Lords Sitting of 14 June 1928

Preamble
The House met at a quarter past four of the clock, the LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

INFANTICIDE BILL. [H.L.]
LORD DARLING: My Lords, I ask leave to introduce a Bill to amend the law with regard to the crime of infanticide, and to move that it be read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(Lord Darling.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

STOKE-ON-TRENT CORPORATION BILL.
Read 2a.
SCOTTISH INSURANCE COM PANIES (SUPERANNUATION FUND) BILL.
Read 3a, and passed.
EXETER CORPORATION BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments: Further Amendments made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

OXFORD EXTENSION BILL. [H.L.]
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES. (THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE): My Lords, with regard to this Bill I beg to move the Motion on the Paper.
Moved, That Standing Order No. 143 be considered in order to its being dispensed with in respect of the said Bill, and that the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Earl of Donoughmore.)
On Question, Motion agreed to: Bill read 3aaccordingly, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

LAND DRAINAGE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE EARL OF STRADBROKE): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Stradbroke.)
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, before the Motion is put might I ask the noble Earl one question? I happen to have been acquainted with the Ouse Drainage Bill from the start, having been Chairman of Quarter Sessions before which the matter came on a legal point. The decision then given led to a large number of subsequent proceedings. I want to ask the noble Earl whether the proposals now contained in the Land Drainage Provisional Order Bill are agreed to.
THE EARL OF STRADBROKE: My Lords, the object of this Provisional Order Bill is to alter the provisions of a Provisional Order Act of 1920 relating to the area under the jurisdiction of the Ouse Drainage Board set up by the Land Drainage (Ouse) Provisional Order Confirmation Act, 1920. Following on the passing of that Act, considerable dissatisfaction was shown with the rating provisions by certain owners and occupiers in the upland area on the ground that they were being rated without deriving any benefit thereby. This dissatisfaction culminated in passive resistance and forced sales being held. As a consequence of this, Provisional Order Acts were passed in July, 1925, and August, 1926, suspending up till January, 1928, the rating provisions in these areas.
A special Commission was set up by Lord Irwin, the late Minister of Agriculture, in August, 1925, to consider the whole problem of the Ouse, and as a result of the Report of that Committee a Bill was introduced into Parliament in March of last year to deal with the question. That Bill contained a clause extending the suspensory period for rating in the area covered by this Bill until a day to be appointed by the Minister of Agriculture. On November 11 of last
458
year, after a lengthy hearing, a Joint Committee of both Houses decided that the Bill could not proceed. The effect of that Bill being thrown out was that the suspensory period in respect of the area covered by this Bill came to an end on January 1. In consequence, notice was given of the introduction of this Bill. The Bill follows the usual precedent of Provisional Order Bills made under the Land Drainage Act, 1918, and provides that no rating can be levied in this contentious area during the suspensory period, the suspensory period being after December 31, 1927, until such day as the Minister of Agriculture may by Order determine. During the suspensory period no works may be executed by the Drainage Board in these areas, except with the consent of those representing the area concerned.
LORD PARMOOR: I am perfectly aware what is in the Provisional Order scheme, but I wanted to know whether it was an agreed scheme. I know that I have not given notice of this question and if the noble Earl cannot answer it I will not press it.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY): If the noble Lord will give my noble friend notice he will get an answer directly.
On Question, Bill read 2a.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (PETERBOROUGH EXTENSION) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (SWINDON EXTENSION) BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH (HALIFAX AND WEST RIDING PROVISIONAL ORDERS) CONFIRMA TION BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 7) BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (GILLINGHAM EXTENSION) BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 8) BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Amendments proposed by the Committee made.

