Lords Sitting of 6 December 1911

MAXWELL'S DIVORCE BILL. [H.L.]
Minutes of Evidence and Proceedings before this House on the Second Reading; together with the documents deposited in each case, returned from the Commons.

AEROPLANES IN WARFARE.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE THE EARL OF HARDWICKE rose to ask His Majesty's Government, in view of the practical demonstration of the utility of aeroplanes in warfare in Tripoli, and in the French, German, and Roumanian manœuvres, and in view of the fact that France already has at her disposal between 200 or 300 war-planes and military pilots, and in view of the fact that Germany has at least fifty qualified military aviators besides numerous others in training, and not less than four military schools, and considering that Great Britain leas only six officer aviators and only two serviceable aeroplanes, whether the Government will now make a statement of its policy with regard to the training of the necessary mechanics, pilots, and military observers and the provision and maintenance in war of sufficient aircraft. so as to remove the serious disadvantage which we at present suffer in this respect; and to ask if the Government propose to give any practical encouragement to the manufacturers of this country with a view to enable them to supply the Government with British built machines.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, before putting the Question that stands in my name I wish to make a correction which I do not think really materially alters the significance of the statement I make in the first paragraph. That correction is this. I state that Great Britain has only six aviation officers and two serviceable aeroplanes. I beg now to correct that statement. Great Britain, I am informed, has thirteen aeroplanes, two of which, if I may borrow a term which is well known in naval circles, might be relegated to Rotten Row; eight, I believe, can be considered serviceable—serviceable, that is, for training purposes. They lack speed, and I do not think they would pass those tests that were lately carried out at the instigation of the French Government. Three you have
650
which are ready to take the field at any moment. I do not think that has materially altered the statement in my Question. With those facts that I have laid down, which I believe are substantially correct, surely it is chargeable to the Government that it shows apathy and a deplorable lack of enterprise when we consider what our neighbours in France and other. Continental countries possess. I do not mean to say that I know all the facts of the case, and I have no very strong indictment to make against the War Office, because I know that in the War Office there are a number of people, and even some of the heads, who realise the enormous potentialities of this new adjunct of war. I lay the charge at the door of the Treasury, and that I believe to be warranted by the substantial facts. I now put the Question which stands in my name.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (VISCOUNT HALDANE): My Lords, the noble Earl has put the Question standing in his mime with a preface in which he refers to our apathy compared with Continental Powers, and he very kindly put the blame on the Treasury. But I do not think the blame should be put on the Treasury. If there is any blame at all it is to be put upon us at the War Office and upon the Admiralty. The Treasury has never stood hi the way of this matter. On the contrary, the Treasury has given us the greatest scientific establishment in the world for investigating air problems—the establishment at Teddington—whieh ought to give us a very admirably-equipped department at Aldershot, and which has done and is doing very valuable work. The Treasury has never stood in our way in any respect.
I myself feel very great responsibility for the spending of public money. I am always ready to spend it, and spend it with the utmost freedom, when I know how to get good results out of it; but there is one thing which I never will listen to as long as I am responsible, and that is to lavish money in the hope that something will come of it. It is quite true that in this country we are behind, but not a great deal behind, with this problem. But there are reasons for that. First of all, nothing develops your aviation department so much as an enormous Army which has to operate within a restricted field and on ground which is more or less level, and

651
where your air service is required as part of that enormous Army organisation. In France and in Germany they have these conditions, and the result is that the air service has responded to the demands of the Army. With us it is quite different. We require our air service for sea purposes; we require it for the purposes of a comparatively small Army—a very small Army compared to those Continental Armies—and one which has to go abroad, and a large part of which is constantly at a great distance. You cannot have that condition of things without its reacting on the mode of your preparations, and I think perhaps the fact that we have not the acute military problem of the Continent, or, at any rate, the problem on the same extensive scale, has had a good deal to do with another cause which has retarded aviation in this country, and that is that the public have not applied themselves to it in the practical way that has been the case in France and in Germany.
I will indicate some of the causes which make it difficult for Ministers to know exactly how they ought to stand in the matter. We set to work on this problem two or three years ago, and the first thing we did was to endeavour to acquire the requisite scientific knowledge. That to a great extent we have done, but the whole field of air work proves to be still in a very undefined condition. I do not mean for us merely; I mean everywhere. Germany is apparently changing the type of her airships. She seems to be turning, as France has turned, from the airship to the aeroplane. But it is by no means certain that an intermediate type of small airship will not prove to be of great value, and that problem appears to be one on which foreign countries are working, as we are working on it. It is a great mistake to suppose that abroad they have made up their minds definitely as to the line on which they are working. They are making experiments and on a huger scale than we are, because they have Armies of much greater size to work for. But at this moment I doubt whether there is any country that could tell what the ultimate form of air craft will be. When we look at things from a distance they appear much better than when close, and we see flaws which I admit to be very great in our organisation but which get much magnified in comparison with other countries because we are looking very close. We have twelve aeroplanes, and three more
652
under construction at the present time. Of these aeroplanes it is difficult to say how many are suitable for war. We have been buying a variety of different types, a variety within these figures, in order to see which is the best. Some of them undoubtedly are as good aeroplanes as we could buy. The noble Earl put them, I think, at eight as serviceable for war.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE: No, only three that would go into the fighting line.
VISCOUNT HALDANE: Well, my information, which I should be sorry to put forward dogmatically, is that a larger number would be good for the fighting line. But there arc some of those that are more adapted for practice than for fighting. We are buying steadily, and it is not a question of money. We have enough money tinder the present Estimates to buy five times the number of aeroplanes that we have at the present time. It is only a question of what is the best type to buy, and that is by no means an easy thing to determine. Aeroplanes change almost every month, and the large numbers which they have on the Continent would, I am afraid, if they were subjected to the close scrutiny of the noble Earl, come under quite as just criticism as he has applied to our numbers. As I say, we have twelve, of which I should say that a good many, or considerably more than the three the noble Earl mentions, are serviceable for war, while others are adapted for practice; and some are under construction. That is nothing like enough, I agree. To compare with Continental numbers we should have a considerably greater number. Then the noble Earl asks about dirigibles, and I will tell him about that.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE: I beg the noble Viscount's pardon; I did not put a question about that.
VISCOUNT HALDANE: Then I will not dwell upon it. The reason I referred to them was that I thought the noble Earl meant to cover them by this Question, because he uses the word "aircraft"
little lower down. Anyhow, we have in construction at the present time several airships. We have one actually working, and a second with which we have made experiments and this is incapacitated just now. Then there is a third, the "Delta," which is practically constructed; certain

