HL Deb 31 July 1919 vol 36 cc123-33

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Lord Chancellor).

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The EARL OF KINTORE in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Removal of disqualification on grounds of sex.

1. A person shall not be disqualified by sex from the exercise of any public function, or from being appointed to any civil or judicial office or post, or from entering or assuming any civil profession or vocation, and a person shall not be exempted by sex from the liability to serve as a juror:

Provided that—

  1. (a) notwithstanding anything in this section, His Majesty may by Order in Council authorise regulations to be made prescribing the mode of admission of women to the civil service of His Majesty, and the conditions on which women admitted to that service may be appointed to posts therein, and providing for the exclusion of women from admission to any branch of the civil service in any of His Majesty's possessions, or in any foreign country; and
  2. (b) any judge, chairman of quarter sessions, recorder or other person before whom the case is heard may, in his discretion, on an application made by a woman to be exempted from service on a jury in respect of that case by reason of the nature of the evidence to be given or of the issues to be tried, grant such exemption.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD BIRKENHEAD) moved, after "or from entering or assuming any civil profession or vocation," to insert "or for admission to any incorporated society (whether incorporated by Royal Charter or otherwise)." The noble and learned Lord said: This Amendment is put down to meet a point which has been taken by certain persons interested in this question in Edinburgh. It was pointed out, and I think justly, that the words of the Bill would not ensure the admission of women to certain incorporated professional societies, such as the Faculty of Actuaries and the Society of Accountants in Edinburgh. On behalf of the former society this Amendment was asked for. The Scottish Office was consulted and they agreed. The words will of course, also allow the admission of women to similar English societies.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 8, after ("vocation") insert ("or for admission to any incorporated society (whether incorporated by Royal Charter or otherwise)").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE moved, in paragraph (a), to leave out "His Majesty may, by Order in Council, authorise regulations to be made," and insert "in any regulations made by Order in Council." The noble Lord said: If the House should think fit to adopt the Amendments that I have to propose, subsection (a) of the clause would read— Notwithstanding anything in this section in any regulations made by Order in Council prescribing the mode of admission to the Civil Service of His Majesty, and the conditions on which persons admitted to that service may be appointed to posts therein, equal consideration shall be given to the suitability of both sexes, and provision may be made as to the admission of women," and so on. The object I have in view is to introduce into this clause, and so to introduce into the Civil Service, the practice with regard to the appointment of women to posts in the service which was settled after a very serious debate in this House, and after several alternative suggestions had been made in the Ministry of Health Bill. Your Lordships will remember that some words were settled on that occasion, and they are the words which I have put down in this Amendment. The officers of the Ministry of Health will themselves be—many of them are—part of the Civil Service, and if that was the right procedure to prescribe for that part of the Civil Service, it seems to me to follow that it would be right that that should be the proposal for the whole Civil Service. As the two noble and learned. Lords are not here who are proposing the omission of the whole of the subsection, I think I need not say anything about that, but merely submit to your Lordships that it is preferable to put these things upon one footing—one adequate and consistent footing—and that that would be better than to remove the proviso altogether as those noble and learned Lords propose. I beg to move the first amendment that stands in my name.

Amendment moved— Page 1, lines 11 to 13, leave out ("His Majesty may by Order in Council authorise regulations to be made") and insert ("in any regulations made by Order in Council").—(Lord Muir Mackenzie.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

The clause if amended as the noble and learned Lord desires, would read as follows— Notwithstanding anything in this section in ally regulations made by Order in Council prescribing the mode of admission to the Civil Service of His Majesty, and the conditions on which persons admitted to that service may be appointed to posts therein, equal consideration shall be given to the suitability of both sexes, and provision may be made as to the appointment of women to any branch of the Civil Service in any of His Majesty's possessions or in any foreign country. I do not think that even the noble and learned Lord himself would contend that the clause as I have read it out would be in a very satisfactory form. There are one or two expressions in it which I think a Court of law would find great difficulty in construing with precision, such an expression, for instance, as that "equal consideration shall be given to the suitability of both sexes." That is a phrase Which certainly seems to me to be a little lacking in precision, but I cannot help thinking that the House will on the whole come to the conclusion that the clause as it was drafted in the Bill really gives to women under this branch of their claim all that it would be reasonable to concede, and all that the efficiency of the Civil Service renders it right to concede.

