Lords Sitting of 21 March 1902

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Standing Order No. xxxix. considered (according to order), and suspended for this day's sitting.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 1) BILL.
Brought from the Commons, and read 1a; Then (Standing Order No. 39 having been suspended), Bill read 2a (The Earl Waldegrave); Committee negatived; Bill read 2a and passed.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

COMMISSION.
The following Bill received the Royal Assent: Consolidated Fund (No. 1).
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

BARON FFRENCH.
Report made from the Lord Chancellor, that the right of Charles Austin Thomas Robert John Joseph Ffrench, Baron Ffrench, to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—
Bromley Gas.
Limpsfield and Oxted Water.
Broadstairs Gas.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

SADDLEWORTH, SPRINGHEAD AND LEES TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
A petition of Messrs. Sherwood and Company, of 7, Great George Street,
682
Westminster, Parliamentary Agents, praying for leave to present a petition of the County Council of Lancaster, praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill, although the time limited by Standing Order No. 92 for presenting such petition has expired; read, and ordered to lie on the Table; and Standing Order No. 92 to be considered on Monday, the 14th of April next, in order to its being dispensed with in respect of the said petition.

PLYMOUTH, DEVONPORT, AND SOUTH- WESTERN JUNCTION RAILWAY BILE [H.L.]
Reported, with an amendment.
SCOTTISH EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY BILL [H.L.]
Reported, with amendments.
STREET URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL WATER BILL [H.L.]
Reported, with amendments.
CITY AND NORTH-EAST SUBURBAN ELECTRIC RAILWAY (No. 1.) BILL [H.L.]
  CITY AND NORTH-EAST SUBURBAN ELECTRIC RAILWAY (No. 2.) BILL [H.L.]
  Leave given to the Select Committee to consolidate the Bills into one Bill.
  BARRY RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
  The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn; the order made on the 24th of February last discharged and Bill committed.
  YSTRADFELLTE WATER BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Select Committee, with amendments.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
  BIRMINGHAM AND MIDLAND TRAM WAYS BILL [H.L.]
  Read 2a..
  DARLEY DALE WATER BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  LINCOLN AND EAST COAST RAILWAY AND DOCK (ABANDONMENT) BILL.
  Read 3a, and passed.
  BROMPTON AND PICCADILLY CIRCUS RAILWAY (NEW LINES, etc.) BILL [H.L.]
  Standing Order No. 92, considered (according to order), and dispensed with, with respect to a Petition of Moss' Empires, Limited; leans given to present the said Petition.
CLAY CROSS RAILWAY BILL.
  CORNWALL ELECTRIC POWER BILL.

    ERDINGTON TRAMWAYS BILL.
    FINEDON URBAN DISTRICT WATER BILL.
    LEICESTERSHIRE AND WARWICKSHIRE ELECTRIC POWER BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.

MIDDLESEX COUNTY COUNCIL TRAMWAYS BILL.
  NEWPORT CORPORATION BILL.

    OMAGH URBAN DISTRICT CAS BLLL.
    READING GAS BILL.
    SHEPTON MALLET GAS BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.

  KING'S ROAD RAILWAY BILL. [H.L.],

    KING'S ROAD RAILWAY (PUTNEY EXTENSION) BILL [H.L.]
    Leave given to the Select Committee to consolidate the Bills into one Bill.
    LANCASHIRE COUNTY (LUNATIC ASYLUMS) BILL. [H.L.],

BRISTOL WATER BILL [H.L.],
  LONG WOOD GAS BILL [H.L.],

    RICKMANSWORTH GAS BILL [H.L.],
    NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.],
    BUXTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [H.L.],
    NORTHUMBERLAND ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.],
    TYNESIDE TRAMWAYS AND TRAM-ROADS BILL [H.L.].
    Report from the Committee of Selecttion, That the Lord Stanmore be proposed to the House as a Member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Earl of Camperdown, and that the Lord Stanmore be Chairman of the Select Committee; read and agreed to.

    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND).
    Amending General Order for the regulation of proceedings under and in
    684
    pursuance of the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899: Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

    PRIVATE LEGISLATURE PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
    Report from the Committee of Selection, That the following Lords be proposed to the House as the panel of Lords to act as Commissioners under the Act, viz.—
    V. Frankfort de Montmorency,
    L. Clifford of Chudleigh,
    agreed to; and the said Lords appointed accordingly.

    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
    Report by the Chairman of Committees of the House of Lords and the Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means in the House of Commons
    That the General Order not complied with in respect of the following Provisional Order:—
    Coatbridge Gas
    ought to be dispensed with, and the Order allowed to proceed, provided that Clause 25 be struck out of the said Order.
    That the General Orders not complied with in respect of the following Provisional Order:—

    Rothesay Tramways (Extensions)
    ought to be dispensed with, and the Order allowed to proceed, provided that the powers to construct Tramways Nos. 1 and 2 be struck out of the Order, and that the consent of the County Council of Bute to so much of Tramway No. 3 as affects the interests of the County Council acting as road authority be proved before the Examiners; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  COLONIES (ANNUAL).
  No. 351, Jamacia; Report for 1900–1901.