653
difficulties are being put right in it. For the fourth the materials are collected, and we have a very efficient factory which is working under Mr. Mervyn O'Gorman, with a very good staff, which is endeavouring to evolve the best type of small dirigible. I should be very grateful if the noble Earl could tell me what is the best type of small dirigible. If he cannot, nobody else can. We have to proceed experimentally in these matters.
Now I come to what has been done about officers. As the noble Earl knows, we have recently constituted an Air Battalion, which has a present strength of 171–14 officers and 135 rank and file, besides warrant officers, sergeants, and so on. Of these officers actually serving at the present time with the Air Battalion there are seven who have been trained in flying. There are thirteen other officers who have pilot certificates, and who have asked to be employed in connection with this battalion; ten of them are Regulars, two Special Reservists, and one retired. Then there are several more officers who have taken pilot certificates but have not at present asked for employment. A notable case is that of General Henderson, Staff Officer to the Inspector-General of the Forces, who is so keenly interested in this matter that he has taken out a pilot's certificate and qualified himself. Then there are several others. We are going, I agree, not very fast, but we are moving. We have a certain number of aeroplanes for which we have got these officers. The General Staff has defined the test we should work up to and the objects at which we have to aim, and we are now addressing ourselves to the question, which I think is a very important one, of how far we can work our establishment and our training schools along with the Navy. With a very small Army relatively, such as we possess, it is very desirable in order to develop to the utmost the potentialities of your service that you should work it along with the Navy, and we are considering that question at the present time in a practical form.
I think I have now answered most of the questions which the noble Earl put to me, except the one at the end. We have under practical consideration the proposal to offer prizes to manufacturers. The noble Earl says "the manufacturers of this country." As soon as we have got the type right our policy will be to manufacture these aero-
654
planes in this country, because they are like war material which is different from other material. That will be done, not with any particular desire to have everything manufactured in this country, but for the simple reason that it is war material and you cannot get it elsewhere in time of war. As for the design, that is too important a matter to limit. The first consideration is to get the very best design for a war aeroplane that you can, and I do not at all tie the Department which I represent to limit itself for designs to British manufacturers. We shall see how that works out, and we shall consider it with perfect freedom.
I will only add, in conclusion, that slowly as we are going we have given a great deal of time to this matter in conjunction with my right hon. friend the Civil Member, Colonel Seely, who is deeply interested in this question, and the Staff Officers at the War Office, and I should be very much puzzled to find a means of going faster. We are moving. I agree that the service as yet is very inadequate, but the difficulties for us are greater than they are in any other country. Slowly we are evolving things. In the case of motor cars this country was for a long time behind, but is now quite as well placed as any other country; and I have very little doubt that, with the practical genius of our race, we shall evolve our own type of aircraft which will be suitable to the conjoint requirements of our small Army and our great Navy.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE: My Lords, after hearing the noble Viscount's answer to the Questions I have put I feel rather like the man who has asked for a whole loaf and is only allowed a bite of the loaf. As far as I can see, my noble friend puts this country in regard to the Army on the plane of Roumania. With all due respect to that virile State, Roumania is not, I suppose, to-day, in aerial matters better than we are. I know it is the idea of the War Office in a certain way to emulate our neighbours the French. They are going to give a competition. Well, it is questionable whether the value will be very great that is to be gained by it. There is no doubt in the mind of anyone who has really followed aviation that aviation has come to stay. It has also become an adjunct to the Army. There is no doubt of that. That is realized by the War Office. In view of that I cannot see why this apathy should still exist. Why

