Lords Sitting of 23 January 1918

Preamble
The Earl of BRADFORD—Sat first in Parliament after the death of his father.

SMALL HOLDINGS COLONIES.
THE EARL OF KINTORE: My Lords, in the enforced absence of Lord HARRIS, I beg leave on his behalf to ask His Majesty's Government when the Report required by Section 10 of the Small Holdings Colonies Act, 1916, will be presented to Parliament.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH): In reply to the noble Earl's Question, I can give the assurance that the Report is now in draft and will be completed and presented without avoidable delay.

TRAINING OF DISABLED SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
LORD GAINFORD LORD GAINFORD had the following Question on the Paper—
To ask His Majesty's Government—What is the total number of soldiers who have been discharged during the war. How many are or have been trained in—

(a) Semi-philanthropic institutions;

(b) Institutions set up by Local War Pensions Committees, and where the training will be paid for out of Imperial funds.

Whether in Darlington the Technical College was placed at the disposal of the Ministries of Munitions and Pensions more than a year ago; whether the total number of disabled men on the Local Committee's Register is 402, of whom only eight had undergone treatment, and only one training up to 30th November last; and what is the cause of the delay in securing the treatment and training of these men.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, it is with some reluctance that I rise to occupy a few moments of your time in order to draw attention to the terms of the Question which I have placed upon the Paper; and I might
1012
say that I should have been content to leave it to the Ministry of Pensions had it not been for the fact that by correspondence I have failed to elicit anything in the nature of a satisfactory reply. I think your Lordships will agree that the importance of training disabled and discharged soldiers and sailors cannot be overrated, and that must be my excuse for pressing this question upon public opinion through your Lordships' House. Lord Charnwood, a few months ago, alluded to the fact that there were 225,000 of such men in the country, and presumably there are still more of them now. The Army and the Admiralty respectively are naturally responsible for the treatment of soldiers and sailors when they are wounded and up to the time they are discharged from the hospitals, but it has always seemed to me that Education Committees which have had experience of technical training, under the advice of the technical advisers of the Board of Education, would have been better bodies to whom to have been given the training of these disabled soldiers and sailors. It has been, however, left to a Statutory Committee under the Ministry of Pensions to provide the necessary assistance required for their training out of public funds; and my complaint is that up to the present there has been so little done in connection with the training of these men.
In many cases local initiative has been discouraged if not entirely stifled. Local committees have started full of enthusiasm and keenness and interest in their work, but owing to the way in which they have been treated by the Ministry they have been discouraged. The men themselves, many of them disposed at the outset to undergo a course of training, have somewhat suffered in the same way and have been discouraged. The increasing number of men who are disabled and mutilated may be seen in our roads and streets all over the country, and in many cases our ex-soldiers and sailors are appealing in the street for the compassionate charity of the public. These distressing spectacles, my Lords, excite our sympathy and commiseration, and I am sure your Lordships are as anxious as the general public that the power left to these men should be preserved and utilised. The Government, I am quite sure, desire as much as any of us that what remains to these men of their powers should be developed, that they

1013
should be given so far as possible an interest in life, and that in spite of misfortune and mutilation they should be trained to help themselves and to help others and to become good and useful members of the community. When men who are induced to select some subject for their training do not find opportunity for their training—when classes are not formed—they sometimes select another subject. Again, a scheme when it is put forward has been turned down by the Ministry. It is not any wonder that the timidity existing in the local authorities should be communicated to the men, and that they should hesitate more and more to come forward for a course of training. If a rider takes a horse up to a fence, jabs him in the mouth and turns him round, and repeats the process, it is not surprising if the horse becomes a confirmed refuser. So with the men. If men after leaving hospital are not grasped warmly and firmly by the hand and found employment, they will in some cases take up temporary employment in some blind alley of occupation, or in other cases become mere loafers and mendicants, and any disposition to learn a trade evaporates and vanishes. My complaint is that, so far as I can gather from figures supplied to me in my own county, there is not 1 per cent. of these men being trained at the present time out of public funds.
On January 9 I wrote the facts of the position of my native town of Darlington to Mr. Hodge, the Minister of Pensions. I drew his attention to the fact that for over a year we had placed at the disposal of the Ministry a technical college with 120 places, with machines properly equipped for the training of disabled men and the teaching of munition workers. From that time to the present that institution has never been full; all other classes have been stopped, the munition department has occupied never more than fifty places, and after they have been trained in that institution girls have not been found places in munition works. Sixteen of them have been there for over four months, although it takes only two months to train them. Seventy places have never been occupied owing to the way in which the Ministry have turned down all the schemes suggested. Mr. Hodge did not acknowledge my letter until my notice appeared upon the Paper of this House, and it was only this morning that I received this further reply, in which he said—
1014
"If the Darlington Committee will inform the Ministry of any cases of training required, efforts will be made to get the men placed in another area, but I hope that the Darlington Committee will themselves at an early date be able to put forward a scheme for training men in their own district."
It is a remarkable reply in view of the fact that for a whole year the Darlington local committee have been putting scheme after scheme in front of the Minister of Pensions, and one and all of them have been turned down. Major Mitchell, who is a director of the Training Department in the Ministry, wrote to Lady Gainford on the 18th of this month saying—
"I can assure you there has been no scheme submitted by the Darlington Committee which has not been approved by the Ministry of Pensions."
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: Who wrote that?
LORD GAINFORD: Major Mitchell.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: Who is he?
LORD GAINFORD: He is the man placed at the head of the Training Department by Mr. Hodge, the Minister of Pensions. I sent that letter to the town clerk, who is the secretary to the Darlington Local Committee for Naval and Military War Pensions. He replied—
"It is not a fact, as Major Mitchell states, that there has been no scheme submitted by the Darlington Committee which has not been approved by the Minister of Pensions. If you refer to my letters of the 11th and 29th January, you will tee that I inquired whether approval would be given to training in munition work. This proposal was not approved. Again on the 18th August I applied for approval for training men as motor drivers, and pointed out that the local committee had received a number of applications. This was also refused, and in such a way as to lead the local committee to believe that the Pensions Ministry did not wish the local committee to undertake that action with respect to training. However, I made a further attempt on October 29."
I turn to the correspondence, and this is what I see happened on August 28. The town clerk, in his letter, said—
"I am desired by the local committee to inform you that several discharged disabled men have applied to them for training as chauffeurs."
On September 6 the Ministry replied—
"The Minister is unable to sanction a general scheme for training men as chauffeurs."

1015
On October 29 the town clerk, in his next attempt wrote:—
"The local committee are informed that training can be successfully provided in engineering, engine driving, clerical work, carpentry and joinery, commercial work, drawing, and tracing. You will accept this letter as a formal application for your approval."
On November 7 the Ministry again replied—
"The Minister is desirous that the course in carpentry and joinery should remain in abeyance. Engineering and engine driving must also remain in abeyance. The Ministry is prepared to consider any course in clerical work, commercial work, drawing and tracing."
The town clerk tells me that a formal scheme of training in clerical work, drawing, and tracing has been submitted for approval, but no approval has been secured.
With these facts before me it seems to me necessary to draw public attention to this matter. I do not complain of the policy of His Majesty's Government or of their desire. Their proclaimed desire is excellent. The instructions which they have issued in Circular No. 30, signed by one of their important officials, is most excellent in tone. It was issued in November. It said—
"Up to the present the proportion of men who are taking up the training course is comparatively small."
Mr. Hodge, in addressing a meeting in December last, is reported to have said—
"There were many things they could do locally very much better than they could by instructions from London. His main object was to decentralise as much as practicable."
Then, in an interview, reported in the Daily Chronicle of January 5 last, he said—
"Our training schemes aim at re-educating the man and restoring him to as high and if possible a higher state of physical efficiency than that which he possessed before the war. Training of disabled men appeals to me as a paramount obligation resting on this Ministry, and hence my description of the Department as a Ministry of Restoration."
The result of this policy can be shown by an article which has appeared in the Municipal Journal. I take merely two extracts from an article which appeared on January 11, from the pen of the Mayor of Darlington, who said—
"In conclusion, I may say that I am very reluctantly coming to the conclusion that instead of every encouragement being given to local committees to provide training for our disabled men, all their efforts are discounted and a premium is put upon voluntary organisations which are able and willing to accept men for training without having to comply with all sorts of unnecessary
1016
and irritating restrictions and conditions. With regard to training, I am afraid that unless some step is taken we shall find the same weary round of form-filling and sanction-seeking—wasteful alike of paper, printing, time, and patience."
Well, my Lords, policy is one thing; administration is another. There has been a great delay in the past and there has been a great deal of discouragement suffered by local committees. Unless the committees are encouraged they cannot canvass the men and find out how many of them they can get into a course which they are ready to provide. Here you have an institution with seventy or eighty places ready, and while every scheme has been turned down, the Ministry do not know of it, and when you write they merely say "Well, let another scheme be put forward." In my judgment too much has been left to voluntary and semi-philanthropic effort. It is the duty of the State to provide public funds to establish a system and encourage local effort, and as up to the present only about 1 per cent. of these men have entered in these training classes, I thought it my duty, even though I have occupied more time than I intended, to draw the attention of your Lordships to the position of affairs.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF CRAWFORD): My Lords, I regret that I am not in the position to give the noble Lord the information asked for in the first part of his Question. I should like to confer with him afterwards as to the approximate numbers of persons who are now discharged. I gather from his speech that he desires to know the number in order to contrast the total number of discharged men with the number who are now being trained under the Ministry of Pensions. May I say that the Ministry of Pensions has no power to compel a man to undergo training? It seemed to me rather to underlie the speech of the noble Lord that the Ministry could enforce training upon men. That is not the case, and the exceptional demand for labour at the present time and the inducements to take up temporary work tend to lessen the number of men who would normally desire to undergo instruction which would lead to permanent employment. There are to-day many thousand vacant places in classes and technical institutes and so forth, for which, unhappily, no candidates are available. In spite of this a considerable number of men have received a course of

1017
training or are now receiving it. Under the head of "semi-philanthropic institutions" mentioned by the noble Lord, there is St. Dunstan's Hostel, where 887 men are receiving full pensions and other assistance from the Ministry of Pensions. These men have been trained there. In Lord Roberts's workshops the number is 1,198. In institutions coming under heading (b)—those set up by local War Pensions Committees—the number is 3,000, and 1,950 are being trained now for special munition work. This makes over 7,000 altogether.
With reference to Darlington, the noble Lord said that the Ministry of Pensions have discouraged local energies and activities. I assure him that that is far from the intention of Mr. Hodge. Indeed, if Mr. Hodge was answering for himself, I do not doubt he would say that his efforts are largely directed to stimulating local activity, which in many cases he finds somewhat slow to move. In the Darlington case, as long ago as July, 1916, the War Pensions Statutory Committee—the antecedent of the present Ministry—wrote to the members of the College regarding facilities for training disabled soldiers and sailors, and, in reply, were informed by the secretary of the. Darlington Education Committee, that their workshops, which would accommodate about thirty men at a time, had been transferred to the Ministry of Munitions for the purpose of training men who wished to enter munition work. While expressing sympathy with the object of the Statutory Committee, which was to press on the training of disabled soldiers, the authorities of the College said that all their energies were being used up in training men for munitions.
In February, 1917—that is seven or eight months later—the Ministry of Pensions again approached the authorities at Darlington to inquire whether conditions had changed so far as to permit of their assistance in training disabled men at the College. The Committee replied that they would give special consideration to individual cases suitable for training in munition work, but again emphasised the point that the sole and immediate object of their classes was to produce munition workers. They expressed the hope, however, that the Government might allow the machinery to remain after the war for training disabled men in engineering. That is what they asked for—that the machinery should remain after
1018
the war. Meanwhile, the Ministry has been in communication as to the training of disabled men with the Local War Pensions Committee, who are specially charged by Statute with this responsibility. In October last the Committee informed the Ministry that they were in negotiation with the Education Committee about facilities for training at the Technical College, but, though recently reminded of this, they have not so far submitted any scheme or any definite proposal regarding the institution of such classes. A general phrase, such as that used in the letter quoted by the noble Lord, "May we do munitions or engineering work," or half a dozen other things like that, is not submitting a definite scheme, and the responsibility of these committees is to submit definite and specific schemes to the Ministry for sanction.
LORD GAINFORD: May I interrupt the noble Earl for a moment in order to say this—that when they have submitted these subjects one after another to the Ministry, they have been told "these subjects are not approved." Therefore it is no good sending forward schemes when the Ministry will not approve of the subjects.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: The noble Lord knows more about Darlington than I do about the Ministry of Pensions, but I cannot help feeling, with the information before me, that the Minister of Pensions has a case on the Darlington problem. In conclusion, let me say that the Minister of Pensions has not been able to verify the figures representing the total number of disabled men on the Register of the Darlington Committee, but he has no reason to doubt the accuracy of the figures quoted by the noble Lord. There are ten men in that area who are now receiving treatment. With regard to training, the Ministry are still awaiting the submission of a scheme by the local committee, and when it is received it will be given the promptest attention.
LORD LAMINGTON: May I say a word on this subject, as I know a good deal about the question? The noble Earl who has just spoken has said that Mr. Hodge has a very good case. I quite agree with him, but it is a most tremendous subject for Mr. Hodge to tackle, and a very difficult one as well. As regards disabled soldiers

1019
and sailors I cannot see that anything has been done by the Government to give them any training classes. A private body, a philanthropic body, has started to supply these classes, but recently we have been told that the Government will not allow any private philanthropy in this direction. Meanwhile they have done nothing themselves and the men get discouraged. It is difficult to trace these men when they once leave hospital.
Only this morning I have seen a man who was in hospital for eighteen months; he underwent twenty-two operations, one leg being taken off, and four inches taken off the other; was shot in the body, and is deaf. About three weeks ago he was discharged from hospital, and the sister said she did not know what the man would do. He was given £1 and sent out into the wide world with that only. He had no friends or relations. The only thing to do was to bring him into a private home and give him training. In the case of this man there was no offer on the part of the Government to give him instruction; he was simply turned adrift into the wide world, with £1 in his pocket, in a perfectly helpless and hopeless condition.
My contention is that whenever men are leaving hospital they should be given some information as to what institution they can go to in order to obtain training and enable them to earn a living. I will not go into the point in detail, but I think it is most important that, when they are leaving hospital they should be directed where they can get treatment and training which will enable them to follow some career. Also there should not be a long delay in giving them a pension. This particular man of whom I have spoken has not, I am told, had a single penny from the Local War Pensions Committee, and he does not know what amount he is going to get.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: May I ask leave to say one word in reply to what the noble Lord has just said. I know nothing I of the case. I assume, from what he said, that, seriously wounded as this man is, I he is capable of being trained for something. If he can be trained for anything his local committee is under statutory obligation to look after him. Every hospital, on the discharge of a man, is under the obligation of letting the man know where his local committee is, and any post-office in any parish in the United Kingdom will
1020
give any discharged soldier the address of his local committee. If the man can take up training he is entitled, during his absence from home, to a separation allowance, and, if he cannot be trained, is entitled to it while living at home. After that training, which may extend over weeks and months, he is entitled to a bonus in money, and during his training is, of course, looked after by the medical superintendent provided by the committee—the treatment committee—which again has a statutory obligation to look after these men. Meanwhile, while he is getting his separation allowance and being trained and watched medically after his discharge, his normal pension is, of course, maturing, although there may be a slight delay. If the noble Lord will give me the name and address of the man I will submit it at once to Mr. Hodge and undertake now that any other man leaving that hospital shall not fail to receive proper information as to the course he should take to secure proper training. At this moment, in London alone, you have upwards of 5,000 vacancies in institutions and polytechnics where these men can be trained.
LORD LAMINGTON: This man's local committee is Birmingham, but he was in hospital in London.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: That makes no difference.
LORD LAMINGTON: We cannot hear anything from the local pension committee at Birmingham. We cannot get any reply from them.

REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
Order of the day read for the House to be again into Committee.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, I think that it may be convenient to the House if, upon this Motion, I give a notice, though I admit that it refers to a future stage of the Bill. The House will recollect that the noble Earl the Lord President of the Council, in his speech yesterday on the large subject of proportional representation, on the Amendment then before the House, laid great stress at the end upon the inconvenience that would

1021
be caused by the delay involved in changing the Schedules. It would have been easy enough to say several things upon the merits of that. In the first place, although I do not want to go back to recriminations regarding the past, if the advice given by some of us in this House some months ago had been taken, that delay would have been greatly minimised because Schedules might have been ready even now.
It is beyond all question the duty of everybody concerned to do everything that is possible to diminish any delay that may be caused. We none of us, I think, want to delay the Bill, and certainly we do not want to put any undue difficulties in the way of its operation. Therefore the practical thing for us is to see what we can do to avoid delay in the hope that the policy adopted by the House yesterday will be carried into effect. On behalf of some of those who are keenly in favour of the change adopted by the House yesterday, I beg to give notice that for the Report stage Amendments will be put down providing that—

(1) As soon as practicable after the passing of this Act the Local Government Board shall appoint Boundary Commissioners to revise the distribution of constituencies set out in the Schedule to this Act so far as respects England and Wales, and the Secretary for Scotland shall appoint Boundary Commissioners to revise the distribution of constituencies set out in that Schedule so far as respects Scotland.

(2) The Commissioners shall have regard to instructions which we hope will be inserted in the Schedules, and shall present their Report to Parliament as soon as practicable showing the areas which are to be constituencies and the number of Members to be returned for each constituency.

(3) The Report of the Commissioners so presented to Parliament shall have effect as if enacted in this Act unless an address is presented by one or other House of Parliament within twenty-one days.

(4) The registration of electors under this Act shall be proceeded with on the passing thereof as if the constituencies were those contained in the fifth Schedule to the Bill for this Act as passed by the House of Commons, and His Majesty may, by Order in Council, make such provisions as appear necessary or expedient to adapt the provisions of this
1022
Act as to registration to the rearrangement of constituencies effected under this section, and to make any registration work done before the rearrangement takes effect available under any new conditions resulting from the arrangement.

This Amendment will, of course, be given proper notice of; but I thought that it might be convenient at this stage to all concerned to give an intimation of our intention.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House again in Committee accordingly.
[The EARL of KINTORE in the Chair.]
Clause 35:
Regulations to be laid before Parliament.
35. All rules, regulations, or provisions made by Order in Council under this Act shall be laid before each House of Parliament forthwith; and if an address is presented to His Majesty by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent twenty-one days on which that House has sat next after any such rule, regulation, or provision is laid before it, praying that the rule, regulation, or provision may be annulled, His Majesty in Council may annul the rule, regulation, or provision and it shall thenceforth be void, but without prejudice to the validity of anything done thereunder.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to omit the words "His Majesty in Council may annul." The noble Marquess said: On behalf of my noble friend Viscount Chaplin, I beg to move the Amendment which stands in his name. It is an Amendment of substance, though I do not think it likely that it will detain your Lordships more than a few minutes. The point is this. There are a great number of Statutes which are brought into effect by means of Rules or Regulations which are laid before Parliament, and both Houses of Parliament have an opportunity of disagreeing with those Rules so that they may have no effect, and the form under which this particular expedient is availed of by Parliament varies a good deal in different Acts of Parliament. I am not in a position at this moment to give your Lordships, nor do I think it would be material, a list of the different forms which this particular method has taken in the practice of Parliament. The matter is, however, of the greatest importance, because of the growing practice of Parliament to place more on Regulations and Rules and less in the body of the Act, and in the present Bill it has reached such a point that the whole of the Schedules can be modified to any extent

1023
by Order in Council; that is to say, there is nothing final in the Hales which we are going to consider presently. Not only can there be any number of Regulations issued under them, but the Rules themselves can be altered by Order in Council, so that the whole thing is left open. Therefore, unless the control of Parliament is precisely and exactly maintained over these Orders in Council, there would be the greatest opportunity to vary what is really the intention of Parliament by means of the subsequent Rules which might be enacted.
The question is, therefore, what control will Parliament maintain over the Orders in Council? That control, whatever it is, is contained in the clause which we are now discussing, and a provision is made of the type of which I have spoken to your Lordships—that Rules and Orders in Council can be laid before Parliament, and if objected to within a certain number of days His Majesty may annul them. There has aways been a doubt as to the effect of the word "may" in this connection. I used to be told that in this connection "may" meant "shall." "May," in point of fact, in English does not mean "shall," but I have always been told that it does here. The reason alleged why "may" always means "shall" in this connection—I am interested to see my noble and learned friend shake his head—is that it is not respectful for Parliament to use the word "shall" to the Crown, and that therefore "may" is inserted. It is a sort of politesse which means "shall." However, in the present case, owing to the very extreme importance of this clause, one or two of us took the precaution of consulting a very eminent lawyer as to whether we might rely upon it that "may" does mean "shall" here, but his opinion was that it was not at all certain. In order to prevent that doubt continuing my noble friend has put an Amendment on the Paper to make it absolutely certain, and to remove the difficulty of our not being permitted to say "shall" to the Crown. We do not mention the Crown expressly and instead of "His Majesty in Council may annul," the phrase is "it shall henceforth" and "shall be annulled." That is to give the express and mandatory meaning instead of "may" and to eliminate any possible doubt. If the noble and learned Lord, the Lord Chancellor, or any other great lawyer says there is no doubt whatever, of course we should accept that at once.
Amendment moved—
1024
Page 24, lines 30 and 31, leave out ("His Majesty in Council may annul").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD FINLAY): The word "may" means "may." It does not mean "shall." There may be cases where, when a power is conferred, the circumstances are such that it is the duty of the authority to whom that power is confided to exercise it. The duty arises from these circumstances, not from the use of the word "may," which, taken by itself, is merely permissive, and confers the power but does not impose an obligation to exercise it. I suggest to my noble friends that this clause should remain in the form in which it appears in the Bill, for several reasons. In the first place, this is a form which has been in use for a great many years. It has not been invariably so but for a great many years this has been, as I am informed, the usual form. If the, noble Marquess will refer to the Old-Age Pensions Act, 1908, Section 10, subsection (3), he will find there is a provision on this point exactly in the same terms with the provision which is contained in this Bill, and I think it is desirable to adhere to that form, with regard to the operation of which no friction whatever has ever arisen. It is the proper mode of dealing with the point. The Crown has made an Order in Council and the power is conferred on the Crown to revoke that Order under certain circumstances.
But I go further, and I submit to my noble friend that it is not desirable to give either House of Parliament the right of its own motion to abrogate an Order in Council of this description. The noble Marquess observes that the power is conferred on either House of Parliament of passing a Resolution. Supposing the two Houses of Parliament take different views on the point, and the feeling in another place is very strong in favour of retaining the Order in Council as it stands, while in this House the feeling is that it should be put an end to. What is the Crown then to do? Surely, if we said that if either House desired that it should be put an end to it would be most inconvenient. There should be some power in the Crown, which, of course will, under ordinary circumstances, act upon a Resolution. But still there must be power in the Crown of saying under such very special circumstances as might emerge with regard to a measure of this kind that the Crown does not desire to annul the Order.

1025
Just observe what the effect of this Amendment would be. It would be this, that if either House passed a Resolution the Order ipso facto would cease to exist. I submit it is not constitutional to give either House the right of abrogating an Order in Council; and, in the second place, it is not desirable, because the conclusion at which one House arrives might be violently in conflict with the opinion of the other House, and in those circumstances you must leave the matter to the Crown, which, of course, will be guided under that, as under other circumstances, by the advice of responsible advisers. I hope that my noble friend will allow the clause to remain as it has been in so many cases. I think that the attempt to alter it would be wrong in principle and might under conceivable circumstances result in considerable inconvenience.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Surely the dictum of the Lord Chancellor carries us very much further than this Bill which we are now discussing. I must say I have never listened to an expression of opinion from so high an authority with so much astonishment. After all, this constitutional precaution of laying Rules and Regulations on the Table of both Houses of Parliament is one to which we are from year to year attaching increasing value, because Parliament is now delegating so much more authority to Government Departments, instead of exercising that authority itself. If what the Lord Chancellor says is true about the Rules and Regulations made under this Bill, surely it is also true of all the Rules and Regulations, all the Orders in Council, all the schemes, and all the various forms of action by by-laws which have been made the subject of this precaution in a perfect host of Statutes. The Lord Chancellor is cutting at the root of a safeguard which is now embedded in scores and scores of Statutes. Has he ever known a case in which the Crown has not withdrawn an Order, or Regulation, or scheme. against which cither House of Parliament has passed a Resolution?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Certainly not. The case has never arisen. I think my noble friend does not appreciate the exact import of what I said. Ordinarily speaking, if one House of Parliament passed a Resolution which should be annulled if there was nothing the other way, the Crown would give effect to it by an Order-in-Council,
1026
but there might arise circumstance. Take the case that I put. Suppose the two Houses of Parliament were of different opinion. Does my noble friend say that there shall be no power in any one of deciding what should be done in those circumstances? What my noble friend suggests would come to this, that though the Houses were of different opinion the opinion of the one desiring abrogation is to prevail. Under ordinary circumstances the Crown will, of course, be advised to annul when one House passes a Resolution, and the somewhat exceptional circumstances which are always possible have never arisen. It has always been acted upon. There was one case, I think, and it was acted upon under a Resolution of this House under the very Act to which I referred. But the residual power ought to remain in the Crown, as it would under this clause.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: The case may never arise. It is also true that nobody ever questioned before the right of one. House, altogether apart from the opinion of the other House to secure the annulment of such a by-law or Regulation. It has never been a question of agreement between the two Houses; it has never been suggested before. It has always been the case that these powers are delegated to a Department with the power reserved in each House, separately and alone, to secure its alteration. What happens when a Resolution of this kind is passed by either House? Why the Crown takes the Order, or Regulation, or scheme back and amends it, puts it again on the Table, everybody is satisfied, there is no hostile Resolution, and the Order comes into force. But what the noble Lord really is asking is that the Cabinet may be able to do exactly what it likes—
Several NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: With a large and very important section of an Act of Parliament, unless both Houses simultaneously pass Resolutions of opposition. It is a new doctrine, and I do not think it is a sound one.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: May I ask the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor a question arising out of something which has just been said by my noble friend. He stated, if I heard him aright, that in all cases this power was given to one

1027
House. My impression is that we have had a good many discussions in the past as to whether in the eases of particular Statutes the concurrence of both Houses in an Address to the Crown ought not to be necessary before the particular Order in Council was annulled. I am sorry to say I do not carry much of the Statute law in my head, and I am not able to name the instance. Very likely my noble and learned friend may be able to. But certainly it is my impression that cases have occurred in which no small conflict has arisen between the two sides of the House as to whether one House should have the power of annulling an Order in Council or whether it would require the concurrence of both to make the action effective. Perhaps some noble and learned Lord with a stronger memory than mine may be able to supply the gaps which I have left.
LORD PARMOOR: So far as I know, the provision has been always in the form that either House may annul. There may be some to the contrary. Take the question of regulations made under the old Charity Acts, or regulations made for changing the Statutes of Colleges—for instance, Winchester, of the governing body of which I happen to be a member—and the Statutes of Universities. I should not like for a moment to say there are no cases in which the two Houses might not have to cooperate, but the ordinary form is certainly the other way.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I think there are cases, but they are not very many and I do not think they have been at all common lately, where the concurrence of the two Houses has been wanted. But, of course, the form which has been in use for many years is one which has worked with perfect smoothness. In the absence of exceptional circumstances the Crown will, of course, he advised, if one House has passed a Resolution, to annul an Order in Council; but there may be circumstances, such as a strong opinion of the other House the other way, which might lead to the consideration that it was proper that the duty which ordinarily speaking would arise on the passage by one House of a Resolution should not be exercised. In looking at these matters it is always necessary, when a radical alteration such as this is proposed, to see what in extreme cases it would end in. I think my noble friend is unduly alarmed at the
1028
idea that there is not an absolute duty on the Crown to put an end to an Order if either House passes a Resolution against it. In ordinary circumstances that would be done, and in ordinary circumstances it would be constitutionally considered that the Minister of the Crown ought to advise the Crown that it should be done; but there are conceivable cases in which, if the clause were altered in the manner proposed, it would give either this House or another place the power by Resolution to put an end to an Order in Council to which great importance was attached in the other branch of the Legislature.
LORD SHEFFIELD: I welcome very much the indication of opinion of the noble and learned Lord, because I have always been under the impression that when either House saw right to present an Address it practically operated and killed the scheme. I have been very familiar with schemes, mainly connected with the question of education, cases of endowed schools, where perhaps it was thought the rights of the Church of England were diminished; and I remember the case of Lincoln College, at Oxford, in which I think the Bishop of Lincoln succeeded in getting your Lordships to throw out the Statutes when the others were altered, and Lincoln remains at this moment with unaltered Statutes. In these educational matters I am anxious that your Lordships should not exercise the power as you have in the past. The noble Marquess's father was fond of throwing out schemes, and he said this House acted as a matter of pure sovereignty and independence, and need not show that any other interests were violated. If they thought their own interests were violated they were entitled to throw out schemes. I very much welcome the Lord Chancellor's intimation.
LORD STUART OF WORTLEY: I am afraid my memory is not strong enough to go quite as far as the House would wish, but I am in a position to say that during my House of Commons' life I do remember an instance—I cannot recall in connection with what Statute it was of such a dissenting Address being presented by this House; an instance in which the other House had expressed no opinion. The rule was gradually maturing, but it was well known that it would have been vain to attempt to persuade the other House to adopt an annulling Resolution; and I can remember

