Lords Sitting of 21 July 1910

BARON SOUTHWARK.
The Right Honourable Richard Knight Causton having been created Baron Southwark of Southwark, in the county of London—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
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 Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8).

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 14).

Local Government Provisional Order (No. 15).

Also the Certificates that no Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bills:

Port of London (Registration of Craft) Provisional Order.

Land Drainage Provisional Order (No. 2).

And also the Certificate that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Middleton Corporation.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
(Ardrossan, Saltcoats and District Electric Lighting Order, and Cambuslang Electric Lighting (Extension) Order.)
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
(Unopposed Orders.)
Reported, without amendment.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
Re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No 1) 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.
Reported, without amendment, and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

SOUTHAMPTON CORPORATION BILL.
  FYLDE WATER BOARD BILL.
    EASTBOURNE CORPORATION BILL.
    Reported, with Amendments.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL.
(Merthyr Tydfil Order.)
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Five Lords appointed a Select Committee on the London County Council (Tramways and improvements) Bill and another Bill, do form the Select Committee for the consideration of the Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill (Merthyr Tydfil Order); read, and agreed to: All Petitions referred to the Committee, with leave to the Petitioners praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bill to be heard as desired, as also Counsel for the Bill.

LITTLE HULTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments: Further Amendments made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL.
  (Merthyr Tydfil Order.)
  Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Earl of Morley be proposed to the House as a Member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Lord Langford; read, and agreed to.

CHILDREN ACT (1908) AMENDMENT BILL.
  COMPANIES (CONVERTED SOCIETIES) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons.
CHILDREN ACT (1908) AMENDMENT BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Monday next (The Lord Stanley of Alderley (L. Sheffield).) (No. 123.)
COMPANIES (CONVERTED SOCIETIES) BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Monday next (The Lord Hamilton of Dalzell.) (No. 124.)
WATER PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): The Amendments proposed by the Committee made: The Report of Amendments to be received on Monday next.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BELL.
  Read 3a (according to order), and passed.

SMALL HOLDINGS (No. 3) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.— (Earl Carrington.)
Loan BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, before your Lordships lose control of this Bill altogether, 1 should like, with your Lordships' permission, to make a short reference to what occurred during the passage of the Bill through Committee while was occupying the Chair. An Amendment was moved, and upon that Amendment privilege was pleaded as a bar to this House entertaining the Amendment. In the first instance, I should like, quite briefly, to recall the facts. The Amendment proposed was in the second clause, and was the substitution of the one word "November" for the word "September," thereby increasing by two months the length of time given to applicants or claimants for compensation in which to prefer their claims. There are, of course, questions on the merits as to whether that extension of time should be given. Into that aspect of the matter I do not propose to enter, or upon it to say a single word.
But the noble Earl the President of the Board of Agriculture, who is in charge of
378
the Bill, met this proposal to increase the time by two months, not by any argument on the merits, but by a simple statement that it would be a breach of privilege. I venture to say that that placed the Committee in rather a difficult position, because if this House accepts, even upon the word of a. Cabinet Minister, that a certain Amendment is a breach of privilege, the House or the Committee may thereby be afterwards committed to the abandonment of its privilege without knowing what it is doing. That does not seem to me a safe position for this House to take. I am perfectly certain that if any member of the Government or any member of this House thinks that a course proposed by a noble Lord is a breach of privilege, he is not only within his duty but is almost bound to point out to the House his opinion. But it is not only reasonable and courteous, but absolutely necessary, that the grounds on which the statement that a particular proposal is a breach of privilege is made should be put before the House; for this reason, that each House is the guardian of its own privileges. Supposing we make an Amendment in a Bill here and it goes down to another place and the authority there says that that particular Amendment is a breach of privilege, that is conclusive so far as the other House of Parliament is concerned. We may accept it or not, or record our opinion. But it is impossible for us to express any intelligent opinion as to whether an Amendment is or is not a breach of privilege until we know the reasons upon which that statement is founded.
It is difficult for me, I am bound to say, to see how this Amendment can possibly be regarded as a breach of privilege. I listened to the arguments while I was in the Chair; and the point which seems to me to be conclusive against its being a breach of privilege is this, that the Amendment does not give one single individual who had not a right to make a claim under the Bill as it formerly stood any right to make a claim. It cannot, therefore, be said with any justice that it places any extra charge on the Exchequer. If a man fails to make a claim by September 1, as the Bill stood he loses his right; but the extension of the time does not give to a single individual who had no right up to September 1 any right to make a claim up to November 1. I think the argument of the Lord Chief Justice on that was conclusive. The request which I want to make to those in authority here or else-

