Lords Sitting of 29 February 1928

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before four of the clock, The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE on the Woolsack.
BOURNEMOUTH-SWANAGE MOTOR ROAD AND FERRY BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a, and committed.
INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1a, and to be printed.
PATENTS AND DESIGNS (CONVEN- TION) BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1a, and to be printed.

INSPECTION OF FACTORIES.
VISCOUNT ASTOR VISCOUNT ASTOR rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether it is proposed to increase the number of factory inspectors so that the inspections may be adequately carried out and unnecessary loss of life and health prevented. The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I rise to put the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper. Your Lordships may remember that this Question was down on the Order Paper in the autumn of last year, but I was unable to raise it then owing to lack of time and pressure of legislation at the end of the Session. Accordingly I had to postpone it. I was asked to raise the question of the adequacy, or inadequacy, of the number of inspectors to carry out the inspection of factories and workshops largely because of a disastrous fire which occurred early last autumn in a film factory. That fire resulted in loss of life and injury to others.
As your Lordships are probably aware, there is a large number of places, rather over a quarter of a million, which are technically factories and workshops and which are liable to inspection. Of these about 129,600 are factories as distinct
288
from workshops. In order to carry on the inspection of these factories the whole staff consists only of 205. Out of that number we have to deduct those organisers and technical advisers who do not carry out routine duties of inspection: so that there is only something like 170 to 180 men and women to carry out the inspection of over a quarter of a million premises. The duties of the inspector under the various Factories and Workshops Acts are multitudinous. They have to carry out routine inspection—there ought to be at least one inspection a year. There are certain premises, where dangerous processes are carried on and where the atmosphere is apt to be vitiated, which ought to be inspected about once every three months. It is obvious that a staff of 170 to 180, however zealous and hardworking they may be, cannot possibly get round more than a quarter of a million premises. In the year 1925 there were 27,663 factories as distinct from workshops which were never inspected at all. There were 1,290 factories which were not inspected either in 1925 or 1926.
That this is unsatisfactory is proved, I think, by the fact that in 1926 there were 140,000 accidents, 800 of which were fatal. It is true that the number of fatal accidents in 1926 is slightly less than in the previous year, but that is very largely because in those industries where a large number of accidents occur many firms were either working part time or were closed down altogether. Actually, in the industries which were not stopped as the result of strikes or from other causes, there was an increase of fatal accidents. I am told on good authority that our staff of factory inspectors is about 25 per cent. below the figures fixed in 1921 as being desirable and necessary. I notice that in another place the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in reply to a Question dealing with another fatal accident in the year 1926, said:—
"I have said more than once that I am not satisfied that I have sufficient inspectors:"
and on previous occasions when questioned in another place he has made a similar statement.
I need not take up your Lordships time by going into any detailed description of these places or of the processes

289
conducted there. All I need say is that in the case I am referring to there was an element of danger and there was a fire and as a result four young women lost their lives and two men were seriously injured. There was naturally an inquest and at the inquest the district inspector, a Miss Dunch, explained that she had visited this factory in the course of her routine inspection, that she had been dissatisfied with what she found there, but that she had been too busy to get round again to see that the alterations and the precautions which she suggested had in fact been carried out. Perhaps I might quote what she is reported to have said at the inquest:—
"… when she visited the place in January things were not satisfactory, and a letter was sent with regard to certain breaches of the Celluloid Regulations. She received a telephone message that a part of the requirements had been carried out.… She was under the impression that the necessary work was being carried out."
She had not actually been able to get there to see for herself.
The coroner asked:—
"If this fire had not occurred these premises might not have been visited until some time next year?"
She answered:—
"I think probably they would have been visited."
But later, when questioned by the Home Office representative, she went on to say:—
"… there were 2,309 factories in her district and 2,546 workshops. About half of them were subject to special codes and regulations"—
that is to say they required more than a routine inspection—
"Her staff consisted of one half-time man, with some assistance given by another inspector. It was impossible to carry out the annual inspection."
That was her own statement. It is obvious that she would not have been able to get round to see that the advice which she had given had actually been carried out. She goes on further to say:
"I cannot say my mind was at case about the place.… It was on my list of dangerous factories."
That is the statement of the district factory inspector. But at the inquest there was also a representative of the
290
Home Office, and he confirmed what the previous witness had said. Mr. Macklin, Engineering Inspector of Factories, stated that the method of drying was grossly improper. He said that more frequent inspection of these places was highly desirable, but was impossible with the existing staff. It is not surprising, accordingly, that at the conclusion of the inquest both the coroner and the foreman of the jury made comments and observations upon what had happened. The foreman of the jury said:—
"The jury find … that a firm dealing with such dangerous material should have stricter supervision, and be visited mote frequently by the factory inspector."
And the coroner said:—
"He thought that more frequent visits by the inspectors were essential, not only for the protection of the employees, but also for educating the employer in the better understanding and appreciation of the requirements of the Factory and other Acts. The evidence illustrated the need for greater supervision in this class of factory."
So we find that there are a considerable number of accidents every year occurring in factories, that many of them are fatal, and that there is an admitted shortage of inspectors.
The responsible Minister, speaking in another place, has admitted a shortage of inspectors, and year by year, when questioned about it, has said that the Government were waiting until the passing of the Factory Bill. I cannot see why the Government should be waiting for this Bill, more particularly as I regret to see that year by year this very much needed and oft-promised Bill is repeatedly postponed. It is not sufficient to say that one or two more inspectors either have been or may be going to be appointed. If it is true that there is anything like a shortage of 25 per cent. in the required number, I hope we shall be told this afternoon that the Government contemplate appointing a sufficient number of inspectors, so that those duties and responsibilities which are necessary and which were intended by Parliament may be properly carried out, and that there may be adequate safeguards for health, limb and life.
LORD DESBOROUGH: My Lords, my noble friend has put his Question in general terms. As he said just now it is identical with one which he placed on

