ROADS BILL.

HL Deb 21 December 1920 vol 39 cc759-97

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

to express their views and submit their arguments. I think I have called your Lordships' attention to two or three vital points which will justify us in adopting the Amendment.

On Question, That the Bill be now read 2^a?—

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 83; Not-Contents, 36.

CONTENTS.
Birkenhead, L. (L. Chancellor.)	Farquhar, V. (L. Steward.)	Dynevor, L.
	Sandhurst, V. (L. Chamberlain.)	Douglas, L. (E. Home.)
Richmond and Gordon, D.	Churchill, V.	Erskine, L.
Ailsa, M.	Falmouth, V.	Faringdon, L.
Bath, M.	Finlay, V.	Greville, L.
Camden, M.	Goschen, V.	Harris, L.
Exeter, M.	Hardinge, V.	Hylton, L.
Linlithgow, M.	Hood, V.	Inverforth, L.
Salisbury, M.	Milner, V.	Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)
Albemarle, E.	Peel, V.	Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)
Ancaster, E.		Lawrence, L.
Bradford, E.	Abinger, L.	Lee of Fareham, L.
Chesterfield. E.	Ampthill, L.	Marehamley, L.
Doncaster, E. (D. Baccleuch and Queensberry.)	Annesley, L. (V. Valentia.)	Monkton, L. (V. Galway.)
	Avebury, L.	Moulton, L.
Dundonald, E.	Balfour, L.	Ranksborough, L.
Lanesborough, E.	Bellew, L.	Rathcreedan, L.
Lindsey, E.	Berwick, L.	Riddell, L.
Lucan, E.	Blythswood, L.	Ruthven of Gowrie, L.
Lytton, E.	Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.)	St. Levan, L.
Malmesbury, E.	Cloncurry, L.	Somerleyton, L. [Teller.]
Morton, E.	Clwyd, L.	Stanmore. L. [Teller.]
Onslow, E.	Cochrane of Cults, L.	Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)
Powis, E.	Cole brooke, L.
Selborne, E.	Crawshaw, L.	Stuart of Wortley, L.
Stanhope, E.	de Manley, L.	Sydenham, L.
Strafford, E.	Deramore, L.	Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)
Vane, E. (M. Lordonderry.)	Desborough, L.	Wigan, L. (E. Crawford.)
Wicklow, E.	Dewar, L.	Wolverton, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.
Lincolnshire, M. (L. Great Chamberlain.)	Ashton of Hyde, L.	Nunburnholme, L.
	Boston, L.	Oranmore and Browne, L.
	Buckmaster, L.	Pentland, L.
Beauchamp, E.	Cawley, L.	Redesdale, L.
Midleton, E.	Chalmers, L.	Rotherham, B.
Russell, E.	Denman, L. [Teller.]	Sandys, L.
Westmeath, E.	Emmott, L. [Teller.]	Saye and Sede, L.
Bertie of Thame, V.	Fairfax of Cameron, L.	Shaw, L.
Bryce, V.	Hemphill, L.	Southwark, L.
Cowdray, V.	Incheape, L.	Stanley of Alderley, L. (L. Sheffield.)
Cladstone, V.	Knareshorough, L.
Haldane, V.	Monk Bretton, L.	Swaythling, L.
Knollys, V.	Muir Mackenzie, L.	Tenterden, L.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Earl of Lytton.)

EARL RUSSELL

My Lords, I notice that the noble Earl in charge of this Bill said on the Second Reading that the measure was practically non-contentious. That is the view of their Bills which is sometimes taken by members of the Govern- ment who wish to get on with them, and I daresay as it was considered in your Lordships' House at the somewhat unusual time of Saturday that was undoubtedly true so far as those proceedings were concerned. The fact is that this Bill although largely administrative bristles with contentious matter, and were it not for the hour both of the session and of the night there would be many points which I should like to discuss at some length with the noble Earl opposite. The main objection taken to it by motorists is one which is outside the purview of this Bill and outside the purview of this House, and that is the very high taxes we have to pay. Those are not imposed by this Bill, which merely deals with the machinery for their imposition.

Motorists as a whole are, perhaps, rather afraid of the Minister of Transport, and I am not sure that they do not always suspect his intentions, but since notice was given of the Committee stage of this Bill I have had an opportunity of consulting not only with the noble Earl but, by his kindness, with some of the advisers of the Ministry of Transport, and I hope that when we come into Committee the result of those conferences will be, considerably to shorten anything we have to say. There are a great many points that I could touch on. as I think the noble Earl knows, but I believe I shall be consulting the convenience of the House if I deal with them specifically as they arise in Committee.

LORD MONK BRETTON

My Lords, before the House goes into Committee, I should like to ask the noble Earl in charge of the Bill whether he can give us any light and leading on the position of the Bill administratively; I mean, the present position of the Bill as regards its administration both from the point of view of the local authorities who have to administer it and of the public who have to suffer under it.

Clause 1 of the Bill enacts that on and after January 1, 1921, these licences have to be obtained. A local authority who have to administer the Act depend for obtaining these licences on the Ministry of Transport. They have to get their stationery forms. They have to get the licences themselves, and I know that in many cases they have not got them yet. Also there are such small details left open and not yet decided as whether they are to use officially stamped letters or whether they are not. The local authorities have in a very short time to provide staffs for dealing with the applications for licences, and it is not easy to provide staffs for temporary work; you cannot take men on for a temporary job lasting three months so easily as you can for one lasting a longer period. It is a complicated thing, and you must have efficient staffs. It is very important that those staffs should have their stationery, forms, and all the paraphernalia in their possession two or three days at least before the Bill conies into operation, because otherwise the county halls of the counties will be besieged by people demanding licenses, and possibly the local authority will not have received these licenses from the Ministry of Transport.

The fact of the matter is that the Ministry of Transport are all behindhand in dealing with this Bill. I will give one illustration. It refers to the Regulations to carry out Clause 10, which says that the local authority are to provide metal plaques for the manufacturers dealing in motors who do not have to pay the full duties. The Ministry of Transport has sent down designs of those plaques. If this Bill is to become operative on January 1, and the local authorities are bound to supply those plaques on January 1, how in the world are they to get them, because the Ministry of Transport has not told them, and they are left to suppose that they have to order them and have them made during the Christmas holidays. The circular which gave this order arrived at the office of my county council on December 17—only four days ago, and the council, as I understand this Bill, have to provide these plaques by the morning of January 1, which appears to me to be a physical impossibility, unless the Ministry of Transport can show us the way. I ask that the noble Earl in charge of the Bill may be able to give us some guarantee that these local authorities are going to be provided with the material and papers and so forth in such time as will enable their new clerks to be able to understand them, and to deal with the public when they demand these things. Otherwise they are put in an unfair position, and the whole situation will be chaotic.

And if it is not fair for the local authorities' officials to put them in this position, it is still less fair to the public, and I fear that, whatever advertisements may be put in the local papers, a great many people who do not read the local papers will not see them, and we may have queues at the county halls demanding things which it is impossible to give, and there will be a great deal of trouble and public irritation. Therefore, the second thing I would ask the noble Earl is whether the operation of the Bill cannot be postponed. There will be no prosecution under this Bill, I should think, until at any rate February 1. If there are to be no prosecutions before then, why not say so? Cannot we get something authoritative from the Government on that point, because the effect would be that people would not all come at the same time on January 1 to get their licenses and create the unfortunate situation which I am rather afraid of. If the Government could give us some such guarantee as that I believe that such a course would do much to oil the wheels and enable this very difficult and critical thing—as it is for these small local authorities—to be dealt with.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

My Lords, I should like to support the appeal made by the noble Lord, Lord Monk Bretton. I think it will be almost impossible to get this Act into working order before January 1. I have seen it stated in the public prints that it is not to come into operation until February 1, but I have only seen that stated without any particular authority. Perhaps the noble Lord can give us some light on this question, because it is obviously impossible for the county councils and also for the public to work under this entirely new system without notice in the period which elapses between now and the 1st of January. I hope, therefore, the noble Lord will be able to give us some information.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

My Lords, I was rather alarmed when I heard the noble Earl opposite take me to task for claiming that this Bill was an uncontroversial Bill, but I was relieved as he went on to find that his chief objection to the Bill was not contained in the Bill at all but was directed to the motor taxes which are imposed by the Budget. A glance at the Order Paper is sufficient to show that this Bill is not without some elements of controversy. That I readily admit, but I hope the noble Earl will find as we go through Committee that, taken as a whole, considering its size and importance, no very great measure of controversy is raised by it.

