Lords Sitting of 25 November 1926

Preamble
The House met at a quarter past four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
MERCHANDISE MARKS (IMPORTED GOODS) BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1ª, and to be printed.

SOLICITORS BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Darling.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clause 1:
Employment of persons struck off the roll or suspended.
1.—(1) No solicitor shall in connection with his practice as a solicitor without the written permission of the Society employ or remunerate any person who to the knowledge of such solicitor is struck off the roll of solicitors or is suspended from practising as a solicitor.
(4) If any solicitor shall act contrary to the provisions of this section or to the terms and conditions upon or subject to which any permission has been given thereunder an application may be made under the Solicitors Act, 1919, to the committee constituted under the Solicitors Act, 1888, as amended by the said Act of 1919, and those Acts shall apply accordingly.
LORD HANWORTH LORD HANWORTH moved, in subsection (4), after "the said Act of 1919," to insert "and the committee may deal with such solicitor in accordance with their powers under those Acts." The noble and learned Lord said: This is really a drafting Amendment, and the purpose of it is to make explicit what is implicit in the Bill as it stands. The
842
present words to my mind are somewhat too tersely drawn, and it is necessary expressly to establish that the committee have the powers which it is intended by the Bill they shall have. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 26, after ("1919") insert the said words.—(Lord Hanworth.)
LORD DARLING: This Bill, as I explained, was drawn by solicitors, and it seems to me that there would have been an advantage, as there often is, in having the drafting settled by learned Counsel. So far as I am concerned I accept the Amendment.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.

LEAD PAINT (PROTECTION AGAINST POISONING) BILL.
React 3ª (according to Order).
Clause 1:
Regulations as to use of lead paint.
1.—(1) The Secretary of State may make regulations for preventing danger from lead paint to persons employed in or in connection with the painting of buildings, and in particular—

(a) for prohibiting the use of any lead compound except in the form of paste or of paint ready for use;

(b) for the prevention of danger arising from the application of lead paint in the form of spray;

(c) for prohibiting dry rubbing down and scraping;

LORD ASKWITH LORD ASKWITH moved to add to paragraph (c) of subsection (1) the words "of all painted surfaces containing or imposed on lead paint." The noble Lord said: I placed this Amendment on the Paper partly to get round the argument that the words previously put down were not altogether suitable and chiefly to inquire from my noble friend whether he was able to answer the question I put to him as to the alteration in more drastic form of the Regulations to be made under the Bill. I am not satisfied with the words which provide that the employer shall satisfy himself that there is no lead paint in the coats on the surface that is being painted, and I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 16, at end insert ("of all painted surfaces containing or imposed on lead paint").—(Lord Askwith.)
LORD DESBOROUGH: I am very much obliged to my noble friend for having put this Amendment in the manner in which it stands on the Paper and I can assure him that the Home Office will do all in its power to meet the point he has raised. They duly appreciate its importance. The Regulations with regard to this Bill have already been considered by the parties concerned—that is, by the employers and the employees. But I understand from my noble friend that he is not quite satisfied with certain words from which it will appear that the employer has to satisfy himself that there is no lead paint which comes into any coat or under-coat on the surface that will be dealt with. The Home Office are not satisfied themselves with the word "satisfied," and they are willing to put in such words, if they can be devised, as will meet the object of the Home Office and of my noble friend. I understand in those circumstances that my noble friend is willing not to press his Amendment, which the Home Office seem to think is already covered by the Bill as it stands. But they are certainly very desirous to meet him on the point he has raised and they hope he will give them all the assistance in his power to enable them to do so.
LORD ASKWITH: In reply to my noble friend and in consideration of what he has said, I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 2:
Prohibition of employment of women and young persons in painting buildings with lead paint.
2. On and after the nineteenth day of November, nineteen hundred and twenty-seven, it shall not be lawful to employ any woman or young person in painting any part of a building with lead paint:
Provided that this section shall not apply to the employment of

(a) persons employed as apprentices in the painting trade under arrangements approved by an Order of the Secretary of State made after consultation with the organisations, if any, representative of the employers and workers in the trade; or