I need hardly point out the supreme importance of reconciling the now universally admitted claims of women to certain considerations which are quite fundamental in dealing with the Civil Service. As I reminded the House on Second Reading, there is a general rule in the Civil Service that women should retire on marriage. I cannot conceive that anyone would desire to alter a practice which is evidently in the interests of the women and their children, as well as of the Service. This is a clause which specially affects the Post Office, but the regulation which the Post Office makes—and, I think your Lordships would unanimously feel, necessarily makes—would become illegal at once if the procedure were omitted. I may mention that women who do retire under these circumstances receive a marriage bounty.

Another point is important and should be borne in mind. Candidates who pass the higher division examination of the Civil Service under the existing practice choose, in the order in which they are placed by the examiner, to which Department they will be appointed, Certainly, if the proviso had been omitted, I think probably under the Amendment of the noble and learned. Lord women might choose the Foreign Service, and the recent scheme of inter-changeability between the Foreign Office and the Diplomatic Service would be rendered nugatory by the extreme difficulty (I put, it very mildly) under existing circumstances, of sending women as Ministers and Ambassadors—and indeed to many of the other appointments—abroad. Under all these circumstances, it appears to me that your Lordships would be well advised at this stage not, to lend support to an Amendment which—as, indeed, I think the noble and learned Lord, after what have said will agree—I think should not be pressed.

I ought to add that I have been asked to receive a deputation, with Mr. Bonar Law as representing the Government in the House of Commons, by a large number of the important women's societies upon this very clause, and, if your Lordships thought that a convenient course, I think that such a deputation might be received and we might listen to what they have to say between the present time and the time when this Bill will fall for consideration in the House of Commons. Careful attention, of course, will be given to any representations that are made, and in these circumstances I hope that the Amendment will not be pressed.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE

With regard to these deputations I am well aware of them because, in fact, they asked me to introduce them to the noble and learned Lord. With regard to the language of the Clause which the Lord Chancellor has criticised—" equal consideration shall be given to the suitability," and so forth, as I have said before, those are not my words. Those are the words which were settled in this House when the Ministry of Health. Bill was before this House. I thought, for reasons that I have also already stated, that it was desirable that the same practice should prevail in the Civil Service generally as was settled for that part of it which has been introduced into the Ministry of Health Bill. I need scarcely say that I shall not venture to press my Amendment against the views of my noble and learned friend.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

As Lord Reading is absent, before we pass his Amendment, which stands next on the Paper, if any noble Lord, for the sake of a short discussion would move the Amendment, it would, I think, be an advantage. I do not know whether Lord Muir Mackenzie would move it?

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE moved, in paragraph (b), after "discretion," to insert "on an application made by or on behalf of the parties (including in criminal cases the prosecution and. the accused) or any of them, or at his own instance, make an order that, having regard to the nature of the case and the evidence to be given, the jury shall be composed of men only or of women only as the case may require, or may." The noble Lord said: I feel some diffidence in moving an Amendment for so high an authority as the Lord Chief Justice. But I have an Amendment of my own which covers a small part of the ground. I put down my Amendment before I had seen that of the Lord Chief Justice, but that part of his Amendment which agrees with my own, of course, I assent to. As for the rest, I think that his Amendment is much more comprehensive, and on the whole, is much better than my own, and it gives me great pleasure to move it.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 23, after ("discretion") insert ("on an application made by or on behalf of the parties (including in criminal cases the prosecution and the accused) or any of them, or at his own instance, make an order that having regard to the nature of the case and the evidence to be given, the jury shall be composed of men only or of women only as the case may require, or may").—(Lard Muir Mackenzie.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

The Amendment that stands in the name of the Lord Chief Justice, in my judgment, is an improvement on the Bill. There are certain cases in which, not merely in the interests of women, but equally in the legitimate interests of men, they would be unwilling to sit on what we may describe as mixed juries. It is unnecessary to give illustrations because too many of your Lordships are chairmen of Quarter Sessions. But there are such cases, and it is not a sex distinction at all. It is a question of a mutual and balanced sex consideration, and I think that the view of the Lord Chief Justice, who has very great experience in these matters, that it should be in the power of the Judge suo motu to take the initiative in a matter of this kind, is one that will probably appeal to the House as it certainly appeals to the Government. I therefore accept the Amendment.