With regard to the point raised by my noble friend Lord Monk Bretton, I agree with him that the late period at which this Bill has been introduced will allow very little time for the preparation and issue of the necessary registration cards, licences, and other forms for which the local authorities will become responsible. I ought, however, in justice to the Minister of Transport to say that the delay in introducing this Bill is not to be attributed to him, because the Finance Act which established these licences only received the Royal Assent on August 4 this year, and therefore there has been a very short time for the Department to prepare all the necessary machinery for working out the details of the scheme now embodied in this Bill. I admit that the fact that the Bill is only now introduced and that it has to come into operation on January 1 will allow a very short time to the local authorities.

I can assure the noble Lord that the declaration forms, registration cards, and licences are all now being distributed rapidly to the various local authorities throughout the country, and I am assured by the Department that all this material will be in the hands of the authorities at any rate by January 1. I will also give him the assurance for which he asks, that it is not the intention of the Ministry of Transport to take any action in Court, or anywhere else, for failure to comply with the requirements of the Act during the month of January—that is to say, no one will be held responsible for the requirements of the Act till February 1. I think the noble Lord will agree with me that that is the best way to attain the end we all have in view, because if we definitely postpone the operation of the Act we should only get the rush that he objects to at a later stage. I therefore give him that assurance. I would also like to add that it is of the utmost importance that those interested in the motor industry and owners of motor cars should apply for their licences and registration cards at as early a date as possible, and should also, as far as possible, apply for them in writing so as to avoid the queues to which the noble Lord has referred.

I can give him the further assurance that whilst the facts to which I have alluded have already been notified in the technical Press, it is the intention of the Ministry of Transport to issue to the Daily Press the information which I have now given to your Lordships.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3:

Establishment of Road Fund.

3.—(1) There shall be established for the purposes of this Act, in accordance with regulations to be made by the Treasury for the purpose, a fund to be called the Road Fund, and subject to such regulations as may be made by the Treasury with respect to accounts and investments, the Road Fund shall be subject to the control and management of the Minister.

(2) There shall be transferred or paid to the Road Fund all moneys which on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-one, are standing to the account of the road improvement giant or are payable to that account, and all investments representing accumulations of money standing to the account of the road improvement grant shall be transferred to such persons as the Treasury may direct, and shall, subject to the provisions of any regulations made by the Treasury under the foregoing subsection, be held by those persons for the purposes of the Road Fund.

(3) Any sums received by the Minister under Part II of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909, shall be paid by the Minister into the Road Fund in such manner as the Treasury may direct.

(4) There shall be paid out of the Road Fund in every year—

1. (a) to every county council by whom the said duties are levied an amount equal to the expenses properly incurred by that council in accordance with directions issued by the Minister with the approval of the Treasury in or in connection with the levying of the duties, and the registration of vehicles, and in issuing licences to drivers of vehicles, and such directions may provide for advances to be made to the said county councils from time to time as may be necessary during the year on account of such expenses:
2. (b) to every local or police authority such sum as the Minister, with the approval of the Treasury, may determine to represent the amount which would, if this Act had not been passed, have been received by the authority on account of fees or charges for the licensing of mechanically-propelled hackney carriages:

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, in subsection (2), after "Treasury may direct and shall," to insert "upon a direction in that behalf being given by the Treasury, by virtue of this Act vest in the persons specified in the direction, and shall." The noble Earl said: This is a drafting Amendment required by the Treasury. It merely gives effect to the intention of the Bill and. makes it clear that no document transferring an investment shall be required.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 35, after ("shall") insert ("upon a direction in that behalf being given by the Treasury, by virtue of this Act vest in the persons specified in the direction, and shall ").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The next three Amendments are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 4, line 8, leave out the first ("and") and leave out ("in issuing") and insert ("the issuing of")

Page 4, line 10, leave out ("to be") and insert ("being") and leave out ("the said")

Page 4, line 12, leave out ("such expenses") and insert ("any expenses so incurred by them as aforesaid").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU had on the Paper an Amendment in subsection (4) (b), before "amount," to insert "net." The noble Lord said: I will not trouble your Lordships with any argument about this Amendment, which I understand the Government will not accept. The noble Earl has explained that it really does not affect the point.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

This was put down under a misapprehension. The. Amendment is not necessary.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

will not move it.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I have next another drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 3, after the first ("the") insert ("estimated amount of the").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

The Question, is that Clause 3, as amended, stand part.

EARL RUSSELL

I should like to ask the noble Earl a question of which I am sorry to say I have not given him notice, and perhaps he will tell me that he cannot answer it. There was, it was always understood, a very large sum of several million pounds (I rather think £5,000,000) to the credit of the Road Fund at the beginning of the war which was, of course, very properly used for the purposes of the war. Has that money been returned, or will that money be returned, to the purposes for which it was originally collected and for which motorists were given to understand it was to be used? If the noble Earl is not in a position to reply I cannot press it, but it is a matter of some importance and I should be glad if he would tell the House what has happened to that sum.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I believe that the money to which the noble Earl refers has already been paid over and is now being distributed in grants.

On Question, Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4 agreed to.

Clause 5:

Provisions as to licences.

5.—(1) Every person applying for a licence under section thirteen of the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by this Act, or under section four of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888, shall make such a declaration and furnish such particulars with respect to the vehicle or carriage for which the licence is to be taken out or otherwise as may be prescribed.

(2) Subject to the provisions of this Act as to general licences, every licence issued under section thirteen of the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by this Act, shall be issued in respect of the vehicle specified in the application for the licence and shall not entitle the person to whom it is issued to use any other vehicle, and a county council shall not be required to issue any licence for which application is made unless they are satisfied that the licence applied for is the appropriate licence for the vehicle specified in the application, and, in the case of an application for a licence for a vehicle purporting to be the first application for a licence in respect of the vehicle, that a licence has not previously been issued in respect of that vehicle.

(3) Where any vehicle in respect of which any such licence as aforesaid has been issued is altered after the licence has, been issued in such manner as to cause the vehicle to become a vehicle in respect of which a licence at a higher rate of duty or a licence of a different class is required, the licence shall become void but the holder of the licence shall, on surrendering the same and furnishing the prescribed particulars, be entitled to receive a new licence in respect of the vehicle on payment of such amount, if any, as represents the difference between the amount payable on the new licence and the amount paid on the surrendered licence.

(4) Notwithstanding anything in the provisions of the Acts relating to Excise licences and without prejudice to those provisions, any such licence as aforesaid may be transferred in the prescribed manner.

