HL Deb 28 June 1927 vol 67 cc1091-6

THE DUKE OE BUCCLEUCH rose to call attention to the action of the Lyon King of Arms in connection With the Scottish National War Memorial in Edinburgh Castle; and to move for Papers. The noble Duke said: My Lords, I shall not take up very much time on this question, which is not perhaps of first-class importance but is still of considerable interest. Perhaps your Lordships are aware that a Scottish national memorial has been erected in Edinburgh Castle. That memorial is nearly completed. It was started with Government sanction and the Chairman, Committee and secretary, if they were not appointed by the Government, were certainly sanctioned by them. It also had the approval of the Crown and the building, which will shortly be opened, being erected on Crown land, will obviously belong to the Crown, and therefore to the nation, so that it is not a private monument, except that the funds for building it have been collected from private subscriptions.

The great object of this memorial was to represent all of those who were born in Scotland or who were of Scottish domicile and who fell in the Great War, to whatever Service they belonged and whether they were men or women. There are representations of all the Scottish regiments and also memorials of some of the other forces, such as the Navy and the Air Force, but it is obvious that this did not by any means represent the whole of those who served. At the beginning of the War there were a very large number in the South of Scotland and in other parts who volunteered but, because the numbers were so great and it was impossible to put them all into Scottish regiments, they were given the option of joining English regiments. Throughout the War, therefore, numbers of these Scottish troops who joined up were sent to English and even Irish regiments.

In order to make this memorial more representative it was decided to have the arms of all the counties and some of the principal burghs. They were all put up by the architect and it was thought everything would be all right. However, the Lyon King of Arms ordered the architect to take them down because certain—I do not know exactly how many—of the counties had not registered their arms. My point is that, in a matter of this kind, the importance of having a correct and proper national memorial was far greater than any petty question of whether these arms had been registered or not. I do not wish to defend those county councils who have not registered their arms, because it is obvious they ought to have done so. There is no reason why, because they have neglected to do so, those who came from those counties should be penalised in a matter with which the county councils have nothing to do.

I do not suppose the order of the Lyon King of Arms would have had any effect, except that it so happened the secretary of the Committee and he were the same individual and he could therefore carry out the order. If anybody else had been secretary, I imagine the order would have been laughed at and the pastime so popular with Americans of twisting the lion's tail would have been indulged in. These arms, however, have had to come down, with the result that the memorial is not as representative as it should be. This is entirely new. These burghs and counties have been using these arms for years without any objection being taken. Here is the opportunity for a great national memorial to be raised up and it is far removed from any question of whether burghs or county councils have arms registered or not. To try to force them to register in this way is an entirely wrong action, one which should never have been carried out, and one of which I hope the Government do not approve. I am not a lawyer, but I should doubt whether Lyon King of Arms was legal in his action. Since this property belongs to the Crown, it seems to me that he was putting the office of Lyon above the Crown, and I was always under the impression, and I sincerely hope, that the Crown is above every one, even including the Lyon King of Arms.

I want to ask the Government, in the first place, whether this action was legal, and if the Lyon King at Arms has power to do anything of that kind without the sanction of some superior Court. It seems to me to be a very large order if he is able to remove or to damage any structure without the order of some superior Court. My second question is why this particular occasion has been taken to force this matter through, when the county councils have been using their arms in other ways for years. The Government cannot get out of their responsibility in this matter. I do not know what is the position of the holder of this medi…val office in relation to the Government, but the appointment is made by His Majesty on the recommendation of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and accordingly I think they must have some responsibility. Certainly a great responsibility rests upon them that this monument should be really representative. I hope to hear in reply their view that this action, if not actually illegal, was certainly taken without their approval; for, after all, whatever else may be said, this was a very petty and tactless thing to do in regard to a memorial of such vast importance as the national memorial to all those from Scotland who fell in the War. I beg to move.