INDIAN HIGH COURTS BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD): My Lords, unless there is any point in relation to this Bill about which any of your Lordships feels any doubt—in which case I shall be very happy to attempt such explanation as is in my power to give—this is not a matter, I think, on which
460
I need detain your Lordships for long. The Bill received the support of my predecessor Lord Olivier, as Secretary of State, of Lord Reading and his Government, and it has equally received the support of myself, of Lord Irwin, the present Viceroy, and the Government of India as at present constituted. The High Courts in India are manned by persons with one or other of four qualifications. The Judges must have been either barristers called to the Bar in this country or members of the Indian Civil Service with long judicial experience as District Judges, or members of the Provincial Judicial Service with equally long judicial experience, or, lastly, pleaders practising at a High Court Bar in India. A succession of authorities for many years has formed the view now that it is not defensible or logical that any class of men capable of being elected to be puisne judges in a court of first instance should be excluded if recommended for their merits for the position of Chief Justice. This is the principal change effected by this Bill. There are others upon which, perhaps, I need not now dwell. The position of a vakil is assimilated to that of a barrister, but the pre-judicial qualifying period is increased from five years to ten years and is made the same in both cases. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Birkenhead.)
VISCOUNT HALDANE: My Lords, I think this Bill is quite right and I have no criticism to make upon it; but I should like to be reassured by the noble Earl on one point. The Memorandum begins by setting out certain provisions of the Government of India Act, 1915. Among these is subsection (4), which provides—
"that not less than one-third of the Judges of a High Court, including the Chief Justice but excluding additional Judges, must be such barristers or advocates as aforesaid, and that not less than one-third shall be members of the Indian Civil Service."
As I understand the meaning of the Bill, it is proposed to alter that provision by enabling anybody who is otherwise qualified to be Chief Justice, and also to add, after advocates, the word "pleaders," so that the law will be that a Judge of the High Court must be a barrister of England or Ireland, an advocate in Scotland or a pleader of not

461
less than five years standing. That is quite right, and I assume that I interpret that correctly.
But I do not like the words "barrister of England or Ireland, or a member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland" remaining there, because I look forward to the time when they will be called to the Bar in India. It is to my mind a great evil that so many young Indian lawyers should have to come over here, where they get a training which is by no means suitable, and are at a loose end, instead of pursuing their legal studies in India in the atmosphere of the Courts and among the pleaders there. That can be done hereafter, if it is decided to do it, by an Amendment, and I think there must be an Amendment, and I want to guard myself against in any way assenting to the proposition that a barrister should be a barrister only of the English Bar or an Advocate of the Scottish Bar. Subject to that, and subject to its being clear, which I think it is, that a vakil is now put in the same position as a barrister, by the amending Bill, I see no reason why this Bill should not pass.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: My Lords, with reference to the points raised by my noble and learned friend, the subsection to which he referred requires, as he has pointed out, that at least one-third of the Judges of the High Court are to be barristers. It has been found from experience that it has often tended to result in the necessity of selecting a barrister for a vacancy in preference to a vakil whose qualifications may easily be markedly superior. It is the purpose of this Bill to place the vakil is this respect in the same position precisely as a barrister. I will not at this stage deal with the other matter raised by my noble and learned friend, as he himself, I think, will probably conclude that if he desires to move at all upon this topic, the convenient stage to do so will be in Committee.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

BANKERS (NORTHERN IRELAND) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Preamble:
Whereas by virtue of certificates issued under Section eight of the Bankers (Ireland) Act, 1845, the aggregate amount of bank-notes which banks in Ireland may issue in excess of the amount of gold and silver coin and other currency held by those banks was fixed at six millions, three hundred and fifty-four thousand, four hundred and ninety-four pounds, and such excess issues are hereinafter referred to as "fiduciary note issues":
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (VISCOUNT PEEL)THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (VISCOUNT PEEL) moved to leave out "may" and insert "are authorised to," and, after "of" ["of gold and silver coin"] to insert "bank notes issued by them against." The noble Viscount said: This is really a drafting Amendment to the Preamble. It really improves the drafting, and makes the Preamble clearer.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 4, leave out ("may") and insert ("are authorised to,") and after the second ("of") insert ("bank notes issued by them against").—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
VISCOUNT PEEL: The next Amendment deals with the same point. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 7, after ("such") insert ("authorise").—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Preamble, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.
Clause 4 [Short title construction and commencement]:
VISCOUNT PEEL VISCOUNT PEEL moved, after subsection (1), to insert the following new subsection:—
"(2) In the Bankers (Ireland) Act, 1845, references to the Dublin Gazette shall be construed as references to the Belfast Gazette."
The noble Viscount said: I think it is obvious why "Belfast" is substituted for "Dublin" which appears in the Bankers (Ireland) Act, 1845. I am advised