LORD SHEFFIELD

As I understand, it will be only in cases where, having regard to the nature of the case and the evidence given, the Judge is of the opinion that it is a case which should be tried exclusively by one or the other sex.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE

That is how I understood it.

LORD SHEFFIELD

I suppose that is intended to cover cases of rape, or indecent assault, which are disagreeable to deal with?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

Or unnatural offences.

LORD SHEFFIELD

If it was left, first of all, to the prosecution or the accused—either of them—to take action and ask for a different jury, I do not see why in ordinary cases there should not be a mixed jury. My own opinion is that women require a much longer training in public affairs before they are fit to serve on juries. However, that is gone by. You have determined that that most embarassing of all public functions should be given to them. In ordinary cases I do not see why men and women should not sit together. As this Amendment is drawn it will have to be either a jury of men or a jury of women. But I do not raise any objection.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2:

Right of peeresses to writ of summons.

2. His Majesty may include in the letters patent for the creation of a peer of the United Kingdom a provision to the effect that where the bolder of the peerage is a woman she shall, if otherwise qualified, be entitled to a seat, place, and voice in the House of Lords.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE had on the Paper an Amendment, at the end of Clause 2, to insert "and in respect of any existing Peerage may, by warrant under the Great Seal, declare that any woman being or becoming the holder of a peerage shall be entitled to a seat, place, and voice in the said House, as fully as if a grant, to that effect had always appertained to that peerage."

VISCOUNT FINLAY

Before Lord Muir Mackenzie proceeds, may I say I was about to make a suggestion. It is that it might be convenient if the question of principle—the question whether anything of this kind should be carried—were determined first. That might be settled if the question were taken whether this Clause should stand part of the Bill. In the event of its being so determined I understand that the Government will be ready to move to re-commit the Bill in order that any necessary Amendments should be made.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE

I was a few seconds late in the House after three o'clock, believing that there was other business coming on. I was therefore not in a position to move the Motion which your Lordships have seen on the Paper.* If that Motion had come on, I think that the question would have been raised upon which the noble and learned Viscount has just spoken, because it began with the words, "That this House, not being un- * The Motion standing on the Paper in the name of Lord MUIR MACKENZIE was as follows: On the Motion that the House do resolve itself into Committee, to move, "That as regards clause two, this House, while not unfavourable to the admission of women, is of opinion that the subject is so connected with the constitution of a Second Chamber, that it would be more conveniently discussed when proposals as to the constitution are before the House. favourable to the admission of women." I should like to support the noble and learned Viscount in what he has proposed because I think it would be more satisfactory to have the details of this clause, considered carefully in some Committee.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I welcome the suggestion made by the noble and learned Viscount, because it appears that it would be a very futile performance to discuss, perhaps in great detail, the circumstances in which Peeresses of one class or Peeresses of another class might sit in this House, if your Lordships were in the end to take the decision that no Peeresses of any class should sit here. If your Lordships should take the view that Peeresses in existing circumstances should be made eligible I will, if it meets your Lordships' approval, move to re-commit the Bill so that the Amendments can be reconsidered.

On Question, That Clause 2 be agreed to—

VISCOUNT FINLAY

I hope your Lordships will say that this clause should not stand part, and I desire to offer a few observations on the subject. I do not think it is desirable, particularly at the present time, that anything of this kind should be carried enabling a grant to be made to women to sit as Peeresses in the House of Lords. It will be said, of course, that they are now qualified to sit in the House of Commons and that judgment has been given Upon that point. Yes, but how has it worked? From the opinion of Parliament on the question whether women should sit in the House of Commons, there was an appeal at the General Election, and although there are an enormous number of women voters I believe I am right in saying that only one woman was returned to sit in the House of Commons. That lady was returned in somewhat special circumstances, and I think she has never taken her seat. The decision of the women, therefore, is adverse to women taking an active part in the Legislative Assembly.