655
not take a leaf out of the pages of the French? Why not help the industry to-clay? The French are in the forefront in this new science. It is a growing industry. And why are the French in the forefront? Because they have been subsidised by their Government. You never have shown any indication that you mean to help our manufacturers. We have to look to private enterprise in these matters. I do not wish to make any indictment, or to go into any searching statement, as to the way in which the money has been spent. I will make a particular statement—perhaps I had better not. But you had a considerable sum of money, and you have nothing to show for it. The sum of £80,000 has been expended in doles by Parliament, and you have nothing material to show for it. I will not say more, but I can assure the noble Viscount that there is a very strong feeling in the country on this subject amongst those who really know. They regard the apathy that is shown towards this question in this country as remarkable.
VISCOUNT ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, all my official experience and prejudices as ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer would induce me to refrain from pressing the War Department in regard to anything that would involve unnecessary expenditure. But I do think that in this matter there has been very slow progress indeed, and that my noble friend behind me is well advised in calling the attention of your Lordships to the subject. When I listened to the speech of the noble Viscount opposite I confess I was not very much encouraged to hope that progress, which has been slow in the past, will be more rapid in the future. The noble Viscount appeared to me to be waiting for some design of perfection in this matter. Now, that has never been the policy of the Navy, and quite rightly, too. I remember ships built on designs which were considered reasonably good but which it was hoped in future years to improve upon, in order that we might be provided with what at any rate was the best that could be obtained at that time. Perhaps it might appear that hundreds of thousands or even millions of pounds have been wasted in that way, but it would never have done to have been unprepared if the moment had arisen when the force was wanted; and I would venture to tell the noble Viscount opposite that I am afraid under present circumstances if we should un-
656
fortunately he involved in war we should be quite unprepared with regard to appliances of the kind which have been the subject of discussion. I do hope, therefore, that the War Office will take care that there is some provision in respect of aviation without waiting for sonic possible design in the future which may not be attained until it is too late.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (VISCOUNT MORLEY): My Lords, before the House proceeds to consider the other business on the Paper, it might suit your Lordships' convenience if I mention that we propose to take the Second Reading of the House Letting and Rating (Scotland) Bill at a morning sitting on Friday next, when the House, we propose, should meet at noon. It is not necessary for me to remind your Lordships that we had originally intended to take the Naval Prize Bill this week if it had reached us from another place, but the consideration of that measure has been postponed until next week. The Bill is expected to come up to your Lordships' House from the other House either tomorrow or on Friday.

EMPIRE TRADE RELATIONS.
LORD KILLANIN: My Lords, I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, when, in pursuance of the resolution passed at the Imperial Conference this year, a Royal Commission will be appointed to inquire into the commercial relations of the Empire and its shipping arrangements and means of transport, and whether, in view of Ireland's interest in such trade and means of transport in the North Atlantic, Ireland will be directly represented in the constitution of the Commission. As I believe the noble Lord who now represents the Colonial Office in this House will, in answering this Question, be addressing your Lordships for the first time, may I, as one who had the pleasure of knowing him when we were both Members of the other House, offer him very humbly a hearty word of welcome to this House.
The Question which I have put on the Paper divides itself into two parts, and with your Lordships' leave I would like to make a few observations on each part separately. The first half of my Question

657
asks the Under-Secretary when, in pursuance of the resolution passed at the Imperial Conference this year, a Royal Commission will be appointed to inquire into the commercial relations of the Empire and its shipping arrangements and means of transport. The question of the appointment of this Royal Commission came into existence in the following way. Mr. Fisher, the Prime Minister of Australia, had put down a resolution dealing with the commercial relations of the Empire in rather general terms, and when the matter came on for discussion at the Imperial Conference Sir Wilfrid Laurier, while expressing sympathy with the object of the resolution, said that in his opinion it was not likely to lead to tangible results, and that it was difficult to suggest improvements in the trade relations between the Dominions and the United Kingdom and between the Dominions themselves unless they had more information than they had at the present time; and on the strength of that he proposed the following resolution—
"That His Majesty should be approached with a view to appoint a Royal Commission representing the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland, with a view of investigating and reporting upon the natural resources of each part of the Empire represented at this Conference, the development attained and attainable, and the facilities for production, manufacture, and. distribution; the trade of each part with the others and with the outside world, the food and raw material requirements of each, and the sources thereof available, and to what extent, if any, the trade between each of the different parts has been affected by existing legislation in each, either beneficially or otherwise."
After that resolution had been proposed, Mr. Harcourt, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, said he had no difficulty in accepting the resolution provided the following was added to it—
"and by what methods consistent with the existing fiscal policy of each part the trade of each part with the others may be improved and extended."
Now that was the resolution that was finally passed unanimously at the Imperial Conference, and it was greeted by the various Prime Ministers as a most practical way of dealing with this difficult question. Mr. Fisher called it "a most practical way of dealing with a rather difficult set of questions." Sir Joseph Ward also accepted it as a very practical way of dealing with the question, and he further pointed out that it would place information, and practical information, before them, and he said that they were really not in a
658
position to ask their respective Legislatures to do what might be necessary in the shape of legislation till they had that information. And finally the Prime Minister said—
"I think the Conference is very much indebted to Sir Wilfrid Laurier for making this very practical proposal. It will set up as the result of the Conference a body whose labours will certainly prepare the way, and possibly make the way plain, for effective practical action by the next Conference; and possibly before the next Conference meets, for the legislation of the Governments of the different parts of the Empire."
I do not think that I am showing any impatience in, after six mouths have elapsed, putting down a Question to His Majesty's Government to ask them when this Commission will be appointed, or, at least, what steps are being taken or have been taken to bring it into existence.
I am well aware that a Royal Commission of this sort cannot he appointed in a hurry. The parties will not be merely interested or concerned in this country; they will represent the various Dominions of the Empire and the United Kingdom, and it stands to reason that there would be considerable difficulty in forming such a Royal Commission. Then the subjects to be considered by the Commission are also large and complex matters. The terms of reference would, too, probably present some difficulty. For all these reasons I do not wish to be understood as suggesting that I think there has been any avoidable delay, because I recognise the importance of the Commission and the many likely difficulties in bringing into being what will be the most important Royal Commission that has ever been appointed. Yet in view of the fact that this decision of the Imperial Conference was greeted as a very practical way of dealing with this question, and that the hope was expressed that the Commission would have reported in time for legislation to be carried out in the different portions of the Empire before the next Conference, and that six months have gone by since this resolution was passed, and we are now only three-and-a-half years oft the next Imperial Conference—in these circumstances I think I am not impatient in asking that we should get some information on this subject, more especially as we are shortly rising and there will be no opportunity, in Parliament at any rate, of informing the public what progress, if any, is being made in the constitution of this Royal Commission.