463
that it would be possible to make the alteration by adopting a certain clause in the Act of 1922, but it is more convenient to do it by direct legislation, and that is why this Amendment has been brought forward. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 3, line 13, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.

CURRENCY AND BANK NOTES BILL
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
Clause 3:
Securities for note issue to be held in issue department.
3.—(1) In addition to the gold coin and bullion for the time being in the issue department, the Bank shall from time to time appropriate to and hold in the issue department securities of an amount in value sufficient to cover the fiduciary note issue for the time being.
(2) The securities to be held as aforesaid may include silver coin to an amount not exceeding five and one-half million pounds.
(3) The Bank shall from time to time give to the Treasury such information as the Treasury may require with respect to the securities held in the issue department, but shall not be required to include any of the said securities in the account to be taken pursuant to Section five of the Bank of England Act, 1819.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, at the end of subsection (2), to insert "and commercial bills not exceeding five and one-half million pounds." The noble Viscount said: I should like to point out that the whole of this clause is a bad innovation. It begins by saying—
"In addition to the gold coin and bullion for the time being in the issue department,"—
464
the amount of which is not stated—
"the Bank shall from time to time appropriate to and hold in the issue department securities"—
again, it does not say what sort of securities, whether foreign bonds or what not—
"of an amount in value sufficient to cover the fiduciary note issue for the time being."
The old £5, £50 and £100 notes are backed by gold. As I understand it, these fiduciary notes will not be backed entirely by gold.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Not at all.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: Not at all! That makes the case even worse. I notice that silver coin is referred to in subsection (2), and I suppose that is the debased coinage which was issued a few years ago. It is bad enough to have even silver. Then there is a very wide subsection regarding securities, and I understand that commercial bills are included under "securities." Surely, they ought to be equally limited in amount. I have placed my Amendment on the Paper in this form—although I know perfectly well that commercial bills are included under "securities"—in order that a limit might be put upon securities as well as upon silver. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 3, line 17, at end insert ("and commercial bills not exceeding five and one-half million pounds").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I think the Amendment moved by my noble friend is an example of the difficulties one has in dealing with this Bill, when different schools of thought are constantly fighting against each other. I was contending during the Second Reading debate to make it plain to those who press very strongly that "securities" should include commercial bills, that I understood that it did include commercial bills. Now I have the noble Viscount on the other side who apparently dislikes these commercial bills. He wants to limit them to a very small amount. The noble Viscount said he belonged to one party and I wanted to point out that there was a very strong party on the other side. The general commercial opinion is, I understand, that certainly a proportion of the securities held against the fiduciary issue should be in commercial bills. It would

