan: May I ask whether you have not power as Chairman to make representations to the Government to stop this abuse of Parliamentary time?
    The Chairman: I have no power in that regard. I cannot do anything contrary to the Order of the House.
    Mr. Gallacher: In view of the decision taken by this House, is it in order for me to suggest that we should now finish completely with Clause 1 and get on to Clause 2? The Order of the House lays it down that we are to finish with Clause 1 at 10 o'clock, and I suggest that we carry out the Order of the House.
    The Chairman: I am bound by the Order of the House, and the hon. Member, who should be able to understand the Order of the House, is interrupting me in the performance of my duty under that Order.
    Mr. Maxton: Is it not well within your power and your duty to select what Amendments shall be taken and what Amendments shall not be taken? Would it not be desirable that you should cease selecting these Government Amendments, since the time for discussion has expired?
    The Chairman: I must ask hon. Members to read the Order of the House under which we are working. I have no option but to put the Government Amendments.
    Further Amendments made: In page 3, line 5, after "Committees," insert:
    "and to persons appointed to sit as assessors with the umpire or any deputy umpire."
    In line 6, leave out "he," and insert, "the Minister."
    In line 9, after "Committees," insert:
    "or who appeal from the decisions of such Committees and to any witnesses whose attendance is certified by any such Committee or by the umpire or deputy umpire, as the case may be, to have been necessary."
    In line 10, leave out "he," and insert, "the Minister."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]
    Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 248; Noes, 134.

    Division No. 109.]

    AYES.

    [10.21 p.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Goldie, N. B.

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Pilkington, R.

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Grant-Ferris, Flight-Lieutenant R.

    Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)

    Radford, E. A.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Raikes, H. V. A. M.

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Grimston, R. V.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N. W.)

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Assheton, R.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Astor, Viscountess Plymouth, Sutton)

    Hannah, I. C.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Baldwin-Webb, Col. J.

    Hannon, Sir P. J. H.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Balniel, Lord

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Richards, G. W. (Skipton)

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Beechman, N. A.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Bernays, R. H.

    Hepworth, J.

    Rowlands, G.

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Blair, Sir R.

    Higgs, W. F.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Bossom, A. C.

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Russell, Sir Alexander

    Boulton, W. W.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Bracken, B.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Brass, Sir W.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Salt, E. W.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Schuster, Sir G. E.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Hunter, T.

    Scott, Lord William

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Selley, H. R.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Bull, B. B.

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Bullock, Capt. M.

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Burghley, Lord

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Kimball, L.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Burton, Col. H. W.

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Latham, Sir P.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Cary, R. A.

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Smithers, Sir W.

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Somervell, Rt. Hon. Sir Donald

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Levy, T.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Lewis, O.

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E Grinstead)

    Liddall, W. S.

    Stourton, Major Hon. J. J

    Colman, N. C. D.

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Lipson, D. L.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.)

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs)

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Loftus, P. C.

    Sutcliffe, H.

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Lyons, A. M.

    Tasker, Sir R. 1.

    Critchley, A

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

    MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.

    MeCorquodale, M. S.

    Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)

    Crossley, A. C.

    McKie, J. H.

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Magnay, T.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Maitland, Sir Adam

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Gulverwell, C. T.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Manningham-Buller, Sir M

    Touche, G. C.

    Denville, Alfred

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Turton, R. H.

    Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.

    Markham, S. F.

    Walker-Smith, Sir J.

    Doland, G. F.

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Donner, P. W.

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Dower, Lieut.-Col. A. V. G.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Duncan, J. A. F.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Eckersley, P. T.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Morris-Jones, Sir Henry

    Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Munro, P.

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Erskine-Hill, A. G.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Wragg, H.

    Fleming, E. L.

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    York, C.

    Furness, S. N.

    Owen, Major G.

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)

    Patrick, C. M.

    George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)

    Peake, O.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Captain Dugdale and Major Sir James Edmondson.

    Gledhill, G.

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Petherick, M.

    614

    615

    NOES.

    Adam, D. (Consett)

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Pearson, A.

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Hardie, Agnes

    Poole, C. C.

    Alexandar, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Price, M. P.

    Ammon, C. G.

    Hayday, A.

    Pritt, D. N.

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Sanfield, J. W.

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Barnes, A. J.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Ridley, G.

    Barr, J.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Riley, B.

    Batey, J.

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Ritson, J.

    Beaumont, H. (Batley)

    Hollins, A.

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Sexton, T. M.

    Benson, G.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Shinwell, E.

    Broad, F. A.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Silkin, L.

    Bromfield, W.

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Silverman, S. S.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Buchanan, G.

    Kirby, B. V.

    Sloan, A.

    Cape, T.

    Kirkwood, D.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Charleton, H. C.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Chater, D.

    Lathan, G.

    Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Leas- (K'ly)

    Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Cocks, F. S.

    Leach, W.

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Collindridge, F.

    Leonard, W.

    Stephen, C.

    Cove, W. G.

    Leslie, J. R.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Logan, D. G.

    Stokes, R. R.

    Daggar, G.

    Lunn, W.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Dalton, H.

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Thurtle, E.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    McGhee, H. G.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Day, H.

    McGovern, J.

    Viant, S. P.

    Dobbie, W.

    MacLaren, A.

    Walkden, A. G.

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    MacMillan, M. (Western Islet)

    Watkins, F. C.

    Ede, J. C.

    Mander, G. le M.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)

    Marshall, F.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    Mathers, G.

    Westwood, J.

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    Maxton, J.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Frankel, D.

    Milner, Major J.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Gallacher, W.

    Montague, F.

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Gardner, B. W.

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    Oliver, G. H.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Grenfell, D. R.

    Paling, W.

    Mr. Groves and Mr. Adamson.

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    Parker, J.

    CLAUSE 2.—(Exemption of certain classes of persons.)
    10.30 p.m.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I beg to move, in page 3, line 17, after "dominions," to insert "outside Great Britain."
    This provision refers to a person employed "in the service of the Government of a part of His Majesty's dominions" and I move to insert the words "outside Great Britain," in order to make the provision completely clear.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I beg to move, in page 3, line 21, to leave out "the United Kingdom," and to insert "Great Britain."
    This Amendment is consequential upon one which was carried earlier this afternoon.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I beg to move, in page 3, line 29, to leave out paragraph (c).
    616
    The point which is dealt with in paragraph (c) is covered by paragraphs (b) and (d) and I therefore move to omit it.
    Mr. A. V. Alexander: Why was it put in?
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the Bill had to be drafted with great speed.
    10.33 p.m.
    Mr. Gallacher: if as a result of drafting the Bill with such great speed a mistake like this can be made, is it not possible that more serious mistakes will be made in the Bill if it is rushed through Committee with such speed and without opportunity for adequate discussion. In view of the fact that the Bill allows for the postponement of the obligations of those called up under it, until suitable date, will the Minister not recommend the postponement of the closure on these Clauses until a more suitable date?
    Sir I. Albery: May I point out that a great many Members of the Committee

