HC Deb 03 April 1950 vol 473 cc924-6

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this be the First Schedule to the Bill."

Mr. Low

I wish to ask, with regard to paragraph (h) why it is we no longer need the expression "Commander-in-Chief"? Is it because we do not have a Commander-in-Chief, or is it for some other reason? If it is that we do not have a Commander-in-Chief, it has taken a very long time for this consequential repeal to take place.

Mr. M. Stewart

It is as the hon. Member suggests. The functions of the Commander-in-Chief were transferred to the Army Council, and this Amendment could have been made at any time during the last 40 years.

Question put, and agreed to.

Second Schedule agreed to.

Preamble agreed to.

Bill reported, without Amendment.

6.42 p.m.

Mr. M. Stewart

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

I should like to take this opportunity to correct an answer I gave to the hon. Member for Blackpool, North (Mr. Low) at an earlier stage. He spoke of the reprinting of the Army Act, and I overlooked the fact that, although the statutory reprinting is not effected for some years, there is a non-statutory copy which can be obtained through the Stationery Office that contains amendments up to the middle of 1949.

Mr. Low

Will the Under-Secretary consult with the Lord President of the Council to see that the Vote Office are supplied with copies? I asked today for the latest copy, and all I could get was this document published in 1940.

Mr. Stewart

It is not a Command Paper, but it can be obtained by the procedure adopted by Members who get Departmental papers.

Earl Winterton

May I point out that in the old days it was always there for Members to read during the Debate? We used to have long Debates on this Bill then which lasted up to six o'clock in the morning.

Major Legge-Bourke

May I ask whether this unofficial reprint with the amendments is made available to officers and other ranks in the Army who have to use it? My memory is rather a bitter one of being supposed to be responsible for keeping my edition up to date and finding that I had not kept pace with all the amendments.

Mr. Stewart

I will look at both points—the availability to Members of this House and to officers.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

I wish to ask for some enlightenment in regard to the Second Schedule, which provides for the repeal of Section 10 of an Act passed in the days of Queen Anne, relating to Officers and soldiers not to destroy game, poultry or fish without leave of the lord of the manor. I do not know whether this has escaped the notice of the noble Lord, but does it mean that officers and soldiers are now able to destroy game, poultry and fish without the leave of the lord of the manor?

Major Legge-Bourke

May I ask whether the hon. Member wishes to invade the Republic of Ireland, because this provision relates only to Ireland?

Mr. Stewart

I think my hon. Friend the Member for Ayrshire, South (Mr. Emrys Hughes), has overlooked the fact that the ordinary law of the land still applies even when this obsolete enactment is repealed. Before the Act of Union of 1801 was passed, it appeared it had been the practice of soldiers stationed in Ireland to use their weapons not so much against His Majesty's enemies as against the game, and to such an extent that special and exceptional legislation was required to prevent them from so doing. With the passage of time, it would now appear that the behaviour of troops stationed in that part of His Majesty's Dominions has so greatly improved that, while the ordinary law of the land still remains, this special legislation is unncessary.

Earl Winterton

In the interests of historical accuracy, and having Irish blood in my veins, may I point out that they not only shot at the game but at the landlords as well?

Mr. Stewart

The noble Lord is certainly quite right. He may recall the occasion when it was suggested, I forget whether it was in this House or before some official committee, that it would be a good thing if soldiers were taught not only to shoot but to shoot straight and that the proposition was seriously opposed in the interests of Irish landlords. This repeal merely symbolises the improvement in the discipline and behaviour of the troops, which I am sure will gratify the House as a whole.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.