1029
a message from the Crown coming down, conveying in dignified put evasive language the intention of the Sovereign to disregard the Resolution which had been passed by this House. I cannot remember in what case it occurred, but there was such a case. What I should like to know is, is there any case in which this particular procedure of operating by Order in Council, gradually maturing in a limited number of days, has been cast in the form in which this Amendment would cast it, because this House must sec that if this Amendment were adopted the words would become self-contradictory. There would be elaborate provision for the making of an Order in Council, solemn and humble prayer by one branch of the Legislature to the Sovereign that the Regulation might be annulled, and no discretion left the Sovereign at all either to ask or act upon the advice of responsible Ministers. That is self-contradictory. If you want complete annulment, that involves complete annulment by the other House of any Regulation which this House may very much wish to see come in force; and I doubt whether there is any instance on record of the procedure being shaped as the adoption of this Amendment would shape it.
LORD PARMOOR: May I say that I think the Lord Chancellor forgets the constitutional position. These are really rules and regulations taking the place of what would otherwise be contained in an Act of Parliament. An Act of Parliament requires the consent of both Houses, and it certainly cannot be brought into operation on the advice of one House. It is really a constitutional matter of importance, and I do not think the Lord Chancellor will find any precedent where you are giving regulations in the place of legislation where the constitutional right of both Houses is not preserved. On that ground I suggest to the Lord Chancellor that the present form is not in accordance with constitutional lights.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: There is no doubt whatever as to the fact that this has been the usual form for a great many years. I am informed by the Clerk of the Parliaments, who has great experience in these matters, that it has been usual. I have given your Lordships one case where you will find this exact form, and I would suggest that we should adhere to the usual form. With regard to what my noble friend
1030
has just said, I would remind him that while the consent of both Houses is wanted to make a law, the consent of both Houses is also wanted to repeal a law. The provision is that the Order in Council may be made, and then if either House passes an Address—I will read the words—" if an Address is presented to His Majesty by either House praying that the Rule, Regulation, or provision may be annulled, His Majesty may annul it." The Amendment will make it read that if either House passes an Address to His Majesty praying that the Order may be annulled, ipso facto the Order has to be annulled.
LORD PARMOOR: Hear, hear.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: It is a departure from usage, and I suggest with all deference to my noble and learned friend that it would be a very rash departure. The thing works with perfect smoothness, and one ought not to let one's mind dwell too much on extreme cases. It is necessary to put them, when revolutionary change in language is proposed, for the purpose of showing to what it would lead; but this is the constitutional way of doing the thing—namely, giving the Crown power to annull its own Order. Ordinarily speaking it would be the duty of the Minister of the Crown in certain circumstances to advise that this power should be exercised. All I point out is that there may be special circumstances, and that case to which my noble friend Lord Stuart of Wortley referred would be an illustration. I am not aware of the case, but the circumstances that he stated exactly illustrate the point I put that there may be circumstances in which it is not desirable that the Order should be ipso facto annulled.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: I hope the noble and learned Lord Chancellor will allow me to say that I am not convinced by his argument from precedent. There have been a great many instances in the past in which Parliament has given power to both Houses of Parliament to present a Petition to His Majesty, and, if that is carried in either House, forthwith the Resolution becomes annulled. I have had the honour, as Lord of the White Stave, of presenting to His Majesty a Resolution or Petition from this House in that sense. As I understand it, the noble and learned Lord, the Lord Chancellor wishes a different procedure to be adopted in the future.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR rose to speak.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: Will the noble and learned Lord allow me?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I rose only to correct the noble Earl's view of what I said. I did not propose a new departure; I proposed adhering to the practice which has prevailed for a great many years.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: The noble and learned Lord is very fond of interrupting. If he will allow me to say so, I quite appreciated the point. What I was saying when I was interrupted was that I have been acquainted for a good many years with the procedure in this House. I know that on previous occasions Resolutions have been passed in this House. Although the other House has had equal power to do it they have not had the opportunity, and, therefore have not done it. But your Lordships' House has passed a Resolution and in consequence the executive Order of His Majesty's Government has been annulled. What the noble and learned Lord wishes is that on this occasion, although your Lordships' House may wish to annul an Order in Council and may pass a Resolution to the effect that the Order in Council ought to be annulled, the Resolution is to have no effect unless His Majesty's Government at that time wish that the Order should be annulled. We know perfectly well that, as things are, the House of Commons is not able to devote its time to the administration of affairs as a great many of us would wish it to be able to do; and in things of that kind it becomes incumbent upon your Lordships' House to take cognisance of these things; in fact, your Lordships' House is the only House which is able to do it, and which has the time to do it.
As I understand it, under the Bill, to which the noble Marquess has moved an Amendment, it will be possible for your Lordships' House to move an Amendment and to wish to annul the Order in Council. His Majesty's Government will take no notice of it whatever, because they will say that the Order in Council has not been discussed in the House of Commons, and, therefore, there is no reason why any notice should be taken of what has been done in your Lordships' House. It seems to me that this is an attempt to place the Crown above Parliament, and to place the power of the Executive above your Lordships'
1032
House. This is an example of the way in which the bureaucracy is gradually taking more and more power out of the hands of Parliament. It is no small matter, and I hope that the noble Marquess who has moved the Amendment will carry it to a Division, in which case I shall have much pleasure in supporting it.
EARL LOREBURN: I agree that the word "may" means "may," and that the word "shall" means "shall." When you use the word "may" it is obvious sometimes, if you are speaking about His Majesty, that it may be supposed to impose upon him a duty. But that is not the real question. It is true that this form in the Bill is common; but there are other forms, also common, which are used whenever the, occasion arises, for delegating the right of making a Regulation without submitting it to Parliament. To my mind it matters little whether the form has been used in the past or not. The question is whether it ought to be, used now; and I should have thought, with my noble friend Lord Beauchamp, that it was desirable that there should be a power in the House to put an end to a Regulation; because a Regulation is equivalent to a Statute, and, therefore, it ought to be within the control of either House.
LORD SUMNER: This appears to be a point upon which a lawyer may be able to contribute something. I agree with my noble and learned friend who has just sat down that one form may be good in one Statute, and another form may be good in another Statute; and I do not think that on the present occasion we are much concerned with any piece of legislation except this one. It is desirable that the effect of the Amendment should be clearly understood. If this Bill should pass as it stands it means this. I will take one instance. Clause 21 subsection (4) says—
"The following special provisions shall apply for the purpose of enabling persons whose names are entered on the absent voters list to appoint voting proxies in certain cases:—(a) His Majesty may by Order in Council direct" so and so.
If then His Majesty does by Order in Council so direct, that Order in Council has the force of a Statute. It is true that it is defeasible and can be annulled in a certain way under Clause 35; but until that happens that is part of the Act of Parliament.
Now, this Amendment proposes—and it is apparently what those who support it intend—that this House can, by an Address

1033
to the Crown, repeal the Act of Parliament whether the other branch of the Legislature likes it or not. It also proposes that this House can by its own act annul an Act of the King in Council which is a different thing altogether. That may be a matter of form, but I should have thought that it was a matter of some importance that one should not without grave reason authorise either branch of the Legislature, of its own motion, to annul an act of the King in Council. But if the Regulation has, under the Statute, as it passes, the effect of law, then the point made by my noble and learned friend Lord Parmoor falls to the ground—namely, that you must have the assent of both Houses before the Regulation can have the force of law. In advance, and by the effect of passing the Statute in this form, the Order in Council—subject to its being defeated—in a certain way is of statutory effect. Then I should have thought that it was most undesirable, and not at all likely to lead to amity between the two branches of the Legislature, that one House should insist upon inserting by way of an Amendment a power, which it gives to itself (even though the other House strongly objected), to repeal that which has already attained the force of law. It is suggested that the real effect is to enable the Government of the day to do this. I think it is obvious that this cannot be on constitutional principles. What may be the case in the future, heaven only knows. I am sure I do not intend to prophesy. But if this House carried an Address to the Throne within the terms of the Amendment praying that the Regulation, or Order in Council (whatever it was) might be annulled, and, without being able to obtain the support of the other House, the Government of the day advised the Crown to pay no attention to that Address, there is a well-known constitutional remedy for bringing such Government to book, and, perhaps, still further. Of course, no Ministry could do it or would think of doing it unless it was able to count upon the support of the other House.
If the matter were challenged and the Ministry obtained the support of the other House, what is going to be the constitutional position? Is it then really desired that in the face of such a situation as that this House, by getting in its affirmative Address first, is to get the Order in Council annulled? I should have thought that the regular form was manifestly the right form
1034
—that the King in Council, having been empowered and authorised to make Regulations which would have the effect of a Statute, should then be approached by an Address upon which in the ordinary constitutional way he would be advised to act, and his Ministers who advise him must advise him constitutionally, or take the consequences.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I should like to state why I cannot agree with what has been said by the noble and learned Lord who has just spoken. I am not a lawyer, nor anything resembling a lawyer, but I have had a great deal of experience in Parliament, and I can tell him, if he will allow me, what is the general belief in respect of this sort of provision in an Act of Parliament. There is a major way of passing a law, and a minor way. Under both methods the assent of both Houses of Parliament is required. The major form of passing an Act of Parliament is a Bill such as now lies before your Lordships, but in order to deal with minor matters the method adopted by Parliament is to let it be put in the form of an Order in Council, and if either House object to it then the Order is annulled. In that way you get the same essential principle, that both Houses of Parliament, either actively or tacitly, assent to what has been done. There is no indignity to the Crown, as one would almost imagine that the noble and learned Lord argued, in doing so. It is merely a method of legislation. Parliament is so overcharged with work that we naturally resort to these methods in order to endeavour to remove the block of business in Parliament. If we are to be told that by-working through Orders in Council or Rules, either House of Parliament parts with its essential privilege of assenting to or dissenting from what is being done, then the matter becomes very serious indeed, because we should never avail ourselves of this method again in any circumstances. I would like to remind the noble and learned Lord how far his doctrine carries him. It is not merely that Orders in Council are to be found under such clauses as he read out, but if he looks at the end of Clause 36 he will see that it is capable of infinite modification hereafter, and, according to him the same rule would apply—neither House of Parliament would have an essential right to refuse. He says it is not a sound doctrine to say that an Order in Council is an Act of the Cabinet of the day. Whose act is it then? Of course it is done

1035
upon the advice of Ministers. It is an Act of the Cabinet of the day, or indeed it may be of a single Minister.
LORD SUMNER: I never said anything to the contrary—at least, I never intended to.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I rather gathered that the noble and learned Lord doubted whether it was an act of the Cabinet of the day; and although the House of Commons still enjoys great power I am not sure, when I regard the onward march of democracy, whether it will always retain that power; and even a Resolution of the House of Commons would be ignored by the Cabinet under the doctrine of the noble and learned Lord. Therefore, having regard to what has fallen from such high authorities as the Lord Chancellor and the noble and learned Lords who have spoken, who have announced that, contrary to all our beliefs, we are not protected as we thought we were, we must insist upon going to a Division.
LORD ATKINSON: I do not rise to continue the discussion, but I want to say a word as to its novelty, which is the thing which strikes me as most peculiar; because I have painful recollection of the Local Government Act of 1898, in which clauses were introduced which enabled the Lord Lieutenant to apply any provision of even English Statutes which he thought desirable to the local government that was about to be set up under the Bill, and farther enabled him to modify existing Irish Statutes so as to bring them into harmony with the new provisions of the Local Government Act. I find, looking at Section 107, subsection (2), it is provided totidem verbis that the Orders so made shall lie upon the Table of either House for forty days, and that it shall be competent for either House to present an Address to His Majesty asking that they should be disallowed, and thereupon His Majesty may annul. Therefore there is no greater mistake than supposing that this is any departure from the usual practice followed. On the contrary, it has been done in many other cases, but in the Act of 1898 the power exercised went far beyond anything which is now contemplated, because it enabled the Lord Lieutenant to apply English Statutes to Ireland and to modify Irish Statues.
EARL RUSSELL: I want to suggest to the noble Marquess that the Orders which he looked upon as so terrible already exist in additional force. There are Orders in
1036
Council which are laid before the Houses of Parliament, but there are precisely similar methods by which powers are given to Government Departments to make Rules and Regulations which, when made, have the force of Statutes and do not require the assent of Parliament. I think Regulations made under the Defence of the Realm Act are in that position and cannot be withdrawn merely on the Motion of one House which objects to them. There are many Rules and Regulations of first-class importance which are in that position, and although I share the objection of the noble Marquess to bureaucratic legislation, and desire that no law should become operative which has not been considered by both Houses of Parliament, it is not a new thing. I do not often address your Lordships from the position of a crusted Tory, but I want to make an appeal to the noble Marquess rather on this ground. This form of words is perfectly well-known, and is a regular form of words, and although he brushed aside any suggestion of any disrespect to the Crown if this Amendment were carried, still it will be a very curious alteration of an old form. An Order will be made by His Majesty in Council, and instead of praying His Majesty to annul and modify that Order, either House will on its own Motion be able to brush that Order aside. It is rather a new practice, and I should have thought that in view of his political sympathies the noble Marquess would hardly approve of it. I cannot support him in the suggestion he has made because in this matter I must be regarded as of the Victorian era.
LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH: I have no doubt that the formula in the Bill is the formula often and indeed continually used, nor should I object to have it retained in the Bill, but the interpretation given to that formula by the Lord Chancellor and supported by my noble and learned friend behind me raises a new danger which we never had before us before. My noble and learned friend behind me says that, suppose this Bill becomes an Act, power is given to the Crown to make certain regulations by Order in Council, and that the Order in Council thereby becomes the same as an Act of Parliament. He omits to remember that power is given to the Crown to make the Order in Council subject to the condition that that Order shall be laid before both Houses, and if within a certain number of days either House

1037
presents an Address to His Majesty something shall follow. Now an Order in Council does not become an absolute Act until the expiration of the time within which that Address may be presented. In the meantime it is provisionally an Act of Parliament, but it is made an Act of Parliament subject to that condition, and only subject to that condition. If that condition amounts to nothing—and the Lord Chancellor says that in certain cases it might mean nothing, that the Address made by this House or the other House might be disregarded on advice given to the Crown by the Minister for the time being—then the situation has entirely changed, and it becomes desirable, since that construction is put upon it, to alter the phraseology to which we have been accustomed and to which we should be quite ready to assent, if the practice had not been questioned by the very alarming interpretation put upon it by the Lord Chancellor supported by my noble and learned friend.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I cannot help feeling that this subject, which has assumed dimensions of somewhat unexpected importance, demands further consideration. The feeling of the House, as I understand it—certainly of a great many noble Lords—is not so much that they are concerned against the form of words as by the interpretation which has been placed upon those words. In view of that interpretation the House may desire to have different words, but it does not follow that, after reflection, it would be prepared to take the precise form of words proposed in the Amendment, which do involve a very definite departure from anything we have seen before. I, for one, certainly could not vote for their insertion in the Bill until all forms of words which have been used on previous occasions in similar circumstances have been examined by the proper authorities. I do not know myself how
far the form of words which appears in the Bill as it stands has been departed from on former occasions. I think probably it has often been departed from, and that there has been some variation of its terms.
Several NOBLE LORDS: No, no.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I am bound to say that if the form has never been departed from the case for retaining it is all the stronger, whatever the Lord Chancellor's interpretation may be, and I should deprecate the insertion by your Lordships' House, as a part of the Bill, of this new form of words which nobody has had much time to consider. I should have thought it might be possible to postpone further consideration of the subject until the authorities have had an opportunity of studying the precedents and thereby enabling us to form a considered opinion.
LORD PARMOOR: May I say one word, although I have already twice addressed the House on this subject? Suppose what the Lord Chancellor and the noble and learned Lord say is correct, the position is this. You have an Order which comes from the Government or from the proper Department. It is laid before both Houses and, whatever either House thinks, the same Department may or may not annul its own Order. Well, it is a futile provision under those conditions. An Order comes from the Government and it is not to be annulled unless the Government desire to annul it, or it comes from a Government Department and is not to be annulled unless that Department wish to annul it. It seems to me that on constitutional grounds you have no safeguard at all.
On Question, whether the words proposed to be left out shall stand part of the clause—
Their Lordships divided:—Contents, 43; Not-Contents, 39.

CONTENTS.

Finlay, L. (L. Chancellor.)

Plymouth, E.

Hylton, L. [Teller.]

Curzon of Kedleston, E. (L. President.)

Russell, E.

Kenyon, L.

Sandwich, E.

Muir Mackenzie, L.

Wigan, L. (E. Crawford.) (L. Privy Seal.)

Newton, L.

Farquhar, V. (L. Steward.)

Pontypridd, L.

Sandhurst, V. (L. Chamberlain.)

Ranksborough, L.

Newcastle, D.

Harcourt, V.

Rathcreedan, L.

Crewe, M.

Peel, V.

St. Davids, L.

Ancaster, E.

Anslow, L.

Saltoun, L.

Chesterfield, E.

Atkinson, L.

Somerleyton, L.

Clarendon, E.

Basing, L.

Stanley of Alderley, L. (L. Sheffield.)

Eldon, E.

De Mauley, L.

Howe, E.

Digby, L.

Stanmore, L. [Teller.]

Lucan, E.

Dinevor, L.

Suffield, L.

Lytton, E.

Elphinstone, L.

Sumner, L.

Mar and Kellie, E.

Gainford, L.

Sydenham, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Argyll, D.

Minto, E.

Courtney of Penwith, L.

Northumberland, D.

Morton, E.

Forester, L.

Cholmondeley, M.

Selborne, E.

Glenconner, L.

Salisbury, M. [Teller.]

Falmouth, V.

Grenfell, L.

Gladstone, V.

Harris, L.

Beauchamp, E. [Teller.]

Knollys, V.

Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

Camperdown, E.

Lambourne, L.

Cottenham, E.

Avebury, L.

Lamington, L.

Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

Balfour, L.

Monckton, L. (V. Galway.)

Beresford of Metemmeh, L.

Parmoor, L.

Fortescue, E.

Brancepeth, L. (V. Boyne.)

Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

Lichfield, E.

Burnham, L.

Saltersford, L. (E. Courtown.)

Lindsay, E.

Carnock, L.

Sandys, L.

Loreburn, E.

Chaworth, L. (E. Meath.)

Wrenbury, L.

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Resolved in the affirmative, and Amendment disagreed to accordingly.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add a new subsection. The noble Viscount said:—This is merely transferring this subsection from Clause 36. It is better from a drafting point of view.
Amendment moved—
Page 24, line 33, at end insert as a new subsection:
"(2) Any Order in Council under this Act may be revoked or varied as occasion requires by any subsequent Order in Council."—(Viscount Peel.)
Clause 35, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 36:
Interpretation.
36. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

(1) The expression "constituency" means any county, borough, or combination of places, or university or combination of universities, returning a member to serve in Parliament; and, where a county or borough is divided for the purpose of parliamentary elections, means a division of the county or borough so divided; and elections for any such division shall be held in the same manner and subject to the same provisions as those for undivided counties or boroughs:

(2) The expression "local government electoral area" means the area for which any county council, municipal borough council, metropolitan borough council, district council, board of guardians, parish council, or any other body elected at the time of the passing of this Act by persons on the local government register or on the register of parochial electors is elected; and the expression "local government election" means an election for any such council, board, or body:

1040

(3) The expression "general election" means an election of members to serve in a new Parliament of the United Kindom:

(4) The expression "university constituency" means a constituency consisting of a university or a combination of universities; and the expression "university election" means an election of a member or members of Parliament for a university constituency; and this Act in its application to university elections, shall be read with the substitution of "voting paper" for "ballot paper," and with such other modifications as are necessary to adapt it to the special circumstances of those elections:

(5) A person who is an inmate or patient in any prison, lunatic asylum, workhouse, poorhouse, or any other similar institution shall not by reason thereof be treated as resident therein for any purpose of this Act:

(6) The expression "transferable vote" means a vote—

(a) capable of being given so as to indicate the voter's preference for the candidates in order; and

(b) capable of being transferred to the next choice when the vote is not required to give a prior choice the necessary quota of votes, or when, owing to the deficiency in the number of the votes given for a prior choice, that choice is eliminated from the list of candidates:

(7) The expression "alternative vote" means a vote—

(a) capable of being given so as to indicate the voter's preference for the candidates in order; and

(b) capable of being transferred to a subsequent choice in case no one candidate has a clear majority of the total number of votes counted at any count:

(8) For the purposes of registration a person's age shall be taken to be that person's age on the last day of the qualifying period:

1041

(9) The yearly value of premises shall be taken to be the gross estimated rental where those premises are separately assessed to rates, and in any other case shall be deemed to be the amount which would in the opinion of the registration officer be the gross estimated rental if they were separately assessed:

(10) The expression "afloat" in connexion with naval and military voters shall be interpreted in accordance with rules made for the purpose by the Admiralty:

(11) The expression "prescribed" means prescribed by His Majesty by Order in Council:

Any order in Council under the Act may be revoked or varied as occasion requires by any subsequent Order in Council.

LORD SHEFFIELD: I want to ask a question here of the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill. I am told that the definition "constituency" here will not affect what was done-with regard to proportional representation. Nevertheless it seems to me that the word "constituency" as defined here is a sub-division of a Parliamentary area which returns its Member. Therefore there will be no constituency in Clause 36 except those returning one Member. I am told that the draftsman of the Bill says there is nothing in the point, and that it will be covered. If the noble Lord says the definition does not affect it, I have nothing to say.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think the definition as it is will fit in very well
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to delete from subsection (4) all the words after "members of Parliament for a University constituency." The noble Viscount said:—These words fall out because of the University clause.
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 24, leave out from ("constituency") to the end of line 29.—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT GALWAY VISCOUNT GALWAY moved the deletion of subsection (7). The noble Viscount said: This is a consequential Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 26, line 5, leave out subsection (7).—(Viscount Galway.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: With regard to the Amendments standing in my name, the first is inserted to make the, clause correspond with the earlier part of the Bill. The Amendment on line 17 is necessary
1042
because a different expression is used in the metropolis from that used in other parts of the country; and the Amendment on line 22 is in order to make the words rather wider so as to include all persons who are serving afloat.
Amendments moved
Page 26, line 16, after ("of") insert ("land or")
Page 26, line 17, after ("rental") insert ("(or in the metropolis the gross value)")
Page 26, line 21, after ("rental") insert ("or gross value as the case requires")
Page 26, line 22, after ("afloat") insert ("and expressions relating to service afloat")
Page 26, line 27, leave out lines 27 to 29.—(Viscount Peel.)
Clause 36, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 37 agreed to.
Clause 38:
Application to Scotland.
38. This Act shall apply to Scotland, subject to the following modifications:—

(1) Unless the context otherwise requires:—

(a) The word "borough" except as used in the expression "Parliamentary borough" moans "burgh";

(b) The expression "local government electoral area" means the area for which any county council, town council, parish council, or school board, is elected, and "local government election" means an election for any such council or board;

(c) The expression "the Local Government Board" means the Secretary for Scotland;

(d) The expression "Valuation Acts" means the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854, and any Acts amending the same;

(e) A reference to the Supreme Court shall be construed as a reference to the Court of Session;

(f) A reference to the Court of Appeal shall be construed as a reference to the Court of three judges of the Court of Session constituted by the twenty-third section of the Representation of the People (Scotland) Act, 1868;

(g) A reference to the county court shall be construed as a reference to the sheriff court:

(2) The yearly value of any subjects shall be taken to be the value appearing in the valuation roll where those subjects are separately valued in that roll, and in any other case shall be deemed to be the value which, would in the opinion of the registration officer be entered therein if they were so valued:

1043

(3) The section of this Act relating to local government franchise (men) shall not apply, and in lieu thereof—

(a) A man who is of full age and not subject to any legal incapacity shall be entitled to be registered as a local government electoral area if he is on the last day of the qualifying period and has been during the whole of that period—

(i) the owner of lands and heritages within the area of the yearly value of not less than ten pounds: Where lands and heritages are in the joint ownership of two or more persons and the aggregate yearly value of the lands and heritages is not less than the amount produced by multiplying ten pounds by the number of the joint owners, each of the joint owners shall be treated as owning lands and heritages of the yearly value of not less than ton pounds; or

(ii) the occupier as tenant of lands and heritages (other than a dwelling-house) within the area of the yearly value of not less than ten pounds: Where such lands and heritages are in the joint occupation as tenants of two or more persons, and the aggregate value of the lands and heritages is not less than the amount produced by multiplying ten pounds by the number of the joint occupiers, each of the joint occupiers shall be treated as occupying lands and heritages of the yearly value of not less than ten pounds; or

(iii) The inhabitant occupier as owner or tenant of a dwelling-house within the area; or

(iv) the occupier of lodgings within the area of the yearly value if let unfurnished of not less than ten pounds: Where lodgings are in the joint-occupation of not more than two persons and the aggregate yearly value as aforesaid of the lodgings is not less than twenty pounds, each of the joint lodgers shall be treated as occupying lodgings of the yearly-value of not less than ten pounds; or

(v) the inhabitant occupier in virtue of any office, service, or employment of a dwelling-house within the area which is not inhabited by any person under whom he serves in such offices, service, or employment;

(b)

(i) the ownership or occupation in immediate succession of different lands and heritages, dwelling-houses, or lodgings, as the case may be, in the same parliamentary county or in the same parliamentary borough shall have the like effect in qualifying a man to be registered as a local government elector for a local government electoral area therein, respectively, as the continued ownership or occupation of the same lands and heritages, dwelling-houses, or lodgings within that area; and

1044

(ii) the occupation of a dwelling-house shall not he deemed to be interrupted by reason only of permission being given by letter or otherwise for the occupation thereof as a furnished house by some other person for a part of the qualifying period not exceeding four months in the whole;

(c) In this section "owner" has the same meaning as "proprietor" in the Valuation Acts, "lands and heritages" has the same meaning as in those Acts, and "dwelling-house" means any house or part of a house occupied as a separate dwelling;

(4) Subsection one of the section of this Act relating to franchises (women) shall not apply, and in lieu thereof—

(a) a woman who is not subject to any legal incapacity shall be entitled to be registered as a parliamentary elector for a constituency (other than a university constituency) if she has attained the age of thirty years, and if either she or her husband is on the last day of the qualifying period occupying jointly or severally as owner or tenant any land or premises in the constituency (hereinafter in this subsection called "the qualifying premises"), and has during the whole of the qualifying period so occupied any land or premises in the county or county of a city in which the qualifying premises are situated:

Provided that for the purposes of this subsection—

(i) the word "tenant" shall include a person who inhabits by virtue of any office, service, or employment any dwelling-house which is not inhabited by any person under whom he serves in such offices, service, or employment;

(ii) the word "tenant" shall not include a person who occupies a room or rooms as a lodger except where such room or rooms are let to him or her in an unfurnished state:

(iii) a woman, though she or her husband may have been occupying land or premises in the constituency on the last day of the qualifying period, shall not be entitled to be so registered, if she or her husband, as the case may be, commenced to occupy the land or premises within thirty days before the end of the qualifying period and ceased to occupy them within thirty days after the commencement of such occupation;

(iv) the occupation of a house shall not be deemed to be interrupted by reason only of permission being given by letting or otherwise for the occupation of the house as a furnished house by some other person for a part of the qualifying period not exceeding four months in the whole;

1045

(v) not more than two persons shall be deemed to be joint occupiers of the same land or premises unless they are bona fide engaged as partners carrying on their profession, trade, or business in the premises; and

(vi) the word "county" means a county inclusive of all burghs therein except a county of a city, and the word "dwelling-house" means any house or part of a house occupied as a separate dwelling.

