§ (1) The Secretary of State shall make up a register of persons having legal right to fish for or take salmon, and of the waters, including any part of the sea within one mile of low water mark, in which said persons are entitled to exercise their said rights.
§ (2) The Secretary of State shall include in said register the name of any person who can satisfy him within twelve months of the passing of this Act, that he has a valid heritable title to salmon fishings. Thereafter, or where the Secretary of State considers there are competing claims or a doubtful title the Secretary of State may include in said register only the names of persons who either are found by the Court of Session to be entitled to the salmon fishings in respect of which they desire to be registered or are the successors of persons already included in said register.
§ (3) A copy of said register shall be kept available for public inspection in the office of every sheriff clerk and sheriff clerk depute.
§ (4) For the purpose of this section the Secretary of State may grant written permission to any person or association of persons to fish for or take salmon in any waters in respect of which no name is included in said register. The Secretary of State may grant said permission either gratuitously or on payment of a fee. Permission granted under this subsection shall be effective only for the purposes of this section and shall not prejudice the civil remedies of any proprietor of salmon fishings.
§ (5) For the purpose of section one of this Act inclusion in the said register shall be sufficient evidence of legal right to fish for or take salmon.—[Mr. Macdonald.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
Mr. MacdonaldI beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
It is nearly 100 years since a reasonably effective Salmon Bill was brought before the House and we of the Liberal Party welcomed very warmly the 346 announcement that this Bill was to come before us. We have, however, been disappointed by the narrow limitations of much of this Bill. We realise that it may prove an effective check to gang poaching which we all wish to see abolished, but we do feel that it may add far greater restrictions to the ordinary angler, the man who, we believe, should have as full scope as possible. We consider, as has been stated on the benches opposite, that this is mainly a landlords' Bill and we see no reason why any of the landlords should be strengthened.
Our rivers are the property of the people; the fish within those rivers are the property of the people, and very few landlords, if any, are responsible for the stocking of their streams. As the Lord Advocate probably knows, a Royal Commission was set up in 1895 under a Liberal Government. It sat in 1895 and finished its report in 1896 when, unfortunately, the Government had changed to a Conservative Government. Its terms of reference were:
To inquire into the salmon and fresh-water fisheries of the River Tweed, its estuaries and its tributaries; the method of fishing therein; the rights affecting such fisheries and the laws applying thereto and the operation of such laws.The findings of the Royal Commission were presented to this Conservative Government in 1896 and that Government remained in power for a number of years. [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] The Commission recommended that an examination should be made into titles of those claiming to have salmon fisheries in the river. The Report stated that on the upper part of the Tweed and its tributaries there was a considerable extent of "unchartered" waters in which the rights of salmon fishing had never been granted by the Crown to a subject, and in these circumstances those fisheries were still held by the Crown.The Report also stated that it appeared to be highly desirable that the matter be cleared up. The findings of that Commission were presented to that Conservative Government and they did nothing about them at all. A Liberal Member, Sir H. Maxwell, in 1898, two years after the Report was published, asked the then Lord Advocate, Mr. Graham Murray, why the findings of the Commission had not been implemented and he received the usual evasive reply, that the recommenda- 347 tions had not been lost sight of, but that the Scottish Office and Board of Trade were not then prepared to promise a Bill for eradicating the difficulties which had been pointed out.
In view of this Conservative resistance, a Liberal Member, Sir John Jardine, in 1908 and 1909—
§ 11.0 p.m.
The Deputy-ChairmanThe hon. Gentleman is going rather beyond his new Clause, which deals with a specific point.
Mr. MacdonaldI am trying to give the basis of my case. This Member presented two Private Bills on this matter, but they both got no further than First Reading because of Prorogation. [An HON. MEMBER: "Was there not a Liberal Government at that time."] Yes, but it was very busy, in spite of the efforts of the Conservatives, trying to bring about social legislation, but it was hampered by the opposition of persons in another place. The Labour Party, in their social reform Measures, have since reaped the benefits of the actions of the Liberal Government in 1911.