(5) Subject as may prescribed every such licence as aforesaid shall, in the prescribed manner. be fixed to and exhibited on the vehicle in respect of which it is issued.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, in subsection (3), after "in respect of the vehicle," to insert "to have effect for the period for which the surrendered vehicle would, if it had not been surrendered, have remained in force." The noble Earl said: This is intended to make it clear that a person applying for a new licence in respect of an altered vehicle cannot demand a quarterly licence instead of an annual licence. If he is in possession of an annual licence he must apply for another annual licence, and if he is in possession of a quarterly licence he Must apply for another quarterly licence. The words are required to make it clear that existing licences must be renewed in the same form.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 11, after ("vehicle") insert ("to have effect for the period for which the surrendered licence would, if it had not been surrendered, have remained in force").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, at the end of the clause, to insert the follow new subsection— (6) Sections twenty and twenty-one of the Revenue Act, 1869, shall, subject to such modifications and exceptions as may be prescribed, apply to the declaration to be prescribed cinder this section, and sections twenty-two and twenty-three of the said Act shall have effect as though references to the declaration to be so prescribed as aforesaid were therein substituted in relation to carriages for references to the declaration under that Act.

The noble Earl said: This is practically a drafting Amendment. It inserts a provision adapting to the present Bill Sections 22 and 23 of the Revenue Act of 1869.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 21, at end insert the said new subsection.—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD STUART OF WORTLEY

I have on the Paper an Amendment to insert, at the end of the clause, the following new subsection— (6) Where upon application for a licence to ply for hire with an omnibus, the licensing authority either refuses to grant a licence or grants such a licence subject to conditions, in either case the applicant shall have a right of appeal to the Minister of Transport from the decision of the licensing authority, and the Minister shall have power to make such order thereon as he thinks fit, and such order shall be binding upon the licensing authority. For the purpose of this subsection the expression "omnibus" includes every omnibus, char-a-bane, wagonette, brake, stage coach, or other carriage plying for hire or used to carry passengers at separate fares. I am advised from a quarter from which all advice that comes is entitled to receive great respect that this Amendment, which I understand will be accepted with an addition, ought to come in Clause 15. Therefore I shall not move it now but will move it later.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6:

Registration and identification marks.

6.—(1) On the first issue by a county council of a licenee under section thirteen of the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by this Act, for a vehicle it shall be the duty of the council to register the vehicle in the prescribed manner without any further application in that behalf by the person taking out the licence, and subject to the provisions of this section, every such council shall assign a separate number to every vehicle registered with them, and the mark indicating the registered number of the vehicle and the council with which the vehicle is registered shall be fixed on the vehicle or on any other vehicle drawn by that vehicle or on both in the prescribed manner:

Provided that any number which has been assigned to a motor car under section two of the Motor Car Act, 1903, and which is the registered number of that ear on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-one, shall be treated as having been assigned to the car under the provision of this section and no new number shall be assigned to such a car.

(2) If the mark to be fixed in accordance with this Act is not so fixed, or if, being so fixed, it is in any way obscured or rendered or allowed to become not easily distinguishable, the person driving the vehicle shall for each offence be liable on summary conviction in respect of the first offence to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds, and in respect of a second or subsequent offence to a penalty not exceeding fifty pounds:

Provided that a person charged under this section with obscuring a mark or rendering or allowing it to become not easily distinguishable, shall not be liable to be convicted on the charge if he proves that he has taken all steps reasonably practicable to prevent the mark being obscured or rendered not easily distinguishable.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The first Amendment to this clause is drafting.

Amendment moved— page 6, line 29, leave out the first ("the") and insert, ("a").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

With reference to the Amendment I have down on this clause, I am well aware that the Government in another place inserted certain words including those now in the Bill. I suggest with all respect that those words are not quite sufficient, and that the words I have put down on the Paper "or that the mark has become obscured by causes beyond his control" should he added. There are certainly circumstances under which snow or mud may get on the number plate and obscure it and the driver may be quite unaware of the fact even though he may have stopped half an hour before to clean the number plate. The Government have no objection in principle to it, but they think it is covered by the words of the Bill. I suggest that the words I have put down make it perfectly clear.

Amendment moved— Page 7, line 11, at end insert ("or that the mark has become obscured by causes beyond his control").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I am afraid I am unable to accept the Amendment proposed by the noble Lord, because it goes further than the Government are prepared to go. I think the case the noble Lord has in his mind is met by the words in the Bill. He has presented the case of a car driven in snow and the driver being stopped and criticised because his number plate has become obscured by snow. If according to the words in the Bill now, he is able to show that within a reasonable period he got down and cleaned the number plate it will be, of course, unreasonable to expect that he should do that every five minutes or even every half hour. If the Amendment were accepted it would be possible for him to go through a whole journey under those conditions without taking any step whatever to see if the number plate were obscured, and he could therefore claim that the circumstances were beyond his control.

I am unable to accept the Amendment because I am told that the Home Office attach a great deal of importance to not further weakening this clause. In support of that view I would like to tell your Lordships some rather interesting facts. Many complaints have been received of serious accidents caused by motor cars which have not stopped and owing to the obscuring of the number plate have passed on, and no means have been available for finding out the identity of the car causing the accident. The police authorities stated that in 1916 there were ten cases of fatal accidents in the metropolis in which the motor cars concerned passed on and escaped without being identified. This led the police to take special action, and in the course of a short campaign following those ten cases they discovered 4,000 cases of defective and not easily distinguishable number plates. In a subsequent campaign they discovered 6,000 similar cases. As the result of that many prosecutions ensued, and the result was that the number of fatal accidents caused by unidentified motor cars was reduced to 7 in 1917, to 2 in 1918, and to none at all in 1919. In view of those facts I hope your Lordships will support me in maintaining the clause as it stands.

EARL RUSSELL

I think the proviso here gives a somewhat illusory protection, because in spite of what the noble Lord says it is rather difficult to prove that you have taken all steps reasonably practicable unless you have in fact stopped every time your number plate becomes obscured, and in the kind of weather we have now it would mean stopping about every two miles. I think if the noble Lord looks into these alarming figures about number plates he will find that a good many of the cases are what I should call trivial. I have heard, and comparatively recently, of prosecutions for defective number plates, because the distance between the figures was seven-sixteenths of an inch instead of half an inch, or whatever it is that is prescribed, and those things do not do any harm; but I realise the difficulty of the Government and of the Minister of Transport. We want to snake sure not only that we shall suppress the road hog and the ruffian who drives a motor car, but that the ordinary motorist shall take every care to have his number plates in proper order; but subject to that we do not want unduly to harass him. I am afraid that whatever this provision is we shall have in the future, as in the past, to leave it to the common sense of the police and of the benches of magistrates.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

After what the noble Earl has said, I will withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, at the end of the clause, to insert the following new paragraph— A person shall not be liable to a penalty under this section if he proves that he has had no reasonable opportunity of registering the vehicle in accordance with this section, and that the vehicle is being driven on a public road for the purpose of being registered. The noble Lord said: The object of the Amendment is to enable a person who is in charge of an unregistered vehicle to drive it to the nearest registry office in order to register it.

Amendment moved— Insert the said new paragraph.—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I think there may be cases in which the provision made will be convenient, and therefore I am prepared to accept the Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7:

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert the following new subsections— (2) In paragraph (c) of subsection (1) or section four of the Motor Car Act, 1903, the words 'may cause' shall be substituted for the words 'shall cause,' and the words 'where any particulars are so endorsed' shall be substituted for the word 'also,' and in subsection (2) of that section the words, 'if so required by the convicting court' shall be inserted after the word ('shall') (3) Where a person who is the holder of a licence which has been endorsed under section four of the Motor Car Act, 1903, or under that section as amended by this Act, has not during a continuous period of not less than three years had any conviction so endorsed on the licence, he shall be entitled, either on applying for a renewal of the licence or, subject to payment of a fee of five shillings, at any time, to have issued to him a new licenc free from endorsements.