465
be a pity to limit the particular bills to £5,500,000. It might quite well be that in many circumstances of the market it would be very desirable to have a good deal more than that held.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: Is the noble Viscount prepared to limit them to some extent?
VISCOUNT PEEL: I will tell the noble Viscount why not. He is so very obliging always with his Amendments. I am not quite sure what limitation he wants. I would ask him not to put any limitation because immediately you classify the different securities to be held against the fiduciary issue you then begin to interfere very greatly with the discretion of the Bank of England as to the class of securities which it should hold against the fiduciary issue. I would, therefore, urge my noble friend not to press his Amendment about limitation to £5,500,000 and indeed not to put in any limitation on the amount of commercial bills, otherwise he is bound to put limitations on the other classes of securities which make up the general securities to be held in support of the fiduciary issue.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: If the noble Viscount would put a limit on all these different classes of security I should be more than satisfied.
VISCOUNT PEEL: That would mean we should have to put in a series of limits and I hope the noble Viscount will not press me to do that.
LORD SWAYTHLING: My Lords, I think the noble Viscount who has just sat down mistook something I said on the Second Reading. I rather gathered that he thought I pressed him to include dollar bills. As the law stands, under the Bank Act dollar bills are now included and the Bank of England have power, I understand, at the present moment, to transfer any security held in the Banking Department to the Issue Department. That would include at the present moment commercial bills and also commercial bills in foreign currencies. What I drew the noble Viscount's attention to was this, that these commercial bills should only be held in those currencies which are on a definitely free gold basis. As to the suggestion that there should be a limit to these commercial bills, there is no limit at the present time and I do not
466
see what advantage there would be in fixing a limit for the future. If we look back at the expansion of business since the Bank Act we will realise that if a limit had been put then on the number of commercial bills used it would have been considerably smaller than the limit which might be put now. If we put a limit now we might have to amend that limit very considerably in the future and that, I think, world be a very great mistake.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved to omit from subsection (3) all words after "department." The noble Viscount said: Under Section 5 of the Bank of England Act, 1819, once a year a return of certain information has to be made to Parliament. The Bank of England is not a Government Department; it is a private concern. I think the public ought to know what sort of securities are being held to back the fiduciary issue. I therefore beg to move the Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 3, line 21, leave out from ("but") to end of subsection.—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: My noble friend, in order to support his view that a return should be made once a year as to what securities are in the Issue Department, has to make reference to a very ancient Act of 1819. I would suggest that the Act of 1819 is to some extent obsolete. The intention of that Act was, I understand, to limit the borrowing powers of the Government and the Bank of England. We have departed far from the year 1819. One can think of a great number of cases where it would not be wise to make public these securities that are held in the Issue Department to cover the fiduciary note issue, but I think I will content myself with one observation, which will perhaps appeal to my noble friend, and that is that none of the Central Banks in any country, I believe, do publish separately the number,, nature and description of the securities which are held against fiduciary issues. I think it would be wise to allow the information to go to the Treasury and no further.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: The noble Viscount says that the Central Banks abroad do not do this, but I ask

467
him to compare their credit with ours. Ours is always much better than theirs because we are open in what we do.
VISCOUNT PEEL: But that particular kind of openness we do not practise.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
Clause 3 agreed to.
Clauses 4 to 10 agreed to.
Clause 11 [Power of Bank of England to require persons to make returns of and to sell gold]:
VISCOUNT PEEL: There is a point I want to mention here which was raised by my noble friend Lord Balfour of Burleigh on the Second Reading. Unfortunately he is not able to be here to-day. His point was whether a penalty was necessary in case some of these bullion dealers would not sell to the Bank of England? He suggested that a penalty clause was required. I am advised it is not necessary because, first of all, these are very substantial people not likely to resist any request of this kind, and if any very extreme case arose in which it was resisted such refusal would be a misdemeanour under the Common Law.
Clause 11 agreed to.
Clause 12:
Penalty for defacing bank notes.
12. If any person prints, or stamps, or by any like means impresses, on any bank note any words, letters or figures, he shall, in respect of each offence, be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding one pound.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, after "person," to insert "writes." The noble Viscount said: The clause reads:
"If any person prints, or stamps, or by any like means impresses, on any bank note …."
It may be much more untidy and dirty to write in ink than to have a banker's stamp on it. I want to make the clause a little more watertight than the present words do. That is why I propose that the word "writes" should be inserted.
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 32, after ("person") insert ("writes").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: I would suggest to my noble friend that he makes it a little
468
too watertight by the Amendment. This clause is intended to prevent stamping or printing or otherwise impressing anything upon these notes. As the noble Lord knows, it is sometimes the practice to require a person to write his name on the back of a note, and I do not think the banks would welcome a prohibition of this kind.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: That being the case, then if he prints his name instead of writing it he incurs a £1 penalty and if he writes it he does not.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I do not think he does print it, he writes it.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
Clause 12 agreed to.
Clause 13:
Short title, interpretation and repeal.
(3) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—
The expression "bullion" includes any coin which is not current and legal tender in the United Kingdom.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in the definition of bullion in subsection (3), after "any," to insert "gold." The noble Viscount said: The expression "bullion" includes any coin which is not current and legal tender in the United Kingdom. Under this clause we should have silver, nickel or even copper coin which is not legal tender. Therefore I think the word "gold" should be inserted before "coin." I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 7, line 13, after ("any") insert ("gold").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
VISCOUNT PEEL: My noble friend in moving this Amendment did so, I thought, with a certain note of indignation in his voice. I am bound to say I have some sympathy with him because the same point occurred to me when I looked at the clause, but I consulted the legal advisers and they quite persuaded me that the insertion of the word "gold" is unnecessary. If my noble friend looks at it I think he will see that "the expression 'bullion' includes any gold coin" would seem to suggest that the word "bullion" can mean more than gold coin. If it includes gold obviously there is something else in it besides gold

