Lords Sitting of 5 July 1910

Preamble
The LORD BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'SThe LORD BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S—Took the Oath.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Belfast Corporation.
Also the Certificate that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 4).
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 4) BILL. [H.L.]
Reported, with Amendments, and re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-Morrow.
EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL. [H.L.]
Reported, without amendment, and re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
MALLOW URBAN DISTRICT GAS BILL.
Reported, with Amendments.
WATER ORDERS CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Chelsham and Woldingham Water Order, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table: The Orders made on the 22nd of June and Wednesday last respecting the commitment of the Bill to a Select Committee in regard to the said Order, discharged.
SHIREBROOK AND DISTRICT GAS BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
EGREMONT URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (GAS) BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
EXMOUTH URBAN DISTRICT WATER BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, a further Amendment made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
EXMOUTH GAS BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendment, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
SOUTHAMPTON CORPORATION BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
TYNEMOUTH CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
MATLOCK BATH AND SCARTHIN NICK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.3) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.5) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.1) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.2) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.3) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Read 2a (according to order), and committed.

GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No.2.) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

POLICE (WEEKLY REST-DAY) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to order).
LORD BELPER LORD BELPER moved an Amendment placing the county authorities in the same position as county boroughs in the matter of receiving four years' notice after the passing of the Act in order to make their preparations to carry it out.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I regret that I am obliged to be somewhat persistent in this matter and to again bring before the House the point to which I referred on the last occasion—the point with regard to the importance of county police authorities being given time to make their arrangements on the same sort of ground as county borough police authorities. I happened the day after the House last discussed this matter to pick up the most recent issue of the official Blue-book published by the Home Office with regard to the police forces of counties and boroughs, and I find that while there are altogether forty-five counties which have their own police forces, there are about fifty-eight county boroughs; but if you eliminate from those the less important ones with very small police forces, those which would not require much time to prepare for the arrangements that would have to be made under this Bill, you eliminate a fat larger number of small forces from the county boroughs than would be the case in regard to the counties. There are twenty-two county boroughs which have police forces of under 100, and twenty-one have a strength between 100 and 200. Therefore taking 200 as a limit, there are forty-three out of the fifty-eight county boroughs which would not necessarily require the time allowed them for making their preparations.
On the other hand, in the counties there are only seven police forces under 100 and twelve between 100 to 200. This gives only nineteen in the case of the counties compared with forty-three in the case of the county boroughs. It is quite true that when you come to the larger numbers there are, perhaps, more large police forces in the county boroughs than there are in the counties, but the two largest forces of all are both county forces, and behind them come two of the forces of the very big boroughs. Therefore, if considered fairly all-round the case of its being necessary to give time for arrangements in counties is quite as strong as in county boroughs; and I think it will be found that in the case of scattered police forces, some parts of the county populous and some parts sparsely populated, it will be very difficult to arrange by the addition of members of the force to give what would be absolutely necessary under the Bill—one day's rest in seven. In those circumstances I have ventured again to bring this particular point before the House, and my Amendments propose to put the counties in the same position as county boroughs with regard to allowing them to have four years' notice in which to make their arrangements. If my Amendments were inserted, this part of the Bill would run as follows—
"If this Act has not come into force as respects any other police authorities on the expiration of four years from the passing of this Act, it shall come into force at the expiration of such period as may thereafter be fixed by Order in Council."
Perhaps the most logical thing to do would be to pick out the police forces above a certain number, and say that all those should have a definite time given them for making their preparations, but as that is not the proposal in the Bill, and as the Bill includes all the minor county boroughs with small police forces as well as the large ones, it seems only fair that the counties should be treated in the same way. I beg to move the first Amendment standing in my name.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 22, leave out ("operation") and insert ("force"), and leave out ("before")and insert ("on") —(Lord Belper.)
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP): My Lords, the noble Lord has taken the convenient course of discussing all his Amendments upon the first one on the Paper, and I