    617
    did not hear the right hon. Gentleman's explanation of this Amendment.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I have said that the point is covered in paragraphs (a) and (d).
    Amendment agreed to.
    10.34 p.m.
    Mr. Alexander: I beg to move, in page 3, line 33, to leave out from "the," to "been," in line 34, and to insert "passing of this Act."
    As the Bill is drafted, the operative date will be 27th April and it will therefore work in a retrospective sense. We submit that it is unreasonable in connection with the introduction of such an important principle as compulsory service, that a retrospective date should be fixed and that we should seek to conscript young men, as from a date on which there was no law in existence to conscript them, especially when we are dealing with a section of our male population who have no votes. We have been very considerably surprised, even under the present Government, at what they have allowed to take place in the last few weeks in connection with this new Measure. Wide dissatisfaction has been expressed all over the country at the action which was taken as soon as the rumour was allowed to escape that the Government intended to adopt compulsory military service, when a wireless message was broadcast throughout the land telling young men that unless they enlisted in particular forces before the night of 26th April, up till midnight, I think—it was all carefully stated to the hour and the minute—they would be bound to be treated as conscripts.
    I think we are entitled to ask, on behalf of my hon. Friends on these benches, under what authority that was done and what was the Act of Parliament under which they did it. They had no statutory authority with regard to compulsory service. Who authorised it? Was it by Order in Council, and, if so, when was it issued? It seems to me that this action was completely outside the law, and really what we are being asked to do in passing this Amendment is to whitewash a completely unconstitutional and illegitimate action by the Executive—and this in face of the repeated pledges, not only to this House, but directly to the electorate. I should like to draw attention to one particular announcement by the
    618
    Prime Minister himself, direct to the electorate, in respect to national service. This is a verbatim report, in the London "Times" of 24th January, of the broadcast made by the Prime Minister over the wireless on the night of 23rd January from Downing Street, and I take this one passage from that speech:
    "One last point I want to emphasise. Ours is a voluntary scheme. Our call is for voluntary effort, and for voluntary effort alone. There are some who sincerely believe that a compulsory scheme would be more effective, but compulsion is not in accordance with the democratic system under which we live or consistent with the traditions of freedom which we have always striven to maintain."
    That is 23rd January—the Prime Minister stating, in his general broadcast to all the electors in the country that compulsion is inconsistent with democracy, is inconsistent "with the traditions of freedom which we have always striven to maintain;" and then, 12 weeks from that, the Executive issuing the unauthorised broadcast statement to the whole of the young men in the country that unless they enlist voluntarily by a certain date, they will be conscripts. We are being asked to-night to whitewash that unauthorised, unconstitutional action of the Executive, and I claim that we ought to have the support of all sections in this House, of whatever party, against this action. Certainly whoever votes against this Amendment tonight ought to be ready to explain to the young men in his constituency—[An HON. MEMBER: "We are!"]—how it is that they were to be treated as conscripts from 27th April when there was no law in the land to make them such. There is not at this moment, and there will not be until the Royal Assent is given to the Bill and it becomes an Act of Parliament. We are, therefore, perfectly entitled to submit that not one of these young men can be regarded as liable to compulsory military service in the terms of this Bill until it has passed through all the phases of its Parliamentary procedure and received the Royal Assent.
    10.41 p.m.
    Mr. Mander: I should like to support the Amendment because we are faced to-night with really a demand for an act of indemnity for the Government having performed an entirely unconstitutional and illegal act. It is, I suppose, on a par, although the circumstances were

    619
    more excuseable, with the loan to Czechoslovakia and other things of that kind. At the same time, the proceedings in which we are engaged to-night are quite farcical, for no opportunity is being given for Parliament to function in the ordinary way, and it is difficult for us to give proper attention to the questions before us. I want to put a specific point to the Secretary of State. I find in my constituency that certain young persons who will be affected by this Bill were actually engaged on the date in question upon examinations which made it impossible for them to enlist or to take notice of the various instructions that were given to them on the wireless. I have no doubt there are other cases of that kind where people could not go and enlist although they would have been glad to do so had they had the opportunity. I should like to know how cases of that kind are to be dealt with, because there is clearly a grievance that ought to be met. It is a minor point but an important one and is quite apart from the constitutional point which has been put by the right hon. Gentleman.
    10.43 p.m.
    Mr. Turton: The position under this Sub-section is different in London from that in the more distant areas of the country. The Prime Minister after Questions made the announcement that compulsory military training, which I welcomed was to be introduced, and the young men were given an opportunity until midnight to join the Territorials. In London they had that opportunity, but in my part of the country and in the more remote parts of Yorkshire they had no opportunity at all. This is a matter to which the Government might give some consideration. I cannot see that the country would lose by having an increased number of young men being given the opportunity of joining the Territorials. I understand that among those who are covered by this Bill are some who are in the schedule of reserved occupations and were not permitted by that schedule to enlist in the Territorials. Therefore, they come within the provisions of the Bill without having had any other opportunity of showing their willingness to serve their country.
    I want to go from that to another question which I would lhave liked to raise
    620
    on another Amendment but which, under the system in which we are working, I was precluded from raising, that is, the question of agriculture. The men engaged in agriculture are no whit less ready to serve their country in time of war than those in any other industry, but a great number of them are working on the system described as family farming and if they gave up their farms for six months and became militiamen they would find that their farms could not carry on at all. It would be possible for those men, by joining the Territorials, to ensure that in time of war they fought and, if necessary, died for their country; but if in time of peace they are to do this militia training it will be quite impossible for the country to get the food production which we desire and which the Minister of Agriculture is pressing for. Only last week we were told that before the 30th September a great amount of land should be ploughed up and in many parts of Yorkshire where there are family farms the farmers are saying, "How can we plough it up if our young men—
    The Chairman: The hon. Member is really getting on to another Amendment.
    Mr. Turton: Perhaps I have been occupying myself a little too much with the agricultural question, which I have not been able to raise hitherto. I would point out to the Government that it would be of advantage if either all these young men or, if necessary, those who are in reserved occupations or on work of national importance, could have the opportunity, until this Bill is passed, of enlisting in the Territorials. They could in that way serve their country while at the same time not being prevented from carrying on the work in which they are engaged.
    10.47 p.m.
    Mr. Ridley: In the opening part of his speech the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton) made a very pertinent point, and I should like to call the attention of the Committee to what may be called the Time-table of this matter. The Prime Minister made his first statement upon this subject in answer to a private notice question by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition on 26th April. It was at the end of Questions and, I suppose, it would be about 4 o'clock, so that at the maximum there were only the eight hours between

    621
    4 o'clock and midnight for information about the conscription intentions of the Government to become known. I have re-read carefully the statement then made by the Prime Minister and there is no reference in it to the provision which it is now sought to embody in the Bill and which seeks to authorise the entirely unauthorised steps which were taken by somebody between the Prime Minister's statement at 4 o'clock and later in the evening. It is very pertinent to ask the Committee to consider the serious disabilities, disadvantages and unfairnesses which a very large number of people must necessarily have suffered that evening. Not everybody possesses a wireless set or is in a position to listen, or was listening, to the 6 o'clock news.
    Mr. Alexander: Many of them would be on duty then.
    Mr. Ridley: First of all they might not be listening and then the information would not be available to them; or it might happen that someone who was listening was otherwise engaged that evening or was far from a recruiting office. In some centres some of them could immediately rush to a recruiting office whereas it would be impossible for others to get there, no matter how hard they might try. A variety of reasons might prevent them—illness, or their being engaged on night duty. I looked at the "Times" for 22nd April this afternoon in the Library. Curiously enough, the "Times" contains no reference at all to the broadcast message the night before, but it does contain from the "Times" correspondent—not the "Times" Military Correspondent, whom it has become a little dangerous to quote in this House nowadays—but the "Times" Parliamentary Correspondent, who said:
    "It is thought that men between 20 and 21 at the passing of the Bill who are already-serving in the Territorial Army will not be made liable for the period of compulsory training."
    It was, therefore, obviously in the minds of responsible newspaper correspondents in this House that night that the Government would not do anything so unfair as, by retrospective legislation, to conscript men in four or five days' time who did not enlist. I beg that the Government will see how unfair this arrangement must necessarily be to a large number of people situated in remote places, and fairness can
    622
    only be recovered by the acceptance of the Amendment.
    10.51 p.m.
    Sir Arnold Wilson: I trust that the Government will stick to their guns, or else make it eight hours earlier. These men, after all, had from 24th January, the date of the Prime Minister's appeal for voluntary service, in which to enlist. They had, therefore, plenty of time to enlist in the Territorial Army.
    10.52 p.m.
    Miss Ward: I would like to associate myself with the appeal made by the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton). I have had certain representations from the North of England on identical lines. I do not think the point is when the appeal was made for voluntary service; it is a question of the people in the South of England having a certain advantage over people in far distant parts of the country. I understand certain notices appeared in the papers in the South of England which were not in the papers in the North of England, and I do think, in view of the country's magnificent response to this proposal of the Government, that where there is any unfairness or any grievance we should, if we can, try to remedy it. I hope, therefore, that my right hon. Friend will find a way out of the difficulty, though I appreciate that it may not be very easy to do so.
    10.53 p.m.
    Mr. Attlee: There is one other point. It is the fact that it is reported very widely that numbers of men who went to join up were unable to join up, not because they came late, or did not listen, or were indifferent, but because the machinery broke down. There were no forms, and they were sent away because they simply could not be taken on. I have not the same indifference to injustice as the hon. Member for Hitchin (Sir A. Wilson), and I do not think we ought to draw a line between one lot of people and another. People who were engaged in serving the country, and who were not sitting over the fire, listening to the wireless, were put in a difficult position, and people in distant parts of the country also, and I certainly think this is a case where there should be reconsideration.
    10.54 p.m.
    Sir R. W. Smith: It has already been pointed out that this was very unfair to