(b) A woman registered by virtue of this section shall be deemed to be registered by virtue of her own or her husband's local government qualification—

(5) The section of this Act relating to registration officers and areas shall not apply-and in lieu thereof—

Each burgh, the town council whereof was entitled under the law in force at the passing of this Act to appoint an assessor for the purpose of parliamentary registration, and each county (exclusive of every such burgh), or, where any county is divided for the purpose of parliamentary elections, each part of the county which lies within a separate parliamentary division, shall be a registration area: and the assessor of the burgh or county under the Valuation Acts, or where there are two or more such assessors, one of them appointed for the purpose of varliamentary registration by the town or county council, as the case may be, shall be the registration officer of that area, and all other assessors (if any) in that area shall, for the purpose of parliamentary registration, be subject to the instructions of the registration officer and shall be bound to act on such instructions.

Provided, that, from and after the date when the first register under this Act shall have been completed, an officer of Inland Revenue shall not be appointed or continue to act as assessor for any burgh or county under the Valuation Acts without the consent of the Treasury.

(6) The provisions regarding the appointment of an assistant judge in the section of this Act relating to appeals shall not apply:

(7) In the application of the section of this Act relating to right to the use of elementary schools the expression "any public elementary school in receipt of an annual parliamentary grant" means "any school in receipt of a parliamentary grant."

(8) The first subsection of the section of this Act relating to expenses of registration shall not apply, and in lieu thereof—

Any expenses properly incurred by any registration officer in the performance of his duties in relation to registration, including all proper and reasonable charges for trouble, care, and attention in the performance of those duties and
1046
any cost incurred by him as party to an appeal (in this Act referred to as "registration expenses"), shall be paid by the council appointing the registration officer. Provided that, where a burgh within the meaning of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889, is not a separate registration area, the council thereof shall pay to the council appointing the registration officer a contribution towards the registration expenses, and subsection (4) of section sixty and section sixty-six of that Act shall apply, with the necessary modifications, to such contribution. The amount necessary to defray any registration expenses or any contribution thereto, as the case may be, shall be assessed and levied in any one of the modes allowed by the Valuation Acts with respect to the costs and expenses of making up the valuation roll:

(9) The sections of this Act relating to returning officers and to the discharge of returning officers' duties by an acting returning officer shall not apply, and in lieu thereof:—

The returning officer at parliamentary elections (other than a university election) shall as heretofore be the sheriff of the sheriffdom within which the constituency is wholly situated or, where the constituency is situated in more than one sheriffdom, the Sheriff specified in the Sixth Schedule; to this Act, and the power of appointing deputies conferred by section eight of the Ballot Act, 1872, on certain sheriffs shall be exerciseable by any sheriff who is returning officer for more than one constituency or who, by reason of sickness or unavoidable absence, is incapacitated from performing any of the duties devolving upon him as returning officer, and in the event of no such appointment being made by a sheriff so incapacitated or in the event of any vacancy in the office of sheriff at the time when any of such duties require to be performed, the sheriff substitute at the place at which the writ for the election is appointed to be received, shall act as returning officer, and shall perform all the duties and have all the powers (including the power of appointing deputies) of such returning officer.

(10) In the case of parliamentary elections the place of election shall be a convenient room situated in such place as the Secretary for Scotland may by order from time to time determine.

(11) For the purposes of the section of this Act relating to alteration of polling districts where necessary, the sheriff shall within his sheriffdom be deemed to be the local authority.

(12) Except as expressly provided in this Act—

(a) Nothing in this Act shall take effect so as to deprive any royal or parliamentary burgh losing separate representation under this Act of any right privilege, or status, whether for purposes of local government or otherwise, hitherto enjoyed by such burgh as a royal or parliamentary burgh; and

1047

(b) Nothing in this Act or in any Act in force at the passing of this Act as read with this Act shall take effect so as to confer upon any police burgh acquiring separate representation under this Act any rights, privileges, or status, whether for purposes of local government or otherwise, not enjoyed by other police burghs.

In this subsection the references to royal, parliamentary, or police burghs shall be deemed to include references to the magistrates, town councils, and officers thereof, respectively, and the expression "separate representation" shall be construed as meaning the right to return, or to contribute as a burgh to return, a member, or member's to Parliament.
VISCOUNT PEEL: All the Amendments in my name to Clause 38, down to page 31, deal with the Scottish clause. They are either drafting Amendments or are necessary to adapt the Scottish clause to the other provisions of the Bill. If noble Lords wish I will go through them seriatim and explain them.
Several NOBLE LORDS: Agreed, agreed.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I beg to move the Amendments on the Paper down to page 31, line 6.
Amendments moved—
Page 27, line 13, after ("Board") insert ("(except where otherwise expressly provided)")
after line 16 insert:
"(e) The expression 'governing body' used in relation to a university means the University Court; "
Page 28, line 1, after ("where") insert ("such")
Page 28, line 10, leave out ("(other than a dwelling-house)")
Page 28, line 25, after ("where") insert ("such")
Page 28, line 32, leave out ("in") and insert "by").
Page 29, line 5, leave out from ("area") to the end of line 11
Page 29, line 12, leave out from ("owner") to end of line 14 and insert ("shall include heir of entail in possession, life-renter, and beneficiary entitled under any trust to the rents and profits of lands and heritages and shall not include the liar of lands and heritages subject to a life-rent, nor tutor, curator, judicial factor, nor commissioner").
Page 29, line 24, leave out ("on the last day") and insert ("during the last fourteen days")
Page 29, line 25, leave out ("jointly or severally")
Page 29, line 25, leave out line 32 and insert ("(b) For the purposes of this subsection")
Page 29, line 36, after ("he") insert ("or she").
Page 30, line 1, leave out from the beginning of line 1 to the end of line 22.
Page 30, after line 27, insert as a new paragraph:
"(iv) Where land or premises are in the joint occupation of two or more persons, each of the joint occupiers shall be treated as occupying the same, provided that not more than two joint occupiers shall be so treated in respect of the same land or premises, unless they are bona fide engaged as partners, carrying on their profession, trade, or business on the land or premises."
Page 30, after line 30, insert as new subsections:
"(5) Subsection (1) of the section of this Act relating to supplementary provisions as to residence and occupation shall not apply except in so far as that subsection relates to the parliamentary franchise for men.
"(6) The section of this Act relating to qualification for membership of local authority shall not apply."
Page 30, line 38, after ("county") insert ("(with the like exclusion)")
Page 31, line 6, leave out ("parliamentary registration") and insert ("the registration of parliamentary and local government electors").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH moved to omit the proviso at the end of subsection (5). The noble Lord said:—I am proposing to omit the proviso on page 31, lines 9 to 14. This is a matter, like the last Amendments, concerned with the intricacies of Scottish law, especially as regards valuation. I will state the case as briefly as I can, and I shall not take many minutes. As you know, in Scotland we have an annual system of valuation. We do not wait for every five years, but all real and inheritable property is valued every year, and therefore the local authorities, who are responsible for seeing it done, have to appoint valuers for the purpose. Going back to 1857, when this system of valuation was brought into force, the county and borough authorities had the power to appoint officers of the Inland Revenue to be their assessors, and this remained absolutely unchallenged until the Local Government Act of 1889. In that year the Treasury asserted the right to have a consenting power before their officers where taken for this public purpose, and that was agreed to. The proviso in that Act says that it shall not be lawful to appoint officers of the Inland Revenue to be assessors without previously obtaining the consent of the Treasury. The renewal of

1049
existing appointments was specially saved in that Act. Under the proviso now under discussion, even existing officers will be turned out from their, to some extent, profitable employment, after having done one more service. I do not think that is fair. We desire to delete this proviso only for the purpose of saving existing appointments. We do not want to alter the condition now existing that the Treasury shall be asked to give consent to new appointments, but we do not think it is reasonable that existing appointments should be cancelled. It is greatly to the detriment of the smaller local authorities that these appointments should be cancelled at all, and it is also exceptionally unfair to the individuals who hold them, because in respect of the local appointments which they hold they have to a large extent in the past sacrificed the chance of promotion under the Treasury. They have got accustomed to the district, formed local connections, and if they are to be now turned out it seems to me an exceptionally hard case. Many of them are men advanced in life, and it will be a serious detriment to their revenue. Many of them, I am sure, would not have incurred these obligations if they had not thought that their appointment would be permanent. I would call the noble Viscount's special attention to this point. The assessors are preserved under the Act for the first work. If it is not detrimental to the Treasury to preserve them for the first work, which will undoubtedly be heavy, why should they be turned out afterwards? Why should they not continue to undertake the duties subsequently the same as they are doing at present? I have given a sufficient outline of what I think is the injustice of the proviso, and I will say no more until I hear what is said on behalf of the Government.
Amendment moved—
Page 31, leave out lines 9 to 14 inclusive.—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
VISOUNT PEEL: The noble. Lord has stated the position of the surveyors appointed as assessors. As the noble Lord knows, I am not very familiar personally with this matter. A number of surveyors have, in fact, been appointed to act as assessors both in boroughs and in counties, and such appointment carries with it the obligation to act as registration officer. Up to the present it has not been found that the work involved in these appointments has seriously interfered with the
1050
duties of the surveyors as revenue officers; but under the present Bill the registration work will not only be vastly increased, but it will be less intimately connected with the duties of valuation assessors than in the past, inasmuch as in the past this Register of voters has been compiled mainly from the yearly returns made for valuation purposes, whereas in future such returns will be of no assistance in the preparation of the second Register in each year. It is anticipated that under the Bill the number of voters will be doubled, and the Registers of electors are to be prepared half-yearly instead, of yearly as at present. Moreover, the Register will contain the names of a vast number of persons who are neither owners nor occupiers of property, and who are, therefore, quite outside the scope of the assessors' activities in relation to the valuation. In these circumstances the Board of Inland Revenue felt that the additional work which may in future devolve on surveyors of taxes as registration officers may be such as to interfere seriously with the Revenue duties for which they are primarily employed, and it is at their instance that the paragraph in question has been added to the subsection. The Board have expressed their willingness to allow those surveyors who are at present acting as registration officers to complete the first Register which will come into force on April 15 next year as the Bill now is. It will then be known what amount of additional work is involved, and to what extent it can be performed by surveyors of taxes without serious detriment to their Revenue activities. In these circumstances the Scottish Office held, as a matter of precaution, that they ought to retain this subsection in the Bill.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: It appears that the attitude of the Inland Revenue arises with regard to this first. Register. But they are retaining the surveyors for the first registration, and surely, until they have found out that they are not able to do their duty at the first registration they ought not to refuse to employ them hereafter if it is found that they are able to do the work I would point out to the noble Viscount that it is a very great hardship on these men, and I thoroughly agree with everything that has been said by Lord Balfour of Burleigh. If they are willing to use the surveyors on the first occasion, why they should absolutely refuse to retain them for the second I do not understand.
VISCOUNT PEEL: If the noble Earl looks at the clause he will see that it says "shall not be appointed without the consent of the Treasury." It does not say "shall not be appointed," but only shall not be appointed without Treasury consent.
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH: I hope that your Lordships will accept Lord Balfour's Amendment. In the past this system has worked extraordinarily well, so well that I think it ought to be kept. What perhaps is not thoroughly realised is that the whole of the work is done by clerks who are paid by the surveyors of taxes out of the moneys they receive, and these clerks are also able to help them to a large extent in their other work. The fact of the matter is that this has proved in the past, and I am convinced will do so in the future, not only a very efficient but a most economical method of doing this work. There have been practically no complaints about it, and it has been universally recognised as an excellent system. I am sure that it will be a very great mistake to interfere with it, and I cannot see that there is any reason for doing so. The surveyors may require a larger staff in order that they may carry out their duties in future as well as they have done in the past, but I think that the surveyors of taxes are almost unanimously in favour of this Amendment, and I do not think that they are a class of men who, unless they could see their way to carry out this work properly without detriment to their other duties, would be likely to be willing to undertake it. I hope, therefore, that this Amendment will be accepted.
LORD LAMINGTON: I echo the words which have just fallen from the noble Duke. If the Government find these duties too heavy in the future they could have an Order in Council to relieve these men of them. They say that they will wait and see. But if we eliminate this now it is not likely to be re-inserted: whereas if we retain it, it will always be in the power of the Government to take steps to have it deleted.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: Whenever a change has been made in any Franchise Bill from 1866 onwards existing interests have been conserved. I am not proposing to alter the present condition that the Treasury shall have to give consent to new appointments. I think that that is
1052
reasonable, although it is only done in the smaller counties, and I think that the Treasury work is not seriously interfered with. The new words in the proviso are not only "shall not be appointed" but also "or continue to act." I think that is a very serious injustice. I may tell the noble Viscount that I believe I am voicing the unanimous desire of every borough authority as expressed in their borough association, and of every' county authority as expressed in their county council's association. I have had letters from the secretaries of both, and I do not think that there is a single dissentient.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I understand that Lord Balfour is upon a rather more limited point than other noble Lords. He is anxious to save the rights of those who are acting already, and does not object to fresh appointments being subject to the consent of the Treasury.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: That is the law now.
VISCOUNT PEEL: But the noble Lord is attempting to do too much if he wishes to leave out the whole of the subsection. It might be done by leaving out the words "or continue to act."
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: That will not do, because technically the appointment is one that goes from year to year to the same man.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I could accept the omission of the words "or continue to act." I am afraid that, as at present advised. I could not go further.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I beg to give the most positive assurance that that will not meet the case, because the same man is appointed year by year by the same authority. His appointment is technically an annual one, and therefore if this proviso stands, even with the words indicated cut out, it would not be possible, as I understand it to make this annual appointment.
VISCOUNT PEEL: But in that case does not the subsection want re-drafting? I think really that is what is wanted. Otherwise if it was omitted, as the noble Lord suggests, it would do what he wants but it would also do more than he wants.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: No, it would not do any more. I will give the reference, Section 83, subsection (4) of the Local Government Act, 1889, provides already that it shall not be lawful to appoint an officer to be assessor without previously obtaining the consent of the Treasury. Renewals of existing appointments are especially saved in that subsection.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I cannot help thinking that there is not much between us on this subject. The object of the noble Lord is clearly to secure that men who have honourably performed these functions in the past shall not be thrust to one side. I think, if the Amendment could be withdrawn now, we could confer with the noble Lord as to the proper method of maintaining existing interests. It might be possible I hope it would be possible—that we could come to an agreement.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: Of course, I accept that. But time is very short, and I hope that, if I repeat the Amendment on Report, it will be really looked into before that time.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: What I had hoped was that we should perhaps be able to do it before the time came for putting it down for Report, in order to have agreed words.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next is a drafting Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 31, lines 20 and 21, leave out ("in receipt of an annual parliamentary grant").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new subsection.
Amendment moved—
Page 32, after line 29, insert as a new subsection:
"(10) The provisions of the last paragraph of the section of this Act relating to register for University constituencies shall not apply, and the said section shall have effect as if regulation sixteen of section two of the Universities Elections Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1881, were enacted therein in lieu of the said paragraph.—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved an Amendment in subsection (10).
Amendment moved—
Page 32, line 30, at beginning of line insert ("The section of this Act relating to place of election shall not apply, and in lieu thereof") and after ("elections") insert ("(other than an election for a university constituency)").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new subsection in lieu of subsection (11).
Amendment moved—
Page 32, line 34, leave out subsection (11) and insert as a new subsection:
"(11) In the application of the section of this Act relating to division of constituency into polling districts and provision of polling places, and of the section of this Act relating to alteration of polling places where necessary, the returning officer shall be substituted for the council having a power or duty under those sections to divide a constituency into polling districts, and the Lord Advocate shall be substituted for the Local Government Board."—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I understand that the returning officer in Scotland is the sheriff. Is there any reason why the sheriff should not be named, instead of being referred to as the returning officer? When a writ is issued the sheriff becomes the returning officer, but he is not the returning officer throughout the year, and he does not become so until a writ is issued, and it cannot be intended that he should not divide the constituency into polling districts until a writ has been issued.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Perhaps the noble Viscount will let me consider the point. I am not very familiar with Scottish matters.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH moved the addition of new subsections. The noble Lord said: This, of course, raises a very large question. I quite admit that it is one of great importance. This new subsection when inserted would keep the existing custom in Scotland of having only one Register in the year instead of two. The reason why I have put it down is really to enable me to raise a point which I could not raise on an earlier question on the ground of privilege. At the present time half the expenses of making the Register for Parliamentary and local government purposes are defrayed between the Imperial

1055
Exchequer and the local authority. That is perfectly reasonable, because they are both made up annually and each one may be required at any time in the year. Under the present Bill, for Parliamentary purposes the Register is made up half-yearly, because that is the Parliamentary usage. It is absolutely of no use whatever for local government purposes, because the local government elections happen only once in three years and by Statute they happen at a stated time when the July Register will be sufficient. The two Registers are absolutely for county or burgh elections, and I may mention that Scotland in this case is only asking what is given to Ireland in the following subsection. The Irish Registers are made up only once a year. If that will do for Ireland, why will it not do for Scotland? It seems to me very unfair that the expense should be divided equally between Imperial and local sources when the whole object of the half-yearly Register is for Imperial and not for local purposes. This matter would have been raised in another place only by accident it was omitted. They ask that two-thirds of the expense should be paid from Imperial funds, and only one-third from local. That Amendment, if I could have raised it at all, would have been raised for England as well as for Scotland. Of course, I cannot ask that the Imperial funds should be differently applied as between England and Scotland. Obviously, it would not be fair that a different proportion should be paid in Scotland from that paid in England, but it seems to me a reasonable way to free us from the second Register. I do not believe that it would make any material difference, because almost all our removals are at one period of the year, at the May term. Therefore in nearly all the burgh constituencies the movements will have taken place and be ready for the July Register. I do not think any material interests will be damaged by this change.
Amendment moved—
Page 33, after line 17, insert the following new subsections:
"( ) The section of this Act relating to the qualifying period shall not apply, and in lieu thereof—

"The qualifying period shall be a period of six months ending on the fifteenth of July and including that day.

"( ) The sections of this Act relating to spring and autumn registers shall not apply, and in lieu thereof—
1056

"One register of electors shall be made in each year, and all the provisions applicable to the autumn register shall apply as respects the yearly register (except that the yearly register shall remain in force until the fifteenth day of October in the next following year) and the provisions as to the preparation of two registers in each year and to the spring register shall not apply.—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh).

VISCOUNT PEEL: I do not think the noble Lord dwelt so strongly on one portion of his Amendment as he did the other. May I take it in two forms? One as regards the two Registers for the Parliamentary vote, and the other as regards the two Registers for the local government vote. So far as regards the Parliamentary Register, the case is, of course, easily intelligible. It would make it more difficult for Parliamentary electors in Scotland to keep upon the Register than it is in the southern part of the island, and probably the noble Lord feels that it would be extremely difficult to have only one Register in Scotland in the year and two in England. As regards the local government Register I understand the case is different. The Secretary for Scotland has received a number of representations from Scotland to the effect that it is unnecessary to make up a Spring Register for local government purposes as the local government elections in Scotland all take place in the autumn, when the Autumn Register will be in force. If the form in which the Register in future is made up is such that there would be a material saving by not making up the Spring local government Register there is much to be said for inserting a provision in the Bill to allow this course to be followed. It seems desirable, however, that this course should be optional. This question of whether or not there will be a saving of trouble or expense in making up the Spring Register will depend on the circumstances of the registration area and also the form in which the Register is to be made up. I have been shown some forms under which apparently it does not seem to make very much difference. As at present advised I am not able to accept either portion of one Amendment which deals with having one Parliamentary Register; but if my noble friend chooses to bring up an Amendment on the Report stage making it optional for the authorities to have one local government Register for the year, then the Government will be prepared to accept that.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I am afraid I cannot undertake to draft an Amendment of that kind between now and Report stage if it is to be taken on Monday, because obviously I must communicate with friends in Scotland who would help me to do it. If, however, the Secretary for Scotland or the drafter of the Bill will collaborate with me, I think the offer is a fair one and I will be glad to assist. I quite accept what the noble Viscount says, that it will be a violent change and a change; to the disadvantage of Scotland to do away with the second Parliamentary Register if there is to be a second Parliamentary Register in England, and that part I have no desire to press; but I venture to say that I hope if this change is made something will be done in consequence to relieve the local authorities of the undue expense they will be put to in connection with the Registers. I do not want to appeal in forma pauperis, but rates are very high in Scotland, and anything we can do to keep them within due limits without sacrifice of efficiency will be welcome in a wide circle.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I can promise that the noble Lord will have the assistance of the official draftsman to produce his Amendment by Monday next.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: In that case I ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I was only going to add that the noble Lord cannot expect me to make any statement on the financial point, which is rather a matter for another place. As for the rates in Scotland being heavy, I could tell him a great story about the English rates if he wishes to listen.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 38, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 39:
Application to Ireland.
39. This Act shall apply to Ireland subject to the following modifications:—

(1) References to the Lord Chancellor shall be construed as references to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

The Lord Chancellor of Ireland shall not sit as a member of the Court of Appeal on the hearing of appeals from the county court under this Act.

In any county in which the jurisdiction of the county court is exercised for
1058
the time being by two or more county court judges, the appeals from the registration officer shall be dealt with by such one of those judges or his assistant judge as may be directed by the Lord Chancellor, or shall be distributed amongst those judges and their assistant judges according as may be so directed.

For the purposes of this Act, county court rules, orders, and scales of fees, costs, and charges may be made under sections seventy-nine, eighty-three, and eighty-four of the County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877; but the provisions of those sections as to the concurrence of, or certification by, county court judges or the recorder shall not apply:

(2) The reference to the Local Government Board in relation to the approval of a deputy for the execution of any of the powers and duties of a registration officer shall be construed as a reference to the Lord Lieutenant, and other references to that Board shall be construed as references to the Local Government Board for Ireland:

(3) The clerk of the Crown and peace for an administrative county shall be the registration officer for any registration area which is coterminous with, or the whole or greater part of which is contained in, the administrative county, and the council of that county shall be the council by which the registration expenses of that registration officer are to be paid subject in cases where the registration area is not coterminous with or wholly contained in the administrative county to such contribution by the council of any other administrative county as the Local Government Board for Ireland may direct: Provided that the registration expenses to be paid by a council shall not include any charges for trouble, care, and attention, in the performance of duties which are performed by the registration officer in person:

The registration expenses shall be paid in the case of the council of a county borough, out of the rate or fund out of which the general expenses of the council are paid, or out of any other rate or fund which the Local Government Board may on the application of the council approve, and in the case of a council of any other administrative county out of the poor rate as a county at large charge, except in cases to which section twelve of the Parliamentary Registration (Ireland) Act, 1885, applies:

(4) Where an administrative county is divided into ridings the Lord Lieutenant may, by order, divide the parliamentary county into a corresponding number of registration areas, and make any adaptations of this Act which may be necessary in consequence of the division, and the clerk of the crown and peace for any riding shall be registration officer for such of those areas as may be directed by the Lord Lieutenant:

1059

(5) For the purposes of appeals from the registration officer, and also for the purpose of the revision of jurors' lists, the powers and jurisdiction of the county court shall, unless and until the Lord Lieutenant otherwise direct, be exercised, as respects the parliamentary borough of Dublin, by the persons who are at the time of the passing of this Act Dublin revising barristers, and as respects the parliamentary county of Dublin by the person who is at the time of the passing of this Act revising barrister for that county; but while those powers are so exercised, the provisions of this Act as to county courts shall apply to them as they apply to county courts:

(6) The expenses of any printing required in connection with registration shall be treated as part of the expenses of the registration officer under this Act, notwithstanding that the printing is arranged for by the county council under section ninety-six of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898:

(7) The expression "administrative county" includes a county borough, and the expression "overseer," means a town clerk, secretary of a comity council, clerk of an urban district council, an existing clerk of the union, within the meaning of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, and a collector of poor rate:

(8) Notwithstanding the limit imposed in subsection (2) of section twenty-seven of the County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877, the salaries of clerks of the Crown and peace may be increased by orders made under that subsection to such extent as appears to the Lord Lieutenant and Council, with the concurrence of the Treasury, to be proper, having regard to the additional duties imposed on those officers by this Act.

(9) The reference to the local authority having power to divide any parliamentary county or parliamentary borough into polling districts shall be construed in the case of a parliamentary borough as a reference to the council of the municipal borough, and in the case of a parliamentary county as a reference to the council of the administrative county which is coterminous with, or includes the whole or greater part of the parliamentary county, and any existing powers in that behalf of a municipal borough council or county council shall be extended accordingly and shall be exercisable as respects the whole of the parliamentary borough or the parliamentary county as the case may be:

(10) Part IV of this Act, and the provisions with respect to an urban district, which is coterminous with, or wholly contained in, a registration area, or with respect to the persons who are to be returning officers, or with respect to the discharge of returning officers' duties by an acting returning officer or with respect to the right to the use of elementary schools, shall not apply:

1060

(11) (a) The qualifying period shall be a period of six months ending on the fifteenth day of July and including that day:

Provided that one month shall be substituted for six months in the application of this provision to a person who has been serving as a member of the naval or military forces of the Crown at anytime during the said six months; (b) One register of electors only shall be made in each year, and all provisions applicable to the autumn register shall apply as respects the yearly register (except that the yearly register shall remain in force until the fifteenth day of October in the next following year), and the provisions as to the preparation of two registers in each year and as to the spring register shall not apply.

(12) The yearly value of premises shall be taken to be the rateable value where those premises are separately valued, and in any other case shall be deemed to be the amount which would, in the opinion of the registration officer, be the rateable value if they were separately valued:

LORD BERESFORD LORD BERESFORD had given notice to move, after the words "shall" ["shall apply to Ireland"] to insert "not," and to leave out from "Ireland" to the end of the clause. The noble Lord said: I ask leave to postpone my Amendment on Clause 39 to the Report stage, as I think something might be said in the debate which might affect the Irish Convention, which would be very serious. But I will ask the noble Lord in charge, of the Bill whether he could not put the Report off till Wednesday. Monday is a most inconvenient day. If he could put the Report stage off until Wednesday I am sure many noble Lords who wish to speak on that stage would be pleased.
THE EARL OF MEATH: I support the appeal of the noble and gallant Lord who has just spoken, and I should like to give certain reasons why I think it is most important that we should have here present, when this subject comes up, the Irish peers. We have at this moment in the House three Irish Beers. All the leading Irish peers, with the exception of those two who are my colleagues at the present moment, are in Ireland on very important work. I do think it is not doing justice to Ireland to pass this Bill without knowing what really is the opinion of Ireland upon it. The only thing I will ask is this. Is it wise in any circumstances, even when the Beers come back, unless we know what is going to happen to Ireland, to include Ireland in this Bill at all? It is now many years since I first sat

1061
upon the Benches in your Lordships' House, and I have been, year after year, distressed in matters of a social character to find the words "This Bill is not to apply to Ireland." Now here is a Bill which appears to me to be the very Bill in which those words ought to appear, but it is just the opposite way. This Bill is to apply to Ireland, and for what reason? Do we know what is going to be the future of Ireland? Do we know what is going to take place? Do we know what are the views of the Irish people?
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: Will the noble Earl forgive me for interrupting him? Do I understand he is going to move Lord Beresford's Amendment?
THE EARL OF MEATH: No; I am supporting it.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I do not know whether we are to have a debate now on the date when we shall take the Report stage. I submit that it is a rather an inconvenient course to interpolate a debate of that character at this moment.
THE EARL OF MEATH: I bow to the decision of the noble Earl, if he considers it is so. But I thought it well to put reasons, because the noble and gallant Lord did not state them particularly, and I think they are important.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I have on the Paper a series of Amendment to Clause 39 which adapts the clause to the provisions of the rest of the Bill, or rather adapts the provisions of the rest of the Bill to the case of Ireland. I will, of course, make a full statement if the House wishes to have one, but I think it possible that your Lordships do not wish me to do so. Therefore I have only to say that the Amendments down to line thirty-six are of a drafting and adaptive kind. I beg to move that they be accepted.
Amendments moved—
Page 33, line 22, leave out ("of Ireland").
Page 34, line 9, after ("county") insert ("not being a county borough")
Page 34, lines 9 and 10, leave out ("registration area") and insert ("parliamentary county")
Page 34, line 12, after the first ("county") insert ("and for any parliamentary borough of which the whole or greater part is contained in the administrative county and no part is contained in a county borough and the clerk of the Crown and peace for a county borough shall be the registration officer for any parliamentary
1062
borough which is coterminous with or the whole or any part of which is contained in the county borough") and leave out the second ("county") and insert ("administrative county or county borough, as the case may be")
Page 34, line 15, leave out ("registration area") and insert ("parliamentary county or parliamentary borough")
Page 34, line 16, after ("county") insert ("or county borough as the case may be")
Page 34, line 18, after ("county") insert ("or county borough")
Page 34, line 19, leave out ("for Ireland")
Page 34, line 33, at end insert as separate paragraphs:
"(c) In the event of any vacancy in the office of registration officer or in the event of the registration officer's incapacity to act, the powers and duties of the registration officer may be exercised and performed by any poison temporarily appointed in that behalf by the Lord Chancellor.
"(d) The power of advancing sums to a registration officer on account of registration expenses shall be exercisable by the council by which those expenses are to be paid.
"(e) This section, in its application to the county of Tipperary, shall have effect as if each parliamentary division of the county were a separate parliamentary county, and as if the clerk of the Crown and peace for the entire county were clerk of the Crown and peace for the administrative counties of the North Riding and the South Riding respectively."
Page 35, line 12, leave out ("them") and insert ("those persons")
Page 35, line 13, at end insert ("with the necessary modifications and particular with the modification that assistant judges may be appointed to assist those persons if, in the opinion of the Lord Chancellor, such appointment is necessary in order to enable the appeals to be disposed of with proper despatch")
Page 35, lines 20 and 21, leave out ("The expression 'administrative county' includes a county borough and")
Page 35, line 21, after ("expression") insert ("assistant.")
Page 35, line 34, at end insert ("Provided that the liability of a clerk of the Crown and peace to account for sums other than registration expenses received by him as registration officer shall not extend to any such increase of salary")
Page 35, line 35, leave out subsection (9) and insert:
"(9) The provisions with respect to the division of a constituency into polling districts and provision of polling places shall have effect with the following modifications:
"(a) A reference to the council by which the registration expenses of the registration officer for any constituency are to be paid shall be substituted for the reference to the council whose clerk the registration officer for any constituency is, or by whom the registration officer is appointed.

