Lords Sitting of 28 July 1915

JUDICIAL BUSINESS.
Ordered, That all periods of time limited by Standing Orders Nos. III, IV, V, and VI be extended to the third sitting day of the House for Judicial Business in October next.
The Lord ADDINGTON—Sat first in Parliament after the death of his father.

EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (DERBYSHIRE, &c.) BILL. [H.L.]
  EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL. [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons, agreed to.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
Colonies (Annual)—No. 850. Gibraltar (Report for 1914).
Boy Labour in the Post Office—Fifth Annual Report of the Standing Committee:
India (Trade)—Tables relating to the Trade of British India with the British Empire and Foreign Countries, 1909–1910 to 1913–1914:
Board of Agriculture and Fisheries—

1. Annual Report on the Administration of the Grant for the Encouragement and Improvement of the Live-Stock Breeding Industry for the year 1914–1915 (1st April 1914–31st March 1915);

2. Report of Proceedings at the Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting of Representatives of Authorities under the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act, 1888 (Tuesday, 22nd June 1915):

Shipping Casualties—

1. (Loss of the steamship "Falaba")—Report of a formal investigation into the circumstances attending the foundering on 28th March of the steamship "Falaba," of Liverpool, in or near latitude 51° 30' N., longitude 6° 36' W., whereby loss of life ensued;

740

2. (Loss of the steamship "Lusitania")—Report of a formal investigation into the circumstances attending the foundering on 7th May 1915 of the British steamship "Lusitania," of Liverpool, after being torpedoed off the Old Head of Kinsale, Ireland:

Trade Reports (Annual Series)—
No. 5450. Persia (Province of Arabistan, year ended 20th March 1914);
No. 5451. Brazil (Trade of Brazil, years 1912–1913):
Presented (by command) and ordered to lie on the Table.
County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877—Account of Receipts and Payments under the Act during the year ended 31st March 1915:
Clergy (West Indies)—Return of the amount payable on 5th January 1915 out of the Consolidated Fund for Ecclesiastical Purposes in the West Indies:
Shops Act, 1912—Orders made by the following Councils and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department affecting certain classes of shops within their respective areas—

1. Council of County Palatine of Chester (Urban District of Ellesmere Port and Whitby);

2. Council of County Borough of Sunderland (County Borough of Sunderland):

Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and ordered to lie on the Table.

SPECIAL ACTS (EXTENSION OF TIME) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, I have given notice of an Amendment to subsection (1) of Clause 1 of this Bill—
1.—(1) Where the time within which a duty is to be performed or a power may be exercised under any special Act is limited, an application may be made to the appropriate Government Department for an order under this Act extending that time; but only in cases where the time is due to expire within twelve months of the date of the application.
But my Amendment to this subsection—after the word "special" to insert "or other"—does not carry out the point which I raised yesterday; in fact, it would be too wide, and I will not move it. But I am anxious about the proposal which I made in the debate yesterday with reference to the Welsh Church question, and I move the adjournment of this discussion in order to give the noble Marquess who leads the House an opportunity of saying whether it is possible for the Government to consider that proposal.
Amendment moved, That the debate be adjourned.—(Earl St. Aldwyn.)
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): My Lords, I understand that the noble Earl agrees that the particular Amendment which he has placed on the Paper is not one which could be included in this Bill. If the noble Earl had moved it, I think that my noble friend in charge of the Bill would have pointed out that the particular terms of the Bill and its title prevent, according to our usual Parliamentary practice, the moving of such an Amendment, which does not fall within the scope of the Bill. But the noble Earl stated his case in more general terms yesterday, and it is on that, I think, that ho desires that I should now say something.
I ventured to point out on the spur of the moment that it would probably be considered by Parliament that it would not do for Parliament to hand over to the Executive of the day at an uncertain date the uncontrolled settlement of this question. It must be remembered that nobody can say for certain, whatever his personal opinion may be, what the composition of the Government of the country will be at that period. That being so, Parliament, as I understand is agreed by those who for the time being are entitled to speak for it—namely, His Majesty's Government—would not be willing to hand over to an unknown Government at an unknown date the possibility, either on the one hand of confirming the words of the Suspensory Act as it stands—namely, that the Welsh Church Act should come into operation the moment the war is closed—or, on the other hand, of postponing its operation for a term which might extend over a year and a half. I am afraid, therefore, that it is impossible to give army satisfaction to time noble Earl in the sense of now producing or enacting a measure which would meet the case.
742
But I think it only right to assure the noble Earl on behalf of the Government that we will keep this matter in view. It is, of course, well within the bounds of possibility that Parliament may think that to carry out the terms of the Suspensory Act as they are now on the Statute Book would not be a fair course to take. If Parliament takes that view—and I venture to say that it is altogether impossible without knowing more of the time and the circumstances than can possibly be foreseen at this moment to say whether they will take it or not—if Parliament takes that view it clearly cannot be a difficult matter, by a very brief Bill amending the Suspensory Act., to carry a change into effect. Beyond that I am afraid it is impossible for us to go. I desire once more to assure the noble Earl and others who are interested in this matter that we shall continue to regard it with close attention in the light of the circumstances as they may alter and of the date of the conclusion of the war, which, as we all agree now, it is impossible to foresee.
EARL ST. ALDWYN: I moved the adjournment of this debate in order to give His Majesty's Government an opportunity of dealing with this question now if they thought fit. I understand from the noble Marquess's statement that they do not feel able to do that, and I have nothing more to say except that I propose, in order to place on record the tact that I have endeavoured to show a way in which the thing which I believe they desire to do could be done, to allow my Motion for adjournment to be negatived, though I shall not put the House to the trouble of a Division.
THE LORD BISHOP OF BANGOR: My Lords, I should like to say a word or two upon the position in which we are left owing to what has taken place. It having been intimated to us that the pledge of the Prime Minister could not be carried out without mischievous results to the interests of the country in the prosecution of the war, there could, of course, be no question that we should waive any demand we might have based upon a definite promise given in Parliament. We readily admit that in the circumstances there was nothing to be done but to withdraw the Postponement Bill.
The Postponement Bill was introduced in order to give us relief in two matters.

743
One was this, that owing to the length of the war there would naturally be a great expiration of life interests, and in those circumstances it was thought, considering the way in which the whole country would be crippled, that it would be unfair to the Church in Wales that a large number of life interests should expire during the interregnum. The Postponement Bill provided that those life interests should, for the purposes of commutation, be considered as still in being. But directly the war comes to an end the life interests which have expired will now be forfeited. For instance, supposing a Bishop were to die just now: there would be no life interest in regard to that Bishop to be commuted when the war concluded. In this way the position is rendered very grave. When we as a committee met and considered the financial situation on the basis that the Postponement Bill was to be passed into law, our conclusion was that a sum of at least £100,000 would have to be raised to carry on the work of the Church for the first year. With the extra war taxation which has been imposed, what chance would there be of getting even that £100,000? But now it will be necessary to put the sum at a very much larger figure.
The second point in which the withdrawal of the Postponement Bill creates great inconvenience is this. I have sat on thirty or forty committees called to consider what is to be done under the circumstances of the Welsh Church Act. The work in connection with the Irish Church was nothing like so complex as this work. In fact, there seems to be work almost for years to come in getting the machinery of the Church into order. Owing to the war our committees cannot be well attended. I will give your Lordships an instance. There are six laymen representing my diocese. Of those one is a Lord Lieutenant and two are colonels of regiments. What possible time can they give to sharing in our councils at a time like this? One knows that they have far more important duties with their regiments and in carrying on the necessary work connected with the war. We know, too, that the date of Disestablishment is to come on a day which no one can prophesy. It may come in a few months' time or it may not come for another year, and we are all working in a state of complete uncertainty as to when we shall find ourselves thrown on our own resources and have to carry out
744
these very difficult things which we are now considering. Had the Postponement Bill been passed it would have given us six months breathing time, and we should have known that we would have that six months clear in which to get ready by a particular date.
It is for those reasons that I have ventured to trespass on the time of your Lordships, that you might know that, while we do not complain of the withdrawal of the Postponement Bill as the Ministers of the Crown considered it in the public interest that it should be withdrawn, we are placed in a position of great inconvenience thereby, and I hope, as the noble Marquess seemed to have some sympathy with the point, that means may be devised to meet it.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, like my noble friend opposite I greatly regret that it should have become necessary to abandon the Postponement Bill, but we are all aware of the circumstances which led to that decision, and I am glad to know from the speech of the right rev. Prelate who has addressed your Lordships that he is one of those who are convinced that in the public interest no other course was open to us. It has been said that His Majesty's Government might, had they chosen, have overborne the opposition proceeding, as I believe it proceeded, from a comparatively small minority of the House of Commons. I have no doubt that is the case, but if that had been attempted or effected it could only have been at the cost of a domestic struggle which could not have failed to have created an impression, not only in this country but outside the limits of this country, of the most disastrous character. The present arrangement seems to be on the whole the best that the friends of the Church could expect to get.
EARL ST. ALDWYN: No.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My noble friend says "No." Under the present proposal the date of Disestablishment is put off to the most distant limit to which it can be put off within the terms of the Suspensory Act. We could not do more without fresh legislation, and it seems to me that an attempt at fresh legislation would be sure to raise the very controversy which we desire and which we hope to avoid by taking the course which we are