291
the Paper last November and which he has informed the House he did not ask. Both of the Questions were inspired, I suppose, by the circumstances attending the fatal fire which took place in September last at the works of the Film Waste Products, Limited, Union Wharf, London, and by the proceedings at the inquest which followed. Taking first the general aspect of the question, the adequacy of the present staff of the factory inspectorate for the work it has to do has been raised at intervals for several years, both on the discussions on the Home Office Vote in another place and on other occasions. The present position, as compared with the position before the war, may be stated thus: In 1913 the staff numbered 222, which included nine inspectors at headquarters; the establishment is now 206, including 20 at headquarters. In comparing these figures, allowance has to be made for the transfer of the factory inspection service in Ireland to the Free State Government and Government of Northern Ireland, which involved a reduction of seven posts. This shows an actual reduction of strength of nine posts which were given up in the interests of economy. The number of visits paid to factories and workshops has dropped, I am sorry to say, from 406,445 in 1913 to 300,368 in 1926.
EARL RUSSELL: That is a drop of 25 per cent.
LORD DESBOROUGH: This decrease, however, relates entirely to inspection of workshops; that is, workplaces where no power is employed. The number of visits to factories (which are the more important premises under the Acts) has not only been maintained, but has improved, the number of visits to factories in 1926 being 188,172 as compared with 176,591 in 1913. This Government, and the previous Government, have been aware all along that the standard of inspection is too low and that the inspectorate staff will have to be increased to secure the high standard of enforcement of the law in factories and workshops which they would like to see attained. Moreover, if and when the Factories Bill, which was introduced into another place in the summer of last year, becomes law, fresh burdens will be thrown on an already over-worked staff. Their policy, which, like their predecessors', has been to wait until that Bill had been passed and the whole question of the
292
organisation and strength of the staff can be examined in the light of the new situation and duties created by the Bill, was explained by the Home Secretary in the debate in the House of Commons on the Home Office Vote on July 14, 1927.
So far as the fire at the Waste Film Products, Limited, is concerned, two questions arose: First, whether the Celluloid Regulations of 1921, made under the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, which apply to all celluloid factories, were sufficient to ensure the highest standard of safety in works where the waste products of film were dealt with—it had already been recognised that these general Regulations were inadequate for works engaged in the manufacture of cinematograph film—and secondly, whether this accident had revealed a need for the immediate appointment of more inspectors in the Metropolitan area, where works of this nature seem to have congregated. As regards the first point, the Home Secretary was satisfied that the existing Celluloid Regulations were not sufficiently stringent. The film stripping industry is one of quite recent development, and is, in the opinion of the Chief Inspector of Factories, appreciably more dangerous even than the film manufacturing industry. The Home Secretary therefore decided that two new Codes of Regulations should be issued, one dealing with the manufacture of the film and the other dealing with works in which the waste film is manipulated. Both these Codes of Regulations have now been made, and will come into force on March 1 next and will introduce a number of new and important safeguards. I have the details here if any noble Lord would care to see them.
At the same time the Home Secretary came to the conclusion that having regard, in particular, to the development of this industry in the Metropolitan area, it was necessary to make some addition at once to the staff in the London divisions. He therefore obtained the sanction of the Treasury to appoint two additional (men) inspectors (included in the establishment of 206 already mentioned) for this purpose and these appointments will be made as soon as possible. In the meantime all waste film work has been specially visited by one of His Majesty's engineering inspectors of factories and the steps