659
In the second part of my Question I ask whether, in view of Ireland's interest in such trade and means of transport in the North Atlantic, Ireland will be directly represented in the constitution of the Commission. I confess that as an Irishman, while interested in the whole question, I am more intimately and more directly interested in the answer which the noble Lord may give to this part of my Question, and am glad of the opportunity of asking this Question before the Royal Commission has been appointed. It might be supposed that Ireland, being a poor country, had small commercial relations, and it might at first glance not be apparent why she should require special representation in such a matter. But I wish to point out to His Majesty's Government that the poverty or wealth of a country has little or nothing to say to its external commercial relations, to its imports or exports, and that as a matter of fact some of the poorest countries have much larger commercial relations than rich countries per head of the population of those countries. In that connection it is interesting to take the United States of America. The United States, in spite of being such a great and rich country, has, as a matter of fact, per head of population very small external commercial relations. I mean by commercial relations external imports and exports. The commercial relations of a country do not depend upon the poverty or wealth of it, but on whether that country is self-contained, self-supporting, and self-sufficing in its productions. It depends on its capacity to produce its own needs. There are, I submit to your Lordships, poor countries, such as Ireland, which, as a matter of fact, have large commercial relations per head of the population. The fact is, Ireland has the second or third largest commercial relations per head of all the countries of Europe. The reason is quite simple. It is because Ireland is a country that produces in large excess one form of product, and hardly produces at all another form of product, and therefore she has a great commercial exchange. I therefore hope that I have shown His Majesty's Government that. Ireland is a country that is peculiarly interested in any question likely to affect the commercial relations of the country.
It may be said that Ireland is in the same boat as England in this matter; and if so, why should any separate consideration
660
be given to Ireland's interests. But Ireland's exports and imports are the exact opposite of Great Britain's exports and imports. As regards the commercial relations of Ireland to Great Britain, that is a great advantage. Differences between nations can, like differences between human beings, be either antagonistic or of mutual advantage, and, as a matter of fact, the difference in the commercial products that Ireland exports and imports and those which Great Britain exports and imports, each to the other, is a great commercial advantage to both countries, and the exchange fits in admirably. Therefore you might ask again, if Ireland is in that position, where do her separate interests in this matter come in. Her separate interests in this matter come in when you begin to relate the commercial interests of these two countries to a third party. As long as you are only considering Great Britain and Ireland the difference in their respective products is a benefit to both, and their commercial relations to one another are advantageous, but it is quite another matter when you come to consider their respective commercial interests and products in connection with a third party, such as Canada. Then the difference between their commercial products becomes extremely important, and it becomes therefore necessary, as I submit to His Majesty's Government, that Ireland's large, separate, and distinct commercial interests should receive direct representation on this Royal Commission. If I were asked to give an instance where Ireland was specially interested in the way I have described, I could not do better than refer to a topic which Sir Wilfrid Laurier and others at the Imperial Conference instanced as typical of the sort of subject that would come under the consideration of such a Royal Commission. That was the embargo on the importation of Canadian cattle. I am not going on this occasion to argue the merits or the pros and cons of that question. I only give it as one out of many of the commercial interests which would come under the consideration of this Commission, and in which Ireland, and Ireland especially, would be deeply and vitally interested.
There are other aspects of this matter to which I would like very shortly to refer, and in which I think Ireland has a peculiar and special concern. In the past commercial intercourse across the Atlantic