    623
    people in distant parts of the country. But there is also the question of those who had offered to serve their country and whose names had been accepted; they were put in an unfortunate position. They did not know what was going to be in the Bill. I refer particularly to the men of the Royal Naval Volunteer Special Reserve. They had entered into a contract to serve their country, they have been medically examined, and interviewed, and, on being accepted for that Reserve, had said that they would not enlist in any other branch of the Services. These men had no chance of knowing that they would not be covered by the Bill. The statement made on the wireless said that they had to enlist before 12 o'clock. At that time we did not know what was in the Bill and these men could not know whether they were or were not exempt. It is hardly fair that they should be caught up in this manner.
    10.56 p.m.
    Mr. Silverman: I have here a letter which gives one practical case which is, I think, in line with the principles of the Amendment, and it might usefully be put on record. I am going to read it, and shall make no comment upon it but I invite the right hon. Gentleman to make any comment upon it that he thinks fair. I hope that I have the permission of the Committee to do that. The letter says:
    "Following our conversation on the phone last Thursday, here are the points of my grievance as briefly as possible.
    On 19th April"—
    a week before there was any announcement of conscription at all—
    "I handed in my completed application form to the Honourable Artillery Company, and I was definitely told:

    (1) That there were plenty of vacancies.

    (2) That there was no doubt whatever of my getting into the Regiment, providing that I fulfilled the usual personal and medical requirements.

    (3) That I should hear from them during the following week, but that if I did not there would be no need to worry.

    Obeying their instructions, I waited without hearing any further hews until 4th May, when I received the accompanying note. dated 29th April, and posted 3rd May. The note said:
    'Dear Sir,
    I am directed to inform you that the active list of this Regiment is now full and recruiting completely closed.
    In these circumstances I am to thank you for your application and express regret
    624
    that it is not possible to offer you a vacancy.
    I may mention that candidates for the last hundred vacancies have had to be selected from many hundreds of applications.
    Yours faithfully—'"
    Here follows the signature of the secretary of the regiment. The letter goes on:
    "On their own declaration, the H.A.C. selected the last hundred candidates from 'many hundreds of applications,' and they also admit having posted 500 similar notes to the one which I received. Therefore, in spite of the fact that they gave ample assurance of vacancies they must have known that they could not accept more than one-fifth of the people to whom they gave that assurance. By doing so they have kept many hundreds of volunteers from joining other units of the Territorial Army, and now, those who volunteered a week before the Military Training Bill was introduced are in a position to be conscripted, whilst those who, under threat of compulsion, rushed in at five minutes to midnight on 26th April are to be exempted. The fact that we who volunteered on 19th April had not been sworn in before the Bill was introduced is hardly any fault of ours, since we were willing, but the Army, in spite of its call for recruits, was not ready to accept our oaths. If recruits are really needed so urgently, then it has been a criminal waste of time. Is it fair that we, who willingly offered our services, should now be penalised for not having taken the oath which we were prevented from taking by those who themselves demand it, and who are imposing conscription as a penalty on the. 'unwilling' whilst the 'willing' who joined under last-minute pressure are commended and free?
    I am ready and willing to do my share by serving a period of years in the Territorials, but it is of vital importance to me that I should not be conscripted for a continuous period of six months—even so I should not complain if there had been no exemption of the later arrivals. Actually for the last 18 months, I have, with Mr. Hemmerde's help and approval, been trying to change my position, and now, if I am to be called away for six months in a few months' time who could be expected even to consider employing me?
    I don't know whether it is possible to ask a question in the House on this point, but the War Office, from outside observation, seem to have been very evasive. Anyway, I am deeply grateful"—
    I need not read the last sentence. That does not matter. The writer signs it and gives his name.
    Here is an actual case. I make no comment on it except to ask the War Secretary whether the state of affairs which put this man in this position is fair, and whether he ought not to meet the position, thus created?
    11.1 p.m.
    Sir Joseph Nall: The letter which the hon. Member has just read may well be a subject for administrative action as to whether these men have in fact bona fide attempted to join the Territorials or not, but surely it does not strike in any way at the fundamental point under discussion. I should like to inform my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin (Sir A. Wilson) that, if any change is to be made to secure a more fair application of the provision, it can only be done by further ante-dating, and not by postponing, the age. I would make one observation on the letter which has just been read. The hon. Member said, I think, that it was dated 4th May—
    Mr. Silverman: I do not know to what date the hon. Member refers, but the writer of this letter made his application to join on 19th April, a week before there was any suggestion of conscription.
    Mr. Ede: When the Government were opposing conscription.
    Sir J. Nall: It is rather curious that it is only brought to the attention of the House on 10th May.
    11.2 p.m.
    Mr. Poole: The idea underlying the whole position is not the idea which the hon. Member for Hulme (Sir J. Nall) has just expressed, but the idea that hundreds of thousands of young men were foolish enough to believe that the Government, when they said a thing, really meant it, and now they find themselves in this unfortunate position. The Secretary of State for War dare not accept this Amendment, because he dare not have put on his hands between now and the passing of the Act the number of men who would join the Territorial Army, and with whom he is not in a position to do anything for want of the necessary machinery and equipment. The Amendment would place him in an impossible position. But I think it should go on record that the men have trusted the Government, have trusted the word of Ministers of the Government, foolishly, and, because of that, they find themselves in this position.
    11.3 p.m.
    Lieut.-Commander Agnew: I think that this point calls for some reconsideration by the Secretary of State. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin
    626
    (Sir A. Wilson) that, if fairness is desired as between one young man and another who is likely to be called up under the Bill, the right thing to do would be to see that the very limited number of people who got knowledge over the wireless in rather an irregular fashion that they were going to be immune if they joined up before midnight, are not left with an advantage over all the rest of the young members of the public who will be affected by the Bill.
    Mr. Mathers: May I ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman how he comes to describe this message over the wireless as irregular? Is he not aware that it was circulated on the instructions of the War Office?
    Lieut.-Commander Agnew: No, I am not aware that it was circulated on instructions from the War Office. I should have thought that if an official announcement was going to be made, it would have been made by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons in the afternoon, so that the evening papers could have given publicity to it and all Members of the House could have known about it and have informed their faraway constituents about it. While it would be contrary to the public interest—which must be paramount—to accept the Amendment, the fairest thing to do would be to bring forward another Amendment at a later date, which would ante-date this by one day more, so that there would be no advantage to be gained by any section.
    11.6 p.m.
    Mr. Gallacher: I had no intention of saying anything in connection with this Amendment, although it had my full support, until I heard the hon. Member for Hitchin (Sir A. Wilson), and then I got, in a flash, an idea of the dreadful fate that might await some of these young lads. I felt it my duty then to make a special appeal to the Minister to give many more of these lads an opportunity of escaping from what is going to be control by some of the older officers of the Regular Army. We have been told continually that some of the older officers of the Regular Army would be used for training these conscripts. When you look around and see some of the older officers of the Regular Army, all you can say is, "God help these conscripts." A