745
now taking. On the other hand, I am in strong sympathy with those who contend that by making the date of Disestablishment coincide with the date of the conclusion of the war we do stand a chance of inflicting a very grave hardship on the Welsh Church. The right rev. Prelate who has just spoken pointed out how utterly impossible it is for the Church, while the war is still in progress, to proceed with the kind of preparatory arrangement which it would certainly resort to in time of peace. My noble friend opposite suggested to us yesterday a means of mitigating this hardship by inserting an Amendment in the Bill now before the House. I am glad to observe that he recognises that that course is not one which the House would be well advised to take, or which would probably meet the necessities of the case. I certainly agree with my noble friend in believing that it will be the duty of whatever Government may be in power when the time comes to consider with an open and a sympathetic mind the position in which the Welsh Church will find itself at the time of the termination of this war; and what has been said by my noble friend who leads the House has, I think, been sufficient to show that in his view at all events the case of the Church ought to and will receive sympathetic consideration. That is what I desire to say, and I think that my noble friend opposite cannot do better than leave the matter where it has been left by my noble friend's statement.
On Question, Amendment (that the debate be adjourned) negatived.
Then the original Motion agreed to: Bill read 3a accordingly, and passed.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order): Committee negatived: Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill read 3a, and passed.

ELECTIONS AND REGISTRATION BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD HYLTON: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to give a Second Reading to this Bill, I would respectfully remind you that it is a war emergency measure, and it is by those standards and not by ordinary standards that I venture to think you should look at its provisions. The
746
Bill deals with two separate subjects, and I will endeavour to keep them distinct in the few remarks which I propose to offer. Subsection (1) of Clause 1 relates to the postponement of the next statutory elections of county and borough councillors, district councillors, guardians, and parish councillors, and provides that the elections which would naturally take place in a short time shall be postponed for a year and that the term of office of the existing councillors and guardians shall accordingly be extended by one year. Subsection (2) of the same clause provides a method for filling up any casual vacancy that may occur; the vacancy is to be filled, not by election, but by co-optation. By subsection (3) your Lordships will observe that the provisions of this clause may be applied, if necessary, to the election, appointment, or co-optation of the chairman, vice-chairman, elective auditors, or members of any kind of local or other body, or committee thereof, by Order of the Local Government Board as respects local bodies and by Order of the appropriate Government Department as respects any other bodies. To this part Of the Bill I do not think your Lordships will be inclined to offer more opposition than was offered in the other House. There opinion was almost unanimous as to the desirability in these war days of postponing the municipal contests that would otherwise take place either in the month of November next as regards borough councils or in the month of March next as regards county councils. In another place there was a general consensus of opinion that all the energy and time of able-bodied persons were required for national purposes, and that municipal contests, with all the paraphernalia such as meetings, canvassing, placards, and so on, might very well be postponed to more peaceful times. Clause 2 of the Bill relates merely to the City of London, and I believe the object of that clause is to enable the election of the Lord Mayor to take place as usual in the month of November.
When you conic to Clause 3 you arrive at a different part of the subject altogether. This clause has nothing to do with the postponement of municipal and local elections, but contains provisions for the postponement of registration. A certain amount of work has already been done as regards the preparation of the Parliamentary and local government registers, but

747
this clause enacts that no more work shall take place after the 31st day of the present month, and the grounds on which I venture to recommend this part of the Bill to your Lordships' favourable consideration are these. In the first place, on the ground of economy. It was stated in another place by the President of the Local Government Board that a saving of about £100,000 was anticipated if this Bill became law, and so far as I am aware that figure was not challenged. The second object of this portion of the Bill is to obviate the difficulty which would arise in ma ay places of even getting the work done were it decided to go on with the preparaticn of the registers.
In that connection perhaps your Lordships will allow me to quote from the remarks that were made in the House of Commons by the Secretary for Scotland. He told the House that when he went to Scotland to talk about economy he received a remarkable deputation from the City of Glasgow, consisting of the chief Unionist agent, the chief Liberal agent, the Nationalist agent, and the Labour agent, and they were absolutely unanimous in begging him to do what he could to forward legislation with the object of having registration work stopped. I believe that in Scotland a great deal of this work which in England is done under the auspices of revising barristers is done by officers known as assessors, and Mr. McKinnon Wood informed the House of Commons that the gentlemen who filled this office to whom he spoke on the subject in Glasgow informed him that they were so much engaged with every kind of national work at this moment—with recruiting, the care of Belgian refugees, the proper carrying out of the Munitions Act, and various other national objects—that they had neither the staff nor the time necessary to carry out their usual registration duties.
A third argument which I think may be justly brought forward in favour of this legislation is that it is almost universally acknowledged that it would be quite impossible this year to obtain a good register. The old register has, of course, now become what is generally called a waning register, but even as such it is considered by those best entitled to speak on this matter to be a more representative register than any new register could be that was drawn up under present conditions when such a vast number of voters have enlisted in the Army and Navy or removed
748
from their old habitations ill connection with Government work, and when, in fact, an altogether unprecedented dislocation of the population has taken place. There is, perhaps, a fourth argument that I am justified in bringing forward in asking your Lordships to pass this portion of the Bill. You are all aware that the Revision Courts held every Year in every constituency—I am talking now of the Parliamentary register—forum arenas in which the flame of political animosity is kept bright and the rival political agents indulge in more or less acrimonious controversy. In a word, the holding of Revision Courts throughout the country would naturally tend to some extent to keep up political and Party strife which quite possibly might otherwise die down. Perhaps your Lordships will think it worth while to give a sympathetic consideration to this view of the matter after the speeches that were made in this House yesterday by the most rev. Primate and by the noble Marquess who leads the House, in which they both spoke in a very sympathetic way of the necessity at this time, as long as the war lasts, of softening as far as possible political asperities. It has been argued that certain expenses have already been incurred in preparing the register. That is quite true, but I hardly think that is a strong argument for going on with the register and increasing those expenses. On that point I can only repeat that it is calculated that a material saying, amounting as I said just now to £100,000, will be effected if this Bill becomes law.
Perhaps I shall be expected to say a word or two with regard to the last lines in subsection (1) of Clause 3. That subsection proposes that any appointments of revising barristers already made and contracts already entered into for the purposes of the preparation of the registers in the present year are, so far as respects that purpose, hereby annulled. Your Lordships may be aware that about three weeks ago the annual appointment of revising barristers by the Judges took place. It is not altogether pleasant to stand up, either here or anywhere else, and suggest, that any contract should be annulled. But your Lordships will, I hope, remember that this is no ordinary time, and that this is a war emergency measure; and I think that revising banisters in particular, and the Bar in general, are patriotic enough to realise that in these times there are

