Lords Sitting of 31 October 1939

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

CONTROL OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS.
LORD STRABOLGI LORD STRABOLGI rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether any steps are being taken to speed up the working of the postal and cable censorship; if they are aware of the difficulties in the way of friendly business men entering this country on business and in leaving it again; and what remedies they propose; whether the machinery for considering applications for import and export licences is to be speeded up; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Motion I have on the Paper affects a number of Government Departments—the Ministry of Economic Warfare, the Home Office, the Foreign Office and the War Office, I understand—but the noble Viscount who represents the War Office so ably in your Lordships' House is, I believe, going to give the Government's side of the case. At the beginning of the present war I tried in this place momentarily to stern the spate of emergency legislation, and I expressed the hope that the result of it all would not be that we should blockade ourselves by making it too difficult for shippers, importers and exporters to do their business. Nearly two months ago now, I particularly asked that steps be taken to prevent undue delays in considering applications for import and export licences. I anticipated delay there; I did not anticipate the other delays to which I draw attention in my Motion. The noble Lord, Lord Templemore, was courteous as usual, but also he was very emphatic that the Government were quite alive to these dangers of delays and hindrances, and he promised that they would not happen. I am sure he was speaking with due authority, and I dare say the Government are trying to see that these things do not happen; but the result is not very satisfactory. So far we have succeeded in blockading ourselves much
1574
more effectively than the whole German Navy and Air Force have succeeded in doing.
We quite realise the difficulties of adjustment at the beginning of a war. The slogan in Whitehall, I understand, was that we were to begin the present war where we left off at the end of 1918. That, of course, was a very admirable idea, but it meant putting into operation in a few days a complicated machinery of control, regulation, censorship, and so on, which was built up during the World War gradually over a period of four years. Of course there was friction and trouble, and the usual delays and difficulties. We quite appreciate that. At the beginning of the last war there was another slogan—"Business as usual," and in the circumstances of 1914 I think that was right. What I suggest we need now is a little more "Business as usual." This is heresy, I know, to the War Office. When a war breaks out the War Office only think of winning it in the field. That is quite right. But they forget the fact that they have to be supported by a country economically strong behind them, that the immense amount of money they are going to spend in the war must be provided from revenue, that the revenue has to be earned by business and work-people in the country, and that if you make it too difficult for the business and work-people in the country you will not get your revenue; then the Army will be hamstrung by not getting its supplies.
I am afraid the War Office, with all their many virtues, have had that one defect of overlooking that simple fact. Particularly I think that is the case to-day—not that they overlook it; but the fact is very apparent to-day that the economic situation of this country in the present war will be of tremendous importance in the months, and possibly years, to come, and this is a factor that may eventually decide the issue. Therefore, while it may be desirable to apply such a strict censorship of letters and cables that not only does no information get to the enemy, but no information gets to our customers abroad or our clients from whom we buy—and you can no doubt in the process outwit a few enemy agents and intelligence officers—at the same time you hamstring the traders and merchants of this country in doing the country's business. I suggest that there is a kind of mean