    627
    man mentioned to me the other day that his son had come of age a few days ago and had joined the Territorials—a certain branch, because of a special interest he had; there is no need to describe that interest. I did not hear the broadcast that has been referred to. I very seldom listen to broadcasts; I have little opportunity, and less desire. Many of these people did not hear it either, and the man I was speaking to thought that because his lad had joined the Territorials—with no intention of dodging anything—that lad was free from compulsory service.
    I could have given the right hon. Member for Hillsborough (Mr. Alexander) a lot of language to describe this Clause, and the fact that the Government are going to use the Guillotine to justify what has been called by the hon. and gallant Member opposite an irregular statement—an irregular statement which produced a situation of which advantage could be taken by those convenient to the recruiting stations. Go to the Highlands and islands and see what chance they had of getting information; it would be three or four days before they could. It is a scandalous position which has been indicated by the statement that the Minister would be unable to accept the Amendment because he would be unable to cope with the effects. Any Member who votes for the Clause as it is will be voting for the justification of an unconstitutional act, which will give advantages to one as against another. The Prime Minister said that the one thing about this Bill—the fundamental principle in connection with the Bill—was that there could never, at any time, be any question of its fairness as between one and the other. Every Member on the benches opposite applauded that statement. I guarantee that the hon. Member for Hitchin applauded it. But everything had to be fair as between one another. If the Minister is prepared to carry out that pledge of the Prime Minister he must accept this Amendment. If he accepts the Amendment, there will be a rush into the Territorials, because there is less chance in the Territorials of coming under the control of the old have-beens of the Regular Army. There will be a rush into the Territorials and there will be no one left for "Belisha's Militia,"
    628
    and that is what the Secretary of State for War is concerned about.
    11.12 p.m.
    Mr. Anstruther-Gray: I feel that the Committee are making too much of this point. If this scheme is properly worked, these men should not only have a period of training, but also a very healthy and enjoyable six months.
    Mr. C. Brown: Holidays with pay.
    Mr. Anstruther-Gray: I am sure from what I have heard of the Regular soldiers who are going to have anything to do with the scheme, that they are going to do their best to make it good fun as well as good training.
    Mr. Garro Jones: Presumably there has been some restriction placed upon recruiting pending the passage of this Bill, but the Bill applies only to people between the ages of 20 and 21. When the Bill has actually passed can the Minister say exactly where the portcullis has fallen in the recruiting offices, and the precise ages? A considerable number of men are involved according to the way it has dropped.
    11.14 p.m.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: The Section of the Bill we are discussing exempts certain classes of persons from liability to do six months' military training and a subsequent period of 3½ pears. Every male British subject between 20 and 21 is liable to those periods of service—the six months followed by 3½ years. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made his announcement on 26th April that every male person would be liable between the ages of 20 and 21 to do the service that I have described.
    Mr. Alexander: It is not making them all.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I am not suggesting it. My right hon. Friend said that a Bill would be introduced particularly for the purpose of giving effect to that announcement, and it is the Bill that we are now discussing.
    Mr. Alexander: An indemnity Bill.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: The right hon. Gentleman presumably wishes me to reply?
    Mr. Alexander: I do.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that irritation is very bad for the health, and he might, at any rate, listen to what I say. The Prime Minister made that statement and said that a Bill would be introduced. This is the Bill. Obviously, after he had made that announcement persons desired to know whether or not if they had done service in the Regular or the Territorial Army they would be exempt. Inquiries were made at the War Office and an answer was given, and it is that answer which I trust will be confirmed by Parliament when this Bill has passed into law, namely, that anyone who had entered one of the Services before that announcement would be exempt, provided he had completed his service. That is what is provided for in this Bill, with this tolerance, in excess of that announcement, that if he had been accepted, although he had not actually entered but subsequently complied with any directions, he would be considered as a person who had enlisted or engaged in a given Service.
    The hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Silverman) recited a case which must obviously have appealed to the sympathy of the House—a case which justice requires should be settled upon lines which give effect to the spirit if not the letter of the proposal. Here was a man who before my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made the announcement had applied for entry into the Honourable Artillery Company, a unit which is notoriously popular and which had at that time, and still has, a very long waiting list. That unit after the announcement was made notified the applicant that they had no vacancy. The War Office, well before this Bill was introduced, had made an attempt to deal with that kind of case and had printed a card which was to be given to the applicant, to certify that he had in fact agreed to serve in the Territorial Army, although there was no vacancy for him at the particular moment. The proviso, and the next Sub-section of this Clause which we are now discussing are intended to cover that case. That is to say, it is intended to cover a person who had been accepted for service but for whom there was no vacancy. It is evident that in a case such as that cited, the procedure I have described, and which was intended to protect persons who even before the introduction of this Bill applied to units such
    630
    as the Honourable Artillery Company. A case such as was mentioned by the hon. Member as a matter of common equity, is covered by the Sub-section which follows this one, and I can assure the hon. Member that his correspondent will in no way suffer because he did not receive one of these cards. That was our intention. I am very glad the hon. Member has called attention to this particular case.
    Most of the arguments which have been adduced to-night are based upon the assumption that some ignominy or stigma Attachés to doing service under this Bill. That is not the case. The State has laid it down that it is advisable that for its protection every person between 20 and 21 should be trained in arms to defend that community. The majority of these men would doubtless have done that as volunteers, but not under a regulated system such as we are now imposing. It is desirable that every person between 20 and 21 should receive military training. There is no stigma attaching to that, no ignomony, and the ordinary person does not want to find a way of escaping from this Bill. If he has done before the announcement was made, or has endeavoured to do some service which is parallel to this he should be exempted, because in any new system a date must be fixed for commencing. Accordingly we say that if such a person as would come under this Bill has served or is serving in the Regular Army a period of training comparable to that provided for in the Bill he shall be exempt, or if that person has been accepted for the Territorial Army he shall also be exempt, provided he complies with any directions given to him so that he shall complete that service. He cannot just enter and then obtain his discharge in a few weeks or months, he must complete the service.
    I hope I have explained to the Committee that no injustice has been intended or has been done to anybody. You have to begin on a certain date and as when the Chancellor of the Exchequer announces his taxation you cannot evade it, so when the Prime Minister announced this proposal it operated from that date, subject of course to Parliament endorsing it, as is done in the case of the Finance Act to taxation.
    Mr. Alexander: If that is so why did not the Prime Minister say so when he made his preliminary announcement?

