§ Lords Amendment: No. 20, in page 7, line 8, leave out Clause 5 and insert new Clause A—
§ "A.—(1) Subject to subsections (3) to (5) below, it shall be an offence for any person to make an addition, alteration or repair to an article bearing approved hallmarks, except in accordance with the written consent of an assay office.
§ (2) Subject to subsection (3) below, it shall be an offence for any person to remove, alter or deface any mark struck on an article, except in accordance with the written consent of an assay office.
§ For the purposes of this subsection "mark" means a sponsor's mark, any approved hallmark, the word "filled", the word "metal" or any other word for the time being prescribed by or under section 4 of, or Schedule 2 to, this Act.
§ (3) It shall not be an offence under subsection (1) or (2) above to batter an article so as to render it fit only for remanufacture.
§ (4) It shall not be an offence under subsection (1) above to make an addition to an article which is not a new ware if the character of the article, and the purposes for which it can be used, remain unaltered and—
§ (a) the addition is of the same precious metal as that of the article;
§ (b) the metal added to the article is of a fineness not less than the standard of fineness of the article; and
§ (c) the amount of metal added does not exceed the lesser of—
§ (i) 1 gram of gold, 5 grams of silver or 0.5 grams of platinum, as the case may be; and
§ (ii) 50 per cent. of the weight of the article immediately before the addition was made.
§ (5) It shall not be an offence under subsection (1) above to add a coating, of a thickness not exceeding 2 micrometres at any point, to the whole or any part of
§ (a) an article of gold, if the coating is of gold of a fineness not less than the standard of fineness of the article; or
§ (b) an article of silver, if the coating is of silver of a fineness not less than the standard of fineness of the article; or
§ (c) an article of silver, if the coating is of gold of not less than the minimum fineness; or
1020§ (d) an article of gold, silver or platinum, if the coating is of rhodium.
§ (6) In giving any consent for the purposes of subsection (1) or (2) above an assay office may make it a condition of the consent that the article concerned, or any addition made to it, be further assayed and struck with—
§ (a) the sponsor's mark; and
§ (b) such of the approved hallmarks as may be specified in directions issued by the Council for the purposes of this subsection or, in the absence of any such directions, such of the approved hallmarks as may be determined by the assay office.
§ (7) If—
§ (a) an application for consent under subsection (1) or (2) above has been refused by an assay office; and
§ (b) the applicant has referred the matter to the Council, in writing;
§ the Council shall consider the case and, if they are of the opinion that the assay office were acting unreasonably in withholding the consent applied for, they shall direct the assay office to grant the consent.
§ (8) Without prejudice to subsection (6) above, it shall be the duty of an assay office to whom a direction has been given under subsection (7) above to comply with the direction."
§ Mr. WigginI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
The new clause is substantially a complete redraft of the existing one but it does not materially alter the sense of the Bill. This is very much the work of parliamentary counsel and we are grateful for the help that he has given us. In his wisdom he has found it necessary to rewrite the clause and many other things.
The new clause reproduces in a concise form what is substantially the existing law, and is intended to safeguard the integrity of hallmarks struck by assay offices against illegal alterations and additions made to articles that have been hallmarked.
Unless the alteration is by way of an addition of precious metal in a very small amount, as with a repair of an article, the consent of an assay office to any alteration is required and it is an offence to make alterations without such consent. My hon. Friend has mentioned that there have been some examples. It is one of the features of the museum in the assay office that it has objects which counterfeiters and others have, by the addition of base metal parts to precious metal objects, used to make themselves a handsome profit. I am sure the House will 1021 agree that this is wrong. The purpose of the clause is to make certain that it is an offence.
These safeguards have been found to be essential and the criminal penalty to be fully justified, if the very real risks of illegal alteration and deception of the public are to be avoided.
The structure of the clause is as followssubsection (1) makes it an offence for any alteration to be made to an article bearing approved hallmarks unless the written consent of the assay office is obtained. Subsection (2) would make it an offence to remove, alter or deface any sponsor's mark, approved hallmark or the words "filled" and "metal" when prescribed under Schedule 2. Subsection (3) makes an exception of the battering of an article for re-manufacturing purposes. That is an obvious exception. I am sure that my hon. Friends from Sheffield and other areas with manufacturers in their constituencies will agree that this is essential.
Subsection (4) affords further exemptions for what may be described as miniscule additions of the same precious metal as that of which the article being altered is made. It would be wrong if repairing a silver tea kettle with silver solder were regarded as a fraud on the public.
§ Mr. Adam ButlerMy hon. Friend has referred to the repair of an article. If, in the course of a repair, an addition is made it is not an offence under subsection (1). If the repair involves the ironing out of dents in an article and no addition is made, will consent be required from the council?
§ Mr. WigginI am no Solomon in these matters, but to some extent it depends upon the alteration. As I understand it, the alteration that matters is the addition of metal. To remove a dent would not in any way be an alteration for the purposes of the subsection. The adding of handles or spouts, or complete conversions of silver articles, are the sort of matters that would require consent.
I had got as far as explaining subsection (4). Subsection (5) allows the coating of an article after hallmarking, but only to a properly small thickness of two micrometers. We have gone over this. This relates to the protective coating of certain rare metals used to protect gold 1022 and silver and improve their appearance and long life. Subsection (6) entitles an assay office to insist on the re-assay and hallmarking of an article when its consent to a proposed alteration to an article is sought. That is exactly the same as the existing law. Subsection (7) gives a right of appeal to an aggrieved applicant for consent to the council and subsection (8) requires the assay office to abide by the council's decision on appeal.
I hope that this is an adequate explanation of the new Clause, which is the same as its predecessor in total effect and meaning but is much more easily understood in its new form.
§ Question put and agreed to.