379
where is this. If, as seems to be foreshadowed, a claim is made elsewhere that this is a breach of privilege, I hope that when that comes up it will be accompanied by a distinct and concrete statement as to wherein consists the breach of privilege of which this House is supposed to be guilty.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (EARL CARRINGTON): My Lords: I hope your Lordships will excuse me from entering into a Homeric contest with my noble friend as to what is or what is not a breach of privilege, or what. is safe or what is unsafe for your Lordships to do. Your Lordships are the guardians of your own honour, and in your Lordships' hands that honour may well be left. I therefore hope my noble friend will excuse me from following him with regard to that. I submit very respectfully that it is not my duty in any way to raise a question of privilege; still less is it my duty to state grounds upon which such a question may be raised in another place. I believe that the question is absolutely certain to be raised in the House of Commons in this instance. I may be wrong, but I did think that I would be wanting in courtesy to your Lordships had I not stated my belief when the Amendment was moved by Lord Dunmore.
On Question, Bill read 3a, with the Amendment, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

DUKE OF YORK'S SCHOOL (CHAPEL) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP): My Lords, the object of this Bill is to vest in the Commissioners of Works, freed from ecclesiastical uses, the chapel comprised in the buildings situate in the metropolitan borough of Chelsea, formerly occupied by the Duke of York's Royal Military School. Your Lordships will see on examining the Bill that it deals only with the chapel, and not with the whole question of disposing of the site. This is, no doubt, a cumbrous way of dealing with a portion of the site, but there were no means of doing so other than by an Act of Parliament. In these circumstances I hope your Lordships will give the Bill a Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD DEN1VIAN: My Lords, this is one of those Bills which make an annual appearance at this time of the year. Its object is to put the Public Works Loan Commissioners and the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland in funds for the exercise of their various lending powers for the present financial year. There is no unusual feature in the Bill, so I trust your Lordships will give it a Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Denman.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

TERRITORIAL FORCE AMBULANCE.
VISCOUNT GALWAY VISCOUNT GALWAY rose to call attention to the recent scheme issued by the Order of St. John of Jerusalem as lately published, and to ask what scheme is now proposed by the War Office for the efficient nursing of the Territorial Force.
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I know that your Lordships are anxious, as all connected with County Associations are, that the scheme for the nursing of the Territorial Force should be on a sound footing, and as, unfortunately, some doubt and misunderstanding have arisen concerning the subject, I venture to call attention to it to-day. Last year a scheme was propounded for the thorough nursing of the Territorial Force. That was left to the Territorial Associations, and the general principle was that., whatever body found the organisation and enrolled the detachments, the whole question of examination and the granting of certificates was to be in the hands of the St. John Ambulance Association. The result was that the St. John Association formed a special branch for Territorial ambulance. A great work has been done