1083
hope I may have the permission of the House to deal with them in the same way, because I think that taking a single Amendment and discussing it by itself is often found most inconvenient. With regard to the first Amendment on the Paper—that is, in line 22, to leave out the word "operation" and to substitute the word "force," and to leave out the word "before" and to insert the word "on" —so far as the Home Office are concerned we shall be very glad to accept it. But with regard to the other Amendments, I am anxious, if I can, to persuade the noble Lord to accept an alternative Amendment, which will, I hope, commend itself to him.
Before referring to that further I feel that I owe it to your Lordships to explain a mistake which I made on the Committee stage of the Bill with regard to county boroughs. I am afraid I misled the noble Marquess the Leader of the Opposition with regard to the point of the Orders in Council affecting county boroughs. I find, on looking into the point, that that is not so, and that, as the Bill stands at present, the county boroughs, in which the noble Lord opposite, Lord Wenlock, is interested, would not be affected. I have thought it right to make this explanation to the House.
With regard to the noble Lord's further Amendments, with the technical wording of which I will not trouble your Lordships at the present time, I think you will see that the effect of them would be that the Act would come into force at a date fixed by an Order in Council, but that the Order in Council could not be made for four years, during which time the authorities would have an opportunity of obtaining recruits and increasing their police forces. The alternative which I wish to suggest is again one with the actual technical wording of which I will not trouble your Lordships at this moment; but the effect of the Amendment which I would ask your Lordships to consider as an alternative is this—that the Act should come into force at a date fixed by Order in Council, but that the date should not be earlier than four years from the passing of the Act. That, I think, really meets the point, but it would not cause the delay which might arise through the adoption of the Amendments which have been placed on the Paper by the noble Lord
1084
below the Gangway. Supposing the Order in Council could not be issued within four years, and we then thought it necessary to give these large local authorities ample time in which to secure recruits, the benefits of the Act would not really accrue to all the police constables in the country for eight years. What we should like to do would be to give them the benefit of it at the expiration of four years. If the noble Lord would allow us to put it in such a way that the Order in Council might, if thought desirable, be issued at once, giving a period of four years, the noble Lord would be able to raise a discussion in this House upon it, and, if necessary, secure an alteration in the draft Order.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: My Lords, the promoters of the Bill are most anxious to meet the noble Lord and the County Councils Association in every way, and I think he can congratulate himself on the excessive inroads he has already made into the material of this Bill. May I say, on behalf of the promoters, that we willingly recognise the desire to give a reasonable time for bringing this Bill into operation, but I do venture to hope that the alternative suggested by the Home Office may commend itself to the noble Lord. It seems to me that that is quite a sufficient time to allow for the bringing of this Bill into operation, and the fact that each Order in Council may be made the matter of debate and comment in this House ought to be a sufficient safeguard for the interests of the people concerned.
LORD WENLOCK: My Lords, as regards the county boroughs I am bound to say that I have heard with great regret the withdrawal by the noble Earl of the statement he made in Committee that county boroughs were to be placed on the same footing as counties. I accepted the noble Earl's statement on that occasion, and was greatly disappointed to hear that the wording of the clause would not cover that particular point. I am bound to say I have heard the noble Earl's statement with the greatest regret and the keenest disappointment. I had hoped that I had impressed upon him the importance of placing county boroughs on the same footing as counties, and I much regret that the noble Earl misled me on the last occasion, as otherwise I might have taken steps to raise the question again on Report. In these circumstances I am afraid nothing

1085
further can be done, and we must accept the situation as we now find it.
At the same time, perhaps, I might be allowed to ask the noble Earl what the position will be with regard to the counties. I understand that notice will be given by Order in Council that the Bill is to come into force on a particular date. It may be three or four years before the Order will take effect. That Order can be objected to when it first appears, say, four years before it is to come into force. But the circumstances of counties may be very different four years hence from what they are to-day, and arguments brought forward to oppose the Order in Council may not have the force to-day which they would have four years hence. The position of the counties is altering every day. New areas are being taken from counties, and the position may be very different four years hence from what it is to-day. I do not know whether the Home Office have considered that point.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I am not surprised that a note of disappointment should have run through the observations just delivered by my noble friend behind me, because, like him, I was left under the impression when we last discussed this subject that this procedure by Order in Council was to apply to all police authorities whether in counties or in boroughs. But the noble Earl who represents the Home Office has told us very candidly on that point that he was not precisely aware of the operation of the measure. Whatever may be the merits, I venture to suggest to my noble friend that it would be impossible for us now to alter the Bill so as to extend procedure by Order in Council to the county boroughs. There is no Amendment on the Paper to that effect, and the alteration would be a vital one. It would, moreover, be an alteration which I gather the promoters of the Bill and the Home Office do not regard with favour. In those circumstances I venture to think we shall do well to accept the variant of Lord Belper's Amendment which is proposed by the noble Earl on the Front Bench opposite, which will, I understand, have this effect, that procedure by Order in Council will apply to the county boroughs, but the Order in Council may be made and also discussed at any time during the period of the interregnum of four years, although
1086
it will not come into operation until after the period of four years.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: I am afraid I have misled the noble Marquess. The Order in Council procedure will not apply to county boroughs. It will apply to county councils and other authorities, but not to county boroughs.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: The procedure of Order in Council will not apply at all to county boroughs?
EARL BEAUCHAMP: That is so.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: It will apply only to county and other police authorities. Then the difference between my noble friend and the noble Earl is that my noble friend desired that procedure by Order in Council should, so to speak, not be set in motion until after the four years were over, whereas under the proposal of the noble Earl opposite an Order in Council might be made in the second or third year although it would not take effect until after the four years interregnum had passed.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: As regards this four years, there seems to be a little misapprehension. The period of four years was inserted in the Bill in order to meet the reasonable objections of those who said that it was not possible to organise the police force to secure a weekly rest-day at once owing to the difficulty of obtaining recruits. It is proposed to say now that the Bill shall come into force, but as it is impossible to get sufficient recruits in one year a period of four years is given in which they can be obtained. I understand that an Order in Council would come into force after the interval of four years, during which the authorities would have time to recruit their police forces up to whatever strength is requisite to give full effect to the Bill.
LORD WENLOCK: Supposing in my county an Order in Council comes out two years hence, would that Order in Council give us four years from the date of its appearance, or would the Order provide for the coming into effect of this weekly rest-day four years after the passing of this Bill, thereby only giving us two years in which to make the necessary