1063
"(b) The powers of a council under the said provisions shall be exercised in accordance with rules made by the Local Government Board, and any exercise of the powers shall be subject to confirmation by that Board who may confirm the proposed division or alteration either with or without modifications, or may withhold confirmation.
"(c) The Board may cause a local inquiry to be held as respects any questions arising in connection with the said provisions, and article thirty-two of the schedule to the Local Government (Application of Enactments) Order, 1898, shall apply to any such inquiry."
Page 36, line 12, after ("officer") insert ("or with respect to place of election")
Page 36, line 20, after ("person") insert ("who is a naval or military voter or")
Page 36, line 21, leave out "(or military") and insert ("military or air")
Page 36, line 22, at end insert "and has ceased so to serve").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to insert a new subsection at the end of Clause 39.
Amendment-moved—
Page 36, at end insert:
"(13) A person shall not be entitled to be registered or vote for a parliamentary constituency in respect of a qualification in a parliamentary borough constituency."—(Viscount Peel.)
Clause 39, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 40 and 41 agreed to.
Clause 42:
Repeal and short title.
42. (1) The enactments mentioned in the Seventh Schedule to this Act are hereby repealed to the extent specified in the third column of that Schedule.
(2) This Act may be cited as the Representation of the People Act, 1917.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to delete from the last line "1917" and to insert "1918." The noble Viscount said: I understand that this is a matter of printing only.
Amendment moved—
Page 37, line 35, leave out ("1917") and insert ("1918").—(Viscount Peel.)
Clause 42, as amended, agreed to.
First Schedule:
VISCOUNT PEEL: My first Amendment is merely to put the words in Rule (1) in the negative form, because the registration officers say it is more convenient to have it done in that way.
Amendment moved—
Page 38, line 29, leave out ("entitled to vote only") and insert ("not entitled to vote").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to omit from Rule (3) "include in" and to insert "add as a supplement to." The noble Viscount said: This absent voters list is a supplement; because the voters first appear on the general list, and they appear again on the absent voters list.
Amendment moved—
Line 32, leave out ("include in") and insert ("add as a supplement to").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next two Amendments are drafting.
Amendments moved—
line 33, leave out ("as")
line 35, leave out ("a list of those") and insert ("of persona").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to insert in Rule 7, after "to," ["within his registration area to"] the words "make the necessary inquiries and to." The noble Viscount said: Supposing the officers cannot make the inquiries themselves and they wish to employ the overseers to do it, they shall have the power to order the overseers to make inquiries and report to them.
Amendment moved—
Page 39, line 34, after ("to") insert ("make the necessary inquiries and to").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved in Rule 7, after the word "unit," to insert "and publish the lists in the unit." The noble Viscount said: The object of this Amendment is to secure that the lists are published in the registration unit.
Amendment moved—
and after ("unit") insert ("and publish the lists in the unit").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add at the end of Rule 8 "or made by or sent to him under section twenty-four of the Municipal

1065
Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1884" The noble Viscount said: The object of this Amendment is to treat the municipal list in the same way as a Parliamentary list.
Amendment moved—
Page 40, line 4, at end insert ("or made by or sent to him under section twenty-four of the Municipal Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1884").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved, in Rule 10, to insert after "The form of claim," the words "for a person making a claim on his own behalf." The noble Viscount said: This Amendment ought to be read in connection with the Amendment on line 25. In one case a person making a claim on his own behalf, and in the second case where a claim is made on behalf of a claimant by another person, the registration officer shall not enter the name of the claimant on the Register unless the masters required to be stated in the declaration under the foregoing provision are proved to his satisfaction.
Amendment moved—
Page 40, line 14, after ("claim") insert ("for a person making a claim on his own behalf").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD GAINFORD LORD GAINFORD moved to omit from Rule 10 the words "or in case such person has no settled residence an address to which communications may be sent." The noble Lord said: The object of this Amendment is to tie a person down to one address. Under the provisions of the Bill as drafted it is possible that some serious difficulties may arise in the event of a roaming voter. A roaming voter might perhaps by more than one of these extra qualifications give different addresses as a shipping agent, or as a banker, or as a solicitor; and it would be impossible to check an individual of that kind. It should be very easy for every roaming voter to name one place and tie himself down to that place. The Courts have held that residence may often be of a somewhat wide character; and I believe that on one occasion they held that travelling abroad was a definition of "residence." But be that as it may, it seems desirable that there should be some means of checking what I might; call a plurality of voting; and unless a man is tied down
1066
to one place he may give several addresses in connection with his different qualifications, and he would run no risk of being punished in the event of discovery.
Amendment moved—
Page 40, line 21, leave out from ("residence") to ("A") in line 23.—(Lord Gainford.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I hope that the noble Lord will not press this Amendment. The noble Lord wishes, in case such a person has no settled residence, to treat him really as if he had one. There is no crime in not having a settled residence. There are a number of people who have no settled residence, but who live in hotels and thus acquire an address. Surely it is very hard in that case to assert that a man must have a settled residence. Take the case of a man who has not a settled residence and who has a business vote. Why should he not have his address at an hotel? Otherwise the effect would be to disfranchise this person. With regard to the fear expressed by the noble Lord of a man voting more than he ought to, there are very severe penalties in other parts of the Bill which should act as a sufficient deterrent. If the Amendment is pressed, I am afraid that a good many people will be disfranchised.
LORD GAINFORD: I do not want to disfranchise anybody. My only desire is to check an individual from giving qualifications and addresses. However, I will not press the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the addition of words at the end of Rule 10. The noble Viscount said: I have stated that this Amendment connects with the Amendment moved in line 14.
Amendment moved—
Page 40, line 25, at end insert ("Where a claim is made on behalf of a claimant by another person, the Registration Officer shall not enter the name of the claimant on the register, unless the matters required to be stated in the declaration under the foregoing provision are proved to his satisfaction").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next six Amendments are consequential upon the changes made in Rule 9.
Amendments moved—
Page 41, line 8, leave out ("before the fifteenth") and insert ("not later than the eighteenth")
Page 41, line 9, leave out ("fifteenth") and insert ("eighteenth")
Page 41, line 14, after ("claimant") insert ("(if registered)")
Page 41, lines 17 and 18, leave out ("person registered as a")
Page 41, line 19, leave out ("before the fifteenth") and insert ("not later than the eighteenth")
Page 41, line 20, leave out ("fifteenth") and insert ("eighteenth").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD GAINFORD LORD GAINFORD moved the insertion of a new Rule (15). The noble Lord said: I think that this will be of real assistance in the event of demobilisation. If these particulars are furnished not only will the definition be defined (which I think is of importance) of the qualification of the soldiers or sailors, but the Bill itself states that soldiers and sailors are to be qualified, although it does not say in the Rule what the qualification shall include. I have put down this Amendment in order to meet this. There was a discussion in the other House on the subject, and I think it was then admitted by the Government that there was a real point in it; the only objection they raised was whether a Bill of this character should go into matters connected with demobilisation. On the other hand, not only would this new Rule secure a real advantage in connection with the identification of soldiers and sailors on demobilisation, but it would explain more definitely the qualification.
Amendment moved—
Page 41, line 25, at end insert:
"16. The particulars to be published in the naval and military section of the register shall include the name of the soldier or sailor, his rank, number, regiment, or ship or station, as the case may be, and his former abode and occupation."—(Lord Gainford.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I recognise the good intentions of the noble Lord, but I think he will see that at any rate a portion of his Amendment is not very practicable. He wishes, for instance, to publish the ship or station of a sailor. I am advised that this would be unwise in the public interest. Secondly, as regards putting all these details on the Register, I can only place before the noble Lord what was said in the other House—namely, that this is a Bill to assist
1068
people to vote and not to obtain particulars about them, however useful such particulars might be. May I remined the noble Lord that there is a Bill of another kind which will soon be before your Lordships, and which provides for matters for which the noble Lord is asking? I submit that the thing would be better done in that way, and kept apart from this Bill, which is, of course, for a totally different purpose.
LORD GAINFORD: I will not press the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD BERESFORD: The next Amendment in my name is merely consequential upon my Amendment carried on Clause 5.
Amendment moved—
Page 41, line 28, leave out ("or Army Council") and insert ("Army Council, Air Council or Beard of Trade").—(Lord Beresford.)
THE EARL OF ANCASTER THE EARL OF ANCASTER moved to amend Rule 16 by inserting, after the words "absent voters and" in line 30, the words "s soon as practicable."
Amendment moved—
Page 41, line 30, after ("and") insert ("as soon as practicable").—(The Earl of Ancaster.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The Government accept the Amendment.
THE EARL OF ANCASTER: I do not know whether further words are required, such as "after the completion of the revision of the Register."
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I think some such words are required; otherwise you leave it rather indefinite, and it might look as if the officer only need do it after the writ was issued, which would not give time.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think I must make on this point the same answer as before—you must leave to the officer who is the responsible officer a certain amount of discretion as to how he acts, and leave it to him to do it as soon as he practically can do so.
Drafting Amendments agreed to.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to delete Rule 17 and to insert a new Rule (17). The noble Marquess said: I venture to suggest to your Lordships and to the Government that Rule 17 is not really a very satisfactory Rule; but, my Lords, it is of a most summary description. Very little is provided in it. I take it that your Lordships, in whatever quarter of the House you sit, are most anxious that these provisions giving soldiers and sailors the vote should be effective provisions. The matter is, I know, very complicated, and I know it from sad experience. In the drafting of the Bill for which I was responsible the provisions which corresponded with Rule 17 covered several pages of print, and I think as a matter of fact, that when the Rule conies to be worked out, if it is intended to be effective, the regulations will have to be at least as elaborate as those for which I am responsible. I do not want to say anything of a polemical character in connection with this Amendment, but undoubtedly the Government must recollect the history of this question. It is not as if the soldiers' and sailors' vote had been received with enthusiasm in all quarters. It was resisted for a very great number of months. It was resisted in very different quarters, but what was much the more important element of resistance was the resistance of the naval and military authorities. I want to speak of them with the greatest possible respect. Of course they did what they thought was their duty; but they were most anxious to prevent soldiers and sailors from having the vote. They were perfectly entitled to that opinion, and of course, they used all their power to prevent the grant of the vote. The reason was that they thought that the amount of work which it would throw upon the authorities in the various fields, both at home and abroad, would be burdensome, and they thought that the idea of introducing polities among troops or sailors was in itself objectionable. I think they fell into an error in that, for two reasons. I think so because the burden of preparation of the necessary papers and information, although not to be despised, is very small when compared with the daily burden of returns thrown upon all officers in the field or at home, as every serving officer knows. I know it of course from experience—the enormous quantity of returns which have to be sent in—and these returns would not figure very largely in comparison with what now has daily to be done.
I want to say with the very greatest respect that perhaps those responsible in supreme command do not realise what a heavy burden is already thrown upon regimental officers, and therefore these returns figure very large to them; whereas all that has to be done in order to prepare the necessary lists, &c., would be small in comparison. I think they are also wrong about the political side of it. They have all been trained in the old state of opinion, that the old Army, which was a regular, select, professional Army, of very small numbers compared with the people, stood altogether aloof from politics. Now practically the whole of the young manhood of the nation is in arms, and it would be absurd to say that they must not take an interest in politics. To keep them out of the political field is to deprive the nation of a large part of the best element, in our electoral body, and so I think with all respect that the military authorities are altogether wrong, in the view they take. But they did take it, and I could quote to your Lordships passages from speeches of Ministers which are absolutely conclusive on that point, because they cited the opinions of high military authorities on the floor of this House.
I have no doubt that the noble Viscount will tell us that the naval and military authorities have now abandoned this attitude, but it does not make it less necessary for us to take every reasonable precaution to see that the provisions in the Bill are effective; and are not likely to be defeated by unwillingness on the part of the naval and military authorities to make them effective. Otherwise we shall be pretending to the country that we are enfranchising soldiers and sailors when we are doing nothing of the kind. Rule 17 provides that "the naval and military authorities shall furnish to the registration officer…" Who are the naval and military authorities referred to? The phrase is rather striking, because in the same Rule they are distinguished from the Admiralty and Army Council. That would be a source of great confusion. Who is Parliament to hold responsible if Rule 17 is not carried out? Who are the people upon whom we are throwing obligations? Naturally one would expect it to be the Admiralty and Army Council as the supreme bodies, but why should there be a distinction in the Rule itself drawn between the naval and military authorities and the Admiralty and Army Council? That is the first ambiguity which in my alternatives

1071
Amendment I propose to make quite clear—that it shall be definitely the Admiralty and the Army Council.
Rule 17 goes on to say "Shall furnish to the registration officer." They do not know who the registration officer is. How should they know? The Naval and Military authorities, the Army Council and the Admiralty, do not know in the least which particular registration officer a particular man has to do with. How should they know? They do not know what the registration areas are. They have no knowledge of the subject whatever. They cannot be brought into relation directly with the registration authorities. The thing is impossible. Who is to begin? Has the registration officer to write to the Army Council or should the Army Council write to the registration officer? I do not think they can be brought directly into relation with each other, because even the registration officer is in this difficulty, that in many cases he probably does not know of the existence of the voter even. I want to bring your Lordships' mind to this point. Take one of the districts in the suburbs of London, like Ilford. I take that district because it is a district well known to be the scene of an enormous number of removals under the present law. The population is always shifting. Let us see how the Bill would work there. An obligation is thrown by the Bill on the registration officer to register the voter. He goes round, let us say, in this district. Will he know all the military voters who used to live there? How should be know of them? They are not there—ex hypothesi, they are at the Front—and their fathers and mothers are not there. They went three or four years ago. They leave no trace. There is no reason to suppose that anybody will know that a military voter has lived there. As the Bill stands there is nothing to enable the registration officer to know, so that he cannot begin the correspondence with the Army Council. He will not know about whom to write. You must, therefore, begin at the other end. You must begin with the Army Council, or the officers under their control, and the Admiralty, who must let somebody know that certain soldiers of full age, that is, nineteen years and upwards, are under their command and are therefore entitled to the vote. That is the first thing to be done. They must send the names and constituencies to which the men belong to somebody. Nobody knows these particulars
1072
except the men themselves. Consequently the Army Council, or the Commanding Officers of units, must be told to forward them.
To whom should they send these particulars? They cannot send them to the registration officer. They do not know who he is. They must send them to some central authority in London. There are no means of getting them from the Army authorities to the London registration authorities except through the central Government. There is no other point at which the two systems really touch. The particulars will be sent, of course, to London, and in London it is quite possible. The Local Government Board is in touch with all the registration officers. The Local Government Board will have no difficulty whatever in finding out to what constituencies the men belong. They would correspond with the registration officer and the thing could be done, but it could only be done in that way. Unless the Army Council and the Admiralty begin you will not know of the existence of the soldiers and sailors entitled to vote, and unless they act through the London authority and the Local Government Board they will not know to what registration officers communications should be sent. I have ventured to sketch, I am afraid very perfunctorily and summarily, the real difficulties which lie in the way of working Rule 17 as it stands. Rule 17 says nothing of these difficulties. It merely says—
"The naval and military authorities shall furnish to the registration officer,—"
whom they do not know—
"for the purpose of the registration of persons as naval or military voters, and their voting as such, such information as may be prescribed—"
That is all. These things are very ambiguous, indeed. There is yet one last ambiguity—the closing words of the Rule—
"after consultation with the Admiralty and Army Council respectively."
Your Lordships will observe the studied vagueness of these words. No conclusive obligation is laid upon anybody, because it is to be done "after consultation." You might consult the Army Council and they might refuse to take any part in the conversation, or, if they did, it might be of the most perfunctory kind. They might say "Well, really we are so much bothered with other things we can't attend to this," and that would comply with all that is said

1073
in the Rule. There is no obligation laid upon any one.
I have ventured, my Lords, to put down an Amendment which tries to meet some of these difficulties. I must make a confession to your Lordships. But for the respect I have for the great toleration of your Lordships when I venture to address you I should have wished to put down an Amendment in a much fuller form, in a really workmanlike form. But that would have covered two or three pages, and it would have been a gross imposition on your Lordships' patience. I have, therefore, tried to put it as shortly as I can, merely to indicate, on the face of the Bill the necessities of the case. I try to provide first of all, that an obligation be placed upon the Admiralty and the Army Council, either directly or through their officers, to furnish to the registration officers in the several constituencies such information as is necessary—not merely consultation with them but an obligation thrown upon them to do this thing—for the purpose of the registration of the men and their voting. Then I go on to say that it shall be the duty of the Local Government Board to assist them in this work and to show the kind of procedure which I have tried to indicate in my observations to-day. This is in order to prevent the possibility of any such proceedings interfering with the proper conduct of the war. I put in a proviso—
"Provided that the Admiralty, Army Council, and Air Council shall not be required to supply any particulars which in their declared opinion would interfere with the proper conduct of the war."
That is to prevent the possibility of the mention of the names of units that ought not to be mentioned or of any other interference with the supreme obligation of carrying on the war. I earnestly hope the Government will consider the matter, and consider it favourably. If they say they would rather have a little more time in which to draft something much better than I have on the Paper, I need not say I should be only too glad, but I do submit that their little performance is far too sketchy to find a proper place in an Act of Parliament which sets out to secure an effective vote for soldiers and sailors.
Amendment moved—
Page 41, line 34, leave out Rule 17, and insert as a new rule:
"17. The Admiralty, the Army Council, and the
1074
Air Council, either directly or through officers appointed by them shall in the prescribed manner furnish to the registration officers in the several constituencies such information as to the names and address of Naval and Military voters and such other particulars as may be necessary for the purpose of their registration and of their voting as such, and it shall be the duty of the Local Government Board to render any assistance that may be required by the Admiralty, the Army Council, or the Air Council, in conveying such information to the registration officers.
"Provided that the Admiralty, Army Council, and Air Council shall not be required to supply any particulars which in their declared opinion would interfere with the proper conduct of the war."—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
LORD BERESFORD: I quite agree with my noble friend that the clause is not clear or definite enough, but it is not misleading. My noble friend pointed out that at the beginning the suggestion that the men in the Navy and Army should get the vote has opposed by the Naval and Military authorities. I thought they were very wrong, and I said so in another place. They do not really realise that we have got a citizen army now, and one quite different from the old army. Although as gallant and as subject to discipline, it is on altogether different lines and composed of men whose opinions will be invaluable to this country when it comes to taking a vote; for what Government shall be in power. My noble friend found fault with the words "Naval and Military authorities" which he said were not clear. As I conceive it the Naval and Military Commanders-in-chief and the officers of the regiments were meant by those words. They would have to submit a roster of their men afloat and ashore. I do not think the clause is clear, and I suggest that my noble friend's Amendment, or something like it, should be accepted in order to ensure that there is no difficulty that these men, who may be all away in the war, should be able to give their votes, no matter where they may be. There has been no difficulty in the case of the Dominions, and I think it should be made quite clear how it is to be done.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Before the noble Viscount, Lord Peel, answers on behalf of the Government, I should like to say one word on this Amendment. It appears that the general line of procedure suggested by the noble Marquess is a definite improvement on the somewhat vague suggestions embodied in Rule 17. I hope therefore, the Government will see their

1075
way, if not to accept the Amendment in its precise terms, to indicate somewhat more clearly, and trace out more clearly than Rule 17 in the Schedule does, the duties which are to be imposed upon the naval and military authorities, respectively. It is most important, the vote having been granted to these servants of the public, to whom we are so grateful, that they should have every opportunity of exercising the right and performing the duty, and, so far as I am able to judge, the experiment which has been described by the noble Marquess ought to bring about that result and surmount some of the very real difficulties which confront those who have to trace the area in which the sailor or soldier is to be entitled to vote.
The only point of the noble Marquess's speech, and also of the noble and gallant Lord's speech, to which I did not entirely agree was the historical preamble. I was one of those who were, unfortunately, responsible for the inability of the Government of the day to accept my noble friend's Bill. I was leading the House at that time, and I do not think either of the noble Lords are entirely fair to the military and naval advisers who expressed themselves strongly at that time regarding the difficulty of giving votes to soldiers and sailors. What I think was in the mind of those advisers was not a desire that neither soldiers nor sailors should vote, but a dread that a General Election might come at any time and that a disturbing element would thereby be introduced into the conduct of the war. It was apparently believed, at that time, that a change of Government could not be brought about except to the accompaniment of a General Election. There were various people who desired a change of Government, and it was supposed that a General Election would follow, and would be accompanied by a certain amount of political turmoil. What I think was in the minds of the naval and military authorities at that time—and I entirely agree with them—was that a General Election during the war would be a misfortune from a naval and military point of view.
It is quite true, as both my noble friends have said, that the Army has ceased to be a purely professional Army and has become a citizen Army. But in spite of this I do not think the higher naval and military authorities can contemplate with entire equanimity the progress of a political campaign
1076
in the different Commands. The prospect which gallant officers had in their minds was that of public meetings being held at the Front, for discussing the possibility of peace and the possible terms of peace. I have very little doubt that officers in High Command would view now such a possibility with equal disapprobation. On the other hand, it is not quite easy to see how they could be forbidden. It is a difficult matter to admit political rights to individuals, and at the same time say that they shall not have an opportunity of instructing themselves, and each other, in the exercise of those political rights, under conditions, of course, consistent with the discipline of the Navy and Army. Therefore, I am not surprised that gallant officers flinched most violently from the notion of a General Election conducted on the various Fronts, and I think it is only due to them to point out that their fears were in that direction, and that it was not in any sense a dislike to the exercise of the vote by soldiers or sailors.
LORD BERESFORD: I should like to say that I am perfectly certain the country would back up both Admirals and Generals in forbidding any such discussion at the Front during war as to whether there should be peace or war. If you allow that you would have no discipline whatever. But that is quite a different matter from enabling the soldier and sailor to get the vote. If we have people at the Front, in the trenches and on the ships, discussing whether they are to go to sea or not, or whether it is to be war or not, we shall get into a position like Russia in less than a month's time. I do not suppose the noble Marquess meant that, although it might have been the idea of the officers. It is entirely a chimerical idea, and would never occur.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I would allow no political meetings at the Front.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am much indebted to the noble Marquess for the restricted voluminous ness of his Amendment. He is only anxious to see, like other noble Lords who have spoken, that the soldier and sailor should, not only nominally have the right to vote, but should really vote, and I am sure the House will sympathise with those expressions. I am not in a position to go-into the ancient history of this subject,

1077
or as to what was the position of the military authorities two years ago. The noble Marquess, Lord Crewe, has made a statement on that subject, but if the military authorities showed some backwardness in coming forward in a matter of this kind—I am not in a position to say whether it was so or not—they are now acting with all the zeal which converts usually show. During the last week a considerable number of discussions have taken place as to the best means of carrying out the particular provisions to which he has alluded. The noble Marquess has, in his Amendment, wished to place a duty upon the Local Government Board of rendering any assistance that may be necessary in this case. I can assure him that the Local Government Board itself is taking the most active interest in all these discussions, and is assisting in framing the Rules that may be necessary. If the noble Marquess would like to be informed of the present situation of those discussions, and of the Rules that have been arrived at, I have authority to say that the Local Government Board would be extremely glad to oblige him with that information.
The noble Marquess asked me one or two questions as to the distinction which he thought was drawn in Rule 17 between naval and military authorities and Admiralty and Army Council respectively. The naval and military authorities would, of course, be the different officers acting under the Admiralty and Army Council who are engaged in these discussions and who are carrying out the work. There is no such divorce as I think was hinted at by the noble Marquess between the different sets of authorities. He referred to the difficulty that there was of getting all these names properly placed upon the Register, and he selected perhaps the most difficult case that occurs—that of a newly-formed, or one of the later-formed, constituencies, where neighbours do not know each other quite so well, and where there is a great deal of change of residence. I did point out at an early stage of this Bill that His Majesty's Government hoped that at least 70 to 75 per cent. of these naval and military voters would be put on by the registration authorities, who would be able to find out in the districts who had gone to the war. As the noble Marquess knows, in the rural districts that is comparatively easy. I made inquiry personally in several rural districts, and found that it can quite easily be done there. Not
1078
only that, but as the noble Marquess also knows, these soldiers and sailors can make the claim to be put on.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: They will never do that unless it is brought before them.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think that the noble Marquess has commanded new Armies himself and I had a humbler command than the noble Marquess.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Not the whole of an Army.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Well, a restricted command. I think it was a Division, and that is a very large command. I can say from my own small experience that all my men are thoroughly competent and capable of making the claim, and are exceedingly alive also to their rights, and I think that it is—I will not say a libel—rather a severe criticism on the new Army to suppose that those who compose the great citizen Army which has gone out do not know what their rights are, and will not be able to claim them. I think that they will know more about claiming their rights than perhaps the noble Marquess suggests.
The question is really whether placing these persons on the Register will be more assisted by the Amendment of the noble Marquess than it will be by Rule 17. I submit that not much greater assistance will be given by the rule of the noble Marquess than by the rule as drawn. It surely is not necessary to put in that the Local Government Board should do their duty, which they are doing so well at present. As regards communication with registration authorities, they are doing now, and will do, their best to see that these lists are properly distributed, and that the registration officers are able to deal with the specific names. The noble Marquess should perhaps, therefore, be satisfied with the much simpler and briefer language used in Rule 17. His Amendment no doubt is more full, but I do not think it really will add practically anything to the efficiency of the working of the Rule, or will enable anything to be done which cannot and is not being done already, or cannot and will not be done under the Rule as it stands in the Bill.
LORD BURNHAM: I should like to point out to the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill that his hopeful prophecy in