381
by this Association ineducating people in the giving of first aid, and the fact that there are over 300 centres in England alone working for this purpose shows how keenly the St. John Ambulance Association have taken up the work.
Unfortunately, some disputes have arisen, into which I do not propose to enter, which have produced. a certain uncertainty which is seriously handicapping the work of the Territorial Associations. One case has come to my knowledge in which members of the St. John Brigades have felt themselves compelled to leave the detachments already formed. I cannot help feeling that this must be entirely owing to some misunderstanding, which no doubt will shortly be put right. But I quote it to show that this, among other things, is very discouraging to the Territorial organisation throughout time country. But the question I specially wish to bring before the attention of the War Office to-day is that of certificates of efficiency. I hope it is not the intention of the War Office in any way to lower the efficiency standard. There is one large county detachment which I know intimately, the members of which all possess the certificates of the St. John Association, and those people, while proud of belonging to the Territorial Force, are equally proud of their St. John certificates, and they would be very averse to any persons joining that detachment who did not possess a certificate of equal value and of an equally high standard. It has been suggested in some cases that lectures might be given by nurses to women candidates for certificates; but I hope that, if a limited number of such lectures are so given, the remaining lectures of a course will be delivered and the examinations for final certificates conducted by medical men.
I have seen it stated in the Press that the War Office at one time contemplated that nurses might not only give lectures but also give certificates. That would be bringing the whole thing to such a farce that I cannot believe it was ever seriously contemplated by the War Office. A really qualified nurse might, perhaps, give women one or two lectures out of a course, but, as I have said, the remainder should be given by qualified medical men. One point on which I hope to get a satisfactory answer is that the War Office will insist on the certificate being given by an independent medical man. On the question of medical
382
men there is one other point I should like to bring to the notice of the War Office. A large number of patriotic medical men have given their services gratuitously in the teaching of classes in their districts, but I understand that the Medical Association is endeavouring to put pressure on medical men to charge certain fees for these classes. I hope that will not be carried to any great extent, because if the Medical Association insisted on medical men demanding large fees for their lectures, it would render the classes practically prohibitive. I hope the War Office will take that matter into consideration.
This whole subject will come before the Territorial Associations at their meetings shortly, and it would be a great advantage if we could he assured with regard to the standard of the certificates. These voluntary aid detachments were only begun last autumn; great progress has been made, and I am sure, if it is clearly understood throughout the country that the whole system of nursing for the Territorial Force in time of war is really meant seriously, that during the coming winter numerous classes will be formed all over the country, and that by this time next year we shall have a thorough organisation. But if we are to have this scheme complete in time of war the whole of the arrangements must be made in time of peace. If, unfortunately, the standard is lowered, the scheme will fail from want of support, and deservedly so. I hope the noble Lord the Under-Secretary will be able to give a satisfactory answer on the points I have put before him, and an answer which will remove the doubts which at present exist.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD LUCAS): My Lords, I am sure I can echo what fell from the noble Viscount with regard to the very valuable work that has been done by the St. John Ambulance Association. We know that they did form what I believe they called a Territorial branch to meet the great calls that were being made upon them in connection with the Territorial Force, the holding of their certificate being ft necessary preliminary to any man or woman becoming a member of a voluntary aid detachment. They have done valuable work in that way, and thanks to what they have done the Red Cross Society has been enabled by much hard work to organise a considerable number

383
of voluntary aid detachments. I need not go more than the noble Viscount did into certain differences of opinion that arose; but one good thing certainly has come out of this—that is that we have recently formed an advisory council which sits at the War Office and has upon it representatives of both the Red Cross Society and County Associations. Recommendations made by that advisory council have recently been submitted to the Army Council, but we have not yet come to any actual decision upon them. I can assure the noble Viscount, however, that we have no intention whatever of lowering the standard of efficiency of persons entering the voluntary aid detachments of the Territorial Force.
In the first place, it is a necessary preliminary before anybody can go into a voluntary aid detachment that he or she should hold a certificate. I would qualify my statement that everybody who goes into these detachments is required to hold a certificate, by saying that we propose to make one or two exceptions for the benefit of specialists, such as people who have already been in the Regular, the Special Reserve, or the Territorial Army Medical Corps—pharmacists and people of that kind; but everyone who joins for general duty will be required to possess a certificate. With regard to the nature of the certificate, there is no doubt that, though good work has been clone by the St. John Ambulance Association, there is a great demand that the granting of certificates should be facilitated. In a number of places there has been a. general desire to raise voluntary aid detachments, but for one reason or another the people who had intended to join have not been able to get the first aid certificate. We are, therefore, considering the acceptance of certificates other than that of the St. John Ambulance Association. The nature of those certificates we have not yet settled, but we do not intend that the certificate should be any lower than that of the well-known standard maintained by the St. John Association.
As to whether classes should be trained by nurses or medical men, the noble Viscount has there touched upon what is undoubtedly a very vexed question. There are a large number of people who consider that nursing should be taught by qualified medical practitioners, and there is another
384
large section who hold the opinion that the best persons to teach nursing are nurses. We have to reconcile those warring factions and arrive at a conclusion which, while enlisting both parties in our support, will not in any way let down the standard. This matter is being considered at the present moment by the advisory council. We are issuing one letter to County Associations on the question, and we shall be issuing more. We are also issuing a letter to General Officers commanding setting out, and asking them to communicate to the County Associations, the attitude we propose to take up with regard to these detachments. We regard the County Association as the authority which should recognise the voluntary aid detachments, and we do not propose ourselves to recognise any voluntary aid detachments which are not recognised by the County Associations. To such voluntary aid detachments as are recognised by the County Associations we shall, of course, afford formal recognition; and we propose to publish from time to time in Army Orders the lists of recognised voluntary aid detachments forwarded to us by the County Associations.
VISCOUNT KNUTSFORD: My Lords, as a former director of the ambulance department of the Order of St. John and a member of the British Red Cross Society, perhaps I may be allowed to say a few words on this occasion, especially as I desire to clear up one or two points that have arisen and which I have seen noticed in the newspapers. In the first place, I am glad that the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War has been good enough to recognise, and with great courtesy, the work that the ambulance department of the Order of St. John has done under the original arrangement of 1909. A territorial branch of the ambulance department was at once formed, and at considerable labour and expense a staff and county sections were started in most of the counties to facilitate persons coming up for instruction and receiving certificates. Then difficulties arose. I do not, however, desire to accentuate them, or to dwell upon them.
I will deal first with the point raised by the noble Viscount, which is one of great importance, and upon which there has been considerable misapprehension. The ambulance department have granted certificates