There are persons on the upper reaches of the Tweed estuaries at present, and probably on other rivers in Scotland, who are usurping the nation's property because they have no legal right from the Crown to the fishing rights of the river. They are leasing those rights for very considerable sums, yet Clause 1 uses the words:
If any person without legal right or without written permission from a person having such right, fishes…I am trying to prove that many of the persons who assume they have legal rights have no such rights at all; therefore, many persons could be prosecuted when they have no reason to be prosecuted at all because they are not trespassing on anyone's fishing.It may be of interest to the Committee to recall just how unsatisfactory is the question of salmon fishing rights in Scotland today. It makes Clause 1 such a farce in its present form. If we turn to Erskine's Institute of the Law of Scotland—
§ Mr. StuartOn a point of order. Is it not the case that we have already dealt with Clause 1 of the Bill?
The Deputy-ChairmanThe hon. Gentleman is going very wide of the new Clause and I hope that he will keep to the point.
The Deputy-ChairmanThis is quite a narrow point, involving the question of setting up a register, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will keep to it.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesIs it not necessary, before we can understand what this register may imply, for the hon. Gentleman to elaborate his argument?
Mr. MacdonaldI cannot find any better case on which to base my argument than the law of Scotland, and Erskine's Institute states:
The doctrine of occupancy is agreeable to the Law of Scotland, in such moveable subjects—as have continued in their original state, and are presumed never to have had an owner —whether animate or inanimate. Thus, pearls enclosed in shells, or pebbles cast on the shore, belong to the finder. Thus also we acquire the property of all wild beasts, fowls or fishes as soon as we kill or apprehend them,…
The Deputy-ChairmanThe hon. Gentleman must listen to my Rulings. Otherwise, he must resume his seat.
Mr. MacdonaldIf I may refer to just one other thing, Sir Charles, I will bring my speech to a hasty conclusion. The Institute also says:
Salmon fishing is…a jus regale and therefore is not carried by a feudal charter without an express clause. As this right, in consequence of its being inter regalia, remains with the sovereign after he is divested of the property of the lands on both sides of the river, the crown may make a grant of the salmon fishing in a river or any part thereof in favour of one who has no lands on either side. The whole estate of such grantee consists in the fishing; and this right entitles him to draw his nets on the banks of the adjacent grounds without the proprietor's consent, as a pertinent of the fishing.Surely it is a fact—I have others that I could bring to the Committee's attention, but they are outside the scope of this Clause—that if we are to see justice does not miscarry in the case of the ordinary angler in Scotland, that the register I have asked for under this Clause should be accepted by the Government and 349 brought into force immediately. The hon. Member for Lanark (Lord Dunglass) earlier in today's debate—I hope I am quoting him correctly—said that it might be a good idea to have a register of riparian owners. The riparian owners, I understand, are those who have a Royal charter to the fishing rights. Thus, in many respects, the noble Lord was in line with much that I have said.
§ Lord DunglassThe hon. Member has put so many words into so many mouths —he must not go on doing this. All I asked was that the Secretary of State might consider nominating riparian owners for a certain purpose. There was no question of a register.
Mr. MacdonaldI apologise to the noble Lord if I misunderstood him. I took quite a different view of what he said. Hon. Gentlemen on the other side have expressed in the Clauses put forward by the hon. Member for Midlothian and Peebles (Mr. Pryde) a similar idea to ours—that something should be done to check up this register of the charters of Scotland. My reason for bringing forward this Clause is the furtherance of an ideal—an ideal that practically all sections of Scottish rivers should, in time, be controlled by their appropriate angling associations for the benefit of the ordinary angler. A register of fishing charters would form the first and very valuable step in this direction.