1575
that you have to find, and that it is better perhaps to allow a little information to escape, or certain goods to find their way by various means to the enemy rather than completely to dislocate and strangle your ordinary trade, and especially your export trade
At the present moment and since the beginning of the war (to deal with the first matter that I venture to refer to in my Motion) there is a very great delay in many cases with regard to letters and cables, both inwards and outwards. I ventured last week to draw attention to an experience I had myself of a business letter from Brussels, which took nine days to reach me. It was opened by the Censor, of course. I do not complain, but cannot we speed these things up? I have here a table drawn up by a business friend of mine who has a large continental connection, and these are the delays that he finds in the delivery of letters passing between London and various important commercial centres on the Continent:—Antwerp, 3 to 9 days—the shortest time is 3 days and the longest is 9—Amsterdam, 4 to 8 days; Brussels, 7 to 12 days; Paris (I understand there is no censorship for France in the ordinary way), 6 days; Geneva, 10 to 12 days; Basle—a round trip, a letter to go out and come back with a reply—20 days; Zürich, a round trip, 20 days. He gives the actual dates of these business communications. All that is very hampering to business. And my friend also tells me that, whilst his French customers can telephone to him in England, he cannot telephone to them in France. I did not know that. It is rather surprising, but that is what he says, and I would like to ask about that.
Those, as I say, are examples of the sort of difficulties that are put in the way of business to-day by this Censorship of the War Office. I suppose it is the War Office. I am not referring to the censorship established for newspaper correspondents under the ægis of Sir Walter Monckton. I understand that is no longer the responsibility of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Macmillan. I am not referring to anything to do with the Ministry of Information this afternoon. I am referring only to the censorship of letters and cables, and I understand the War Office is the final authority. From Australia
1576
also I find that there is great delay. I had a letter from Wellington, New Zealand, which was posted on September 5 and reached me on October 26—that in spite of the air mail. That is a very long delay. I gather that part of the difficulty is due to the evacuation policy of the Government with regard to Government Departments.
The Chief Censor has apparently gone up to Liverpool. According to the wireless notices, he is at Aintree Racecourse, and I suppose he is occupying the grandstands and the stewards' offices there. Apparently most things have to go up to Liverpool to be dealt with. That is the case with ships' manifests and documents from the Port of London and other ports. They have to go to Aintree to be examined. I would much rather see the racecourse revert to its natural use and the Chief Censor come back to London. He can have a branch in Liverpool, but this is too much a case of decentralisation. Why should not you have Censors' offices in the principal ports? Why send everything to Liverpool? There may be a good military reason, and perhaps the noble Viscount will tell us. In this connection I must congratulate the Government on facilitating the resumption of the air mail to France, Belgium, and the Scandinavian countries, but it will not be much use unless this censorship is speeded up.
The next trouble that business people have is in getting out of the country on their business and, when they get out, in returning again. I quoted a case last week of a business man whom I sent over to Paris on important matters. He cabled and wrote a week before he left to the principals he was to see. When he got to Paris they had received neither the letter nor the cable, and they were away, so that his trip was fruitless. He had the greatest difficulty in the first place in getting out of the country to go to Paris. He had to get an exit visa—contrary to Magna Charta, but I suppose that is in abeyance during the war—and when he was in Paris he had great difficulty in coming back again. He tells me that our own Consular authorities in Paris were very courteous and helpful, but he was not able to find out whether the difficulty lay with our own people or with the French.
When it is a case of a business man coming here from a friendly country to bring grist to our mill, he first of all has great difficulty in getting a visa—I am talking of respectable people in a substantial position—and once here he has the greatest difficulty in getting out again. Recently a very important Greek shipper wished to come here on business, but he could not get a visa at all and he gave up the business altogether. I know of another case of a gentleman living in a neutral country, perfectly friendly to this country, who has been trying without success to get a visa for a short business visit since the beginning of the war. When they do come here, as I say, business men have the greatest difficulty in getting out. Last week I met a Dutch friend of mine. This unfortunate gentleman had come over on business connected with the British Government. He was providing certain essential materials needed by the War Office itself and other Government Departments. He did his whole business in forty-eight hours, but it then took him nine days to get permission to leave the country. As he is a busy man no doubt he will think twice before coming here again.
All this sort of thing hampers trade. I again can only repeat that you can make the regulations so stringent that you probably stop all unfriendly people from travelling, but in so doing you will stop a hundred times the number of perfectly friendly people who benefit this country by coming here with their business and custom. I do plead that there should be greater relaxation. If it is a case of not having enough staff to deal with these matters—and this is perhaps a surprising complaint for me to voice—it would be a wise economy to increase the staff. A tremendous volume of business depends on the quick working of this machinery.
With regard to export licences and import licences, complaints have been voiced by business men all over the country, as the noble Viscount probably knows. I had a case recently of my own where we were sending goods on Government contract for His Majesty's Government's use in the Middle East, and the Customs tried to hold them up. They said we did not have permission to export. Fortunately we had a determined man handling the matter on the spot, and he told the Customs people exactly what they should do and shipped the goods. They were
1578
already paid for by the Government, and eventually we got the permit to send these goods after they had already crossed the Bay of Biscay. That was an exceptional case, where there was a man of great determination who defied the Customs officials, and of course he was on very strong ground. Here, again, we quite appreciate the difficulties. We realise that you cannot allow free export of goods which may be scarce and may be needed in this country, nor can you allow goods to go to the enemy, and you have to reckon whether there is cargo space available. We appreciate all that, but I do beg the Government to try and avoid the apparently unnecessary delays which occur.
There is a case that was quoted in the Evening Standard of the unfortunate merchant who was trying to ship goods to Singapore. That was on October 26. He said he had had a consignment of goods for Singapore at the docks since September 14 and added:
"I cannot get them away. They have missed four ships so far. The trouble is that there is only one Customs officer, in many cases, attached to each ship, and he cannot get through the work of clearing the cargo, under the new regulations, before the ship sails. Often she has to go off suddenly, to join a convoy, and the goods are simply left on the dock side."
It was stated in the same article that in a case in which one ship left Tilbury for the East there was one Customs officer to deal with about 1,000 consignments. Only about 200 of them were passed in time. The rest had to wait for another ship. What is the use of saying, as the Government do, that we must encourage export trade, when people with business to do as exporters find these obstacles and difficulties in their way?
I do not want to cite too many cases,—I could quote a great many—but there was the famous case of the foodstuffs that came over in the "Aquitania" and which consisted, among other things, of bacon, of which there is a certain shortage. These foodstuffs arrived at Southampton, and the shipping company was asked whether they had permits to bring the food into this country. The cargo consisted of bacon, poultry, and other foodstuffs. The company replied they had no permits, so the bacon and the rest of the foodstuffs were placed in cold storage and later the company were