385
during the last year to something like 30,000 men and women, every one of whom is free to join the voluntary aid detachments. It has been said that there has been a brigade order of the ambulance department of the Order of St. john which prevented members of the brigade from joining voluntary aid detachments, but I am informed that there is no such order. In one county—Devonshire—a letter was shown stating that was the case that since the department had separated from the agreement with the War Office members of the brigade would not be allowed to join voluntary aid detachments. That was a pure mistake, and it arose in the office during t he absence of Sir Richard Temple, the assistant director of the. St. John Ambulance Association, whose work has been most excellent and consistent throughout in helping forward these great objects. Directly the matter came to his notice Sir Richard made a speech at Gosport in which he stated distinctly the position of the ambulance department. He said—
"Join voluntary aid detachments if you wish, or join the St. John Ambulance companies if you wish. It is nothing to the St. John Ambulance Association which you join, as long as you do join one or the other and learn first-aid and nursing. Choose in your own neighbourhood the One which best suits you."
To prevent difficulty arising in the future or any doubt that those who obtain the St. John certificate are at liberty to join any body, it has been arranged that the substance of the speech of the assistant director shall be embodied in a circular, which will be sent out as soon as possible. I hope that statement will satisfy the noble Viscount on that important point.
To return to the difficulties and friction that arose: The original agreement provided that all persons who joined voluntary aid detachments should have the certificate of the ambulance department of the Order of St. John, and it was feared that if certificates were accepted of other societies, or if certificates were given on an inferior course of training and examination, it would tend to lessen the value of the certificates of the St. John Ambulance Association. I need hardly say that it would be fatal to our work and to the work of ambulance altogether if in any way the value of those certificates were diminished. Not only would that be the case
386
in this country. It would be a fatal blow in India, where we have done magnificent work, helped by Lord Curzon, Lord Minto, Lord Kitchener, and, amongst others, by Lieut.-Colonel A. Yate, who did very good service in promoting that work; and also in almost every Colony (those with responsible government as well as Crown Colonies), where we have active working centres in close touch with the ambulance department here. Therefore to lessen the value of the certificate would he a dangerous thing, and I am glad that Lord Lucas recognises that. I need hardly point out, moreover, that the decision to allow an inferior certificate was a direct breach of the agreement that was entered into between us, the British Red Cross Society, and the War Office. Therefore after very careful consideration by what I may call the experts in this work—the director of the ambulance department., the assistant director, and the executive committee—it was decided that we could do better and help the War Office more easily and without friction if we acted independently; and to show that we were desirous in every way of continuing the work two resolutions were passed, one giving the reason why we separated from the War Office arrangement, and the other stating that the ambulance department —
"will continue to carry on the work of instruction it has already inaugurated on a large scale, and will in such other ways as are open to the St. John Ambulance Association render assistance to those who desire to qualify themselves to give aid to the sick and wounded of the Territorial Force in time of war."
Turning to the actual scheme now put forward of having St. John Ambulance county companies, I may explain that it was felt to be necessary to give greater facilities to people who wished to undergo instruction and obtain certificates. Therefore these companies have been established in the counties, but every member who obtains the St. John certificate can join any body he pleases—a voluntary aid detachment, or the brigade, or the ambulance association. I may add that every man arid woman who obtains the certificate of the St. John Ambulance Association and joins at any time one of these St. John county companies is bound to make a declaration to serve with the Territorial Force whenever it is mobilised in the event of war. Therefore under this