We have no desire to confiscate the legal fishing rights of anyone, but it is our wish to cancel the bogus rights of some persons in the interests of the general public. I wish to see that the sport of salmon fishing is available to the sporting fraternity of all classes and not simply available to a privileged few, some of whom have no legal right to the fish in the stretch of river they own. I commend the Clause to the Government and the Committee.
§ The Lord AdvocateI intervene at this stage in the hope that I can convince the Committee that we should deal with this very shortly and try to get through the other new Clauses and Amendments on the Order Paper tonight. We must remember that the salmon season has opened, and that we want the Bill to become effective as soon as possible. These continued delays are defeating part of the purpose of the Bill. I make that 350 appeal to the Committee. In so far as this may give an opportunity of making propaganda speeches on the issue, we have already had that opportunity during the discussion on the new Clause introduced by the hon. Member for Midlothian and Peebles (Mr. Pryde), whose brevity in moving it I would commend to the Committee.
Our principal objection to this Clause is not on the question of merit—I do not wish to involve myself in that tonight —but simply that this is not an appropriate Clause to add to a Bill of this nature. It gives rise to a great deal of consideration and might affect the right of property—perhaps correctly, I am not expressing any opinion about that tonight —but it is a very fundamental change which would be introduced into the law. It might have a desirable effect, but to introduce it by way of a new Clause to a Bill which is designed for the entirely different purpose of bringing into one composite whole the criminal offences in respect of salmon poaching in Scotland is, I think, rather unfortunate.
Should it be desired that this greater question should be canvassed, it is, in my submission, such a fundamental question that it should form the subject matter of another Bill. For that it might be necessary to have full inquiries. It is no use the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Macdonald) referring to a Royal Commission in 1895. We might want to have a much fuller inquiry with a view to getting perhaps a different remedy from that recommended by the Royal Commission in 1895.
Mr. MacdonaldThe investigation will be done by the riparian owners themselves registering and will be done within a year, as is suggested in the Clause.
§ The Lord AdvocateMy principal objection is that it would be inappropriate to introduce such a fundamental change by way of the side wind of a new Clause. That is without prejudice to the opinions which anyone may have as to the merits of the proposal. In any event, for technical reasons the Clause as framed is not acceptable. One reason is that at present it is an offence to fish for salmon without legal authority; and the only new introduction we have in the Bill is that permission must now be in writing. At present people still have 351 to have permission to fish for salmon; otherwise they are committing an offence according to the laws of Scotland; therefore, the question of ownership is in no way affected as between the new Bill and the old law.
I do not think that my right hon. Friend or any other Secretary of State, would wish to set himself up as a judge of the legal titles of the various aspirants to these claims. It is not the function of the Secretary of State to adjudicate on legal titles, to construe legal deeds and determine legal ownership. That is the function of the courts, and it may be the function of the courts to decide that, if such a decision were necessary. These are merely technical objections, but my principal objection, which, I hope, the Committee will accept, is, irrespective of the merits, that this is not appropriate to this Bill.
§ Mr. BoothbyI agree with the Lord Advocate. I do not think this is the occasion to introduce a Clause to nationalise the rivers of Scotland. I wonder if the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Macdonald) has given serious consideration to the case of the River Thursoe, or if he has consulted in any way the riparian owners; because I do not think he should have said one quarter of the things he has said without at least taking counsel with the man I still regard as the intrinsic and even the titular leader of the Liberal Party.
§ 11.15 p.m.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesI have not yet said one word on the Committee stage of this Bill, and nobody who knows anything of the contributions I make in this House will accuse me of wishing to indulge in propaganda speeches. I heard the speech of the Lord Advocate with both sorrow and in anger, because if he is correct this Labour Government will be as dilatory and as reactionary, and will do as little, as the Conservative Government of 60 years ago—the time of which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Macdonald) spoke.