1579
made to take the whole lot back to New York—250 tons weight, according to this newspaper report. I drew the attention of the noble Viscount to this matter so that he could make inquiry, and I hope a suitable explanation may be made; but it is certainly a curious state of affairs.
The last matter to which I shall refer is the machinery for clearing ships which come here. Of course we quite understand that we must be very careful with cargoes bound for the Continent, and all sorts of safeguards must be taken to see that they are not breaking the blockade of Germany, but here again there is a real need for quickening up the machinery. I quote one particular case, that of the American ship the "Sundance." I do not wish to go into details, because I hear the American Consul-General has the matter in hand. This vessel took twenty-four days to clear, and apparently there was a delay of nine days between permission being given by the Ministry of Economic Warfare for the ship to clear and the notification of such permission reaching the Customs officials at the ship's side. Somehow or other the permission or documents got lost for nine days, and the ship was held up. That may sound very amusing, but it makes it very expensive for the unfortunate shipper or shipowner. All the time this ship was lying in port in this country waiting to be loaded and go on her way 4 per cent. per month for war risk insurance had to be paid, and if the ship was worth £100,000 the owners had to pay for war risk alone £4,000 for what was practically an idle vessel.
I do not wish to make too much of this and other cases, because no doubt the procedure will be quickened, but it is a most serious matter. It annoys neutrals who recognise the need for our blockade and support it, but who do complain of these unnecessary delays in operating the blockade. I would like to mention, if I may, the case of the Dutch ships in the Thames. There is always, apparently, a delay in allowing them to sail from the Port of London. They have to anchor for the night at Southend, there is further delay at Southend, and they cannot make their own ports at Rotterdam or elsewhere in daylight, which is serious in view of the mines which are floating about. It is
1580
not only annoying but dangerous for them, and this seems to be a case where the machinery creaks and works stiffly and slowly. A little sympathy and understanding is required. The trouble seems to be that there is not sufficient co-operation between the Ministry of Economic Warfare and His Majesty's Customs. In the case of ships which in the ordinary way would not come to London but are stopped in the Downs, they come under Admiralty control in addition to that of the Ministry of Economic Warfare and the Customs, so that they have to deal with three Departments and if there is a lack of co-ordination both delays and loss occur. It is necessary to-day to get ships here quickly and enable them to turn round, and to make the utmost use of the friendly tonnage, and, of course, of our own ships also that we can at the present time.
These are the cases which I venture to bring to the notice of the noble Viscount. They are important to the business men in the country. I do not think the lieges are unreasonable. I believe the public is prepared to put up with difficulties and dislocations which a war must cause, but there is a very widespread feeling that a good deal more could be done to make things easier for people doing business in and out of the country. If, in so doing, you perhaps allow a little leakage of certain goods to the enemy, or perhaps some undesirable person gets into the country or even gets out again, that counts as nothing in the balance if you can help our trade all over the world. In other words, a little more business as usual and a little less of the rigid restrictions and controls that I have referred to would, I think, be a great help.
4.22 p.m.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, the noble Lord opposite has based the case which he has put to the Government on the need for maintaining both our export trade and our revenue, and I do not think anybody can deny the force of his arguments from those points of view. I think he has made a case which deserves, and no doubt will receive, a careful answer at the hands of the Government. The war has been going on now almost two months; therefore it will not be quite good enough for the War Office to reply that all these are teething troubles and that everything is in the course of being put right. I hope the