  TRADE REPORTS—ANNUAL SERIES.
  No. 2750, Russia; Odessa.
  No. 2751, Germany; Prussian Estimates.
  No. 2752. united States; New Orleans.
  No. 2753, Chile: Coquimbo.
  Presented [by Command], and ordered to lie on the Table.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Standing Order No. lvii. considered ("according to order), and suspended for this day's sitting.

  LONDON WATER BILL.
  Message from the Commons that they have appointed a Committee to consist of five members to join with a Committee of this House to consider the London Water Bill: and request this House to appoint an equal number of Lords to be joined with the Members of their House; The said message considered, on Motion: Moved that a Committee of five Lords be appointed to join with the Committee of the House of Commons, as mentioned in the said Message—(The Earl of Waldegrave); agreed to; Then (Standing Order lvii. having been suspended) the Lords following are named of the Committee:—

  E. Harrowby,

  E. Crewe,

  V. Llandaff,

  L. Balfour,

  L. Ludlow.

  Ordered that such Committee have lower to agree with the Committee of the House of Commons in the appointment of a Chairman.
  Then a Message was ordered to be sent to the House of Commons in answer to their said Message to inform them of the appointment of the said Committee by this House, and to propose that the Joint Committee do meet in Committee Room A on Monday, the 14th of April next, at two o'clock.

STATE OF MILITARY SUPPLIES IN 1895—REFERENCE TO DEBATES IN THE OTHER HOUSE—POINT OF ORDER.
LORD MONKS WELLhad the following notice on the Paper: "To ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Secretary of State is correctly reported to have said on Monday, March 17, The circumstances in which he (Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman) left the War Office in 1895, the position in
686
which he left the country, not merely in regard to small arms ammunition, which did come out, but the efficiency of the artillery, which did not come out, were such that, if complications had ensued in South Africa—["Hear, hear" from Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman]. The right hon. Gentleman cheers ironically, but twice the amount of ammunition he left was soon running short in South Africa; and the whole of the artillery he left was such that, if we had depended on his supply, we must have cleared out of South Africa after the first three months; '† and if it is the fact that in October, 1894, contracts had been entered into with private firms for a supply of cordite, and that no other contract with private firms for land purposes was found necessary till February, 1899; and to ask on what facts the statement as to an insufficient supply of artillery and ammunition is based; and to move for Papers."
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDEWNE): My Lords, before the noble Lord begins his remarks, I wish to say a few words on a point of order. We do not bind ourselves in this House by very stringent rules of procedure, but I am bound to say that the notice which the noble Lord has placed upon the Paper seems to me to be of a most extraordinary and irregular character. I understand the situation to be this—that there took place some days ago a discussion on military questions in the other House of Parliament, that during that discussion the Leader of the Opposition made some complaint to the Secretary of State for War, and that the Secretary of State for War thereupon retorted and made certain statements. There the matter, so far as the other House is concerned, ended, although I understand that the Leader of the Opposition had, and may vet have, opportunities of returning to the charge. The noble Lord now intervenes with an attempt to change the venue, and to extend to this House a discussion which took place in the other House. That, to say the least of it, is a very unusual proceeding. The noble Lord asks us to
†For the Hansard Report, see page 227 of this Volume.
confirm the accuracy of a statement made by the Secretary of State for War and to supply him with the facts upon which that statement was based. I therefore, in the first place, object to the Motion as being in an irregular and inconvenient shape. But, my Lords, that is not all. This notice was put on the Paper yesterday. I saw it, and I believe my noble friend behind me (Lord Raglan) saw it for the first time this morning. The question raised is one of very great importance, and if "it is to be debated we ought obviously to be given an opportunity of referring to the Papers and documents. The matter is one which personally concerns me not a little, because I happened to he Secretary of State for War when the late Government left office, and I certainly should like to have a sufficient opportunity of seeing from Papers which are in my possession what the position of the artillery and of the reserves of small arms ammunition was at the time I took office and at the time I relinquished office. As I saw this notice for the first time at nine o'clock this morning, and as I have been busily occupied since that moment, it must be obvious to the House that I could not have had the opportunity which I should have desired for that purpose. In these circumstances, I would suggest to the noble Lord that he would do well, in the first place, to present his Motion to your Lordships in a more regular and usual shape, and in the second place, to do so after an amount of notice at least sufficient to enable us to make ourselves masters of the case.
LORD MONKSWELL: Of course it is quite impossible after the appeal of the noble Marquess for me to proceed with my Motion today; but I thought that as the Secretary of State for war had made definite charges against Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman, it would only take a few minutes to get together the evidence on which the right hon. Gentleman relied to substantiate those charges. I shall, however, be quite willing to put off my Motion until the noble Marquess has had the opportunity of making such research as he may think desirable. At the same time, I cannot see why the terms of the
688
Motion should be altered, unless the noble Marquess states that it is out of order to refer to a debate which took, place in the House of Commons.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRIVY SEAL (The Marquess of SALISBURY): Hear, hear!
LORD MONKSWELL: Then I am prepared to alter the form of my Motion. I myself heard the Secretary for War's statement in the House of Commons, and therefore it appears to me that I am quite within my right in suggesting that the right hon. Gentleman made a certain statement, irrespective of the newspaper report. But that will be a matter for further consideration. For the present, I accept the suggestion of the noble Marquess to postpone my question.
THE EARL OF NORTH BROOK: My Lords, I, too deprecate notices similar to that on the Paper. I think it is an extraordinary proceeding to ask for an explanation in your Lordship's House of a statement alleged to have been made in the other House. Surely, it is for Sir Henry Campbell - Bannerman in the House of Commons to raise the subject, when an explanation could be given by the Secretary of State. The present certainly seems to be an irregular proceeding.
LORD TWEED MOUTH: While I think we must all agree that the form of the Motion is not strictly in order, I do not think it fair to take exception to the action of my noble friend, who has only erred a little in point of form. As the noble Marquess himself frankly admitted, he was the Minister responsible for the administration of the War Office at the time to which the Question refers, and, therefore, I do not think that, on reflection, noble Lords opposite will feel that my noble friend has exceeded what was a proper action in bringing this question forward in this House. He has expressed his desire to comply with the forms of the House, and to give the noble Lord opposite as much time as he requires to search the records, and I think that he is entitled to your Lordships' indulgence.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The noble Lord's Question is principally a demand to know whether the Secretary for War had been correctly reported in what he said the other night in the House of Commons. Just conceive what would be the result if in each House we asked whether the newspaper reports of the proceedings in the other House were correct and made them the subject of discussion. It would not be at all convenient that the debates in one House should be immediately referred to and form the subject of debate in the other House. After all, something else has taken place in the other House, but there is no reason why that should not be made just as much a subject of discussion as the question of cordite. I do not know that we could induce anybody in this House to carry on the debates with the vigour which Mr. Dillon has shown, but everybody will feel that it is not a convenient course to depart from the very wholesome rule that obtains in this matter with regard to debates in the other House.
THE MARQUESS OF RIPON: It is rather remarkable that the noble Marquess, in objecting to debates in the other House being referred to, himself alluded in the course of his observations to a discussion in the House of Commons in which Mr. Dillon took part. I do not regard the Motion as strictly in order, but the subject is a proper one for discussion, and my noble friend has undertaken to amend the form of his notice on a future occasion.
LORD TWEEDMOUTH: I think the whole point of the question is contained in the last half-dozen lines. The preceding part of the notice is merely the preamble.
[The subject then dropped.]

