Lords Sitting of 5 February 1918

NATIONAL INSURANCE (UNEMPLOYMENT) BILL.
Returned from the Commons (yesterday), with the Amendment, agreed to.
NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE BILL.
Returned from the Commons (yesterday), with the Amendments, agreed to.
PORT GLASGOW WATER ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR STAFFS.
LORD HINDLIP LORD HINDLIP had the following Question on the Paper—
To ask His Majesty's Government whether any decision has been arrived at concerning the salaries and allowances paid to members of the Diplomatic and Consular staffs in Scandinavian countries, who by reason of the abnormal rates of exchange and excessive cost of living are suffering considerable disabilities.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the question which I have on the Paper this afternoon will not take up very much of your time, and as I understand from Lord Newton that the answer which His Majesty's Government are going to give is more or less favourable, I propose to cut my remarks as short as possible.
The question of the pay and allowances of the officers and staff of the Diplomatic and Consular Services in Scandinavia and other neutral countries is one which, through the fall in the exchange, the lack of shipping, and the increased cost of living on all sides, has made life for these people extremely difficult. Certain criticism, I fancy, is being made as to my Question being confined to Scandinavia. I confined it to those countries simply because during the past twelve months this question has been brought to my notice somewhat forcibly on several occasions; but, of course, the principle will apply to all other countries within neutral zones. The question arose in Russia before the Revolution and before the rouble became valueless, and the question was settled
378
there on a piecemeal principle after the visit of Lord Milner to that country rather more than a year ago, and after one or two itinerant Members of the other House had been there and made certain representations to the Foreign Office and to the British Treasury. Therefore that forms a precedent; other precedents are the increased pay and allowances in America, which have been part and parcel of the Foreign Office form of pay for a good many years.
I made—I think it was last October—a calculation while I was in Sweden, and a kroner stood then at about l2½ to the £1. The value of the sovereign at that time, with the rise in the cost of living and the fall in exchange taken into consideration, was only about 6s.; so that your Lordships will readily understand that if a man got only 6s. for every £1 of pay he received from this country, his position was not a particularly happy one. The cost of all foodstuffs had risen in a most extraordinary way. It was far worse, I think, than in almost any other country; and, in addition to that, although they had no Food Controller, a great many things had absolutely disappeared. For instance, coffee did not exist at all. Acorns were being sold at nearly 1s. per lb. for making coffee. The whole of the coffee drunk in the country was made out of a mixture of acorns and dandelion roots—a very unpleasant mixture. Butter and milk were practically non-existent, and had not been on sale for some time. Members of the staffs who before the war had taken a house or lodgings which they thought they could afford, found that rents had gone up and incomes had gone down very considerably, and they could not move into cheaper houses or lodgings because in those countries there is hardly a room to be had from one end of Sweden to the other end of Denmark or Norway. I hope I have made out as shortly as I can a case for these rather hard-worked officials, and I hope that the noble Lord will be able to give me, as I understand he will, a favourable reply.
LORD MUIR MACKENZIE: My Lords, before an answer is given to the Question, I should like to say that I have the strongest personal reason for knowing how very serious is the state of affairs in connection with the members of the Diplomatic staffs in Scandinavian countries. I have occasion to hear, as often as the postal arrangements allow, how very great the difficulties are from day to day, and that the prices are

379
quite beyond what these people with the incomes of our Diplomatic and Consular Services are able to pay. What, of course, is almost more serious is that actual articles of food are scarcely to be procured unless supplied from this country.
THE ASSISTANT UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (LORD NEWTON): My Lords, the salaries and allowances of the Consular and Diplomatic Services in Scandinavian countries have been frequently under review during the last two years, and owing to the heavy fall which took place in the exchange in October of last year additional compensation was obviously required. I need hardly assure my noble friend that, having formerly been a member of the Diplomatic Service myself, I am in full sympathy with his complaint.
The arrangement which has been effected is as follows. All salaries up to £300 a year are paid at the par rate of exchange; on salaries above that amount the first £300 and half the balance is paid at par. This arrangement is based on the assumption that some part of every salary, especially above £300, is spent in this country in the form either of Income Tax or insurance premiums. In addition a percentage bonus, varying with the increase in the cost of living in the different Scandinavian countries, is paid on the proportion of salary convertible at the par rate; this bonus being at the present moment at the rate of 50 per cent. in Norway, 35 per cent. in Sweden, and 33⅓ per cent. in Denmark. It is not contended that this bonus actually meets the increase in the cost of living. The increase I understand in Norway, according to figures supplied in July last, was no less than 70 per cent.; in Sweden, 50 per cent.; and in Denmark, 47 per cent.; and there is every reason to suppose that there has been an increase since then. It is felt, however, that some part of the burden must fall on the officials concerned, although their representative character renders it necessary to make their position relatively easy, in the opinion of the Foreign Office, as compared with officials in this country.