    631
    The Secretary of State for War has quoted the precedent of taxation. No taxes operate until the Chancellor of the Exchequer opens his Budget and the House immediately proceeds to pass the Budget Resolutions. The cases are not comparable. The country was never notified of any date.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: As I have said there must be a date for the commencement of any scheme, but for this Sub-section anybody would be liable whether he had entered the Territorial Army or not. What we are doing is to exempt a certain number. We are not dragging a certain number in, but leaving out a certain number of persons who would otherwise be in. That is the purpose of the Clause, and I think it will operate fairly in excluding from it those who have legitimate claims to be excluded, bearing in mind that it is our desire, as I hope it is the desire of the country, that as many persons as possible between these ages should be effectively trained in arms.
    Mr. Arthur Henderson: The right hon. Gentleman has said that the case mentioned by the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Silverman) is a case which should be treated under the rule of equity; and that the person would presumably be entitled to the benefit of having applied before the appointed day. Will the right hon. Gentleman explain, to the Committee how he proposes to bring the person in question within the limits of Subsection (2), which applies to a person who has actually been accepted for service in one of His Majesty's reserves or auxiliary forces? The complaint was that he had not been accepted into the H.A.C., and, therefore, that he would not come within the Sub-section.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: The answer to that is quite simple. As I said, we had provided a card, or form, which certified that the man had agreed to serve when he was called up when the vacancy occurred; that is to say, he had been accepted, but could not be admitted. What I should propose to do in the case mentioned would be to ask the Honourable Artillery Company whether the facts as stated in regard to this particular man are correct, and if so, whether they will give this card, which, of course, they will, if the facts are true. In such a case, the man will
    632
    be deemed to have been accepted under this Clause.
    Mr. Attlee: I have put a point to the right hon. Gentleman and he has not dealt with it. The fact is that there is no proof, because the system of cards broke down. These people tried to join and the card system broke down, and numbers of people who went out to join were turned away. The right hon. Gentleman cannot get off on the plea that people do not object to being conscripted. The Prime Minister's own statement was a perfectly clear statement of what the position in the country was. There is a feeling that it is better to be a volunteer than a conscript. Therefore, these men who actually volunteered have a right, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman how he is going to deal with that right.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I have dealt with it in spirit. I can only say that if there are any cases in which, as the right hon. Gentleman says, the system of cards broke down, I shall endeavour to cover them. I believe I can cover them by the method I have already described to the Committee, but that I intend to cover them, so that no such grievance shall remain, the right hon. Gentleman may accept. I will do my best to see that all such people are covered in the way I have described. I realise that I have omitted to answer one of the points mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton). It is a fact that there were persons on the Schedule of Reserved Occupations who could not in the past have joined the Territorial Army. Of course, if they are on that Schedule they cannot have been trained, and it is the purpose of this Bill to give everybody the training. Similarly, I recognise the case of a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Central Aberdeen (Sir R. W. Smith), who belongs to a service in which no training is provided. I think the hon. Member has written to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour about that case, which is now being investigated. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition that if there is any case in which the card system broke down, I shall endeavour to cover it either administratively or, if necessary, by introducing an Amendment on the Report stage.
    Mr. Attlee: It is very important that we should have this point cleared up. The

    633
    right hon. Gentleman says that he will deal with such cases administratively. Suppose that he cannot get any evidence. He says that he is going to ask the unit, and if they can give evidence that the man really did join, then it will apply. As a matter of fact, a number of the people were simply turned away and nothing taken from them, because the machinery broke down. Surely, he cannot meet the point in that way, and the only thing is to change the date.
    Sir Stafford Cripps: Is the right hon. Gentleman really suggesting to the Committee that he is going to ask a responsible member of the Honourable Artillery Company to make a statement which is clearly untrue; that is, that this man was accepted for service before a certain date, when admittedly he was not? Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to try to evade the section of his own Bill by suborning to falsehood some member of the Honourable Artillery Company staff?
    Major Milner Major Milner rose—
    Hon. Members: Answer.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I hope the Committee does not think that I do not wish to answer the hon. and learned Gentleman, but one of his own supporters had risen to speak. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] I do not think I have the reputation of being afraid to answer questions, even when they are put by the hon. and learned Gentleman in his best Old Bailey manner.
    An Hon. Member: Play the game.
    Mr. Davidson: His Old Bailey manner may help you some day.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I think the suggestion contained in an interruption by one of the hon. Members behind the hon. and learned Gentleman might have been intended for the hon. and learned Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps) himself. He asks me whether I really intended to be guilty of subornation of falsehood. If a question of that kind had been put
    to any of the hon. Gentlemen opposite, perhaps they would have made an equal noise but from different motives. I do not intend, if I can avoid it, to be guilty of subornation of falsehood. I intend to deal with the matter, as I have said, either within the powers that already exist, if the case is appropriate to such powers, or with such powers as are given under this Bill if they are appropriate or at least prospectively appropriate or else on the Report stage, as I have said, I will introduce an Amendment which will enable me to do that.
    Major Milner: Is the Committee to understand that anyone who has applied may be given exemption, provided he has applied before the appropriate date? The difficulty arises here from the fact that the Sub-section uses the word "accepted" and the right hon. Gentleman also used the word "accepted." If we are to understand that anyone who has applied before that date may have exemption, the position may be met to some extent. Even though the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hillsborough (Mr. Alexander) has not been met, it would be a help if the right hon. Gentleman would say that anyone who applied before that date may receive exemption.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: The hardship is not as great as is imagined, because if anybody applied to the Honourable Artillery Company or any of the other units which are known to have very long waiting lists, he must have been aware all along that he could have joined one of the units in which there were vacancies. Nevertheless, I said that in such a case, where a bona fide application was made, indicating the man's intention to enlist, I will try to cover it in one way or another, in one of the alternative ways that I have mentioned.
    Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 225; Noes, 144.

    Division No. 110.]

    AYES.

    [11.36 p.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P G.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Baillie, Sir A. W. M.

    Bernays, R. H.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Balniel, Lord

    Bossom, A. C.

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Baxter, A. Beverley

    Boulton, W. W.

    Boyce, H. Leslie

    Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.

    Petherick, M.

    Bracken, B.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Pickthorn, K. W. M.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Hannah, I. C.

    Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Asshaton

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Radford, E. A.

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Raikes, H. V. A. M.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-

    Ramsden, Sir E.

    Brown, Brig-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Hepworth, J.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Bull, B. B.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Bullock, Capt. M.

    Higgs, W. F.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Reid, J. S. C.(Hillhead)

    Butcher, H. W.

    Holmes, J. S.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Cartland, J. R. H.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Cary, R. A.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Rowlands, G.

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Hunter, T.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Hutchinson, G. C.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Salt, E. W.

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Sandys, E. D.

    Colman, N. C. D.

    Keeling, E. H.

    Scott, Lord William

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Selley, H. R.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs)

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Latham, Sir P.

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Critchley, A.

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.

    Crossley, A. C.

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Levy, T.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Liddall, W. S.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Lindsay, K. M.

    Somerset, T.

    Davidson, Viscountess

    Lipson, D. L.

    Somervell, Rt. Hon. Sir Donald

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'ld)

    Denville, Alfred

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)

    Doland, G. F.

    Lloyd, G. W.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Donner, P. W.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Lyons, A. M.

    Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h)

    Dugdale, Captain T. L.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Duggan, H. J.

    McCorquodale, M. S.

    Tasker, Sir R. I.

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Tata, Mavis C.

    Dunglass, Lord

    McKie, J. H.

    Thomas, J. P. L.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Magnay, T

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Edmondson, Major Sir J.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Markham, S. F.

    Titchfield, Marauess of

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Touche, G. C.

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Walker-Smith, Sir J.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Fildes, Sir H.

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Fleming, E. L.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Fremantle, Sir F. E.

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Furness, S. N.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Gledhill, G.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

    Goldie, N. B.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)

    Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    York, C.

    Grimston, R. V.

    Patrick, C. M.

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Peake, O.

    Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Guinness, T. L. E. B.

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Lieut.-Colonel Kerr and Mr. Munro.

    NOES.

    Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)

    Batey, J.

    Cove, W. G.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Bellenger, F. J.

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Daggar, G.

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Broad, F. A.

    Dalton, H.

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Bromfield, W.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Ammon, C. G.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)

    Buchanan, G.

    Day, H.

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Cape, T.

    Dobbie, W.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    Barnes, A. J.

    Chater, D.

    Ede, J. C.

    Barr, J.