I regret that the Lord Advocate of a Socialist Government did not immediately accept this Clause. I am all in favour of this register. I believe that my constituents, although they may not be enthusiastic about other provisions in 352 the Bill, are unanimously behind me in supporting this new register. When the Lord Advocate rose, I thought he would argue that such a register could not be compiled because of a practical difficulty, but I submit that there is in existence already a document which would help considerably in the drawing up of this register.
There need be no delay at all, as the Lord Advocate thought; not 24 hours need go by before finding a large proportion of this new register to put in the hands of the printers. In fact, I have here the first instalment of this register, which will keep the printers employed until the salmon fishing begins, and I am prepared to hand it to the Lord Advocate. It is a far more impressive document than the one my hon. Friend from the Liberal Party recommended to the Committee.
This document was compiled by the most eminent historian we have in Scotland at the moment, a man who sat in this House for a generation and whose utterances were listened to with great respect, who became the Secretary of State for Scotland. It is a document which would assist the Lord Advocate in getting this register compiled immediately, and I fail to see completely why he should introduce this opportunist argument about time when there is this important document, which can be as interesting to the population of Scotland as the Magna Carta.
The new important Clause says:
The Secretary of State shall include in said register the name of any person who can satisfy him within twelve months of the passing of this Act, that he has a valid heritable title to salmon fishings.I have no doubt that my hon. Friend would be prepared to alter the wording of the Clause, to allow, if necessary, the major part of the Bill to proceed and to introduce a further Clause which can come into operation in 12 months' time, or in two years' time. I for one would be prepared to see the major part of the Bill go on the Statute Book and, if the Lord Advocate is prepared to assure that Committee that within a reasonable time we should have a new Bill in which the main principles of my hon. Friend's Amendment are incorporated, I believe my hon. Friend would be prepared to consider withdrawing his Clause. [Interruption.] If the hon. Member says we 353 shall be out, I am quite prepared to fight the next election on whether or not this Clause should be inserted in the Bill, and whether such a register should be compiled. More than that, I am willing to go into the constituency of the Lord Advocate and to say—
§ Mr. HughesI am merely stating, I hope briefly, what influences my mind in rejecting the appeal of the Lord Advocate that we should rush through this Bill.
The Lord Advocate is putting up what I call a frivolous objection, and I do not believe that his arguments—although he is the most influential servant of the Crown in Scotland—should be allowed to influence the decision of this Committee. As it is only seven minutes to the time when we have to adjourn this discussion, this Clause should be discussed at a later date. There are very elaborate arguments, and a very large amount of evidence, that have yet to be placed before the Committee. Not only have I a large amount of evidence, but my hon. Friend the Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Manuel) and my hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) have also. We have to deal not only with our parts of Ayrshire, but also with your parts of Scotland as well, Sir Charles.
I fail to see why my argument should be interrupted by the irrelevant remark that the Bill needs to be finished tonight. It is not necessary to rush the Bill and steam-roller the Liberal Party at a time when this is the last hope of the resurrection of that party.
The Deputy-ChairmanThere is nothing about the Liberal Party in this Clause. The Question is, "That the Clause be read a Second time." Those of that opinion say "Aye"; to the contrary "No."
§ Mr. HughesI have not come to the end of my argument yet.
§ Mr. HughesWe are entitled to have this Clause discussed on its merits, and I submit that we are going to have it discussed.
§ Mr. Granville (Eye)On a point of order. It was absolutely impossible on these benches to hear you put the Question, Sir Charles.
§ Mr. HughesOn a point of order. All this time I have been devoting my remarks to the Lord Advocate's speech. I have taken up much time which, otherwise, I would have devoted to discussion on the Bill, but everything that I have said is relevant to the discussion on this Clause. I am entitled to say why I support this Clause. The main reason why I support this—
§ Mr. BoothbyI understood, Sir Charles, that you had put the Question.
The Deputy-ChairmanThe hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) sat down, and I put the Question, but if I put it before everyone was satisfied, then the discussion must go on.
