Lords Sitting of 11 June 1940

Preamble
The House met at four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
CORNWALL ELECTRIC POWER BILL.
Read 3a, and passed.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
Read 3a, and passed.

THE LATE PRINCE TOKUGAWA.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON): My Lords, I have to report to your Lordships that since the House last sat my noble friend the Foreign Secretary called my attention to news which had just reached this country that Prince Tokugawa, the former President of the House of Peers in Japan, had died, and it was felt that it would be suitable to send a message of condolence from this House to the House of Peers at Tokyo. Prince Tokugawa was, of course, a most distinguished figure and I thought it right to send the following message to the President of the Japanese House of Peers:
"The House of Lords have learnt with deep regret of the death of Prince Tokugawa, who for so long presided over the deliberations of the House of Peers. I desire to extend on behalf of the House of Lords heartfelt sympathy at this irreparable loss to Japan.—Simon, Lord Chancellor."
I trust that your Lordships will concur in the course which I have ventured to take on behalf of your Lordships' House.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, I do not know if there is anything before the House, but I should like to take the opportunity of reminding your Lordships and the Lord Chancellor that the deceased Japanese statesman visited London a few years ago for the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the triennial meeting of

509
which was held in London. A predecessor of the Lord Chancellor, Lord Sankey, represented the House of Lords at the proceedings and he and the deceased statesman received the guests at the great reception that was held. Prince Tokugawa then showed his great interest in the working of our Parliamentary system.

LAW REFORM (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) (SCOTLAND) BILL. [H.L.]
LORD ALNESS: My Lords, I beg leave to present a Bill to amend the law of Scotland with regard to the enforcement of decrees ad factum praestandum and for other purposes; and I move that the Bill be read a first lime.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(Lord Alness.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
LORD TEMPLEMORE: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend the Leader of the House, I beg to move the Motion that stands in his name.
Moved, That Standing Order No. XXXIX be considered in order to its being suspended for this day's sitting.—(Lord Templemore.)
On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

AGRICULTURAL WAGES (REGULATION) (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
Then, Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended, Bill read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

INDIAN AND COLONIAL DIVORCE JURISDICTION BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.5 p.m.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA AND BURMA (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, put very briefly this Bill applies the provisions of the Matri-
510
monial Causes Act of 1937, which is commonly known as the Herbert Act, to Europeans domiciled in Great Britain but normally resident in India. In 1921 the High Court here decided that the Indian Legislature was not competent to confer jurisdiction on Indian Courts to dissolve marriages the parties to which were not domiciled in India, and in consequence a number of decrees of dissolution which had been granted under the Indian Divorce Act of 1869 were found to be invalid, or at all events invalid here if not invalid in India. Parliament forthwith passed a short validating Act and further decided that it would involve great hardship to the large European population of India, the great majority of which, though they spent many years of their lives in India in the Government service or in business, returned to this country on their retirement and were not domiciled in India, if they were obliged to have recourse to the English or Scottish Courts for relief in their matrimonial affairs and could not obtain a divorce in India. Accordingly in 1926 jurisdiction was given by the Indian and Colonial Divorce Jurisdiction Act of that year to selected Judges of a limited number of High Courts in India to make decrees for the dissolution of marriages and incidental orders as to damages, alimony or maintenance, and custody of children and costs, in cases where the parties to the marriage were British subjects domiciled in England or Scotland. The Courts in England and Scotland as the case may be remain, of course, open to such persons.
The clear intention when that Act was passed—indeed it was stated in the Act itself—was that the grounds on which a decree for dissolution could be granted by one of the specified Indian Courts should "be those on which such a decree might be granted by the High Court in England according to the law for the time being in force in England." The intention therefore was quite clear, but as your Lordships will be well aware Acts of Parliament do not always achieve what they set out to do; and it is unfortunately the case that other provisions of the Act were such as to fit in appropriately only with the grounds for divorce which were available at the time the Act was passed, and to raise considerable doubts whether the wider grounds provided by the Her-