469
coin. That may tend to throw doubt on the user of the word "bullion" in other parts of the Bill.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: If between now and the Report stage my noble friend will consider some Amendment to prevent silver coin and copper coin and nickel coin, which are not legal tender, being included, I should be very much obliged to him.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am always ready to consider any suggestions of the noble Viscount, but I rather thought that the point I put to him was conclusive, that to insert the word "gold" would throw doubt on the meaning of the word "bullion." However, I will certainly think over what he says.
LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM: I think there is something in this Amendment. I do not ever feel satisfied when I am told that an Amendment is right but that it is not necessary. If it is right put it in, if it is wrong do not put it in, but do not say that in the opinion of legal advisers it is not necessary. That is generally a way of keeping out something which eventually turns out to be necessary.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I am always glad to hear any intervention of my noble friend, especially when, as in this case, he is a supporter of the Bill, but I think he has misunderstood me. I did not say the Amendment was not necessary. I said the Amendment, in fact, had an element of wrong in it because it might result in doubt about the meaning of the word "bullion" in another part of the Bill.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 13 agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Gage.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
THE LORD CHAIRMAN: There is only one Amendment to this Bill and that is in the Schedule. I think, therefore, that if there is no objection on the part of your Lordships I might put all the clauses of the Bill without naming them separately.
Clauses 1 to 25 agreed to.
First Schedule [Additional benefits]:
LORD ASKWITH LORD ASKWITH moved to insert the following paragraph:—
"(5) Allowances in respect of dependants of insured persons in receipt of sickness or disablement."
The noble Lord said: In 1926 there was a Royal Commission on national health insurance and that Commission made a voluminous Report, containing certain suggestions which they desired to have put on the Statute Book. Among those suggestions was the provision of allowances to dependants of any insured persons in receipt of sickness or disablement benefits. They proposed that that should be made a statutory benefit as and when funds were available to meet the cost and that it should come in the order of priority they laid down. This Bill, in the First Schedule, sets out certain matters which are to be substituted for the Third Schedule of the principal Act and which are to be optional, that is, additional benefits. The proposed grant to dependants is, however, left out entirely. The maternity benefit is put in as an additional benefit, but not the grant to dependants. It has been said that approved societies have not asked for this, but I have been given a list (which I add up to 124) of different women's societies, of varying strength throughout the country, affiliated together, and they have either passed resolutions on the principle of this or have debated and approved it. So I propose an Amendment that this should come as the fifth additional benefit which an approved society would be allowed to use if and when they wanted to. The advantage would be that if they do so use it experience would be gained as to its working and in the future it might even possibly be made statutory.
The Royal Commission went at great length into this matter. They came to the conclusion that it ought to be the second principle to be put upon the Statute Book for additional allowances.