§ Mr. HughesI should be very loth indeed, Sir Charles, to ignore your Ruling, and very loth to be suspended from the service of this honourable House, but if one is not to be allowed to state one's case then that action would be necessary. We are not going to be bullied by the Lord Advocate—an influential man—because this happens to be something moved by an insignificant party. What has that got to do with it? Despite the attempt to steam-roller this new Clause, I am fully entitled to put my argument. If the Lord Advocate desires to get the Bill through then all he has to do is to accept the new Clause.
§ The Lord Advocaterose—
§ Mr. HughesThe Lord Advocate may be an authority on national affairs, but he does not understand our point of view.
Mr. McNeilMy hon. Friend has delivered his speech with great good humour so far and I can understand a joke, but I am sure he will agree that what he just said sounded very much like a threat.
§ Mr. HughesI apologise to the Secretary of State, and to his susceptibilities, 355 but I assure you, Sir Charles, that my susceptibilities are not ruffled.
I submit that we are entitled to proper consideration, and I am not pleading solely for myself; I am pleading for other hon. Members of the Committee who have made it clear that they wish to adduce arguments as to why the new Clause should be added to the Bill. After all, minorities have the right to be heard, and we do not intend to be put aside by the Secretary of State, or the Lord Advocate, or by both combined. This compilation should be made because, for the first time in our history, we should have this register which would show to every angling club in Scotland exactly who are the proprietors of the land over which—
§ Mr. Bowen (Cardigan)rose in his place, and claimed to move,"That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee proceeded to a Division—
§ Mr. Turton (Thirsk and Malton)(seated and covered): On a point of order, Sir Charles. You called for the doors to be locked, but the door of the Aye Lobby remained open for some three minutes
§ afterwards and one hon. Member got through the Lobby after the order had been given. I gather that it was the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. A. Lewis) who went through the Lobby after the order for the doors to be locked had been given and when the door of the Aye Lobby had been inadvertently left open.
The Deputy-ChairmanI regret that an error was made by one of the messengers. The Division is not void on that account.
§ Mr. Molson (The High Peak)(seated and covered): Further to that point of order. Does your statement that an error was made by one of the messengers invalidate this Division or does it not, Sir Charles?
§ Mr. Rankin(seated and covered): Further to the point of order, Sir Charles. What position would be created if the Division now under dispute turned out to be a vital one and perhaps resulted in a majority of hon. Members voting that the Question be now put?
§ Ayes, 163; Noes, 24.
357| Division No. 35.] | AYES | [11.35 p.m. |
| Awbery, S. S. | Donnelly, D. | Higgs, J. M. C |
| Bacon, Miss A. | Drewe, C. | Holman, P. |
| Hartley, P. | Duncan, Capt. J. A L | Holmes, H. E. (Hemsworth) |
| Benn, Hon. A. N. Wedgwood | Dunglass, Lord | Houghton, Douglas |
| Bevins, J. R. (Liverpool, Toxteth) | Duthie, W. S. | Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire) |
| Bing, G. H. C. | Dye, S. | Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.) |
| Bishop, F. P. | Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. | Hutchinson, Geoffrey (Ilford, N.) |
| Boardman, H. | Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) | Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.) |
| Boles, Ll.-Col. D. C. (Wells) | Fernynough, E. | Janner, B. |
| Bowden, H. W. | Finch, H. J. | Jones, D. T. (Hartlepool) |
| Brockway, A. Fenner | Fletcher, E. G. M. (Islington, E.) | Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W |
| Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. | Forman, J. C. | Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge) |
| Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T. | Fort, R. | Kinley, J. |
| Bullus, Wing-Commander E. E. | Fraser, Sir I. (Morecambe & Lonsdale) | Lee, F. (Newton) |
| Burton, Miss E. | Fraser, T. (Hamilton) | Lever, L. M. (Ardwick) |
