Lords Sitting of 25 June 1919

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
TYNE IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Read 2a.
MIDDLESBROUGH CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
  STOCKTON-ON-TEES CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
  Read 3a and passed, and sent to the Commons.

PREVENTION OF ANTHRAX BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF JERSEY: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to give a Second Reading to the Bill which stands in my name, I would first say that the Prevention of Anthrax Bill is based upon the recommendations of a Departmental Committee which reported last year, and that it may be regarded as uncontroversial in that it has the unanimous support of both employers and employees in the industries concerned. The subject is one on which labour opinion is particularly strong, and it is therefore of special importance in present circumstances that the Bill should pass into law at the earliest possible date.
It may, perhaps, be convenient if I give your Lordships a summary of the main points in the Report of the Departmental Committee, and then of the steps by which it is proposed to carry out their recommendations. Anthrax is a germ disease of world-wide distribution. Hoofed animals are particularly susceptible to it, and infection is conveyed through skins, hides, wool, hair, and bristles to workers who come into contact with these materials. The disease usually takes one of two forms—either external anthrax, caused by the virus gaining access to the system through
1058
an abrasion of the skin, or pulmonary or internal anthrax caused by inhalation of the virus. The latter is almost invariably fatal. The Committee were originally appointed to investigate the question so far as it concerned the worsted industry, but their investigations were subsequently extended over the entire field.
The whole question has received a good deal of attention since 1879, when Dr. J. H. Bell, of Bradford, first established the fact that the disease then known in Bradford as woolsorters' disease was in fact anthrax. A code of voluntary rules was brought into operation soon afterwards, and this system was continued until 1897, when a code of special rules for wool sorting was brought into legal operation as a result of the Departmental Committee in the previous year. Similar regulations for wool combing were established in 1901, and a combined code for wool sorting and wool combing was brought into force in 1905 and is still in operation. In the same year a trade body, known as the Bradford and District Anthrax Investigation Board, was set up and has since done very valuable work. In spite of all the precautions taken, there has been a steady increase in reported cases of anthrax during the past twenty years in the woollen and allied trades. The countries from which the dangerous materials are exported are India, Central Asia, Persia and Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, Peru, Russia, Egypt, and South Africa. Incidence of anthrax appears to be particularly severe among animals in India and all Asiatic countries. The Committee say, however, that—
"All materials must be regarded as being possibly infected, except those derived from countries in which notification of cases and measures for prevention of anthrax, including destruction of wool and hair of infected animals, are effectively enforced—"
—as in New Zealand. The most dangerous materials of all are East Indian goat hair, Persian wool, East Indian wool, and Egyptian wool.
The Committee report that the existing regulations are unequal to the task of coping with the nature of the disease; and they go on further to say that—
"The danger of infection from anthrax in wool is not one which can be dealt with advantageously by means of regulations, and, given the satisfactory alternative, is one which ought not to be dealt with in factories."