511
bert Act of 1937 can be taken into account by the Courts in India in exercising their jurisdiction under the 1926 Act. I need scarcely remind your Lordships that questions of validity in the matter of marriage and divorce are above all questions on which any doubt or uncertainty is most undesirable.
The main object of this Bill then is to make it quite clear, as was intended in 1926, and is, as I think your Lordships will agree, on the merits, appropriate, that the Indian Courts are to be governed by the law of divorce as it now stands in this country after the passage of the Matrimonial Causes Act, the Herbert Act, of 1937. I scarcely think I need take your Lordships through the clauses of the BILL. which have only this object in view, but there is one small respect in which the Bill does more than apply the law laid down by the Act of 1937 to which I will call your attention. The Act of 1926 provides that a decree granted under it in India or elsewhere should not be valid until it is registered in the High Court in England or Scotland as the case may be, and the duty of registration was left to the parties to the divorce. Experience has proved that this is an unsatisfactory arrangement, a case having occurred in which a person who had obtained a divorce under the Act proceeded to marry again, apparently found that did not work very well and then sued for a decree of nullity on the ground that the previous marriage was still subsisting, since she had taken no steps to register the decree of dissolution here, and the Courts had no option but to grant her a decree of nullity. Clause 4 of this Bill provides that registration of the Indian decree is made a function of the Courts and not of the parties to the divorce. In every other respect the Bill merely applies the Act of 1937 to Europeans resident in India.
Your Lordships may be surprised at having such a relatively trivial Bill brought before you at this very serious time, but it is long overdue, and the fact that it was not introduced before the war was due to a series of regrettable, but unavoidable, hitches. In the circumstances, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State decided that it would be right to proceed with the Bill which I have accordingly put before your Lord-
512
ships. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
4.11 p.m.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I am sure that all parts of the House will be willing to give support to this Bill. It fills me as a layman with some wonderment that it should have taken ingenious minds so long to devise a suitable remedy for a long-standing hardship, but we may be comforted to know that at last it has been forthcoming.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

COURTS (EMERGENCY POWERS) AMENDMENT BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without amendment.
MIDDLESEX DEEDS BILL. [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without amendment.

POOR'S ALLOTMENTS IN HORNSEY BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.13 p.m.
LORD TEMPLEMORE: My Lords, this is a small Bill which should have been brought forward last year, I think, but it has been delayed owing to the outbreak and continuance of war. It is merely a Bill to confirm a scheme made by the Charity Commissioners for the management of the charity called Poor's Allotments in Hornsey. I do not think I need explain it to your Lordships. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Templemore.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