The noble Earl said: There are two other Amendments dealing with this matter on the Paper in the names of Earl Russell and Lord Montagu of Beaulieu. and I hope they will find that the new subsections which I am now moving will meet the point which they have in view. The point is this. It has been, I think, a justifiable ground of complaint on behalf of motor drivers for many years past, that if, as the result of some offence—it may be only a trivial offence—their licence is endorsed, that endorsement remains upon the licence for all time. Motorists have continually asked that some limit at any rate may be put to this period of endorsement. The Amendment which stands in my name will have this effect, that if for a period of three years no conviction has been recorded against the holder of a licence, he will then be entitled to apply for a clean licence. That, I think, is sufficient to carry out all the promises and mote or less pledges given to motorists on this point, and I think also as much as it is reasonable to require.

Amendment moved.— Page 7, line 14. at end insert the said new subaction.—(The Earl of Lytton.)

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I beg to thank the noble Earl for his concession on this point. I think it. is only fair that there should be some time limit to these endorsements. The days are past when you branded a person for life on the forehead, or by means of his licence, and there is no other offence known to English law for which your record of crime is placed against you for all time. Therefore the notate Earl is wily doing what is fair and eight.

EARL RUSSELL

I wish to join my noble friend in thanking the noble Lord opposite. I think we have received a concession which has, I think I may say, been to some extent held before motorists for some time as a reasonable thing for there to look for, and I am glad that our join efforts have succeeded in obtaining form the noble Lord, with his assistance, what I think is substantially the concession asked for. I may point out that I have at this moment in my pocket a licence with an endorsement of the year 1904 for an offence which I do not hesitate to say no bench of magistrates would convict to-day. I have been compelled for sixteen years to carry that stamp of infamy in my pocket and I am glad to get rid of it.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, at the end of subsection (5), to insert "in such manner and in accordance with such directions as may be contained in any Order in Council made under this Act." The noble Earl said: This merely gives effect to the intention of the Bill and follows the wording of subsection (5) which refers to the payment of certain funds into the Exchequer.

Amendment moved— Page 8, line 28, at end insert ("in such a manner and in accordance with such directions as may be contained in any Order in Council made under this Act").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

Do these words make it possible for the proceeds of taxation on motors to be diverted to other purposes by Order in Council?

THE EARL OF LYTTON

They will be diverted into the Exchequer instead of into the County Council.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 8:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I move the omission of Clause 8. This is a consequential Amendment.

Amendment moved— Leave out Clause 8.—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9:

(3) Where a licence has been taken out as for a vehicle to be used solely for a certain purpose and the vehicle is at any One during the period for which the licence is in force used for some other purpose, the person so using the vehicle shall, if the rate of duty chargeable in respect of a licence for a vehicle used for that other purpose is higher than the rate chargeable in respect of the licence held by him, be liable on summary conviction to a penalty of an amount not exceeding, three times the difference between the duty actually paid on the licence and the duty payable on a licence appropriate to a vehicle used for that other purpose or twenty pounds, whichever amount is the greater.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, in subsection (3), to leave out "on summary conviction to a penalty of an amount not exceeding" and insert "to an excise penalty of an amount equal to." The noble Earl said: These words are moved for the purpose of amending the clause to the form which is usual in the case of excise penalties. It does not alter in any way the effect of the clause, as under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts a penalty less than a maximum can always be imposed, but these being Excise penalties the draftsman attaches importance to the fact that the language in all cases should conform to that of the Excise Act. The Amendment is now moved for that purpose.

Amendment moved— Page 9, lines 11 and 12, leave out ("on summary conviction to a penalty of an amount not exceeding") ark insert ("to an excise penalty of an amount equal to").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10:

Provision as to licence duty in case of manufacturers or dealers in mechanically propelled vehicles.

10.—(1) If any person being a manufacturer of or dealer in vehicles makes, in the prescribed manner, an application in that behalf to the council of the county in which his business premises are situate, that he may be entitled, in lieu of taking out a licence for each vehicle kept by him at the appropriate rate of duty chargeable under the Second Schedule to the Finance Act, 1920, to take out a general licence in respect of all vehicles used by him the council may, subject to the prescribed conditions, issue to him such a licence on payment of duty at the yearly rate of ten pounds, or, in the case of a licence chargeable with duty under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2 of the said Schedule, at the yearly rate of thirty shillings:

Provided that—

1. (a) licences under this section at the yearly rate of fifteen pounds may taken for one quarter of the year only beginning the first day of January, the twenty-fifth day of Marsh, the first day of July, or the first day of October, and in the case of any licence so taken out the duty shall be thirty per cent. of the full annual duty; and
2. (b) the holder of any licence issued under this section shall not be entitled by virtue of that licence to use more than one vehicle at any one time, or to use any vehicle for any purpose other than such purposes as may be prescribed; and

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The Amendments in my name are drafting. I beg to move.

Amendments moved—

Page 9, line 35, after ("licence") insert ("to be used only on vehicles")

Page 9, line 40, leave out ("fifteen") and insert ("ten").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved in subsection (1) (b), after "at any one time," to insert "except in the case of a vehicle drawing a trailer and used for the prescribed purpose." The noble Lord said: I put down this Amendment in order to enable a motor landed at a port to tow another one, or to tow a trailer up to the registering sergeant. The manufacturer naturally has to get a number plate for each vehicle used, but when he tows another vehicle it will save trouble I think if he is allowed to have one number plate for the two.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 7, after ("time") insert ("except in the case of a vehicle drawing a trailer and used for the prescribed purpose").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I accept this Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 11:

VISCOUNT GALWAY moved, at the end of the clause, to insert: "Provided that the power conferred on the Minister by this section shall not be deemed to extend to any sums now or hereafter payable by any persons, whether by virtue of any Act or otherwise, and whether in one sum or by annual or other instalments, by way of charges for the adaptation, alteration or reconstruction of any road used by their vehicles."

The noble Viscount said: The matter I wish to bring before your Lordships is rather a different one, and to my mind a very important one. We are all aware that during the year 1921 a further tax is to be imposed on motors which will bring in a large revenue. We cannot be certain how long that tax will last. This is a question which concerns county councils in a very important manner. As your Lordships are aware, when boroughs have obtained powers of running omnibuses into county areas it was done by private Acts of Parliament under which arrangements were made for the payment of a lump sum or a sum paid by instalments to the county councils to meet what had to be done in the way of the reconstruction or reinstatement of roads for the purpose. Under the clause as it stands in the Bill, the Minister has power if he thinks fit to change or alter the whole principle on which such payments are made. I do not think that is a fair or right position for a county council to be put into when they have made a distinct bargain under an Act of Parliament, and I think the Act of Parliament ought to be carefully observed and not changed at the will of the Minister. Therefore I have put down an Amendment with the object of preventing those sums which are paid either by instalments or else in a lump being affected or changed by the Minister. It was part of a bargain by which the roads of the county were made fit and suitable for the purpose I have mentioned. It is a totally different proposition to the mileage rates for the maintenance of roads, and if the noble Lord says that a large sum of money is going to be allotted to the maintenance of roads that is a different point to the one I wish to bring before your Lordships. I sincerely hope my noble friend will accept my Amendment, and recognise the difference between the two classes of charges.

