§ Amendments reported (according to Order).
§ Clause 2 [Partial Exemption Orders]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the first Amendment is consequential. I do not think I need weary the House with any explanation of it.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 8, leave out from (" morning ") to (" in ") in line 9.—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 3 [Special provisions in respect of the sale of meals and refreshments off the premises]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next four Amendments are drafting.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 2, line 15, leave out from the beginning to (" which ") in line 16, and insert (" As respects shops ")
§ Page 2, line 20, leave out from (" sold ") to (" the ") in line 21
§ Page 2, line 23, leave out (" such ") and insert (" those ")
§ Page 2, line 24, leave out (" such ") and insert (" those ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 7:
§ Special provisions for persons observing the Jewish Sabbath.
§ (8) In the event of any change in the occupation of a shop registered under this section it shall be the duty of the person who becomes the occupier to serve on the local authority notice of the change, and in the event of any change in any partnership or among the directors of any company by which such a shop is occupied, it shall be the duty of the partnership, or of the company, as the case may be, to serve on the local authority a notice giving particulars of the change, and, whether or not such a notice is served, the 744 registration of the shop shall, upon the expiration of a period of fourteen days from the date on which the change occurred, be deemed to be cancelled, unless within that period, or within such further time as may be allowed by the local authority, a fresh application under this section is made in respect of the shop:
§ Provided that, where such a fresh application is made by reason of a change in any partnership or among the directors of any company by which the shop is occupied, the local authority may dispense with the statutory or other declaration or certificates required by paragraph (a) of subsection (2) and by subsection (3) of this section in the case of any person who has made such a declaration in connection with a former application in respect of the shop.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next four Amendments are drafting.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 4, line 33, leave out from (" shop ") to (" declaring ") in line 34 and insert (" in such form as may be prescribed ")
§ Page 5, line 29, leave out (" an offence under ") and insert (" a contravention of, or failure to comply with, any of the provisions of ")
§ Page 5, line 36, after (" occupied ") insert (", or not occupied solely,")
§ Page 5, line 38, after (" occupier ") insert (" or to the other occupiers, as the case may be,").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved to add to the proviso in subsection (8) "either in person or by an agent." The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I think it is usual when a person has leave to appear to be heard that leave is also given for him to be represented by an agent. I cannot for the moment produce any precedent, but I hope my noble friend will be able to accept the Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 38, at end insert (" either in person or by an agent ").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVAMy Lords, it is quite impossible for the promoters to accept this Amendment. I feel certain that if any of the Law Lords were here they would be horrified by the proposal that any one can be represented in Court by any Tom, Dick or Harry. There are certain phrases in certain Acts which do enable people to be represented, but those are all directed towards one purpose, and 745 that is to protect the high officers of State, chief constables and people of that kind, from the waste of time in having to be there all the time themselves. You cannot extend that principle to everybody. It seems to me and to the promoters that it is in the interests of justice that the Court should have before it either the actual occupier of a shop or a legal representative who is capable of acting on his behalf. Of course, the Rules of Court, as my noble friend knows, will allow the owner of the shop as it is to be represented by a solicitor or by counsel.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, to shorten the proceedings I will withdraw at once after the explanation given by our noble friend.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment is drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 5, leave out (" number of ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment is mainly drafting, and unless there is any desire for an explanation I will merely move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 44, leave out (" the shop ") and insert (" that shop or any other shop in the area of the local authority ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment is drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 7, line 15, leave out (" so ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 8:
§ Special provisions for London.
§ 8.—(1) If the Common Council of the City of London or the London County Council ore satisfied that any part of their respective areas—
- (a) is a district in which it was, before the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-six, customary to hold street markets on Sunday; or
- (b) is a district, being a district within the City of London or the Metropolitan Boroughs of Bethnal Green, Shoreditch, or Stepney, in which it was customary before the said date for the majority of the shops in the district to be kept open
746 on Sunday and that, having regard to the character and habits of the population in the district, the application of the provisions of this Act requiring shops to be closed on Sunday would cause undue hardship,
§ Provided that before making an order applying to any district referred to in paragraph (b) of this subsection the council shall take steps to ascertain the wishes of the occupiers of such shops as appear to them to be likely to be affected, and if they are satisfied that a majority of the occupiers of any class of such shops are opposed to the making of the order the council shall exclude that class of shops from the operation of the order.
§ THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR moved, in the proviso in subsection (1), to leave out "paragraph" and insert "paragraphs (a) and ". The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this Amendment is intended to cover a point which was discussed in Committee. The noble Earl, Lord Munster, assured me on this clause, then Clause 6 and now Clause 8, that all the points I desired were covered by his Amendment; but his Amendment did not cover paragraph (a) at the beginning of the clause. The leaving out of the shops and traders in paragraph (a) means that as the clause is now drawn the local authority—that is to say, the County Council and the City Corporation—can only administer this clause as regards Bethnal Green, Shoreditch, or Stepney, or the City of London. Surely, it is only right that those who are included in paragraph (a) should also have the advantage of the clause. It may perhaps make it a little more difficult to administer, but personally I have seen many Acts of Parliament much more difficult to administer than would be the case if my Amendment were agreed to.
§ It has been my lot to try to administer some very difficult sections of Acts passed by this House and another place, and I am quite sure that if this Amendment is agreed to it would not make the Bill any more difficult than some of the 747 measures we have successfully administered in the past. I cannot see why this privilege should be confined to these three Boroughs and to the City and also to shops. Moreover, the traders concerned are very anxious that it should be applied to them all over London, and, if they are willing, I should have thought half the difficulty of administration would disappear. My noble friend Lord Dufferin tells me that he is not inclined to accept this Amendment, but I cannot see why he should not be able to accept it after what the noble Earl, Lord Munster, said in regard to his Amendment—namely, that all my points had been covered. Perhaps the noble Earl can explain why his Amendment did not cover paragraph (a) and why it should not. I shall be interested to hear his explanation, and in the meantime I should like to move my Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 38, leave out (" paragraph ") and insert (" paragraph (a) and ").—(The Marquess of Aberdeen and Temair.)
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVAMy Lords, on behalf of the promoters I would like as strongly as I may to urge your Lordships to resist this Amendment. Clause 8 has certain provisions, first of all, for those areas in London where street markets have long been held and where long usage has entitled people to consider that they have almost a right to hold them; and, secondly, under paragraph (b), for those districts where in the past it has been customary for shops to keep open on Sundays. So far as the latter are concerned, those districts where shops have been kept open on Sundays, where there has been no long-established street market, it is provided in the Bill that local authorities shall take steps to ascertain the wishes of the shops concerned, and if the majority of the occupiers of any class of shops desire to be excluded from the order that order shall not apply to them. I would remind my noble friend that, following the procedure of the existing Shops Act, only occupiers of shops will be allowed to vote on this matter. If my noble friend's Amendment is carried, an exactly similar procedure would apply to the orders made for these street markets, and the result surely would be this, that whereas it is perfectly possible that the owners of 748 shops in these districts where street markets are held are not favourable to the markets, they nevertheless will have the right to vote as to whether they are to be allowed to be held on Sundays or not. That does not seem to me to be right.
It is a gross violation of every principle of justice that the people who are most directly concerned should not be allowed to vote in a matter of this kind, whereas those whose direct interest may well be for the closing of these markets should have the power to vote and influence the local authorities in making this Order. It seems to me, therefore, only just that this Amendment should be resisted. I would call my noble friend's attention to subsection (4) which instructs the local authority to give public notice of their intention to make an order, to specify the period within which objections have to be made, and to take into consideration the objections they receive. Surely the local authority, if sufficient objecttions were received from the shop owners and occupiers, would take them into consideration in making any such order. Surely the shop owner is perfectly well protected as it is, and I urge your Lordships not to accept this Amendment that so closely affects the interests of people who nevertheless are not able to vote. This Amendment, if agreed to, would make a great deal of difference to their livelihood.
§ On Question, Amendment negatived.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment is drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, lines 41 and 42, leave out (" a majority of ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, this, too, is a drafting Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 42, after the second (" of ") insert (" a majority of ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, this is also another drafting Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 9, line 14, leave out (" during the whole of ") and insert (" on ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
749§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next is a purely drafting Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 9, line 15, at end insert (" in like manner and for the like purposes as it would, but for the order, have been required by this Act to be closed on Sunday ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, this is a drafting Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 9, line 35, leave out (" occupiers ") and insert (" occupier ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, I have a drafting Amendment which I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 9, line 41, leave out (" common council ") and insert (" Common Council of the City of London ").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 10:
§ Miscellaneous savings.
§ (4) Notwithstanding anything in this Act, any person carrying on or employed in the business of a hairdresser or barber may, at any time, for the purposes of that business attend any person—
- (a) in any place, if that person is unable, by reason of bodily or mental infirmity, to go to the place where such business as aforesaid is carried on; or
- (b) in any hotel or club, if that person is resident therein.