1581
noble Viscount will be a little more explicit as to the reforms that are taking place, and a little more confident in his assurance that we may look for better things. There is no doubt whatever that commercial folk are suffering under very great difficulties and handicaps at the present time. The delays have been, and are, extreme. The noble Lord quoted a letter which he had had from Wellington, New Zealand, which I think he said was dated September 5 and arrived on October 26. I can beat that. I had a letter from Wellington which was dated August 24 and arrived on October 24—probably by the same mail. That was at the very early stages of the war, and nobody would stress too much one unfortunate incident of that sort.
My object in rising to support the noble Lord is to call attention to one particular matter where, I think, a remedy is urgently required and can be easily applied, and that is on the question of the use of commercial codes. At the present time the Censorship ordains that everybody has to send their cables to all parts of the world in clear language. That, of course, is excessively expensive. Apart from that, it is apt to be embarrassing. The most ordinary business transactions have aspects which it is not desirable to proclaim from the housetops. One can never be quite certain that there will not be a leakage about terms and conditions. It is interesting to note that in the war which began in 1914, while that condition was imposed at the start, within quite a few weeks authority was given to use ordinary codes. I cannot give the exact date with certainty, but I find that at all events by the beginning of November—I think probably by the month of October—authority was given. I do not know whether it would be universal or whether you had to be specially authorised, but, the ordinary commercial codes were in common use.
That war began in August, and, therefore, we have not quite reached a parallel period in this war. But this time we have the advantage, or so we had hoped, of starting considerably more organised. I have a suspicion that we started the last war rather under-organised. I hope we have not started this war rather over-organised. I am a little bit afraid that perhaps we have. I would like the noble Viscount to take into consideration one particular point.
1582
Talking of respectable businesses, let us enable them to be authorised to use ordinary commercial codes, and thus save a good deal of money and probably save time as well. If necessary, everybody would be prepared to submit a copy in clear language with the coded copy of the cable, and I cannot conceive that there can really be any objection to that. I hope the noble Viscount will be able to give an assurance on that point.
4.26 p.m.
LORD GIFFORD: My Lords, I am very glad the noble Lord opposite has raised this question to-day, because it gives me the opportunity of bringing to the notice of His Majesty's Government one or two points connected with the matter. The other day I had occasion to call on the noble Viscount, Lord Cobham. He received me very courteously and asked me to be good enough to bring to his notice any little matters which came my way which were perhaps irksome to the community and possibly not altogether necessary. Having spent a good deal of my life in one of our Dominions, opinions from that country reach me quite frequently. There is no doubt that travellers to and from our Dominions at the present time are travelling under certain difficulties which I feel could be avoided. Travellers who left by air three weeks ago took some fortnight or three weeks to get a French visa for their passports and the only reason they had to get the French visa was that the flying boat spent nine hours at Marseilles. I should have thought that possibly some undertaking from Imperial Airways or something of that kind might have been accepted in lieu of the visa. It seems rather absurd that because of those few hours in France they must send away their passports and that some three weeks should be taken to get visas. In addition to that, Australian passports were not accepted, and the passengers were told that they had to replace these passports by passports issued in Great Britain.
There are only two other small matters to which I should like to refer. With reference to the question of codes raised by the noble Lord, Lord Balfour, I should like to mention one other point and it is this. Is there any reason to continue to prohibit the use of telegraphic cable addresses? Surely, if necessary, the full

1583
postal address could be submitted with the cables. All these cable addresses are listed in books of reference, so that it would be quite a simple matter to check them and see that the cables were not destined for someone who might be giving help to the enemy. The other matter is this. I have had a letter from Holland recently in regard to the dissatisfaction which is very prevalent there about the unnecessary delay to Dutch ships. My correspondent told me that on the first occasion when goods had been declared contraband they were kept on board a particular ship for about ten days instead of being cleared off the ship into a dockside wharf for disposal. It is felt by my correspondent that this procedure might be avoided. I am sure His Majesty's Government are doing their best to avoid these unnecessary restrictions where they can be lightened without harm to our warlike precautions, and I feel sure the noble Viscount will do what he can as a result of this debate.
4.31 p.m.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (VISCOUNT COBHAM): My Lords, this debate has covered a great range of subjects which have required reference to a number of Departments other than the particular one to which I belong. I have divided the noble Lord's original question into the three parts into which it naturally falls—namely, postal and cable censorship, the position of business men coming into and going out of this country, and the issuing of export licences. If he will allow me I will deal with these three particular points to start with, and then pass on to the other matters that he and the two other noble Lords behind me have raised.
The noble Lord will remember that in reply to the question he put to me on October 11, I said that the terms of the Order of September 6 which set up the rules and regulations under which the postal and cable censorship is being operated were being revised, and that a new Order would shortly come into operation which would to some extent relax the regulations laid down in that Order. The new Order came into operation on October 22. The principal difference between this and the original Order is that all printed matter may now be conveyed or sent, otherwise than through the post, without a permit between the United
1584
Kingdom and any part of His Majesty's Dominions, Colonies and Protectorates, North and South America and Dependencies and France and her Dependencies. That means that newspapers and books shipped in bulk or carried by passengers to those countries are not now subject to censorship. We hope that this will relieve a considerable amount of the annoyance that was caused to passengers going overseas to France, to our Dependencies and to America.
In regard to the working of the postal and telegraph censorship much of the criticism of delay is not altogether well-founded, and such delays as have occurred can by no means always be attributed to the operation of the censorship. It must be realised that much of the delay, particularly to countries in South-Eastern Europe, and also to countries further away, is caused by the disorganisation of transportation. The mail which is delivered for censorship at the headquarters in Liverpool in the morning of any day is as a general rule cleared by the evening of the same day. At the latest it is cleared on the following day. The possibility of the establishment of a special section to deal with airmail letters in the same way as a special section is now dealing with the immediate despatch of British newspapers is now under consideration.
LORD STRABOLGI: Do I understand that all this is done at Liverpool? For example, does a letter coming to me from Brussels go to Liverpool?
VISCOUNT COBHAM: Yes, I understand that is so. Liverpool is the centre of postal and telegraphic censorship.
LORD STRABOLGI: That accounts for the whole thing then.
VISCOUNT COBHAM: Is not the answer to that point that this very large office must have a centre somewhere? There is really no room left for it in London. That really is why this very large and important office has been centred at Liverpool.
LORD MANCROFT: Would it not be possible to divide the work and have another office for communications going to the Dominions as distinct from those going to non-British addresses? Could there not be another office, say at some point in the centre of England, to relieve

