Sitting of 9 August 1921

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

METROPOLITAN WATER BOARD (CHARGES) BILL.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (THE EARL OF DON OUGHMORE): My Lords, I beg to make the Motion standing in my name.
Moved, That the Order made on the 13th day of April last,"That no Private Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after Thursday, the 16th day of June next," be dispensed with.—(The Earl of Donoughmore.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Donoughmore.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.
EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: My Lords, in moving that the Committee stage be negatived, I should like to say that this Bill has been before a joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

COVENTRY CORPORATION BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
LANCASHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (DRAIN AGE) BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (STOKE-ON-TRENT EXTENSION) BILL.
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH (THE EARL OF ONSLOW): My Lords, I beg to make the Motion which stands on the Paper with reference to this Bill.
Moved, That the Order made on the 13th day of April last,"That no Provisional
330
Order Confirmation Bill brought from the House of Commons shall he read a second time after Thursday, the 16th day of June next," be dispensed with.—(The Earl of Onslow.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.— (The Earl of Onslow.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.

MINISTRY OE HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (OSSETI' AND WAKEFIELD EXTENSION) BILL [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the consideration of Commons' Amendments read.
THE EARL OF ONSLOW: I beg to move that the Commons Amendments he now considered.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
THE EARL OF ONSLOW: I beg to move that the Commons Amendments be agreed to. They are all of a drafting character.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

WAR PENSIONS BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT PEEL): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. I have had the pleasure of introducing into this House many Bills, and I think I can recommend this one as being a really useful and good Bill, which will tend to administrative simplicity and to economy. It is based, mainly, on the recommendations of a very representative Committee, which was presided over by the Under-Secretary for Pensions, and which unanimously recommended, I believe, the proposals that are embodied in the Bill.
As regards the first portion of the Bill, which deals with the simplification of the machinery and the alteration of the position of local pensions committees, the Bill recognises, as the Committee recognised, the conclusions to which your Lordships came six years ago, when the original Bill was brought in setting up local pensions committees. Your Lordships then