293
necessary for compliance with the new regulations have already been taken in hand. I suppose the new Factory Bill will be coming on next Session, but in order to expedite matters the Home Secretary has already decided to advance the date of appointment of a Committee to go into this question of additional inspectors, so that no time shall be wasted, though it will be very difficult, till one knows how the new Factory Bill is going to emerge, to draw up any Regulations or to appoint many more inspectors. That cannot be done till we know what their duties are likely to be. Nor can we claim that an increase of factory inspectors will obviate these accidents. Accidents occur, unfortunately, in a great many places which are most carefully inspected, and I do not think the inquiry which has been referred to satisfied the authorities that the deplorable accident was necessarily due to a lack of inspection or would have been avoided had there been more inspection. The Home Secretary stated in another place that the accident in question was not directly attributable to a deficiency of inspectors but that an increase of staff coupled with the introduction of Regulations containing more stringent safeguards ought to afford workers greatly increased protection.
LORD ARNOLD: My Lords, I think the House is indebted to the noble Viscount for raising this question. The insufficient number of factory inspectors is a scandal of some years' standing and indeed the evil is admitted. I am bound to say the reply of the noble Lord has done very little indeed, as I think I shall show in a moment, to deal with the matter. He did not hold out any real hope of improvement. The noble Lord relies, apparently, upon the forthcoming Factory Bill—that Bill about which we have heard so much and seen so little. I cannot recall, at the moment, how many times it has been postponed. It certainly was definitely promised for this Session and now it is again postponed and we are told it is to be brought in next Session. We must be pardoned for being a little sceptical about that in view of past experience. There is no reason to wait until that Bill is passed before appointing a distinctly larger number of factory inspectors. I thought the reply of the noble Lord was, if I may say so with
294
respect, weak on that point. There is no reason to wait; it could be done now.
It is admitted that the factory inspectors are 25 per cent. below strength, and in my view the number of factory inspectors ought to be doubled. It is not a question of 25 per cent., which I do not think would be adequate. The noble Lord gave certain figures which, possibly, not listened to very closely, seemed impressive, but, if I followed them aright, they came to this, that the number of inspectors has been increased by one per cent. over a number of years. I am very much afraid that the trouble in this matter is only another instance of the indifference of the Government in regard to labour interests. There was a debate only the other night in another place dealing with a question which has also been raised in your Lordships' House—the question of the Washington Eight Hours Convention. The record of the Government in that matter is such that we cannot have confidence in their zeal in matters that vitally affect the interests of labour.
There is the question, not merely of factory inspectors, but of mine inspectors. What are the Government doing? They proposed, as a matter of economy so-called, the abolition of the Ministry of Mines. I do not mean the abolition of it in the sense that all the work which it has done would be done away with, but the Government thought so little of its importance that the Ministry of Mines was to be put back under the Home Office. There is a question of whether the number of mine inspectors ought also to be greatly increased. I cannot help fearing that the real reason why more is not done by the Government in this matter is because of their zeal for what they call economy. The noble Lord almost seemed to assent to that, because he mentioned the Treasury, but the Government can override the Treasury. The Government are masters in this matter. It really is not economy to have cheese-paring in the matter of factory inspectors. It is not economy, it is parsimony of the worst description. It would pay well, in many ways, to increase the number of factory inspectors. The noble Lord, with a great flourish of trumpets, indicated another one per cent. increase. If I heard the figures aright I think the 206 have become 208.
LORD DESBOROUGH: 205 become 206.
LORD ARNOLD: That is half of one per cent. increase. After a great amount of machinery and pressure apparently the number of inspectors has been increased by hall of one per cent. This Government, unhappily, where labour interests are concerned, are always very good at finding reasons for doing nothing. This afternoon the reason is, as I have said, that the Factory Bill is to be introduced and therefore nothing can be done at present. I am afraid we cannot do more than make our protest. There is no question whatever that if the Government have the will to deal with this matter, and deal with it adequately, they could do it perfectly well without waiting for the Factory Bill.
LORD BANBUR OF SOUTHAM: My Lords, I am afraid the noble Lord who has just sat down knows that he has a very bad case, because he has introduced two subjects which have nothing whatever to do with the question before your Lordships' House—the Washington Convention and the abolition of the Mines Department. They are evidently introduced in order to make political play for the by-elections which are coming on. They have nothing whatever to do with the point at issue. So far as I personally am concerned, I rather regret that my noble friend has not said he is going to reduce the number of inspectors instead of increasing them. What we want now is to give people an opportunity to work, and to work as long as they possibly can, and not hamper them by introducing all sorts of inspectors, who cost money and do no good to anybody.
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, I am glad to hear from the noble Lord opposite the pure doctrine of undiluted Toryism. What he wants is that people should do more work and do it under-inspected and under-protected. That, I think, is a doctrine which the Government will hesitate to endorse or put forward as their view. The noble Lord need not be afraid that we have a bad case or that we need wander elsewhere to make our case stronger. The insufficiency of factory inspection has been, as my noble friend said, a growing scandal for many years. The staff is under-manned. What could be worse than the admissions which were
296
heard at the inquest. There was an admission that here was a factory suspected of being dangerous in which something had to be done which ought to have been inspected attain to see if it had been done, but which could not be inspected for lack of time and people to do the work. The solatium that we are offered of one inspector in addition to 205 is really something too ridiculous.
LORD DESBOROUGH: Two additional inspectors have been appointed and that brings the number up to 206.
EARL RUSSELL: Very well, I will give the noble Lord his two. Two is not a proper number. I agree with my noble friend that the number of inspectors ought to be doubled. These factories are places where dangerous trades ate carried on and where the workpeople should be protected. As the Government perfectly well know, they will not be protected unless observation is kept upon the employers, and it is necessary to provide inspectors for that purpose. If I might have the attention of the noble Marquess the Leader of the House for one moment, I should like to refer to the Factory Bill. I ventured to say last year that the Factory Bill had again gone out of existence and the noble Marquess challenged me and asked how did I know. I did not know, but I suspected, and apparently I suspected rightly, because there is no mention of it in the King's Speech and I understand it is not now suggested that it will be introduced. Heaven knows when we shall see the Bill and still less when it will become an Act. It is not as if inspectors had no duties to perform now. They have a large number of duties under existing Acts. I cannot understand what the passage of the Factory Bill has to do with the appointment of additional inspectors. I do not think that those of us on this Bench, who feel that the conditions under which these people work require protection and safeguarding, can be satisfied with the answer given by the Government, and I hope that the noble Viscount who raised the question will bring it up again later in the Session if nothing substantial is done meanwhile.
LORD JOICEY: My Lords, I scarcely think there can be two opinions in your Lordships' House with regard to the accidents which take place in our various in-

297
dustries. I feel sure that the Government, the employers and the workmen are all very anxious to avoid these accidents if it be possible. I have studied figures going back a long way, and I find accidents have gradually decreased in proportion to the quantity of work which is turned out in our various industries. I know politicians are in the habit of saying that that is owing to the Acts of Parliament which have been passed and the Regulations which have been made under those Acts of Parliament, but I do not agree with that. I think accidents have decreased in proportion to the work done very largely owing to the improvement of the methods of carrying on our industries and the better class of machinery which is used. It is not to these new Regulations that I would attribute the decrease in the number of accidents. I think if you inquire in various industries you will find that the most important thing that troubles employers is the hesitation and the negligence you find very often amongst workmen in carrying out these Regulations.
I could give you many instances where workmen have gone directly in opposition to the orders of their foremen and their employers, with the result that there have been serious accidents. I will take one instance. When a pit is being sunk the men working in the shaft should have a rope put round them so that, if they should slip off the timber upon which they are standing, they will not be seriously injured. It is a most difficult thing to get men to carry out that Regulation. That is one instance. I could give you many others. Employers, so far as I am able to gauge their opinions, are most anxious to adopt any means they can in order to decrease the number of accidents. In mines, as you know, we have inspectors drawn from among the workmen themselves. Where gas is likely to be found one or two men who have been appointed by the men themselves go down and examine the place before the workmen go in, and report whether it is safe to work there or not. There is another point with regard to working in mines. How often have we known of cases where timber has been lying ready to be used to protect the roof from falling and yet men, anxious to produce as much coal as possible, have thought that they would get out more coal before putting in the
298
timber to protect themselves. Unfortunately, the roof comes down and a very serious accident takes place.
I think there is a great deal of exaggeration with regard to the value of inspectors generally. You often hear complaints from employers of interference by inspectors. I think that it is absolutely necessary, where Regulations are not properly carried out, that punishment should fall, not only upon the employers, but upon the workmen who neglect to carry out the Regulations. One would think, to hear some people talk, that employers had no interest in this matter, but surely it is a very serious loss to employers when an accident happens. We have very heavy financial penalties, going up to something like £600, if a man is killed and a considerable sum if he is injured. That alone will induce any employer to try to avoid accidents. So far as I am concerned, I would welcome most heartily more inspectors if I believed that their appointment would reduce accidents, but I am very doubtful about it. If you consult large employers you will find, I think, the opinion that strong pressure ought to be exercised upon trade unions to induce their members to make known to the employers or the foremen all cases where negligence is shown in carrying out Regulations. I think that would have far more effect in stopping many accidents than the employment of more inspectors.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY): My Lords, I think, if I may say so, that the noble Lord who has just sat down is abundantly justified in pointing out that it must not be thought that employers are indifferent to accidents in their works. Apart from the humane feelings which, in spite of what some extreme politicians say, undoubtedly characterise the great body of our employers, it is of course to their direct interest that there should not be accidents in their works. It is not right to assume, as is so often assumed, that employers are set on doing wrong and that it is only by means of Government inspection that they are induced to do right. The noble Earl, Lord Russell, whom I do not see in his place at the moment, said just now that here was a mischief of long standing. I do not know how far it is a mischief, but whatever the