749
very few of us who are not called upon to make some sacrifice or other. If your Lordships hold that on the general merits of the Bill a good case has been made out fur passing it into law it would, I think, be almost grotesque that the Revision Courts should be held this year merely in order to give occupation to the revising barristers. In another place the President of the Local Government Board has said that if the Bill becomes law he will use every endeavour to provide other employment in his Department, for those gentlemen whose appointments are annulled and who are willing and able to render assistance to that Government Department. It will be my duty presently, if your Lordships are willing to give a Second Reading to this Bill, to move certain Amendments making Mr. Long's object in that respect a little clearer than perhaps it otherwise would be. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Hylton.)
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, I certainly do not rise to oppose this Bill, for I believe it to be necessary in present circumstances, and I have no doubt that will be the view of your Lordships. But I confess to some surprise that His Majesty's Government did not introduce it a couple of months ago before any registration work had been done and before the revising barristers had been appointed. I do not know in the least what the reasons for the delay could have been. The circumstances were just the same as they are now, and it was pretty clear then that something of the kind would be required unless we were to have these municipal and other contests during the time now before us, which none of us desire.
I should like to say a few words with regard to Clause 3, which practically continues the present register, which is waning, until the end of the year 1916. That register is now very imperfect; by that time it will be really obsolete, and it is perfectly obvious that it will not be a register upon which any election ought to take place. Supposing there are Parliamentary vacancies during the year 1916 when that register ordinarily would be no longer in force, what is to happen? It is all very well to say that by arrangement between the Parties there will be no contests, but this Bill does not prohibit
750
contests in Parliamentary constituencies, and the register will be so imperfect that if there should be any independent candidate, desiring to stand he will certainly not have a fair opportunity of contesting the opinion of the electors. Further, if happily the war should be over before the end of 1916, as I am sure we all desire, the time will unquestionably come for an appeal to the country by the Government of the day. It will take some time to prepare a new register. The circumstances will be difficult. Many of those who ought to vote will be abroad and will have been abroad for some time. Our soldiers and sailors will be largely deprived, because of their non-residence, of the franchise which they axe so well qualified to exercise, and they may, although the war is over, be still absent, from the country on naval or military service. I have no doubt that the matter has been considered by the Local Government Board, but I confess it does not seem to me that this Bill deals very satisfactorily with the question of the register for Parliamentary elections, and I should have been glad to hear something from the noble Lord in charge of the Bill with regard to the intentions of the Government as to future dealing with that matter.
Some of us can remember occasions when there has been a Reform Bill passed by Parliament and when the ordinary registration of the year has been accelerated in order that there might be an election under the new Reform Act. Even then it takes some time; and having regard to that fact and to the difficulty of residence to which I have alluded I confess I have a feeling that, as His Majesty's Government delayed dealing as with this question of registration so long that a considerable part of the work had already been done, it would have been better, in spite of the extra expenditure that would have been required, to complete the register for the present year. One of the main expenses in connection with the Parliamentary register, after it has been settled by the revising barrister, is the printing of the new register. That might certainly have been delayed until it appeared likely that the register would be required for the purpose of an election. I know from what passed in my own county council that the saving would have been considerable by the mere delay of the printing. I suspect it would form a very large part of the saving of £100,000 to which my noble friend

751
alluded. Therefore I am sorry that, having delayed the introduction of this Bill until so much of the registration work of this year had been completed, His Majesty's Government have not hardened their hearts to go on with it to completion, leaving the printing of the new register to be done at such time as might be thought desirable.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, I desire to make a slight suggestion to the noble Lord in charge of the Bill with regard to one part of it. I gathered from his concluding remarks that we are to have something which answers to a Committee stage on this Bill, because he said he was going to move Amendments. Well, that is an improvement on some of the procedure to which we have recently got accustomed. In these circumstances I think it would be convenient if I indicate to the noble Lord the nature of the simple Amendment which I propose to move. My Amendment has nothing to do with registration or with any public body that requires popular election in the ordinary sense; but there are a certain number of corporations in Scotland which have changes from time to time in their constitution, such as harbour boards, and it is quite unnecessary to bring them under this Bill at all, because there is no register, nothing but a circulation of proxies to vote by post, and I cannot see why that should not go on as usual. The framers of the Bill seem to wish to bring that into operation, because the first words of subsection (3) of Clause 1 are that the provisions of this clause may be applied if necessary to certain bodies. My suggestion is that the best judge of whether the application of the Bill is necessary or not is the body itself, which knows its constitution and its difficulty. These harbour boards are not under the Secretary for Scotland, nor are they under the control of any Department. What I suggest is that after the word "body" where it first occurs in subsection (3) of Clause 1 the words, "and on the application of such body" should be inserted. That is the form of my Amendment, and I thought it would be convenient to the noble Lord to know the precise suggestion that I am going to make.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, of course we take careful note of what fell from the noble Lord who has just sat down as to the terms of the Amendment
752
which he desires to move to subsection (3) of Clause 1. I have no wish to argue the point with him at all now, although I confess I should have supposed that in such cases as those which he mentioned, where no expense is involved and where none of the apparatus which accompanies so many of the elections dealt with by this Bill is involved, the particular Department concerned would have had no difficulty in meeting the wishes of those who compose the body and in authorising the particular election to take place. There are, of course, certain bodies which are only indirectly public bodies where large expense would be avoided by the application of this Bill—such a body, for instance, as the General Medical Council, who are anxious to postpone their election—but I have no doubt there are cases which fall within the category which the noble Lord mentioned, and I should have thought in regard to those that the terms of the Bill would have satisfied all that the noble Lord requires. But, of course, he will have the opportunity of stating his case further.
With reference to what fell from the noble Earl on the Front Bench opposite, I think it must generally be admitted that there are certain objections attaching to this postponement, as is certain to happen in every such case. We do not at all attempt to deny the validity of the objecttions which the noble Earl raised. In one of the cases which he mentioned, that of a by-election for a Parliamentary constituency, the objection of an imperfect register would no doubt apply. In the case, however, of a possible General Election at an earlier date than seems from all the indications we possess to be at all likely, I am bound to say that I do not think the noble Earl's objections have so complete foundation. In the first place the probability is, I am afraid, a very remote one; and, in the second place, I think it would be less difficult than the noble Earl appears to suppose to make special arrangements for such a contingency.
The noble Earl proceeded to argue that as some part of the registration business had been already undertaken and some expense incurred, it would have been desirable to complete the register although the printing of the lists might have been deferred. My impression is that the expense which has already been undertaken is not a large fraction of the total which would be incurred if the

753
ordinary practice were pursued and the register completed. I cannot help noting that this is an instance, although not by any means a glaring instance, of the difficulty which always confronts us when particular economies are suggested. There are always arguments at any rate of a certain force to be found against the undertaking of any particular saving of expenditure. The saving of expenditure in this case is not, of course, very large in comparison with the sums which we are spending, but on the other hand it is not contemptible; and while admitting the force of the suggestions which the noble Earl has stated we must, I think, continue to hold that the advantages—and not less the advantage of the saving in money—which will be the consequence outweigh the objections which the noble Earl stated.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: My Lords, I cannot help feeling that in this Bill a matter of simple justice has been very lightly treated. At a stated period the senior Judge of the Assize, wherever it is, is obliged by law to appoint the barristers who are to revise the register. One must not forget what the state of things used to be before revising barristers were appointed. For days one had to wait for the decision of the returning officer, who had himself to decide such questions as would now arise before the revising barrister and be decided before the election took place. Everything in connection with the registration this year has been done in the ordinary course. The revising barristers have been appointed in pursuance of the Statute and have made their arrangements, and the importance of having Revision Courts every year is illustrated by the experience of everybody who has undertaken a contested election. I have had the satisfaction of having undertaken five. One of the great difficulties in an election is change of residence and hunting out the persons who are entitled to vote. All the appointments, as I have said, have been made this year, expenses have been incurred by the persons appointed, and that is all to be set aside and no arrangement is to be made. It may be asked, What is the use of the register when there is to be no election upon it? There is a great mistake made in taking that view. One of the things that strikes one in this matter is the extraordinary number of changes of residence even in the same year; and everybody knows that at the
754
end of the year it has always been a sort of tradition that if there is to be an election you must wait for the new register, because the expense is extraordinary which is incurred in tracing those persons whose residences have changed in the interval.
As a matter of mere justice I want to know what is to be done for the revising barristers who have already been appointed. Let it be remembered that the Government knew what the course would be. Those who are responsible for this Bill must have known that such a thing was going to be done as is now suggested, and were perfectly able to give notice before the appointments were made. But though the revising barristers are nominally appointed year by year, these are definite appointments, except through death, illness, or misconduct. Now, having allowed the whole course of things to be taken as though the work was going to be done, it is proposed that there should be no register. I think that in itself is a misfortune, for the reasons I have given. But what is perfectly scandalous, as it appears to me, is that no provision is made for the compensation of those persons who have incurred expenses upon their appointment for the purpose of fulfilling it. I suggest to your Lordships that that is not a thing one ought to sanction. I think further that the importance of having the register as accurate as it can be is a matter which should be well considered before it is abandoned. At all events I make an appeal on behalf of the revising barristers who have been appointed, and who are entitled to such expenses as they have already incurred in the endeavour to fulfil the appointment which is now being set aside.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD BUCKMASTER): My Lords, there are two points raised by the noble and learned Earl, and they will be recognised at once as quite distinct and independent of each other. The first is whether or not registration should be suspended; the second is, if it be, whether it should be suspended upon the terms provided by the Bill. The noble and learned Earl thinks that there is no advantage gained by suspending registration. I think, if he will allow me to say so, he has overlooked the fact that if registration were to proceed now it must be a loose register having regard to the number of people who are away and under