1585
the congestion at Liverpool? It is very unlikely that anything unworthy would go to His Majesty's Dominions.
VISCOUNT COBHAM: I am very much obliged to the noble Lord for his suggestion, and I will at once bring it to the notice of those responsible. We are only too ready and anxious to have such suggestions, and every one of them will be put before the Department for consideration.
In regard to business men entering and leaving this country, the Government fully appreciate the importance of maintaining trade with neutral countries, and they realise that in order to maintain existing trade and capture new markets which before the war were served by Germany, it is necessary both for foreign business men to visit this country and for British business men to travel abroad to some extent. On the outbreak of war the Government required all foreigners to obtain visas to come to this country, whether in peace time they would have required visas or not, and required all persons, whether British or foreign, to obtain exit permits from the Passport and Permit Office before leaving. The Government fully realise that some inconvenience has been caused to friendly persons, but it is their aim to reduce this inconvenience to a minimum and they would welcome any constructive suggestions for improvements of the existing machinery.
At the same time the Government have no evidence that foreign traders wishing to visit this country for bona-fide business purposes are at present experiencing undue difficulties. Immediately after the outbreak of war there was inevitably a certain amount of delay in obtaining both visas and exit permits. It must be emphasized that the most careful inquiries are necessary if the system of control is to be effective for the purposes for which it is intended, but further instructions will shortly be sent to British Passport Control Officers abroad which, it is hoped, will facilitate as far as possible the journeys of genuine business men to this country, and steps are being taken with a view to making speedier decisions in urgent and straightforward business cases.
The third matter raised by Lord Strabolgi was in regard to the machinery for considering applications for import and
1586
export licences. This is a matter of course, entirely under the Board of Trade. Undoubtedly there was at first serious congestion and delay at the Export Licensing Department in dealing with applications, due, firstly, to the very large number of commodities included in the list; secondly, the enormous number of applications received, and thirdly, the necessity to provide an adequate staff and accommodation. This is not pleading that the two months during which the war has been in progress is necessarily an adequate excuse, but in this case it is a very real one, because this Department before the war dealt only with the control and export of arms, ammunition and dangerous drugs. That control has now been extened to cover virtually all the foodstuffs, a very large number of raw materials and important chemicals, and certain fully manufactured goods of national importance.
Another reason for the congestion and delay in the early stages was that other Departments have continually to be consulted, principally the Ministry of Supply and the Ministry of Economic Warfare—both those Ministries, incidentally, newly-created Ministries. Lastly, another reason why in this case particularly it was quite impossible to give notice and information beforehand regarding the prohibition was that, if you had done that, of course it was opening the way to the possibility of a large flood of exports being taken out of the country and perhaps getting into undesirable hands. No notice of the coming into force of that prohibition could have been given. The immediate result was, of course, that the Export Licensing Department was overwhelmed with mere inquiries, quite apart from applications for licences, and with applications for licences for goods which did not require them.
These problems are being solved as quickly as possible by various steps which have been and are being taken by the Board of Trade to free the exportation of a number of items which need not now be included, to familiarise the trading community with the list of prohibited goods and thus save the work of answering a mass of inquiries, and, generally, to try to find means of making the position easier to exporters. Let me impress upon your Lordships that that is the object