299
condition of things is at present it is of long standing, and when I hear noble Lords sitting on the Labour Benches denouncing us for not increasing the number of factory inspectors I should like to ask what they did when they were in office.
LORD ARNOLD: They were a minority Government.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: They would not have found any opposition. They know that very well. I am afraid the noble Lord cannot get off on that plea. They did nothing at all in this matter, although they now reproach us. While I feel very strongly indeed that it is the duty of the Government to provide for adequate inspection, I do not believe that the efficiency of the service varies according to the number of inspectors. That is a wholly wrong way of looking at it. The proper way of regarding this subject is to ask, in the first place, has there been a great increase in the number of accidents? Noble Lords have quoted one important accident, but what general evidence is there that there has been an increase of carelessness owing to the absence of inspection? Without that evidence the whole case falls to the ground. It does not matter how many inspectors there are; the question is whether adequate inspection is carried out, and no other question is in issue. Until noble Lords begin to show that such is not the case—and I should have thought that this lay at the very foundation of any charge of negligence—they can show nothing. I do not admit that a great case has been made out. No doubt we should like to have more inspectors, and I hope that it may perhaps be possible hereafter to have them, but the case must not be argued on these lines.
I should like to make one further observation to the House in respect of the particular accident, in which celluloid was concerned, to which attention has been called. I do not know whether sufficient notice was taken of my noble friend's assurance that since that accident occurred additional Regulations have been made by the Home Office in order to prevent the recurrence of such an accident. Accordingly the idea that the Government are indifferent to what happened in this connection is wholly un-
300
founded. As regards the Factory Bill, I was going to remind the noble Earl if he had been here that we missed his presence in the debate on the Address. If he had been here he would have heard the full account which I ventured to give the House on that occasion of the reasons why the Factory Bill cannot be introduced in the present Session.
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, I should like to say one word in reply to the noble Marquess. It is no defence or explanation, as it appears to me, to say that other people have done as badly as you are doing, and on that ground I think it is quite unnecessary to go into past history, although I should not agree with the conclusions that the noble Marquess has drawn. I am quite certain, however, that he would never base a case for adequate inspection on what another Government had done during a short period of power. Such an argument is altogether impossible, as no Government could shelter itself under such an excuse as that.
I want to say one other word. The representative of the Home Office admitted, as I thought, a shortage of inspection. I am not dealing merely with numbers, for you have to take numbers and skill combined. If I understood his argument, it was that there had been, and still is, a shortage of inspection, but he indicated that the matter was likely to be further considered and additional inspection provided for. I think I am right in my summary of his statement. That is an argument, valid in itself, to which one wishes to give due weight. It entirely justifies the Question of the noble Viscount, because where you have inadequate inspection from day to day lives are being put in jeopardy under conditions which ought not to prevail. I do not doubt that the employers have good intentions. Nobody doubts that. But I should join issue with the noble Lord when he suggests that the workmen are to blame rather than the employers. I do not put any blame on either party. In the history of factory work it has been found that adequate inspection is necessary in order that the lives and health of the workers may be properly protected. There is no dispute on that question, and it is beside the point to suggest special intentions or special wickedness on either side.

301
I understood the noble Lord to say that there was not adequate inspection now, but a shortage. This is a deficiency that ought not to be allowed to continue for a day. If any man's, health is injured in consequence of that state of affairs it becomes a scandal, and I think that the noble Lord who represents the Home Office will be entirely in agreement with the opinion that I am expressing. I do not blame him in respect of his speech. I thought that it was an admirable speech in the sense that he recognised the shortcomings of the present time, and on account of his promise that, as regards the number of inspectors, some additional inspectors were to be appointed.
LORD DESBOROUGH: In relation to the new Factory Bill, when their duties will all be reconsidered, I think I said that the Home Secretary had made preparations that there should be no delay in the appointment of inspectors, and that this question was being gone into now.
LORD PARMOOR: If I might give the obvious answer to that—I am not going back into the question whether the Factory Bill ought to be introduced or not; that has been adequately discussed—if the Factory Bill implies the need of new inspectors, that can only be because it was necessitated by the condition under which industry was being carried on. That is the only real basis upon which an argument of that kind can be founded, and accordingly it seems to me that it was very strongly brought out by the noble Viscount that we are admittedly in the position of having a shortage or insufficiency of inspectors at the present time, and that this ought to be put right, not in the interests of a class but in the interests of our whole industrial life, at the earliest possible moment.
VISCOUNT ASTOR: Can the noble Lord who speaks for the Home Office say whether, in the opinion of the Home Secretary, the appointment of these two additional inspectors will enable the duties of the staff of inspectors, under the existing law, to be carried out adequately, satisfactorily and fully, or does he contemplate that further inspectors will have to be appointed if their duties are to be carried out satisfactorily, irrespective of the new legislation that is referred to as the Factory Bill?
LORD DESBOROUGH: I tried to explain that, as the new Factory Bill is coming, the whole situation will have to be reviewed, and I think that it would be premature to create a large number of new inspectors at the present moment.