471
They suggested that there should be given to the wife of a man who was sick and unable to provide for his family 2s. a week and 2s. for each child, or in the case of disablement 1s. They recommended that there should be given to a widower 2s. for each child in the case of sickness and 1s. in the case of disablement. They recommended that in the case of unmarried insured women no allowance should be paid in respect of dependent children because it would create such tremendous difficulties, but that the dependants for the purposes of the scheme should be the widowed mother of such persons. All grants to children were to be only for children up to fourteen years of age. These are not very expensive grants. There would be only certain cases in which they would be wanted, but I can imagine that in those cases in which they would be wanted they would be very badly wanted. The addition of these grants to the Schedule would not cost the country a penny. My Amendment is not one which at the present time would increase expenses, but it will give an opportunity to approved societies, if they so decide and if they have funds in hand—which, if trade improves, they may have in the future—to give these benefits, or a portion of them, to dependants. Therefore I think it is a reasonable Amendment. The matter is one which should not be lost sight of and an opportunity should be given to those who wish to grant these benefits to do so.
Amendment moved—
Page 24, line 11, at end insert the following subsection:—
("(5) Allowances in respect of dependants of insured persons in receipt of sickness or disablement").—(Lord Askwith.)
VISCOUNT GAGE: I must thank the noble Lord for giving the Ministry full particulars of his intention regarding this Amendment and the moderation with which he urged what undoubtedly would appear at first sight to be a reasonable case. My right hon. friend has examined it very carefully and regrets very much that he must resist it on the same grounds as he resisted a rather similar Amendment, moved in another place. It is perfectly true that allowances for dependants take a prominent place in the recommendations of the Royal Commission, but, together with
472
the abolition of insurance committees, the partial pooling of surpluses of approved societies, and other matters, this recommendation had to be abandoned, in this case on the ground of cost and of the financial burden that it would impose upon the scheme. It may be observed that the Royal Commission did not recommend that the allowances to dependants should be administered as an additional benefit by the approved societies. They specially recommended that these allowances should be taken out of the list of additional benefits. There were several reasons for this. In the first place the principle was not popular with the approved societies and was never used, and in the second place it was generally agreed amongst people experienced in these matters that, if the principle is to be admitted at all, it should be done by way of a general provision applicable to all insured persons and not only to members of such approved societies as could afford it.
But a more important reason still is that not only the Ministry but the approved societies themselves consider that the surpluses should be devoted principally to benefits in the nature of treatment. These societies already have a very wide field over which they can apply their surpluses, the amount of money they have is limited, and they consider, as does the Ministry, that it is desirable that this money should be applied in making adequate provision for a few additional benefits for which there is the greatest need, rather than that it should be dissipated over a large list of additional benefits. Up to the present time, amongst all the additional benefits open to the societies, the dental and ophthalmic benefits have been regarded as most important, and my information is that, if this Amendment were passed and the approved societies decided to adopt it, there would be little or no money left for these particular benefits. That is the principal reason that has led my right hon. friend not to accept this Amendment.
I admit the reasons may appear to be a little too technical to carry the immediate persuasion and conviction with which I should like to meet so experienced a debater as my noble friend Lord Askwith, but I think that, from a common sense point of view, there is yet, a more significant argument still, and