1087
arrangements? On that point I am not clear.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: I have not yet seen on the Paper the actual Amendment which the Home Office propose to substitute for those drafted by Lord Belper. I do not know whether it would be possible for the noble Earl who represents the Home Office to read out the exact words of the Amendment which he proposes.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: I shall be very glad to do so. The alternative Amendment which I suggest would be this, that the clause should read—
"And if this Act has not come into force as respects any other police authority—
that is to say, a county authority or a smaller borough—
"on such date, not less than four years after the passing of this Act, as may hereafter he fixed by Order in Council, it shall come into force at any date so fixed."
I think these things are very complicated and difficult to follow, but if we might see the Amendment in print in the Bill we might have an opportunity on Third Reading of considering whether a further Amendment was necessary.
LORD BELPER: My Lords, I feel that I have been reasonably met in the different Amendments which I have proposed. I shall be very glad to accept the Amendment suggested by the noble Earl on behalf of the Home Office if it does carry out what I hope it may do, and ensure that we shall not have shorter notice than four years. I recognise that we have one weapon which may be of some advantage—namely, the provision that these Orders in Council have to lie on the Table of the House. I do not fancy that any Minister representing the Home Office is likely to be unreasonable when we have such a weapon as that, which will enable us to object to the Order in Council when made if reasonable proofs are not given that it is a proper action to take. If I may leave it in that form until I see it on Third Reading, I shall be glad.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD BELPER LORD BELPER, having accepted the alternative Amendment put forward by
EARL BEAUCHAMP EARL BEAUCHAMP, did not move his further Amendments dealing with this point.
EARL BEAUCHAMP EARL BEAUCHAMP then moved his alternative Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, lines 22 and 23, leave out ("the expiration of such period") and insert ("such date not less than four years after the passing of this Act."—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 24, leave out ("operation") and insert ("force.")—(Lord Belper.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, lines 24 and 25, leave out("the expiration of that period") and insert ("any date so fixed.")—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD BELPER LORD BELPER, on behalf of Viscount ST. ALDWYN, next moved an Amendment to provide that the Order in Council "may contain such modifications as may be necessary to provide for the case of small police stations in rural districts, or for other special circumstances affecting the district of a police authority."
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I must ask your indulgence in moving the next Amendment. The noble Viscount, Lord St. Aldwyn, is unavoidably prevented from being here to-day, and has requested me to state the reasons which have induced him to ask for this little further Amendment in the Bill. The fact is, there are many rural counties where the difficulties may be considerable in carrying this Bill into force absolutely literally. In Gloucestershire there are more than fifty stations with only one policeman, and there are more than forty with only two policemen. I believe this is true to almost the same extent in Wiltshire, and I have no doubt that if we had the opportunity of getting the statistics of other counties we should find that there are others similarly situated. It is quite true that in such districts there is practically no crime, and the policeman's work on the Sunday usually consists in attending church and having a healthy walk in the afternoon. But this is often the day when boys get into mischief, and

1089
it is very undesirable that a district should be left without police on Sundays. If one constable had to relieve another, it would often involve very great trouble, and expense, and it seems, therefore, that some variation should be made to allow of the particular difficulties of rural districts like these being met in some way as by a modification of the Order in Council. I am sure noble Lords will see that the suggestion which Lord St. Aldwyn has made is of a very reasonable character, and designed to meet practical difficulties which would no doubt arise if you had to carry out absolutely literally the relieving of every policeman for one day in seven and putting another in his place. I am sorry the noble Viscount is not here, as he probably has more knowledge than I have of the particular districts to which his Amendment refers; but I think your Lordships will recognise the importance of having some latitude with regard to these cases.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 26, after ("Order") insert ("and may contain such modifications as may be necessary to provide for the case of small police stations in rural districts, or for other special circumstances affecting the district of a police authority")—(Lord Belper.)
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: So far as the promoters of the Bill are concerned, we are glad to accept this Amendment. So far as I myself am concerned, I confess I was under the impression that an Order in Council could make these regulations, and so forth, without any words being inserted in the Bill. But if the insertion of these words in the Bill is necessary, I am very glad to accept them.
On Question, Amendment agreed to,
Bill to be read 3a on Monday next, and to be printed as amneded. (No.88.)
House adjourned at five minutes past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.