In the case of diplomatists who receive very small salaries—my noble friend is probably aware that the third secretaries receive in some instances as little as £150 a year—and who are expected to provide £400 a year from their own means, the
380
difference between the current and par values on £200 is allowed them, and a bonus at the proper rate on the same sum, in addition to the bonus on their salaries. Apart from these concessions, His Majesty's Government are prepared to defray three-quarters of the cost of providing coal for Consular and Diplomatic officials in various places in Scandinavia where coal has risen to an extraordinary price representing in some cases more than £20 per ton. I hope that my noble friend will be satisfied with this assurance.

LADY ANGELA FORBES'S CANTEEN.
LORD RIBBLESDALE LORD RIBBLESDALE rose to call attention to the case of Lady Angela Forbes's canteen; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am sorry to say that in an evening paper last week I saw it stated that I was embarking on an errand of chivalry. I have lots to do and lots wherewith to occupy myself, without riding abroad redressing the wrongs of a fallible world. I have put down this Motion on the Paper of your Lordships' House for two reasons. One, perhaps, is in a sense a personal reason, for since my youngest days I enjoyed the friendship of, and met with much kindness from, Lady Angela Forbes's father, and all my life I have known the members of her family well. From that personal point of view it is a pleasure to me, even in rather difficult circumstances, to call and even direct the attention of the House to the good work which has been done by Lady Angela Forbes's canteen and huts since the very first beginning of the war. Secondly—and this is the serious and real reason why I have put this Motion on the Paper—I am anxious to try and clear away the unfortunate and unwholesome atmosphere by which this matter seems to me, at all events, to be depressed and surrounded. That some real clearing away of this kind should take place is, I think, desirable, both in the interests of Lady Angela Forbes and also of the great Department for which my noble frend Lord Derby is responsible in his place in Parliament. I hope that in his reply he will be able to bring this about—this clearing away of what I have called a depressing and miasmatic atmosphere in such a way as to dispense altogether with that part of my Motion in which I intimate my intention to move for Papers.
The Department over which the noble Earl (Lord Derby) presides has lately been

381
the object of some critical attention. Much, if not most, of this criticism has seemed to me of a vague, irresponsible, and undesirable character. Only last week, on an occasion of a semi-convivial character, the noble Earl met and dealt with his critics in an able and a good-humoured way, and he faced, I think quite fairly and squarely, various charges which have been levelled against himself and his flock—that is, against G.H.Q. abroad and in Whitehall. I read wth care and commendation what he had to say. I might say that I have always followed his utterances with a particular interest. Whatever the noble Earl's attitude may be in private his public attitude is always the same, and it always appears to me to be irreproachable. The noble Earl's public attitude is based on this—that hearsay is not evidence; that to charge or to allege is not to prove. I more than agree. Last week he even went further, if I may say so. He was almost Baconian. He told his audience at Aldwych that a person set in a great place—in addition to being a servant of the State, he might have added a servant of Fame and a servant of Business—becomes also of necessity a target of all kinds of irresponsible criticism. Now to-night I have no sort of desire or intention to criticise the noble Earl or those whom he represents here. I would only remind him that a person—or persons, if you like; I want to get off the personal ground—that persons not set in great places, but who have done their best, given their help and their time, and given their energy to try and serve their country and its brave soldiers in any way they can, may with some justice be equally entitled to the consideration which he claims for himself. So much for that.
The rest of what I have got to say is very short, because, as to the canteen itself, I do not want to anticipate or to stand between your Lordships and some one who will speak in a moment and who knows all about its working and administration from direct knowledge. I will only say this, that it is a considerable thing, having started as I said at the beginning of the war, to have ministered to four and a-half millions of our brave soldiers overseas. The scheme was started in a very small way on the Gare Maritime, Boulogne, and from that it reached the large activities and operations which the canteen carries on now. I will also say this, that many
382
of these brave men have passed into the shadowland where these voices cannot reach them; but I believe that if those men were here, most of them—all of them—would attest and acclaim the benefits and the comforts which they have received from the Etaples and Boulogne canteen and buffets.