THE PAYMASTER-GENERAL (THE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND)

My Lords, the Lyon King of Arms Act, 1867, provides that The jurisdiction of the Lyon Court in Scotland shall be exercised by the Lyon King of Arms, who shall have the same rights, duties, powers, privileges and dignities as have heretofore belonged to the Lyon King of Arms in Scotland. The rights, powers, etc., so referred to are embedded in the Common Law of Scotland and in various Statutes with which I need not weary your Lordships as they are considerable in number. To put the position briefly, no person or body in Scotland is obliged to bear arms. If, however, it is desired to bear them the law imposes the obligation, whether on private individuals or on burghs, towns or counties, of obtaining the right, either by establishing in the Lyon Court and registering in the Lyon Register a right belonging to their predecessors prior to 1672, or, failing that, by obtaining a new grant. The Lyon King of Arms has no power to permit a contravention of the law on the subject.

The present Lyon King of Arms was appointed to that office only last January. Immediately after his appointment it was brought to his notice that several of the shields of coats of arms intended as decorations in the Scottish national war memorial were not recorded in the Public Register of Arms and Bearings. As the use and display of these arms would be illegal the Lyon King of Arms was bound to take action whether he wished to do so or not. On March 10, 1927, the Lyon King wrote to those county councils who had no registered coats of arms explaining that it was proposed to engrave on the walls of the Scottish national war memorial, in addition to regimental badges, some recognition of the districts from which the various services had been recruited, that in cases where public bodies had duly registered arms these would be recorded on the walls, but that it would not be possible to record arms which were not duly registered. In such a matter his jurisdiction is self-contained and the Secretary of State for Scotland has no power either to give or to withhold approval of any action which the Lyon King may think necessary in regard to enforcement of the law.

The fee for registration of arms is £50. All such fees are paid into Exchequer and go towards relief of the general taxpayer. I believe that this is not so in England, where they go to the responsible authority. Since Lyon King took action in March, twelve counties and two burghs have recorded their arms, and I think only one or possibly two counties have not done so. I think the noble Duke said that in many cases this sort of thing had been allowed before, but this is not by any means the first occasion on which Lyon King has found it necessary to intervene in order to prevent illegal use of arms in connection with public buildings. During the years 1863–5, a number of unregistered armorial bearings were placed in the stained glass windows of Glasgow Cathedral In obedience to the commands of Lyon King a number of these were removed whilst many of the persons concerned registered arms in order that they might be permitted to appear. Similar action was taken in connection with a contemplated display of unregistered arms in connection with the McEwan Hall in Edinburgh, and in connection with the renovation of windows in the Parliament House.

It is quite true, as the noble Duke said, that the memorial is being erected on Crown property and that the scheme had the general approval of the Government. On the other hand, the Government have not been consulted regarding, and have no responsibility for, minor details of the scheme, such as the display of coats of arms on the walls, and matters of that sort, which have not been brought into the purview of the Government in any way. When the Committee in charge of the memorial proposed to display arms as part of the decoration, the proper course would have been to ascertain from Lyon that the arms were in order, but the Committee may, mistakenly but not unnaturally, have assumed that arms which were being used by local authorities were being so used with proper authority. However that may be, it was the statutory duty of the Lyon to see that arms were not irregularly displayed, and the action he took seems to the Government quite reasonable and proper.

In reply to the legal point that the noble Duke raised, I may say that this action was perfectly legal. Lyon King of Arms has no authority whatsoever to remit fees, and I really think that one must look at it from the point of view of what would have happened if he had not taken action in the way he did. His conduct in that case would have been illegal and totally unauthorised, and some notice must have been taken of it.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH

My Lords, the answer is somewhat on the lines that I expected, but I think it is very disappointing because, after all, the question of the national memorial is far greater than any question of mere red tape. What I want to know is why these county councils have been allowed for years to use these arms if they are not entitled to them. Apparently nothing has been done, and what was resented, and I think rightly, was that a very solemn occasion was used to force people to register—and people, particularly Scotsmen, do not like being forced. I am sorry that the Government are not taking any action. The only point that I really care about is that the memorial should be really representative of the whole of Scotland, as it will not now be, and that is my reason for raising this question. But since my noble friend tells me that the Secretary of State has no jurisdiction over the Lyon King of Arms, and as I believe that no qualifications are necessary for appointment to that office, I will only suggest that, as much has been said lately about various offices in Edinburgh, I think that this particular office may perhaps require looking into and somewhat overhauling. I do not propose to press my Motion for Papers.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

House adjourned at twenty minutes past seven o'clock.