844

(b) women or young persons in such special decorative or other work (not being work of an industrial character) as may be excluded from the provisions of this section by an Order of the Secretary of State.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved to add to the clause:—
"or
"(c) women who at the passing of this Act are employed in any trade which involves as part of their occupation such painting as aforesaid."
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I do not propose to trouble your Lordships with the first Amendment which stands in my name on the Paper and which proposed to add to that part of the clause which precedes the proviso, the following words: "save those who have been so employed before the passing of this Act." Those words would have followed the word "person." It has been pointed out to me that a difficulty would arise if those words were inserted in the case, say, of a woman who had been employed in the industry ten years previously. My second Amendment appears to me to cover almost the same point and to be free from the objection I have mentioned. I understand that the Home Office is prepared to accept it, and I feel sure that the women affected will feel most grateful to His Majesty's Government. I beg, therefore, to move.
Amendment moved—
Clause 2, page 2, line 28, at end insert the said words.—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
LORD DESBOROUGH: My Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble Viscount for having, rather at the instance of the Home Office, altered his Amendment. As it stood first of all women would have been excepted who had been employed—that is, in painting surfaces—before the passing of this Act. That might really have included almost any woman at almost any time who said she had been employed in this manner. The Amendment suggested by the Home Office, which my noble friend has been willing to accept, limits it to the time of the passing of the Act—
"women who at the passing of this Act are employed in any trade which involves as part of their occupation such painting as aforesaid."
There is a precedent for that arising out of the Convention which was passed by

845
the Labour Conference on very similar lines in the year 1920, which limits the application of the Regulations very much as it is proposed to limit them now—namely, to those who are actually employed, and whom you can ascertain as being so employed, at the passing of the Act. The measure to which I refer is the Employment of Women, Young Persons, and Children Act, 1920, which states in Clause 3, subsection (3)—
"Nothing in this Act shall prevent the employment in any industrial undertaking or ship of a child lawfully so employed at the commencement of this Act."
This Amendment will follow on the lines of that Act and women who are actually employed at the time will be exempted from its operation. In those circumstances the Home Office are willing to accept the Amendment as moved by my noble friend.
LORD ARNOLD: My Lords, I confess I am surprised that the Government has notified that it will accept this Amendment in this form or in any form, because, surely, it is very late in the day to make this change. The point has not been raised until the Third Reading when it might have been perfectly well raised earlier. We were told on the occasion of the Committee stage that the Government were not prepared to insert an Amendment. We were told that if an Amendment was inserted it would create great difficulties in another place when the Bill went back there.
LORD DESBOROUGH: I think that was applied to the noble Lord's Amendment, which was contrary to the Second Reading of the Bill.
LORD ARNOLD: This Amendment, as I understand it, is contrary to the Convention on which the Bill is founded. It is certainly not consistent with the main tenet of the Bill, which is that lead paint poisoning can cause great harm and is especially bad for women. That is the Government's position; they cannot deny it, because we debated that last week and they pressed it very strongly and would not budge. Now they do budge from that as far as women are concerned, and I confess I think that is an extraordinary thing to do at this late hour.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Bill passed, with the Amendment, and retuned to the Commons.

BURGH REGISTERS (SCOTLAND) 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 Duke of Sutherland.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clause 1 [Burgh register of sasines discontinued]:
THE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND: I beg to move a number of Amendments of a purely drafting nature which have the object of improving the phrasing. If any noble Lord raises the point, I will move them separately; otherwise, I think they might really be taken together. I beg to move the Amendments to Clause 1 that stand in my name on the Paper.
Amendments moved—
Page 1, line 16, leave out from ("division") to ("in") in line 18, and insert ("or divisions of the general register of sasines applicable to the county or counties mentioned opposite to such burgh")
page 2, line 3, leave out ("all writs") and insert ("any writ")
page 2, line 8, leave out from ("county") to ("and") in line 10, and insert ("mentioned opposite to such burgh in the First Schedule to this Act annexed or to the county mentioned in the said schedule opposite to the part of the burgh in which the property to which the writ relates is situated")—(The Duke of Sutherland.)
On Question, Amendments agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.
First Schedule:
THE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND: I beg now to move drafting Amendments to the First Schedule.
Amendments moved—
First Schedule, page 5, leave out lines 28 and 29 in the first and second columns and insert:—

("Dumfries. So much of the Royalty as lies within the County of Dumfries.

County of Dumfries.

The remainder of the Royalty.