Amendment moved— page 10, line 31, at end insert the said new proviso.—(Viscount Galway.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

Whilst I am not able to accept my noble friend's Amendment, I think there is a great deal of force in what he has said. I certainly recognise that there is a difference between the two classes of charges to which he has referred. Clause 11 as it stands empowers the Minister to determine or modify mileage charges or other annual payments in respect of the use of roads by motor omnibuses. These mileage charges are usually payable either by borough councils running omnibuses outside their districts or by omnibus companies. My noble friend I think agrees that it is desirable that these payments should end since they are now to be superseded by the road fund. But it is true, as he has pointed out, that there are also occasions when quite apart from the mileage charges lump sum payments are made by these omnibus undertakings in respect of the alteration of roads or by boroughs running omnibuses outside their areas, and in so far as those are capital sums paid in respect of alterations to the roads, whether as lump sums or by payments covering a number of years in annual instalments, it is not the intention of the Minister to interfere with those payments, and I am informed that the Amendment of the noble Lord is really not necessary. There is always an objection to putting words into a Bill which must be presumed to have some meaning, when in fact they have no meaning. If the noble Lord will be satisfied with my assurance that the distinction between these two sums is recognised and will he maintained, I hope he will not press the Amendment. I am unable to accept it.

VISCOUNT GALWAY

I shall be quite satisfied with the noble Earl's assurance, and no doubt the Minister of Transport would thoroughly endorse everything he had said. But still he admits himself that his clause gives the Minister of the day power to interfere, and although one is only too glad to rely on the noble Earl's assurance, still words in an Act of Parliament, when they come to be interpreted elsewhere, do not command that, amount of respect that one would like to see granted to assurances given in this House.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

I am not quite able to understand the position of the noble Earl in charge of the Bill. Either his words have an effect, or they have not. So far as I read them the effect seems to me entirely reasonable, because it stops the breaking of an existing bargain. The noble Earl's statements seemed to me to be inconclusive. He seemed at one time to say it would be of no effect and at the other time that the Minister of Transport would do the thing without them.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I am sorry if I did not make my point clear. I did not mean that the Minister would give an assurance that he would not use the words of the clause in a particular sense, but I am informed that the words as they stand do not, in fact, cover the case which the noble Viscount has in his mind. For that reason the Amendment is unnecessary.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 11 agreed to.

Clause 12:

Special provisions as to hackney carriages.

(2) Where a licence has been taken out in respect of any vehicle at the rate of duty appropriate to a hackney carriage seating not more than a certain number of persons, the person keeping the vehicle shall, if it is used on any occasion for the purpose of seating more persons than the number aforesaid, be liable on summary conviction to a penalty of an amount not exceeding three times the difference between the duty actually paid on the licence and the duty payable on a licence for a vehicle being a hackney carriage seating that greater number of persons.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

There is a drafting Amendment here.

Amendment moved— Page 11, lines 8 and 9, leave out ("on summary conviction to a penalty of an amount not exceeding") and insert ("to an excise penalty of an amount equal to").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "three times." The noble Lord said: I put this Amendment down in order to ask the Government whether they do not think this penalty is rather stiff. There may be cases in which it would be wise to leave to the Bench the exact amount of the penalty.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 9, leave out ("three times").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I am afraid I cannot accept this, because the effect would be to make the penalty for seating more persons in a hackney carriage than the number for which the licence has been taken out only the sum equal to the difference between the duty actually paid and the duty payable on a licence for a vehicle seating a greater number of persons. It would, in effect, be no penalty at all, and it would merely require the payment of the proper amount of duty. The penalty in the Bill is quite a light one, and payment of three times the difference is, in the opinion of the Government, by no means excessive.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I beg to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

There are four drafting Amendments here.

Amendments moved—

Page 11, line 13, leave out ("hackney")

Page 11, line 14, after ("type") insert ("being hackney carriages")

Page 11, line 18, leave out ("vehicle") and insert ("carriage")

Page 11, line 19, leave out ("vehicle") and insert ("carriage").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 12, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 13:

Regulations.

13.—(1) The Minister may make regulations generally for the purpose of carrying this Act into effect, and in particular, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, may make regulations—

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, in the first paragraph of subsection (1), to leave out "and in particular, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, may make regulations." The noble Lord said: I should like to know if the noble Lord in charge of the Bill could explain what these words mean. They are English words, no doubt, but I do not understand them.

Amendment moved— Page 11, 1ine 28, leave out from ("and") to end of paragraph, line 30.—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

EARL RUSSELL

Before the noble Earl in charge of the Bill replies I should like to ask if I understand correctly that Clause 13 is the clause which is giving power to make regulations in substitution for the section in the Motor Car Act, 1903, and whether this is the clause which will give the power there used to be in the Local Government Board Regulations under the 1903 Act. With regard to paragraph (c) I am not sure about the "size, shape and character of the identification marks," but I take it that those words refer to what one ordinarily calls the numbers. Then there is also a provision for displaying the new licence. I do not wish to discuss the draft regulations now because they are not before us, but I should like to take this opportunity to make an appeal, through the noble Earl, to the Minister of Transport to avoid as far as possible defacing what, after all, in many cases are private carriages with an increasing number of symbols and other things stuck about them. We have had to put on a great number of them at the front and back of motor cars, and I understand it is now proposed that we should display some sort of coloured sign visible to the whole world on our wind screen. I hope it will be remembered that in many cases these are not tradesmen's vans but private carriages.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I think there is some misunderstanding as to the meaning of the clause. The clause runs as follows—"The Minister may make regulations generally for the purpose of carrying this Act into effect." That is to say, the clause does not give to the Minister any power of making regulations generally except in so far as to carry out any one of the clauses of this Act for which regulation may be necessary. It only gives him the power of making the regulation if it is necessary for the purpose of fulfilling any of the provisions of the Act. The words which Lord Montagu proposes to leave out would confine the power of the Minister to making regulations to the specific items which are mentioned below. I am not able to say offhand whether there is any other provision in the Bill which requires a regulation. I am not aware that there is, but there may be. This Bill has been drafted rather hurriedly in order to carry out the administration of the new funds provided by the Act, and I am told that it is possible there may be some clause in the Bill for which a regulation will have to apply which has not been included in the specific items below. That being so, it is desired to retain the words, but I can assure the noble Lord they will have no other effect than giving power to the Minister to make the Regulation should the Regulation be necessary to carry out any of the provisions of this Act.

With regard to the remarks of the noble Earl, I can assure him that it is not intended to issue any vexatious regulations or to interfere with the liberty and convenience of motorists more than is necessary for their own protection and their own convenience. The regulation with regard to licences to which he has referred has been made as much in the interests of the motorists as in the interests of the administration. Hitherto, as the noble Earl knows, a licence has been attached to the individual and may be transferable to any car. Now the licence is to Be attached to the car itself and will remain attached to the car. It is necessary to have some means of identifying the car to which the licence is attached with the owner, and it is only to establish that link between the owner and the licensed car that the registration books, to which I shall refer later, have been introduced, but not by any means for the purposes of red tape or vexatious Regulations.

EARL RUSSELL

There is a point in connection with licences attaching to cars instead of owners which I should have been glad to hear considered had time allowed. The noble Earl no doubt realises—I am sure the Ministry of Transport does—that if anybody sells a car at any period of the year, except on December 31, he will, in effect, lose a considerable sum of money—namely, the proportion of the licence fee paid for the whole year. I rather wish that when the Ministry of Transport attached the licence to the car it had at the same time made the surrender value, so to speak, of the licence payable by the purchaser of the car. It will cause a good deal of actual difficulty in practice in people taking new cars for old ones at any time except at the end of the year. There will be an administrative difficulty.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The noble Earl has not appreciated the fact that when the car changes hands the licence changes hands also, and the new owner gets the advantage of it.