Be that as it may, it is now common knowledge that on a certain day—I have not the date here, but it does not matter; I unfortunately left a large bundle of dates behind—the canteen and the huts were taken over by the War Office. I believe they have been taken over on perfectly fair terms. There is no question of that. Let me say at once that I recognise that this action may well have been taken and dictated by many reasons of military expediency. It is obvious that the necessity of centralisation and control of things cannot be ignored and put aside, and must, in fact, be carried into effect. Yet, my Lords, you will hardly believe that this prosaic action of the War Office has given rise to all kinds of fantastic and ridiculous tales. I must not further occupy your time, and I will only say one thing in conclusion. I hope that in the noble Earl's reply he will be able, in the interests of all concerned, to place this matter on a plain, common sense foundation. No man, I venture to say, can do that better than the noble Earl. I beg to move.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My Lords, I wish to associate myself with the statement which has been so well made by my noble friend. I am in a position rather different from him, because from the inception of these canteens I have acted as treasurer to them. I made an appeal three years ago in the public Press for funds for them, and I have taken some part in their work. I, therefore, consider that my honour is bound up in the good name and the good repute of the management of these canteens, and I am well content that it should be so. I hope, with my noble friend Lord Ribblesdale, that the noble Earl to-night will once and for all put a stop to the lying tongues of slander that have been busy about the good name of a woman who has certainly done as hard work, and who, as far as the limitation of her opportunities permitted, has done as good work, as anybody else in this war.
I must ask your indulgence if I tell you what that work has been, and I may be

383
compelled to make my remarks somewhat in the form of an eulogy. I am quite sure that there is no one in the world to whom that form of address would be more repugnant than it is to the subject of the eulogy. If I may say so, I think that Mr. Macpherson, in the House of Commons the other day, showed how little those in high authority—I do not blame them, for they have other things to think about—know of the work that this woman has done. He said that she had "kept a canteen at Etaples." It is quite true that she kept a canteen at Etaples. I believe it was by far the most popular canteen in France. She managed it on business principles; and I believe it is also true that, with more courage than discretion, she increased the not inconsiderable number of her enemies by proclaiming, urbi et orbi, that it was absurd to ask for funds to keep up these canteens when they ought to pay for themselves. She published a balance sheet in the early part of 1915, and wrote to the Army Council asking them to take over her profits as she made them. There was no machinery for them to do so, and she determined, instead of doing what other interests are doing—namely, keeping them to be disposed of in some way at some time when the war is over—to devote her profits as she made them to objects which, as far as she could make them, would directly beneft the soldiers who contributed to make those profits.
But, my Lords, a canteen like this can be run by anybody of business capacity, of integrity, and energy, and if the canteen at Etaples were all that this woman had done, I do not think her case would excite the sympathy that it has, nor do I think that my noble friend and I would take the active part in it which we do. I will try and prove to you what a very small part of her work that canteen was. May I quote an extract from a letter of the gallant and brilliant son of the noble Lord who last addressed you, and tell you what he said of the wonderful work which Lady Angela Forbes was doing in France, and how he supposed it was due to "her promptitude in understanding human needs." He had, with many other gifts, a genius for expression, and I think he showed it there.
I will give you an example. In the winter of 1914, at the beginning of November, when war work was not the fashion and when the arrangements for the wounded were very far from their present state of
384
perfection, she landed one day at Boulogne—a wet day. She saw the wounded lying in rows on the platform and on the quay—the rain was beating on them. They were without shelter and without food. She went back to London that very same day, collected a few stores, made an appeal in the newspapers, and was back again in Boulogne the next morning. She made arrangements with the keeper of the buffet, and that very evening she met the train with the wounded coming in. I think this showed that she was prompt to understand human needs; and from that day, throughout those winter months, through all weathers, all night and all day, sometimes working for twenty-four hours at a stretch, every train that came in was met and the wounded men given drink and food by her and her workers. I venture to say that this was work a great deal more valuable than running the most successful canteen in the world. After that the wounded were treated differently. They were detrained at the central station, and that part of the work was taken out of her hands.