331
pointed out that as they were going to spend public money there ought to be full control over them. They were important bodies at the outset, though not so important as they became, because, first of all, the suggestion was that they should spend voluntary money which was contributed for extra pensions, and also certain grants which were, given to the Central Committee. But in 1917, when the Naval and Military War, Pensions, &c. (Committees) Act was passed, they became far more important, becoming, in fact, the agents of the Pensions Ministry, although the Ministry exercised a very limited and rather elementary control over them. The result is that last year. I believe, they spent something like £20,000,000 of public money, and, as I say, the control over them was very limited and not nearly sufficient. Moreover, the officials have been responsible not to the Ministry but to the local committees, whose zeal naturally evaporated a good deal after the war and who have not been nearly so active as formerly was the case. In addition, there were far too many of them and a good deal of over-lapping.
Shortly put, the general proposal of this Bill as regards these committees is to make them advisory instead of executive. The Pensions Ministry will, therefore, have all the valuable assistance of local advice and knowledge, but will be able to control its own officials, through its regions and so on, and will sec that public money is carefully spent. Again, the number of these committees will be reduced by about 800—from 1,250 to, I think, about 450. As your Lordships will see from the main proposals in the second portion of the Bill, the work will become rather more stereotyped and simple, and in this way the functions of the committees need not be so much developed as they were before this measure was proposed. It will be seen that the cost of administering the pensions will be immensely reduced and some millions of money—I should not like to say how many—will be saved to the country, without any loss to those who receive the pensions.
The second proposal of the Bill is also of great importance, and is, I think, a very valuable one. Most of these pensions are now of a temporary character, and are constantly reviewed. Twenty thousand men, I understand, are reexamined every week, so that a vast
332
paraphernalia of doctors and all the rest of it are involved, one doctor in every five in the country being engaged in the work. It will be possible to sweep away most of this imposing facade, and it is now proposed that after a period of four years from the time of discharge or the first examination the pension will.be made permanent. That is the result, as I understand, not of haphazard, but of very careful medical investigation. For two years or thereabout there is a. good deal of improvement in the condition of these men; then, for another year, the improvement is rather slower, and you may say that by the end of four years there is a sort of even level of disability reached, and if their pensions are then fixed and made permanent, you do away, in the interest of the pensioned men, with all the tiresome travelling, investigations and examinations, and, in the interest of the country, you save a good deal of money.
There are only two other points in the Bill to which I need allude. The first is that a period is fixed after which no more original claims for pensions can be made. Your Lordships know that in many cases men are discharged, and it is only some years, or at any rate some time, afterwards that they realise that they are suffering front illnesses or disabilities which are directly attributable to the war. Now, the period of seven years has been fixed within which these originating payments must be brought in. I think that is a longer and more generous period than is to be found in any other country. I believe that four years is the nearest approach elsewhere to the period of seven years which is set by the Bill. Thus it will be seen that the Bill really re-organises and simplifies and makes permanent the whole of the complicated administration of war pensions. There is one minor clause which enables pensions to be commuted, or, in the case of the merchant service, puts the members of that service on the same basis as soldiers and airmen. I commend this Bill to your Lordships, because I think it will not only save a great. deal of money, but also a great deal of worry to those who are receiving pensions, and will set free a great many valuable doctors, who are now occupied in this work, for the general service of the country. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Viscout Peel.)
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: My Lords, I do not rise with the intention of opposing this Bill, but for another specific object. I have no doubt the Bill is very much wanted, and will remove many of the difficulties under which we have suffered. Each succeeding Minister has endeavoured to settle questions that have occasioned a great deal of difficulty, and I hope this Bill will prove a satisfactory solution. There is one protest that I should like to make. The noble Viscount talked of the evaporation of interest by local committees. My experience is that so far from the interest of local committees evaporating their interest has increased as time goes I cannot speak too highly of the support that the Minister has always received from local committees and local sub-committees in the county with which I am connected.
I hope your Lordships will pay attention to the powers that are given to the Ministry. Those powers, I admit, ought to be full, but they aught not to be too full. I speak under a sense of grievance, having been chairman of a Committee since its stare. I thought that position would afford me an opportunity of doing something to help the men who had done so much for us. Under the present system the Minister has the power to require the local committee to terminate the appointments of its principal officers. We have had a case of that kind with which to deal. Grave charges were made against two of our principal officers, and tin Minister requested us to determine their appointments. We made some investigation, and passed a unanimous resolution requesting that no action should be taken until the own charged had had an opportunity of answering the charges made against them. I do not think that was an unreasonable request. Very likely the Minister may be right, and I may be wrong, but at any rate what we felt very strongly, and what we still feel very strongly, is that the men who have difficult and responsible positions should not have their appointments terminated until they have had an opportunity of answering any charges that are made against them. We were overruled in these particular cases.
I would, however, like to take this opportunity of saying that I have always been received by the Minister with the greatest courtesy, and I have had more than one interview with him. I used all my
334
powers of persuasion with him, but they were quite ineffective, and the appointments of these two officers were terminated without their having been given a chance to answer the charges made against them. I do not think dart is right, and I hope it will be made perfectly clear that an opportunity will be given, when charges are made, for the men so charged to answer those charges.
LORD HARRIS: My Lords, I desire to call attention to one part of the Bill. Possibly the noble Viscount may say that it is more a matter for Committee than for Second Reading, but I submit, very respect-fully, that it is a fundamental point. I am referring to the composition of the tribunals.
VISCOUNT PEEL: The appeal tribunals?
LORD HARRIS: Yes, They are statutory bodies, I understand, and they have hitherto been composed of a representative of the Services— that is an ex-Service titan—a member of the medical profession, and a member of the legal profession. That seems to be a very fair distribution of the points of view which might be directed towards an inquiry as to whether a man was deserving of an increase of pension, or of a pension at all, or of a final pension. Now, as I read the Bill, it is proposed to alter the composition of that tribunal, and to do away with the member of it who has had a legal training. Hitherto, that has been the chairman, and it is proposed to substitute for that member with a legal training a second member of the medical profession. We who have had experience of Private? Bill legislation in this House know how very easy it is to find experts who differ, and it is doubtful whether it is quite wise, where a man's future is concerned, to have two members of the same profession, with a chance of their differing and leaving the unfortunate ex-Service man in the position of having to decide between them. If he decides in favour of the man, it will inevitably be said that he is partial. It is open to question whether that proposal is wise.
I should have thought that it was desirable to have a lawyer on the tribunal. Of course, it can always be said that if you want expert advice you can get it from outside, and that there is no necessity to have your expert on the inquiring body. That, I think, is true in some eases, but