473
that is that the approved societies themselves have never asked for this extension. After all, additional benefits are administered, not by bureaucrats from Whitehall, but by representatives of 16,000,000 insured persons, grouped in over 7,000 societies and their branches, and it really seems only reasonable that, out of such an enormous mass of individuals, including many millions of women, there would be some who would be sufficiently strong-minded to make their representatives in the approved societies urge upon the Minister the case that the noble Lord has presented. Nevertheless it is a fact that the approved societies, when they were enabled to devote their surpluses to this purpose, never did so during the whole period from 1911 up to the present time, and further that during the preparation of this Bill, when the Minister was in the closest touch with the approved societies, no representations were made to him that the approved societies were in favour of this proposal.
If the noble Lord could convince the Minister that the approved societies hold the same views in these matters as the societies he has quoted, he might at any time be prepared to make some concession. Let me point out in conclusion that under the terms of paragraph 17 of the First Schedule, he is enabled to take these steps. The paragraph makes provision for—
"such other additional benefits, being of a character similar to that of any of those hereinbefore mentioned, as may be prescribed."
I hope that the noble Lord will not think it necessary to press the Amendment in view of the arguments that I have put forward.
LORD ASKWITH: I do not think that the noble Viscount has convinced me at all. He has merely pointed out that under a paragraph of the First Schedule something might be done to enable these benefits to be given. While the Bill has been before the House it has, of course, been impossible to obtain the opinion of 7,000 approved societies. I recognise that the noble Viscount has met me in the most courteous manner. Perhaps, in the circumstances, I might quote my noble friend Lord Banbury, and say that this is another instance of an Amendment
474
which the noble Viscount agrees is right, but which he says is not necessary. I do not propose to press the Amendment.
LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM: I am not at all sure that I agree with this Amendment. As I understand it—I may be wrong—the Royal Commission recommended that something of this kind should be done when the money could be found. As I understand it, the money is going to be found by the approved societies. On the other hand the approved societies do not want to find the money. It has been pointed out by the noble Lord below the gangway that certain women's associations had asked for this. These women's associations would ask for anything. The next thing will be that every woman is to have £2 a week so long as she remains a woman. The result will be that we shall all be bankrupt. I am very glad that the Government are going to resist this Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
First Schedule agreed to.
Remaining Schedules agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.

PETROLEUM (AMENDMENT) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
LORD DESBOROUGH: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a third time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(Lord Desborough.)
EARL BUXTON: My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed on behalf of those with whom I act, to express our recognition of the friendly attitude with which my noble friend and the Government have received the suggestions that we have made. We have not a complete loaf, but we have a very considerable portion of the various Amendments that we suggested, and I think he will himself recognise that these were all in accordance with the object that we had in view—namely, to get rid of these pumps, so far as we can, in all places where they destroy the beauty of the scenery and the amenities of the surroundings. If the noble Lord will allow me, I would also like to

475
press upon him that the Government should do their very best to get these Amendments through the other House. I am sure that he can truthfully say that, in this House at all events, there is no difference of opinion at all, and that we hold that Clause 5, as it is now amended, makes a very important addition to the Bill, and helps to secure the object that we all had in view.
On Question, Bill read 3a.
Clause 5:
By-laws as to petroleum filling stations.
5.—(1) For the purpose of preserving for the enjoyment of the public the amenities of any rural scenery or place of beauty or historic interest or of any public park or pleasure promenade, or of any street or place which is of interest by reason of its picturesque character, the council of any county or borough may make by-laws—

(a) regulating the appearance of petroleum filling stations; or

(b) prohibiting the establishment of petroleum filling stations.

LORD DESBOROUGH: My Lords, I am sure that on behalf of the Government I can voice their appreciation of the sentiments expressed by my noble friend opposite, and for my own part I can assure him that I will do my best to get facilities for the Bill, so that it may be passed with all expedition in another place. I am sure we are all working with the same object in view—namely, the preservation of places of beauty and historic interest. I have one Amendment to move. In Committee doubts were expressed as to whether the word "rural" in Clause 5 covered not only "scenery"
476
but "places of beauty or historic interest," and to make it clear that the word "rural" is not the governing word for all these matters, I beg to move the insertion of the words "of any" after the words "scenery or." The clause will then read:—
"For the purpose of preserving for the enjoyment of the public the amenities of any rural scenery or of any place of beauty or historic interest."
I think the insertion of those words will make the intention of your Lordships and of the Government perfectly clear.
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 31, after ("scenery or") insert ("of any").—(Lord Desborough.)
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, I would like to thank the noble Lord for this great improvement in drafting. I know that the other evening, when this was being discussed, he expressed the opinion of the Government that the word "rural" applied only to scenery, and now we have the matter made quite clear. The question was raised by Lord Arnold, and I think that the noble Lord opposite has met my noble friend's objection very frankly and fully.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

COTTON INDUSTRY BILL.
Read 3a(according to Order), and passed.
House adjourned at a quarter past five o'clock.