387
system there will be thousands and thousands of trained men and women at the disposal of the County Associations and British Red Cross Society if they are wanted. Experience has shown that there is a different feeling in different counties. In Lancashire, for instance, as I am informed, there is a very small feeling in favour of the British Red Cross Society but a very strong feeling in favour of the work of the ambulance department of the Order of St.. John, and I think probably in that case most of the men and women who get certificates will prefer to join the St. John ambulance company. In sonic other counties—Gloucestershire, I am told, and Devonshire, for instance—the feeling is the other way. But, at all events, every man and woman who obtains our certificate is free to join whatever organisation lie or she prefers. I hope I have shown that we have in no way separated from the scheme of the War Office through any dislike of the work or any intention not to carry it on. It is quite the contrary. We hope to do the work more effectively in the future than we have been able to do it hitherto considering the differences of opinion that arose under the original agreement; and the result is that the War Office will have in time of war an enormous number of men and women all ready and bound to join the Territorial Force,
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed to say a word or two on this subject as I raised the question the other day. I was under the impression that the noble Lord the Under-Secretary was going shortly to provide the County Associations with fresh instructions. I do not know whether it is desirable, certainly not so far as we are concerned, to wait until the advisory council have made up their mind on the matter. What I wish to specially emphasise to-night is that the County Associations who have had instructions to do this work are at a standstill because the foundation on which they were originally instructed to build has broken down. The scheme as represented by the diagram is admirable. You have at the head the War Office; following that you have the British Red Cross central office; then you get the County Associations all working in unison, the county branches of the Red Cross Society, the county directors appointed by those branches, and, finally, the voluntary
388
aid detachments. But those voluntary detachments are in the chrysalis state.
In the first instructions the County Associations were made responsible for ambulance services for the Territorial Army. They were allowed, however, to delegate their powers to the Red Cross Society, and to that society alone; but in the original scheme, paragraph 22, County Associations in England were told that all persons wishing to join voluntary aid detachments should be in possession of the first aid and nursing certificates of the St. John Ambulance Association. And here I should like to add my meed of praise to the St. John Association for the admirable work they have done. It was, as I have said, originally contemplated that every man and woman before joining the voluntary aid detachments should be in possession of the St. John Ambulance certificate. I do not propose to deal with the differences of opinion that have unfortunately arisen, but I should like to say a word with regard to the county companies of the St. John Ambulance Association, which were also referred to by the noble Viscount who has just sat down. In most counties, although we may not have our voluntary aid detachments absolutely complete, we have the framework for them, and counties which have delegated their powers, as most have, to the Red Cross Society will be placed in a position of great difficulty if they have to compete with the county companies of the St. John Ambulance Association. Gloucestershire has already got forty-three voluntary aid detachments in full work, and they are very apprehensive of the difficulty which may arise.
As to the question of certificates, I think we understood from what fell from the noble Lord that these certificates would be given by independent medical men. That, I take it, the St. John Association is very anxious to insist upon, and also that there should be no lowering of the present standard. The noble Viscount who initiated this discussion raised the question of instruction by nurses. To the ordinary mind instruction in home nursing given by a certified nurse is a very natural and desirable thing; but I believe the great difficulty in introducing the question of home nursing lies in the fact that the British Medical Union will have nothing to do with it. That Union is a very powerful body, and if that point is lost sight

389
of we may again find ourselves in considerable difficulty with those medical men who are in the British Medical Union. I believe a great number of the most responsible medical men belong to that Union, and it is quite possible, unless we are very careful in this matter, that we may find ourselves in the difficulty of not having the necessary medical men to give the instruction and the help required. While we have up to now in many cases been able to depend on the generous assistance of the medical profession in giving instruction free, I understand that in certain parts of the country medical men have been instructed that they must be paid for the work they do. That, of course, would add very largely to our expenditure. I refer to these points because if we are to have a satisfactory solution they will have to be carefully considered.
There were one or two other points raised in a discussion at a meeting of the Council of Territorial Associations, and I undertook that these points should be put before the noble Lord. As an impression has got about that members of voluntary aid detachments in time of war will receive ls. a day and rations, I should like to ask the definite question whether that is right or not, and whether any payments in money or kind will be given to Members of voluntary aid detachments. The other question which was raised, and which I undertook should be brought before the noble Lord's attention, was that of the county companies of the St. John Ambulance Association. If they are formed and officially recognised, will they in case of war be protected under the Geneva Convention? That is a point worthy of consideration, because it may make a considerable difference when the choice is offered to those interested whether they will join the voluntary aid detachments or the county companies of the St. John Association. We hear a good deal at one time and another about a free hand being given. I gather from what the noble Lord the Under-Secretary has said that County Associations are to be given a free hand in this direction; but where we have already formed voluntary aid detachments under the original scheme of the War Office, we shall be in a considerable difficulty. I would therefore urge that definite instructions should be given to County Associations at the earliest possible date.