661
between Great Britain and America was mainly to the United States of America. But now there is the extraordinary development. of Canada, where cities and industrial concerns and the population are increasing at an amazing rate; and there is the position of Newfoundland also, which is now growing prosperously as a colony of the Empire, and we must bear in mind that traffic—of passengers, mails, and freight—from Great Britain across the Atlantic will he directed more and more in the future to Canada and Newfoundland. Now it is quite clear, as a geographical fact, that the shortest and quickest line, and therefore the cheapest and safest route, from Great Britain to Canada and Newfoundland must go through Ireland. In the case of any other route from Great Britain the ships must stiffer from inconvenience and delay and danger in going round Ireland. In this ocean trade route across the North Atlantic, as distinguished from trade routes going to the United States, Ireland is either an obstacle in the way, or it can be made, as I hope it will be made, a stepping stone on that route. That is another very important aspect of this question in connection with the shipping interests and the means of transport between the United Kingdom and the Dominion of Canada, in which, I would suggest to His Majesty's Government, Ireland has peculiar and special interests which ought not to be neglected, and which ought to be directly represented.
I hope that His Majesty's Government will support the view which I have endeavoured to present, and that they will show their desire in this matter to serve and to develop and protect the commercial interests of Ireland which have been so much neglected. So much so is this the case, that one may say there is no country in the world where they have been less attended to, and where they more require attention. Mr. Bonar Law, in his speech in the House of Commons the other day, I was glad to see, said— It has always been our policy, and it always will be my desire, to help in every possible way to develop the resources of Ireland;"
And Lord Lansdowne, at Derby, said last Friday—
"Ireland has resources which require to be developed; she has industries which deserve to be encouraged."
662
I hope His Majesty's Government will not be behindhand in taking its part in protecting and developing the commercial interests of Ireland.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (LORD EMMOTT): My Lords, in the first place may I thank the noble Lord opposite for his kind and courteous welcome to your Lordships' House. It is true that this is the first time that. I have spoken in this House, and it is also true that this is the first time I have ever spoken in either House in a Ministerial capacity. For six years I have had a good deal of experience in listening to speeches in another place, but I have had no experience in making them in regard to political questions; and therefore I shall find myself, I expect, a little out of practice in that department. I have in these circumstances especial need on this the first occasion on which I take any part in your debates to throw myself upon the kind indulgence of your Lordships' House.
The noble Lord began his speech by an account of what happened at the Imperial Conference, an account which I think was perfectly correct, and he expressed some concern at the apparent delay that has occurred in the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into our Imperial trade. His Question, I think, is a very reasonable one. As he pointed out, it is divided into two parts. The first part is as to when, in pursuance of the resolution passed at the Imperial Conference this year, a Royal Commission will be appointed to inquire into the commercial relations of the Empire and its shipping arrangements and means of transport. I am sorry to say that I cannot give a categorical answer to that question. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to be able to tell the noble Lord now that the Commission would be appointed in a few clays time, and would commence its work within a few weeks. But, my Lords, correspondence in regard to matters of detail is taking place—and correspondence is a very lengthy business in a world-wide Empire like ours—between widely scattered parts of His Majesty's Dominions. I do not for a moment mean to imply that any difficulty has arisen. The negotiations and the correspondence are proceeding in a normal way to a satisfactory conclusion. But sonic further delay must occur before any announcement can be

663
made. Therefore at present I cannot give any more precise answer to the first part of the noble Lord's Question.
The second part of the Question deals with the separate representation of Ireland on this Royal Commission. I think I am bound to give a quite frank and straightforward reply to that question. The noble Lord opposite gave various reasons why Ireland should be separately represented. He stated that she has separate interests, and that those interests are affected when a third party comes into the question. He mentioned particularly as examples the question of the so-called embargo on Canadian cattle. That is a question about which I shall have something more to say in a few moments. He mentioned also the question of Atlantic routes. I quite agree with him that Ireland's interests ought not to be neglected in this inquiry, and I am quite sure that they will not be neglected. But a separate representation from Ireland would practically involve parcelling out the United Kingdom into geographical areas and appointing separate representatives from each part of the United Kingdom. I do not think it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to adopt that plan. Their intention is to appoint as representatives men who shall as completely as possible represent the general interests of the United Kingdom in this inquiry as to food, raw material and other natural products, and the production, manufacture, and distribution of each part of the British Empire. In other words, they will have regard rather to the general interests of the United Kingdom than to the particular part of the United Kingdom in which individual members who are chosen to serve on that Commission happen to live.
I need not remind your Lordships that this must be an inquiry on a great scale. The British Empire is a vast Empire. Its resources, its production of food and other raw materials, its manufacture, its shipping, are all on an immense scale, and this kingdom is the head and centre of this Empire. I emphasise that point because the noble Lord opposite specially mentioned one matter in regard to which we know Ireland is specifically interested, and that is the question of the so-called embargo on cattle. I wish we could call that a requirement to slaughter at the ports, because I do not like the word "embargo."
664
That is really what it is. It is a requirement to slaughter cattle at the ports. I must point out that that question affects one branch of agriculture. Anybody who had the opportunity of listening to the interesting debate in this House the other night, in which that question was dealt with, roust realise its enormous importance, and anybody who heard the powerful speech of my noble friend Lord Burghclere will remember what a graphic picture he drew of the enormous destruction caused by cattle disease some thirty or forty years ago in this country. The question is of enormous importance. But what would be the effect of appointing a representative from Ireland especially with reference to that question? Would it not be to indicate that there was some change probable in the policy of this country, and if it did give any impression of that kind I venture to think it would be very misleading, and very much to be regretted. Again, why should that particular subject be chosen? There is an old legal maxim—I know nothing about law myself, but it applies to this matter—inclusio unius exclusio alterius. I think it does apply to this question. If you appoint a representative in regard to one branch of agriculture, are you not inferentially saying that other questions relating to agriculture are of minor importance?
LORD KILLANIN: My proposal was not that there should be a representative from Ireland so as to represent one branch of agriculture, but that there should be a representative from Ireland of Ireland's commercial interests, because they are peculiar to Ireland and different from those of Great Britain. I only mentioned the cattle embargo because it was mentioned at the Imperial Conference so much.
LORD EMMOTT: The noble Lord combined the two things. He was to be a representative of Ireland, and he would represent, in the first instance, as one of the questions in which Ireland was specially interested, the embargo on cattle. However, I will not further pursue that question. It does seem to me that if we were to adopt a plan such as I thought the noble Lord suggested we should not get as good a representation of the general interests of the United Kingdom as I think and hope will be obtained under the plan of the Government. A little reflection,