§ (5) This Act shall not apply to any sea going ship.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, I beg to move this drafting Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 18, after (" in ") insert (" Section one of ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
THE MARQUESS OF DUFEERIN AND AVA moved, in subsection (4), to leave out paragraph (a) and insert:
(a) in any place, if such attendance is necessary by reason of the bodily or mental infirmity of that person; or
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this is a small but rather important point. As the clause stands a barber may attend a person on Sunday "if that 750 person is unable by reason of bodily or mental infirmity to go to that place "where the barber's business is carried on. This apparently means that a barber could attend on Sunday a person with no legs but would not be entitled to attend a person with no arms. I hope this Amendment will meet with your Lordships' approval.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 22, leave out paragraph (a) and insert the said new paragraph.—(The Marquess of Dufferin and Ava.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVA moved to insert after subsection (4):
(5) If the local authority are satisfied that any person engaged in handicraft at his home is dependent for his livelihood upon the sale on Sunday of articles produced by him in the course of his handicraft to such extent that the prohibition of such sale would involve substantial hardship, they may grant to him a certificate exempting him during such period as may be specified in the certificate from any of the provisions of this Act in respect of the sale of those articles during such hours and subject to such conditions as may be so specified.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this is an Amendment which I move in answer to a promise that I gave my noble friend Lord Phillimore. I do not see the noble Lord in his place, and I therefore imagine he is satisfied with the compromise I have made. I have attempted to include the man who would suffer a real hardship if the product of his own hand was not allowed to be sold upon a Sunday. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 26, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Marquess of Dufferin and Ava.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved to insert:
(6) Nothing in this Act shall apply to the carrying on on Sunday of the business or a retail dealer in butcher's meat as defined by the Retail Meat Dealers' Shops (Sunday Closing) Act, 1936.
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to exclude from the scope of this Bill the business of a retail trader in butcher's meat. Your Lordships will recollect that we have passed a Bill entitled the Retail Meat Dealers' Shops (Sunday Closing) Bill and it is accordingly unnecessary to deal with 751 butcher's meat in the general Bill which is now under discussion.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 27, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 11 [Provisions respecting shop assistants]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the Amendments in my name on this clause are practically drafting, and unless any noble Lord wishes for an explanation I shall not say anything further upon them.
§ Amendments moved—
§
Page 11, line 23, leave out paragraph (a) and insert:
(a) in the case of a person so employed for more than four hours on any Sunday, that person shall—
§
Page 12, line 1, leave out paragraph (b) and insert:
(b) in the case of a person not so employed for more than four hours on a Sunday in any month, that person shall receive in respect of his employment on any Sunday in the month a half-holiday in addition to his statutory half-holiday, if "any, and that additional half-holiday shall be on a weekday of the week beginning with that Sunday unless he has in respect of his employment on that Sunday, already received such a half-holiday on a weekday of the previous week.
§ Page 13, line 5, after (" the ") insert (" two ")
§ Page 13, line 23, at end insert (" about the business of that shop ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 12 [Notices]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the Amendment in my name to this clause is drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 13, line 33, leave out from (" Sunday ") to the end of line 36 and insert (" who are entitled to any holidays prescribed by the foregoing section of this Act, and of the respective days of the week
752
upon which those persons receive those holidays ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 13 [Extension of provisions of this Act to retail trading elsewhere than in shops]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the Amendments in my name on this clause are drafting. I beg to move.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 14, line 4, after (" six ") insert (" and section eight ")
§ Page 14, line 13, leave out (" therein ") and insert (" thereat ")
§ Page 14, line 14, leave out paragraph (c).—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 14:
§ Enforcement.
§ 14.—(1) In the ease of any contravention of, or failure to comply with, any of the provisions of this Act, the occupier of the shop shall be liable to a fine not exceeding—
- (a) in the case of a first offence, five pounds;
- (b) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, twenty pounds;
§
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in subsection (1), after "occupier of the shop," to insert "and in the case where a shop is occupied by a partnership every partner and agent of the partnership and in the case where a shop is occupied by a company every officer or agent of the company besides the partnership or company." The noble Viscount said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is that the director of a company should not be able to get off scot free if he orders the company to contravene the provisions of this clause without being personally liable. I have taken the precedent from the Companies Act, 1929, Section 351, which reads:
If any company to which part of this Act applies fails to comply with any of the foregoing provisions of this part of this Act the company and every officer or agent of the company shall be liable to a fine.