Country of the stewartry of Kirkcudbright."

page 6, leave out line 5 in the third and fourth columns and insert:—

("Rutherglen.

So much of the Royalty as lies within the City of Glasgow.

County of the Barony and Regality of Glasgow.

The remainder of the Royalty.

Country of Lanark.)

—(The Duke of Sutherland.)
On Question, Amendments agreed to.
First Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining Schedule agreed to.

POOR LAW BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
VISCOUNT GAGE: My Lords, as your Lordships will have realised this is not a Bill for the reform of the Poor Law, but a Bill to consolidate the various enactments relating to the subject of the Poor Law. At present they are to be found in about one hundred Acts of Parliament, ranging from the Poor Relief Act of Queen Elizabeth's day to modern times. It will be seen from the Schedule of repeals appended to the Bill that some 60 Acts of Parliament are proposed for total repeal and about 40 others for repeal in part. The general effect of the Bill would be to replace about 220 pages of the Statutes Revised, many of which represent pre-Victorian legislation and are archaic in form, by an Act of 140 pages, couched in modern language and arranged in modern form.
I do not think it will be necessary to make out any elaborate case for the necessity of this Bill. Consolidation has, I believe, been regarded as desirable for a number of years. It is obvious that should be so when it is remembered that the enactments concerned cover a period of about three hundred years, during which not only the language but also the social conditions involved have undergone very serious modification. But I must explain the reasons which have led His Majesty's Government to attempt this very considerable task now. Firstly, it is done on the general grounds which I have already mentioned and, secondly, because it forms part of the policy of my right hon. friend the Minister of Health to consolidate and to simplify as many as possible of the complicated Acts of Parliament for the administration of which he is respon-
848
sible. I need only give in this connection the example of the Housing and Insurance Acts passed in the last two years. Thirdly, recent experience has convinced the Government that it would be impossible satisfactorily to discuss Poor Law reform by the light of the existing enactments, and that an attempt should be made to reduce the existing Poor Laws to a single code which would be readily available to all persons interested and from which the scope and effect of the changes proposed could easily be seen. In the event of your Lordships agreeing to a Second Reading of this Bill I shall propose that it be sent to the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2ª.—(Viscount Gage.)
On Question, Bill read 2ª.
Moved, That the Bill be referred to the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills.—(Viscount Gage.)
On Question, Motion agreed to and ordered accordingly.

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY (BLIND PERSONS FACILITIES) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: My Lords, this is a Bill which I hope your Lordships will accept. The principle was agreed to by the Government last year; it was approved by the Committee set up by the Government to inquire into broadcasting questions generally; and the Bill has been passed without Division through the House of Commons. The object is simply that blind persons should be entitled to have, free of licence duty, the right to receive broadcast messages. The Postmaster-General is vested with powers of control and he can impose conditions and restrictions with the object of avoiding any abuse of this right. It has of course many analogies, such as free dog licences, travelling facilities, postage of books and other advantages which blind persons are entitled under Acts of Parliament to enjoy. I think broadcasting has a very great educational value. Certainly, for a blind person, it is the best agency of self-instruction and education and, as such, is likely to be of material as well

849
as personal or sentimental value to blind persons generally. I beg, therefore, to move that the Bill be now read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2ª.—(The Earl of Crawford.)
On Question, Bill read 2ª, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