POST OFFICE AND TELEGRAPH BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.14 p.m.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (LORD TRYON): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. This House is rich in the number of former Postmasters-General who are now members of the House and I am happy also to see a former Assistant Postmaster-General present. This Bill is the direct consequence of the recent Budget. In that Budget a number of charges were heavily increased. The object, which was legitimate and indeed absolutely necessary, was not connected with the ordinary business management of the Post Office—I think your Lordships will agree that the Post Office has for some years been run on business lines and, if I may say so, successful lines—but the additional charges are really taxes put on to secure additional revenue. Most of them can be made without any legislation, but there are some exceptions. Most of them can be provided for by Warrant or Regulation, but there is one postal charge, and one only, for which it is necessary to legislate: that is the inland registered newspaper rate.
I will take the clauses of the Bill in their order. Clause 1 removes the statutory maximum charge and enables this postal charge to be enacted by Warrant. The charge for registered newspapers will be 1½d. for four ounces, instead of 1d. for six ounces. This change makes necessary the provisions of Clause 2. It will be, I think, familiar to everybody that there are frequently cases where the subscription rate for a newspaper or periodical is a charge which covers the postal rate. It would not be right to impose upon the providers and senders of these newspapers and periodicals the charge for the additional postal rate. Therefore, under this clause the contracts can be terminated so that fresh arrangements can be made. Clauses 3 and 4 deal with the telegraph service proper. Clause 3 imposes a new maximum for inland Press telegrams of 1s. 3d. for sixty words instead of the former charge of 1s. Clause 4 raises the maximum charges for certain special classes of telegrams, that is to say priority telegrams and greetings telegrams, where previously the maximum, was 1s for twelve words. In future the charge for priority inland telegrams will be 1s. 3d. for nine words, and greetings telegrams will in future be charged 1s. for nine words.
514
The innovation of greetings telegrams, I think your Lordships will agree, has been popular, and it has already produced a considerable addition to Post Office revenue. I have made it my business to find out how popular they have been, and I find that, in the last twelve months for which figures are available, no fewer than 4,500,000 greetings telegrams were sent. Therefore we may hope for a very appreciable addition to the revenue by this additional charge.
Clause 5 deals with telephone charges. The Budget charges which were announced included an increase of 15 per cent. on the exchange service and 25 per cent. on the private telephone service. There has been some misunderstanding about what is meant by the private telephone service. It is not the ordinary telephone service which I suppose we all have in our own houses. This increase will operate in cases where persons of busy life and great business activity have private lines between their houses or offices and other places within their control. A private line is a line between two places which does not go through the ordinary exchange. I thought it was necessary to explain that the new charge does not affect the ordinary telephone in a private house. The increase in the charges for telephone calls does not require legislation, but there is a case for change and special arrangements where contracts are involved. People entering into a contract with the Post Office for a telephone service will find themselves liable to be charged more from July 1 than the amount which originally formed part of the contract. Therefore it is only right, and it is arranged in the BILL. that if they do not wish to pay this additional charge the contract can be abandoned. Clause 5 refers to "any local telegraph authority," which really in effect means the Corporation of Hull. The effect of this clause is to give to the Corporation of Hull the same rights as the Postmaster-General has in relation to the public. Finally, I should like to repeat and make clear that this is really a consequence of the Budget, and that these additional charges are a necessary part of the financial effort which we are making to carry on the war.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Tryon.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

SUPERANNUATION SCHEMES (WAR SERVICE) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.22 p.m.
LORD TRYON: My Lords, this Bill also has a direct connection with the war. Your Lordships will be aware from the newspapers of the great addition to the number of people at work; and a great effort has been made to divert individual people from work which is not of great national importance to work where they can contribute more effectively to the national effort. There is, however, a risk in existing circumstances that some of them may lose the rights which they have under various employment schemes to pension and to superannuation generally. It is of vital importance that this effort to move people from one occupation to another where they will be doing more war work should not be in any way discouraged by the feeling among the workers that they will be losing superannuation rights. Indeed, the field covered by this Bill amounts to about 6,500 firms, companies or businesses, and the number of workers amounts to 1,500,000; so that it is of considerable importance.
With regard to civil employment, unless power is given to the trustees or other persons concerned with the administration of a superannuation scheme to undertake such measures as are necessary to prevent loss of superannuation rights, any men and women transferring to employment for war service from employment covered by a superannuation scheme would suffer a loss. Many concerns have been anxious to maintain the rights of their employees who have volunteered or who have been called up, and this Bill gives the necessary powers. The Bill is an enabling BILL. and does not compel employers or trustees to take advantage of its provisions. It has been discussed by the National Advisory Council which represents the organisations of employers and trade unions. The Government are asking the House to pass the Bill in the confident expectation that full use will be made of it, and that
516
employers who can spare workpeople covered by their superannuation schemes for work of urgent national importance will do so to the greatest possible extent, and will put no obstacle in the way of such transfers. It would be a difficult matter to make the Bill compulsory, owing to the very wide variation in the nature and terms of superannuation schemes. If, however, the Bill does not achieve the object desired, the Government will not hesitate to suggest further legislation to enforce conditions similar to those which the Bill permits. With regard to service in the Armed Forces, the Bill covers such service whatever the way in which a man has entered these Forces, either as a volunteer or through being called up.
The Ministry of Labour and National Service will decide what civil employment should be recognised for the purposes of the Bill. Broadly, the intention is to recognise employment in all the industries essential for the maintenance of the war effort—that is, armaments, ship-building, coal mining and agriculture. Service in A.R.P. work and the Auxiliary Fire Service will also be recognised. The proposals of the Bill have been discussed with the representatives of the life insurance companies. Many private firms operate their schemes largely through insurance companies, who issue group policies to cover both pension benefit and life insurance benefit. The insurance companies have agreed that, where payment of contributions is continued, they will allow the employee concerned to continue in any scheme without loss of pension rights. If the contributions are not continued, the benefit clear to the date of cessation of payments will be protected and contributions may be resumed at the end of the war upon the return of the employee and re-entry to the scheme.
With regard to life assurance benefits, the group premiums cover only the risks allowed for in the original employment, and make no allowance for increased hazards such as military or other wartime service. In the case of men serving in the Armed Forces, provision has already been made by the Government for death and disability attributable to war service. In most cases the provisions of the scheme will enable employees transferred to civil employment where there is a material increase in risk to effect an