1059
The consideration of these points leads the Committee to their first recommendation, namely, that—
"The policy of attempting to control the danger of infection from anthrax in wool by regulations under the Factory Act should be abandoned, and instead the principle of compulsory disinfection substituted."
A special Sub-Committee was appointed to investigate the possibilities of disinfection. This Sub-Committee succeeded in evolving a system of disinfection which appears to be completely effective without damaging the material. The Committee are strongly of opinion that disinfection should be brought into operation immediately, even though on a small scale, and that routine disinfection of East Indian goat hair, Persian wool, East Indian wool, and Egyptian wool should be established as soon as possible.
To turn to the steps taken to carry out the Committee's Report, they are as follows. In the Anthrax Prevention Bill it is suggested that two main provisions should receive effect—namely, first, power to prohibit by Order in Council the importation of goods infected or likely to be infected with anthrax, either absolutely or subject to specified conditions such as have reference to particular ports and disinfection; secondly, power for the Secretary of State to provide and maintain (or to arrange for the provision and maintenance of) the necessary works for the disinfection of infected goods, and to make rules for the payment of fees by the importers of infected goods. As regards offences the Secretary of State may, by Order in Council, be given the same powers of dealing with improperly imported goods as are possessed by Customs officers under the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876—that is to say, powers of seizure and destruction. Clause 2, paragraph 2, authorises the incurring of expenditure for carrying the Act into effect "up to such an amount as the Treasury may approve."
The next main provision is that which provides for the trial disinfection station and appointment of a Committee. A Committee has been appointed, including representatives of the trade and of the Home Office and the Local Government Board, with Sir W. Middlebrook, M.P., as Chairman, to advise as to the arrangements to be made for the establishment of the trial disinfection station recommended in the Committees Report; to carry out disinfection, and control the working of the
1060
station subject to the instructions of the Home Office; to make recommendations as to the construction and working of the disinfecting stations and the arrangements necessary for bringing the complete scheme into operation; and to advise on any other matters which may be referred to them in connection with the scheme. As soon as the trial station is working, it is proposed to start with disinfecting East Indian goat hair (the most dangerous of all varieties, and at present subject to no regulation), of which between 4,000,000 lbs. and 5,000,000 lbs. are imported annually.
Then we have to consider the possibility of international co-operation. The Department are in consultation with the Foreign Office, the Colonial Office, and the India Office, and it is hoped that international action in the matter may ultimately come about. As this Bill is part of the Government policy to improve the lot of the workers in the country and as it has received general and indeed unanimous support, I trust that your Lordships will see your way to grant it a Second Reading. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Jersey.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

TUNIS.
THE EARL OF MAYO THE EARL OF MAYO rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether it is true that the Tunisian Government, by the Decree of the 22nd of February, 1919, has imposed a tax on the resale of all property in the Regency of Tunis to foreigners by Tunisian or French subjects, and that this tax will not be imposed on any sale of property as between French subjects and French subjects or Tunisian and Tunisian subjects, or French and Tunisian subjects, therefore placing all British subjects who may wish for business or commercial reasons to acquire any property in the Regency of Tunis in a disadvantageous position as compared with French and Tunisian subjects.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Decree institutes a tax on all property sold by a French or Tunisian subject to the subject of any other nation. The Decree commences by stating that it was on the advice of the Conférence Consultative that this tax was imposed. I should like to

1061
explain to the Government and your Lordships what the Conférence Consultative is. It is not an elective or even a representative body. The members are chosen by the French Minister Resident General, and can be considered in no way independent. I am told that when the question of this new tax was before the Conférence a member remarked that this tax was not likely to bring in much revenue. He was informed that the tax was not being instituted for fiscal but for national resources. The discussion was then dropped.
It must be remembered that the principal owners of land in Tunis are Arabs and Mahomedans. It is a great surprise to them that, in spite of the cordial relations which they have been led to believe exist between England and France, a Beyical Decree should have been issued and countersigned by the French Minister Resident imposing what, from their point of view, they look upon as a fine on them if they sell any property to a British subject.
The manner in which this tax has been brought forward is most dangerous, and it has formed a precedent which the French may invoke in other countries under their domination or which may come under their domination, especially where the system of government is that of a protectorate. If this tax is imposed it will be a serious impediment to any trade or commercial interest that England may hope to obtain in the Regency of Tunis. If a firm of British merchants wish to establish their business there and send representatives to Tunis for the purpose of acquiring property for the purpose of the business they will find this tax, to be levied by the Tunisian Government, placing them at the outset in a very disadvantageous position as compared with a French firm. A British firm would hardly be encouraged to start any business in the Regency.
It has been said that this tax has been levied more especially to prevent Italian subjects coming to the Regency of Tunis. Whether this is so or not the fact remains that British interests, as well as Italian interests, will be affected. The Italians, I imagine, are quite equal to defending their own rights. But I wonder what our Allies would think supposing they wished to come here and buy property in the British Isles and were told that if they
1062
bought property they would be specially taxed because they had bought the property. That is what has occurred to me in this matter.
Our relations with the French are most cordial, but I do not suppose anybody outside the Foreign Office knows anything of this matter. The Foreign Office may have had a report from our Consul-General at Tunis upon it, and I think it should be brought forward in public in order that our interests should be protected. I hope that there will be some explanation as to what the Government propose to do in the matter. It would be out of the question that we should retaliate; that is unthinkable. But with regard to the prospects of increasing our trade all over the world I think it is, to put it mildly, rather a strong order that the French should promulgate this decree without any one knowing anything about it.
THE CONTROLLER OF THE PRISONERS OF WAR DEPARTMENT (LORD NEWTON): My Lords, as the Lord President of the Council has an important engagement elsewhere. perhaps the noble Earl will allow me to answer the Question on his behalf. The facts are as stated by the noble Earl, and I am quite prepared to accept all that he has said. It is extremely doubtful whether we have any real grounds for protest, because although we enjoy, technically, "most-favoured-nation" treatment in Tunis, that does not comprise the treatment which is enjoyed by France; and, moreover, as the tax technically is imposed on the French or Tunisian vendor, and not on the foreign purchaser, the French Government may very well contend that we cannot prevent them taxing their own nationals.
The noble Earl made some allusion to the position of the Italians in Tunis, and, as he is well aware, Italian interests are considerably more important than British interests in Tunis. There are a far larger number of Italian subjects settled in Tunis than there are British. His Majesty's Government have been in communication with the Italian Government, and, in spite of the much greater interest which this question possesses for Italy, it appears that the Italian Government do not contemplate taking any action with regard to the action of the French Government.