THE USE OF ETHYL IN MOTOR SPIRIT.
LORD BUCKMASTERhad given Notice to move to resolve, That it is expedient that His Majesty's Government should immediately set up a Committee to advise as to the public danger that may arise from the use of lead tetra-ethyl in motor spirit. The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, last summer I was speaking to a, very eminent medical man, and he asked me if I knew anything about ethyl spirit. I replied that I knew nothing at all. He said: "You very soon will if the spirit is introduced over here." I asked him why. He replied that it was one of the most dangerous things that men could possibly handle. I said: "In those circumstances you may be quite sure that either the Home Office or the Ministry of Health will either prevent or make strict Regulations for its use." I am sure that the noble Marquess, who, I believe, will reply, will not accuse me of an excessive indulgence in optimism as to what this Government will do. I am sorry to find that my unguarded lapse on that, occasion had no foundation in fact. It appears that this spirit has come over here, being introduced into this country at the instance of one of the most powerful trade organisations in the world, and is being pressed for sale, and that, so far as I know, neither protection nor regulation from either the Home Office or the Ministry of Health has been provided with regard to its use.
It is as well, if your Lordships will bear with me, to consider for a few moments, what scientific men say about this spirit. It was discovered so far back as 1859, but nothing was done with it until about 1879, when Professor Franklin investigated it more closely. It was then classed as the most dangerous poison known. During the War it was considered as a proper poison gas, as it was regarded as a means by which we could disseminate more certain death than with any other poison that we had, but it was rejected, not because of any deficiency

303
in its lethal power, but because its method of dissemination, either through shell or liberation from tanks, rendered it unsuitable. The detonation destroyed some of its chemical molecules and so destroyed some of its effects. I will not pause to say how the contemplation of such a subject as this gives added emphasis to the need that something should be done to prevent a repetition of the horror presented by eminent scientific men poring over their crucibles in factories, seeing whether they can devise some compound of simple elements by which you can speedily and universally destroy human life. It was then rejected, and nothing, so far as I know, was done with it until, recently, its use was discovered in connection with motor ears, and its use is certain.
It has two great values. The first is this, that owing to its permission of greater compression than ordinary petrol vapours, it enables cars to take gradients more easily than the ordinary spirit, and it also avoids the knocking which is due to some detonation, not quite fully explained, which in car running is regarded as most unpleasant. It is these two things which it may be accepted that this spirit most certainly does. What is said on the other side? This spirit contains, as its very essence, lead tetraethyl, and it is this which distinguishes it from the ordinary motor spirit. The character of that ingredient is this, that if it is either put upon your hand, or breathed in, you run a very grave risk indeed of lead poisoning, and the thing that is most important to notice is this, that as it is capable of being dissolved in oil, and is highly volatile, there is no need for any abraised surface on your skin for this poison to take effect. Indeed, a very eminent scientific man said to me only the other day: "I would not have one drop of that on my finger. If I had I would spend the whole of the rest of the day trying to secure cleanliness." That is the character of the spirit which is being brought over here, and, like so many of these things, its action is not, necessarily instantaneous. Its real mischief is a form of lead poisoning more deadly than lead poisoning effected through the use of paint or of lead glazing. It is an illness which comes on without warning.
304
The idea that pain is a sentinel to warn you of the approach of illness is a theory which I do not think is found to be proved in practice. If pain he a sentinel then the sentry often sleeps at his post, for diseases like cancer, tuberculosis and lead poisoning pass him unchallenged, and enter into the very citadel of life. That is the character of this poisoning, and unless some steps are taken, if it is used, as it will be used if these trade organisations can push their produce and motorists find advantage in its use, the consequent danger which may result is something very grave indeed to contemplate. This spirit had its origin in the United States of America, and hearing of its mischiefs the Government of the United States appears to have appointed a Commission, some two years back, to inquire into this matter. The Commission reported that no positive evidence could be obtained of harmful effects, but they urged strongly that suitable appropriation be requested from Congress for the continuance of the investigations.
So far as I can see, even over there this substance is only allowed to be used subject to rules and regulations issued by an authority which is equivalent to the Ministry of Health over here, and these rules and regulations are really somewhat laughable when regarded from the point of view of the accidental carelessness of our men who have the use of petrol spirit. For instance, you are not carelessly to spill it on the floor of the garage. Your Lordships have probably been in many garages. Have you ever found one where there was not some petrol spirit carelessly spilt upon the floor? Again, you are to wash your hands before food or tobacco or anything else is conveyed to your mouth. Those are some of the suggestion made over there to protect people against the attack of an insidious and deadly disease, but we all know that they are perfectly useless over here, and I do not suppose that we are going to entrust the safety of our people to recommendations made by the authorities in another country. The welfare of our people is our concern and not theirs, and whether they like to use this substance and make regulations over there is a matter of no concern of ours.
We are bound, if warned, to look after the matter for ourselves. Have we been