755
arms and who have removed their residence. Therefore the register made this autumn would be perfectly useless for the following year. That is the first reason why registration ought to be stopped. The next is this. Although there may be special cases, as Lord St. Aldwyn mentioned, where unexpected by-elections will in spite of Party arrangements take place, it is well understood that there will be no contested Party election until the General Election, and when that takes place there will be provision made beforehand to secure that there is a proper register on which it can proceed. When you find that the representatives of every Party agree that to proceed with registration now would be a waste of money it appears to me impossible to avoid coming to the conclusion that, unless there were some overwhelming disadvantage associated with postponing the registration, registration ought not to take place. If we feel, as I am sure we do, that one of our first duties at home is to promote a domestic campaign for economy, surely we ought not to look too closely and too critically at the means by which that economy is to be secured.
The second part of the noble and learned Earl's speech deals with another matter, and the opinions which he expressed are exactly what we might have expected when we know the sympathetic interest which he has always shown in the people who have been the least fortunate in the great struggle in the profession of the law. But I think that there he has again, quite unintentionally, over-estimated the disadvantage that will arise. Let me assume that it is agreed that registration ought not to take place this year and that had this Bill been introduced six weeks earlier, say, no reasonable objection could have been taken to its passage. In that case I feel quite certain that the noble and learned Earl would not have said that the revising barristers were, none the less, to expect to be appointed to an office which could have no duties whatever associated with it. That cannot for a moment be maintained. What has happened is no doubt unfortunate. The introduction of this Bill has been so long delayed that some of the barristers have been appointed, but they have discharged no duty, and though it may be, as the noble and learned Earl says, that in certain cases they have made plans thinking their services would be required, I feel certain that
756
representations made upon that footing to the Local Government Board would meet with the sympathetic consideration of Mr. Walter Long, who has promised that he will do all things in his power to secure that the opportunities of giving work which he possesses shall be utilised for the purpose of mitigating to the greatest possible extent any hardship that may be suffered by reason of this Bill. In circumstances like that I feel quite sure that members of the bar, even those who suffer most acutely by what this Bill provides, would be most reluctant to have their personal interests urged against a matter which was believed to be for the public good. For these reasons I trust that your Lordships will give a Second Reading to this Bill.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, there is one point which I should like to mention in connection with what has been said by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. The noble and learned Lord told us that this registration would be of no value because of the number of soldiers and sailors who are absent. But, if I max say so, that does not agree with the statement made on the same subject by Mr. Walter Long in introducing this Bill. He said, on the contrary—
"It means that all these overseers' lists will be available as the foundation of the new register upon which any future election will have to take place, and therefore not only do I deny that this work has been wasted, but, on the contrary, I think it is very valuable and necessary work which has been done."
It is quite clear that there is a complete contradiction there between the views of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and those of Mr. Walter Long who introduced the Bill, because if the imperfect list uncriticised by the revising barristers is of very great value for future elections it follows much more clearly that when that list has been revised and finished it must be of considerably more value. One is very glad to hear that, £100,000 is going to be saved. I think it is rather a pity that the £200,000 which has been expended has not been saved also. But my point is this—Is it really a saving admitting, as Mr. Walter Long says, that the work that has been done will be of great value?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Perhaps the noble Viscount will permit me to call his attention to something he has over-