335
I am a little doubtful whether it is so in this case. Who is going to settle the legal question, if one arises? Is it not almost certain to be the Department? The Department's legal adviser will give the tribunal his legal opinion. Have the tribunal any power of going anywhere else for a legal opinion? Have they the right to call in outside legal opinion to controvert, if it is possible to controvert, the opinion of the legal adviser of the Department? I would respectfully suggest to my noble friend that before we go into Committee it should be considered whether this is not an unwise change and whether the composition of these tribunals should not remain as it is, because T understand they have given satisfaction to the parties principally concerned—namely, the unfortunate men who make an appeal because they think the lower tribunals have not decided fairly to them.
VISCOUNT PEEL: Perhaps I may be allowed to say one word in reply to what my noble friend, Lord Harris, has said. These appeal tribunals, as regards making permanent these assessments for pensions—of course, they did not deal with permanent cases before—were composed of a doctor, a lawyer, and an ex-Service man. I believe in many cases the questions brought before them were of a. semi-medical and a semi-legal nature, so that they required the assistance of these gentlemen. But now I understand the case will be rather different. They will really have nothing to do but to settle the permanent disability of these ex-Service men. The questions will be purely medical ones, and I think your Lordships will see that, if the questions are purely medical, the lawyer, however valuable he may be on most occasions, will be of no value whatever, because he will not be able to set up his medical opinion against the doctor's. It is much better that it should be predominantly a medical tribunal. I do not know whether that statement will meet what my noble friend has suggested.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: think if my noble friend will look at the clause he will see that in the first subsection the Minister has a very wide power, which may be open to question in Committee, of prescribing the principles upon which any such awards are to be made. That clearly goes very far beyond the actual medical condition of the particular
336
patient. I have had some experience of tribunals, and there is no doubt when you once begin to work with certain principles which have been originally laid down a regular code of jurisprudence gradually builds itself up and you require a lawyer to help you. We certainly found that we needed a lawyer's assistance.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I will consider the matter as the noble Marquess presses it, but I understand that these questions will really hardly arise. It will not be so much whether this case falls within one department or another of the Act or of a rule, but as to what, is the actual medical condition of the man himself. But I will confer further with the Minister of Pensions, as the noble Lord has raised the question.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

LICENSING (No. 2) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, this Bill, called the Licensing (No. 2) Bill, arose as the result. of a suggestion made by the Attorney-General in another place, that it would be as well if persons of varying opinions upon licensing questions should meet together and try to agree upon sonic common basis for a Bill. I understand that this Committee did meet. It was composed of extremists on both sides and a. certain number of other persons, and this Bill is really the result of the Committee's deliberations and it is in the nature, so far as any Bill can be, of an agreed Bill. It really embodies the sifting of all the experience which has been gained by the Control Board so far as that experience may apply to a post-war period. But I should like to say this to your Lordships. The Bill is a very nice equipoise, which may be very easily disturbed. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships will not apply to this Bill quite that severity of logic which you are accustomed to use, but will consider that the Bill is a compromise and has to be treated with that peculiar logic which is applicable to compromises.
I can deal with the actual details of the Bill very briefly. The main questions in these licensing matters are, T suppose, the