665
I think, will show that it is better in an inquiry of this magnitude to appoint the representatives with a view to their knowledge of the general interests of the United Kingdom, rather than to choose them because of that part of the United Kingdom in which they happen to live or with reference to what must in a vast inquiry like this be comparatively sectional interests.
LORD KILLANIN: My Lords, I cannot express myself satisfied with the reply received from the noble Lord. Ireland in fiscal or commercial matters is always doomed to be badly treated or disregarded. The noble Lord insists upon treating the United Kingdom as one commercial unit, and as having similar commercial interests in this matter. I have endeavoured to show to him that the commercial interests of the two countries are different, and that, although that difference is an advantage as between the two countries, it would be very important that it should be properly represented when you came to consider the relation of the different commercial products of the two countries to other parties. Therefore I do press upon him that he should recognise in this matter the geographical distinction between Ireland and Great Britain. As regards Great Britain itself, roughly speaking, its commercial interests all over the country are similar. It is a great manufacturing country, importing food stuffs. Ireland is a country with hardly any manufactures, and exporting food stuffs. Ireland and Great Britain have, therefore, distinct and different interests in this matter, and I hope that when His Majesty's Government come to finally settle about the appointment of this Royal Commission, they will see that Ireland is entitled to receive, and should receive, distinct representation on it. I do not suggest for a moment that the person appointed should only represent his own corner, so to speak; nor do we contemplate that the Premiers from the different Dominions are going only to represent their own corner. I would, of course, expect that whoever was entrusted with the Irish case would fit in his view as well as possible into the general conditions of the situation, and have full regard for the great world-wide objects of the inquiry that was to be held. All I suggest is that there should be some one on the Commission who would be competent to present Ireland's case.

BRITISH INDIANS IN SOUTH AFRICA.
LORD LAMINGTON LORD LAMINGTON rose to move that an humble Address be presented to His Majesty for all correspondence between the Colonial Office and the South African Administrations on questions relating to British Indian subjects which has taken place since August, 1910. The noble Lord also had the following two Questions on the Paper—(1) To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any reply has been received to the communication of the Secretary of State to the Union Government regarding certain disabilities imposed upon British Indians resident in the Transvaal by the Draft Municipal Ordinance and how far the Draft. Ordinance has been proceeded with; (2) to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give the substance of the replies, if ally, of the Union Government to the representations of the Secretary of State as to the complaints of the British Indian population regarding the operation of the Transvaal Gold Law, 1908, and Townships Amendment Act, 1908 and 1909.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Questions I have put on the Paper have reference to a series of interpellations that Lord Ampthill, who is, unfortunately, not present to-clay, has addressed to his Majesty's Government from time to time on Asiatic subjects connected with South Africa. Considerable doubt exists in South Africa on the point. I would ask whether the Government would lay on the Table the correspondence which has taken place between the Colonial Office and the South African Administrations on questions relating to British Indian subjects which has taken place since August, 1910, up to the present time. The first of the two Questions which I have to ask has a particular bearing on the point in regard to the licences issued to Asiatic traders—that is, licences in respect of shops, trolley drivers, hawkers, &c. I believe it may be argued, that some of these licences are not suitably differentiated, or, rather, that Asiatics are not differentiated as regards Europeans, and that therefore they have no cause of grievance. But what they are aggrieved at is that the municipalities or local councils who issue the licences are naturally in many cases traders and competitors in the lines of business carried on by the Asiatics and therefore they are not very likely to