753
I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 14, line 30, after (" shop ") insert the said words.—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVAMy Lords, I am afraid I cannot accept this Amendment on behalf of the promoters, for two reasons. Firstly, I think that when an Act is passed we must taken into consideration all the other Acts upon the point. For instance, Clause 14 applies Section 14 of the Shops Act, 1912, which contains provisions with respect to offences. Subsection (2) of that section runs as follows:
Where an offence for which the occupier of a shop is liable under this Act has in fact been committed by some manager, agent, servant or other person, the manager, agent, servant or other person shall be liable to a like penalty as if he were the occupier.This enables any person other than the occupier who is guilty of an offence to be proceeded against. I hope that meets my noble friend's point. I feel that it is quite unnecessary to insert the rather vindictive provision which he has proposed in regard to an offence, which, after all, is no worse than the offence of depriving a shop assistant of his half-holiday. Why, therefore, single out this particular offence for so drastic a provision. I therefore hope my noble friend will see his way to withdraw the Amendment.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, if as my noble friend says—and I am quite sure he is right—this point is covered in the 1912 Act, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment in my name is drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 14, line 41, leave out (" in ") and insert (" at ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 16:
§ Short title, citation, application, commencement and repeal.
§ (3) This Act shall come into operation on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-seven.
754§ THE EARL OR MUNSTER moved, in subsection (3), to leave out "January" and insert "May". The noble Earl said: My Lords, I think you will appreciate that after the passing of this Bill there will be a certain amount of work to be done by the Home Office and local authorities, and it is thought better to postpone the date of the commencement of this Act from January 1, 1937, to May 1, 1937. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 15, line 33, leave out (" January ") and insert (" May ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ First Schedule:
§ FIRST SCHEDULE.
§ Transactions for the purposes of which a shop may be open for the serving of customers on Sunday.
§ 1. The sale of—
§ (g) medicines and medical and surgical appliances by any person who has entered into a contract with an insurance committee under the National Health Insurance Acts, 1924 to 1935, for the supply of drugs and appliances;
§ (h) aircraft, motor or cycle supplies, or accessories for immediate use;
§ (l) guide books, postcards, photographs, reproductions, photographic films and plates, and souvenirs at any gallery, museum, garden, park or ancient monument under the control of a public authority or university, and, if and to the extent that the local authority certify that such sale is desirable in the interests of the public, at any other gallery or museum, or at any place of natural beauty or historic interest, or at any zoological, botanical or horticultural gar dens or at any aquarium;
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in paragraph (g), to omit all words after "appliances." The noble Viscount said: My Lords, under this paragraph as it stands it appears to me that no person would be able, unless he had entered into a contract with an insurance committee under the National Health Insurance Acts, 1924 to 1935, to supply drugs and appliances, and it seems to me rather hard that a man should not be able to have a prescription made up or be able to get a patent medicine to prevent a cough or something of that kind. My noble friend Lord Munster has an Amendment down which I believe will 755 cover the point that I am raising and if he will assure me that that is so I shall not press this Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 16, line 22, leave out from (" appliances ") to end of paragraph (g).—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, I will endeavour to explain to my noble friend the Amendment which stands in my name and which follows his on the Paper. It is an Amendment relating to the sale of medicines and medical and surgical appliances, and as the Schedule stands the exemption is confined to those chemists or drug stores who have entered into a contract with the local National Health Insurance Committee. Any chemist or drug store can enter into such a contract, but it has been pointed out by my advisers that certain chemists have not done, and have no wish to do, insurance work. At the same time they do desire to remain open on Sunday. It is in order to include this type of shop that it is proposed that the exemption shall apply also to any premises registered under Section 18 of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, 1933. This will have the effect of applying the exemption to any chemist shop irrespective of whether it is the subject of a contract with an insurance committee or not. I think that should meet my noble friend's point. But I must add that his Amendment, if your Lordships accept it, would mean that a grocer or an ironmonger's or a general shop which stocks a few bottles of patent medicine might remain open on Sunday and I am sure my noble friend does not wish that to happen. I think my Amendment will cover the point which the noble Viscount has in mind.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, it is not my intention that any grocer's shop should be open for the sale of drugs of any sort. I am not quite clear, however, whether under the Amendment which my noble friend is to move a person who wants a prescription made up can go into a chemist's shop and get a patent medicine also. Will he assure me on that point?
