Lords Sitting of 6 June 1923

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before four of the clock, the EARL OF DONOUGHMORE on the Woolsack.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (BRIDPORT EXTENSION) CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Amendments proposed by the Committee made.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (BRIDLINGTON EXTENSION) CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Amendments proposed by the Committee made.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (BRIGHTON EXTENSION) CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Amendments proposed by the Committee made.

GAS REGULATION ACT, 1920, SPECIAL ORDERS.
THE EARL OF CLARENDON: My Lords, I beg to move the Resolutions standing in my name on the Paper. It will probably be for the convenience of the House if I move them en bloc, and with your Lordships' permission I should like to do so.
Moved, That the Draft Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Swindon United Gas Company, which was presented on the 29th May, and published, be approved.—(The Earl of Clarendon.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Moved, That the Draft Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regu

423
lation Act, 1920, on the application of the Hatfield Gas Company, Limited, which was presented on the 29th May, and published, be approved.—(The Earl of Clarendon.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Moved, That the Draft Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Colwall Gas Company, Limited, which was presented on the 29th May, and published, be approved.—(The Earl of Clarendon.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Moved, That the Draft Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Southend Gas Company, which was presented on the 29th May, and published, be approved.—(The Earl of Clarendon.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

RESTORATION OF ORDER IN IRELAND (INDEMNITY) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clause 1:
Indemnity for action taken under Restoration of Order in Ireland Regulations.
1.—(1) No action or other legal proceeding whatsoever, whether civil or criminal, shall be instituted in any court of law against any person for, or on account of, or in respect of the issue before the passing of this Act and since the sixth day of December, nineteen hundred and twenty-two, of any order purporting to have been made in pursuance of regulation 14 B made or purporting to have been made under the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act, 1920, or for, on account of, or in respect of any act done before the passing of this Act for the purpose of carrying any such order into effect; and if any such proceeding has been instituted, whether before or after the passing of this Act, it shall be discharged and made void, subject in the case of a proceeding instituted before the seventeenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-three, to such directions as to costs as the court or a judge thereof may think fit to give:
Provided that any person who, in pursuance of any such order, has been deported to Ireland since the sixth day of December, nineteen hundred and twenty-two, and therein interned or the personal representative of any such person who may have died shall be entitled within three months after the passing of this Act to claim against such person as may be designated for the purpose by the Treasury compensation for any loss or damage he may have sustained in consequence of such deportation and internment, or of any act done for the purpose of carrying such order into effect, and the amount of such compensation shall be assessed on the principles on which damages would be assessed at common law in a common law action for trespass but without regard to any statutory minimum, or in Scotland for wrongous imprisonment or assault, and awarded by a tribunal consisting of three persons (of whom one shall be a person who holds or has held high judicial office) appointed by the Lord Chief Justice of England, or, in cases of persons deported from Scotland, by the Lord President of the Court of Session, and the decision of such a tribunal shall be final.
(2) The Tribunal of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, shall apply to such a tribunal as if the tribunal had been established and that Act had been applied thereto in manner provided by that Act.
(3) Any such tribunal shall have power to award and assess such sums by way of costs as they, in their discretion, may think fit.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY) moved, in the proviso to subsection (1), to leave out "or the personal representative of any such person who may have died." The noble Marquess said: This is a drafting Amendment to the necessity for which attention was called by the noble and learned Viscount, Lord Haldane, on the Second Reading. It refers to the heirs or personal representatives of any deported person who may have died. The words at present in the Bill are not in accordance with the provision which comes a little later in the same subsection that damages are to be assessed according to the method adopted in actions for trespass at Common Law because, apparently, such an action takes no account of the personal representative of a dead person, so that the words require to be altered.
I propose therefore to omit the words "or the personal representative of any such person who may have died" in order to insert at the end of the subsection these words: "If a person so deported and interned dies the claim for compensation