667
obtain fair or equal treatment, and they ask that this should be remedied. They ask, at least, that there should be a right of appeal to a resident magistrate or some authority who would be more likely to be impartial than the local councils and municipalities. That is the grievance felt, as naturally they are competitors one with another. The second Question has reference to the position of leases and stands held by Asiatics. By the Act of 1885, I think it is, an Asiatic cannot hold fixed property, but a fiction has been allowed to grow up and has been recognised by the Supreme Court in the Transvaal that an Asiatic may be the owner of property if there is a nominal owner in the person of some friendly European. That is a system that has been allowed to prevail hitherto. Now under the law of 1908 this system is not allowed, and a European is liable to a heavy penalty if lie accepts the nominal ownership of such a place. In the result it is plain that these Asiatics will be driven off these different stands and will be segregated in locations solely inhabited by coloured persons. This, it is said, would be going against the policy always upheld by His Majesty's Government. These are the specific points on which I ask for information.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty for all correspondence between the Colonial Office and the South African Administrations on questions relating to British Indian subjects which has taken place since August, 1910.—(Lord Lamington.)
LORD EMMOTT: My Lords, the noble Lord will know that I have only been at the Colonial Office for a few weeks, and, of course, he will know that this particular question of the treatment of British. Indians in South Africa is one of the most delicate, difficult, and complicated of all the questions with which we have to deal at the present time. I cannot pretend as yet to be a master of the question or to know the whole history of the case from the beginning, but I hope to be able to give a reply not entirely unsatisfactory to the Questions of the noble Lord. I will deal with his Motion in regard to the Papers and with the two Questions at the same time.
The matters with which the noble Lord's Questions deal are, of course, constantly receiving the careful consideration of His Majesty's Government. As regards the
668
Union of South Africa there was published in March last a Parliamentary Paper [Cd. 5579] containing with other Papers a draft Bill to regulate immigration into South Africa based on proposals made to the Union Government by the noble Marquess, Lord Crewe, when he was Secretary of State for the Colonies. The main object of those proposals was to put an end to differentiation against Indians in the text of immigration legislation, and to terminate the movement of passive resistance on behalf of Transvaal British Indians, particulars as to which will be found in still earlier Parliamentary Papers of this series. The position of Indians was that while they acquiesced in the exclusion of fresh Indians, with the exception of a limited number required to cater for the religious and professional needs of the resident population, they desired that such exclusion should be by means of administrative action, and not by differentiation in the text of the Bill on the ground of race or colour. They also desired the repeal of the Transvaal Registration Act of 1907, as they held that its repeal had been promised at an earlier stage in the Transvaal.
It will be seen from the text of the Bill published in the Command Paper to which I have referred, and from the published correspondence, that these desires of the Indians would have been provided for. The Bill was read a second time with certain amendments which went still further in the direction of meeting the views of Indians; for example, by saving the rights of domiciled Indians, and by providing that the fresh Indians of the religious and professional class who were to be admitted should be exempt from registration as Asiatics in the Transvaal. The discussions in the Union Parliament, however, revealed certain difficulties and defects in the Bill. One difficulty arose especially regarding the question whether the fresh Indians to be annually admitted into the Union should have the right to enter the Orange Free State, from which, as the noble Lord knows, Asiatics had been practically excluded altogether. The Union Government accordingly decided, with the concurrence of His Majesty's Government, to withdraw the Bill last session. In announcing this decision the Minister of the Interior intimated that the whole question would be further considered in the light of the criticisms of the Bill, and that an amended Bill would be introduced next year.

669
At the same time an agreement was arrived at with the Transvaal British Indians by which the passive resistance movement in the province was brought to an end. That is the history of the question up to comparatively recent times.
Now I have to tell the noble Lord that correspondence respecting the terms of a new Immigration Bill is still proceeding, and it would not at the present time be proper to lay Papers, though His Majesty's Government will have no objection to considering at some future time whether they can lay Papers with regard to this question, with the concurrence of the South African Government. The noble Lord's Motion calls for a publication of all correspondence back to 1910, and in his Questions he refers to correspondence on two specific points—the Draft Transvaal Municipal Ordinance and the Transvaal Gold Law and Townships Amendment Acts of 1908 and 1909. The correspondence up to March, 1911, as regards the question of immigration, has already been published in the Command Paper to which have referred [No. 5579], and I have already answered the noble Lord's question as to the publication of further correspondence on that question. Between August, 1910, and March, 1911, other correspondence dealt almost entirely with the passive resistance movement in the Transvaal, and as a provisional settlement of that question has been arrived at, I think the noble Lord will agree that no good end will be served now by publishing Papers with regard to it. As regards the correspondence since March, 1911, on subjects other than immigration, it will probably be sufficient on the present occasion if I state the substance of the replies of the Union Government on the two specific points raised in the Questions, without publishing the correspondence. First of all, as to the Transvaal Municipal Ordinance, that was referred to a Select Committee of the Provincial Council, whose Report will not be brought up until the Council meets in January. The Union Government have, however, stated that in all, or nearly all, of the points complained of the Ordinance merely repeats existing legislation; and in regard to the specific points about which it is thought that a grievance may still exist, which were mentioned by the noble Lord, I may say those points are now the subject of correspondence between the Home Government and the Union Government.
670
There remains for me only to deal with the question of the Gold Law and the Townships Amendment Acts of 1908 and 1909. The Union Ministers state that they do not understand the grievance alleged to have been imposed on Indians by the Townships Acts. With regard to the Gold Law, it has been laid down in a judgment recently given in the case of Tamblin v. Rex by the Supreme Court of South Africa that there is now no restriction imposed by the Act on the letting to Asiatics of any stands laid out under the Mining Laws prior to 1908. I think, therefore, the noble Lord will see that the difficulties of which he has spoken have been to a large extent removed.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: I think noble Lords will agree that the reply of the noble Lord who has addressed us for the first time, and on whose first appearance in our debates I must be allowed to congratulate him, was on the whole satisfactory, as it certainly was sympathetic. I agree with the noble Lord that no more complicated question ever collies before this House than that of the position of British Indians in South Africa. I had to deal with the question myself for some years while in India, and I have kept in touch with it. ever since; and there is, not on this side of the House alone but equally among noble Lords opposite, a genuine desire that this running sore, for it is nothing else, on the surface of the Empire should be satisfactorily removed.
The noble Lord, I think, gave a perfectly satisfactory reply to the first Question about Papers. He reminded us that the last Papers were presented to us only in the Spring of the present year, and he told us that when matters are further developed we may reasonably ask for more. The fact is, as you will have gathered from the speech of the noble Lord, there are really two aspects to this case. There is, first, the large issue of the admission of Indians to residence in South Africa. This has been, of course, the main bone of contention between the two parties for all these years, and has resulted in the movement of passive resistance with all its painful and distressing features to which the noble Lord referred. I have taken great interest in that question, not only because of the acute form it had assumed when I left India, but at a later date I was in South Africa and had