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERYes.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEVery well, I ask your Lordships' leave to withdraw.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, the next Amendment in my name is drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 16, line 22, after (" appliance ") insert (" (i) at any premises registered under Section twelve of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, 1933; or (ii) ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVA moved, in paragraph (h), to leave out "for immediate use." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I do not consider this Amendment necessary, but I move it in order to remove the fears of some people who think that local authorities may interpret the words "for immediate use" in a very strict sense—so strict that a motorist who wanted to buy a spare tyre or to lay in a store of tyres before undertaking a long journey would not be entitled to do so. I cannot think that local authorities would be so crass as to prevent that being done, but I am prepared to move this Amendment in order to remove the fears.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 16, lines 26 and 28, leave out (" for immediate use ").—(The Marquess of Dufferin and Ava.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved to leave out paragraph (l) and insert:
(l) guide books, postcards, photographs, reproductions, photographic films and plates, and souvenirs—
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, the purpose of this Amendment is to permit the sale of guide books, postcards, 757 photographs and other things on passenger-carrying vessels. I do not think I need weary your Lordships with a long explanation. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 17, line 1, leave out paragraph (l) and insert the said new paragraph.—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ LORD ELTISLEYMy Lords, may I ask in what manner specifically this Amendment differs from the original words in the Bill?
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERThis Amendment contains complete exemption for sea-going ships.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
THE MARQUESS OF DUEFERIN AND AVA moved to insert:
(o) fodder for horses, mules, ponies and donkeys at any farm, stables, hotel or inn.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this Amendment is intended to carry out a promise I gave at an earlier stage in order that people who ride on Sundays should be able to obtain fodder for their horses. The Amendment has been carefully considered and it is the best we can do. I think it covers every conceivable eventuality and I understand that those who pressed the point most strongly are quite satisfied.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 17, line 14, at end insert:
(" (o) fodder for horses, mules, ponies and donkeys at any farm, stables, hotel or inn.")—(The Marquess of Dufferin and Ava.)
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, there seems to be one defect in this Amendment. What about dogs? May I not give my dog his dinner on Sundays?
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEI have, an Amendment on the Paper to cover that.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved to insert:
( ) food for domestic animals at any hotel or inn.
§ The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I am much obliged to my noble friend for feeding horses, but if human beings, horses, mules, ponies and donkeys can be provided with refreshment on Sunday, I do not see why domestic animals such 758 as dogs and cats should not have the same privilege. I hope the noble Marquess will see his way to accept the Amendment.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 17, line 14, at end insert:
( "( ) food for domestic animals at any hotel or inn.")—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVAMy Lords, the first question that I must ask my noble friend is whether he regards a goat as a domestic animal. That, I am told, is a very important point in this connection. To those of your Lordships who enjoy a classical allusion I will say that Viscount Bertie's attitude in relationship to the law appears to be very much the same as Cato's attitude in relationship to the gods. As your Lordships know, de minimi's non curat lex. It does appear to me that my noble friend in this Amendment is really pressing the matter a little too far. After all, any decent man will share his meal with his dog and any man having dinner at an inn would certainly find it difficult to separate the bill for his canine friend's refreshment from his own. That is common practice. Therefore I feel that in this particular matter it is unnecessary to have a separate provision of this kind.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, in replying to my noble friend's question whether a goat is a domestic animal, I must say that I have no idea. My noble friend said that any man will share his meal with his dog, but your Lordships will know that in many restaurants dogs are not admitted. Your Lordships may also know that cats are just as hungry as dogs. I do not see why they should not be provided for. On the whole I think that I really must press the Amendment.
THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVAMy Lords, I should very much dislike your Lordships to divide on this matter. It might appear rather trivial to the outside world. I feel that there is no reason why dogs should be treated as a separate item, and the man who takes a cat into a restaurant and is given a drop of milk would not expect to see on his bill an item "Fodder for cat." I do ask my noble friend to come down to reality and not press this Amendment.
§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEMy Lords, I can only speak again by leave of your Lordships, but I would like to point out that it would be an offence under this Bill to supply food if my Amendment is not included.
§ On Question, Amendment negatived.
§ Second Schedule [Transactions in respect of which a partial Exemption Order may be made under Section Two]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, there is a drafting Amendment to this Schedule. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 17, line 20, at end insert (" of this Act ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Third Schedule [Transactions in respect of which an order may be made under Section Four of this Act]:
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERMy Lords, there is also a drafting Amendment to this schedule. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 17, line 31, leave out (" four ") and insert (" five ").—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to