NAVAL DEFENCE.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My Lords, I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether in the case of this country being at war with one or more European Powers, he can rely absolutely upon the Navy alone for protection against invasion; and, further to inquire whether by relying upon the Navy for security against invasion, its general
690
power and effectiveness, the world over, would not be, pro tanto, lessened by the necessity of retaining in our home waters a sufficient naval force for the protection of the Unired Kingdom, I feel that very few words are needed in putting these Questions to the noble Earl. I have no wish to raise the general question of national defence, for I have a notice on the Paper dealing with that subject which I hope to be able to bring on later in the session, and which I shall postpone till late in the session, in the hope that by that time we shall know better how the proposals of the Government with regard to military organisation are working and are likely to work in the future. My only object today is to direct attention to two very important points in connection with the question of national defence. There is in this country a school who hold that we need look no further than the Navy, and that the Navy alone is all-sufficient for home defence. The chief exponent of that view is Sir John Colomb, and he is backed up by a certain portion of the Press. Therefore I am anxious to know what the opinion on the subject is of the First Lord of the Admiralty. My second Question illustrates my own view of what the effect would be of having to retain in the home waters a sufficient naval force for the protection of the United Kingdom. I hold that no British Government does its duty which does not put the country in such a position with regard to home defence that it shall be independent of the Navy. What strikes me as the great weakness with regard to what I will call the Colombine School is that they forget that the general power and effectiveness of the Navy throughout the world would be pro tanto lessened by the necessity of retaining a sufficient number of ships in our home waters for the protection of the United Kingdom. I beg to ask the Questions standing in my name.
THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (The Earl of SELBORNE): With very great respect to my noble friend who has asked these Questions, I hope he will allow me to say that I do not clearly see what public purpose is going to be served by putting these

691
conundrums. Nor do I consider it my duty to supply formulas to answer questions which contain material for debate for all the debating societies in London for years to come. Therefore I cannot enter into this matter quite in the spirit that the noble Lord asks me to do. If he wishes for an expression of opinion on my part, I can only say that I think it will be an evil day for this country when it ceases to regard the Navy as the instrument of material force in which it must place its reliance for protection against invasion, and that the place for the Navy in any such war as that contemplated would be wherever the ships of the enemy were to be found.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Will the noble Lord answer my second Question?
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I have nothing to add.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Because you cannot.
House adjourned at ten minutes lie-fore Six o'clock, to Monday, the 14th of April next, at quarter past four o'clock.