517
individual policy for the amount for which he has hitherto been covered without evidence of health. I have spent a good deal of time endeavouring to condense the essential principles of this Bill into as few words as possible, and I will only add that the Government regard the passing of this Bill as an urgent matter and hope that it may soon become law.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Try on.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

THE WAR AND ITALY'S ENTRY.
4.27 p.m.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I beg to ask the noble Viscount the Leader of the House whether he is in a position to make any statement on the international situation.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DOMINION AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT CAL-DECOTE): My Lords, in view of the grave events which I will try briefly to recount to your Lordships this afternoon, His Majesty's Government have come to the conclusion that the time is no longer appropriate for the holding of the proposed Secret Sitting of the other House on home defence, and I hope that that view will meet with your Lordships' approval. Your Lordships will need no assurance from me that this decision has been reached solely out of consideration for the public interest. The work devolving upon Ministers and their Departments is at the present moment heavy, as your Lordships can fully appreciate, and the work of preparation for a debate of the character contemplated would undoubtedly have interfered with the performance of duties which are not only heavy but which also require prompt discharge.
The most grave and unhappy event of the last twenty-four hours has, of course, been the decision of Signor Mussolini to involve his unhappy people in the war. From any point of view the decision is a tragedy. It will drag millions of innocent people in the Mediterranean area into a combat out of which none of them can hope for anything but loss, suffering and death. That retribution will follow this felon blow, none of your Lordships can doubt. We will give blow for blow.
518
There has been a swift reaction not only in this country but also on the other side of the Atlantic. Perhaps it astonished the leader of the Italian people to find that others beside himself could take grave decisions and act with swift directness. The speech of President Roosevelt has encouraged every lover of freedom. His assurance that the material resources of this great industrial nation will be placed at the disposal of the Allies makes it inevitable that, however hard and long the road may be, the cause of civilization will in the end prevail.
The heavy news of the loss of His Majesty's ship "Glorious" and of others of His Majesty's ships is news that the people of this island realm and of the Empire will bear with fortitude. It will not shake their resolution. Once more we salute the memory of those who have given their lives. At present the toll is heavy, but the reward is great, and your Lordships will await with assurance the coming of victory on sea and on land.
Meanwhile, our gallant Allies are fighting side by side with the British Forces a battle which the whole world watches with breathless suspense. The severe toll taken of the German Forces has retarded their advance. The direction of their main thrust has not been reached, and the superb qualities of the French Armies have never been more unfalteringly displayed. On account of the pressure of the war on other fronts, the Allied Forces have been withdrawn from Norway. The Norwegian Forces in North Norway have laid down their arms; and in order to save Norwegian territory from further destruction by the Germans, and so as to watch over Norwegian interests during the war, the Norwegian King and Government have left Norway and have come to this country. It was with deep regret that His Majesty's Government were forced to take the decision to abandon the campaign in Norway, at the moment when it had turned in our favour and Narvik had fallen into our hands. The campaign has been bravely fought by the combined Allied Forces under ardous conditions, and has succeeded during the past two months in retaining vastly superior German Forces away from the decisive theatre of war.
The time had come, however, when it was clear that all the available resources at the disposal