But soon afterwards the men on leave began to come in. There was no one to feed them; they came long distances, sometimes having to wait for boats that did not arrive, and for trains that did not start. For months she fed these men, and I believe that in no single instance, although she was never sure whether she would have to feed 2,000, 3,000, or 4,000 men, did the food run short, or the men ever go home dissatisfied or hungry. I venture to say that this was not bad work. Again, she kept her canteen open at Boulogne for stranded soldiers who went by, all day and all night, for three years; and the other day, when the wounded survivors of the "Sussex" were brought into Boulogne, her canteen was the only place to which they could be taken. I believe that Mr. Macpherson, when he spoke of her canteen at Etaples, did not know what she had done at Boulogne, or that the people of Boulogne think she has done a considerable part in this war.
Let us go to Etaples—not to that modern creation, that wonderful example of the industry and the power of our military machine, but to the old Etaples that some of us know, the dirty squalid town by the sea. She lived near there, and when she was going home one day she saw that the potential values of Etaples as a camp and training ground were being discovered. There were a few base details there,

385
and also the workmen from Holloways, who were building the huts. She saw them hanging about, and spoke to them. They told her that they had nowhere to go except the lowest possible public houses in Etaples. Again she was prompt to recognise human needs. That very day she took the biggest house in Etaples and started an institution there which was crowded be day. The workmen had nowhere to get breakfast. She and her children cooked breakfasts for the workingmen every morning at five o'clock.
Then came the time when her hut was built. To show your Lordships how very little importance she attaches to her work at that hut. I will tell you one thing. I notice that Lord Rhondda is not present; but in January, 1917, when she saw that there was a food shortage approaching, she went to her head officer and said, "In my opinion these canteens are a mistake in view of the shortage of food. They ought to be turned into recreation rooms, and I am ready, as the persaa running the most successful canteen, to offer mine as a first sacrifice if the other institutions will follow in my footsteps." Rut there were other more powerful institutions. Perhaps the late missioner for food economy will tell you about them. Anyhow, her idea was not carried into effect. There was a great camping ground at Etaples where 10,000 men were drilled even, day. They came long distances. There was no food for them, and it was considered right that they should have rations. The difficulty was how, in half an hour, to feed 10,000 men. Being supposed to be somewhat of an authority on catering, they asked her advice. She suggested that, though they could not feed them altogether in one place, they might quite easily feed them in parties of 1,000 in ten different places. Feeling that she could not devote the profits that she made out of the men in the evening better than to their welfare in the morning, she offered to build fourteen huts where these men could be fed and entertained. Her offer was accepted, and she organised and started the scheme, and I believe that the whole system was admirable for discipline.
One other point, my Lords. At Etaples the work she has liked best, and the work that she has done best, is, I think, the work that she was asked to do by the authorities because nobody else could do it—and that was the feeding of the men who were going
386
on that tragic journey up the line to the Front. She and her workers have been there every morning; and I do not know how many thousands of men, as the trains moved off, have waved a farewell to the workers, and as they did so, looked upon the faces of Englishwomen for the last time. I do not think that any work that she has done is nearer to her heart; and at the present moment even her daughter and two workers are still carrying on that work. Only the other day the railway transport officer there, the man who is in command of the station, said that before Lady Angela came there with her canteen he used to lose men every day; since she had come there, he had not lost a single man.
My Lords, I could tell you a great deal more, but I do not wish to weary you. I could tell of the workshops that she has built and fitted up in different camps. I could tell how she has organised boxing and other recreations of the camp. I could tell how one day, driving along the road, she met an old hunting friend, and heard that he belonged to a Remount Camp where 1,000 men, many of them perhaps retainers of some of your Lordships, were quartered quite alone. She took them under her wing. Each Christmas she has given to 1,000 of these men a Christmas dinner and an entertainment. I have given you a sketch of the work she has done. It is work that I think is not known by the higher authorities. She has not tried to work in the limelight. She has had no share—she desires no share—in that shower of fantastic titles which fall with spasmodic profusion on the deserving. The only recognition she has worked for has been the appreciation of the men for whom she has laboured. It has been given her with lavish generosity. It has been shown to her and her children in countless ways. I am told that it is quite impossible at the present moment even to go into the wards of any military hospital in this country where you will not find men who will speak with appreciation and gratitude of her work in France. An officer, whose misfortune it is to have had to read more letters probably than anybody else has ever read before, said the other day that the greatest tribute that any man or any woman could get Lady Angela had received in the daily letters which the men had sent to their homes. She has worked under four commandants. She has been repeatedly thanked by each of them. There is not one single officer under whom she has worked and who knows

387
of her work, from Generals to the chaplain who was appointed by the noble Earl, who is not prepared to testify to her work and to herself. It is, I think, her regard of their good opinion and her wish to justify it, that has made her face the odium of publicity.