671
communications with General Botha and General Smuts and with the British Indian community, and there was a good deal of discussion as to a possible basis of compromise. It is that compromise that has been embodied in the Bill to which the noble Lord referred, and I would ask His Majesty's Government most earnestly to keep their eyes fixed on the progress of that Bill. We understand that certain difficulties occurred which prevented the passage of the Bill into law last year, and that it was withdrawn with the consent of the British Indian community, but the Bill is to be introduced again in the forthcoming session. If there were, as I do not think there is likely to be, any slowness on the part of the Union Government in South Africa in pushing forward the matter, I am certain that the noble Lord opposite, as the custodian of wider interests even than those of South Africa, will see that the matter is proceeded with without delay.
Then there is the smaller issue raised by the other Question of my noble friend behind me. They are matters, of course, narrower and less important than those raised by the bigger question of admission to South Africa. But as any noble Lord will understand who reflects that the great majority of these British Indians are small people engaged in petty trade, they are intensely personal to the everyday life and interests of settlers in that country. The restrictions under which they live and pursue their trade have been regarded by them as exceedingly vexatious in the past, and have been responsible, perhaps even more than the larger restrictions, for the trouble that has arisen. As regards the first of these two sets of grievances mentioned in the second Question of the noble Lord, I gathered that the reply of the Under-Secretary was a satisfactory one. Upon the second matter I understood the noble Lord to say that the Union Government are of opinion that the case of grievance does not arise; that there has been a misunderstanding.
LORD EMMOTT: I think there has been some misunderstanding as between the Townships Act and the Gold Law. The Townships Act refers, of course, to the land in the townships, in which the law is different, and the Gold Law refers to land in mining districts outside the townships. I think there has been some confusion between the two.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: That, of course, is a confusion that we cannot elucidate or remove in this House. I would merely ask the noble Lord, in discharge of the duties of his new office, to keep an eye upon the smaller as well as the larger issues, and if he can help to remove these petty grievances he will do a great deal to earn the gratitude not only of British Indians in South Africa but of those in India also.
LORD EMMOTT: I can assure the noble Earl that there is nothing the Colonial Office is more anxious to do than to remove these grievances, which are a real source of difficulty not only to us, which is a small matter perhaps, but also to the Empire, and our constant endeavours will be extended in that direction.
LORD LAMINGTON: I beg to withdraw the Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

MERCHANT SHIPPING BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF LIVERPOOL: My Lords, this is a Bill to give jurisdiction under Section 76 and Part VIII of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, to certain British Courts in foreign countries. It has been brought about by the fact of a certain appeal having been made to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 109 on the question of the steamship "Maori King," and it had reference to a dispute as to the jurisdiction of a foreign Court at Shanghai. I should say that under the Foreign Jurisdiction Act, which relates to the exercise of jurisdiction by the Crown in certain foreign countries, a number of Courts have been established at places abroad and have been furnished with powers for dealing with criminal and civil cases. The expression "foreign countries" is defined in the Act as meaning any country or place out of His Majesty's Dominions, and therefore includes British Protectorates as well as foreign countries properly so called. Of course, in this case it also includes a Treaty port such as Shanghai. The alterations made in the actual clauses are first of all to meet the case of this steamship "Maori King," which was

  673
  sailing under British colours although owned by Russian owners. The first portion of the amending Bill is intended to give to these foreign Courts the same powers of dealing with ships which have become subject to forfeiture as are conferred by a section of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, on Admiralty Courts in the United Kingdom and in British possessions abroad. The second is to make the definition of the powers of these foreign Courts absolutely clear. In this particular case at Shanghai it was argued that the wording of Section 504 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, taken in conjunction with the decision in the "Maori King" case, precludes such Courts from dealing with cases of limitation of liability. It is to make the matter quite clear that this other amending clause is put into this Bill. I beg to move.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Liverpool.)
  On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
  House adjourned during pleasure.
  House resumed by the Earl BEAUCHAMP.

NATIONAL INSURANCE BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Monday next (The Viscount Haldane). (No. 234.)
House adjourned at Eleven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.