519
of the Allies must be employed on the main front, where the issue of the war and the fate of Norway and of all other free and democratic countries will ultimately be decided. It was no doubt a hard decision for the Norwegian King and the Government to leave their own country. They held out for two months against the full weight of the German Forces, and were undefeated to the end. During this time, the example of the King's courage and devotion and dignity in distress has been the mainstay of Norwegian resistance. Norway has decided to continue the struggle against Germany on other fronts, and the Norwegian Government made this clear in the Royal Proclamation issued on June 9. Whereas before the British, French and Polish Governments had been helping Norway in their war of independence, the Norwegian Government will now use all their resources to help the Allies in their common war against Germany. This decision, for which the Allied Governments are deeply grateful, is evidence of the conviction of the Norwegian people that the only hope for the future lies in an Allied victory and that the Allied cause, with which they are now more than ever identified, will surely prevail.
My Lords, what the next few days may see none can tell; but what we may all be assured of is that the resolution of the British people is unshaken and that we shall face whatever tasks and trials still await us with the determination that has inspired all the actions of His Majesty's Forces up to this present moment.
4.35 p.m.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I think it must rarely have happened, even in the records of your Lordships' House, that so many dramatic and grave statements have been contained in one short message to the House. I should like first of all to deal in a sentence or two with the domestic matter mentioned by the noble Viscount at the beginning of his statement—namely, the proposal not to hold the suggested Secret Session to-morrow. In the circumstances I am sure we shall all agree that that decision is inevitable. At the same time, I think that every one of us who has been in touch with people outside will have been impressed with the urgency of the matter which it was
520
proposed to discuss, that of national defence. I feel, therefore, that it would be wrong if we were to have an indefinite postponement of this secret discussion, because the matter is so exceedingly urgent; and it would not be, I think, too much to suggest that a definite day for that discussion should be fixed forthwith. I hope that the noble Viscount will be willing to consider either Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.
With regard to the other matters which have been referred to, I am sure that the announcement of the decision of Signor Mussolini has had no effect anywhere in this country save to fortify our resolution. That fortification in this particular instance has been reinforced by a large measure of disgust; for history must surely contain few examples of the policy of the jungle being introduced into international affairs in this open way. I cannot help feeling that if the Italian people were in a position to say what they think, or at all events if those of them who have a knowledge of the history of their own country could do so, this decision would be received with grave disquiet by multitudes of them. It is impossible to imagine that any Italian who knows anything of the history of his own country and of the share that British people took in supporting the liberators of Italy could receive this decision with anything but the gravest disagreement. We know that the head of the great Church whose headquarters are in Rome has expressed himself in no uncertain language on several occasions. I would express the hope that, although we know that Signor Mussolini and his exemplar will have no regard for the destruction of homes or of anything which people hold precious, yet we shall be able to defeat Mussolini—and we certainly shall defeat him—without damage to the City of Rome, which is a treasure which belongs to the world.
This decision, taken at this time, has, I am sure, had another effect upon British people. It has made us realise that it is for us to do everything that we can, and even more, to help our gallant Allies in France who are now compassed almost on three sides by enemies. They need all the help that we can give, and I am glad to have the assurance that His Majesty's Government are losing no chance of giving them all the help that