757
looked. In the later part of his speech Mr. Walter Long made this statement—
"I have not thought it necessary to go into the whole details of registration, but that is one of the reasons why a register made this year must be absolutely valueless, because all the soldiers and the sailors, all the men engaged in mine-sweeping, all the men who are doing heroic service to the country, in addition to the men who are now engaged in munition work, who have been moved, not of their own will, from one part of the world to another to serve their country, and all the men who have been moved from their homes to different parts of the country, will be left out of the register, besides a great many others. Therefore it would be utterly useless."
Therefore I am right in what I said.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I certainly read that passage, but the only reason I did not refer to it was that I did not think it necessary to show contradictions existing between the statements of a Minister in another place. It is perfectly obvious that Mr. Walter Long means that this work is of considerable value as far as it goes, but a completed register would not be useful because it would not embrace soldiers and sailors. That does not disturb my main point which is this. You have spent already £200,000. Next year you may have to say "We will have another register." You will then have to go back two years to an old register, and it is far more difficult to go back for two years than to go back for one year, and it may be that the cost of the extra labour you will incur in going Lack two years will exceed the amount of £100,000 which you will have saved by not completing this present registration. That is a point that has not been dealt with, but I am advised by those who have more knowledge than I have of election expenses that that very likely may take place.
LORD HYLTON: My Lords, I should like to say a word with regard to the grievance that Lord Halsbury thought the revising barristers would suffer from. It is unfortunate that the Amendments which it will be my duty to move presently in Committee have not been printed and circulated. I apologise to the House, but it is not my fault. As a matter of fact this legislation was taken very late in another place, and the Bill was only printed and circulated here this morning. Therefore although I am not strictly in order, perhaps the noble and learned Earl will allow me to read out an Amendment which I am going to move in Committee, which will show him that the interests of the
758
revising barristers have not been altogether forgotten in this matter. At the end of subsection (2) of Clause 3, I propose to move that these words be inserted—
"Provided that the duty of certifying for payment of expenses certifiable by a revising barrister in relation to the preparation of the register in the present year and the apportionment of such expenses shall be performed by the Local Government Board, or by some person appointed by them."
If those words are inserted in the Bill I hope that the persons so appointed by the Local Government Board will be those who would otherwise this year be revising barristers. As to the questions raised by my noble friend Lord Peel, the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has answered them fully.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House forthwith.
House in Committee accordingly.
The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.
Clause 1:
Postponement of local elections.
1.—(1) The next statutory elections of county and borough councillors, district councillors, guardians, and parish councillors, shall be postponed for a year, and the term of office of the existing councilors and guardians shall accordingly be extended by one year.
This provision shall apply only where the next statutory election would take place before the first day of duly nineteen hundred and sixteen.
(2) Any casual vacancy, requiring to be filled by election, among the members of any county council, any borough council, any district council, any board of guardians, or any parish council shall, until a new register comes into force, instead of being filled by an election, be tilled by means of the choice by the council or board of a person to fill the vacancy, and a councillor or guardian so chosen shall hold office in the same manner in all respects as if he had been elected to fill the vacancy.
(3) The provisions of this section may be applied, if necessary, to the election, appointment or co-optation of the chairman, vice-chairman, elective auditors, or members of any kind of local or other body or committee thereof, by order of the Local Government Board as respects local bodies, and by order of the appropriate Government Department as respects any other bodies, and may be so applied with the necessary modifications and either generally as regards all bodies of any particular kind, or specially as regards any particular body or bodies. In the year nineteen hundred and sixteen the day of election of a chairman of a county council shall be the day of the first ordinary quarterly meeting of that council after the eighth day of March in that year, and nothing in any Act of Parliament shall require the council to hold a meeting for the election of the chairman or of aldermen apart from other county business.
(4) Any provisions of any Act or Order or regulations relating to any such councillors or guardians, or to any such chairman, vice-chairman, or member of a local or other body, shall be construed as if they were modified in such a manner as to give effect to the provisions of this section, and the Local Government Board as respects councillors, guardians, or local bodies, and the appropriate Government Department as respects any other bodies, if any question arises, may by Order specify the actual modification which is to be made in pursuance of this section.
(5) If any question arises as to the appropriate Government Department by which an Order should be made under this section, that question shall be determined by the Treasury, and their decision on the matter shall be conclusive for all purposes.
(6) For the purposes of this section the expression "councillor" includes "alderman," the expression "borough" includes "metropolitan borough," the expression "statutory election" means an election to fill the place of councillors and guardians retiring on the expiration of their term of office, and the expression "existing councillors and guardians" means councillors and guardians who are in office at the time when the next retirement of councillors or guardians after the passing of this Act would, but for this Act, have taken place:
Provided that a person so chosen shall hold office only until the next statutory election of councillors or guardians, and provided also that nothing in this subsection shall alter the law regulating the filling of a casual vacancy in Scotland or Ireland.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, the Amendment which I spoke of a few moments ago is in Clause 1, subsection (3), after the words "or members of any kind of local or other body," to insert the words "and on the application of such body." I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, subsection (3), page 2, line 1, insert ("and on the application of such body").—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
LORD HYLTON: I do not know whether the noble Lord would be satisfied with an assurance that the provisions of the Bill will not be imposed on any harbour board against the wishes of that board.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: There are other bodies of the same class, such as the Medical Council in Glasgow and the Councils of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons and Physicians. If the noble Lord gives a pledge on behalf of the Government that in cases of that kind, where there is no register and no popular election, it is not intended to enforce the provisions of this Bill without the consent of the body, then I am satisfied.
LORD HYLTON: Yes; the Government are willing to give that assurance.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: Then I withdraw my Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD HYLTON: In subsection (3), after the words "In the year nineteen hundred and sixteen the day of election of a chairman of a county council," I move to insert "in England and Wales other than the London County Council." There are no quarterly meetings of the London County Council, and the words "in England and Wales" were in the Amendment as moved in the House of Commons but appear to have been omitted by inadvertence.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 2, line 8, after ("council") insert ("in England and Wales other than the London County Council").—(Lord Hylton.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD HYLTON: I move to delete from subsection (6) the words "Provided that a person so chosen shall hold office only until the next statutory election of councillors or guardians, and provided also that nothing in this subsection shall alter the law regulating the filling of a casual vacancy in Scotland or Ireland." The principal reason for moving that these words should be left out is that they would interfere with the rotation system in the case of councils whose members retire by thirds each year. In the House of Commons the President of the Local Government Board accepted the Amendment that was moved that these words should be inserted, but he did so subject to its being clearly understood that at a further stage of the Bill he should have the opportunity of moving to strike out the words if he so desired. The Local Government Board have considered this case very carefully, and think it would be inconvenient were these words to remain. In their opinion it would be far better that the councillor who is co-opted should remain in office for three years, two years, or one year, as the case may be, in common with his colleagues who were elected at the same time.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 2, line,36, leave out from ("Provided") to the end of line 39.—(Lord Hylton.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clause 3:
Postponement of registration.
3.—(1) The parliamentary and local government register of electors, or any register based on the same, in force at the time of the passing of this Act, shall remain in force until Parliament provides for special registers being made or otherwise directs, but in no case after the thirty-first day of December nineteen hundred and sixteen; and the provisions of the Acts relating to the Registration of Electors, so far as regards the preparation of the new registers in the present year. shall not as from the end of the thirty-first day of July be carried into effect; and any appointments of revising barristers already made, and contracts already entered into for the purpose of the preparation of the registers in the present year are, so far as respects that purpose, hereby annulled:
Provided that nothing in this Act shall prevent any payment being made to the overseers or any other officer or person in respect of work done under or in connection with the Acts relating to the Registration of Electors before the first day of August fur the purpose of the preparation of the registers in the present year.
(2) The duty of certifying for payment of expenses in relation to the preparation of the register for the present year shall be performed by the Local Government Board, and if any question arises as to any such payment or the apportionment thereof or as to the effect of this section on any contract, that question shall be referred to the Local Government Board, and their decision thereon shall be conclusive for all purposes.
LORD HYLTON: I move to omit from subsection (2) the words "The duty of certifying for payment of expenses in relation to the preparation of the register for the present year shall be performed by the Local Government Board, and." Then I shall move to insert at the end of the clause words which will make a rearrangement of this subsection.
Amendment moved—
Clause 3, page 3, line 23, leave out from the words ("The duty") to the word ("and") in line 25 inclusive.—(Lord Hylton.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD HYLTON: I now move to insert at the end of subsection (2) a proviso which it is hoped will enable the Local Government Board, in pursuance of the undertaking that was given by the President in the other House, to give work to those revising barristers who are willing and able to undertake it.
Amendment moved—
Clause 3, line 29, insert:
"Provided that the duty of certifying for payment of expenses certifiable by a revising barrister in relation to the preparation of the register in the present year and the apportionment of such expenses shall be performed by the Local Government Board, or by some person appointed by them."—(Lord Hylton.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.
Amendments reported: Bill read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons, and to be printed as amended. (No. 155.)

NAVAL DISCIPLINE (No. 2) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading Read.
THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, I regret that it is necessary so soon to again ask your Lordships to consider the question of naval discipline, but I hope to satisfy you that the alterations which we propose to make in the Naval Discipline Act are in the interests of the country. Clauses 1, 2 and 3 are the result of experience gained by the war, and I shall refer ill detail to them in a moment. Clauses 5 and 6 are general and necessary for any Act of Parliament of this character. Clause 4 is one to which we have given considerable thought and attention, and in it we have taken the opportunity to remedy a point which in the Opinion of most of us ought to have been met before.
The first clause of the Bill amends subsection (3) of Section 56 of the Naval Discipline Act. Under that section the officer in command of the tender is invested with the full power given to one of the captains of His Majesty's ships. The employment of a large number of small vessels under the command of warrant officers has made the work under this section of considerable difficulty during the war. Generally warrant officers are not accustomed to discipline, and have not the same ideas of enforcing discipline as those who are more acquainted with the facts and traditions of the Service. The proposal in this clause is to place the imposition of punishment in the hands of the commissioned officer who may be in charge