DISABLED MEN (FACILITIES FOR EMPLOYMENT) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF JERSEY: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to give a Second Reading to this Bill I may, perhaps, say that it passed the House of Commons without discussion. It is based on the unanimous recommendations of a Departmental Committee which reported last year. The Departmental Committee was appointed in consequence of representations that difficulties were being experienced in arranging for the return to civil employment of disabled men discharged from His Majesty's Forces, owing to an apprehension amongst some employers that such men may be more liable to accidents, and that the cost of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Acts may be increased, or, if the employer insures against his liability under the Acts, that the insurance company may raise the rates of premium.
The Committee considered that employers should be relieved by the State of additional charges, if any, of this kind which may be entailed by the employment of disabled sailors, soldiers, or airmen (the test of disability to be the receipt of a disability pension from the State), and recommended a scheme on the following lines. First, that arrangements be made between the Government and insurance companies under which, in return for certain guarantees against resulting loss, if any, the companies would undertake to insure these men (along with the other workmen, or alone if desired) at the same rates of premium as able-bodied men, and not to raise those rates in consequence of their employment. Secondly, the recommendation was that direct arrangements should be made by the Government with any large firm, if so desired, for a Government indemnity in respect of any compensation cost incurred in respect of these men above the average cost for the works in the case of other workmen. This alternative concession must be limited to large firms in whose case the figures as to compensation, etc., for the works are large enough to give fair averages They also recommended that arrangements be made with mutual indemnity societies on similar lines, but with modifications to suit the varying systems on which these societies conduct their business. It has so far been found that an arrangement on the same
1064
principles as either the first or second recommendation will be suitable in each case.
I would point out that, whatever the charge may be, it will be a constantly decreasing charge as these men will not be for all time a charge on the State. I do not, however, think that any such consideration will weigh with your Lordships in, as I hope, consenting to grant a Second Reading to this Bill, as we all feel that we owe it to these men to do all that lies in our power to enable them to return to their old employment, or some other congenial work, and that they should not suffer any further disability as the result of the sacrifices they have already made on our behalf.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Jersey.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE (QUALIFICATION OF WOMEN) BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day read for resuming the adjourned debate on the Motion for Third Reading.
On Question, Bill read 3a.
Clause 1:
Women shall not be disqualified from being justices of the peace.
1. A woman shall not be disqualified by sex or marriage for being appointed or being or becoming by virtue of office a justice of the peace.
LORD STRACHIE LORD STRACHIE moved to insert, at the end of Clause 1, the words "provided she has attained the age of thirty years." The noble Lord said: In moving this Amendment I am following the precedent set under the Franchise Act of last session. It is only reasonable, if a woman is not to be entitled to vote for a Member of Parliament (which in some ways is not so important a matter as administering justice) until she is thirty years of age, that she should not have the right to send persons to prison until she has attained the age of thirty. The noble Earl, in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, based his principal argument on the desirability of women sitting on cases of indecent assault and crimes against women. I am entirely with the noble Earl in that view, and I am