INJURED TERRITORIALS.
EARL STANHOPE*EARL STANHOPE rose to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any application had been made that pensions and allowances should be paid to the men of the 4th London (Howitzer) Brigade injured by a motor-van on August 12 last, and if so, what action His Majesty's Government proposed to take in the matter.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, the Question I have put on the Paper refers to an accident that happened on August 12 last year on Salisbury Plain. Your Lordships may, perhaps, remember that the 4th London (Howitzer) Brigade was returning to camp, I think after doing its annual firing, when a newspaper motor-van dashed into the rear of the column, hurling the men in all directions. Five of the men were so seriously injured that they were unable to return to their ordinary vocations for a considerable period, and two others were injured to such an extent that there is great doubt whether they will ever completely recover. I am informed that the owners of the motor-van, the Daily Chronicle, have behaved with considerable liberality, but the men have not yet really received proper compensation. I believe I am correct in stating that there is no legal liability on the War Office to make any payment at all; but were these men employed by private individuals they would receive compensation under the Act, or if they were members of the Regular Forces they would receive the usual pensions and allowances. I think your Lordships will agree, therefore, that there is considerable moral obligation that some payment should be made to them. Perhaps it is going rather far to state that if the War Office behaved with generosity and promptitude in this case it would be an incitement to people to join the Territorial Force and be run over by a motor-van; but I think the noble Lord will agree that if a grievance, either real or imaginary, is allowed to continue in such cases, it will at any rate be a grave deterrent to recruiting, I therefore trust that the noble Lord will be able to assure the House that the claims of these men will be met in a satisfactory manner.
LORD LUCAS: My Lords, one of the men injured in this unfortunate accident last year died; nine were treated in the

391
military hospital, two of whom were removed in November to St. Bartholomew's Hospital; and six men were treated in camp. I take it that the noble Earl's Question refers more particularly to the two men who were very seriously injured. They have just recently, 1 understand, left the civil hospital to which they went, and have, I very much regret to say, been discharged from the Territorial Force as being medically unfit to perform their duties. We deal with Territorials in such cases as this on exactly the same lines as we deal with Regulars. A man who has to be discharged from the Army as being unfit to perform his duties has a claim for a pension, and we have done with regard to these men what we should have done with regard to Regulars. We have forwarded their case to the Chelsea Commissioners, who are at the present moment considering whether they can give pensions in this case. As your Lordships know, the rules with regard to the granting of pensions are laid down, and they are rules from which we can never depart in any circumstances whatever. They are carefully drawn up and extremely fair. But I can assure your Lordships that the case of these men will receive the fullest consideration, and that they will be treated in every way exactly as if they were men of the Regular Army who had been injured. With regard to the other men whose injuries were not of what may be called a permanent character, we have a special method of treating such injured persons. Whilst they are in hospital or under medical treatment they draw for every day they are there a certain rate of pay, usually 3s. 6d. a day. I am sorry to say I have not been able to get accurate information as to whether those men have received the pay to which they are entitled, but 1 have no doubt they have. If the noble Earl has any information to the effect that they have not, I hope he will communicate with me, and. I will see that the money is paid, though I have every reason to believe it has been.
LORD HAVERSHAM: My Lords, I think it would be satisfactory to your Lordships if my noble friend could give some assurance that if these pensions are not granted by the Commissioners and cannot come within the terms of the Army regulations, the greatest possible
392
pressure will be used by the War Office to obtain pensions from those who caused the injuries. If I recollect aright, it was the most disgraceful case of racing in the early morning that I ever heard of. The men in this motor-van, in the rush to sell their newspapers, drove right into this Brigade. There was a dense fog at the time, and when the motor-van was in the midst of the men the driver drove on and injured more. I never heard of a worse case, and it will be a national disgrace if these men do not receive pensions from some source.