425
may be made or prosecuted by his personal representative and compensation may be assessed as if he had not died. "I need not, tell your Lordships that the meaning is the same as that intended by the Government in the first instance, but (he drafting is more correct.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, lines 1 and 2, leave out ("or the personal representative of any such person who may have died").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
VISCOUNT HALDANE: I called attention to this defect in the drafting on Monday. Of course, the Government intended the very thing which the Amendment covers, but the whole matter goes to show the disadvantage of redrawing Bills on the floor of the other House. I dare say it would have been as bad if we had redrawn the Bill on the floor of this House. It also shows the advantage of an Opposition looking after things.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBUEY: It also shows the advantage of a House of Lords.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 18, at end insert ("If a person so deported and interned dies the claim for compensation may be made or prosecuted by his personal representative and compensation may be assessed as if he had not died").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, at the end of subsection (2), to insert: "Provided that in any proceedings on such a claim any parties shall be entitled to appear by counsel or by a solicitor or law agent." The noble Marquess said: There is no need, I think, to explain this Amendment to your Lordships as its meaning is obvious. It is designed to entitle a person claiming compensation to be represented by a counsel or solicitor when he makes his claim. This is in pursuance of a pledge given by the Attorney-General in another place.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 22, at end insert ("Provided that in any proceedings on such a claim any party shall be entitled to appear by counsel or by a solicitor or law agent").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
House resumed, VISCOUNT HALDANE on the Woodsack.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I beg to make the Motion of which Notice has been given to suspend Standing Order No. XXXIX for the purpose of taking the remaining stages of the. Bill.
Moved, That Standing Order No. XXXIX be considered in order to its being dispensed with for the purpose of taking the remaining stages of the Restoration of Order in Ireland (Indemnity) Bill.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.
Then, Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended, Amendments reported (according to Order).
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODON VISCOUNT GREY OF FALLODON had given Notice to move, on the Motion for the Third Reading, that the following words be added to the Motion: "and that this House affirme the long established principle of the Constitution that the Executive should not without the previous and special authority of Parliament exercise the power of arrest without bringing to trial by due process of law. "The noble Viscount said: My Lords, after what passed on Monday I do not propose to make another speech. Indeed, I said on Monday all that I had to say in support of the words which I have put on the Paper and the Government have been good enough to say that they will accept the words as they stand. Therefore I will formally move them.
Amendment moved—
At the end of the Motion insert ("and that this House affirme the long established principle of the Constitution that the Executive should not without the previous and special authority of Parliament exercise the power of arrest without bringing to trial by due process of law").—(Viscount Grey of Fallodon.)
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: On behalf of His Majesty's Government I accept the Amendment.
VISCOUNT LONG OF WRAXALL: My Lords, before the Question is put, may I say a word? I believe I am in a minority of one, but that does not make it any less incumbent upon me to state very briefly the reasons for the position I take. I confess that I am rather puzzled by the procedure which has been recommended to the House by the noble Viscount opposite and adopted by the Government. I should have thought that the words moved would be generally regarded as expressing the universal opinion not only of the House but of every constitutionally-minded, law-abiding person in the country, and therefore to add them to this Bill without, as I conceive, any special reason is unnecessary. I am, however, quite satisfied, having observed the noble Viscount very closely for a great many years, that he would not recommend to this House any course of action which was not in his judgment necessary and desirable, and therefore, probably, desirable in the opinion of the great majority of the people of this country.
It is not because I disagree with the views expressed in this House that I ask permission to say why I regret the adoption of these words at this moment. These words appear to me to be very imperative. They affirm, of course, a great constitutional principle to which, as I have said, we all subscribe and to cherish and maintain which we all do everything in our power. Therefore I should have thought that their reassertion at this moment was not necessary. The reason I regret their adoption by the House is that this Bill is the result of special and very drastic action on the part of the Government of the day. I agree—of course, everybody must who believes in the Constitution of this country—that it is most deplorable that the Government should be called upon to arrest men without trial and the words of the noble Viscount ask you to affirm that this should never be done.
What happened in the case which rendered necessary the introduction of this Bill and led to the proposal now before us? There was a great conspiracy which existed not only in Ireland but had its branches over here. The Government in Ireland believed, I have no doubt with very good reason, that grave danger to the Government of Southern Ireland would result if drastic
428
steps were not taken. We know, from a statement made in another place by the Home Secretary, that His Majesty's Government shared those views, and believed also that the danger was not confined to the stability of the Government in Ireland, but also existed in some degree here. We all remember with horror and regret, and infinite sorrow, the murder of the late Sir Henry Wilson, a most distinguished and gallant soldier and a great citizen of this Empire. That murder must have been the result of a long pre-arranged plan and deep-seated conspiracy in this country. Now, I am quite content, in this as, indeed, in anything else which I can imagine, to take the guidance and leadership of His Majesty's Government, particularly when accepting a Motion made by the noble Viscount opposite; but I do take note of the fact that at this moment there is an inclination to adopt the view that, as we have terminated the old system of government, under which we in this country were responsible for the government of Ireland, therefore we may look forward to a totally different future from the black past to which we have to look back, and that it may never be again necessary to exercise the drastic powers which Governments of all complexions have been compelled to exercise in times past.
But as I read these words they convey a distinct direction to the Government not to arrest unless they are prepared to bring to trial. I hope that circumstances such as we are all familiar with may not arise again, but at the same time I am not ashamed or afraid to state here, that, firmly though I believe in, and profoundly as I admire, the British Constitution, and strongly as I will always fight for its maintenance in every degree and in every detail, yet I hold that the first duty of the Government is to protect the lives, liberties and property of the citizens of this country. And if they have any reason to believe that a conspiracy exists, if they have evidence that convinces them, although they know perfectly well that they cannot bring that evidence into Court—that has occurred more than once in the history of Ireland—I should regret very much if the language now to be adopted by the House did anything to suggest to them that they are not to act in such circumstances of dire peril.