EARL RUSSELL

Yes, I have, and the old owner loses the surrender value.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

That will be taken into consideration by the man who buys.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

Under the Bill you can take out a quarterly licence or a half-yearly licence for the rest of the year at a reduced rate.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The next Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 39, after ("displayed") insert ("and rendered easily distinguishable whether by night or by day").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I wish by the next Amendment to call attention to the question of registration books. I know the police attach a good deal of importance to them, and think that they will prevent traffic in stolen cars. I doubt that. As you can write for a licence book, so I think it will be possible for a car thief to write from a respectable address, such as a hotel, for a registration book, afterwards sell the car and produce a title for it. I think this provision will give facilities to the thief. We are anxious to avoid the perils of car stealing which has reached considerable proportions. Hundreds are stolen in the course of the year. Gangs go about stealing them, but I doubt whether the registration books will prevent them. I should like to hear what the noble Earl says, however.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 1, leave out ("registration books") and insert ("licences").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I could not accept the Amendment, because the institution of these registration books is, in fact, one of the most important provisions of the Bill. My noble friend is right in thinking that one of the reasons for the introduction of the registration cards is that it will make more difficult the theft of a car. He, on the contrary, I understand, is of opinion that it may have the opposite effect; that men may steal a car, drive it to another part of the country, stay at a hotel there for some days and then apply through the authorities for a registration card in respect of the car. I do not think the task of the thief will be so easy as my noble friend believes, because in future when any one applies for a registration card—and he must apply to the authority of the county in which he resides—the county authority will require either the production of the registration card of the car, or some evidence that the car for which the registration is required is a new car. He will either have to show the car or produce the invoice from the manufacturer or the dealer from whom he has bought the car, or produce some evidence to show that the car is a new car and has never had a licence before. Only on production of such evidence, which could not be produced in the case of a stolen car, would the card be issued. If my noble friend considers the matter carefully I think he will come to the conclusion that the system of registration cards which is introduced in this Bill will prove to be a very effective preventive to motor thefts which have been common in the past.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, in subsection (1) (g), after "payable" to insert "including vehicles belonging to the Crown." The noble Earl said: Cars belonging to the Crown do not at present pay licences, and it might be held that because of that they would not be entitled to the issue of registration cards. The Amendment is moved to make it quite clear that though licence duties are not paid in respect of these cars, Government Departments may apply for registration.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

Although it is the practice for such cars not to have licences they wear out the roads as much as any other cars, if not more so. I have always held that cars in the service of a Government Department should pay I towards road upkeep. I do not resist the Amendment, but I think all cars should contribute.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 20, after ("payable") insert ("including vehicles belonging to the Crown").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 13, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 14:

Penalties.

14.—(1) If any person uses any vehicle for which a licence under the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by this Act is not in force, or being a holder of a general licence or general licences issued under this Act uses at any one time a greater number of vehicles than he is authorised to use by virtue of that licence or those licences, he shall be liable to an excise penalty of twenty pounds, or an excise penalty equal to three times the amount of the duty payable in respect of the vehicles or vehicles whichever is the greater.

Proceedings for a penalty under this subsection may be brought at any time within a period of twelve months from the date on which the offence was committed.

(2) If any person in connection with an application for a licence for a vehicle or a carriage makes a declaration which to his knowledge is false or in any material respect misleading, or if any person being required by virtue of this Act to furnish particulars in connection with a change of the registration of any vehicle furnishes any particulars which to his knowledge are false or in any material respect misleading, he shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding one hundred pounds or to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding six months.

(3) If in any proceedings under this section any question arises as to the number of vehicles used or as to the character, weight or horse-power of any vehicle or as to the number of persons seated by a vehicle, or as to the purpose for which any vehicle has been used, the burden of proof in respect of the matter in question shall lie on the defendant.

(4) If any person forges or fraudulently alters or uses or fraudulently lends or allows to be used by any other person any mark or identifying a vehicle or any licence or registration book under this Act, he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding six months.

(5) All penalties and forfeitures recovered under or in pursuance of this Act, whether by a county council or by any other person, shall be paid into the Exchequer in such manner and in accordance with such directions as may be contained in any Order in Council made under this Act.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The first Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 41, leave out the first ("a") and insert ("the").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "one hundred" ["one hundred pounds"] and insert "fifty."

Amendment moved— Page 13, lines 17 and 18, leave out ("one hundred") and insert ("fifty").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I accept.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved to leave out subsection (3). The noble Lord said: This is a very stiff penalty which comes from the Revenue Act of 1869. The effect of it will be that if one of your Lordships filled up a form in January next for a certain vehicle and in good faith mis-stated the weight you might be liable to six months' imprisonment or a very severe fine. I think for this offence the penalty is too great. I am quite aware that this penalty was put in originally for purposes of the Revenue Act, but it seems to me that in criminal proceedings it has always been the tradition that a man is innocent until he has been proved guilty. Now, however, you put upon the man the burden of proving he is innocent.

Amendment moved— Page 13, lines 20 to 25, leave out subsection 3.)—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I think the noble Lord's Amendment and that which follows are alternatives. I very much regret that I am unable to accept either of them. The first Amendment would omit altogether the provision for placing the onus of proof on the defendant in respect of certain questions in any proceedings.

This provision is one commonly inserted in the Excise Acts. For instance Section 25 of the Revenue Act, 1869, is to the same effect. I believe in all Excise Acts that is the ordinary law, and it is necessary to maintain it in this case. If the noble Lord will consider for a moment cases might arise in which if the onus of proof were upon the prosecuting authority, the owner has it in his power by refusing necessary information to make such proof impossible. For instance, if a false declaration were made regarding the horse-power of a car the only means the authority would have of proving it to be false would be by inspection of the car. The owner of the car might refuse access to the car and therefore proof by the authority would be impossible. I hope your Lordships will allow the Bill to stand as it is.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 15:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

These are all drafting Amendments.

Amendments moved—

Page 13, line 39, after the second ("any") insert ("county council")

Page 13, line 41, at end. insert ("a").

Page 13, Page 14, line 2, after the second ("any") insert ("county council or")

Page 13, line 5, after ("paid") insert ("or to whom a general identification mark has been assigned under proviso (b) to subsection (4) of section two of the Motor Car Act, 1903")

Page 13, line 8, after ("licence") insert ("or mark")

Page 13, line 10, after ("licence") insert ("or mark").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD STUART OF WORTLEY moved, at the end of subsection (2), to insert the following new subsection— Where upon application for a licence to ply for hire with an omnibus, the licensing authority either refuses to grant a licence or grants a licence subject to conditions, in either case the applicant shall have a right of appeal to the Minister of Transport from the decision of the licensing authority, and the Minister shall have power to make such order thereon as he thinks fit, and such order shall be binding upon the licensing authority. For the purpose of this subsection the expression 'omnibus' includes every omnibus, char-a-bane, wagonette, brake, stage coach, or other carriage plying for hire or used to carry passengers at separate fares.

The noble Lord said: I should tell your Lordships that these words are copied from the Ministry of Transport Act, 1919, but in that place they are only temporary in their operation and this would make them permanent. The object is to give an appeal from the arbitrary refusal by a licensing authority of a licence to any vehicle requiring to he licensed submitted to a police authority to be so licensed. No one would suggest that there has been an abuse or arbitrary conduct in many cases, but there have been cases which made it seem necessary to Parliament to grant this appeal in the Ministry of Transport Act. I therefore move it here, and I have been asked to make an addition to the form which is on the Paper—namely, to insert between the two paragraphs— An order made by the Minister under this subsection shall be final and not subject to appeal to any Court, and shall, on the application of the Minister, be enforceable by writ of mandamus. I suppose I must accept those terms as a condition of the acceptance of my words. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 14, line 16, that the said two paragraphs, with the addition, be there inserted.—(Lord Stuart of Wortley.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I accept the Amendment in the form in which it is now moved.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 15, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 16:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The first two Amendments in my name are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 14, lines 18 and 19, leave out ("and paragraph (3) of section three of the Locomotives Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1878")

Page 14, line 20, leave out ("prescribe") and insert ("prescribes").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The next two Amendments taken together have the effect that they give power to prescribe by regulation different weights for the different class of locomotives in order to meet the case of locomotives carrying different kinds of gear and detachable parts.