337
questions of hours. The first clause, as regards hours applies, I may say, to clubs as well as to licensed premises. Previously, of course, the system was different from hat now adopted. There were a certain number of hours when liquor could not be dealt with on licensed premises, but it was open to be dealt with at other premises. That principle is now reversed, and there are a certain number of what are called permitted hours. Those hours vary as between the country and the Metropolis. In London they are nine hours, and outside London they are eight hours. But in addition to these permitted limits, there are certain outside limits of hours within which these permitted hours are allocated. They are allocated, of course, by the Justices, or, in the case of clubs, by the committees of the clubs. These outside limits of hours are from a.m. to 11 p.m. in the Metropolis, and from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. elsewhere. Pending allocation by the Justices or by the committees of the clubs, there is set out very clearly in Clause 1 a sort of standard allocation which will have effect, till the decisions of the Justices or the clubs have been made. There is one very important matter to which I think I ought to refer, and that is that there is no power for the Justices to reduce these hours. At one point, I believe, there was a good deal of discussion in another place on that subject, but it was finally settled that these, hours were not, flexible in the sense that they were not to be reduced.
The next important point is Sunday closing. Here again, the same principle is followed, and there are five permitted hours on Sundays, divided in this way: Up to two hours between 12 noon and 3 p.m. and up to three hours between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. Your Lordships will see that Wales is exempted from this provision. As we all know, there was Sunday closing in Wales before the war. But for this purpose Wales is extended and includes Monmouth, so that in Wales and Monmouth there will be complete Sunday closing for all except those who are called residents in licensed premises, if there are any, and also excepting clubs. Clubs in Wales and in Monmouth will have the same hours as are permitted in the rest of the country. There are a certain number of representations on the subject of including Monmouth in Wales, and, of course, that point may be raised later. But now I will only say that for ecclesiastical and a
338
great many legal purposes Monmouth is included in Wales.
Then, the third Clause deals with what I believe aroused a great deal of attention, especially in London. This clause was called the"theatre-supper"clause. It is really, as your Lordships will see, a modification or an extension of Clause 1, and of the hours set out in Clause 1, because under this clause alcoholic drinks can be taken with a meal for one hour after the usual closing time, and, in addition to that one hour, half-an-hour is given for its consumption, so that if you order your refreshing drink a minute or two before the end of the hour you need not consume it until another half hour has elapsed. I think, therefore, the"theatre-supper"persons can have very little ground of complaint in the future.
Clause 4 is the forbidding clause; and Clause 5 deals with certain exemptions which have to be set out statutorily owing to the change that has been made in the length of the hours. Clause 6 adapts the provisions of the Licensing Act., 1910. Subsection (2) of this clause is a very important one, because Section 61 of the Act of 1910 disappears, and with the clause disappears also the well-known figure of the bona-fide traveller. No provision is made for him. It is considered that with the advent of charabancs and motor-buses his position is almost absurd, and that it is very difficult indeed for him to be bone fide any longer.
Clause 7 deals with certain restrictions on the hawking of liquor, which is forbidden. The clause makes this more difficult, and introduces certain provisions which, I believe, are already in force in Scotland. Then comes the question of the restriction on credit. Under Clause 8 no credit is to be allowed for on-sales. But the restriction which prevailed under the Control Board on off-sales is now entirely done away with. Clause 9 deals with the question of what is known familiarly as the"That is now done away with, I believe to the general satisfaction of the Temperance Party and the Trade, who are glad that this particular competition has been abolished. Clause 10 deals with the strength of spirits, which can be sold up to 35 degrees under proof without notice of adulteration. Clause 11, which was introduced with general acclamation in another place, provides that beer which contains less than

339
2 per cent. spirit shall not be subject to these regulations at all, but shall be treated purely as a temperance drink. Clause 12 contains supplementary provisions for the new work which Justices will have to do, and Clause 13 deals with the inclusion within club rules of statements as to what the permitted hours shall be. Clause 14 to some extent strengthens the penalties.
Part II deals with rather another subject. It entirely abolishes the Control Board, and excellent though the work of the Board has been no doubt in many ways, no one, when the time comes, seems to regret its disappearance. Its Regulations and Orders come to an end within a fortnight after the passing of this Bill; but two months is allowed to the Control Board to prolong its existence, mainly because it' has to hand over its property and licensed houses, both in Carlisle and the other controlled experimental areas, to the Home Secretary in England and the Secretary for Scotland in the case of Scotland. The proposal is that under these high officials these experiments should be carried on until Parliament otherwise determines. But all the Regulations and the Control Board itself entirely disappear in this brief period of time. The only other point to which I need refer is in Clause 19, which provides that billiard-playing from henceforth will not be restricted to the permitted hours, but will be allowed in licensed houses for exactly the same time as in any unlicensed place. Those are briefly the proposals of the Bill. It is, of course, something like a portent to have an agreed Bill on the licensing question, and it is a minor portent that I present it to your Lordships.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a — (Viscount Peel.)
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: My Lords. I hope the Bill will receive a Second Reading without question, and I imagine that its prospects of becoming law are fairly secure. The time has come when some Bill on this subject must be introduced and passed into law, even if it is a measure of a temporary character only. It was necessary within a few months that something new Should be placed on the Statute Book if we were to avert the calamity either that the Licensing Laws would be in a condition of chaos, or that we should have reverted to the
340
conditions which preceded the war, conditions to which, now that we have had special light thrown upon them, no one, as far as I know, wishes to revert. The noble Viscount has reminded us that the Bill is the outcome of a Conference, and that it has the merits, or demerits, which belong to a measure rapidly produced in such conditions and for such purposes. The noble Viscount did not refrain from deprecating criticism of this measure. He described it as one to which we must not apply any logical test, and said that the equipoise of the Bill was an equipoise which had been arrived at under peculiar difficulties. He also gave us to understand that the Bill was only an indication of what was permanently to operate in these matters.
What the measure does is to harmonise, to sonic extent, the restrictions upon hours of sale, and to apply the same principle, not a complete one, of uniformity to the treatment of clubs and licensed premises. So far as it goes, it makes permanent some of the war-time Regulations, whose value has been generally, I might almost say universally, acknowledged. The decent interment of that most misnamed person, the bona fide traveller, is, I hope, now practically secured. The name has been a byword for many years, and precisely opposite was the person to whom this epithet was applied. Then, there is the prohibition of the on-sale of liquor on credit— an important point, which is all very much to the good. It was noticeable how little opposition there was to the Bill in another place. I have read with some care the rather prolonged debates in the House of Commons and in the Standing Committee of that House. The main objections to the measure, if we regard it as a temporary measure only, are either objections on local points—boundaries, the inclusion of Monmouth in Wales, the boundaries of greater London and the Metropolitan area—or objections which emanated from people who regard as harmful all restraining provisions with regard to the liquor traffic.
It might be thought that such people are scarcely to be found; but they were found, and they made themselves heard very pointedly in the House of Commons. One member, in a speech of great length, pointed out the mischief that attached to all kinds of restrictions, and went on to say that the industrial disturbances of the last two months were mainly due to the