I think that she has already received, in the letters that have reached her, some compensation for the misery that she has had to go through. A chaplain with the Australian Forces wrote to her and said he had read with amazement in the newspapers what had been said. He could only state that on behalf of his countrymen he thanked her from the bottom of his heart for the magnificent work she had done for the Australians. Colonels of battalions totally unknown to her have written and thanked her for what she has done for their men, and the men themselves have taken the trouble to write to her and express their sympathy, sometimes in rather forcible terms. Surely, my Lords, the light of living tributes like these must search out and kill the morbid growth of slander which malice has engendered. The other day Mr. Macpherson, in the House of Commons, quite rightly according to military law, spoke of her as a "camp follower." I believe that Lady Angela has always recognised her position. She knows that the military authorities have a perfect right summarily to close her canteen at any time they like. She knows that services like hers are accepted by the Government as long as they are wanted, and that when they are no longer needed they can be ruthlessly scrapped and dispensed with. I do not think that she objects to the name of a camp follower. And, my Lords, I think that if the name of "camp follower" can be dignified as it has been in her case by work like hers, there is hope in every name.
Lady Angela Forbes may go down in the archives of the War Office docketed as a "camp follower, who kept a canteen at Etaples," but others will think of her as a woman who was quick to understand and quick to help—a woman who gave all she had to give, her strength and her health, unreservedly to the service of the soldiers. Of this I am sure, that when at last the long-drawn-out agony of this war is over, when balances are finally adjusted, and when individual efforts in human achievement and human endeavour are seen in their proper proportions, the
388
name of this "camp follower" will be remembered in many a home in Scotland, in England, and overseas, long after the very existence of those who conspired to blast her reputation and destroy her work has been mercifully forgotten.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (THE EARL OF DERBY): My Lords, I can have no complaint whatever to make with regard to the way in which the two noble Lords have put forward the case of Lady Angela Forbes. Before actually dealing with the matter, may I, however, on behalf of my friend and colleague in the other House, Mr. Macpherson, assure the noble Lords that the term of "camp follower" was only used in answer to a Question—
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I quite acknowledge that. I said it was.
THE EARL OF DERBY: It was not meant in any way offensively. The noble Lord who asked the Question was perfectly right in saving that, in the interests of military discipline, it is necessary that the control of huts in big military areas should be centralised. That is an order which has existed for some time, and it is being gradually carried into effect. The noble Lord paid a tribute to the work that Lady Angela has done, as did also the noble Earl opposite from more intimate knowledge of that work. I have had some opportunity myself when in France of hearing of the work that she has done, not only at Etaples but at the landing station before. I quite recognise the valuable and difficult work that she has done. The closing of her canteen is not intended in any way to reflect on her management of the hut, nor upon the zeal and ability that she has shown in running it. It is an onerous task at all times to run a canteen, especially in France, and still more when it is run at a profit. I understand that she is prepared now to take up other war work, and I should regret most sincerely if this incident in any way interfered with her doing so. I am told that there are many wild rumours with regard to this case, and for this I beg to assure the noble Lords that the military authorities are in no way responsible. I hope that the incident may be considered closed, and that those rumours which I deprecate just as much as they do, may cease once and for ever.