521
it is in their power to give. Every one of us, moreover, was fortified and encouraged by the decision of President Roosevelt to which the noble Viscount referred.
I should like, in conclusion, to associate myself with what the noble Viscount said with regard to the loss of His Majesty's ship "Glorious" and the others which accompanied it. In due time I hope that we nay know more about this incident, because as it stands it gives rise to some concern as to why this valuable and important ship had apparently so little protection. No doubt further details will be made available. Our sympathies of course go out to the Norwegians, the Danes and the other peoples who are amongst the afflicted of the earth at the present time, and if anything could fortify decent people anywhere in the world to continued resistance, it would be the action of Signor Mussolini during the last twenty-four hours.
4.40 p.m.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, in joining the noble Lord who has spoken in thanks to the noble Viscount opposite for the statement which he has made, in the first place I would say that I agree that it is not possible to offer any protest against the decision to postpone the holding of what I prefer to call a Private Session. It had seemed to some of us that the position of this House was somewhat different from that of another place and that it conceivably might have been possible to hold such a Session here, though not there. But I quite followed the argument which was stated by the noble Viscount as to the amount of work that would be entailed, not only upon Ministers on the Front Bench but upon the Departments, in preparing the material for such a discussion, and therefore we here altogether bow to the decision. At the same time, I agree with my noble friend Lord Addison in expressing the hope that the Private Session will not be indefinitely postponed. Whether it is possible to do what he suggests—namely, to state a day on which such a Session could be held—I am not sure, and that is a matter which I think we must leave to the consideration of His Majesty's Government. But I strongly hope that the postponement will not be for too long, because on this particular
522
matter of home defence I am quite certain that a number of points could be raised which would be discussed in your Lordships' House with a knowledge which so many noble Lords possess almost more than anybody else.
As regards the grave matter of the Italian entrance into the war, I think we can feel that if the dice had fallen in a somewhat different combination, if instead of the disaster of the passage of the Meuse and of the break-up of the Belgian Army, the Allied Forces had been making an entrance into Germany, then Signor Mussolini would have found that there was a great deal to be said for the attitude of the pluto-democracies, and he might have thought that there were some gains to be made on the frontiers of Northern Italy which in the long run might accrue to the Italian people. That being so, one asks what is the value of this alliance; and it may be that in the end the ambitions of Germany will find themselves hampered rather than aided by this assistance which is now so cordially welcomed. I feel that in Italy there is one figure which we can regard with nothing but sympathy, and that is that of the Pope. It must be a bitter moment for his Holiness, no doubt a good Italian, to feel that his people are joining hands with those who not only follow but profess the worst traditions of paganism, and to see his own people, like the Gadarene swine, possessed by a devil and running down a steep place to the sea. I am certain we can express our sympathy with the Vatican.
There is really at this moment nothing to be said on the last naval disaster. No doubt we shall know about it in due course, and until then it is impossible to do anything whatever except to express, as the noble Lord did, the deepest sympathy with those who gave their lives for their country. I think we must all agree that in the circumstances the withdrawal from Norway was a prudent, and indeed almost a necessary, act. It involves no disgrace, either to Norway or to France, or to ourselves; on the contrary much heroism has been shown there, and our attempt to hold Northern Norway has un-questionably played its part in hampering the full German activity. As to the future, I think we may congratulate ourselves on three things: the first is that united Germany has not won a war for seventy years; in the second place, united

523
Italy has never won a war; and in the third place, the British Empire has never lost a war, and is not going to lose this.
4.49 p.m.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, perhaps I may say one word with reference to the proposed debate on home defence and the request of the noble Lord opposite that the date for it should be fixed. I am fully conscious of the importance of the topic, and equally alive also to what the noble Marquess opposite said as to the special competence of many of your Lordships to make contributions upon this important question. I am not underrating its importance if I ask your Lordships to allow me to consider the date a little more and to discuss it through the usual channels. I am not sure whether Tuesday or Wednesday of next week would be a convenient date, but it must depend to some extent on the circumstances of the next two or three
524
days; and if noble Lords will accept the assurance from me that I will certainly not postpone it more than is absolutely necessary I think the noble Lord opposite will be satisfied in the end.
There is one other matter which I may be allowed to mention. My noble friend Lord Elibank was good enough, at the request of the Government, in view of the proposed Secret Session, to postpone a Motion standing in his name from tomorrow till Thursday. In accordance with what I understand is the usage of the House, I shall propose to ask the leave of the House to-morrow that this Motion may be restored to its original position—that is to say, the discussion will take place on the day originally named, Wednesday. The House will meet at four o'clock and not at three o'clock, as was arranged last week.
House adjourned at ten minutes before five o'clock.