305
wanted? Sir William Pope, Professor of Chemistry at Cambridge, wrote a letter to The Times of February 22, in which, after quoting from this Report, he says:—
"Pharmacological evidence has been published which proves conclusively that lead tetra-ethyl is absorbed from its dilute petrol solutions by animals through the skin and by the lungs. A garage hand who continually wets his skin with such a liquid, splashes it on his clothes, eats his food without scrupulous attention to cleanliness, or breathes an atmosphere tainted with the vapour, must thus be liable to contract lead poisoning; careless engine cleaners or repairers will incur a similar liability."
That was Sir William Pope's statement, but Professor Baker, who is the President of the Chemical Society, a Fellow of the Royal Society, Professor of Chemistry, and Governor of the Imperial College of Science and Technology, and was created C.B.E. for his services during the War, writes another letter to The Times to this effect:—
"Sir William Pope has, I think, understated the case against the use of lead tetra-ethyl in motor spirit. This substance does not act on the body as an ordinary lead poison, but it has a specific action which is much more harmful. It is little less poisonous than the corresponding mercury compound which caused the death of two promising young chemists at Oxford many years ago. Lead tetra-ethyl passes rapidly through the skin, is absorbed by the blood, and causes very severe nervous trouble. If sufficient is absorbed death occurs in a few weeks."
He then gives certain instances, with which I need not trouble your Lordships, and points out that whenever it is put upon the skin it finds its way into your body even although, as I said before, your skin is unabrased.
He concludes with a statement which I cannot help thinking requires some further comment. He says:—
"I wrote, as president of the Chemical Society, to the Ministry of Health more than a month ago, calling their attention to the urgency of the matter. So far as I know, nothing has been done."
Not only has nothing, so far as we know, been done, but this distinguished gentleman, who was seeking to put his knowledge at the service of the Government, and warning them of a matter which surely ought to have enlisted their attention, received nothing for his pains except a curt, acknowledgment of his letter. I am bound to say I do not think that is
306
the way in which a most eminent and distinguished scientific man should be treated by a Government Department. I think the very least that should have been done was that the Department should have implied what he had got to say, and should have thanked him for the interest which led him to call their attention to a matter which, it may well be, had escaped their notice.
I want to know whether the Government are aware of this—whether they have taken any steps at all about the matter, or whether they are just going to allow this spirit, which, whether there be disputes about its malignity or not, is condemned by two of our most eminent teachers of chemistry to-day as a most deadly poison, to be used unprotected, unregarded, and without any warning from the Ministry of Health of any kind as to what may be the result of its use. Of course, we shall not suffer from it. It is not the least likely that our hands are going to be stained by this stuff, or that we are going to breathe the fumes; but most assuredly the people who have to do with cars, if they use it, will. Imagine what will happen in a big motor omnibus garage, with all the hands and people about there. I say it is a terrifying prospect, when you have people making statements like that, that nothing should be done. If they are doubted, then there surely ought to be a Committee of Inquiry, as I ask. But you cannot say these things are untrue. They are said by men whose judgment and learning we trusted readily enough in times of difficulty, and now no attention whatever appears to have been paid to their warning.
I have often heard members of the Government saying that this kind of Government is a useful thing because the country needs repose. Well, I am not prepared to disagree. I think that, after fever, rest may not be unwise, but when rest degenerates into torpor the condition of things becomes serious, and something should be done by which the subject should be aroused. It is with the desire that it should be aroused and that we should know what it is going to do that I have put this Motion on the Paper. Of one thing you may rest assured, that unless the Government acts nothing will be done. These vast trade

307
organisations do not care how many people suffer from the exploitation of their goods, for commerce, as you know, has no conscience, and trade no tenderness of heart. If there be profit to be won by the sale of this spirit there will be thousands of men who will be ready to reap the gain, even though they do it with the certain knowledge that the harvest is only gathered at the cost of the lives and the suffering of their fellow men.
Moved to resolve, That it is expedient that His Majesty's Government should immediately set up a Committee to advise as to the public danger that may arise from the use of lead tetra-ethyl in motor spirit.—(Lord Buckmaster.)
LORD GREENWAY: My Lords, I should like to support very strongly the noble and learned Lord's Motion. It may be suspected that, in doing so, I have an axe of my own to grind, but I can assure your Lordships that that is not the case, but that I am taking up the matter solely in the interests of the oil industry as a whole. It may not be generally known that all of the big petrol producing companies are engaged on the problem of how to produce the quality of natural or compounded spirit best qualified to meet the demands of the large portion of the public who now favour high compression engines in motor cars, but none of us is desirous of producing a spirit which is liable to criticism on the score of danger. It is a matter of importance to know how far we can go in the admixture of non-petroliferous substances, which may themselves be of deleterious character, but which are not so when mixed in very small proportions with natural spirit.
The position as regards tetra-ethyl spirit is that this new compound has been placed on the market, and whilst the company which introduced it claims that it is non-injurious to health, various statements have appeared in the Press suggesting that it is toxic in character and dangerous to the health, or even the life, of the people who use or handle it. The number of people who use and handle petrol is now so enormous that I consider it essential in the public interest that a properly constituted board, including some of our leading chemists and toxicologists, should be appointed de-
308
finitively to settle once and for all the point in dispute, and, if it be found that tetra-ethyl is non-toxic, it should be given a clean bill of health in order that the public may be able to buy it and use it freely; on the other hand, if it be found that it has dangerous properties it should be subjected to some such safeguards as are adopted in the case of other dangerous and poisonous compounds. The matter to me is one of the very first importance, not only from the point of view of the oil companies, but of the public generally. I therefore give the noble and learned Lord my heartiest support, and I hope the rest of the House will do the same.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, the noble and learned Lord has accused the Government of being torpid. Certainly, unless fatigue is the same as torpor I cannot say that I feel the least like what he described. When I think of the series of crises of the first order which we have had to deal with, the vast number of topics with which we have had to grapple, I must say that I think it is a little hard that the noble and learned Lord should accuse us of indolence in respect of public affairs. On the contrary, the real difficulty of modern government is that there is too much to do, and the implied charge of indolence against us is, I think, wholly undeserved.
Having made that protest, I want to make an admission to the noble and learned Lord. He suggests that my right hon. friend the Minister of Health and his office have been guilty of discourtesy to an eminent chemist because they have not paid sufficient attention to a letter which he addressed to the Department. I am afraid there was a little want of attention. It is not that the letter was not acknowledged. It was acknowledged, but, as is usual, I think, in cases of this kind, the definitive answer was reserved for future attention, when the necessary material for making the reply could be got together. Unfortunately, rather too long a period was allowed to elapse between the two letters—not, I think, a month; at any rate that is a matter of detail; but still too long, I fully admit. And if the noble and learned Lord thinks that this eminent chemist—whose eminence I do not dispute for a moment—feels in the