    Cocks, F. S.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    Bartlett, C. V. O.

    Collindridge, F.

    Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)

    636

    637

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    Lathan, G.

    Ritson, J.

    Foot, D. M.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Frankel, D.

    Leach, W.

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Gallacher, W.

    Leonard, W.

    Sexten, T. M.

    Gardner, B. W

    Leslie, J. R.

    Shinwell, E.

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Logan, D. G.

    Silkin, L.

    George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)

    Lunn, W.

    Silverman, S. S.

    George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Simpson, F. B.

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Sloan, A.

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    McGhee, H. G.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    McGovern, J.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Grenfell, D. R.

    MacLaren, A.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Griffiths, G. A. (Llanelly)

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    Mander, G. le M.

    Stephen, C.

    Groves, T. E.

    Marshall, F.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    Maxton, J.

    Stokes, R. R.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Milner, Major J.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Montague, F.

    Thurtle, E.

    Harris, Sir P. A.

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Tinker, J. J.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, s.)

    Tomlinson, G.

    Hayday, A.

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Turton, R. H.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Nathan, Colonel H. L.

    Viant, S. P.

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Naylor, T. E.

    Walkden, A. G.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Watkins, F. C.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Oliver, G. H.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Paling, W.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Hollins, A.

    Parker, J.

    Westwood, J.

    Hopkin, D.

    Parkinson, J. A.

    White, H. Graham

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Pearson, A.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Poole, C. C.

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Price, M. P.

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth)

    Pritt, D. N.

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Kirby, B. V.

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Kirkwood, D.

    Ridley, G.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Riley, B

    Mr. Mathers and Mr. Adamson.

    11.44 p.m.
    Mr. Parker: I beg to move, in page 3, line 37, to leave out from "forces," to the end of line 40.
    When the Prime Minister made his statement in favour of conscription he stated that the proposal of the Government was a great democratic Measure intended to treat the sons of rich and poor alike. The son of the duke and the son of the dustman would receive the same amount of money and go through the same period of training. If this is a democratic Measure, as the Government claim, why should not the future officers of the Army and the Air Force undergo this training? If, as an hon. Member opposite said just now, it will be a healthy and enjoyable six months, why should not those who are to go to Sandhurst or Woolwich or Cranbrook also do this six months' training before they start the course in those colleges? It might mean that they would have to postpone for six months their entry into the military college, or it might be arranged that this period of six months' training might count as part of the service they did at college. Such an arrangement could be fixed up by the military advisers of the Government.
    638
    I see no reason why some people should not do their military training at a little earlier age, say at 18, instead of 20. At the present time most conscripts join the French Army at the age of 18, though many go in at a later age. I have a cousin doing service in the French Army who joined at the age of 27, because he had had exemption till then owing to the training he was going through. In France people are doing their military service at all ages, though the great mass are aged about 18 to 20 when they join. We shall have people of different ages in our own conscript Army, because under an Amendment already passed we shall allow a certain number of people to postpone doing their training for a year or two on account of being apprenticed to a trade or being at a university. Surely there is no reason why some people should not do their training earlier. Personally, I think it would be very much to the advantage of the British Army and the Royal Air Force if the officers of those Services had been in the ranks for at least six months and had done the same military training as everybody else. I ask the Government why they cannot make an arrangement of that kind. If they mean anything at all when they talk about the desirability of having what they call a great democratic Service there

    639
    should be no exceptions and everybody who is to become an officer in the Army or the Air Force should do this training. I, therefore, hope that the Government will be able to accept the Amendment.
    11.48 p.m.
    Mr. Ritson: I have great pleasure in supporting this Amendment. Over and over again I have heard people say, "If only we could get rid of class hatred what a wonderful new world we should have," but the first principle of this Bill—and it is sticking out of it like a man's toes sticking through his stockings—is class hatred of the very worst type. As my hon. friend the member for Romford (Mr. Parker) has said, this ought to give a splendid opportunity to these young men, highly educated and facing a career, to come in with the new conscripts and start from where the Government intended they should start. Surely there is nothing wrong in that. Our young lads can teach them what real life is. They will teach them fortitude and character and give them a new outlook on life. I will not say more because I want to give the Minister time to say that he will accept the Amendment. When the Minister was in opposition and was looking for a job on the side of the House where he now sits nobody showed greater agility in jumping from here to there. It was the same with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Both were very alive and active and determined to arrive at their goal. I can assure him that there is nothing better he could do than to accept this Amendment. It would do these young men good. The manners of the working-class boys would be better and they would be higher in stature, mentally and physically. You are building a new structure. By putting in these young men, to whom I have no objection, you will be improving their careers. They might as well begin early. Let them get into touch with the hard-headed men of the North, and these will, in turn, learn to understand the fine mannerisms of the South. This will make them officers in the true sense of the word. We are up against class distinction of the very worst kind. I hope the Minister will accept this Amendment.
    11.52 p.m.
    The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Sir Victor Warrender): The Com-
    640
    mittee will, of course, realise that the primary object of the Bill is to provide a short period of training for all men between the ages of 20 and 21. If the Amendment were carried it would exclude from the exempted classes and render liable to military training all boys who go into the military colleges and Sandhurst, Woolwich and elsewhere. In those colleges they will have an intensive period of training before going on to join the various Services with permanent commissions. I do not quarrel with much that the hon. Member said who spoke last, but I can tell the Committee this: if it were not for the fact that this Bill is of a temporary character we should be considering at this moment in the War Office reorganising the courses at Sandhurst and Woolwich so that cadets going to those colleges could do six months' training before they went in.
    The Committee realises that that would involve upsetting the present arrangements and that it would take a little time to do. In this case we are applying the same system to those who go to cadet colleges for permanent commissions as we are to those serving in the ranks. It has already been laid down that the man who has enlisted in the Army and has done at least six months' service shall be exempt, but the boy who comes to a military college will, if he stays there for a normal time, do much more than six months' training. If through his own fault or for any reason, he leaves the cadet college before he has completed his training there, or before he has reached the age of 21, he will still remain liable for his six months' training, and would not be exempt by reason of the fact that he had served a short period in the college. We are treating the two categories in exactly the same way. Therefore, I hope that the Committee will agree that this is not an Amendment that we could accept.
    Mr. Davidson: You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
    11.54 p.m.
    Mr. Ellis Smith: The speech to which we have just listened provides us with a key to the understanding of the class government by which this country is governed. My tight hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood) moved an Amendment about two hours ago with

    641
    the object of postponing the liability of men undergoing a term of apprenticeship. Here is a good example of the class legislation which this National Conservative Government have been pursuing since 1931. This kind of attitude is responsible for placing this country in jeopardy and in its present very serious international position. I hope that the country will be aware of the treatment accorded to our Amendment to give the sons of our people an opportunity of continuing their education and carrying on their technical development to equip them to become the skilled craftsmen which this country will need if it is to hold its own in the international situation; while, on the other hand, the rich sons of rich people are allowed to carry on with their education at the cost of this country.
    11.56 p.m.
    Mr. Amery: I want to ask only one question. Is there anything in the Bill which would preclude the War Office reconsidering the courses at the military colleges in the next few months and enabling the colleges to prescribe that no one can go to the college who has not fulfilled six months' normal Militia training as well as having passed the necessary examinations? I entirely agree that that would be based on the assumption that the Militia system now introduced is to be permanent, but is there anyone here who doubts that that is so?
    11.57 p.m.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: There is nothing in the Bill which would prohibit that. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent (Mr. E. Smith) suggested that we are trying to draw some distinction between the rich and the poor.
    Mr. Gallacher: Not trying to.
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: I hope he realises that the Government have now opened Sandhurst and Woolwich to anyone who has the necessary qualifications—
    Mr. S. O. Davies:—and the necessary money—
    Mr. Hore-Belisha: Quite irrespective of means. For the first time it has now been made possible for anyone to receive an education at Sandhurst or Woolwich who has the higher educational school certificate and 100 per cent. of the candidates can receive 100 per cent. of the cost, and a maintenance scheme and pocket money in addition.
    11.58 p.m.
    Major Milner: The Financial Secretary drew an analogy between the man in the Regular Army and the cadet at the military college. Am I not right in saying that the man serving in the ranks of the Regular Army has to serve six months after reaching the age of 17 years in order to be exempt, while the cadet need not have served any time at all, and might even be entered for the college between now and the passing of the Bill? Therefore, it would be possible for anyone to enter his son now at any of the colleges to receive exemption.
    Sir V. Warrender: I thought I had made that point clear. The mere entry of a boy for a cadet college would not exempt him. Nor, indeed, is he exempt if he goes. He is exempt only if he completes, and passes on to the Army. If, for any reason, he leaves the college, either through his own fault or not, and is below the age of 21, he still remains liable for compulsory service.
    Major Milner: Is it not true that as a cadet can be entered now and may undergo his training as from to-morrow he may be exempt, because exemption is operative in this case only from the passing of the Bill?
    Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 237; Noes, 133.