1587
of His Majesty's Government. They are fully alive to the stress, the strain and the annoyances to which many exporters are now being subjected, and it is their earnest desire to see that those restrictions and annoyances shall be removed so far as is possible. Actually now there is little delay in a very large number of the applications that are made. In a considerable number of cases the licence is issued within forty-eight hours, sometimes within twenty-four hours. Where other Departments have to be consulted, the time taken generally is three to five days, unless there are special circumstances requiring investigation, or there is a hold-up while general policy in regard to a particular country is being considered. Then the noble Lord asked me whether it would not be possible to arrange that free telephone business could be conducted with France. That matter is now under consideration, and the Department hope to come to some arrangement in the course of a few days.
Lord Strabolgi also brought the case of the "Sundance" to your Lordships' notice. There was delay in the clearing of that ship, and he has drawn attention to it. I have here the full story; I do not know whether he would desire me to read it. On October 16 the Ministry decided that one out of 100 different items of which her cargo was made up should be seized, some items detained for further inquiry—they were consigned to a whole number of different people—and the rest of the cargo released. These decisions were received by the Customs on the night of October 17, and in the usual way they were given on separate forms. One of the forms—namely, that relating to items for detention—became separated from the other two in the Customs Department, with the result that an incorrect decision was given to the shipping company. This is just a mistake of the kind that arises, and that largely explains the seven days' delay. It was discovered shortly afterwards and the matter was finally rectified on October 24. It was very annoying, no doubt, to the owners of the ship, but it is one of the cases that almost inevitably arise in the particular circumstances in which we are placed, and the Departments concerned are doing their very best to see that it does not recur.
The noble Lord referred to 250 tons of poultry, bacon and other foodstuffs which
1588
had been brought over from America. The statement, which appeared in the Daily Express on October 26, to the effect that 250 tons of poultry, bacon and other foodstuffs which had been brought over in the ship's store chambers of the "Aquitania" were sent back to the United States, is understood to be incorrect. Inquires have been made of the Cunard White Star Company, who say that the poultry and bacon amounted to some sixteen tons, the remainder of the 250 tons were other foodstuffs and these were disposed of in this country. The poultry and bacon were returned to the United States in the "Georgic." Under the import licensing scheme of the Board of Trade, the import of chicken from the United States is restricted to a quarter of the previous year's trade. Imports of other poultry from the United States are prohibited. The quantity of bacon was one and a half tons only. The Ministry of Food hope shortly to introduce a scheme whereby shipowners will be encouraged to bring in surplus food in unregistered spaces to form a pool for provisioning out-going ships.
In regard to the delay to Dutch shipping in the Thames, these ships are never detained for contraband control examination longer than is strictly necessary in order to make the inquiries which are required in many cases by the Contraband Committee with regard to the destination of their cargo. Delays principally occur in the cases of ships with large mixed cargoes about which few particulars are given in the ship's papers, thus necessitating long and detailed inquiries. Steps have already been taken to reduce these delays to a minimum, with the result that the position has already greatly improved. Further arrangements have also been made to remove certain minor causes of inconvenience and annoyance which existed at the beginning of the war. For example, masters are now permitted to communicate direct with their consuls or their agents, and homeward-bound Netherlands vessels detained at the Downs are now permitted to proceed to London to disembark their passengers on the understanding that they will return afterwards to the Contraband Control base. I have considerably more about that, but I do not know that I need go into details. The matter is receiving attention and is being dealt with.

1589
The noble Lord, Lord Balfour, asked me about codes. Within two or three weeks a limited number of authorised commercial codes will be allowed. We have to wait for the other parts of the Empire to make the necessary arrangements. Lord Gifford asked me about the French visas. Of course, any question of French visas and their suspension in the case of passengers in aeroplanes at Marseilles and other French airports, is a matter entirely for the Foreign Office, who might be asked to make representations to the French Government for reciprocal concessions.
4.51 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, I am sure you are very much obliged to the noble Viscount for the very full answers that he has given to the points that were raised. What seems to come out of the discussion is that the delay in the censorship is due to the over-centralisation of the censorship at Aintree Racecourse, Liverpool; and it seems common sense, as the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, suggested, to have different censorship offices for different centres. You ought to have one for London, one for Glasgow, one for Southampton, and that sort of thing, to speed up the business of censoring letters and mails. That seems to be the obvious lesson of the first two months of the war.
The other matter which seems to emerge is the need for increasing the staff of the Customs service. There do not seem to be enough Customs officers to handle this business. I think the noble Viscount practically admitted that in his answer. In the case of ships with a mixed cargo, it is a complicated business to clear them and you really need more personnel to do it. I very much hope that that will be done. I am very much obliged to the noble Viscount. With reference to the case of the "Sundance," that was an obvious mistake. The human element is bound to fail sometimes. It shows the need for more people. Probably the Customs officers are overworked, but I should like to say that everybody acknowledges how helpful everyone tries to be and how courteous these officers are. There is a need for more people; the whole thing creaks. I do not wish to press my Motion for Papers.
LORD GIFFORD: The noble Viscount might perhaps mention the question of cable addresses.
VISCOUNT COBHAM: I will make inquiries about that matter.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

INTERNMENT OF ENEMY ALIENS.
4.54 p.m.
LORD NEWTON LORD NEWTON asked how many British and foreign civilians have been interned since the declaration of war; how many have been released and whether such releases were recommended by the Advisory Committee; and whether it is possible to state approximately the length of the period during which appellants are usually detained in custody before their cases are dealt with by the Advisory Committee.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I understand that the number of aliens interned at the present moment is approximately 700. This is a number which is very much smaller than was the case in the last war, when several thousands were interned. The discrepancy is explained by the fact that in the present war, so far, fortunately, there is no conspicuous hate. I think that the absence of hate, which we must all welcome, affords the explanation. The absence of hate, which, as I say, fortunately prevails at the present moment, is I think due mainly to the fact that in the former war we treated our prisoners with humanity and consideration. It was a great gratification, not only to me but I expect to everybody else travelling on the Continent after the war, to find that our humane action with regard to prisoners was recognised by the enemy countries themselves, and nobody had any complaint to make against us on that score.
I think I can safely assume that the authorities who deal with alien prisoners at the present moment are just as humane as those who dealt with them twenty years ago. I am not going to make any general complaint against them. But there are one or two criticisms which I do feel disposed to make. I have a strong suspicion that there are a certain number of men shut up without cause, who really are perfectly harmless and innocent. An alien is dealt with by one of numerous bodies of what are called "one man" tribunals, of which I think there are more than a hundred. When you have to choose as many people as