309
least that he has not been properly treated, I hope he will accept from me the fullest apologies. I should be very sorry that anything of the kind should occur.
With regard to the substance of the noble and learned Lord's speech, I do not think a very great deal of difference will be found between His Majesty's Government and himself. He says that the great company which has the control of this commodity is thoroughly indifferent to human suffering. Even if I were an eminent lawyer and Judge I should hesitate to make so strong and unsupported a statement. So far as the Government are concerned there is no indifference at all. We recognise the importance of the matter. We recognise the risk attaching to this commodity and we propose to deal with it. Having said so much, I would ask your Lordships to bear in mind a certain distinction. There is this poison, the tetra-ethyl, and there is the petrol which has a small portion of the poison in its composition. Tetra-ethyl itself is highly dangerous. It has, of course, very serious consequences if it is not properly treated, and it is dangerous in the highest degree. But that does not mean that it must not be manufactured. We manufacture many things which are highly dangerous, such as vitriol and arsenic. But it does mean that the greatest care ought to be taken.
As a matter of fact it is not manufactured in this country at all, but in America. A moment of special risk occurs, however, when, having been imported into this country, it is blended with petrol spirit. The blending process involves considerable risk, undoubtedly, and that is a matter which is receiving the attention of the Home Office at this moment. As your Lordships will readily understand, an inspection of that kind comes under the Home Office administration, and it is being very carefully looked into. I ought, however, to say that up to now no case of lead poisoning has arisen from this commodity in England. I do not want to press that too far, but so it is that there is not yet a single case of lead poisoning which has arisen in consequence of the blending of this highly dangerous commodity in this country. Turning from the poison itself to the petrol which has a very small ad-
310
mixture, I think I am correct in saying it is a mixture of one in 1,300 parts, or something of that kind. I do not mean to say that eliminates all its toxic character, but I want your Lordships to have a, true picture of the exact condition of affairs. That blend is undoubtedly a very useful commodity and a very useful source of power. I need not say, without derogating for a moment from the warning which the noble and learned Lord has given your lordships, that a matter which the Government have to consider is as to how far they ought to interfere with a recognised improvement in the source of power for petrol engines, especially for aeroplanes, where it is particularly useful.
What about the danger of ethyl petrol, the spirit which is slightly diluted with this commodity? As the noble Lord has stated, there has been an American investigation into it. The Public Health Department in America appointed an investigating body consisting of seven distinguished scientific men. The noble and learned Lord has referred to that inquiry, which is a very important one, and in quoting one of the letters I think he mentioned a phrase which appears in the the Report which that Committee made—
"No positive evidence could be obtained of harmful effects attributable to the use of ethyl gasolene."
As a matter of fact the evidence goes considerably further, as your Lordships will see from the conclusions of the Committee. The first conclusion is:—
"Drivers of cars using ethyl gasolene as a fuel and in which the concentration of tetra-ethyl lead was not greater than one part to 1,300 parts by volume of gasolene, showed no definite signs of having absorbed lead after exposures approximating two years."
As the noble and learned Lord will see, I am going a very long way to meet him in a moment, but I want him and your Lordships to realise that this matter has already been investigated, and that the findings, though not conclusive for us in this country, are still very significant—after two years Cleve was no definite sign of any lead having been absorbed.
The second conclusion is:—
"Employees of garages engaged in the handling and repairing of automobiles and employees of automobile service stations may show evidence of lead absorption.