763
of one of these various groups of small vessels. This is considered to be in the interests of the Service and also in the interests of the men who are serving on board these vessels. The second subsection of Clause 1 deals with a grammatical error, and is purely of a drafting character.
Clause 2 provides for the establishment of a new Court to try officers for disciplinary offences as it is found extremely inconvenient, especially during time of war, to assemble a Court-Martial. This clause is to be operative only during the war. The new Court is only proposed to be established for the trial of certain minor offences, and the Court is to consist of not less than three nor more than five officers, of whom one must be not below the rank of a commander. It has been found during the war that there are a large number of men who are employed as skippers of trawlers and drifters, and there are occasions upon which their behaviour has had to be dealt with in a summary fashion. It is proposed that this Court should be established to try these minor offences. The highest penalty which can be inflicted is dismissal from the Service. Incidentally this brings in another matter by which still further punishment can be inflicted. Practically none of the men to whom this would apply are regular members of the Service. Therefore dismissal from the Service would entail no penalty. But the Merchant Shipping Act gives the Board of Trade power to suspend certificates of officers in the mercantile marine if it is shown that they have been convicted of an offence, but in order to be convicted of an offence they have to be tried before a statutory tribunal. The establishment of the tribunal under the clause we are now considering will remedy this. Accordingly if the case were one which in the first place warranted dismissal from the Service by the Admiralty, it would be possible, if the case deserved it, for the man to receive punishment at the hands of the Board of Trade.
As to Clause 3, a new point has arisen, because Section 90 of the Naval Discipline Act provides for discipline on hired ships. During the present war a certain number of ships have been bought, and there are some doubts as to whether the provisions of Section 90 apply to those ships. This amending clause is introduced in order to do away with any ambiguity on that point.
764
Clause 4 is the one to which I alluded just now, and it stands in a somewhat different category in so far as it is not due to the war. We have taken the opportunity of making an amendment in the general law which we think to be desirable. I am not going to say that the Cases are likely to be larger, but still it is a power which we think it desirable to have. The power we seek to obtain is in its essential respects the same as that conferred by Section 145 of the Army Act. That Act enables deductions to be made from the pay of men who have failed to obey orders in affiliation cases. This puts in many respects the Navy in the same position as the Army, but there are two important differences necessary to be observed for purely naval purposes. Owing to sailers being absent at sea it may not be possible for them to attend and answer a summons, and it is proposed that the power of making a compulsory deduction from their pay shall only apply if the authority which has to order the deduction is satisfied that the individual has had a reasonable opportunity of defending his case before the magistrate. The only other difference from the Army Act is that we do not propose that the power should be extended above the rank of chief petty officer. In other respects it brings the Act in conformity with the Army (Annual) Act. There are not many cases which may occur under it, but we think it is a power which it is desirable we should have. Those are the features of the Bill, and I hope it will be passed into law during the present sittings.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.
Committee negatived: Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill read 3a, and passed.

POLICE MAGISTRATES (SUPERANNUATION) BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order): Committee negatived: Then (Standing Order. No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill react 3a, and passed.

PRICE OF COAL (LIMITATION) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: My Lords, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill I hope it will not be necessary to detain your Lordships at any length, as I venture to think you are familiar with the circumstances which have led to its introduction. We are all aware, probably from painful experience, that during the last winter the price of coal, particularly in the South of England and in London, advanced to figures much above those which are usually paid in rime of active trade. It is difficult, perhaps, completely to trace the reasons for that increase, but there is no doubt that it was largely due to the shortage of labour in consequence of a large number of miners having enlisted, particularly in the early period of the war. It has been reckoned that at the end of February last more than one-sixth of the men employed in mines had joined the Colours. It is true that some 50,000 men have been drafted into the mines from other areas, but still the shortage amounted to nearly 14 per cent., and since the end of February further reduction is understood to have occurred in the numbers at work. The natural result was a diminution of output. At the same time there were certain counteracting features, such as the limitation of the amount of coal exported.
In the latter half of the past twelve months the decrease both in the production of coal and in the amount available for home use was less than in the first half. This was to a certain extent due to the Railway Executive Committee dealing will the congestion on the railways, and I hope that the difficulties with which they then had to contend have been very much reduced if not removed. The difficulties which this question involves, owing to the exceptional nature of the industry and its variations not only in different districts but almost in the same mines, make any alteration far from easy to manage. Every effort was made to avoid having to take legislative measures to procure this result. The President of the Board of Trade has been able to enter into arrangements with a number of leading coal merchants by which a limitation has been placed upon the price of coal, and the figure at which they sell the coal in the wagon or in the trolley is limited to a certain price above that which they pay at the depôts
766
where they receive the coal. It was hoped that this could have been still further extended, but unfortunately it was found that arrangements could not be effected without having recourse to legislation.
The essential feature of the Bill which I now have the honour to present to your Lordships is that the price of coal is limited by Clause 1 to an amount of 4s. above the price at the corresponding time last year. It has been no easy matter to arrive at an exact comparison of like with like, but efforts have been made as far as possible to do so. All corresponding terms being equal the price is not to exceed 4s. per ton above the price at the pitmouth on the corresponding date last year. That has been agreed to after a good deal of discussion, and the remaining portions of Clause 1 set up the machinery for carrying that into effect.
I now come to Clause 2. As your Lordships are probably aware, there are a number of collieries which do not possess sufficient wagons of their own to carry their coal, and wagons have to be used belonging to other collieries. A limitation is put upon the profit which those wagons can earn. This will, I hope, have some effect also in preventing high prices being charged for coal. There are, of course, many difficulties in connection with this measure. I cannot ask your Lordships for one moment to consider it to be a water-tight measure, and I certainly would not like to suggest that I regard it as a great economic instrument. It is a temporary measure solely for war purposes, and designed solely to get over a very serious and difficult problem.
There are two main sources of criticism. One is that we shall not have any check on the retail prices. As regards that I have already made allusion to the action which the President of the Board of Trade has taken. It is impossible to fix a maximum price, but we hope that the arrangements which have been made between the President of the Board of Trade and the leading London coal merchants will have the effect of preventing anything like a very large increase in the retail price. I then come to the second of the main criticisms which I know will be directed to the Bill. We have to deal with the question of existing contracts. This has provided the greatest amount of difficulty in the House of Commons, but I am glad to say that an arrangement has been

767
effected which, if I may respectfully say so, reflects credit upon my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade and his advisers, who have taken great pains in endeavouring to get what was a fair compromise. It also reflects the greatest credit on the draftsmen who have been able to get into the clause the number of conflicting claims of the various contending parties. But above all I think the greatest credit is due in that this Clause has been made possible by the good sense and the good spirit shown by the various Members representing different interests. I dare say the clause is not altogether quite a simple one for anybody except an expert lawyer or draftsman to deal with, but at any rate it does represent a compromise which has been effected, and which I hope and have every reason to believe will be successful.
This Bill as it now reaches your Lordships will, I hope, have some effect upon preventing anything like panic prices occurring in the coal trade. But it will be a great mistake for anyone to suppose that under this Bill there is going to be anything like cheap coal. The Bill is not going to lower the price of coal; it is only going to prevent the price of coal being raised to undue limits. It will also have another effect, and that is to prove to those who are engaged in the industry that, whatever may have been the case in the past, undue profits through the war will not be made in the future. The question of undue profits is not one that comes within the scope of this Bill. It is a matter with which the Chancellor of the Exchequer may or may not be in a position to deal later; but at any rate it does not arise on this occasion. I say this Bill is not a perfect Bill. It deals with a difficult and complicated subject, and represents the best thought which those who have the amplest means of knowing the difficulties have been able to give to it, and they hope they have produced a Bill which will be of material use during the period for which it may be called upon to run.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
LORD STRACHIE LORD STRACHIE had the following Motion on the Paper—
On the Motion for the Second Reading to move to resolve, That in the opinion of this House the proposals of the Bill in regard to the regulation of the price of coal are futile or inadequate.
768
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Motion which I have had on the Paper for some days has been amply justified by the action of the Board of Trade in another place. The noble Duke in charge of the Bill said that no doubt your Lordships were aware of what the Bill contained, but I very much doubt whether any of your Lordships, unless they were present in the House of Commons yesterday during the discussion on the Report stage or perused Hansard this morning, are really aware of the contents of the measure. I do not think the noble Duke will for one moment deny that the Bill has been practically turned inside out by the action of the Government only yesterday in the abnormal alterations that have been made. There has been very little opportunity to see this Bill in its amended form, but I suppose I cannot complain, because it does not seem to be the custom of your Lordships' House to object seriously on the ground that a Bill has been only circulated for one day, however big that Bill may be.
Your Lordships are asked to consider this Bill and pass it through all its stages to-day. I believe we are to have a Committee stage, but that will be merely formal, because I understand that no Amendments can be accepted, on the ground that in that case the Bill would have to go back to the House of Commons and would not be able to receive the Royal Assent to-morrow. Although we are to have a Committee Stage for all practical purposes we are asked to pass this important Bill without any time for consideration or any opportunity to make such Amendments as the House might deem desirable. As I have said, the President of the Board of Trade has entirely justified my assertion that the Bill was "futile or inadequate," because the measure has been recast. The Bill as introduced was a shop-window Bill—useful at an election, but for practical purposes no good at all. As a matter of fact, it only dealt with twenty per cent. of the coal that would be sold during the next twelve months. It is now true that under a provision which was introduced yesterday by the President of the Board of Trade contracts are to be broken under the Bill. When that was first suggested the President of the Board of Trade said he did not like the idea of breaking contracts, and I dare say there are many in your Lordships' House who do not like the idea; but it may be fairly said that during a great war