EMERGENCY REGULATIONS.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE EARL OF BALFOUR)had given Notice to move, That the Regulations made by His Majesty in Council under the Emergency Powers Act, 1920, by Order dated the 20th instant, shall continue in force, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 2 (4) of the said Act. The noble Earl said: My Lords, I beg to move the Resolution which stands in my name. I do not think it necessary to say anything about the general character of it, for we are familiar with the reasons which have induced your Lordships on more than one previous occasion to pass these exceptional measures. I have, however, to say that we have hopes that the condition of the coal trade will enable us to abolish some of these exceptional measures before the month has expired. If that be so, it requires, of course, a new Order in Council. When the Government are advised that such a course would be desirable they will bring forward the necessary Resolution to your Lordships to amend and mitigate these Regulations. Your Lordships would, of course, in that event have notice.
Moved, That the Regulations made by His Majesty in Council under the Emergency Powers Act, 1920, by Order dated the 20th instant, shall continue in force, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 2 (4) of the said Act.—(The Earl of Balfour.)
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, I think it is very satisfactory to hear from the noble Earl that there is a chance of mitigating certain of these Regulations (which certainly are very strong) on the ground that the difficulties in the coal trade are likely, at any rate partially, to be settled. I presume the Government have considered what are the Regulations that they think may be mitigated and
850
the noble Earl would perhaps indicate what they are. I ask that for this reason. I have drawn attention on former occasions to one or two of the Regulations which, in my opinion, are exceptionally objectionable, having regard to the Common Law principle by which these matters are governed in this country. There was a reference to it in the other place yesterday. Where complaints have been made to the noble and learned Viscount about magistrates, amongst others, I have noticed, as far as I have seen them, that they have arisen partly in respect of the very questions which I think are most difficult and in regard to which I, at any rate, should desire a mitigation to be introduced at the earliest possible moment.
I do not want to deal with this at any length because I have done so previously, and I will only take one illustration relating to proceedings which are taken under Regulation 21, where a person has attempted, as it is called, to cause civil disaffection. One understands mutiny, sedition and matters of that kind, but it is quite obvious that civil disaffection may be something about which there is a difference of opinion when the parties are dealing with such questions as may arise in connection with the coal strike. That is one of the matters upon which one feels very strongly that it should not be within the power of the Chief Constable of a particular county to prosecute perhaps a member of the other House, because, after all, that member has only been expressing his political views, though he might not express them in the particular way that would be most friendly and amicable. What I should like to know very much is whether the noble Earl can tell us whether a provision of that kind—I take that as a test provision—is likely to be mitigated shortly.
There are also other provisions, such as the noble Lord said, I think, that he had not studied much last time, provisions like those contained in No. 14. They show the other side of these Regulations. They contain ample power, if necessary, for the Government to take over the production and distribution of coal in this country and to control prices, and generally they give very wide powers indeed. I am not suggesting that powers of that kind may not

851
be otherwise than useful during the continuance of the coal trouble, but I should like to know what is the noble Earl's view, or the view of the Government if they have formed one. I understood last time that in their view No. 14 could not be practically used if the Government thought it necessary to bring pressure upon the coal owners or the coal miners in order to bring a dispute of this kind to an end. I understood him to say that when we discussed the question last time. I do not want to go further than to ask the noble Earl if he can give some information on the point whether the Government think they will be able to introduce mitigating Regulations within a short time.
THE EARL OF BALFOUR: My Lords, by leave of the House I may perhaps say one word in answer to the noble Lord. I do not think we should gain much by discussing particular phases or particular parts of these Regulations, and I hope noble Lords opposite and the House at large will be content with the statement that the Government are most desirous of returning to a normal state of affairs, and in proportion as circumstances allow us to do that we shall take full advantage of the opportunities given us.
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, I cannot say any more, but the noble Earl will appreciate, of course, that that gives no information at all.
THE EARL OF BALFOUR: My Lords, I do not want to enter into a dispute with the noble Lord across the floor of the House, because I believe I am not in order, but how could I reply in any other way than I have done? The Home Secretary is, of course, watching the course of events most carefully and critically. He has expressed in another place on behalf of
852
the Government, and I think with the full acceptance of members in another place, his intention of mitigating these Regulations as and in proportion as circumstances will permit. I do not think it is possible for me to say more than that. He would, of course, have modified, and the Government would have modified, these Regulations had they after careful examination thought that could be safely done in the existing state of the coal industry. They have come to the conclusion that it could not safely be done yet, but prospects seem on the whole fairly satisfactory and we have every hope that mitigation which is at present impossible will become possible before the month has elapsed which requires these Regulations to be renewed, if, unhappily, that necessity should occur. I quite agree that I have given very little information to the noble Lord except to express the good intentions of the Government, but I would ask how it is possible without the gift of prophecy, which unfortunately I do not possess, to give him any more accurate information as to the future course of events.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE EARL OF BALFOUR: My Lords, I understand that the course of business, which naturally depends upon the way in which Bills come up to your Lordships, will make it extremely convenient in the public interest that there should be a formal meeting of the House at half-past ten to-morrow, to receive Bills from another place. On Tuesday we take the Electricity (Supply) Bill, of which we passed the Second Reading yesterday, and the anticipation is that we may have to sit after dinner on that day.
House adjourned at a quarter before five o'clock.