311
"In garages and stations in which ethyl gasolene was used, the amount of apparent absorption was somewhat greater than in those without ethyl gasolene;"—
I would like the noble and learned Lord to note this limitation—
"but the effect was slight in comparison with that shown by workers in other indus-industries when there was definite danger from lead … and for the periods of exposures studied was not sufficient to produce lead poisoning."
And this is the third conclusion:—
"In the regions in which ethyl gasolene has been used to the greatest extent as a motor fuel for a period of between two and three years, no definite cases have been discovered of recognisable lead poisoning or other disease resulting from the use of ethyl gasolene."
I do not desire your Lordships to accept the conclusions of that Report as conclusive. After all, it was not a British Committee, and I have no means of testing the competence of the scientific men who are said to have conducted the inquiry. But, undoubtedly, it was a Committee of scientific men appointed by the relevant Department in the United States, and those are the conclusions at which that Committee arrived. So I would suggest that we must approach the condemnation of this commodity with a certain amount of caution, and, at any rate until the steps are taken which I shall indicate in a moment, not fall into the error of assuming the worst until it is proved.
I come now to consider what ought to be done. Undoubtedly the British Government cannot be indifferent to the risk to which the noble and learned Lord has called attention, and they are intent upon the closest investigation and are about to undertake research of a careful character. For that purpose the Government are going to appoint an Inter-Departmental Committee, the composition of which has not been definitely settled, but I think it will consist of representatives of the Ministry of Health, of the Home Office and of the Medical Research Council. Those three bodies, I hope, will form part of this Inter-Departmental Committee, and they will be able to check the conclusions which have been arrived at in America and either confirm them or differ from them, as the case may be. I think I shall have satisfied your Lordships that we do not deny that there it a case for investigation, but we
312
deprecate a hasty conclusion condemning this commodity without investigation. We, however, propose to set the matter absolutely at rest by appointing this Committee forthwith.
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, the concluding words of the noble Marquess make it unnecessary for me to argue the main case ally further before your Lordships. I am personally very glad to hear that he is going to set up this Committee, and if the Committee come to findings resembling the American findings I think we may probably feel relieved in our minds. The noble Marquess will not mind, I am sure—he indicated as much himself—if I say that one would prefer to accept the findings of a Committee of our own in this country rather than be bound by any findings in America. I really rose, after what the noble Marquess has said, only to say that prima facie we do, of course, know that lead poisoning is a most insidious and a, most deadly disease, and that if this material actually causes it there would be the gravest necessity to take action.
Like the rest of your Lordships I am not capable, and only such experts as will sit on this Committee are capable, of saying whether, in fact, poisoning does or will take place from this diluted form of tetra-ethyl. I do think it is in the interests of everybody—in the interests of those who make and sell this spirit and of motorists, who I understand are using it in increasing numbers—to have it settled definitely whether or not this stuff is fit to use. That, I understand, is what will practically be the reference to this Committee. I am sure that will meet the noble and learned Lord who has moved this Motion. But prima facie lead is dangerous and this, as I understand, is a particularly soluble and volatile form of it, and does suggest such a dangerous chance of lead infection and of lead poisoning getting into the body that it certainly is a subject for inquiry. I can only say I am very glad that the noble and learned Lord has succeeded in his object and very glad to think this matter will be settled definitely one way or the other. We shall then all know where we are and we shall have nothing more to complain of. I have nothing further to say in view of what the noble Marquess has said.
LORD BUCKMASTER: My Lords, the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) rather resented my suggesting that the Government had been inactive in this matter. If he will provide me with a proper word to describe the course of conduct which has already permitted six months to pass, while a spirit undoubtedly suspicious and condemned by eminent men as being dangerous has bean allowed to be disseminated throughout this country, without taking any steps whatever to inquire into this danger or to protect the public against its use, I will gladly substitute the word that he supplies for the one I used. The next thing he suggested—and I do not think he meant it—was that I was here representing Professor Baker. I do not know what he meant by that. Let me assure him that I had never spoken to Professor Baker about this matter before I put down the Motion. I do not think it is in accordance with the noble Marquess's habitual courtesy, most notably shown towards myself, to suggest that I have come here representing anybody else. I never have represented anybody else in this House except myself, and I am responsible for the things I say, and no one else is.
The noble Earl, Lord Russell, seems satisfied. I wish I could be. An Inter-Departmental Committee is not the thing I want. I want, and I submit the country wants, a scientific investigation, not, an investigation by a Departmental Committee. If a Departmental Committee can be of any use it could have been set up a year ago. What you want are eminent scientific men. Departments do not have eminent scientific men on their staffs.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The Council of Medical Research has.
LORD BUCKMASTER: The Council of Medical Research has a certain number of doctors, but what you want are scientific men, such as eminent chemists, who know all about this matter and who would soon satisfy the noble Marquess, who speaks lightly of one in 1,300, that watered vapour from nickel will poison with one in 20,000. Professor Baker, knowing that I was setting this Motion down, and after I had set it down, wrote to me a letter in which he said that after this spirit has burned in the cylinders of the engine the lead comes into the
314
exhaust as a fine quality of lead oxide and that in a crowded street, like Piccadilly, for example, the unfortunate passer-by would be exposed to the same danger of lead poisoning as painters were before they were protected by Government action. I am not guaranteeing what Professor Baker says; I merely say that here is a man who ought to know, and that is what he says about it. He does not say that one in 1,300 is a matter that you need nut trouble about. On the contrary, he says it is very dangerous. I have never seen the Report which has been referred to, but I am bound to say I heard with alarm the statements made in that Report about the attendants and servants in motor garages already showing, not grave symptoms, but symptoms of illness from the use of this spirit.
THE MARQUESS OE SALISBURY: I am afraid I have parted with the paper for a moment but what it stated was that they showed symptoms that they had absorbed lead—it may have been an infinitesimal amount—but the sentence went on to say that they were not poisoned by the lead.
LORD BUCKMASTER: The noble Marquess must know that lead poisoning is one of the most hideous and incurable of all our complaints. If he had ever seen a person suffering from it he would realise what the danger is.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I do realise it.
LORD BUCKMASTER: When you say a man is beginning to absorb lead in small quantities he is doing something which in the end can only lead to lead poisoning. It is not a matter of small moment because people are only found to be slightly affected. These people will go on getting more and more affected till illness and death overtake them, and we shall have done nothing except to wait nine months and then set up an Inter-Departmental Committee. I beg the House to note that they are about to appoint, not that they have appointed, a Committee to see what is to be done with regard to the dissemination of a spirit which men who ought to know say is fraught with greater danger than any other that is known to them. I know that it is no use asking for more. I know perfectly well that if we divided and

315
beat the Government it would have no effect. I do not propose to proceed with my Motion. I have done my duty by calling attention to this matter.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: May I, with the permission of the House, say one word? If the noble and learned Lord thinks that there should be scientific men added to those who sit on the Inter-Departmental Committee, I will certainly represent that in the proper quarter.
LORD DANESFORT: May I ask one question? Am I right in supposing that this Committee will have power to take evidence and be able to call before it eminent chemists, technologists and others to instruct them? If that is so it seems to me that would get over a good deal of the objection which the noble and learned Lord put forward against the Inter-Departmental Committee.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I will discuss all these matters with my right hon. friend in the light of what has been said.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES COMMITTEE.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (THE EARL OF DONOUGEMORE): My Lords,
316
I beg to move that Viscount Peel be added to the Select Committee on House of Lords Offices.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

WARWICK CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEESinformed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: The Order made on Wednesday last discharged, and Bill committed.
IMPORTATION OF PLUMAGE (PRO- HIBITION) ACT (1921) AMENDMENT BILL. [H.L.]
Order for the Second Reading tomorrow discharged.

ANNFIELD PLAIN AND DISTRICT GAS ORDER, 1928.
Special Order proposed to be made on the application of the Annfield Plain and District Gas Company:
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and referred to the Special Orders Committee.
House adjourned at half-past five o'clock.