769
it is a ease of "necessity knows no laws," and any previous objections that might have been entertained on the ground of the sacredness of contracts disappear under present conditions. Although contracts are allowed to be broken, they can only be broken after three months; until November they will remain in force, and eighty per cent. of the coal consumed during that period will not come under it.
The noble Duke did not tell us why the recommendations contained in the Report of the Departmental Committee set up by the President of the Board of Trade at the beginning of this year have not been adopted by the Board of Trade. Not one of those recommendations has been adopted in this Bill; on the contrary, the Bill goes in the face of the recommendation that it was undesirable to set up a maximum price at the pit head. It is extraordinary when a Government Department sets up a Departmental Committee and then legislates upon the particular subject with which the Committee had dealt, not only without adopting any of the recommendations of the Committee, but actually going in the face of them. It would have been interesting had the noble Duke explained that matter to us.
I am well aware of the reason for not wishing to put any limit on exported coal, the ground being that in these days it is very important that we should export coal in order to get paid for it and thus bring more gold into the country, though it is true that the Departmental Committee say in their recommendations that it would be a good thing to have less coal exported because prices would then have a tendency to fall. Then with regard to the position of the Admiralty under this Bill. They are in no better position than any one else as regards the coal exported for their own use or for the benefit of our Allies. It has been asserted that the Admiralty were paying 10 s. per ton more for coal than the open market price in this country, and although the President of the Board of Trade said that the Admiralty were not behaving in that extravagant manner he did not say what was the amount they were paying in comparison with the current rate. I know it will be said that our Allies have very good contracts running, and that therefore as far as they are concerned they are well taken care of. But, as probably will be the case, those contracts will run out before the end of the war; then our
770
Allies will not have any advantage and will have to pay for their coal just like any other customer. I hope the noble Duke will assure me that the reason why the Admiralty prefer only having private arrangements of their own has nothing to do with any question of commission, because it occurred to my mind that the Admiralty had been making large contracts and putting money into the hands of middlemen who buy coal on contract, and that that might be the reason why they had not come under the arrangement. When interrogated on the matter the only answer given by the President of the Board of Trade in another place—and it is rather curious that the representatives of the Board of Admiralty were conspicuous by their absence—was that it was against the public interest to make any statement. It is peculiar why it should be against the public interest to make a statement when the question was one of putting the Admiralty in a position that they need not pay more than 1s. a ton extra at the pit head.
The noble Duke saw at once that the principal objection to the Bill would be that although the coalowners' profits are limited there is no limitation of the profits of the merchants; the merchants under this Bill are exempt. The noble Duke told the House that the Board of Trade had made an arrangement with the principal coal merchants of London. That may turn out to be a good arrangement, but I am afraid it will have no effect except as regards the well-to-do people in the West-end. The poor people in the East-end, I expect, will have no benefit under that arrangement and will be exploited, as in the past, by the coal dealers. As regards the provinces, there is no guarantee that in our large cities such as Liverpool, Birmingham, and Bristol, there will be any arrangement there. I expect the difficulty was so great that it was not attempted to be got over. Although the arrangement may be satisfactory from the point of view of London, though I doubt it, it is not satisfactory from the point of view of the provinces that there has been no protection whatever for the small consumer. To my mind this question of regulating prices is a very doubtful one indeed. I am an old-fashioned Liberal who believes in the principle of supply and demand, and no doubt if you once begin regulating prices

771
in one particular you will have demands for regulating prices of all kinds. I do not know whether any of your Lordships read an article on this Bill in the Spectator, which expressed very much the views I have endeavoured to enunciate as regards the seriousness and difficulty of dealing with the question of fixing prices generally. I will quote one sentence, which puts the whole thing in a nutshell—
"Politicians never seem capable of understanding that high prices, if left alone, kill themselves—first, by reducing consumption; secondly, by stimulating production."
I believe that to be absolutely true, and that in the long run it will be very likely found that this Bill has done more harm than good.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Does the noble Lord move the Motion standing in his name on the Paper?
LORD STRACHIE: No.
On Question, Bill read 2a.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: My Lords, I know that this Bill is rather different from other Bills, but it would be a matter of great convenience not only to the Government and to the House of Commons but to the coalowners themselves if this Bill could go through its remaining stages to-night. As to the point put to me by the noble Lord, I do not know all the facts relating to the Admiralty, but I understand they did not wish to be included. They prefer to make their own arrangements; they consider their present arrangements satisfactory, and prefer to remain outside the Bill.
LORD STRACHIE: There is no question of commission?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: No.
Committee negatived.
Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended): Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
LORD STRACHIE: On that Motion, I should like to ask the noble Duke why Ireland has been excluded from the Bill? It is very difficult to follow the debates in another place, especially as they are not now reported in the newspapers at any
772
length, but I understood the reason to be that there are a number of small coal pits there that it is thought unfair to include within the operations of this Bill. There are also a large number of small collieries in other parts of the kingdom, and if it is fair to exclude small collieries in Ireland why is it not equally fair to exclude small collieries in this country? I hope the noble Duke will not give me the answer that one must remember the Irish vote in the House of Commons, and that that may be the reason for the exclusion.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: I am quite aware of the Irish vote. I also know something about Irish coal; and, though it may be used for local purposes, I do not think it worth bothering about and bringing under the Bill.
On Question, Bill read 3a, and passed.

COTTON ASSOCIATIONS (EMERGENCY ACTION) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, this is a Bill designed to make legal and regular the action taken by the Cotton Exchanges at the time of crisis when the war broke out. Your Lordships are aware that cotton is dealt in very much like stocks and shares are on the London Stock Exchange; any particular cargo is subject to purchase and sale many times over from the time it leaves America to the time when it is landed at Liverpool. When war broke out there were a large number of these contracts open; the market fell, prices could not be made, and ruin stared the cotton merchant in the face unless the Exchanges took the matter in hand. They did take the matter in hand and postponed settlements in some cases, and dealt with the matter in other ways, leaving the ultimate seller and buyer together to carry out their bargains in the ordinary way. Their action was most prompt, most efficacious, and most wise, but unfortunately it may not have been legal, and this Bill is introduced for the purpose of regularising and legalising what they did. In certain cases the contracts were accelerated as well as postponed. Therefore it will be necessary to introduce an Amendment to substitute the words "altering" and "alteration" for the

773
words "postponing" and "postponement" wherever they occur. As this amendment is required it is necessary that the Bill should be disposed of to-day in order that it may be sent down to another place at once. Therefore if your Lordships grant the Bill a Second Reading now, I shall also ask you to take the subsequent stages forthwith.
On Question, Bill read 2a.
Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House forthwith.
House in Committee.
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clause 1:
Confirmation of postponement of contracts by cotton associations.
1. Any action taken by any cotton association before the passing of this Act for postponing the date of delivery under any contracts made expressly or impliedly subject to the rules of the association by any persons (whether members of the association or not) for the future delivery of cotton is hereby confirmed; and the date of delivery under any such contracts shall be, and shall be deemed to have been, postponed in accordance with any notice for the postponement thereof issued by the association and subject to the conditions contained in the notice.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 6, leave out ("postponing") and insert ("altering").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 11, leave out ("postponed") and insert ("altered").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 12, leave out ("postponement") and insert ("alteration").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clause agreed to.
Amendments reported: Bill read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