| Butler, H. W. (Hackney, S.) | Freeman, J. (Watford) | Lewis, A. W. J. (West Ham, N.) |
| Champion, A. J. | Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok) | Lindgren, G. S. |
| Clarke, Col. R. S. (East Grinstead) | Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead) | Lloyd, Selwyn (Wirral) |
| Clarke, Brig. T. H. (Portsmouth, W.) | Gibson, C. W. | Logan, D. G. |
| Collindridge, F. | Gilzean, A. | Lucas-Tooth, Sir H. |
| Conant, Maj. R. J. E. | Gianville, J. E. (Consett) | McAdden, S. J. |
| Cook, T. F. | Granville, E. (Eye) | McCallum, Maj. D. |
| Cooper, G. (Middlesbrough, W.) | Greenwood, A. W. J. (Rossendale) | MacColl, J. E. |
| Cove, W. G. | Grimond, J. | Mackeson, Brig. H. R |
| Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) | Hall, J. (Gateshead, W.) | McKibbin, A. |
| Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E. | Hannan, W. | McKie, J. H. (Galloway) |
| Darling, Sir W. Y. (Edinburgh, S.) | Hargreaves, A. | MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.) |
| Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.) | Hastings, Dr. Somerville | MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty) |
| de Freitas, Geoffrey | Hayman, F. H. | McNeil, Rt. Hon. H. |
| Deer, G. | Heath, E. R. | MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling) |
| Delargy, H. J. | Herbison, Miss M. | Macpherson, N. (Dumfries) |
| Digby, S. Wingfield | Hicks-Beach, Maj. W W | Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) |
| Mathers, Rt. Hon. George | Proctor, W. T. | Taylor, R. d. (Morpeth) |
| Mellish, R. J. | Redmayne, M | Teevan, L. T. |
| Mellor, Sir J. | Rees, Mrs. D. | Thomas, D. E. (Aberdare) |
| Messer, F. | Richards, R. | Thomas, I. R. (Rhondda, W.) |
| Middleton, Mrs. L | Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvonshire) | Thomas, I. O. (Wrekin) |
| Mitchison, G. R. | Robertson, J. J. (Berwick) | Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford) |
| Moeran, E. W. | Robinson, J. Roland (Blackpool, S.) | Vosper, D. F. |
| Molson, A. H. E. | Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.) | Wade, D. W. |
| Moody, A S. | Royle, C. | Wallace, H. W |
| Moore, LI.-Col. Sir T | Russell, R. S. | Weitzman, D. |
| Morley, R. | Scott, Donald | Wells, P. L. (Faversham) |
| Morris, P. (Swansea, W.) | Shackleton, E. A. A. | West, D. G. |
| Morrison, Maj. J G. (Salisbury) | Silverman, J. (Erdington) | Wheatley, Rt. Hon. John (Edinb'gh, E.) |
| Nabarro, G. | Simmons, C. J | Wheatley, Major M. J. (Poole) |
| Nally, W. | Slater, J | Wilkins, W. A. |
| Neal, H. | Smithers, Peter (Winchester) | Williams, D. J. (Neath) |
| Nicholls, H. | Sorensen, R. W. | Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge) |
| Padley, W. E. | Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir F. | Winterbottom, I. (Nottingham, C.) |
| Pearson, A. | Sparks, J. A. | Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A |
| Perkins, W. R. O | Spens, Sir P. (Kensington, S. | Yates, V F. |
| Popplewell, E. | Stross, Dr. B. | |
| Porter, G. | Studholme, H. G. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| Powell, J. Enoch | Sylvester, G. 0. | Mr. A. J. F. Macdonald and |
| Mr. Bowen. | ||
| NOES | ||
| Anderson, A. (Motherwell) | Henderson, John (Cathcart) | Stoddart-Scott, Col. M. |
| Arbuthnot, John | Hudson, J. H. (Ealing, N.) | Thompson, K. P. (Walton) |
| Bennett, W. G. (Woodside) | Keenan, W. | Timmons, J. |
| Boyle, Sir Edward | Longden, F. (Small Heath) | Turton, R. H. |
| Braddock, Mrs. E. M | McInnes, J. | Ward, Miss I. (Tyne[...]vth) |
| Crouch, R. F. | MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) | Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro) |
| Cullen, Mrs. A. | Manuel, A. C. | |
| Deedes, W. F. | Poole, Cecil | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
| Fisher, Nigel | Rankin, J | Mr. Carmichael and |
| Mr. Emrys Hughes. |
§ Mr. Emrys HughesOn a point of order. I submit, Sir Charles, that there has occurred an incident unprecedented in the history of the House of Commons, and I wish to ask you for a Ruling and for guidance. When the Division was called, two Tellers on behalf of the Liberal Party changed their minds and did not wish the
§ Division to proceed. I ask you, therefore, whether the Division is in order if those who had called for it did not wish to continue it.