Amendments moved—

Page 14, line 21, leave out ("the prescribed weight") and insert ("such weight as may be prescribed")

Page 14, line 22, at end insert ("and different weights may be prescribed with respect to different classes of locomotives").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, at the end of the clause, to insert the following new paragraph— () After five years from the passing of this Act no vehicle or locomotive using the highways shall exceed a hind axle laden weight of six tons and a front axle weight of three tons.

The noble Lord said: I have put this Amendment down in order to raise the question of the desirability of not increasing the weight of heavy vehicles upon the roads of this country. At the present moment heavy vehicles weigh far too much, up to 14 tons, with 8 tons weight on the hind wheels. This is far too much for anything but the best made roads, and this is an attempt on my part to limit the weight of laden or unladen vehicles. I think this is a subject to which the Ministry of Transport should give attention. Although I do not press this Amendment to-night it is a matter of great importance, and I trust local authorities will bring it forward again in some other form.

Amendment moved— Page 14, line 22, insert the said new paragraph,—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I sympathise entirely with the object of the Amendment and I can assure the noble Lord that the subject is engaging the attention of the Ministry of Transport. I am informed, however, that it would be quite impossible to accept this Amendment. At the present time it is found impossible to restrict some locomotives with a maximum weight of 10 or 14 tons. It is only by a certain measure of indulgence that locomotives are able to be kept within that figure, and it would be impossible at present to restrict them to 9 tons weight. Even in five years that would be impossible. I shall be glad, therefore, if my noble friend will not press his Amendment at this stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 16, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 17 agreed to.

Clause 18:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

The first of the two Amendments to this clause which stand in my name is the usual provision in the interpretation clause, and the second is purely drafting.

Amendment moved—

Page 14, line 36, after ("Act") insert ("unless the context otherwise requires").

Page 15, line 3, at end insert ("the expression 'police authority' includes the receiver of the metropolitan police district").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved to leave out subsection (2). The noble Earl said: This is only a drafting re-arrangement; subsection (2) becomes paragraph (a) of the next clause.

Amendment moved— Page 15, lines 4 to 12, leave out subsection (2).—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 18, as amended, agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON moved, after Clause 18, to insert the following new clause—

19. In the application of this Act to Scotland:

1. (a) A reference to paragraph (3) of section three of the Locomotives Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1878, shall be substituted for the reference to paragraph (3) of section twenty-eight of the Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878; and
2. (b) Except in this section references to a county shall be deemed to include references to a royal, parliamentary, or police burgh containing within its boundaries, as ascertained, fixed, or determined for police purposes, a population according to the census for the time being last taken of or exceeding fifty thousand, and every other burgh shall be deemed to form part of the county within which it is situated, and the expression "county council" shall be construed accordingly; and
3. (c) Section four of the Locomotives Act, 1898, with the exception of subsection (3) thereof shall apply to Scotland, with the substitution of arbitration by a single arbiter to be, appointed, failing agreement, by the sheriff, for arbitration under the Arbitration Act, 1889, and county and town councils may borrow for the purposes of the said section as so applied in like manner as they may borrow for the purposes of the Roads and Bridges (Scotland) Act, 1878.

The noble Earl said: The new clause which I move to insert after Clause 18 is consequential. I moved it out in another place and I move it in now.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

As I understand the matter the new clause which the noble Earl is moving is in substitution of the subsection which has been omitted from Clause 18.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

This is so.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

I have given notice of an Amendment to the subsection, and the best way of bringing it forward will be to move the same Amendment to the same words which stand in paragraph (b). Perhaps the noble Earl in the Chair will put paragraph (a) first?

On Question, Amendment (new Clause 19 as printed to the end of paragraph (a)) agreed to.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

With regard to paragraph (b) I beg to move an Amendment to the Amendment. The Amendment I move is in these terms: Leave out the words "Except in this section" and insert after "police burgh" "containing within its boundaries as ascertained, fixed or determined for police purposes a population according to the census for the time being last taken exceeding 60,000 and every other burgh shall be deemed to form part of the county within which it is situate."

I think the Amendment is an extremely bad one on every ground. It will have a most unfair effect on local administration in Scotland, and in my opinion will cause very grave and very great difficulties. In the first place it takes control away from the local authority which now has it. In Scotland nearly all burghs manage their roads, do repairs and pay for all expenses, and to take from those burghs the control of the motor traffic and give it to the county councils will be most unfair. The county councils will not have the same interest as the purely local authority, but in all probability their interest will be diverse and different.

The clause has only been brought to my notice to-day, and from the tenour of the communication I received I cannot think that the local authorities can have known of it for very long. I should like to ask those who know exactly when this clause was produced, when it saw the light for the first time.

Amendment moved to the Amendment— In paragraph (b) of the Amendment, leave out ("Except in this section"), and leave out all words after ("police burgh") and insert the said words.—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I have had no notice of this Amendment, and I am afraid that it is quite impossible for me to accept it. The noble Lord speaks of this as if it were a new clause moved now for the first time, but this is only a re-arrangement of the Bill as it was originally introduced. I have moved an Amendment on Clause 16 to leave out a paragraph of that clause for the purpose of inserting it here—the clause applying the Bill to Scotland. The clause to which the noble Lord takes exception is introduced from the Motor Car Act, 1903. So far as I understand, this is not a novel provision. It is, however, a little difficult for me to know what the effect of the Amendment is.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

Suppose there is a large county, and in it there are a dozen or 15 burghs. At the present time those burghs manage their own roads, they control the traffic, they pay the expenses, and they are the local authority. The effect of the provision which is now suggested is to take away the control from the purely local authority and give it to the county council. I cannot conceive that this has been made public without protests being received, and the tenour of the telegram which I have received today shows that the Convention of Royal Burghs, an authority which represents all the burghs in Scotland, have evidently only learnt of it for the first time. I am quite confident from my knowledge of local affairs that it is wrong in principle, it will be had in effect, and will cause a great deal of friction and difficulty in the future administration of this matter.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH

I should like to support my noble friend. These burghs are not only entirely separate from the counties, but in most cases they have also an entirely separate police force. I do not see how it is possible for the county council to carry it out, and from my own experience I do not think they would have any desire to do so.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I can only repeat the assurance which I gave just now, that the provision to which the noble Lord takes exception is directly copied from the Motor-car Act of 1903. It is not a new provision at all, and I cannot help thinking that the noble Lord is dealing with a different point. Although I have had no previous notice of the Amendment I have been informed of the telegram to which he refers, but that telegram refers to a different clause of the Bill—to Clause 7, which deals with the closing of roads, and that is quite a different point. The point there is that it is provided, on the application of a county council, that the Minister, after holding a local inquiry, may order a road to be closed, and the Convention of Royal Burghs of Scotland, I understand, have taken exception to that provision, thinking this gives the right to the county councils to close the roads over which they have control. That, however, is a complete misapprehension. The county councils will have no control whatever over the portion of the roads which belongs to the Royal burghs, but the clause to which that telegram refers gives to the Minister, on the application of the County Council, the power to hold an inquiry at which of course the burghs who are the road authorities would have -an opportunity of being heard, and if the Minister is satisfied, after holding such an inquiry and hearing what the burghs have to say, that it is desirable that a portion of the road should be closed, then the Minister and not the County Council will take the necessary action. Therefore, the protest to which the noble Lord must be referring deals with another part of the Bill, and that protest is also, I think, made under a misapprehension, became the Bill will not have the effect which I think it was supposed it would have.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