THE SUPER-TAX.
LORD MONK BRETTON LORD MONK BRETTON rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether the notice and form to be served on persons required to make a return of their total income from all sources for the purposes of assessment to Super-Tax, and attached to the Regulations made by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue under Section 72 (8) of the Finance Act, 1910, and laid upon the Table of this House, are regarded by His Majesty's Government as part of the Regulations, and whether, in the event of the Commissioners altering the form at any future time, any revised form will be laid before Parliament as a Regulation under the Act.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Question which I have on the Paper is of some importance considering what has been said in another place by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in regard to the reconsideration which the Regulations for the Super-Tax may require. Under Section 93 of the Finance Act the Super-Tax Regulations have to lie on the Table of your Lordships' House for forty days. I take it that the object of Parliament was to ensure that the questions which were asked by the Treasury officials should be reasonable questions, and that the period within which those questions should be answered should give adequate time for getting the answers. The Question I ask is, Arc this return and this form regarded as part of the Regulations? If not, it is open to the Treasury officials as soon as the forty days expire to tear up this paper, to issue a totally new set of questions some of which it may be impossible to answer, to fine people for not answering them, and to change the period of time within

393
which they have to be answered. The last sentence of the first paragraph of these Regulations runs—
"Such notice shill be in the form hereto attached or in such amended form as the Commissioners of Inland Revenue shall approve."
Section 93 of the Act says that all Regulations shall be laid on the Table, but what I want to make sure of is whether this Regulation which enables the Treasury to make other Regulations absolves them from laving those other Regulations on fie Table of the House. If so, it would leave the matter in the same position as if these forms were merely schedules and not part of the Regulations. I merely want an assurance that these questions arc not to be changed for totally different questions at the will and pleasure of the Treasury without being laid before Parliament, as was undoubtedly the intention of Parliament when the Finance Act was made law.
LORD DENMAN: My Lords, the answer to the first part of the noble Lord's Question is in the affirmative. The notice and form are part of the Super-Tax Regulations. As to the second part of the Question—namely, whether in the event of the Commissioners altering the form at any future time any revised form will be laid before Parliament as a Regulation under the Act—I am advised that any subsequent alteration of the form will not necessitate its being laid before Parliament. That is the legal position of the Treasury in the matter. But I should think it would be very unlikely that alterations of importance would be made off-hand by the Treasury without Parliament being aware of the fact; and, of course, it is always open to any member of either House of Parliament to criticise the Regulations which have been made. The noble Lord appears to think the Treasury capable of altering the Regulations merely for the purpose of having the pleasure of finding or punishing people who do not make a correct return. I must remind the noble Lord that all the Treasury want is to get the necessary information with the least possible trouble to the individual, and they are certainly not likely to take a course which will necessitate the making of further returns than are absolutely necessary.
LORD MONK BRETTON: My Lords, I cannot quite understand the noble
394
Lord's answer. He began by telling me that both of these papers are part of the Regulations. Under the Act the Regulations have to be laid before Parliament. Consequently I presume, if there is any alteration in any part of this form, including the questions which have to be answered, that, being part of the Regulations, it would have to be laid before Parliament for forty days under Section 93 of the Act. But the second part of the noble Lord's answer contradicted that. The noble Lord said that if the Commissioners alter this form it would not be laid before Parliament. But if this form is a part of the Regulations it would be a breach of Section 93 not to lay it before Parliament. In those circumstances I do not understand the answer of the noble Lord.
LORD DENMAN: I am afraid I am unable to explain the legal ground on which the Treasury have given me this information, but I have no doubt that their legal position in the matter is perfectly sound. I really do not think there is a contradiction in terms, as the noble Lord suggests, and it is obvious that it must be necessary for a Department to have this power. Very often the alteration made would be of a minor character, and it would be rather superfluous for the Department to have to lay a Paper before Parliament in every case.
THE EARL OF MEATH: My Lords, this is an important matter. I do not think any Department of the Government ought to have the power of really going contrary to the wish of Parliament owing to a technicality. The wish of Parliament evidently is that these matters should be laid on the Table of the House and be considered, but apparently it is in the power of the Treasury to get round the Act. That is, I think, a matter which the House ought very seriously to consider.