The Deputy-ChairmanThey have been appointed as Tellers by the Committee and they must carry on with their duties.
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 3; Noes, 203.
359| Division No. 36.] | AYES | 11.45 p.m. |
| Granville, E. (Eye) | ||
| Grimond, J | ||
| Wade, D. W. | ||
| TELLERS FOR THE AYES: | ||
| Mr A. J. F. Macdonald and | ||
| Mr. Bowen. | ||
| NOES | ||
| Alport, C. J. M. | Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. | Crouch, R. F. |
| Ashton, H. (Chelmsford) | Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T. | Cullen, Mrs. A. |
| Awbery, S. S. | Bullus, Wing Commander E. E | Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.) |
| Bacon, Miss A | Burton, Miss E. | Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N) |
| Bartley, P. | Butler, H. W. (Hackney, S.) | de Freitas, Geoffrey |
| Benn, Hon. A. N. Wedgwood | Carr, Robert (Mitcham) | Deedes, W F. |
| Bennett, W. G. (Woodside) | Champion, A. J. | Deer, G. |
| Bevins, J. R. (Liverpool, Toxteth | Clarke, Col. R. S. (East Grinstead) | Delargy, H. J. |
| Bing, G. H. C | Clarke, Brig. T. H. (Portsmouth, W.) | Digby, S. Wingfield |
| Bishop, F. P. | Colegate, A. | Donnelly, D |
| Black, C. W. | Gollindridge, F. | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord M |
| Boardman, H. | Conant, Maj. R. J. E. | Drewe, C. |
| Boles, Lt.-Col. D. C (Wells) | Cook, T. F. | Duncan, Capt. J A L |
| Boyd-Carpenter, J. A. | Cooper, A. E. (Ilford, S.) | Dunglass, Lord |
| Boyle, Sir Edward | Cooper, G. (Middlesbrough, W.) | Duthie W S. |
| Braddock, Mrs. E. M. | Cove, W. G. | Dye, S. |
| Brockway, A. Fenner | Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) | Ede, Rt. Hon J. C. |
| Brooke, H. (Hampstead) | Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E. | Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) |
| Fernyhough, E. | Lever, L. M. (Ardwiek) | Robinson, J. Roland (Blackpool, S.) |
| Finch, H. J. | Lewis, A. W. J. (West Ham, N.) | Robinson, Kenneth (St. Paneras, N.) |
| Fisher, Nigel | Lindgren, G. S | Roper, Sir H. |
| Fletcher, E. G. M. (Islington, E.) | Lloyd, Selwyn (Wirral) | Royle, C. |
| Forman, J. C. | Logan, D. G. | Russell, R. S. |
| Fort, R. | Longden, F. (Small Heath) | Scott, Donald |
| Fraser, Sir I.(Morecambe & Lonsdale) | Longden, G. J. M. (Herts S. W) | Shackleton, E. A. A. |
| Fraser, T. (Hamilton) | Lucas-Tooth, Sir H. | Silverman, J. (Erdington) |
| Freeman, J. (Watford) | McAdden, S. J. | Simmons, C. J. |
| Gage, G. H | McCallum, Maj. D | Slater, J. |
| Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok) | MacColl, J. E. | Smithers, Peter (Winchester) |
| Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead) | McInnes, J. | Sorensen, R. W. |
| Gibson, C W. | Mackeson, Brig. H. R | Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir F. |
| Gilzean, A. | McKibbin, A. | Sparks, J. A. |
| Glanville, J. E. (Consett) | McKie, J. H. (Galloway) | Spens, Sir P. (Kensington, S.) |
| Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. | MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.) | Steele, T. |