1079
regard to urban constituencies is not likely to be realised. The registration officers in London will, I think, find it extremely difficult to obtain in the various boroughs the information that will enable them to put soldiers or sailors on the Register. It must be recollected that in the London boroughs 30 per cent. of the population change their homes or tenements every year, and as it is now nearly four years since the beginning of the war, it will be practically impossible for the registration officers to obtain the information locally, however much it may be vouchsafed to them by the Army Council and the Board of Admiralty. So far as the London regiments go—and that will apply almost to the same extent to many of the great boroughs in the country—registration officers will have to rely almost entirely upon the information that comes from the naval and military authorities. I do not think, however, that the Amendment put down by my noble friend Lord Salisbury carries us very much further than Rule (17). The language is vague, and everything will depend upon the spirit in which the instruction is carried out as to whether it will be effective for the purpose or not. The greatest importance should be attached to obtaining in the simplest form from the commanding officer of each unit all the information he has in regard to the soldier or other enlisted person. I think that that ought to be pretty full, because in the case of casualties we know that, as a rule, the information is accurately and easily given to the various depots, whereas local information in the big towns will be very meagre.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I do not know whether I must accept what has fallen from the noble Viscount as the last word of the Government. I certainly should have thought that it would have been wise on their part, if I may say so to so experienced a manager of a Bill as my noble friend has become, if there seems no objection to the Amendment I have put clown, to accept it. By universal admission, I believe that it would improve the Bill, because it does indicate the directions in which the several authorities ought to act, and it does throw a definite obligation upon the Army Council. I think, therefore, that the Government ought to accept it. I believe that it is the view of the House that they ought to accept it, and if the noble Viscount cannot say anything more against my Amendment than he has said there is
1080
really no reason why they should not accept it. It does not do anything wrong, and it does carry us much farther than the Rule as it stands. On the line of argument of the noble Viscount you might have something much simpler even than Rule (17) merely by making it the duty of the public authorities to assist in the registration of naval and military voters. By doing that the noble Viscount might assure us that everything would be done to help matters forward. I speak with great confidence when I say that my Amendment is an improvement upon what is in the Bill.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I do not know that I can say much more, but the noble Marquess will see that a great deal has been done and is being done under Rule (17) as already drawn. And what is done and what will be done must, in so very complex a matter, depend largely on the enthusiasm and the readiness with which the different authorities are working. I think that must be quite clear. Is it worth while, when the noble Marquess himself, as I think, rather feels that his Amendment would not carry the matter very much further than the clause in the Bill—
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Oh, I think it would.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Then, is it worth while at this stage, when I can assure him that so much has been done already, and I have offered him that he should make himself acquainted with what has been done, to put in a fresh Rule which rather suggests that the work should be done in a different way? Is it wise to disturb those authorities who are now working hard at these matters by putting in an Amendment which in my judgment—speaking, of course, on advice—does not carry the matter very much further? I agree that there are valuable suggestions in the Amendment, but everything is now being carried out, and I suggest that he should leave well alone.
LORD RIBBLESDALE: I hope that the noble Marquess will stick to his point. It seems to me that the noble Viscount attaches excessive importance to conversion and new zeal, and to certain activities which he says are going on, but which nobody knows anything about. I do not think zeal and conversion necessarily tend to efficiency of treatment in a matter of this

1081
sort, and, as I understand, what the noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury, wants to do by his Amendment is to lay an obligation on certain people to make sure that that zeal and those activities that we know nothing about are implemented in a way which everybody will understand and will have to abide by.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: What I shall be glad to elicit from my noble friend in charge of the Bill is whether, in his view, the Amendment really contains anything antagonistic to the arrangements now in force. This Amendment is an amplification and a clearing up of a system which already prevails. I think it is admitted by the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill that the Rule as it now stands is open to criticism; and if we are to choose between a better and a Worse form of the same thing, I prefer to choose the form which appears to be the better of the two.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I do not think I suggested that there was anything that was deficient in the Rule as drawn in the Bill. I merely stated as regards the action of the Local Government Board, which the noble Marquess wanted to make explicit in his draft, that it was unnecessary really to put in any definite duty on them in this matter because might be said to come within the general duties of the Local Government Board, and that the Local Government Board was cooperating constantly, heartily, and energetically with the naval and military authorities in order to produce proper Rules. If the noble Marquess is very much set upon his Amendment, suppose he withdrew it now, and between this and the Report stage I should, perhaps, provide him with such information as might assure him that everything was being done, and that any further amplification of this subsection was unnecessary.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I should like to say, if the noble Viscount will allow me in the presence of other members of the Government, that it is not a good way to conduct the Bill to refuse to accept Amendments to which no objection can be made. It is far wiser to take them and improve them, if necessary, with the assistance and advice that the Government have. I feel that perhaps he may think it very impertinent of me to say that; in that case I apologise. But it is so, and if he wishes me to withdraw the Amendment
1082
now I shall not press it, but if I have to put it in a much fuller and more difficult form upon Report I am afraid he must not blame me. If he does not accept it I will reconsider it, and I shall be much honoured if I could receive information from the Government which will help me to reconsider it; but I cannot promise that I shall not have to return to the charge.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I would prefer not to accept the Amendment now.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
THE EARL OF ANCASTER THE EARL OF ANCASTER moved an Amendment in Rule (21). The noble Earl said: I think this is an Amendment of some importance, because I am informed that as the law stands at present, though we have been at war now for over three years, it would be quite possible for a German who happened to be on the Register still to remain there, and the registration officer would be perfectly incapable of getting him off unless some one objected.
Amendment moved—
Page 42, line 24, after ("dead") insert ("or subject to any legal incapacity").—(The Earl of Ancaster.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I accept that.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved an Amendment in Rule (21). The noble Viscount said: These words are proposed to be inserted in order to prevent duplicate entries in the case of local government voters.
Amendment moved—
Page 42, line 28, after ("constituency") insert ("or as a local government elector in respect of more than one qualification—

"(a) in the same borough for the purpose of borough council elections; or

"(b) in the same electoral division or ward for the purpose of county council, metropolitan borough council, and urban district council elections; or,

"(c) in the same parish or ward of a parish for the purpose of rural district council, guardians, or parish elections").—(Viscount Peel.)

VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I think this Amendment will allow the elector to be registered only in one ward of a municipal borough, but in a metropolitan borough an urban district or a county he could be registered in every ward or electoral division.

1083
I think that is very undesirable. I understand under the present law he would, in the absence of any choice, be marked to vote first for his residence, and I think it is desirable that the existing law should be continued in the future. The noble Viscount's Amendment makes a difference as to whether he is registered in a municipal borough or a metropolitan borough.
VISCOUNT PEEL: That is so. The noble Viscount knows that that is the existing law, and this Amendment merely carries out the existing law in this respect
VISCOUNT HARCOURT VISCOUNT HARCOURT moved, in Rule (22), after the word "of," where it first occurs, to insert "Parliamentary." The noble Viscount said: This is only to make clear that the meaning of the following word "constituency" is a Parliamentary constituency.
Amendment moved—
Page 42, line 30, after the first ("of") insert ("Parliamentary.")—(Viscount Harcourt.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to substitute "registration unit" for "parish" in Rule (22).
Amendment moved—
Page 42, line 31, leave out ("parish") and insert ("registration unit").—(Viscount Peel.)
THE EARL OF ANCASTER THE EARL OF ANCASTER moved an Amendment in Rule (22). The noble Earl said: The object of this Amendment is to give the same benefit to a district of boroughs as you are giving to the voters in the counties. I have no partisan feeling in the matter. I believe it will benefit the constituency of the present Prime Minister.
Amendment moved—
Page 42, line 31, after ("constituency") insert ("or district of boroughs").—(The Earl of Ancaster.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I accept the Amendment.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I have three Amendments. The first two are merely drafting, and the Amendment on page 43, line 1,
1084
merely makes quite clear that the present, Rule is to be followed in the separate lettering and numbering of polling districts.
Amendments moved—
Page 42, line 33, leave out ("to be registered")
Page 42, line 35, leave out ("any person so registered") and insert ("any such person").
Page 43, line 1, after ("register") insert ("(with a separate letter and a separate series of numbers for each polling district)").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD GAINFORD LORD GAINFORD moved an addition to Rule (24). The noble Lord said: This is, I think, required in order that there should be publicity given, and no secrecy, in connection with what is done by the authority responsible for the registration. At the present time the revising barrister has to do this, and very often he makes mistakes inadvertently, but when the matter is read out in open Court corrections are made. Not only that, but I think it is desirable it should be publicly stated. There is a real point to be made, if I may have the noble Viscount's attention, in connection with the absent voter. The absent voter will often ask individuals at home to look after his interests. If there is anything incorrect appearing in the absent voters list as the result of the registration, the absent voter will not be able to receive his communication in time to have the alteration made which is necessary. But if somebody is acting on his behalf, and the matter is read out in the ordinary way in which it has hitherto been read out, any correction which is required in the absent voters list may be effected. There seems to me to be no reason why there should be any secrecy about this, and the alterations should be made publicly.
Amendment moved—
Page 43, line 2, at end insert ("The registration officer when revising such lists shall read out audibly in open court the names expunged and inserted by him therein and all corrections and insertions made by him and shall in open court write his initials against the names respectively expunged or inserted, and against any part of the said lists in which any mistake shall have been corrected or any omission supplied or any insertion made by him and shall sign his name to every page of the several lists so settled").—(Lord Gainford.)
LORD BURNHAM: Before the noble Viscount replies, may I say that it seems

1085
to me this Amendment is highly necessary. Under this scheme you are given the duty of registration to a number of officials who are not in the least expert. They will no doubt discharge the duty to the best of their ability, but they will not be learned in the law, and many of them will take it over in addition to a great deal of other work. In these circumstances I think the more you insist on publicity and accuracy the better. I hope the Amendment will be accepted.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think these words, or words similar to them, are drawn from the old revising barristers' court.
A NOBLE LORD: Yes.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am right in my inference, and therefore I may be right in the further inference that the noble. Lord is to some extent comparing the work done by the registration officer with the work done in the revising barristers' court. But there is a great distinction, of course, because the revising banister's court was in the nature of an appeal. That is not the case here. This is work done by the registration officer quite informally, not in a court, and therefore really there is no point in suggesting that the revision of these lists should he read out in open court. Where there is an appeal from the registration officer there is en appeal to the county court, and the county court really is the court to be compared in this respect with the revising barrister's court. Therefore the two matters are not in pari materia, and the matters which would suit in the case of a court would not suit the more informal arrangements under which the registration officer will work. I hope, therefore, the noble. Lord will see that his Amendment is both unsuitable and unnecessary.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I cannot quite agree with the noble Viscount. I do not know whether he has had experience in a revising barrister's court, but I have; and I know that when alterations have been made by the revising barrister he is compelled to read the thing out in open court. He goes down the column, and the agents are there, listening and comparing the registers. There are perhaps two or three "John Jones's" on the register, one of whom has to be struck out, and when the revising banister reads the list in open court the people concerned notice from his reading that he has struck out the wrong
1086
John Jones. They say at once that there is an error, and the barrister says "Yes, I see I have made a mistake," and the thing is put right at once. It will also lead to greater accuracy if there is a reading in court.
VISCOUNT PEEL: May I call attention to this. When these names are struck out notice is sent. The noble Viscount will see, under Rule (23), that where the registration officer makes any corrections in the lists otherwise than in pursuance of a claim or objection, or for the purpose of correcting a clerical error, "he shall give notice to the person affected by the correction." Therefore it will be perfectly well known what is done.
LORD BURNHAM: May I point out that one of the great objects of the change in the system is to obtain simplicity and to prevent the constant litigation which now takes place. I hope there will not be the same number of appeals before the County Court that there have been before the revising barrister. It may well develop that there will be what practically amounts to a court of first instance held by the registration officer and that many disputes will be settled there which under the present system would undoubtedly be taken to the revising barrister. If that is so, I do attach importance to accuracy and form, even if these words do not fit in. We cannot draw an exact analogy between what will go on under this Act and the cumbrous and costly procedure which now exists.
VISCOUNT PEEL: The work done by the registration officer will be work of detail. There will be no occasion for the reading out of the lists as there was in the revising barristers' courts. The different cases will be taken and will be dealt with, and there will be no such lists as the noble Lord refers to to read out. The registration officer will deal with each case as it comes on. But at any rate these words are entirely unsuitable.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
THE EARL OF ANCASTER THE EARL OF ANCASTER moved in Rule (30), after the word "court" where it first occurs, to add "and to the person or persons concerned." The noble Earl said: I think it is only fair when there is a case for appeal that the persons concerned should have the right of knowing what is going on. If is possible that the Amendment, if the noble Viscount accepts it, will require a

1087
little amendment; it ought to be "copy of such notice." The notice itself could not be sent to the person concerned.
Amendment moved—
Page 43, line 31, after ("court") insert ("and to the person or persons concerned").—(The Earl of Ancaster.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am advised that this Amendment is unnecessary. Under the rules of the County Courts, already existing, when an appeal is made notice is sent to all the parties concerned; and under Rule (27) any person desiring to appeal must send a notice in the prescribed form to the registration officer and to the opposite party. That seems to cover the point.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved an addition at the end of the first paragraph to Rule (29). The noble Viscount said: If some words of this kind were not put in, it would not be certain for how long the particular document was to be published. The Amendment limits the time.
Amendment moved—
Page 44, line 11, at end insert ("any document required to be published shall be kept published for the prescribed time").—(Viscount Peel.)
THE EARL OF ANCASTER THE EARL OF ANCASTER moved to substitute "list" for "Register" in Rule (32).
Amendment moved—
Page 44, line 33, leave out ("register") and insert ("list").—(The Earl of Ancaster.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I accept that.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved an addition at the end of Rule (33). The noble Viscount said: This Amendment is to make it clear that the registration officer need not ask the questions personally.
Amendment moved—
Page 44, line 42, at end insert ("any notice requiring information under this rule may be sent by post").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new Rule (34). The noble Viscount said: These words were introduced in pursuance
1088
of a promise to Lord Ancaster to bring up some words in order that the clause about conscientious objectors should be effective. The noble Earl will see that a duty is now placed upon these authorities to provide this information so that it may be known who are disqualified as conscientious objectors and who are not.
Amendment moved—
To insert a new Rule:
"34. The Local Government Board shall collect from the Naval and Military and Air Force Authorities, the tribunals established for the purpose of the Military Service Act, 1916, and other available sources such information, as it is reasonably practicable to obtain, with reference to persons disqualified on account of conscientious objection to military service from being registered and voting under this Act, and shall place any information so collected at the disposal of registration officers."—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new rule at the end of Rule (35). The noble Viscount said: This is a rule under which a certificate of birth may be obtained at a reduced rate.
Amendment moved—
Page 45, line 13, insert as a new rule:
"36. Where for the purpose of the provisions of this Act any person requires a certificate of birth, that person shall, on presenting a written requisition in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed particulars, and on payment of a fee of sixpence, be entitled to obtain a certified copy of any entry of the birth of that person in the birth register under the hand of the registrar or the superintendent registrar having the custody thereof, and forms of requisition for the purpose shall on application be supplied without charge by every registrar of births and deaths and by every superintendent registrar."—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new rule at the end of Rule (38). The noble Viscount said: This is a rule providing that certain days shall be dies non as to polling.
Amendment moved—
Page 45, line 27, at end insert as a new rule:
"39. In reckoning time for the purpose of these rules, Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, and any day set apart as a public holiday, or day of public fast, or public thanks giving shall be excluded; and where anything is required by these rules to be done on any day falls to be done on any such day, that thing may be done on the next day not being one of any such days."—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved an addition to Rule (39). The noble Viscount said: This is another of the Scottish Amendments to which I have alluded.
Amendment moved—
Page 45, after line 34 insert:
Rule 2 shall apply as if after the words "in separate divisions" there were inserted the words "or otherwise to distinguish."—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next Amendment standing in my name is purely drafting.
Amendment moved—
Page 46, line 7, leave out from ("shall") to end of line 8, and insert ("not apply").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next Amendment is one of the Irish Amendments to which I have already referred.
Amendment moved—
Page 46, line 25, at end, insert ("in order to give full effect to the foregoing provision, the clerk of the crown and peace for a county borough shall, as respects any parliamentary borough for which he is registration officer, appoint the town clerk of the county borough to act as his deputy for the purposes of Rules 9 to 13 and for the purpose of publishing the lists and notices to be published under Rules 6 and 8 of this schedule if the town clerk so desires, and any town clerk so appointed shall, for the purposes aforesaid, have the like powers and duties and be subject to the like liabilities as if he were registration officer.
"Any question which may arise as to what duties are analogous duties within the meaning of the provision aforesaid shall be determined by the Local Government Board, whose determination shall be final.")—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next Amendment is purely drafting.
Amendment moved—
Page 46, line 38, after ("him") insert ("on the requisition of the registration officer").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: This next Amendment is consequential.
Amendment moved—
Page 46 line 39, leave out ("or persons in receipt of poor relief").—(Viscount Peel.)
First Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Second Schedule agreed to.
After the Second Schedule:
VISCOUNT HARCOURT VISCOUNT HARCOURT had on the Paper a new Schedule (which filled 19 pages of print) to be inserted after the Second Schedule. The noble Viscount said: I move this without any attempt to go into a detailed explanation of this necessary Amendment, because it is consequential. I move it as a consequential Amendment on the decision of yesterday. It is obviously fair and necessary that the voters and the members of the House of Commons should know how they are to proceed in the future. My Amendment is on the Schedule of what was once the Municipal Voting Bill of Lord Courtney; and it is clear that, after the decision of yesterday, it must be inserted in the Bill now before the Committee.
Amendment moved.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think it is very unfortunate that the noble Viscount has deprived the House of the advantage of hearing his explanation of the draft rules; but may I ask him nor to insert them, for this reason. He says they are consequential on the Amendment previously carried; but he must remember that those are draft rules, and are not finally settled. They were put forward in the White Paper only as a foundation of the way in which the rules might be carried out. Therefore I hope he will not wish to insert them in the Bill, because they are not fully considered and finally decided upon. Of course, I submit that the Government is neutral on the question of proportional representation; and speaking for the Government I can only say that I hope he will not cumber the Bill by this prodigiously long Schedule, which is really only a draft.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: It is not I who am encumbering the Bill but noble Lords who voted for the proposal after I pointed out that this was the necessary result of proportional representation. What I want to know is at what stage and where are the new Rules going to be inserted in the Bill, because they must be inserted if proportional representation is to stay there.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I do not think it is necessary that these Rules, any more than any others, should be in this Bill. Clause 18, subsection (4), provides that "His Majesty may by Order in Council frame regulations prescribing the method of

1091
voting, and transferring and counting votes, at any election, according to the, principle of the transferable or of the alternative vote." That is in the Bill already, and on page 25 is the definition of what the expression "transferable vote" means. The whole thing is already provided for.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think it is in order and fitting that the noble Earl who is responsible for the proportional representation Amendment should provide the answer to this Amendment.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT.: As your Lordships obviously have not a quorum present, I shall not proceed to a Division.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[The sitting was suspended at eight o'clock and resumed at twenty minutes past nine.]
Third Schedule:
LORD GAINFORD LORD GAINFORD moved, at the end of Rule (4), to insert certain regulations with regard to naval and military voters. The noble Lord said: This is an Amendment which I do desire, to press upon the Government. It is somewhat of the same character as that which was moved by the noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury, at an earlier period in the evening. It is directed to securing for every soldier and sailor and every man afloat the opportunity of recording his vote.
It seems to me that under the system which is provided in the Bill there is a danger of a certain number of soldiers and sailors and others who are risking their lives in the service of their country during a period of war losing their votes because they may not secure a proxy form. If the responsibility to secure each man a proxy form is placed upon the Naval and Military authorities two things will happen. Every man who is abroad in the service of his country will automatically receive a vote and the responsibility for his not doing so will rest on the Naval and Military authorities. It is inconceivable that those authorities would not know who were the men who were abroad and who were entitled to this proxy vote. The other authorities at home have not the same knowledge of the men who are serving abroad as is possessed by the War Office on the one hand and the Admiralty on the other This arrangement would not only secure for every man his vote but it would
1092
prevent any possibility of duplicate proxy forms being supplied to any individual.
I see no objection to this Amendment, while I think there is a great deal to be said for it. The only objection raised in another place when this Amendment was moved was that it would prevent the initiative being taken by the voter himself in applying for a proxy form. Well, I have provided for that by the last paragraph in the Amendment which stands upon the Paper. Therefore, so far as personal application is concerned either by a sailor or a soldier, the man is in no way prejudiced if the Government will accept the Amendment. There is also another argument. Having some knowledge of the Post Office work I am quite satisfied that if it is left to Party agents to try to secure proxy forms for those who are serving abroad there will be a large duplication of communications that are sent through the Post Office to those individuals who are serving abroad. In the interest of the Post Office I say that the general argument in favour of my proposition is that unless some such plan is adopted the Post Office wall be flooded with millions of forms from Party agents to soldiers, while endless trouble and needless expense will be caused to the candidate and also the Post Office. For these reasons I press upon the Government that they should accept this Amendment which provides machinery to secure for every one serving abroad and every one serving in this country the certainty that he will not be deprived of the vote and that no one will receive two proxy forms.
Amendment moved—
Page 49, line 7, at end insert ("in the case of an election occurring during the present war or within twelve months thereafter, the following regulations shall be observed with respect to naval and military voters:
"A naval or military voter who is serving or who is about to serve afloat or in an area in which the Order in Council referred to in section twenty, subsection (4) (a) of this Act, entitles him to vote by proxy, shall receive a proxy paper through the naval or military authorities. The proxy paper of a naval and military voter shall be signed by the applicant in the presence of, and the signature shall be witnessed by such officer as the Order in Council shall define, and shall then be forwarded by the voter to his proxy, who shall send it to the registration officer for the area in respect of which the voter is registered as an elector, and if the proxy paper appears to the registration officer to be in order he shall register and stamp it and return it to the proxy.
"Provided that nothing in this rule shall prevent the issue of a proxy paper to a sailor or soldier on his personal application by the registration officer for the area in which such sailor or soldier is registered.").—(Lord Gainford.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The noble Lord who moves this Amendment has dealt with some arguments which he tells us have already been used against the proposition he brings forward. But I was going to oppose the Amendment on rather a different ground. One quite recognises that there is a very valuable suggestion in the scheme put forward as to the methods in which these proxy votes should be exercised. In fact, I think I may tell the noble Lord that this method of doing it approximates very closely to the method which has been already suggested for some draft rules which are to be issued. There is I think only one small difference, and that is that a post is saved, because the Amendment suggests that the document shall go, first of all, to the proxy and then be sent to the registration officer. The Amendment of the noble Lord, I believe, suggests that it should go direct to the registration officer and then be sent to the proxy which would mean the saving of a post. I quite recognise, of course, the skill with which the noble Lord has devised the scheme but I ask him not to press the Amendment on this ground. Experience will be very valuable in showing the best way of carrying it out and, I suggest, it would be a mistake to stereotype a particular method by making it statutory, and inserting it in the Bill. I hope he will be satisfied with this explanation and will therefore not wish to place it, exactly in this form in the Bill. Experience may show that other Amendments and changes may be valuable and necessary.
LORD GAINFORD: I am in a somewhat difficult position. In a full House I should be inclined to press the Amendment on somewhat the same grounds as the noble Marquess was inclined to press his Amendment. But I am very anxious that we should get on with the Bill, and, in the circumstances, I withdraw.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD STUART OF WORTLEY LORD STUART OF WORTLEY moved, in Rule (5) after the word "for" ["Parliamentary elector for"], the insertion of the words "or resides, or has a business address in." The noble Lord said: My noble friend Lord Ancaster, who is momentarily absent, has asked me to take charge of this Amendment. It may very well be that a soldier or sailor whose proxy it is proposed to take may have no means of knowing who is really on the Register,
1094
and who is not. It may very well be that the Register has not come into force when he has to sign his proxy, and it is easy to suppose that an election may take place very soon after the Register comes into force. The soldier, therefore, cannot have any means of knowing whether the person he proposes to appoint as his proxy is, or is not, on the Register and able to vote for him. Many soldiers and sailors have few relatives, and they may not be living in the constituency. This Amendment will provide for the case where they may have a friend, who is employed at the same works and in the same constituency as the soldier was working, and he might happen to be on the Register for the constituency. I submit this is no more than what is equitable to give effect to these proxy conditions.
Amendment moved—
Page 49, line 10, after ("for") insert ("or resides or has a business address in.").—(Lord Stuart of Wortley.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The object of the Amendment is obviously to extend the number and class of persons who may be appointed as proxies in a constituency. If the noble Lord will look at the Third Schedule he will see that the net is cast very wide, because it includes a wife, husband, a parent, a brother, or sister of the elector. They can become proxies; and if he has no relations of that kind, then he can appoint a person who is a Parliamentary elector in the constituency. I am going to ask the noble Earl not to try and extend that area wider than it is already, and partly for this reason. In another place a great deal of jealousy was shown to the proxy vote. It was felt that there were, and no doubt there are, objections to the proxy vote, and it would not therefore be wise to extend too widely the area of classes of persons who could act as proxies. I submit that very considerable latitude is already allowed to the naval and military voter, and in really every case he would be able to find some relative or friend who would act for him. I hope the noble Lord will not press the Amendment. I think I ought to add that, in the form in which it is drawn, it would apparently apply to all persons of any age—to an infant. The noble Lord will see that there is a limitation in the case of brothers and sisters—they must be of full age. As it is drawn, there is no limitation on the Amendment. A person who "resides" may obviously be

1095
somebody not of age. Apart from that detail, I hope that the House will think that the number of persons who can become proxies is widely distributed enough to give everybody an opportunity of employment then.
LORD STUART OF WORTLEY: It remains a fact that a person is by no means more fitted to be a proxy by reason of the circumstance that he happens to be on the Register than is anybody else who is interested in the soldier giving his vote. But I cannot press the Amendment against the weighty objection which has been made.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments moved—
Page 49, line 16, at end insert ("in the same constituency")
Page 49, line 34, leave out ("made by regulations under this Act") and insert ("prescribed")
Page 49, lines 40 and 41, leave out ("to whom or on whose behalf a proxy paper for any constituency has been issued") and insert ("who is for the time being entitled to vote by proxy in a constituency").—(Viscount Peel.)
Amendments moved—
Page 50, line 13, leave out ("corrupt practice other than personation") and insert ("illegal")
Page 50, line 15, leave out ("corrupt") and insert ("illegal")
Page 50, line 19, leave out ("six") and insert ("ten").—(Lord Stuart of Wortley.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am ready to accept the Amendments. The penalty seems severe.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I am against excessive penalties, but the effect of this Amendment would be to reduce the penalties. There is, I think, some danger of improper voting under these proposals. It is a system which easily lends itself to improper practices, and those should be discouraged, certainly in the early days of exercising this new form of voting, by the fear of as heavy penalties as possible. Though as a general rule I am against heavy penalties, we may have a new system which lends itself undoubtedly to this possibility and I am not sure that we should be wise to reduce the penalties.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Probably the noble Viscount is not aware of the penalties.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: Yes, I know what they are.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Perhaps other noble Lords are not aware that in the case of an illegal practice the penalties run to £100 and five years disqualification. There is no imprisonment.
LORD MUIR MACKENZIE: There will have to be in the words "an illegal."
LORD STUART OF WORTLEY: That can be done at the Table.
Amendment moved—
Page 50, line 20, at end insert ("A person appointed and voting as a proxy for another elector shall not thereby be prejudiced or prevented from voting at the same election as a registered elector in his or her own right").—(Lord Stuart of Wortley.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I submit in this that it is wholly unnecessary. There is no suggestion of a possible reason why a person who votes as a proxy for another should be prevented from voting for himself.
LORD STUART OF WORTLEY: I do not press it.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment moved—
Page 50, lines 26 and 27, leave out ("by regulations made under this Act").—(Viscount Peel.)
Amendment moved—
Page 50, lines 33 and 34, leave out ("on or").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved, in Rule (14), to omit the word "election" where it secondly occurs, and to insert "poll."
Amendment moved—
Page 50, line 34, leave out ("election") and insert ("poll").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD SOMERLEYTON: This Amendment, I suggest, does not improve the Bill. It gives a very insufficient time for cancellations which might be received on the eve of the poll, and no time, especially in a county, might be left to communicate either with the presiding officer at the polling station, or with the persons appointed as proxies.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think the noble Lord has not recognised that the word