1065
also in entire agreement with him in his condemnation of the inadequate penalties imposed by justices in some of these cases. But I think that is all the more reason why you should have women of mature age, at any rate of over thirty years of age, to adjudicate on such cases. I see the noble Earl, Lord Crawford, smiling—
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I entirely agree.
LORD STRACHIE: It would be very disagreeable for any noble Lord, sitting at the hearing of such eases as bastardy cases, to have a young unmarried woman sitting with him on the Bench. In such cases, if you are to have women justices, it is only fit and right that they should be women of mature age, and I am unable to see why the noble Earl in charge of the Bill (Earl Beauchamp) disagrees with me. The only reason appears to be that he thinks it is a further inequality between men and women, but I do not think that he objected on the Franchise Bill to the age limit which was there imposed. It seems to me that the question of inequality is not a very strong argument, because as a matter of fact I think the noble Earl would say that he himself as a Lord Lieutenant would not think of appointing a young man of twenty-three or twenty-four. The old idea of appointing a man simply because he had arrived at the age of twenty-one has now fallen into disuse. Therefore I think we may put aside the question of equality and treat this matter entirely upon its merits, and ask ourselves whether it is not desirable that we should have a limitation, and whether, if it is right to put women upon the Bench, it should not be on the same conditions as those on which they obtain the franchise—namely at the age of thirty. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 7, after ("peace") insert ("provided she has attained the age of thirty years").—(Lord Strachie.)
EARL BEAUCHAMP: We have already had one discussion upon this subject, and therefore it is not necessary that I should detain your Lordships at any great length. The noble Lord who has moved this Amendment has put forward no argument in favour of it beyond those which he advanced on the previous occasion to which I have already referred I confess that I am not able to agree with him.
1066
There is no analogy between the vote given in this House upon the question whether women under thirty should be given the franchise and this present measure. The former was a compromise agreed to between all parties in the State, and this is a smaller matter dealing with a different question, and really it seems to me that it is impossible to find any analogy. You might just as well say that, in any matter dealing with the power and privileges of women, they should not be given a voice until they arrive at the age of thirty. Just at the moment when we are trying to sweep away all the barriers between the sexes it seems to me unfortunate that we should create this new one.
There is no reason to suppose—indeed, I heard the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack say on the last occasion that he would himself prevent—the Benches being flooded by a large number of inexperienced women. Nobody expects that this would be the result. For my own part, I have complete confidence in the Lord Chancellor and the Advisory Committees, and I am sure that they will not recommend the appointment of unsuitable women. In the circumstances I hope that your Lordships will agree to the Bill passing as it is drafted, and will not insist upon inserting a clause which certainly by a very large number of women will be looked upon as a fresh and new disqualification against their sex.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD BIRKENHEAD): I rather hope that the noble Lord who moved the Amendment will not think it necessary, on reflection, to carry the matter to a Division; and if he will allow me to tell him, almost in a sentence, the reasons which lead me to form this hope, I think I can show that the case of which he is apprehensive is one which, on reflection, he will see is extremely unlikely to occur in the actual circumstances which will arise when this Bill is passed.
I attempted to make it clear that I should not in any circumstances, if this Bill became law, sanction the appointment of large numbers of women justices. It would be impossible to do so, if only for the reason that the Bench, speaking generally, is very fully manned all over the kingdom, and it is obvious that women who aspire to become justices will only receive con