| Greenwood, Anthony W. J. (Rossendale) | MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty) | Stoddart-Scott, Col. M. |
| Grimston, Hon. J. (St. Albans) | McNeil, Rt. Hon. H. | Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.) |
| Hall, J. (Gateshead, W.) | MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling) | Stross, Dr. B. |
| Hannan, W. | Macpherson, N. (Dumfries) | Stuart, Rt. Hon. J. (Moray) |
| Hargreaves, A. | Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) | Studholme, H. G. |
| Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.) | Mathers, Rt. Hon. George | Sylvester, G. O. |
| Hastings, Dr. Somerville | Mellish, R. J. | Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth) |
| Hayman, F. H. | Mellor, Sir J. | Teevan, L. T. |
| Heald, L F. | Messer, F. | Thomas, D. E. (Aberdare) |
| Heath, E. R. | Middle[...]on, Mrs. L. | Thomas, I. R. (Rhondda, W.) |
| Henderson, John (Cathcart) | Mitchison, G. R | Thomas, I. O. (Wrekin) |
| Herbison, Miss M. | Moeran, E W. | Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford) |
| Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W | Molson, A. H. E. | Thompson, K. P. (Walton) |
| Higgs, J. M. C. | Moody, A S. | Turton, R. H. |
| Holman, P. | Moore, Lt.-Col Sir T. | Tweedsmuir, Lady |
| Holmes, H E. (Hemsworth) | Morley, R. | Vosper, D. F. |
| Hornsby-Smith, Miss P. | Morris, P. (Swansea, W.) | Wallace, H. W. |
| Houghton, Douglas | Morrison, Maj. J. G. (Salisbury) | Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth) |
| Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire) | Nabarro, G. | Weitzman, D. |
| Hoy, J. | Nally, W. | Wells, P. L. (Faversham) |
| Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N) | Neal, H. | West, D. G. |
| Hudson, J. H. (Ealing, N) | Nicholls, H. | Wheatley, Rt. Hn. John (Edinb'gh, E.) |
| Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) | Orbach, M. | Wheatley, Major M. J. (Poole) |
| Hutchinson, Geoffrey (Ilford, N.) | Padley, W. E | Wilkins, W A. |
| Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W) | Pearson, A. | Williams, C. (Torquay) |
| Hylton-Foster, H. B. | Perkins, W. R. D | Williams, D. J. (Neath) |
| Janner, B. | Porter, G | Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge) |
| Jones, D. T. (Hartlepool) | Powell, J. Enoch | Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro) |
| Jones, Jack (Rotherham) | Proctor, W. T. | Winterbottom, I. (Nottingham, C.) |
| Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W | Pryde, D. J | Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A. |
| Keenan, W. | Rankin, J. | Yates, V. F |
| Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge) | Redmayne, M. | |
| Kinley, J | Rees, Mrs. D. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
| Lee, F. (Newton) | Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvonshire) | Mr. Popplewell and Mr. Bowden. |
| Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H | Robertson, J. J. (Berwick) |
Question put, and agreed to.
§ It being after Half-past Eleven o'Clock, The CHAIRMAN left the Chair to report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again Tomorrow.