1097
"election" is used here in the technical sense, not as the day on which the polling takes place, and therefore I think the Amendment does improve the Bill.
LORD SOMERLEYTON: I quite grasp that fact, but the substitution of "poll," instead of "election," is the very thing that does not allow sufficient time for the cancellation. If the word "election" remains there is sufficient time from the nomination for the cancellation, but if the word "poll" takes its place there is insufficient time to communicate with different officers.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Would it not be better to have the word which is clearly understood—"nomination."
LORD SOMERLEYTON: Certainly, I will move that Amendment.
Amendment to the proposed Amendment moved—
Leave out "poll" and insert "nomination."—(Lord Somerleyton.)
Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved the insertion of a new Rule.
Amendment moved—
Page 50, line 34, insert:—
15. In the application of this schedule to Scotland the expression "the registration officer of the constituency in which the elector is registered" means "the registration officer of the registration area in which the elector is registered."—(Viscount Peel.)
Third Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Fourth Schedule:
LORD SOMERLEYTON LORD SOMERLEYTON moved, after "expenses" ["other than personal expenses"] to insert "and the fee, if any, paid to the election agent." The noble Lord said: I understand that in the House of Commons two of the chief parties were in favour of this Amendment, and I have the best reasons for thinking they are still in favour of it—I mean Sir George Younger and Mr. Gulland. If the Election is to be cleanly contested, as we all desire, the election agents should, of course, receive; a fair fee. There is no maximum mentioned in my Amendment. If any be desired two of the chief parties would, I believe, readily
1098
agree to it. The elections in future times will cover twice as many electors, and the amount allowed for expenses is about half what it used to be, so that the amount of work thrown on the election agent is going to be paid at the rate of probably something like half or a quarter what it was before. If no sum be named for the election agent's fee the fact still remains that it would be published, and that fact would act as a deterrent on the candidate or the agent against the fee being exorbitant or too small either. Any fee so paid might be dealt with as the personal expenses of the candidates have been dealt with up to now and the amount included in the election expenses. I venture to think that as it stands at present the election agent will not be very well treated. I think we all desire to see elections conducted well, and thoroughly, and the man who acts as election agent should be adequately paid. I submit he should not have his fees cut down to an extent which will bring in a great number of people who are unsuitable.
Amendment moved—
Page 51, line 7, after ("expenses") insert ("and the fee, if any paid to the election agent").—(Lord Somerleyton.)
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I warmly support this Amendment. The election agent is a person who has been created by Statute. He has most responsible duties to perform, and the responsibility will be even greater with the large accession of new voters to our polls. A candidate may suffer very seriously if he is so unwise as to employ an inexperienced or careless agent. I am sure the election agent is a man whom we who have been in the House of Commons have learned to appreciate and value. I believe the present scale of expenses allowed will not permit of the agent being paid proper fees. I do not think there can be the slightest objection to the agent's fee being treated as outside the ordinary expenses of the contest but being returned, of course, at the amount paid, as the personal expenses of candidates are. I believe you would do a great injustice to a most deserving class if you do not allow future candidates and Members of Parliament to pay their agents properly. Under such a provision as this I am sure the agent will be grossly underpaid or that arrangements outside and the contrary to the law will be made by a number of people, which is an undesirable thing to encourage.
LORD BURNHAM: If I may make the inevitable reference to the Speaker's Conference, it was unanimously desired there to cut down expenses so far as possible. The first proposal was to take the County Council's scale, which is lower than that in the Bill. It was pointed out that this was inadequate, but at the same time it was an object entertained by all parties alike to make it approximate to the County Council scale as nearly as possible. On the other hand, I feel there is a great deal to be said for my noble friend's Amendment. The present practice; in regard to election agents is unsatisfactory in the highest degree. What happens to the common knowledge of all who have contested Parliamentary seats is this, that in order to bring expenses within the maximum allowed by law it is very common to put down a nominal sum, even if any is as a matter of fact paid, for the election agent, who is almost invariably the Party agent. The practice has been to make up in the intervening years to him that which he did not receive for the work he legitimately performed during the electoral contest. Anybody will feel that that constant evasion of the law is a deplorable and mischievous thing. The election agent honestly earns his stipend, and with the lower rate of expenditure allowed by the Bill I confess that there is very little chance of his getting it. Then this House is adopting the system of proportional representation and that means constituencies of a large size. The agent responsible for the conduct of that election must be a man of the highest knowledge from the expert point of view, and he will be saddled with very heavy responsibilities. It would be undesirable, I think, in those circumstances, that his position should not be recognised. Although I feel as much as anybody how important it is to cut down the expenditure by law so as not to cripple the candidate of scant means, I think on the whole it will be wiser to recognise it as proposed by my noble friend; because I think it is most important, if his Amendment be adopted, that a maximum should be fixed beyond which it is impossible to go. I do not think that to leave it an open charge could possibly be reconciled with the principle which guided the Conference in the first place, or the House of Commons in the second place, in drawing up the scale.
VISCOUNT PEEL: This Amendment is advocated by three noble Lords who, in
1100
addition to their positions in this House, have had other Parliamentary experience. I do not think that I ever heard an Amendment advocated on the ground that the Chief Whips on both sides were in favour of it, although I know that my noble friend has a natural sympathy with persons who occupy that position.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: Mr. Hayes Fisher was in favour of it.
VISCOUNT PEEL: That is even worse still. I must call the attention of noble Lords to the fact that one of the points on which the noble Lord has dwelt very strongly is that the expenses of elections were to be cut down, and a certain maximum sum was fixed for personal expenses, and then a maximum amount has been fixed per head of the electorate for general expenses. It was understood in the other House that the fee for the agent was to be found out of these sums.
As regards these two Whips who were quoted by my noble friend, I must say that practically the overwhelming opinion in the other place was against the suggestion made by the noble Lord. I admit that the question of proportional representation and large constituencies must obviously make some difference to the fee. But this is of general application, and would apply not only to the proportional representation constituencies but to the single-Member constituencies—the few which the noble Earl (Lord Selborne) was good enough to leave as a reminiscence of an earlier state of things. I suggest that this is pre-eminently a question for the other House to settle. The amount which candidates and Members should pay to the election agent is more a question for the House of Commons. Therefore, if they accept the Amendment on proportional representation in some form, is it not better to leave it to them to decide what the amount should be?
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: They cannot do it.
LORD GAINFORD: Unless this House puts some Amendment in the Bill at this particular place, I suggest that it will not be open to the other House to insert Amendments here because of Amendments which have been moved in connection with proportional representation. I think it will be better for us, therefore, even if we are

1101
prepared to leave the decision to the other House, at any rate to insert here some words. My suggestion would be that after the words which the noble Lord who has moved this Amendment has inserted we should limit the amount, as for instance in single-Member constituencies to not more than £100, and in proportional representation constituencies to not more than £150. Of course I am aware that in connection with this matter it might be a question of privilege, but it is quite possible to put a suggestion of that kind in practice, so that the other House may have an opportunity of raising the matter.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: There is no privilege in this. There is no charge.
LORD GAINFORD: I want to express my concurrence with Lord Burnham, who suggested that there should be some limit of expense. I know that certain Labour Members in another place said that no man was worth more than £100. I am sure that if elections are to be conducted properly, especially in large county constituencies, where the areas cover an enormous extent of territory, it is necessary to have a man of experience and weight, and physical endurance. Also, if he is to do his work properly, I do not think a maximum of £150 would be too high a figure to insert.
LORD SOMERLEYTON: I only wish to say one word more, and that is that the chief Party representatives evidently were in favour of it when this matter was discussed in another place. I believe both supported it, and the proposal was upset by a maximum being introduced. With regard to a maximum, I personally am not in favour of putting it in at the present time, although I believe it would be acceptable to the representatives of the two chief Parties if it were put in. I trust this may be put in such a way that it will not cause us to divide upon it, but I believe it would be acceptable if the Amendment were accepted by the Government.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: The Speaker's Conference very strongly recommended a reduction of expenses, and it seems to me rather unreasonable that we should force, upon candidates for the other House any increase of that; but I am convinced in my own mind—I have no right to be dogmatic on the point—that we having inserted proportional representation and
1102
therefore changed the relative operations of the Returning Officer and the amount of work to be performed, the House of Commons would be perfectly entitled as a consequential and resulting Amendment to change the incidence of expense and fees; and I must strongly submit to your Lordships that it is most desirable that we should not take the initiative, when the House of Commons itself is entitled, I am convinced, to do so. If we put in the maximum it must be carefully drafted You cannot extemporise a maximum, because I understood from an Amendment yesterday that some seats return one Member and some groups five or six or even more—Leeds was mentioned. Under those conditions the maximum must vary according to the number of electors, and I do not think we can extemporise a maximum at this moment.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I desire to make a comment upon one observation which fell from the noble Earl opposite. He seemed to think that because proportional representation had been introduced in a particular clause, it therefore would be competent for another place to make an Amendment in other clauses, under the guise or colour of their being consequential. I am afraid that is not the interpretation of the Rule as between the two Houses. I think it will be found that unless some verbal Amendment is made in the particular clause or part of the Bill it is not competent for the House of Commons to touch it at all, however morally consequential the proposed alteration might be. I am inclined to think it is necessary to make some kind of verbal alteration in the form of an Amendment to a particular clause or subclause before the House of Commons can touch it at all.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I merely wish to say I bow entirely to what the noble Marquess says about the practice of your Lordships' House. I made my remarks from eighteen or twenty years experience in the other House, which I am sure would have no scruples at all in putting in a consequential Amendment which the House of Lords had either preferred not to put in or had omitted to put in, in order to make a workable scheme.
LORD EMMOTT: My experience in regard to this matter is that it depends on how Mr. Speaker advises the other House. He is really the arbiter in these matters,

1103
and if I may venture to advise your Lordships if you want this point considered in the other House it would be far safer to put in an Amendment which would ensure its reconsideration. I cannot quite see how an Amendment could be proposed in another place applying to single-Member or two-Member constituencies, even if one could be put in as regards the larger constituencies. Certainly, from the point of view of safety, it would be much better to put in the Amendment, so that the matter could be considered.
LORD BUCKMASTER: I certainly have no desire whatever to minimise the services which are rendered by election agents, but surely nobody could be better qualified to judge of the value of those services than the other House, and to introduce the suggested Amendment, which includes a maximum of £100 or £150 for borough and county constituencies, is a very serious thing indeed. In the first place it is quite obvious that the maximum would become the minimum, it would become the fixed and standard fee. That is quite certain. A second thing is equally clear, that by the introduction of these figures you will, in the case of boroughs, increase the election expenses by something like 25 per cent., if not more. Well, my Lords, surely seeing that the whole thing affects the election of Members to another House it is a little unnecessary for us to suggest to them what the fees should be that they will have to pay to their election agents.
VISCOUNT PEEL: This is, of course, very largely a matter which may be said to be consequential, and, therefore, since, I suppose, the Government is neutral—
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: It is not consequential. It would have been brought forward whatever happened.
VISCOUNT PEEL: It is quite obvious, I think, that the Amendment in its present form is consequential. I think noble Lords are, clear about it. Would it be better if the noble Lord brought up a carefully-drawn Amendment on the Report stage?
LORD SOMERLEYTON: I should prefer to move it as it is.
VISCOUNT PEEL: While the Government do not accept it, if it is pressed the Government would not offer opposition to
1104
it. I do not know whether it is wise to suggest to the Members in another place that one result of their accepting the noble Lord's Amendment is that they will have to pay more money.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I beg entirely to protest against that. The noble Lord's Amendment has nothing whatever to do with proportional representation. Proportional representation may affect the scale, but this would have been moved if my Motion had not been on the Paper at all.
LORD SOMERLEYTON: I do not myself favour the putting in of any maximum by this House. I think that is properly left to the other House, but if the Amendment is accepted as it stands it will leave it open to the other House to put in any maximum which may be desired. I do not propose to move any maximum.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: Before we go to a Division I should like to say that I cannot agree with the noble Earl who spoke a moment ago, because it is quite clear that the constitution of five-Member constituencies must enormously increase the fee paid to agents, and rightly do so. I am not at all sure it ought not to multiply the habitual and past fee by at least five.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I did not say it did not affect it at all. I said my noble friend would have put the Amendment down if mine had not been on the Paper.
Amendment moved—
Page 51, line 9, leave out ("county election") and insert ("election for a county constituent)").—(Viscount Peel.)
Amendment moved—
Page 51, line 11, after ("borough") insert ("constituency").—(Viscount Peel.)
Fourth Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I move the adoption here of a new Schedule, with one alteration, and that is with regard to the form of voting paper and the starred note below, on page 40. That form comes out because of the previous decision of your Lordships on the application of the transferable vote

1105
to University constituencies. Your Lordships will see that the Schedule is extremely detailed, but not complicated, with reference to the nomination of returning officer, polls. &c., at Universities. It has been carefully considered by the authorities and is practically an agreed Schedule.
Amendment moved—
After the Fourth Schedule, insert as a new schedule:
FIFTH SCHEDULE.
PART I.—PROVISIONS AS TO UNIVERSITY ELECTIONS OTHER THAN SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY ELECTIONS.
Returning Officer.
1. The returning officer shall be—

(a) in the case of the Oxford, Cambridge, and London University constituencies respectively the Vice-Chancellor of the university;

(b) in the case of the Dublin University Constituency, the Provost of Trinity College; and

(c) in the case of the combined English university constituency, the Vice-Chancellor, Principal, or Corresponding Officer of the University of Birmingham;

and the writ for any election of a member or members for Parliament for a university constituency shall be directed to the returning officer of that constituency.
2. It shall be the duty of the returning officer to make all arrangements for the election, including arrangements for the nomination of candidates, and the poll and counting of votes, and to certify the result of the election in pursuance of the writ.
Nomination.
3. The nomination shall take place on such day and at such time and place as may be fixed by the returning officer, being not less than four days and not more than twelve days after the receipt of the writ, and the returning officer shall give public notice of the day, time, and place so fixed within two days after he receives the writ.
4. The candidate must be nominated in writing by two electors as proposer and seconder and by eight other electors as assenting to the nomination, and his nomination must be delivered to the returning officer by some elector.
5. If, at the expiration of the time fixed for nomination, no more candidates are nominated than there are vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer shall declare the candidates who stand nominated to be elected and certify the result of the election accordingly.
6. If, at the expiration of the time fixed for nomination more candidates stand nominated than there are vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer shall arrange for a poll to be taken.
7. A candidate may be withdrawn in manner provided by regulations made under this Act, and if, owing to the withdrawal of a candidate after nomination, a poll becomes unnecessary, the returning officer shall countermand the poll and declare any candidate elected whose nomination remains standing.
8. If one of the candidates nominated dies after he has been nominated and before the commencement of the poll, the returning officer shall countermand the poll and other proceedings for the election and commence the same again as if the writ had been received by him on the day on which he is satisfied of the fact that the death took place.
No fresh nomination shall be required in the case of a candidate who stood nominated at the time the poll was countermanded.
Poll
9. The poll shall remain open for five days, and shall take place on such days as may be fixed by the returning officer commencing not more than twelve and not less than three clear days after the day of nomination.
10. The returning officer shall appoint such polling places as appear to him to allow reasonable facilities for voting, and may give special directions that certain electors shall be allotted to certain polling places.
11. An elector may vole at a poll by the delivery of a voting paper (signed by the voter at any time subsequent to the nomination) in the form appended to this part of this schedule, or in a form to the same effect and accompanied with a like declaration, or, if the returning officer gives special directions to that effect, in person, and may so vote at any polling place if he has not been allotted to any polling place, or, if he has been so allotted, at any polling place to which he has been so allotted.
The returning officer may, if he thinks fit, give a special direction that voting in person is to be allowed at the election, and, if a direction is so given, may, If he thinks it, limit the days of poll on which votes in person are to be received in pursuance of the direction.
12. A voting paper may be delivered at a polling place on behalf of the voter by an elector, or by being sent to the presiding officer at the polling place by post, and any voting paper received by a presiding officer at a polling place at which the elector may vote before the close of the poll shall be counted, unless rejected as invalid.
Voting papers may also be sent to the returning officer by post, and any voting papers so received by the returning officer shall be sent by him to the proper presiding officer.
13. The poll shall be open for such time between the hours of 8 a.m. in the morning and 8 p.m. in the evening, not being less than four hours, as the returning officer may direct, except that, if in pursuance of a direction of the returning officer votes in person are received, but are not received on all the days of the poll, six hours shall be substituted for four as respects the days on which votes are so received as the minimum time under this provision.
14. The returning officer shall give public notice of the days and hours of poll and of the polling places appointed, and of any special directions given by him as to the days or hours of poll, or the allotment of electors to certain polling places, or as to voting in person.
15. The returning officer shall appoint a presiding officer for every polling place at which he does not act as a presiding officer himself and the presiding officer shall have general control over the arrangements for voting at the polling place and shall record the votes of electors voting in person and receive voting papers.
16. Each candidate may appoint a person to be the candidate's representative at each polling

1107
place, and a candidate's representative may object to any voting paper received at the polling place or to the vote of any person claiming to vote in person at that place, and the presiding officer shall submit any such objection to the returning officer for decision.
17. The returning officer shall decide on the validity of any voting paper to which objection is taken, or on the right of any person to vote in person, if that right is questioned, and the decision of the returning officer, if the voting paper or the right to vote is allowed, shall be final, but, if the voting paper or the right to vote is disallowed, shall be subject to reversal on any proceeding questioning the election or return.
18. The register kept in pursuance of this Act shall be conclusive as to the right of any person to vote at the poll; but this provision shall not entitle any person to vote if that person is subject to any legal incapacity.
A person shall not be entitled to be placed on the register as a graduate until the university authorities are satisfied that the grant of the degree is complete.
Counting of Votes.
19. After the poll is closed all voting papers received at any polling place and a record of votes (if any) given by electors in person shall be placed in a proper receptacle and sealed up and delivered to the returning officer, and the returning officer shall, as soon as practicable after the receipt of the votes from all the polling places, count the votes and publish the result.
20. The voting papers counted, and the record of votes (if any) given by electors in person and any papers which have been rejected as invalid and a list of persons (if any) who have tendered their votes in person, but who have not been allowed to vote, shall be placed in separate packets, and shall be kept by the returning officer for a period of twelve months after the close of the poll.
21. The returning officer shall give notice to the candidates of the time and place for counting the votes, and shall permit any candidate and a representative authorised by the candidate for the purpose to be present at the count.
No person other than the returning officer, his assistants and clerks, and the candidates and representatives so authorised shall be entitled to be present at the count except with the sanction of the returning officer.
22. Where an equality of votes is found to exist between any candidates on a final count and the addition of a vote would entitle any of those candidates to be declared elected, the returning officer whether an elector or not may give a deciding vote, but the returning officer shall not be entitled to vote at the election in any other case.
Special Provisions for a Combined University Constituency.
23. In a combined university constituency the Vice-Chancellor, or the person performing the duties of a Vice-Chancellor, at each university forming the combination, shall, for the purpose of making arrangements for the poll and the holding of the poll, have at the university the powers and perform the duties of the returning officer (including the power and duty of deciding upon the validity of voting papers and the right of a person to vote).
24. Arrangements may be made for counting votes at an election for a combined university constituency at each of the universities forming
1108
the combination, if neither the transferable nor alternative vote is used at that election, and for a record of the votes counted at each university being sent to the returning officer for the combined constituency in order that he may ascertain and declare the result of the election.
General.
25. The returning officer shall appoint such deputies and clerks as he may think necessary for the proper holding of the election, and shall supply a form of voting paper to any elector applying for such a form, and shall supply forms of nomination papers.
The governing body of the University may designate an officer of the University to act temporarily as returning officer in the event of a vacancy in the office of returning officer or in the event of his incapacity to appoint a deputy.
26. Any expenses reasonably incurred by the returning officer in connection with the arrangements for a university election and the conduct thereof shall be repaid to the returning officer by the University.
In the case of a combined University constituency any such expenses incurred by the Vice-Chancellor or corresponding officer of each University shall be paid by the University whose Vice-Chancellor or officer has incurred the expenses, and any other such expenses shall be paid in equal shares by the Universities forming the combination.
In the case of a combined University constituency any candidate's deposit which is forfeited to the University shall be retained by, or paid to the University whose Vice-Chancellor or other officer is the returning officer of the combined constituency and applied by that University in the payment of the expenses which are under this provision to be paid in equal shares by the Universities forming the combination.
27. A voting paper shall be deemed to be a public document within the meaning of subsection (3) of section four of the Forgery Act, 1913, and section five of the Perjury Act, 1911, applies to any declaration or statement made in the voting paper.
28. A voting paper shall not be liable to stamp duty.
29. If any person, for the purpose of enabling an elector to vote at a university election, corruptly pays on his behalf any fees which the elector is required to pay in order to be registered or entitled to vote, he shall be guilty of an illegal practice within the meaning of the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883, and that Act shall apply accordingly.
30. In reckoning time for the purpose of the provisions in this Schedule, Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, and any day set apart as a public holiday or day of public fast or public thanksgiving shall be excluded; and where anything is required by these provisions to be done on any day falls to be done on any such day that thing may be done on the next day not being one of any such days.
31. If regulations are made under this Act as to the manner in which public notice is to be given under the provisions of this Schedule, public notice shall be given in manner directed under any such regulations for the time being in force, and if no such regulations are in force shall be given in such manner as the Returning Officer considers best fitted for giving notice to the persons concerned.
32. An election shall not be declared invalid by reason of non-compliance with these provisions if it appears to the tribunal cognisant of the case that the election was conducted in accordance with the principle of these provisions and that the non-compliance with these provisions did not affect the result of the election.
Form of Voting Paper.
I, A.B. (here give the elector's name in full, with his university degree and college, if any), give my vote as indicated below:—

* Candidates.

Order of Preference

A

B

C

D

I declare that I have signed no other voting paper and have not voted in person at this election for the university constituency of
† I also declare—

(In the case of a man) that I have not voted at this general election in respect of any qualification other than a residence qualification;

(In the case of a woman) that I have not voted at this general election for any other university constituency.

Signed A.B.

Address

The

day of

19.

I declare that this voting paper (the voting paper having been previously filled in), was signed in my presence by A.B., who is personally known to me, on the day of 19.,
Signed C.D.
Address
PART II.—PROVISIONS AS TO SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY ELECTIONS.
Returning Officer.
1. The returning officer for the combined Scottish University constituency shall be the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Edinburgh, to whom the writ for any election of a member or members of Parliament for that constituency shall be directed.
2. It shall be the duty of the returning officer to make all arrangements for the election, including
* This form will require modification where the transferable or alternative vote is not used at the ejection.
†This declaration is to be made only at a general election.
arrangements for the nomination of candidates, and (where a poll is necessary) for the poll and counting of votes, and to certify the result of the election in pursuance of the writ.
3. The returning officer shall give notice to the candidates of the days fixed for the poll and of the time and place for counting the votes, and any candidate and an agent appointed by any candidate for the purpose may be present at the poll and the count.
No person other than the returning officer, his assistants and clerks, and the candidates and their agents shall be entitled to be present at the count except with the sanction of the returning officer.
Nomination.
4. The nomination shall take place on such day and at such time and place as may be fixed by the returning officer, being not less than four days and not more than eight days after the receipt of the writ, and the returning officer shall give public notice of the day, time, and place so fixed within three days after he receives the writ.
5. The candidate must be nominated in writing by two electors as proposer and seconder and by eight other electors as assenting to the nomination, and his nomination must be delivered to the returning officer by some elector.
6. If, at the expiration of the time fixed for nomination, no more candidates are nominated than there are vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer shall declare the candidates who stand nominated to be elected and certify the result of the election accordingly.
7. If, at the expiration of the time fixed for nomination more candidates stand nominated than there are vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer shall arrange for a poll to be taken.
8. A candidate may be withdrawn in manner provided by regulations made under this Act, and if, owing to the withdrawal of a candidate after nomination, a poll becomes unnecessary, the returning officer shall countermand the poll and declare any candidate elected whose nomination remains standing.
9. If one of the candidates nominated dies after he had been nominated and before the commencement of the poll, the returning officer shall countermand the poll and other proceedings for the election and commence the same again as if the writ had been received by him on the day on which he is satisfied of the fact that the death took place.
No fresh nomination shall be required in the case of a candidate who stood nominated at the time the poll was countermanded.
Poll.
10. The poll shall remain open for not less than four days nor more than six days, and shall take place on such days as may be fixed by the returning officer, commencing not more than twenty and not less than twelve clear days after the day of nomination.
11. The poll at each University shall be open at such place and for such time each day between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., not being less than four hours, as the Vice-Chancellor of the University may direct.
12. The Vice-Chancellor of each University shall give public notice of the days and hours of poll and of the polling place appointed.
13. The Vice-Chancellor of each University shall at the University act as presiding officer and shall have general control over the arrangements

1111
for the conduct of the poll at such University.
14. No person other than the Vice-Chancellor, the registrar, their assistants and clerks, and the candidates and their agents shall be entitled to be present at the poll except with the sanction of the Vice-Chancellor.
15. The Vice-Chancellor of each University shall as regards the voting papers relating to such University decide on the validity of any voting paper to which objection is taken, or on the right of any person to vote, and the decision of the Vice-Chancellor, if the voting paper or the right to vote is allowed, shall be final, but, if the voting paper or the right to vote is disallowed, shall be subject to reversal on any proceeding questioning the election or return.
16. The register kept in pursuance of this Act by the University Court shall be conclusive as to the right of any person to vote at the poll; but this provision shall not entitled any person to vote if that person is subject to any legal incapacity.
17. Votes shall be given by means of voting papers, and no elector shall be allowed to vote in person, or in any other way than is herein provided. Each voting paper shall be in the form (A) appended to this Schedule. Each voting paper shall have a number printed or written on the back thereof, and shall have attached a counterfoil with the same number printed or written on the face. Before a voting paper is issued to an elector as hereinafter provided, it shall be marked with an official mark, either stamped or perforated, and the number of such elector, as stated on the register shall be marked on the counterfoil, and a mark shall be placed in the register or any copy thereof used for the purposes of the election against the number of the elector to denote that a voting paper has been issued to him.
18. The registrar of each University, as soon as he conveniently can after the day of nomination, and not later than eight clear days thereafter, shall issue through the post a voting paper, in the form (A) appended to this schedule to each elector to his address as entered on the register who shall appear from said address to be resident within the United Kingdom or the Channel Islands; and such voting paper (the Christian name, surname, designation, and residence of the elector as appearing on the register having previously been filled in by the registrar, or some one having his authority), contained in an envelope marked on the outside as sent by the registrar of the University, shall be accompanied by a letter of intimation in the form (B) appended to this schedule, and by a stamped envelope addressed to the registrar, for the return of the said voting paper; and each elector, upon receipt of his voting paper, if he desires to vote in the election, shall record his vote thereon, and the place and date of signature, and affix his subscription thereto, in the presence of one witness, who shall personally know the elector, and who shall attest the fact of such voting paper having been signed by the elector in his presence at the place therein mentioned, by signing his name at the foot thereof, and adding his designation and place of residence in the form or to the effect set forth in form (A) appended to this schedule.
19. Thereafter the voting paper so signed and attested as aforesaid, shall, if the elector desires to vote in the election, be returned through the post to the registrar of the University by whom
1112
it was issued, so as to reach him not later than the time specified in the said letter of intimation for the return of the voting paper. Each voting paper, when received back by the registrar, shall be kept by him unopened in a fireproof safe, or other place of safety, until the poll begins.
20. If an elector, before or after he has received a voting paper, shall intimate or cause to be intimated in writing to the registrar that he is incapacitated from blindness or other physical cause to vote in the manner prescribed by this Act, it shall be lawful for the registrar, on getting back the voting paper from the elector, if such has been issued, to issue to the elector so incapacitated a voting paper in the form or to the effect set forth in form (C) appended to this schedule; and on said voting paper being received by the elector, it shall be competent for him to record his vote by the hand of a justice of the peace in the manner therein directed; and the said justice of peace shall certify and attest the fact of his having been requested and authorised by the elector to sign said voting paper for him, and of its having been so signed by him in the presence of the elector by signing an attestation in the form (C) aforesaid; and such voting paper, when received by the registrar, shall have the same effect and be similarly dealt with as a voting paper signed by an elector in the form (A) appended to this schedule.
21. An elector who has not received a voting paper sent by post as aforesaid to his address as appearing on the register, or who has before re-delivery thereof to the registrar, inadvertently spoilt his voting paper in such manner that it cannot be conveniently used as a voting paper, or who has lest his voting paper, may, on his transmitting to the registrar a declaration signed by himself before a justice of the peace setting forth the fact of the non-receipt, the inadvertent spoiling, or the loss of the voting paper, require the registrar to send him a new voting paper in place of the one not received, or spoilt, or lost; and in case the voting paper has been spoilt, the spoilt voting paper shall be returned to the registrar, and when received by him shall be immediately cancelled, and in every case where a new voting paper is issued a mark shall be placed opposite the number of the elector's name on the register, to denote that a new voting paper has been issued in place of the one not received, or spoilt, or lost.
22. An elector who does not appear from his address as entered on the register to be resident within the United Kingdom or the Channel Islands, may apply in writing to the registrar to send a voting paper to him to an address within the United Kingdom or the Channel Islands.
23. The registrar, upon receiving an application in terms of either of the two preceding provisions hereof at any time before the day on which the poll begins, shall forthwith transmit a new voting paper, or a voting paper, as the case may be, to the address as appearing on the register, or to the address within the United Kingdom or Channel Islands as the case may be: Provided that the registrar shall open all letters coming addressed to him from the Bead Letter Office after the date of his issuing the voting papers, in order to ascertain and make public the names and addresses of the electors whose voting papers have not reached them, which he shall do by exhibiting publicly at his office in the University as they reach him a list of the names and addresses of the electors whose letters have been