LORD RIBBLESDALE: My Lords, I beg to thank the noble Earl for the statement which he has just made, and to say that I accept it on Lady Angela's behalf as a settlement of her case. While I think no one will consider, in view of the nature and extent of her work for the soldiers, that the appreciation of her services has erred on the side of exaggeration, am ready to admit that, in view of the circumstances which have necessitated this discussion of her car, the noble Earl's tribute to-night is not ungenerous. Lady Angela and her friends would, of course, have preferred the investigation for which she has repeatedly pressed, but she recognises that the exigencies of the Service, the critical state of public affairs, and the expense of these inquiries render it extremely difficult for the authorities to grant one. In view of what the noble Earl has said, I ask leave to withdraw my Motion for Papers.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL OF KEDLESTON): My Lords, inasmuch as none of us has any idea when the Representation of the People Bill will leave the House of Commons and come back to your Lordships' House, although no doubt it will be some time in the course of the evening, I think it would be unfair to ask your Lordships now to remain in session with a view to taking the later stages any time to-day. At the same time, I am convinced that all your Lordships will be anxious to proceed with the further stages of the measure with as little delay as possible; and there being no judicial business of this House to-morrow, I venture to recommend to your Lordships that you should meet at twelve o'clock midday for that purpose.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, we are always very grateful to the noble Earl for the consideration which he gives us, and I can assure him that there is no desire on our part to delay business. But I am afraid it would not be very convenient to many noble Lords to sit as early as twelve o'clock. I would earnestly represent to him that a rather later hour than that should be fixed. It is quite right to say that it would be very strange indeed to have asked your Lordships to consider the Bill again this evening, without having the
390
opportunity of seeing what course the House of Commons have, in their discretion, thought it right to take with regard to our Amendments. But the noble Earl will realise that we shall not know that for certain until to-morrow morning, and there must be certain. consultations among ourselves in order to determine what course we ought to pursue. In these circumstances I think the noble Earl will see that twelve o'clock is unduly early for the meeting of the House, and I earnestly hope he will reconsider the hour of meeting.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: My Lords, I should like to ask the noble Earl who leads the House whether he has made himself acquainted with the expectation of the other House as to our proceedings; because I understood that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in opening the proceedings there to-day, suggested to the House of Commons that it should remain sitting late in order to receive back from this House any observations or alterations that we wish to make regarding their Amendments.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: My Lords, the noble Viscount is quite correct in what he has said, and I do not think that what had passed in another place was known to the noble Marquess when he spoke just now. It is true that the Leader of that House stated at the commencement of the proceedings this afternoon that it was likely that this House would remain in session in order to take the Amendments that might come back from another place later in the day. That remark of his, which was the result of a general discussion that took place this morning, was based upon the hypothesis that the measure would leave the House of Commons in sufficient time to enable your Lordships, after a short suspension of business, to proceed with the measure. But inasmuch as no news has come to me during the last few minutes of the progress of events in another place, I thought it well, in the interests of the convenience of your Lordships' House, to ignore the undertaking given by the Leader of the House in another place. But in these circumstances surely I am not asking too much of your Lordships, not placing any undue pressure either upon your time or convenience, in suggesting that, with a view to carrying this matter to the final stages, you should meet as early as twelve o'clock to-morrow. The noble Marquess quite truly said that

391
he and his, friends will want to consult together as to the course they wish to pursue; but really there are others, myself and other members of the Government, who are also rather busy people. We shall be cognisant of what has passed in the other place only at the same time, and we shall have to consult as to what we shall do. I think we ought to be in a position to meet your Lordships at twelve o'clock tomorrow. Unless any noble Lords can give me stronger reasons than have yet been urged, I must ask your Lordships to saddle yourselves with the slight inconvenience of meeting at that hour.
LORD WILLOUGHBY DE BROKE: The noble Earl has asked for instances in which it may be inconvenient to noble Lords to meet as early as twelve o'clock. There are a good many of us who are on military duty in London or in the neighbourhood who might find it impossible to leave their military duties until the afternoon. Therefore we would welcome the idea of an afternoon sitting to-morrow if it could possibly be arranged.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: My Lords, I must respectfully protest against the idea of meeting to-morrow morning. We are as desirous as my noble friend opposite that this matter should be considered with perfect calmness and impartiality by both sides, but I submit that to ask us to meet here at twelve o'clock is not reasonable. There will be plenty of time in the afternoon, after lunch, to dispose of this matter.
392
It is really impossible for those of us who have many engagements, or who have to come up from the country, or who, as my noble and gallant friend said, have military duties, to give our attention to this matter so as to be ready to meet your Lordships at twelve o'clock.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: One of the difficulties of your Lordships' House is the well-known one of ascertaining the views of noble Lords in general, a principle to which I desire as far as possible to conform. The noble Earl said that it was inconvenient to many noble Lords to meet in the morning. It was the afternoon I was suggesting; but that is a small point. It is represented to me that it may be more convenient to your Lordships if the meeting takes place after lunch. May I suggest two o'clock? That will give all of us ample time in which to consider the matter; and if your Lordships agree, I will move that the House do adjourn until that hour.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: We are very much obliged to the noble Earl.
Several NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear. Agreed.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: I move that the House do adjourn until two o'clock to-morrow.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past five o'clock.