I submit-that the present is a singularly inopportune moment for altering the constitution of the House of Lords. We are face to face with a proposal for the reform of this House. When such proposal is dealt with, let us deal with the subject as a whole and not tinker with alterations which interfere with the state of things that has existed so long, I personally believe to the general advantage of the House and, through the House, of the country. No one proposes, as I understand it, that there should be perfect equality of the sexes with regard to the rights of Peeresses to sit in the House, that they should descend to all the children born irrespective of sex and in order of date of birth. No such proposal has been made, and I do not think that if it were made it would be regarded as workable. Then with regard to the House of Commons, a woman, of course, has to run the gauntlet of a constituency before she can sit there. However, why should we, when the whole thing must be overhauled at no distant date, alter things in a matter of detail of this kind and also on a matter in regard to which opinion is very much divided? My opinion is that it would be inconvenient, that it would do no good, and that it would be much better that the clause should be left out of the Bill. Therefore I move that this clause do not stand part.

Amendment moved— Leave out Clause 2.—(Viscount Finlay.)

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

My proposal is to insert a clause which merely gives to Peeresses, who are Peeresses in their own right, a seat in the House of Lords. The noble and learned Viscount says it is inopportune to take any steps because at no distant date there will be a complete reform of your Lordships' House. Ever since I can remember anything I have always been told that your Lordships' House is going to be reformed; but I do not think it will be done in a great hurry. It is about the biggest alteration of the Constitution which you can possibly effect, and when it comes—well, it will come. At the present time the great thing is to know whether your Lordships wish to give those Peeresses—there are not many of them—the right to sit in the House who are Peeresses in their own right. The Amendment standing in my name on the Paper is to omit the clause in the Bill and to insert another clause which will give to Peeresses in their own right a seat in this House, to Irish Peeresses the right to vote for the representative Irish Peers or to be elected direct, and the same with Scottish Peeresses. Therefore I should like to ask your Lordships to adopt my proposed clause instead of the clause in this Bill.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I ought to say a word on behalf of the Government in relation to this proposal, although I made it plain on the Second Reading that every member of the Government could vote as he pleased and, of course, the Government Whips would not be employed. If the decision were taken, as it may be, that this Clause at the present stage should not find a place in the Bill, it ought I think to be made clear that your Lordships are not pre-judging the ultimate and extremely important question which will have to be faced one day as to whether or not women are to be made eligible for such Second Chamber as may take the place of this. I think your Lordships would be very reluctant to reach any conclusion in arriving at which it was not made plain that you were alive to the movements and changes which have taken place in the last ten or fifteen years, and that you were prepared to consider with a completely open mind when the time came the arguments which won acceptance in the House of Commons. Also that your Lordships take the view—at a time when it is plait that in the near future considerable proposals for amending the constitution of this House will be forthcoming—that you are fully entitled to a say if all-round changes are about to be introduced within one, two, three, or even five years—because that period is small in comparison with the 600 or 700 years in which we have lived under the old conditions. With that observation, in order that our attitude may not be misunderstood outside the House, I repeat that the members of the Government will vote as they may be advised.

VISCOUNT BRYCE

I should like to say a word, in response to what has been said by the noble and learned Lord, as one of those who have given a most constant and firm opposition to the proposal of including women in the franchise at all. I believe that we ought not to apply that principle in the case of this House; in fact, I endeavoured to convey that view when speaking on the Second Reading. I think that the vote now given will not be given with any view at all in this House towards the permanent exclusion of women, but merely as a statement that we do not consider this an opportune moment, as the noble and learned Viscount has observed, for making a change.

LORD MUIR MACKENZIE

I am sorry to trespass upon the time of the House again upon this Bill, but I should like to say that I am very much obliged to the Lord. Chancellor for what he has said about it being thoroughly understood that this is not giving a decision against the admission of women into this House. The reason why I put down a Motion on going into Committee was to try if possible to get rid of that situation; but if it is perfectly understood that we are not in fact voting against the exclusion of women by leaving out the clause which provides for their inclusion, it seems to me that the proposal of the noble and learned Viscount May very well be adopted.

LORD EMMOTT

I do not want to detain the House, but I should like to add one word. It seems to me that the House is going to vote for the exclusion of this clause. I know of no sufficient reasons why woman should not be qualified even as art interim matter. At the same time I do not consider the matter to be one of great importance, and I do not want to detain the House in argument.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

There are very few of your Lordships here, and therefore I shall not offer any opposition to the exclusion of the clause.

On Question, Amendment to delete Clause 2 agreed to.

Remaining clause agreed to.

Title:

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I have a formal Amendment in the Title involved in the decision which the House has readied.

Amendment moved— In the Title, delete the words ("and with respect to the rights of peeresses").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.