REPORTED MASSACRES IN ARMENIA.
VISCOUNT BRYCE VISCOUNT BRYCE had the following Question on the Paper—
To ask the Lord President of the Council whether His Majesty's Government have any information regarding the massacres of the Christian inhabitants which are reported to have been committed by the Turks in the districts of Zeitun, Mush, Diarbekir, Bitlis, and elsewhere in the region inhabited by the Armenians; and regarding a reported wholesale deportation of the inhabitants of some districts into Central Asia Minor and the desert parts of Mesopotamia; and whether, if these reports are well-founded, there is in the opinion of the Government any step that can be taken to save what remains of the Christian population of Armenia.
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I cannot say how far it is likely that His Majesty's Government will have any considerable amount of definite and accurate information upon which they can rely regarding what is supposed to have been done in Eastern Asia Minor, Armenia, and elsewhere; but from what information has reached me I have little doubt that terrible massacres have been committed. This information comes partly from Tiflis, partly from Petrograd, and partly from Constantinople to Switzerland and Paris. The stories are that all through Armenia in the Taurus Mountains and north-eastwards towards the Russian and Persian frontiers, and particularly in the districts of Zeitun, Mush, Diarbekir, and Bitlis, there have been extensive massacres in which large numbers of Christians have perished. I hope my information may be exaggerated, as reports in the East often are, and if there is any information in the possession of His Majesty's Government which can mitigate the account of the horrors we shall be only too glad to have it.
According to my information there was, at Mush in particular, a very extensive massacre; at another place all the male population that could be seized were brought out and shot, and women and children to the number of 9,000 were taken to the banks of the Tigris and, thrown into the river and drowned Similar horrors are reported from other

775
places, particularly at Zeitun, where the inhabitants are a warlike race. These people occupied a valley which was difficult of access; thee were summoned by the Turks to serve in the Army, and when they threatened to resist, the Turks prepared an expedition to attack Zeitun and proceeded to enter the passes. The passes were well guarded and the people were able to defend themselves tolerably well. But a message was sent up front the Turkish Governor of some of the towns lower down in the plain warning the people of Zeitun that if they offered further resistance the Armenian population of those towns would be wiped out. Under this threat the Zeitunlis consented to admit the Turks into the upper part of the valley where the town lies. When the Turks got there they immediately seized the inhabitants, carrying off the women and children and such of the men who did not succeed in escaping to the mountains. And so far from keeping their promise the Turks did not spare the inhabitants of the villages below. From the accounts that have reached me I understand that in some cases the whole population has been practically deported, sent off some of them into Central Asia Minor, particularly to the neighbourhood of Angora, where they were placed in a marshy and unhealthy spot. Some of them were sent to the Desert of Zor in Mesopotamia, where they experience great difficulty in supplying themselves with food, and where they are exposed to neighbouring nomadic Arab tribes.
As far as I know, these are the facts of the case. It would appear that the whole purpose of Sultan Abdul Hamid to do what he could to exterminate the Christian population is now being carried out with frightful effectiveness, and in some places I understand that Moslems from other parts of the country are being brought in to fill the void which has been left by the extermination of the Christians. Of course, the Kurds have played a leading part; and those of your Lordships who remember the terrible events of 1895 and 1896 will recall what the Kurds were then guilty of, and it is needless to say that their present participation has been accompanied by numerous outrages upon women. I do not know whether it is possible under existing circumstances that much, if anything, can be done. Still I think it is right that your Lordships should know these facts, and if His Majesty's Government can
776
give us any information we shall be glad to have it.
Some three months ago; when the Turkish authorities in European Turkey were threatening to put to death the Armenians in large numbers—they have in point of fact executed a good number of persons upon charges of "conspiracy"—a warning was given by our Foreign Office, possibly by the Allied Powers generally, that those responsible for such crimes would be held guilty at the end of the war and that there would be an endeavour to see that condign punishment should be inflicted upon them. I do not know whether there is any way of bringing to the knowledge of the Turkish Government—perhaps it could be done through the American Embassy—that their conduct now could not fail to be remembered and would affect whatever action the Allied Powers might take at the conclusion of the war. Whether any good would be done by a step of that kind I must leave it to His Majesty's Government to determine. But in any case I hope they will bear the matter in mind, and will draw further the conclusion that the faults of the Turkish Government are incurable, and that we cannot hope that anything less than the most drastic measures will be sufficient, when the time comes for us to consider remedial measures, to secure the safety of the unfortunate Christian inhabitants in that country.
THE EARL OF CROMER: My Lords, I fully sympathise, and I am certain that His Majesty's Government will, with the spirit which has inspired the noble Viscount in putting his Question. As we all know, the lot of the Armenians in the past has been terrible, and we also know the persistent interest which the noble Viscount has taken in their lot for a long while. I am afraid that their hardships have not been mitigated by the rising German influence in Turkey; I should think rather the contrary. The difficulty is to know what to do, and I confess I have no more practical suggestions to make than those which the noble Viscount has made. The only thing to do would be, through the American Ambassador, to call the renewed notice of the Ottoman Government to the matter. At any rate, it would have the effect of again drawing the attention of that Government to the position of these unfortunate people, and perhaps alleviate their lot a little. More than that I am afraid we cannot do.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: Lords, I think the House and the country should be grateful to the noble Viscount for bringing this question to public notice—public notice, it may be, abroad as well as at home. It falls to me, in circumstances with which I need not trouble your Lordships, to be in frequent communication with those who have had to do with Christians in a somewhat different region though not far remote from that to which the noble Viscount referred—Christians on the Turkish and Persian borders where the Kurds abound, in Urumiah. I have had letters during the last few months giving appalling accounts of the wrongs and massacres that have been perpetrated by the Turks during their temporary occupation of territory now occupied by the Russians. Among the most pitiable parts of the communications was the wail put up by those who wrote that nobody in Europe seemed to know or care anything about the matter. I cannot help feeling that such words as have been spoken by the noble Viscount and the noble Earl to-night will show those whom they may ultimately reach, and their friends elsewhere, that it is not at all events without a desire to show such sympathy as may be practicable that we hear accounts of the horrors that have taken place. At this moment the Russians occupy Urumiah, and the plain country at the bottom of the mountains is also in the hands of the Russians; and it is not unimportant that it should be known by our Ally that we have feelings of intense horror at what has happened in these districts during their Occupation by the Turks. Ineffective as anything that may be said here to-night may be, it should not be entirely useless, for it will show that we are endeavouring to extend as much influence as we can to bring about an amelioration of the lot of those people, the horror of which it is almost impossible to exaggerate. If the noble Viscount has been correctly informed as to the condition of things, then it is approaching the extermination of the Christian population in this region, a region which we hope is to be in future dominated under Christian auspices. It is well that it should be known that our eyes are not entirely blind to the horrors which require alleviation and to the wrongs we desire to see punished.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I am grieved to say that the information in the possession of the Foreign Office on
778
the subject which my noble friend has raised, although it is not much more ample than that of which he is possesied, is in conformity with what he has told us. I fear that there can be no doubt that the general facts are as my noble friend has described them. The noble Viscount and the most rev. Primate have reminded the House that some two months ago, in concert with the Governments of France and Russia., representations were made in regard to the massacres which had been perpetrated up to that date, May 24, to the effect that members of the Ottoman Government and all their agents who could be shown to be actually implicated would be held personally responsible for the crimes that had taken place. Since then the crimes have increased in number, and, if possible, ill atrocity. Wholesale massacre and wholesale deportation have been carried out under the guise of enforced evacuation of particular villages, and there have been a series of other outrages such as my noble friend has described. In addition there have been the particular cases, to which the most rev. Primate alluded, of similar crimes committed against the Nestorian Christians on the Persian border. It is also we believe true, as the noble Earl opposite indicated, that these crimes have been countenanced, if not in some cases actually encouraged, by the German officials in Turkey, whose presence there and the influence which they have exercised has been an absolute and unmitigated curse both to the Christian and Moslem populations of Turkey. These officials have shown a most cynical disregard of the welfare of the country and of all the people who inhabit it. It is true, as has been stated by all the speakers, that for reasons quite obvious to anybody who follows the progress of the war there are no immediate steps which we can take for the actual repression of these atrocities. All that we can do at the moment is to repeat, and repeat with emphasis, the expression of our determination, rendered more emphatic as the weeks go on and bring fresh evidence of these crimes, that those who can be held to be responsible for them, whether by their direct commission or by their inspiration—and all the more I am tempted to say the higher and the more responsible the positions they 1101d—should receive punishment accordingly.
House adjourned at ten minutes before Seven o'clock, till Tomorrow, Three o'clock.