1113
returned to him from the Dead Letter Office, for the information of all concerned.
24. When the poll begins, the voting papers shall be opened and examined by the registrar in the presence of the Vice-Chancellor and any candidate or agent of a candidate who may attend, and the voting papers found to be marked with the official mark and the number on the back as appearing on the counterfoil, and otherwise regular, shall be put apart until the end of the poll. Any voting paper which has not the official mark and the number on the back as appearing on the counterfoil, or which is in the opinion of the Vice-Chancellor otherwise invalid, shall not be counted as a vote in the election, but shall be sealed up in a paper apart, marked on the back thereof with the words "voting papers received but disallowed," and initialled by the Vice-Chancellor.
25. It shall be lawful for any candidate or the agent of any candidate who may be in attendance at the poll, to inspect any voting paper and to object to it on one or more of the following grounds:—

(1) That the elector named in the voting paper has already voted at that election:

(2) That the person giving a vote by the voting paper is not qualified to vote:

(3) That the voting paper is forged or falsified:

(4) That the voting paper is wanting in any of the essential conditions required by this Act:

Provided, that in case the objection offered to any voting paper shall be that it is forged or falsified, such voting paper shall not on that ground alone be disallowed by the Vice-Chancellor, but he shall write upon it, "objected to as forged," or, "objected to as falsified," together with the name of the person making such objection.
26. No voting paper shall be counted which does not reach the registrar before ten of the clock on the morning of the day on which the poll closes.
Counting of Votes.
27. After the poll is closed all voting papers received at any polling place shall be placed in a proper receptacle and sealed up and delivered to the returning officer, and the returning officer shall, as soon as practicable after the receipt of the votes from all the polling places, count the votes and publish the result.
28. Where an equality of votes is found to exist between any candidates on a final count and the addition of a vote would entitle any of those candidates to be declared elected, the returning office may give a deciding vote, but the returning officer shall not be entitled to vote at the election in any other case.
General.
29. Arrangements may be made for counting votes at an election for the combined university constituency at each of the universities forming the combination, if neither the transferable nor alternative vote is used at that election, and for a record of the votes counted at each University being sent to the returning officer for the combined constituency in order that he may ascertain and declare the result of the election.
30. The returning officer shall appoint such deputies and clerks as he may think necessary for the proper holding of the election, and shall supply forms of nomination papers.
31. All voting papers received and counted at an election, and the counterfoils thereof, as well as any voting papers disallowed for informality, or on any other ground, and the counterfoils thereof, shall be filed, and, along with any copy of the register used for the purposes of said election, shall be kept by the returning officer for a period of twelve months after the closing of the poll.
32. Any person falsely or fraudulently signing any voting paper in the name of any other person, either as a voter or as a witness, and every person signing, certifying attesting, or transmitting as genuine any false or falsified voting paper, knowing the same to be false or falsified, or with fraudulent intent altering, defacing, destroying, withholding, or obstructing any voting paper, shall be guilty of a crime and offence, and shall be punishable by line or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.
33. No such voting paper as hereinbefore mentioned shall be liable to any stamp duty.
34. Any expenses reasonably incurred by the Vice-Chancellor of each University in connection with the arrangements for an election shall be repaid to him by that University: Provided that any expenses so incurred by the returning officer in connection with the nomination and the counting of votes shall be paid in equal shares by the four Universities forming the constituency.
35. If any person, for the purpose of enabling any other person to vote at a university election, corruptly pays on his behalf any fees which such other person, is required to pay in order to be registered or entitled to vote, he shall be guilty of an illegal practice within the meaning of the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883, and that Act shall apply accordingly.
36. In reckoning time for the purpose of the provisions in this Schedule, Sunday, Christmas Day, and any day set apart as a public holiday or public fast or public thanksgiving shall be excluded; and where anything required by these provisions to be done on any day falls to be done on any such day it may be done on the next day not being one of any such days.
37. If regulations are made under this Act as to the manner in which public notice is to be given under the provisions of this Schedule, public notice shall be given in manner directed under any such regulations for the time being in force, and if no such regulations are in force shall be given in such manner as the returning officer or the Vice-Chancellor, as the case may be, considers best fitted for giving notice to the persons concerned.
38. An election shall not be declared invalid by reason of non-compliance with these provisions if it appears to the tribunal having jurisdiction that the election was conducted in accordance with the principle of these provisions and that the non-compliance with these provisions did not affect the result of the election.
39. Where the Vice-Chancellor or registrar of any University is absent, or is incapacitated by illness for discharging any duty required of him by this Act, or if the office of Vice-Chancellor or of registrar shall be vacant, the duties by this Act imposed on the Vice-Chancellor or registrar respectively shall be discharged by a person appointed for that purpose by the University Court of such University; and such person shall in that respect, but in no other, act for the time as and be deemed to be Vice-Chancellor or registrar of such University.
FORM A.
UNIVERSITY OF (Name of University) VOTING PAPER.
No.(number of elector as on the register).
I, AB. (here give the elector's name in full and his designation), give my vote as indicated below:—

* Candidates.

Order of Preference

A

B

C

D

I declare that I have signed no other voting paper at this election for the combined university constituency of the University of St. Andrews, the University of Glasgow, the University of Aberdeen, and the University of Edinburgh.
† I also declare—

(In the case of a man) that I have not voted at this general election in respect of any qualification other than a residence qualification;

(In the case of a woman) that I have not voted at this general election for any other university constituency.

Signed A.B.

Address

The

day of

19.

I declare that this voting paper (the vote having been previously recorded thereon), was signed in my presence by A.B., who is personally known to me, on the day of 19.
Signed C.D.
Designation
Address
FORM B.
UNIVERSITY OF (Name of University).
REGISTRAR'S LETTER.
No. (number of elector as on the register).

Persons Nominated.

Proposed by

Seconded by

A

Name of Proposer

Name of Seconder

B

Do.

Do.

C

Do.

Do.

D

Do.

Do.

* This form will require modification where the transferable or alternative vote is not used at the election.
† This declaration is to be made only at a general election.
SIR,
I HAVE to intimate that the above-named persons have been nominated for the office of member of Parliament. Along with this letter you will receive a voting paper, and, should you desire to vote at this election, I have to request that you will record your vote thereon and the place and date of your signing, and having signed your name thereto in presence of one witness, who will also sign his name as directed, you will return the voting paper by post to me at the University of, so as to reach me on or before 10 a.m. of (insert the day on which the poll finally closes).
I am, &c.
(Signed) G. H., Registrar.
(Date.)
FORM C.
UNIVERSITY OF (Name of University) VOTING PAPER.
INCAPACITATED ELECTOR.
No. (number of elector as on register).
I A.B., (here give the elector's name in full and his designation), give my vote as indicated below, and I have requested and authorised C.D., a justice of peace, to make the entries in this voting paper on my behalf and on my instructions, and to subscribe this voting paper and declarations for me, as I am from (state the incapacity) unable to write:—

* Candidates.

Order of Preference

A

B

C

D

I declare that I have signed no other voting paper at this election for the combined university constituency of the University of St. Andrews, the University of Glasgow, the University of Aberdeen, and the University of Edinburgh.
† I also declare—

(In the case of a man) that I have not voted at this general election in respect of any qualification other than a residence qualification;

(In the case of a woman) that I have not voted at this general election for any other university constituency.

Signed A.B.

Address

The

day of

19.

* This form will require modification where the transferable or alternative vote is not used at the election.
† This declaration is to be made only at a general election.
I C.D., a justice of peace for, and residing at, hereby declare that A.B, before named, being personally known to me, did in my presence make the declaration(s) before mentioned, and did duly request and authorise me to make the entries in this voting paper on his behalf and on his instructions, and to subscribe this voting paper for him, which I did on day of 19, in the presence the said A.B.
(Signed) C.D., a justice of peace for, and residing at—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD GAINFORD: I have an Amendment, merely a verbal one, to this proposed new Schedule. I do not know whether the noble Viscount will accept it.
VISCOUNT PEEL: There is a subsequent Amendment with regard to a Welsh University, and perhaps the noble Lord would be inclined to postpone his until he sees the fate of that Amendment.
LORD GAINFORD: It is merely a verbal Amendment, and in the circumstances perhaps it had better be postponed.
LORD EMMOTT LORD EMMOTT moved, in Rule 1 (c) of the proposed new Schedule, to leave out "University of Birmingham," and insert "such university being one of the universities combined for the purposes of a Parliamentary election, as may be from time to time appointed by the Board of Education for that purpose." The noble Lord said: In the absence of Lord Ashton and Viscount Bryce, I should like to move the Amendment standing in the name of the noble Viscount. It is a little invidious to pick out one University, and the proposal in the Amendment is that, instead of the Vice-Chancellor or Principal or corresponding officer of the University of Birmingham being the returning officer for the combined Universities, that the nomination of the officer, who shall be returning officer, shall be left to the Board of Education.
Amendment moved to the proposed new Schedule—
To leave out ("the University of Birmingham") and to insert ("such university being one of the universities combined for the purposes of a parliamentary election, as may be from time to time appointed by the Board of Education for that purpose").—(Lord Emmott.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: Birmingham was selected and inserted in the Bill because some place had to be selected as the most convenient for counting the votes. That is the reason why the name of Birmingham is inserted, but if the noble Lord is anxious that that name should not be inserted, and I understand there are certain reasons of precedence why that should be done, I am quite ready to make that alteration. I would make the suggestion to the noble Lord, it is merely in the drafting of his Amendment, that it should run "such University being one of the combined Universities as may from time to time be appointed by the Board of Education for the purpose." I should be glad if he would be willing to accept it in that form.
VISCOUNT BRYCE: Certainly, if I may venture to say so, it is an improvement in that form, and my noble friend and myself are much obliged to the Government for the view they have taken of the matter. I may say that there is a certain amount of sentiment involved on the part of the other Universities, and this change will be welcomed by them.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Perhaps I may be allowed to express the same view, in concurrence with my noble friend. The University over which I have the honour of presiding has not made any representation in this sense, but I have no doubt that it will welcome what is being done.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I move to omit from my new Schedule the two lines preceded by an asterisk at the bottom of page 40.
Amendment moved—
Page 40, leave out "* This form will require modification where the transferable or alternative vote is not used at the election."—(Viscount Peel.)
New Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Fifth Schedule:
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I ought to say that at this moment I would naturally be moving the substitution of other Schedules. It was only yesterday that we were able to have the advantage of the assistance of the Parliamentary draftsman, and he has been most obliging, and has

1119
been working very hard all yesterday, and the Schedules will be quite ready, I think, by to-morrow morning, and perhaps even to-night. We propose to put them down in ample time for Report, and with ample notice, combined with instructions to the Boundary Commissioners for their review if the principle is accepted. I apologise to your Lordships for not having them ready at the present moment, but I think that you will see that in the circumstances it was really not possible to do that. They will be quite ready for Report.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: If they are handed in to-morrow, of course we shall see them on Friday morning?
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I am not responsible for their circulation.
VISCOUNT PEEL: May I say, with reference to what the noble Earl has just said, that there is a series of Amendments here for altering the names of constituencies. I suppose that this Schedule may be entirely altered by the Proportional Representation Schedule, and I am in the hands of the House as to whether we should proceed with the Amendments now. I am, of course, referring only to the Amendments suggesting the change of names of constituencies, standing in the names of Lord Burnham, Viscount Chaplin, and others.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I agree that the noble Viscount's appeal is reasonable. It is most absurd, if the House is to accept my Schedule afterwards, to discuss the point now. If the House does not accept my Schedule on Report, of course the whole thing falls through, and noble Lords may then proceed with their Amendments.
LORD BURNHAM: I understand that the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill thinks it more convenient not to discuss these points at this stage.
VISCOUNT PEEL: It does seem that it would be a waste of time to discuss them now if another Schedule is to be introduced afterwards. This does not apply to all the Amendments. There is, for instance, one in the name of Lord St. Davids.
VISCOUNT HARCOURT: And of Viscount Halifax.
THE DUKE OF ATHOLL: Shall we be in the same position later on?
VISCOUNT PEEL: I cannot tell.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: If my Amendment is adopted, the noble Duke will I have the opportunity of raising the question if he wishes to do so; if it is not adopted, he will similarly have the same chance.
LORD BURNHAM: I am entirely in the hands of the House, and in these circumstances I will put down the Amendment to the Schedule on Report.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX VISCOUNT HALIFAX moved, in paragraph (2), to omit "one" ["York, County borough of—one"] and insert "two." The noble Viscount said: The object of my Amendment is to retain the two members for York. This is a matter which is extremely felt in the North of England. The Bill deprives York of its two Members and retains the two Members for the City of London. I am quite unable to see the reasons which are adduced for the retention of the two Members for the City of London which do not apply mutatis mutandis with much greater effect to the City of York. I understand, if the test of population is to decide the matter, the number of those sleeping in the City of London is very little, if at all, in excess of the population of York. I have inquired why York, with its history, is to be treated in a different way from the City of London. I am told the reason is that the City of London occupies an entirely exceptional position among the London constituencies. I do not in the least quarrel with that argument; all that I maintain is that it applies with still greater effect mutatis mutandis to the City of York, for York occupies quite as exceptional a position among the cities of England as the City of London does among London constituencies.
Probably your Lordships will remember that the City of York was the capital of Great Britain during the Roman occupation. It was where the Emperor Constantine was proclaimed, whose conversion affected the whole history of the Roman Empire and the whole history of Christendom. It is intimately associated with the name of the Empress Helena, who is believed by Christendom to have found the

1121
true Cross. York was the capital of Great Britain sifter the Roman occupation. London can pretend to no such honour. It was designated by Gregory the Great as the seat of an Archbishopric. The Archbishop of York sits in your Lordships' House at the present day, and great and distinguished as are the Prelates who have illustrated the See of London, the See of London has got no Archbishopric. York claimed to have had a mayor before the City of London, and in connection with the City of London it was the only town in England which had a Lord Mayor. There was a Lord Mayor of London, there was a Lord Mayor of York, there was a Lord Provost of Edinburgh, there was a Lord Mayor of Dublin, but there were no other Lord Mayors at all, and York had been in possession of a Lord Mayor for 500 years before any other town in England could claim that distinction. It is mentioned in Domesday. It was incorporated by Henry I soon after the eleventh century. Before Sheriffs existed it had its own bailiffs. It is one of the very oldest towns that is a county in itself. It returned Burgesses to the first Parliament ever summoned in England, and I do beg your Lordships to bear this in mind. The names of its two Burgesses who were summoned 10 the great Parliament of Edward I in 1295 are extant, and the names of the Burgesses who have succeeded them from that time to this are still extant. I ask your Lordships, can you have the heart to destroy such a tradition as that? Let me just illustrate the position of York. The Members for York have the right of sitting next to the Members for the City of London on the Treasury Bench in another place. There is no city in England that can compare with the historical associations and traditions of York.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Winchester.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX: Winchester has never been the capital of the north of England as York has been. I do not in the least care for the noble Earl's interruption on that point. I think it is quite out of place. But I ask your Lordships for a moment to consider some of these historical associations of York. What other town has supplied a title to our Royal Family? There has been a House of Lancaster, but it is not Henry of Lancaster who gives his best historical title to our present Sovereign;
1122
it is Elizabeth of York, and His present Majesty is the fourth of our kings who has been Duke of York. I might mention the Minster of York, which is the glory of England and the pride of all Yorkshiremen. There are many other historical associations I could mention, but what I do want to impress upon your Lordships is this: that it is the greatest possible mistake, and I am sure you cannot wish to do anything of that sort, to undervalue the importance of historical associations. I venture to say they are much more important than mere material associations, and have a much greater influence upon the life of the country than that which comes to-day and goes to-morrow.
There are many other things I might say, but let me mention that York is at this moment the centre of the Northern Command. It is the centre of the whole of the North-eastern railway system of England, and all those who are going to Scotland and coming back on the Great Northern Railway travel through York Although I am not going to put what I am now going to say in rivalry with what I have already said, let me remind your Lordships that Dick Turpin and Black Bess went from London to York and did not go from York to London. I am the more bold to make this allusion because I possess an acknowledgement in Dick Turpin's own handwriting of the refuge he took in a barn in my own neighbourhood close to Doncaster. That is a fact I am not going to forget, but I do not wish to press a matter of that sort unduly. What I do say is, when you think of the unrivalled history of York it is the last thing you can do to deprive it of its two Members, which it has possessed ever since the days of Edward I.
There are only two other references I have to make, and the first is this. Despite the noble Earl, however great Winchester may be—and I do not dispute it; I think Winchester should not be deprived of its Member—and however great the City of Durham may be, I still say that York is pre-eminently before any other city in England; and it is impossible, with any show of reason, to adduce what may be done for York as a precedent for what may be done for any other town in the country.
My last point is this. This is a question outside of all political considerations, for I do not suppose that there is any city in

1123
England where representation has been more equally divided between Liberals and Unionists—or Tories, if you like so to call them. If your Lordships look at the figures of recent elections you will see that it has been five votes one way and ten votes another way; and as far as the one or the other Party is concerned there is nothing whatever to choose between the two. I earnestly ask your Lordships to support my Amendment. I appeal to the noble Viscount in charge of this Bill to have some regard for historic tradition, and not to deprive York of what it has had since the time of Edward I; and in view of its history which ought to appeal to all hearts.
Amendment moved—
Page 80, line 14, third column, leave out ("one") and insert ("two").—(Viscount Halifax.)
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I feel bound to rise to say a word in support of my noble friend, though not with the brilliant eloquence which he has displayed in describing the claims of York. I have family associations with it; one of my great grandfathers sat for the City of York; and I have spent many years living in its neighbourhood. But I am bound to say that I think that my noble friend is absolutely justified in describing the claim of York for retention of its Membership as quite different from that which any other city—except the City of London—can put forward. The claims of the City of London have been admitted by His Majesty's Government; but all that my noble friend has said about York is perfectly true. The other great historical cities and towns in England—for instance, the two great commercial cities of the Middle Ages, Bristol and Norwich (both great and important still)—cannot rival York. Neither can the great political cities. Winchester and Chester, or, indeed, Oxford. York does stand entirely by itself among the cities of England in historical interest. My noble friend has stated its unique position in having through hundreds of years given a title to the Royal House, the importance of which has transcended all others. There are fifty other reasons why York should be considered I am aware that it is not easy for His Majesty's Government to make further additions to the roll of Parliament, which the Leader of the House has already said has been made infinitely too large by
1124
the Government Bill—a view with which I have no doubt many of your Lordships will agree—but it was impossible for me not to join my noble friend in expressing the view that, if any change is made, the claim of York is entirely of a different character, just in the same way as the claim of the City of London is from that of other places, and that its parallel in that respect cannot be found in the United Kingdom.
VISCOUNT PEEL: It is clear that, whatever the number of its representatives in the other House may be, the City of York does not lack eloquent and forcible supporters in this House. In fact, so strong is the case, and so brilliant the historical researches of my noble friend into the ancient history of York, that one almost feels that it hardly requires anything like more representation in the House of Commons to carry on its historical greatness.
The speech of the noble Viscount seemed to proceed on the basis that York was to have no representation at all in the other House. That is not so. The proposals in the Schedule are that it shall have one Member instead of two. And may I point out to the noble Lord what an enormously enhanced and important position that one Member will have if he is still present and represents and bears upon his shoulders the tremendous weight and tradition of this place. I do not wish to enter into a comparison between York and London. I can only warn the noble Viscount that I am fairly well up in the historic and early traditions of the City of London, but I will not enter upon that much controverted subject tonight. I am afraid I have to deal with the Amendment less from the poetic and historic point of view than from the more prosaic point of view of figures. Not whether Constantine lived there or whether it existed before the Roman occupation, but what are the numbers in that City to-day. Now the number, unfortunately—I think the noble Viscount rather judiciously did not deal with the question—the number of persons in the City of York—because the decision of the Commissioners was that the area of the Parliamentary borough should be extended so as to be co-extensive with the county borough, so that the county borough was made as large as it could reasonably be—the estimate of its population for the year 1914 was 83,380.
In order, therefore, to justify us in giving York, on the basis of numbers, two Members, it ought to have a population of

1125
120,000. As the noble Viscount will see, it falls very far short of those numbers, and it you were to grant the desire of York or of its representatives in this matter you would be beset by numberless claims from other places which, although they have not got the great historical traditions of York, yet have very great industrial and social claims to-day, which they would press vigorously upon the attention of Parliament. I might mention such places as-Halifax with over 100,000 or Northampton with over 90,000, and so on. Therefore, because I have listened so sympathetically to the speech of the noble Viscount, I am sure he will realise with what pain I feel compelled, speaking on behalf of the Government, to say that it its not possible for me to accede to the desire that York should retain its two Members. Its representation should be based rather more on its population than upon the historic glories to which the noble Viscount so feelingly alluded.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX: Might I ask what are the numbers of the sleeping population of the City of London, because I understand it is the population sleeping in a constituency at night which determines its representation. Is it very much larger than that of York? That is the point. If number is to determine the question I want to know why, if the numbers are nearly equal, preference is given to London over York?
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am afraid the noble Viscount is trying to draw me into a comparison which I said I did not want to enter upon.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX: It is not historical comparison I want to draw the noble Viscount into, but a comparison on the more prosaic matter of figures.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
LORD ABERCONWAY LORD ABERCONWAY moved to insert, in Part I of the Fifth Schedule, words providing for a new constituency composed of "Denbigh and Flint District of Boroughs." The noble Lord said: There is a strong feeling in Wales that at least one more Member ought to be given to the Principality in order to make the numbers constituting an electoral unit approximate to the numbers which are applicable under the Bill to England and Scotland. This
1126
Amendment has for its object the creation of a new group of boroughs, by retaining the old boroughs. The effect of it would be that the unit of population for a Welsh constituency would be increased to about 70,000. Even that would compare unfavourably with England and Scotland. The population per Member in England, which is at present 73,000, would be reduced by the redistribution scheme of the Bill to 71,000, and that of Scotland would be reduced from 68,000 to 66,000, while, as the Bill stands, in Wales it would be increased from 71,000 to 72,000.
The subject was discussed at some length in the other House, and three proposals were made which are substantially as follows. The first was the proposal that I move before your Lordships to-day. The second was to give a Member to Radnorshire, and the third was to give a separate Member to the Welsh University. It was felt that as Radnorshire is a small county that proposal could not be successfully pressed; and I am bound to say that of the three I should greatly prefer giving separate University representation to Wales. If I thought the Government were disposed to accept that Amendment, which will be proposed by Lord St. Davids, I should, of course, be glad to withdraw this proposal in favour of that one. In any case, if separate representation is not given to Welsh University, this Amendment of mine could be re-introduced on Report. The reasons are so strong for something to be done that I hope the Government, on consideration, will see their way to consent to what the Welsh people regard as only a simple act of justice. I do not, however, propose to press my Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 80, line 42, at end insert:

"Denbigh and Flint District of Boroughs.

Existing contributory boroughs of Denbigh, Holt, Ruthin, Wrexham, Caergwrle, Caerwys, Flint, Holywell, Mold, Overton, Rhuddlan, and St. Asaph.

One."

—(Lord Aberconway.)
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD LAMINGTON LORD LAMINGTON had an Amendment on the Paper to substitute "Dennistoun" for "Camlachie" as the name of one of the Glasgow constituencies in Part I. The noble Lord said: I do not think my Amendment will stand. It was really only a question of nomenclature. I was asked

1127
to put it down by the Glasgow Corporation. The Camlachie district is chiefly included under the Bill in the Shettleston Parliamentary area. The Dennistoun municipal ward is also in this district, and it would be much more acceptable to everybody, and more geographically correct, if the name of Dennistoun were substituted for Camlachie.
Amendment moved—
Page 83, line 46, fourth column, leave out ("Camlachie") and insert ("Dennistoun").—(Lord Lamington.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I believe the general principle we have followed elsewhere with reference to this change of names has been that the Government has generally been unwilling to depart from the name as settled by the Boundary Commissioners, unless there was really some consensus of opinion from the districts themselves in favour of a change. I really can only ask the noble Lord whether he is in a position to assure me that that is so. If he is able to give me that assurance, I would not oppose his suggestion, and it could take its chance in another place. If he cannot give me that assurance, then he cannot expect me to take up that favourable attitude.
LORD LAMINGTON: I move the Amendment at the instance of the Glasgow authorities, and I presume they have satisfied themselves.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I was under the impression that all these questions of nomenclature were to be passed over. One or two have been passed over and there are more to come. I should like to know the intention of the noble Viscount in regard to this point.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I made the suggestion, but at the same time I cannot refuse to answer the noble Lord.
LORD LAMINGTON: Under the Schedule the name is a misnomer and not geographically correct. Can I make a further inquiry at a later stage?
VISCOUNT PEEL: Perhaps the noble Lord will do that. To me, being a plain Saxon, Camlachie sounds far more Scottish than the other.
LORD LAMINGTON: Oh, Dennistoun is all right.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD DIGBY LORD DIGBY moved, in Schedule (5), to leave out "Poole" and insert "Eastern." The noble Lord said: The Dorchester District Council are anxious that this alteration should be made, and passed, a resolution at their last meeting that the name of Eastern Dorset should be retained. The three other Divisions of the County have retained their names. Northern, Southern and Western. That of Eastern Dorset has been changed to Poole, and the Dorsetshire County Council object to the alteration and prefer that Eastern Dorset should be retained.
Amendment moved—
Page 102, line 30, fourth column, leave out ("Poole") and insert ("Eastern").—(Lord Digby.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: The representations of the County Council would, of course, deserve every consideration. If the noble Lord, therefore, wishes to press it I should not offer any opposition, but it is subject to the same possibilities as the other constituencies.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: But for the closing observation of the noble Viscount I should like to support my noble friend. I live for a certain part of the year in this constituency and am much interested in it. I should think that in everything, except the very important and indeed historical celebrity of Poole, Poole would dislike to be called Poole, while the rest of the Division would like to be called according to its own name of East Dorset. I agree, however, with the noble Viscount opposite that we are rather beating the air in discussing these names when on the Report stage the whole question is going to be raised on the new Schedule in the name of my noble friend Lord Selborne. I cannot help thinking that my noble friend Lord Digby would be well advised, with great respect to him, not to press the matter now. On Report I will support him.
LORD DIGBY: I am afraid that I shall not be here; if the noble Marquess will take it from me I shall be much obliged.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I will take care of my noble friend's interests in

1129
the event of his not being able to be here upon Report.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH: I withdraw the Amendment in my name at this stage [page 130, line 37, fourth column, after "Llandaff" insert "and Barry"] on the understanding that it comes up later.
LORD ST. DAVIDS LORD ST. DAVIDS moved to insert in Part III Universities, "Description of University constituency," the words "University of Wales—one." The noble Lord said: I think that perhaps I shall be in order in moving along with this Amendment the Amendment two lines later which is consequential. I will be as brief as possible in putting forward what is really a substantial grievance. Wales has been very badly treated under this Bill, worse treated than any other part of the United Kingdom. I think that I will prove that to the House in a moment or two by the figures that I will give.
I want to make it clear, however, that I am not going to base my case upon the number of graduates of the Welsh University. Oxford, for instance, has about 15,000 or 16,000 graduates. The Welsh University with its three Colleges of Bangor, Cardiff, and Aberystwyth, has a very substantially smaller number of graduates than the number that would be half the number of Oxford, which has two Members. I do not base my case on that, although I think it very likely that I should base it upon it if I had at my command the number of the graduates of the two new Irish Universities that have been, by the result of the Speaker's arbitration, awarded seats only yesterday. I know nothing about those two Universities, one of which—no doubt it is my ignorance—I had not heard of previously. It is not necessary to base my case upon the number of graduates, because the Welsh University is a very young body and it naturally has not got anything like the list of graduates which the old University has with its men of eighty, seventy, and sixty. Most of the graduates of the Welsh University are naturally young men. But Wales is not only a separate nationality; it has an entirely different system of education. It has different education laws from any other part of the Kingdom, so that if there ever was a case for a separate Member for a University the case is stronger in Wale than it is anywhere else. I want to
1130
give you the grievance on population. After this Bill becomes law Scotland will have one Member for every 66,000 of the population, and, besides that, it will have three University Members. The population of Scotland is not double the population of Wales. It is not only over-represented as regards its population, but it is over-represented as regards its Universities. England under the Bill is to be given one Member for every 71,000 of population, and, in addition, is to have seven University Members. I need hardly speak about Ireland, because in Ireland the case is so monstrous that they had 103 Members the day before yesterday, which was something like thirty or forty more than they were entitled to, and they have, been given two more University Members, or four University Members altogether. On that basis I ought to be asking for two University Members for Wales, not for one. Apart from University Members Scotland has one Member for 66,000 population: England one for 71,000 population; and Wales one for 72,000 population. So that on our population basis we are actually far worse treated than any other part of the Kingdom, quite apart from not having a University Member at all given to us under the Bill.
The Boundary Commissioners have taken their figures as to population from the Local Government Returns from 1911 to 1914, which I believe were the last they had available. In those years the population of Scotland actually fell 13,000, and the population of Wales rose 102,000. And the population of Wales, with the development of industry, is rising with exceptional rapidity year by year, and, as far as I can judge, owing to the state of the industries, that rise is likely to go on to an accentuated degree. But quite apart from that, as we stand now we have a great grievance as regards population. Under this Bill we are given in Wales thirty-five Members. We are entitled on population to a fraction over thirty-six, and we are entitled to a University Member as well on the basis of population.
On the basis of population, look at this. The population of Wales in 1914 was 2,523,000. The population of the whole country was something under 42,000,000. Apart from the rise of population in Wales, which I am sure has been exceptional since that time, that would give you roughly one-sixteenth of the population