1591
that for a business of this kind, it is extremely probable that you will find amongst them a few—not many, I hope—who are incompetent and who make serious mistakes. That there are occasionally very serious mistakes made, I gather not only from correspondence which I have received but from cases which I read in the newspapers. I observed in The Times last Saturday that there was a case reported—a London case—in which it appeared that the alien, who was a perfectly harmless poet or musician or something of that kind, was unable to speak English and that the president of the tribunal was unable to speak German; it is almost incredible, but there was no authorised interpreter in the court at all, and it was with great difficulty that the proceedings were conducted. When they were finally closed, the president of the tribunal sentenced the man to internment. When he was asked why he did it, he refused to give any reply, probably because he did not feel quite sure that he had done the right thing.
A man of that kind seems to be quite unfit to deal with cases involving imprisonment; and I am bound to say that, in the solitary case of which I have any knowledge, I was not at all impressed by the responsible authority. I happen to be acquainted with a young German who came here to do literary work, and in the course of his work he had to consult me. He had been in the country for several years, having fled from Nazi persecution, and he was very anxious to become a British subject. I should have thought he was the last person who would have incurred suspicion, but, feeling apprehensive that if there was war he might get into trouble, I wrote to him and said I should be quite prepared to give evidence in his favour and to give any guarantees that were required. When this man appeared before the tribunal, which was in London, although I could have been at the court in, say, ten minutes, the President of the tribunal never thought it necessary to call my attention to it, whereas I consider that if a respectable person—and I hope I may be allowed to include myself in the list—offers to give unlimited guarantees, the least one can do is to hear what he has to say. I flatter myself that, if I had been able to
1592
approach this functionary, I might possibly have persuaded him not to intern the man. What did happen was that he was interned, he has been interned for a month and he cannot succeed in getting his appeal attended to; he hears nothing at all. I cannot help thinking that there must be a certain number of similar cases which are extremely unjust and disagreeable to all concerned. That is one of the criticisms which I desire to make, and I hope that if any one of these authorities does make any egregious error of judgment, or does anything particularly stupid, attention will be called to it by the high legal authorities, and that, if necessary, he will be removed.
The other criticism which I desire to make is with regard to appeals. I said at the beginning of my remarks that there are 700 aliens in internment at the present moment. Any alien in order to obtain his freedom has to run the gauntlet of the committee entitled the Advisory Committee; his appeal goes to them. They consider it, and if they recommend his release, then he is released. Against this Advisory Committee I have nothing to say. I should say that the members of the Committee are extremely competent people, they are presided over by an eminent lawyer. But the Committee only sit four or five days a week, and up to now, although the war has been on something like two months, they have only disposed of forty appeals—owing, I believe, to various accidents. But the Committee tell me that the maximum work they can do is to dispose of twenty appeals in a week. That means eighty appeals a month. There are 700 aliens to deal with, and we may safely presume that the great majority of them will appeal. Of course, there are certain unfortunate people who are so poor that they are quite glad even to be in an internment camp, and there may be others—not many, I expect—who would like to return to Germany, in which case I should hope the sooner they are got rid of the better.
But the vast majority of these people undoubtedly will want to appeal. In certain cases it may take months and months before the appeal is ever dealt with. I wonder how any noble Lord would feel if he had been interned by some ignorant person, he being perfectly innocent and knowing that he could make no appeal for months and months. I do