429
It may be that I am stupid in my interpretation of the course which your Lordships are now invited to take, but I have said what I have said because I hold these views very strongly, and because I have myself been confronted with circumstances of greatest peril, in which I was compelled, as Minister of the Crown, to take independent action. I can only say that if, to-morrow, I were called upon—and I never shall be again—to occupy an important position under Government, I should not hesitate—and I am sure the noble Viscount opposite would not hesitate—in the interests of peace and order, to arrest a man, although I knew I should not be able to bring him to trial. I hope that the circumstances may never arise again, but I consider that I should not be loyal to those brave and able men who worked under myself and other Ministers in days gone by, and up to the very last moment in our history, in dealing with these terrible circumstances in Ireland, if I did not say that I should always support any Government which took immediate action, even although in taking that action it might run some risk of breaking the greatest and most fundamental principle of the Constitution.
I am not going to offer any opposition to the Bill—of course, that would be futile—but I desire to say these words because I think they are due to those who co-operated with myself and other Ministers in the supremely difficult task of maintaining order in Ireland and protecting the lives of the people, there and here: because I do not want it to be thought that in accepting these words I make the smallest suggestion that in future, if a time of dire peril comes, Ministers should not act without fear of consequences, confident that Parliament will always indemnify them if they have done their duty in a very difficult position.
VIKCOUNT GREY OF FALLODON: My Lords, perhaps it is only courteous that I should make a few observations on the noble Viscount's speech. The reason why I feel that it is appropriate that your Lordships should add these words to the Motion at this moment is really based upon what the words themselves say, namely, that a Government must not exercise the power of arrest without bringing to trial unless it has" the previous and special authority of Parliament."
430
I understand the decision of the Court which has given rise to this Indemnity Bill was that the Home Secretary and the Home Office did what they did without being covered by the authority of Parliament. I will not go over what the noble Marquess said the other day, that, even if it was only a technical breach, it was at any rate a breach of the Constitution, in the sense that the action taken was not covered by the authority of Parliament. I think while we are passing an Indemnity Bill for that action, which the Courts have declared to be unconstitutional—a Bill which has been accepted unanimously by the House, and with every sign of good will—it is not inappropriate that the House should also take the opportunity of affirming that the general principle of the Constitution remains unchanged.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, may I ask the leave of the HOUSE TO SAY a word for fear of misunderstanding? The Government accepted most cordially the Motion of the noble Viscount opposite, but I should be very sorry if it were thought that, in doing so, they wished to accept any condemnation upon the action of my right hon. friend the Home Secretary, or of themselves. The action which he and the Government took, and which my noble friend the Secretary for Scotland took, was taken in pursuance, as it was then thought, of the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act, and if the Government had been right in that assumption they would thus have had the special authority of Parliament to which the noble Viscount refers in his Amendment. It turned out that the action taken was illegal, but we have no reason to shrink from re-asserting that we do not pretend, any more than any other Government in England, to act without the authority of Parliament. If the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act, had meant exactly what we took it to mean we should not in any way have transgressed the principles which the noble Viscount now desires us to re-assert. In these circumstances, of course, we can have no objection whatever to his reaffirming those principles upon this occasion. On the contrary, we think, with him, that the passage of a Bill of Indemnity is a suitable occasion on which to re-affirm those fundamental principles.
On Question, Amendment agreed to, and Bill read 3a.
THE MAEQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

RENT RESTRICTIONS (NOTICES OF INCREASE) BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendment (according to Order), and passed, and returned to the Commons.

CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA BILL. [H.L.]
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name.
Moved, That a Committee of four Lords be appointed to join with a Committee of the House of Commons to consider the said Bill, and that the Lords following be named of the Committee:

L. Oranmore and Browne.

L. Kintore (E. Kintore).

L. Southwark.

L. Sterndale.

—(The Marguess of Salisbury.)
LORD GAINFORD: My Lords, I represent here not only the Mining Association of Great Britain but the British Coal Exporters' Federation, and it has been a matter of great surprise to us that it has become necessary at all for a Bill of this character to be referred to a Joint Committee. A very important point has arisen, and, by an Amendment which I placed on the Notice Paper, we thought all opposition to the Bill would have been arranged and the Government would at once have accepted it. It appears that in September, 1921, representatives of various nations met together and considered questions connected with ocean-borne traffic, and in the course of the proceedings Sir Henry Duke, who presided, admitted that certain words were to be inserted in the Rules which were then under discussion. It is recorded in the Proceedings that
"The question is that after the words 'bill of lading' there be inserted these words:
432
'issued in respect of all goods other than goods shipped in bulk, as in those Rules defined.'
"Is it the pleasure of the Committee that these words be inserted?
"Agreed."
That is an extract from the Report of the Proceedings.
Those of us who are interested in the exportation of coal were under the impression that any legislation which was introduced into Parliament would have exempted bulk cargoes from the operation of this Bill. But the Board of Trade, which is the Department which is expected to look after the interests of traders, instead of inviting into consultation either the British Coal Exporters' Federation or the Mining Association of Great Britain, introduced this measure, in which no reference whatsoever is made to the exemption of bulk cargoes. And, if this Bill had gone through as it was introduced the other day by the Government, the whole of our great export coal trade, which is of the greatest value to this nation, would have been upset, and we should have been compelled to accept the weights of coal delivered abroad, instead of the weights of coal as it is shipped in this country. Thus, the whole export trade would have been disorganised and a great blow would have been struck at one of the most vital interests of our trade.
I think noble Lords will realise how impossible it would be to expect us as a nation to accept, we will say, the weights of an individual at Genoa who carries the coal in a basket on his back and puts it on a dump there and to permit weights of that character to replace those upon which the workmen, the railway companies and the dock dues are paid in this country. Had the Government seen their way to accept the Amendment which I placed upon the Paper in accordance with the arrangement which was made in 1921 I believe that this Bill might have passed without further opposition. I am not, of course, opposing the consideration of this Bill by a Joint Committee of both Houses. But the matter is of such vital interest to the coal industry of the country as well as to the nation that I thought I ought to ask at once why it is that this Bill has now to be considered by a Joint Committee instead of passing through the usual procedure

433
in Committee of your Lordships' House. However, I take no exception to the procedure.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I am sorry that I did not explain to your Lordships just now the reason for the appointment of this Committee. The noble Lord may, perhaps, remember that I tried on a previous occasion to explain why it was that the Government proposed that this Bill should be sent to a Joint Select Committee. I do not know whether he was present or not.
LORD GAINFOED: I beg the noble Marquess's pardon; I was not present.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The noble Lord is a very constant attendant and, therefore, it was only by a very rare exception that he was not present on that occasion; but the reason is that there was a criticism delivered against this Bill not merely from the point of view from which he has approached the subject—namely, the point of view of those interested in shipping—but also from the legal point of view. A rather strong criticism was delivered against some of the provisions of the Bill by my noble and learned friend Lord Sumner, who speaks, of course, upon legal matters with very great authority. When the Government found that the
434
Bill, which they hoped would have passed as a non-contentious measure, was criticised not merely from the point of view of the noble Lord, Lord Gainford, but from the legal point of view as well, they thought the best plan would be to see that the Bill was very carefully considered by a strong Committee before they asked Parliament to assent to it. They were very gratified to be able to announce, as I did on the last occasion, that the Master of the Rolls himself had undertaken to be the Chairman of the Committee. I think the noble Lord may rest assured that before such a Committee as this will be—a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament, presided over by the Master of the Rolls—all the matters which he has so strongly urged upon your Lordships will be duly considered.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Ordered, that such Committee have power to agree with the Committee of the House of Commons in the appointment of a Chairman: Then a Message was ordered to be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint them with the Motion, and to request them to appoint four Members of that House to be joined with the said Committee.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes before five o'clock.