1131
of the country. One-sixteenth of the population of the country would give you the right to one University Member if there were sixteen for the whole of Great Britain and Ireland. There are fourteen. There are seven for England, three for Scotland, four for Ireland since yesterday; and Wales has not one at all. I think, as regards numbers, that is a great, grievance. If you give us to-night one additional Member for the University you are only giving us in effect what our population basis entitles us to, without any addition as of right for the University. We are entitled on a population basis and for the University too, to thirty-seven seats, and we have got only thirty-five. I am so modest in my humble request that I am only asking you to give us thirty-six.
Considering the hour, I do not wish to keep your Lordships unnecessarily detained. But I would just say this. I am doing this most certainly from no Party spirit. A friend of mine said to me tonight, "Surely you, who represent Liberals in Wales, ought not to be proposing a seat for a privileged class," because everybody knows that a University Member mainly represents the professional classes of the country, and on the whole the professional classes in Wales, just as they do in England and Scotland, belong to the Conservative Party. I have very little doubt that if you give us this seat to-night it will be in the main, perhaps always, a Conservative seat that you will be establishing. I am Chairman of the Central Liberal Association for all Wales, but I am quite certain that I represent the feeling of the people of Wales. I certainly represent the feeling of the Liberal Welsh Members in the House of Commons when I say that the Liberals in Wales undoubtedly would like this seat established, even though they know it will be a Conservative seat. Welsh people have a great love of education and a great love of culture, and we have a love of our country and we do want justice. I would press very strongly on your Lordships to-night, even at this late hour, that I have made out a perfectly clear case of grievance as regards numbers, and I press urgently on the Government that they should accept this Amendment.
Amendment moved.
Page 137, line 43, at end insert ("The University of Wales 1")
Page 137, line 45, leave out ("the University of Wales").—(Lord St. Davids.)
THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH: I should like to support the Amendment of my noble friend, Lord St. Davids. I do not wish to go over any of the ground he has traversed, but to mention two more points which perhaps would induce your Lordships to agree with the Amendment. Of course, as he has rightly said, the defence of University representation cannot be upon the number of graduates. It is given, I imagine, because it is thought desirable that those who pass through the highest education that can be tested by honours and degrees should be entitled to some representation on that account. If this is so, there is a difference between the different parts of the country, the nature of the students, and the kind of higher education which is given. I believe that this varies substantially in Wales from the forms and results of education in the newer Universities in England. I believe it is a fact that the majority of the students in Wales come from the working classes. In the newer English Universities I think it will be agreed that they come largely from the professional classes and from what is generally called the middle classes. So that in this respect you get a difference in the nature of those who become graduates. There is also this rather curious fact, that the faculty of the humanities—and I say this on the authority of the Vice-Chancellor of the University—is much more popular amongst the students in Wales than the faculty of science. Exactly the opposite holds good in the younger English Universities.
I advance these two points only to show that there is a distinct difference on educational grounds between those who go to the University colleges of Wales and those who go to the newer Universities in England. Even under the Bill as it stands the Welsh University will be grouped with several English Universities, which latter would naturally have the right of selecting a candidate; and it is extremely probable that the Welsh University would not get any real representation.
I was going to claim a very disinterested state of mind, but my noble friend Lord St. Davids has rather taken that position from me. I think I am right in saying that the students in Wales come much more from the working classes than they do in England; and so far as my knowledge of the colleges in Wales is concerned, I should be very much surprised indeed if their single

1133
representative belonged to the Party with which I have associated myself and to which I have had the honour to belong. My noble friend Lord Salisbury rather warned us last night that possibly the vote which I induced your Lordships to give then might be construed by some as favouring the political Party to which he belonged. However disinterested we may know ourselves to be, that may be levelled against us. But in this instance, at least, I do not think that this can be levelled against the view I am now taking.
LORD DYNEVOR: I heartily support this Amendment. On the basis of population, Wales is certainly entitled to at least one more Member; and I cannot think of a better way of giving her that extra Member than by giving her a representative for her own University. As has been pointed out by Lord Plymouth, under the Bill the Welsh University is united with several English Universities. I cannot believe for a moment that Wales will be able to send her own representative to Parliament as she will be out-voted. By the means now proposed Wales would have a Member who would be able to speak for the whole of the Welsh educational interests. I trust, therefore, that His Majesty's Government will accept the Amendment.
LORD PONTYPRIDD: I am not going to enlarge upon the case so excellently made by my noble friend Lord St. Davids. I will only say this, that there was very great disappointment in Wales when the Bill was in another place that it did not provide for a Member for the University. We are one of the four nationalities which make up the United Kingdom, and we have an education of our own, and I say it is necessary, in order that we should be properly represented, that we should be treated as are the other parts of the United Kingdom. Wales feels that she ought not to be treated as a poor nation, and there is no reason why she should be so treated. Welshmen have reason to be proud of the way in which their countrymen have acted in arms lately, and I as a Welshman am proud to know that my country has come out so strongly in these terrible times. This is the day of small nationalities. We are making great sacrifices for small nationalities. I ask your Lordships to think of another nationality nearer home.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The question before your Lordships is undoubtedly a difficult one. The difficulty is that one does not want to give special representation to a University which is undoubtedly small, but there are strong arguments on the other side, I admit. There is the argument of the noble Lord who moved the Amendment, that although the present number of the graduates is small, this is particularly to be attributed to the fact that it is a young University. I think all of us must give duo weight to that, because it makes a substantial difference, and in the course of years, even if the University of Wales does not increase the number of its undergraduates, the number of graduates will increase.
Then there is the very important consideration that the Welsh people are underrepresented as the Bill stands. I have not gone into the figures, but I take them with absolute confidence from noble Lords. Assuming that to be true, as I do, I think it is an inequality which we should make it our object to put right if we can. I do not suppose—in fact it is obvious that we cannot put it right by an alteration of the basis on which the Speaker's Conference has calculated the quota which goes to make a representative, but the Welsh people, by the mouth of Welsh Peer after Welsh Peer, come forward and say they will accept a University representative in full satisfaction of their claim. I think we must accept that as another fact.
I think these arguments are very strong. I do not think it is a satisfactory arrangement that the Welsh University should form part of a constituency with a number of English Universities. I do not put the claims of Welsh nationality quite as high as does the noble Lord, although I have a very very remote connection with the principality; but I do think that the national feeling in Wales is a thing highly to be respected and admired and encouraged and if it made the Welsh people more contented, that would be an additional advantage.
LORD RATHCREEDAN: Although not a Welshman, I have a certain connection with Wales, and in addition I represented for many years in the House of Commons a London constituency which had a large number of Welsh residents. Therefore, I wish strongly to support my noble friend.

1135
There is one point which has not been mentioned, and that is that it is very necessary that Wales should have special representation for her educational system. Her people have made great sacrifices in order to establish this new University, and they have a special system of intermediate education which provides stepping stones from the board school to the University. I would also urge upon your Lordships the fact that, taking England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales during the terrible struggle in which we are now engaged, Wales has the honour of having given, proportionately to her population, the largest number of men for the fighting line. Moreover, the civil population which remains behind consists in the main of miners and farmers. The miners have done much, not only for the Navy but for the merchant service, while the farmers are doing all that is possible to increase the food supply. Therefore, Wales has the double claim, that she has not only put the largest proportion of men into the righting line, but she has the largest number of her population at the present moment engaged, as it were, in feeding that fighting line. I think that is a strong point which should appeal to your Lordships, and I hope you will give full support to my noble friend.
VISCOUNT PEEL: The comprehensive and interesting speech of the noble Lord who introduced the subject rather held out as a bait to your Lordships, that a Conservative might be returned for the University. I think that proposition has had some doubt thrown upon it by subsequent speakers, I think your Lordships will agree that one has rarely heard during the course of these discussions so unanimous a request on any particular Amendment. Those who are not Welsh Peers have been parading (if I might use the expression) their Welsh connections. Therefore, possibly, I may be allowed to mention that my sympathy with Wales rests on the fact of having had a Welsh grandmother. The noble Lord rested his case very largely, I think, on the fact that in the redistribution of seats Wales had to some extent suffered, if we take the average numbers of people per seat for the Test of the country. No doubt that is so on the figures. If I may, I would deprecate rather too nice or to jealous a comparison being made of the exact representation which different parts of the country—
1136
Wales, Scotland, and England—have received, though, no doubt, it is an element which must be taken into account. I quite agree with what the noble Marquess said, that it is important, if possible, to give separate representation to the Welsh University, which differs in character from the English Universities; and there is the further fact which my noble friend Lord Dynevor spoke of, that probably if it was combined with the English Universities, there would not be much chance of the Welsh University getting representation in the House of Commons. Your Lordships will have noticed from the observations which fell from the Leader of the House that there is considerable objection to increasing the members in the House of Commons. I feel, speaking on behalf of the Government, that this is in some sense a unique position, so distinct and has been so very strongly pressed on the Government, with no dissentient voice, that the Government would be justified in the circumstances in accepting the Amendment.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to omit the words "The University of Edinburgh, the University of St. Andrews, the University of Glasgow, and the University of Aberdeen," and to insert "the University of St. Andrews, the University of Glasgow, the University of Aberdeen and the University of Edinburgh." The noble Viscount said: This Amendment merely alters the order of precedence.
Amendment moved—
Page 137, leave out lines 49 and 50 in first column, and insert ("The University of St. Andrews, the University of Glasgow, the University of Aberdeen, and the University of Edinburgh").—(Viscount Peel.)
Fifth Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Sixth Schedule agreed to.
Seventh Schedule:
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out Rule (5).—The noble Viscount said: This is a consequential Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 139, line 18, leave out paragraph 5.—(Viscount Peel.)
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: With reference to the next Amendment (to leave out Rule 6), on behalf of my noble friend the Earl of Selborne I am authorised to say that he would wish to postpone it until the Report stage. It should stand in the name of my noble friend Lord Burnham, and perhaps it will be put down in his name for Report.
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved in Rule (7) after the word "eleven" to insert, "twelve," and to leave out "that section"—["shall be substituted in that section for Parliamentary purposes"] in order to insert "those sections." The noble Viscount said: These Amendments are both drafting.
Amendments moved—
Page 139, line 39, after ("eleven") insert ("twelve")
Page 139, lines 42 and 43, leave out "(that section") and insert ("those sections").—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to omit from paragraph 9 all reference to the County Electors (Scotland) Act 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 28), and to the County Voters Registration (Scotland) Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 83) as adapting the Bill to Scotland, The noble Viscount said: This is a drafting Amendment also.
Amendment moved—
Page 140, leave out lines 16 to 32 inclusive.—(Viscount Peel.).
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved to omit from paragraph 9 the reference to the Ballot Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 33) as adapting the Bill to Scotland. The noble Viscount said: This is consequential also.
Amendment moved—
Page 140, leave out lines 39 and 40.
Page 141, leave out lines 1 to 3 inclusive.—(Viscount Peel.)
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved, in paragraph 9, to leave out "1917" in order to insert "1918." [Representation of the People Act, 1917]. The noble Viscount said: This is a drafting Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 141, line 20, leave out ("1917") and insert ("1918");
Page 141, line 27, leave out ("1917") and insert ("1918").—(Viscount Peel.)
Seventh Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Eighth Schedule:
VISCOUNT PEEL said: This English Schedule entirely consists of Acts, portions of Acts, or clauses repealed. So far as I am dealing with my own Amendments, down to that in the name of Lord Lamington, might it be possible to move them all together?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: They are all formal, I believe?
VISCOUNT PEEL: Yes.
Amendments moved—
Page 142, line 36, at end insert:

"25 Geo. 3. c. 84.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1785

The whole Act so far as un-repealed.

"33 Geo. 3. c. 64.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1973

The whole Act."

Page 143, line 3, third column, leave out from ("sections") to ("and") in line 6, and insert ("sixty-six, seventy and seventy-six")
Page 143, lines 11 and 12, third column, leave out ("from 'Provided always' to the end of the section").—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD LAMINGTON LORD LAMINGTON moved to insert the repeal of section 36 of the Representation of the People (Scotland) Act, 1832, so far as relates to town clerks or deputy town clerks being entitled to vote. The noble Lord said: I have been requested to have this inserted by the Corporation of Glasgow. By the Representation of the People (Scotland) Act, 1832, town clerks were debarred from voting for Members of their burgh or from being agents to the candidate, or from being Member for their burgh. The reason for this was that they had a great deal to do with affairs connected with the elections of the burgh, and therefore they were debarred by the Act of 1832 from voting. As all the registration is now taken out of their hands, why should they not be put upon the same footing as any other citizen who has a right to vote? I hope, therefore, that the noble Viscount will be able to accept the Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 143, line 14, third column, after ("five") insert ("section thirty-six, so far as relating to town clerks or deputy town clerks being entitled to vote").—(Lord Lamington.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: Will your Lordships allow me to consider this Amendment and bring it up again on Report? In the meantime the matter can be considered rather more than there has been time to consider it up to the present.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments moved—
Page 143, lines 18 and 19, third column, leave out ("twelve and sixty") and insert ("and twelve")
Page 143, line 19, at end insert:

"5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 36.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1835

Section seven."

Page 143, line 20, third column, after ("sections") insert ("three")
Page 143, line 32, third column, at end insert ("the word 'overseer' in section ninety-seven,")
Page 143, line 41, third column, leave out from ("to") to ("section") in line 45, and insert ("nine and").
Page 144, third column, leave out lines 7 and 8 and insert ("sections two, three, five, six, and seven")
Page 143, line 10, at end insert:

"16 & 17 Vict. c. 68.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1853.

In section one the words 'for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge and' the words 'to the Vice-Chancellors of the said Universities and' and the words 'Vice-chancellors and'; sections four and five."

Page 143, leave out lines 14 and 15 in the third column.
Page 143, line 17, at end insert:

"24 & 25 Vict. c. 53.

The University Elections Act, 1861.

The whole Act so far as un-repealed."

Page 143, leave out lines 21 and 22, in third column, and insert ("the whole Act so far as un-repealed")
Page 143, line 32, third column, leave out ("thirty-four")
Page 143, line 33, leave out ("forty-one to forty-five")
Page 143, line 35, leave out from ("sixty-one") to end of line 40, and insert ("and Schedule H.); in section fifty-nine the words 'and in construing' to the end of the section")
Page 143, line 41, third column, leave out ("nine") and insert ("eight")
Page 143, line 44, in the third column, after ("twenty-six") insert ("thirty-seven to").
Page 145, line 7, third column, leave out from ("three") to end of line 9, and insert ("and twenty-one")
Page 145, line 9, at end insert:

"31 & 32 Vict. c. 65.

The Universities Elections Act, 1868.

The whole Act."

Page 145, line 21, third column, at beginning of line insert ("section five; section eight from 'all expenses' to 'by law payable'")
Page 145, line 25, third column, leave out ("employment") and insert ("is proved on such trial to have voted at such election")
Page 145, line 28, at end insert ("rules 3 and 58 in the First Schedule").
Page 146, lines 7 and 8, third column, leave out ("and eleven to") and insert ("eleven, thirteen, and")
Page 146, line 24, at end insert:

"44 & 45 Vict. c. 40.

The Universities Elections Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1881.

The whole Act."

Page 146, lines 27 and 28, third column, leave out ("sections thirty-two and thirty-three") and insert ("(except as to the disqualification for the receipt of union or parochial relief or other alms); in subsection (2) of section eleven the words from 'or (b) being entitled' to 'to be made,' and the words 'In either of those cases;' section thirty-two; section thirty-three (except subsection (4))")
Page 146, line 31, third column, after ("forty-nine") insert ("in subsection (2) of section fifty-one the words 'or vote in more than one ward'; sections").
Page 147, lines 5 and 6, third column, leave out ("subsections (3) to (8)") and insert ("subjection (1) of section thirty-five, from 'and may charge' to the end of the subsection; subsection (3)")
Page 147, line 6, third column, after ("thirty-nine") insert ("section forty-seven")
Page 147, line 12, third column, after ("subsection") insert ("subsection (9) of section sixty-nine, paragraph (7) of Part I of the First Schedule")
Page 147, line 14, third column, leave out from ("schedule") to end of line 17
Page 147, line 33, third column, leave out ("thirteen").
Page 147, line 40, third column, leave out ("eight") and insert ("to")
Page 147, line 43, third column, leave out from ("eight") to beginning of line 47, and insert ("nine")
Page 147, line 47, at end insert ("and the Second Schedule")
Page 147, line 48, third column, leave out lines 48 to 51 (inclusive) and insert ("As respects England and Scotland the whole Act so far as unrepealed, and as respects Ireland, subsections (3) and (4) of section eight, sections ten to twelve, subsections (3), (4), and (5) of section thirteen, sections fourteen, fifteen, eighteen, and twenty, and in section twenty-six the words from 'with the following' to the end of the section")
Page 147, line 52, leave out ("unrepealed") and insert ("it relates to parliamentary electors")
Page 148, line 15, at end insert:

"50 & 51 Vict. c. 55.

The Sheriffs Act, 1887.

Subsection (2) of section eighteen, so far as respects sheriffs' courts required for the purpose of elections.'

Page 148, line 18, third column, at beginning insert ("Paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of section two from 'or is registered' to the end of the paragraph")
Page 148, lines 18, 19, and 20, third column, cave out ("from 'the places of' to the end of the paragraph")
Page 148, lines 21 and 22, third column, leave out ("from 'the places of' to the end of the subsection").
Page 149, line 32, at end insert:

"8 Edw. 7 c. 14.

The Polling Arrangements (Parliamentary Boroughs) Act, 1908.

The whole Act "

Page 149, line 37, third column, leave out ("section three") and insert ("the whole Act").—(Viscount Peel.)
Eighth Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
House resumed.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: May I ask the noble Earl opposite on what days the Government propose to take the Report stage of the Bill.?
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I suggest that it should be taken on Monday.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Oh, no!
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: May I be allowed to join in supporting the exclamation of my noble friend. The noble Lord, Lord Balfour, postponed for further consideration certain matters relating to Scotland, and my noble friend, Lord Beresford, postponed the whole question of the inclusion of Ireland in the Bill. We are told that by the end of the week we may be in possession of the new Schedule which is to be produced by those who favoured and succeeded in obtaining the introduction of proportional representation. It does seem to me a very short time indeed for consideration of these important points—and of a number of others which have, by common agreement, been allowed to stand over—if the Report stage is taken so early as Monday. It is clear that it is everybody's object to get the Bill through this House and back to the House of
1142
Commons as early as possible, and I should have thought that we might be able to do that by the end of next week. To do it sooner would surely hardly be possible, It the Report stage were taken on Wednesday next it would, I think, be possible to get rid of the Bill by the end of the week, and I do not see that your Lordships could hope to do it very such sooner by taking Report on Monday. I trust, therefore, that His Majesty's Government it will consider whether a postponement of two days might not meet the case.
Before I sit down I am anxious, as I shall not have another opportunity, to express my thanks and those of other noble Lords who sit on this bench to the noble Earl who has been in the Chair during this protracted and by no means always easy Committee stage. I have had the honour of sitting under many Chairmen of this House, since Lord Redesdale's time, and I am bound to say I have never seen a complicated Bill more capably conducted by a Chairman than this Bill has been by my noble friend.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I am sure we shall all agree with my noble friend who has just spoken in expressing our thanks to the Lord Chairman for his services. It has been an extremely difficult business, and I am very glad that it did not fall to me. I must impress on the Government the absolute necessity of giving us a little more time and not putting down the Report stage for Monday. The Bill will hardly be reprinted by then. Just think of the alterations that have taken place in this Bill. I should think there is no Bill in recent times which has undergone so much change, both verbally and substantially, as this Bill has done in the course of its passage through Committee. The changes are very large in bulk and very vital in character, and there are a great number of subjects which are held over till the next stage. The Government have been a little reluctant, I may remind them, to accept Amendments, even when they had no arguments to resist them, thus making it necessary to postpone them till the Report stage. That makes an additional difficulty. We have to reconsider these subjects in the light of information which the Government are being good enough to convey to us in the meantime. All these things combine, and I am afraid I must most respectfully impress upon them the importance of further time. This

1143
House is the revising Chamber. It is its business to send up the Bill at the end of its deliberations as perfect as it is possible for human nature to achieve, and we cannot do that unless we are able to see the Bill reprinted, unless we have time to consider all the subjects reserved for the Report stage, and unless we have time to frame Amendments which may be necessary still to put in, and, for those of us who are going to take part in the discussion, to see what Amendments are given notice of, and what we are going to discuss. I venture to think that, on reflection, my noble friend, the Lord Privy Seal, will take that view.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I desire to associate myself with what has fallen from Lord Crewe, and, if Lord Kintore will allow me, I should like to pay my tribute of admiration and respect for the patiencee, the urbanity, and the skill with which he has conducted the Committee stage. I would most willingly fall in with the suggestion that delay should be granted if I thought it was necessary or convenient to Parliament as a whole. I should like to represent to your Lordships my view as to the desirability of the Bill proceeding on Monday next. In the first place, the Bill, as reprinted, including Lord Selborne's Amendment, will be in the hands of your Lordships on Friday morning, so that the Bill will not be rushed in any very serious fashion, if one takes into account the fact that nothing of first-class importance is likely to be discussed during the Report stage. I take it there will be no discussion about the really controversial topics which have occupied us during the last fortnight. I take it there will be no discussion about proportional representation, or about the alternative vote, or about woman suffrage. These things are settled, and I do not think there is any disposition in any portion of your Lordships' House to reopen these cardinal topics on Report. Lord Crewe said there was an important question about Scotland, about which Lord Balfour of Burleigh has given notice.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: There certainly was a question, and I have no doubt that, as Lord Balfour introduced it, it was important; but I have not the least idea what it was.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I read it, but I did not understand it, either. But Lord Balfour understands it, the Scottish
1144
Peers understand it, and my noble friend Lord Peel understands it. So far as that is concerned I think we shall be able to proceed on Monday next. Then Lord Crewe mentioned Lord Beresford's Amendment, which was postponed to-day. We all understand that Amendment, and that could be discussed to-morrow if necessary. No delay is required for further consideration on that point. And then Lord Selborne's Schedule. That Schedule raises no question of principle. He has won his case on the point of principle, and his Schedule merely, I imagine, introduces a re-grouping of constituencies in order to fit them into the decision which your Lordships have taken. I do not think Lord Selborne—I speak subject to correction, of course—would claim that any broad principle is involved in that Amendment, important as it is. The real merits or demerits of that Amendment, I take it, will have to be decided, not in your Lordships' House or in the House of Commons, but at the local inquiries which will take place, I presume, in the constituencies concerned. I therefore submit that the questions which are coming up, and which Lord Peel is prepared to deal with on and from Monday next, will be questions of drafting and detail, and a certain number of other topics of interest to groups of your Lordships, but not of any great moment or consequence on grounds of principle.
Apart from that particular aspect of the question, may I further submit this to your Lordships. We have occupied a fair amount of time on the Bill already. We took the Second Reading before Christmas. We then had a very tolerable interval. We have had ten days in Committee; and, if I may say so with real deference and respect, our sittings have not been very long. I am certain they have averaged less than six hours per sitting, which, of course, is a very short sitting indeed. To-morrow we expect to get from the House of Commons a Bill of really vital importance relating to military service. I do not know whether your Lordships will be prepared to take it on Friday. I do not like to press your Lordships to sit on Friday, but if it is not taken on that day I presume it will have to go over to next week, which would be unfortunate in the interests of that particular object. I think we have reached a stage in the Session when we really ought to push forward with our business as much as we conveniently can.

1145
Really important and urgent questions relating to the finances of next session are almost upon us at this moment; and I confess that with this Bill and the Military Service Bill before us, and with other Bills not of first-rate importance but which will require your Lordships' consideration, such as the Insurance Bill and the Non-Ferrous Metals Bill, I sincerely hope that your Lordships, even if it should cause some personal inconvenience, will consent to resume the discussion of this Bill at the earliest possible moment.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: May I ask the noble Earl whether he is able to indicate when the Non-ferrous Metals Bill is likely to reach us? I understand that the Insurance Bill will be taken on the 29th of this month?
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: We have the Non-ferrous Metals Bill now on your Lordships' Table. I will put it down for to-morrow.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: We would rather have it postponed until next week.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: As far as I am concerned, the Government may put down the Military Service Bill when they think right; I shall never be a party to checking any Bill which is necessary for the prosecution of the war. But as regards this other Bill, I must press upon the Government again that with a Bill which is printed only upon Friday it is impossible to get Amendments given notice of again on Monday. Most of your Lordships would never see the Amendments at all until the Monday.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: Why not?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Because a great many noble Lords do not live in London. That is not a possible arrangement. I am not responsible, nor are your Lordships responsible, for the fact that the Government have produced their business so late in the session. I do not blame them. I certainly do not blame my noble friend who is leading the House at the moment. He has always treated us with the greatest possible courtesy and consideration. I doubt whether the House will consent to consider the Bill on Monday. I think that the Government ought to study the wishes and the convenience of the House in this matter.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I will put down the Non-ferrous Metals Bill nominally for Monday, and, if necessary, the noble Marquess will tell us if he wishes it postponed. To-morrow your Lordships may be able to settle whether we shall have to meet on Friday. Personally I have no doubt that to many of your Lordships it is most inconvenient to sit on Friday. The learned Clerk at the Table reminds me that we shall not receive the Military Service Bill until to-morrow evening; therefore nominally it cannot be put down for an earlier day than Friday.
On the other point, I am extremely sorry to press your Lordships, but the reason why we are pressed is not the fault of your Lordships opposite; it is the fault of the Government for having had so many sittings which have been of two or three hours' duration only. That has been out of deference to the expressions of opinion which have reached us from various parts of the House. Consequently we have taken ten days over the Committee stage of the Representation of the People Bill.
LORD GAINFORD: Will it be possible for the Amendments to the Representation of the People Bill to be circulated on Friday?
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: Yes, quite Possible.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE; It is not quite fair for the noble Earl to talk of our short sittings. We sat every day for seven days from half-past three until nearly eight o'clock—
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I have taken out the figures.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: And when you meet at half past four and adjourn from eight until a quarter past nine, there is only an hour or an hour and a half's difference. The work for those who have attended has been very constant, and the concentrated attention which we have had to give has been rather a strain. My noble friend talks of his recollection of the House of Commons. The strain on the Government Bench is always the same, but in the House of Commons, one must remember, most of the members who are attending to the Committee stage do not stay in the House all the time. Therefore I think my noble friend rather underrated the amount of work which we have put into

1147
this Bill. I think he was driving a very hard bargain in asking us to resume the consideration on Monday. Cannot he rearrange the business and put down other Orders for Monday, so as to give us a longer interval for this Bill.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I should like the advice of the noble Marquess (Lord Crewe). I have stated my case and put forward arguments which of course have not been met—that all questions of principle have been discussed and will not be discussed again; that the Amendments will be circulated on Friday, and Lord Peel is quite prepared to proceed on Monday; and that certain matters on which specific points have been made are already ripe for discussion and do not require further adjournment. I also have strongly urged the general consideration of business, not only in respect of this Bill but in respect of proceedings in the House of Commons, which makes it most desirable that we should proceed with our business and get
1148
the Bill back to the House of Commons, where it will require long consideration, at the earliest possible moment. I will put the Report stage of the Bill down nominally for to-morrow, so that this conversation can be resumed after consideration.
The Report of Amendments to be received to-morrow, and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 125.)

NON-FERROUS METAL INDUSTRY BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next (The Lord Hylton). (No. 126.)

METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a to-morrow (The Viscount Sandhurst). (No. 127.)
House adjourned at twenty minutes before twelve o'clock.