ARMY HOSPITAL ACCOMMODATION.
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH rose to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War what arrangements are made at Whittington Barracks (Lichfield) for providing accommodation for nurses and hospitals for the women and children in the barracks.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I have given the noble Lord notice of this Question,

395
but if he is not in a position to answer the particular point raised I have no doubt he will be able to inform me what is the usual practice and what system does exist in garrison towns for providing nurses and hospital accommodation. My attention has been called to the want of this accommodation in the case of Whittington Barracks, which are situated within three miles of Lichfield. It is a large garrison, and there are connected with it 242 women and 509 children. I am told that there is no sort of hospital accommodation for the women or any provision as to nurses. The local Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association has for the last few years provided a nurse to look after these women and children, but she is now on leave. She had to go away because there was considerable danger of her health breaking down, and the cause of that was the impossibility of procuring suitable lodgings in the neighbourhood of the barracks. That we hope, in course of time, to overcome; but as a matter of fact the nurse has had to go on leave, and there is no one to look after the women and children connected with this garrison. Whatever is done by the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association is, of course, private effort, and does not absolve the Government from responsibility in this respect. It has been suggested to me that there ought to be some form of women's hospital, or at any rate some military nursing sisters, to look after the women and children in these big garrison towns. By the July Army List I see that there are attached to the garrison of York five of these nursing sisters. I believe Lichfield has a larger garrison than York, and I am told that Lichfield has none of these nurses allotted to it. I hope that the noble Lord will undertake that full inquiry shall be made, and that he will find out the actual state of the case at Lichfield.
LORD LUCAS: My Lords, the noble Earl was kind enough to send me notice of this Question, but I have not had time to inquire into the specific case. I can, however, tell your Lordships what is our general policy in matters of this kind. In certain of our larger garrisons we do maintain military hospitals. We also maintain them for some of the smaller garrisons if a civil hospital is nowhere within reach. We do not, however, maintain hospitals in what may be considered the smaller garrison towns. But where we have these
396
military hospitals, if there are more than 100 beds for soldiers we also maintain a certain number of beds and cots for women and children. We do not, however, recognise any actual responsibility with regard to that. In Lichfield we have not got a military hospital, and I am afraid we do not propose to maintain anything there in the nature of a hospital for women and children. We quite recognise and arc grateful for the work done by the organisation of which I think the noble Earl is the head in that county-, which maintains a nurse there. These women and children when they require special treatment can be admitted to the civil hospital, and if they do not require that they receive medical attendance in their own quarters. That is our general rule with regard to places such as Lichfield, and I am afraid it would be useless for me to hold out any hope to the noble Earl of our being able to modify that.
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: Will the noble Lord make inquiry into this particular case.
LORD LUCAS: I will certainly.

PLACES OF WORSHIP (ENFRANCHISE- MENT) BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to authorise the enfranchisement of the sites of places of worship held under lease—Was presented by the Lord President (E. Beauchamp); read la; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next. (No. 125.)
WEMYSS AND DISTRICT WATER ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Wemyss and District Water—Was presented by the Lord Pentland (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, Sections 8 and 9); read 1a, and to be printed. (No. 126.)
MILITARY LANDS PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order of the Secretary of State under the Military Lands Act, 1892—Was presented by the Lord Lucas; read 1a; to be printed; and ref erred to the Examiners. (No. 127.)

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE
LORD SITUTTLEWORTH: My Lords, before the House adjourns I should like, with your Lordships' permission, to put a Question to my noble friend the President of the Board of Agriculture. information has reached me that there has been an outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the West Riding of Yorkshire. Can the noble Earl state whether that is true or not?
EARL CARRINGTON: My Lords, I regret to say that the information which has reached my noble friend is correct. Just before coming down to the House I received the following—
"A report of suspected foot and mouth disease on the premises of William Richmond, at Northclose Farm, Kirkby Malzeard, near Ripon, Yorks (West Riding), was received by the Board from the police yesterday afternoon. Mr. W. W. Smart, the Board's Superintending Veterinary Inspector, proceeded at once to the spot and to-day reports that seven or eight animals on the farm are affected with foot and mouth disease. Further particulars to follow.
"Instructions have been given for the issue of an order prohibiting the movement of all animals over a wide area around the
398
seat of the outbreak, which order will be issued to-night. Local authorities throughout Great Britain have been warned by telegram of the fact that foot and mouth disease has reappeared in this country.
"The Board's chief veterinary officer is proceeding to Yorkshire to advise as to the steps to be taken in connection with the outbreak, and will report by telegram."
[The sitting was suspended at twenty minutes before six o'clock, and resumed at a quarter past eleven, o'clock.]
The Lord HERSCHELL—Chosen Speaker in the absence of the Lord Chancellor and the Lords Commissioners.

PORT OF LONDON (PORT RATES ON GOODS) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed, and referred to the Examiners. (No 128.)
House adjourned at twenty minutes past Eleven o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.