1067
sideration as and when proper vacancies occur. In those circumstances let us consider what a woman has to face who desires to become a justice of the peace. In the first place it is, of course, the Lord Chancellor who appoints. The noble Lord said inadvertently that the Lord Lieutenant appoints, but he is far too conversant with constitutional practice not to know that the Lord Chancellor has never surrendered the right to appoint justices of the peace, although he generally, and I may say invariably, is glad to have the experience and advice furnished to him ungrudgingly by the Lords-Lieutenant and the Advisory Committees.
It is nevertheless true that any woman of twenty-five years of ago who aspires to become a justice of the peace would have to satisfy the Advisory Committee of her exceptional fitness. I am
Resolved in the affirmative, and Amendment agreed to accordingly.
Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Bill passed and sent to the Commons.

CENSORSHIP IN INDIA.
LORD SYDENHAM: My Lords, I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether it is the fact that there is a double censorship in India at Peschawur and at Simla; and if so, whether a competent censor cannot be found to do the
disposed to believe that if any such woman is able to satisfy not only the Advisory Committee but the Lord Lieutenant and the Lord Chancellor, she would be a rather remarkable young woman, and might conceivably be a valuable addition to the Bench. The noble Lord need have no apprehensions that, at any rate while I occupy my present position, there will be any invasion of the Bench by women of twenty-five years of age. If the noble Lord thinks it necessary to carry the point to a Division I confess, although I have not very strong feelings on the point, I shall vote with the noble Earl who moved the Second Reading.
On Question, whether the words proposed shall be added to the clause?
Their Lordships divided:—Contents, 35; Not-Contents, 17.

CONTENTS.

Argyll, D.

Waldegrave, E.

Hylton, L.

Northumberland, D.

Lawrence, L.

Sutherland, D.

Allendale, V.

Saltoun, L.

Falkland, V.

Sempill, L.

Linlithgow, M.

Harcourt, V.

Shandon, L.

Hood, V.

Sinha, L.

Bathurst, E.

Somerleyton, L.

Grey, E.

Annesley, L.

Stanmore, L.

Harewood, E.

Avebury, L.

Strachie, L.[Teller.]

Jersey, E.

Barrymore, L.

Sudeley, L.

Malmesbury, E.

Desborough, L.

Sydenham, L.

Mayo, E.

Forester, L.

Wigan, L.(E. Crawford.)

Stanhope, E. [Teller.]

Granard, L. (E. Granard.)

Wyfold, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Birkenhead, L. (L. Chancellor.)

Strafford, E.

Forteviot, L.

Rathcreedan, L.

Wellington, D.

Clinton, L.

St. Levan, L.

Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.) [Teller.]

Shaw, L.

Camden, M.

Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

Weardale, L.

Beauchamp, E. [Teller.]

Emmott, L.

Willoughby de Broke, L.

Bradford, E.

Erskine, L.

work at Peschawur, and thus prevent delays in the transmission of news to the Press.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (LORD SINHA): My Lords, I regret that the India Office has no information on the point referred to in the noble Lord's Question, but we are inquiring upon it from the Government of India; and perhaps it will be some satisfaction to the noble Lord that we have already arranged that Reuter's daily messages with regard to the Afghan situation should have Government priority in transmission.
LORD SYDENHAM: I thank the noble Lord for the reply. The whole House will be glad to know that we shall probably now get better, fuller, and quicker information about the situation in Afghanistan than we have had hitherto.

PRIVATE BILLS.
[From Minutes of June 24.]
STONEY'S DIVORCE BILL [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read: Counsel called in: Witnesses examined: Moved that the Bill be now read 2a; agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
STRETFORD URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
  PENSIONS FUNDS (CARDIFF) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.
SHEFFIELD CORPORATION BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
NORTHAMPTON GAS BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.

ANIMALS (ANÆSTHETICS) BILL.
Second Reading (which stands appointed for to-morrow) put off sine die.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes before five o'clock.