If the noble Lord says the Bill has not that effect, that will probably be so. As I understand it, this is an interpretation clause applying the Bill to Scotland. It applies the term "Council" in a special sense. The term "Council" is used in Clause 7 to which the noble Earl referred. That word "Council" is interpreted in this Amendment just in the same way as it was in the Bill before the noble Lord moved out the last sub-section. The noble Lord says I am wrong, but as I read it it means that the Burgh Council will be cut out of any authority at the inquiry and everywhere else and will never he heard.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

No.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

That is the interpretation put upon it. I will read him the telegram: "Have wired Scottish Office and Ministry of Transport protesting against sub-clause (2) and proviso of Clause 7 as interfering with autonomy of burgh road authorities with populations under 50,000. See clause 18 (2)"—that is a clause which has just been cut out, and which is now being put in again in the same words—"In Scotland nearly all burghs are road authorities. If this objectionable clause is retained the restriction or prohibition of motor traffic on a burgh highway would be in the hands of County Council." That is their interpretation of it. If the noble Lord will give me the undertaking that the burgh council will be summoned to this inquiry which is indicated, of course I will accept it and not detain the House.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I will certainly give the noble Lord the assurance for which he asks. The effect of the clause to which this telegram refers will be that although the portion of the road is in the charge of the Royal burgh which is the road authority for that portion of it, on the motion of the county council the Minister may held an inquiry for the purpose of closing the road, but at that inquiry the burgh which is the road authority will not be shut out. The burgh will have full opportunity of stating its views, and its views will be heard. The effect of the words will not be as stated, to transfer the powers over the roads from the burgh to the county council; it will merely mean that on the motion of the county council the Minister will have the right to hold an inquiry. As I stated to the noble Lord, the county council will have no power whatever to close the roads over the heads of the burgh.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

I cannot carry the matter further.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, remaining paragraphs—(b) and (c)—of Lord Lytton's Amendment agreed to.

Clause 19:

Amendment moved—

Page 15, line 13, at beginning insert the following new subsection: ("(1) This Act, in its application to Ireland, shall have effect with the following modification, namely, a reference to section two of the Public Roads (Ireland) Act, 1911, shall be substituted for the reference to section twenty-eight of the Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878.

(2) Section four of the Locomotives Act, 1898 (which relates to the erection and use of weighing machines) shall apply to Ireland with the following modifications, namely—

1. (a) a reference to county councils and urban district councils shall be substituted for the reference to road authorities;
2. (b) a reference to the enactments with respect to arbitrations in Ireland shall be substituted for the reference to the Arbitration Act, 1889; and
3. (c) a reference to the Public Health (Ireland) Acts, 1878, to 1919, shall be substituted for the reference to the Public Health Act, 1875."—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 19, as amended, agreed to.

Remaining clause agreed to.

First Schedule:

Amendments of Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909.
Sections 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 19, and Schedule.	References to the Minister shall be substituted for references to the Road Board.
Section 8	The following paragraph shall be substituted for paragraph (a) of subsection (1)—
	"(a) to make to any highway authority advances in respect of the construction of new roads or the maintenance or improvement of existing roads, or to make such advances, in conjunction with a highway authority, to any company or person."
	In subsection (5) the definition of "roads" shall be extended so as to include road-ferries and footways.
Section 11	In subsection (1) for the words "the Treasury have approved a proposal by the Road Board" there shall be substituted the words "the Minister proposes."
	Subsection (2) shall cease to have effect,
	In subsection (6) the words from "and any receipts" to the end of the subsection shall be repealed.
Section 13	For the words "the road improvement grant" wherever those words occur there shall' be substituted the words "the Road Fund."

LORD STUART OF WORTLEY moved, at the end of the new paragraph (a) substituted for paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of Section 8, after "person," to insert "or to any local authority or company responsible for the maintenance of any road or part thereof." The noble Lord said: The Amendment which stands in my name was based upon this principle. This is a Bill which, in consideration of further taxation upon the owners of motor cars and motor vehicles offers them better roads by intercepting the revenue so raised and making it applicable to giving the motorists a better quality of roads by applying it in relief of persons and authorities liable for the maintenance of roads. Among such persons and bodies are county councils, borough councils and other municipal authorities and companies who own tramways. It seems to me quite unreasonable that whereas you do not diminish in any way the liability of these authorities to make their present statutory contribution to the upkeep of the roads you are going to deny them participation in what is practically a grant-in-aid intended to secure them from the injury to the roads caused by the traffic of heavy vehicles brought from a distance by persons who do not contribute to the local rates. In another place the Amendment was moved and your Lordships should remember it represents the great interests of the county councils, municipal borough councils and other local authorities owning tramways, besides tramway companies. It was treated with scant courtesy, but later the truth came out when the Minister was obliged to confess practically that he had not foreseen this necessary act of justice and had not provided money to pay for it. I submit that it is an act of justice to tramway companies and authorities who are liable for the maintenance of roads to the extent of 18 in. of each side of the full width of the track. They were subjected to that liability by Parliament at a time when tramways, being horse tramways, really did use and wear out roads to some appreciable extent. The wearing out of the roads by tramway authorities has not increased, but the authorities are not relieved of their statutory liability, and vet they are told they are not to be made participants in the benefits of the Bill.

Amendment moved— Page 16, line 15, after ("person") insert ("or to any local authority or company responsible for the maintenance of any road or part thereof").—

THE EARL OF LYTTON

I do not know what the noble Lord means by calling this Amendment an "act of justice." The position is that these tramway companies, as part of the obligation which they entered into when they obtained their Acts, undertook, where they broke up the roads, to pay a contribution towards the repair of the roads afterwards and the maintenance of the road 18 inches on each side of the tramway track. This obligation applies not only to tramway companies but also to railway companies in respect of bridges which they cross, gas companies, electric lighting companies, water companies and, in fact, all companies who for the purpose of their undertakings have to break up the road. None of them would be relieved of their statutory undertakings by the Amendment of the noble Lord. In consideration of these statutory obligations to maintain the roads tramcars under the Finance Act only pay the nominal duty of 15s., whereas omnibuses pay duties up to £70 and in London up to £84. Tramways practically pay no duties under the Finance Act towards the Road Fund, and it would be far from an act of justice—it would be very unfair—if you were to ask motor users who pay these large duties into the Road Fund to pay a contribution which would have the effect of relieving the tramway undertakings from their statutory obligations. I cannot possibly accept the Amendment, which I do not think your Lordships would consider reasonable, and I hope the noble Lord will not press it.

LORD STUART OF WORTLEY

I adhere to my statement that this Amendment is an act of justice. The strictures of the noble Earl would be deserved if I were asking for relief from any of the obligations under which tramway com panics are laid. I am not doing that. All T am doing is to ask those companies should participate in the relief.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

First Schedule agreed to.

Second Schedule:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

My Amendment is to apply this to the Edinburgh and Dublin Gazettes.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 1, leave out ("Gazette") and insert ("Edinburgh or Dublin Gazette as the case requires").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 20, after ("oath") insert ("and the person holding the inquiry shall for that purpose have power to administer an oath").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Second Schedule, as amended, agreed to.

Third Schedule:

THE EARL OF LYTTON

This Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 44, in third column, leave out ("sections seven") and insert ("section seven: subsection (3) of section eight, subsection (2) of section eleven, and sections").—(The Earl of Lytton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Third Schedule, as amended, agreed to.

THE EARL OF LYTTON

As I postponed the Committee stage to suit noble Lords who had Amendments on the Paper, I hope your Lordships will allow the Bill to be taken through its remaining stages to-night. I have to move (Standing Order No. XXXIX. having been suspended), that the Report be now received.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

Bill read 3^a and passed, and returned to the Commons.