1593
not like to criticise without making any suggestion to improve matters, and it occurs to me that in view of the fact that the Committee can only work very slowly, surely the natural thing to do would be to appoint another committee to help them. If that idea is not approved, then the alternative might be considered of having a kind of visiting committee, which would go to the two camps. There are only two camps of importance, one at Seaton in Devonshire, and the other in Edinburgh. These people could go to the camps, and a great deal of time and trouble could be saved in that way. I imagine the difficulty would be that the members of the Committee would naturally much prefer to do their work in London. But in any case I must say I think it is little less than a scandal that a man who in all probability is perfectly innocent should be kept in an internment camp without any chance of putting up any defence or getting a reply to his application. I do not propose to compare it to Nazi methods, but I certainly think it is an instance of undue harshness—involuntary harshness—and that it ought to be remedied by either adding fresh committees or finding some means by which appeals could be more quickly dealt with.
I would venture to point out on the general question that nobody now desires to see a lot of civilians in confinement. In the last war it was quite different, and the sensational Press distinguished itself by continually vociferating, "Put every Hun behind barbed wire and we shall win the war." That idea does not prevail now. We have grown more sensible. There is nothing whatever to be gained in any case by shutting up a lot of civilians, most of whom are probably harmless, and I think the noble Viscount, Lord Cobham, would agree that the people who would rejoice most to see the number of alien prisoners reduced would be the War Office and the Army, because a pure waste of energy is involved, and they feel that the men who are employed in guarding these prisoners might be doing something much more useful. I am advocating this very modest reform solely on the ground of humanity; but there is another side to it, and that is the political side. We are always being told, whenever a statement is made by a member of the Government, that we are not fighting the German people but the Nazi Government—that
1594
Government which, without exaggeration, can be described as a curse to civilisation and a danger to the whole of Europe. We know perfectly well that a large proportion of the German people are bitterly opposed to the Nazi régime, just as much as we are ourselves. It seems to me that we ought to differentiate clearly between the two classes. Let us make it plain once for all that we have no quarrel with anti-Nazi Germany. The best way that we can show our sympathy with those people is to make the hardships from which they are suffering under present circumstances as light as possible, and I believe the results would be beneficial to everyone concerned.
5.8 p.m.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (EARL DE LA WARR): My Lords, I think all of us who look back to the last war and remember the services that the noble Lord, Lord Newton, performed with regard to this particular subject will realise that no one has a better right than he to speak on this matter. He is jealous, as I think all your Lordships must be jealous, of the reputation of this country for fair dealing with the problem of enemy aliens. He referred to certain rather exaggerated feelings that we certainly had at the beginning of the last war, but which nevertheless did not lead to our losing our reputation. And with regard to this war, he has reminded us that we have not now got those feelings that made certain people say that every Hun should be behind barbed wire. I think we should all agree that there is nothing to be gained by such an attitude. What is the position to-day? We have, as the noble Lord said, something like 106 local tribunals, before whom in the first two months of the war approximately 13,000 enemy aliens have appeared. Of those 13,000 just over 900 have been interned, but included in that figure of 900 are, I think, a number of war prisoners, or rather, men who have been brought in from captured German merchantmen or removed from neutral ships. Of that 900, 150 have appealed against the decision of the local tribunal. Thirty-seven were released almost immediately without their appeals going before the Advisory Committee because it was clear, on investigation, that they should be released.
The noble Lord has made certain suggestions. He has mentioned the fact that

1595
in one or two cases, of which he has personal experience, he considers the treatment of the enemy alien has been harsh. My own experience of refugees in whom I have been interested is that they have been very generously treated. The noble Lord mentioned a particular case in which he had himself offered to go guarantee for the gentleman. I do not know the details of that case, but I cannot help feeling that it is in some way extraordinary that the noble Lord was not called to give his testimony. It would have been quite natural not to call him if the case was to be passed through and the appellant was not going to be interned. I should certainly like to look into the details of the case because, prima facie, I should have thought the complaint of the noble Lord was by no means unjustified.
The noble Lord also mentioned the lack of interpreters. He will be glad to hear that it has already been arranged that interpreters should be available for all tribunals. He made the further suggestion that there should be another Appeal Committee. He mentioned that there have been delays, and that of these 150 appeals only forty had been dealt with. There is no doubt there have been delays. It was probably bound to be so before the machinery got into operation, but I can assure the noble Lord that the Committee is catching up with its work. Even if it does go ahead at a quicker rate than it has been able to do in the past, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary is not convinced that it will be able to proceed sufficiently quickly, and he is therefore, at the present moment, considering the appointment either of a second Committee or—what really amounts to the same thing—having the same Committee to sit in two divisions.
LORD NEWTON: Do I understand the noble Earl to say that only 150 appeals have been received?
EARL DE LA WARR: That is the figure I have in my possession. I would not like to be taken as in any way committing my right honourable friend the Home Secretary, at the moment, to the appointment of a second Committee, but I can say he is considering it, and considering it very sympathetically, and he is also considering the question of the
1596
same Committee sitting in two divisions. These are the only points the noble Lord has raised, and I hope he will feel on the two particular proposals he has made—namely, the appointment of interpreters and the appointment of a further Committee—the case he has put is being favourably considered.
LORD NEWTON: My Lords, I rise only for the purpose of thanking the noble Earl for his statement. I understand he will be good enough to convey my suggestions to the Home Secretary.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

COTTON INDUSTRY (REORGANISATION) (POSTPONEMENT) BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Royal Assent was given to the following Bills:

Local Elections and Register of Electors (Temporary Provisions),

Cotton Industry (Reorganisation) (Postponement),

Baird Trust Order Confirmation.