    Division No. 111.]

    AYES.

    [12.1 a.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Baillie, Sir A. W. M.

    Bracken, B.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Balniel, Lord

    Brass, Sir W.

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Baxter, A. Beverley

    Briscoe, Capt. R. G.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm' h)

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Bernays, R. H.

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Apsley, Lord

    Bossom, A. C.

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Boulton, W. W.

    Bull, B. B.

    Assheton, R.

    Boyce, H. Leslie

    Bullock, Capt. M.

    Burghley, Lord

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Pickthorn, K. W. M

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Radford, E. A.

    Butcher, H. W.

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Bushan-

    Raikes, H. V. A. M.

    Cartland, J. R. H.

    Hepworth, J.

    Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Herbert, A. P. (Oxford U.)

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Cary, R. A.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    Higgs, W. F.

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Gayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Holmes, J. S.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Chapman, A- (Rutherglen)

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    Rowlands, G.

    Colman, N. C. D.

    Hunter, T.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Hutchinson, G. C.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs)

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. HI. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Salt, E. W.

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Keeling, E. H.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Critchley, A.

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Scott, Lord William

    Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Selley, H. R.

    Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Crossley, A. C.

    Latham, Sir P.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Crowder, J F. E.

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Leighton, Major B. E. P.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Davidson, Viscountess

    Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.

    Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Levy, T.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Denville, Alfred

    Liddall, W. S.

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Doland, G. F.

    Lipson, D. L.

    Somerset, T.

    Donner, P. W.

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Somervell, Rt. Hon. Sir Donald

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.

    Duggan, H. J.

    Lloyd, G. W.

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Dunglass, Lord

    Lyons, A. M.

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Eckersley, P. T.

    McCorquodale, M. S.

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Edmondson, Major Sir J.

    Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Thomas, J. P. L.

    Ellis, Sir G.

    McKie, J. H.

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Magnay, T.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Errington, E.

    Markham, S. F.

    Touche, G. C.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Turton, R. H.

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Walker-Smith, Sir J.

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Medlicott, F.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Fremantle, Sir F. E.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Furness, S. N.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Gledhill, G.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Giuckstein, L. H.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Watt, Lt.-Col. G. S. Harvie

    Goldie, N. B.

    Morrison, G. A. (Soottish Univ's.)

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Grant-Ferris, Flight-Lieutenant R.

    Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)

    Munro, P.

    Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)

    Grimston, R. V.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Guinness, T. L. E. B.

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    York, C.

    Hambro, A. V.

    Patrick, C. M.

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Hannah, I. C.

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)

    Petherick, M.

    Lieut.-Colonel Kerr and Captain Dugdale.

    NOES.

    Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Day, H.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Bromfield, W.

    Debbie, W.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Buchanan, G.

    Ede, J. C.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Cape, T.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Charleton, H. C.

    Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)

    Ammon, C. G.

    Chater, D.

    Foot, D. M.

    Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)

    Cocks, F. S.

    Frankel, D.

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Collindridge, F.

    Gallacher, W.

    Banfield, J. W.

    Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Gardner, B. W.

    Barnes, A. J.

    Dagger, G.

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Bartlett, C. V. O.

    Dalton, H.

    George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)

    Batey, J.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Bellenger, F. J.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    644

    645

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    McGhee, H. G.

    Shinwell, E.

    Grenfell, D. R

    McGovern, J.

    Silkin, L.

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    MacLaren, A.

    Silverman, S. S.

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Simpson, F. B.

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    Mander, G. le M.

    Sloan, A.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Marshall, F.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Hall, J. H. (Whiteshapel)

    Maxton, J.

    Smith, E. (Stoke)

    Harris, Sir P. A.

    Milner, Major J.

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Hayday, A.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Haskney S.)

    Stephen, C.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Nathan, Colonel H. L.

    Stokes, R. R.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Naylor, T. E.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Hicks, E. G.

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Thurtle, E.

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Oliver, G. H.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Hollins, A.

    Paling, W.

    Tomlinson, G.

    Hopkin, D.

    Parker, J.

    Viant, S. P.

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Watkins, F. C.

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Pearson, A.

    Watson, W. McL.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Poole, C. C.

    Westwood, J.

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Price, M. P.

    White, H. Graham

    Kirby, B. V.

    Pritt, D. N.

    Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)

    Kirkwood, D.

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Lawson, J. J.

    Ridley, G.

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Leach, W.

    Riley, B.

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Leonard, W.

    Ritson, J.

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Logan, D. G.

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Lunn, W.

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Macdonald, G. (Ince) McEntee, V. La T.

    Sexton, T. M.

    Mr. Mathers and Mr. Groves.

    It being after Midnight, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of this day, successively to put forthwith the Questions on Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given, and the Question necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded at Midnight at this day's sitting.
    Amendments made:
    In page 4, line 39, leave out "or," and insert "and."
    In page 5, line 3, after "be," insert "or would have been."
    In page 5, line 3, after "liable," insert "to be registered in the military training register or."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]
    Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 236; Noes, 125.

    Division No. 112.]

    AYES.

    [12.12 a.m.

    Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)

    Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)

    Davidson, Viscountess

    Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.

    Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)

    Denman, Hon. R. D.

    Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)

    Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.)

    Denville, Alfred

    Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.

    Bull, B. B.

    Deland, G. F.

    Albery, Sir Irving

    Bullock, Capt. M.

    Donner, P. W.

    Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)

    Burghley, Lord

    Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)

    Amery, Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S.

    Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.

    Duggan, H. J.

    Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)

    Butcher, H. W.

    Duncan, J. A. L.

    Anstruther-Gray, W. J.

    Cartland, J. R. H.

    Dunglass, Lord

    Apsley, Lord

    Carver, Major W. H.

    Eastwood, J. F.

    Aske, Sir R. W.

    Cary, R. A.

    Eckersley, P. T.

    Assheton, R.

    Castlereagh, Viscount

    Edmondson, Major Sir J.

    Baillie, Sir A. W. M.

    Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)

    Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.

    Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)

    Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)

    Ellis, Sir G.

    Balniel, Lord

    Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)

    Elliston, Capt. G. S.

    Baxter, A. Beverley

    Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)

    Emrys-Evans, P. V.

    Beauchamp, Sir B. C.

    Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)

    Entwistle, Sir C. F.

    Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)

    Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)

    Errington, E.

    Beechman, N. A.

    Colman, N. C. D.

    Evans, Capt. A. (Cardiff, S.)

    Bernays, R. H.

    Colville, Rt. Hon. John

    Everard, Sir William Lindsay

    Bird, Sir R. B.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs)

    Findlay, Sir E.

    Bottom, A. C.

    Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)

    Foot, D. M.

    Boulton, W. W.

    Cox, H. B. Trevor

    Fox, Sir G. W. G.

    Boyce, H. Leslie

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Fremantle, Sir F. E.

    Bracken, B.

    Critchley, A

    Furness, S. N.

    Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)

    Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page

    Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Brass, Sir W.

    Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.

    Gledhill, G.

    Briscoe, Capt. R. G.

    Crossley, A. C.

    Gluckstein, L. H.

    Broadbridge, Sir G. T.

    Crowder, J. F. E.

    Goldie, N. B.

    Brocklebank, Sir Edmund

    Cruddas, Col. B.

    Gower, Sir R. V.

    Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)

    Culverwell, C. T.

    Grant-Ferris, Flight-Lieutenant R.

    Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)

    Magnay, T.

    Selley, H. R.

    Gridley, Sir A. B.

    Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest

    Shakespeare, G. H.

    Grigg, Sir E. W. M.

    Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.

    Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)

    Grimston, R. V.

    Markham, S. F.

    Shepperson, Sir E. W.

    Gritten, W. G. Howard

    Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.

    Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.

    Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake)

    Maxwell, Hon. S. A.

    Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)

    Guinness, T. L. E. B.

    Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.

    Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)

    Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.

    Medlicott, F.

    Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)

    Hambro, A. V.

    Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)

    Snadden, W. McN.

    Hannah, I. C.

    Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)

    Somerset, T.

    Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)

    Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)

    Somervell, Rt. Hon. Sir Donald

    Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.

    Moreing, A. C.

    Southby, Commander Sir A. R J.

    Heneaga, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.

    Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)

    Hepburn, P. G. T. Buahan-

    Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)

    Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)

    Hepworth, J.

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)

    Strickland, Captain W. F.

    Herbert, Lt.-Col. J. A. (Monmouth)

    Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Meray and Nairn)

    Higgs, W. F.

    Munro, P.

    Tate, Mavis C.

    Hogg, Hon. Q. McG.

    Nall, Sir J.

    Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)

    Holmes, J. S.

    Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.

    Thomas, J. P. L.

    Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.

    Nicholson, G. (Farnham)

    Thomson, Sir J. D. W.

    Horsbrugh, Florence

    Nicolson, Hon. H. G.

    Thorneycroft, G. E. P.

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)

    O'Connor, Sir Terence J.

    Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.

    Hulbert, Squadron-Leader N. J.

    O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh

    Titchfield, Marquess of

    Hunter, T.

    Orr-Ewing, I. L.

    Touche, G. C.

    Hutchinson, G. C.

    Patrick, C. M.

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.

    James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.

    Perkins, W. R. D.

    Turton, R. H.

    Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)

    Peters, Dr. S. J.

    Walker-Smith, Sir J.

    Jones, L. (Swansea W.)

    Petherick, M.

    Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan

    Keeling, E. H.

    Piskthorn, K. W. M.

    Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)

    Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)

    Radford, E. A.

    Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)

    Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)

    Raikes, H. V. A. M.

    Warrender, Sir V.

    Lamb, Sir J. Q.

    Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.

    Waterhouse, Captain C.

    Lancaster, Captain C. G.

    Rankin, Sir R.

    Wells, Sir Sydney

    Latham, Sir P.

    Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)

    White, H. Graham

    Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)

    Reed, A. C. (Exeter)

    Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)

    Leech, Sir J. W.

    Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)

    Williams, C. (Torquay)

    Leighten, Major B. E. P.

    Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)

    Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)

    Levy, T.

    Reid, W. Allan (Derby)

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Liddall, W. S.

    Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)

    Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)

    Lipson, D. L.

    Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.

    Little, Sir E. Graham-

    Rothschild, J. A. de

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Llewellin, Colonel J. J.

    Rowlands, G.

    Womersley, Sir W. J.

    Lloyd, G. W.

    Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.

    Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.

    Loftus, P. C.

    Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.

    York, C.

    Lyons, A. M.

    Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)

    Young, A. S. L. (Partick)

    Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)

    Salmon, Sir I.

    Macdonald, Capt. T. (Isle of Wight)

    Salt, E. W.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.

    Sandys, E. D.

    Captain Dugdale and Lieut.-Colonel Harvie Watt.

    McKie, J. H.

    Scott, Lord William

    NOES.

    Adams, D. (Consett)

    Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.

    Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.

    Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)

    Frankel, D.

    Lawson, J. J.

    Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)

    Gallacher, W.

    Leach, W.

    Adamson, W. M.

    Gardner, B. W.

    Leonard, W.

    Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)

    Garro Jones, G. M.

    Logan, D. G.

    Ammon, C. G.

    Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)

    Lunn, W.

    Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.

    Green, W. H. (Deptford)

    Macdonald, G. (Ince)

    Banfield, J. W.

    Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.

    McEntee, V. La T.

    Barnes, A. J.

    Grenfell, D. R.

    McGhee, H. G.

    Barr, J.

    Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)

    McGovern, J.

    Batey, J.

    Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)

    MacLaren, A.

    Bellenger, F. J.

    Groves, T. E.

    MacMillan, M. (Western Isles)

    Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.

    Guest, Dr. L. H. (Islington, N.)

    Mander, G. la M.

    Bromfield, W.

    Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)

    Marshall, F.

    Brown, C. (Mansfield)

    Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)

    Maxton, J.

    Buchanan, G.

    Harvey, T. E. (Eng. Univ's.)

    Milner, Major J.

    Cape, T.

    Hayday, A.

    Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)

    Charleton, H. C.

    Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)

    Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)

    Chater, D.

    Henderson, J. (Ardwick)

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Cocks, F. S.

    Henderson, T. (Tradeston)

    Nathan, Colonel H. L.

    Collindridge, F.

    Hicks, E. G.

    Naylor, T. E.

    Gripps, Hon. Sir Stafford

    Hills, A. (Pontefract)

    Noel-Baker, P. J.

    Daggar, G.

    Hollins, A.

    Oliver, G. H.

    Dalton, H.

    Hopkin, D,

    Paling, W.

    Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)

    Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)

    Parker, J.

    Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)

    Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)

    Parkinson, J. A.

    Day, H.

    Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.

    Pearson, A.

    Dobbie, W.

    Jones, A. C. (Shipley)

    Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.

    Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)

    Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.

    Poole, C. C.

    Ede, J. C.

    Kirby, B. V.

    Price, M. P.

    Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)

    Kirkwood, D.

    Pritt, D. N.

    648

    649

    Quibell, D. J. K.

    Smith, E. (Stoks)

    Watson, W. McL.

    Richards, R. (Wrexham)

    Smith, T. (Normanton)

    Welsh, J. C.

    Ridley, G.

    Sorensen, R. W.

    Westwood, J.

    Riley, B.

    Stephen, C.

    Wilkinson, Ellen

    Ritson, J.

    Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)

    Williams, T. (Don Valley)

    Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)

    Stokes, R. R.

    Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)

    Sexton, T. M.

    Summerskill, Dr. Edith

    Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)

    Silkin, L.

    Thurtle, E.

    Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)

    Silverman, S. S.

    Tinker, J. J.

    Simpson, F. B.

    Tomlinson, G.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Sloan, A.

    Viant, S. P.

    Mr. Mathers and Mr. Anderson.

    Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)

    Watkins, F. C.

    Resolution agreed to.

    Whereupon the CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
    Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

  RESERVE AND AUXILIARY FORCES [MONEY].
  Resolution reported:
  "That for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to make further and temporary provision for enabling the reserve and auxiliary forces of the Crown to be called out for service as may be found necessary, and for purposes connected with the matter aforesaid, it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of any ex-
  650
  penses incurred by any Secretary of State or other Minister of the Crown in consequence of the passing of the said Act or the making of an Order in Council thereunder."
  The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
  It being after Half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Wednesday evening, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the. House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
  Adjourned at Twenty-two Minutes after Twelve o'Clock.