341
fact that the liquor which people obtained was not strong enough, that they did not get enough of it, and that, if we could secure for them more and stronger liquor, our industrial troubles might practically be regarded as likely to come to an end. That view did not obtain much support, but it was significant of the kind of objection that is taken to this Bill. Few champions will be found for arguments of that kind, however. I doubt whether we are likely to find any substantial opposition to the Bill in its progress through your Lordships' House.
I am anxious, however, to make it clear to-night that it must not be supposed that those who have been interested in these subjects for a long time are now regarding the matter as practically settled by the passing of a Bill of this kind. It must not be supposed that the difficulty which has beset the subject for so many years is now ended, and that the Bill gives a satisfactory legislative solution for the years to come. I gladly recognise that the Government have made no such claim. As was said by the Leader of the House of Commons, this measure is of a provisional and temporary character, and was produced under a pressure of business which prevented the preparation of the larger measure which was to follow. That was distinctly stated by the Leader of the House of Commons, who made it clear that the Bill was provisional and tentative because, in present conditions, time was lacking to do better. He did not deny—indeed, he stated distinctly—that the matter requires much fuller handling and larger treatment. Members on both sides of the House, both those who spoke on behalf of the Trade, Colonel Gretton and others, and those who spoke on behalf of the Temperance Party, accepted the position that the Bill was not to be regarded as having the large and far-reaching character which some people might have been disposed to give to it.
Had it been otherwise, we should have been obliged to protest against it as entirely inconsistent with the kind of promises which have been made to us quite clearly with regard to the Government's intentions of legislating in these matters. It was my responsibility, or my duty or privilege, about eighteen months ago——I think is November, 1919—to introduce to the Prime Minister an extremely strong and representative deputation of people of all sorts and kinds who desired to see a
342
permanent character given to some, at least, of the restrictions which had been found useful during the war. The Prime Minister's reply was of a most emphatic and, to us, satisfactory character. He stated in perfectly um ambiguous terms that he was in agreement with us in desiring to semi a far-reaching measure dealing with this subject, and giving effect to provisions of the Liquor Control Board which had been found useful during the war.
He put that in perfectly clear terms, and, as I am anxious there should be no misunderstanding, I want to read two or three sentences of his reply. He said—
" Beneficent results have been accomplished by the restrictions imposed during the war. The very remarkable book which has been published by Mr. Carter is in itself a testimony to the admirable work done by the Board, of which he is such an able associate. I think it is very important that the work of the Board should be perpetuated, and the first step, I think, before we come to legislation of a more far-reaching character, is to prevent this work from lapsing. Unless legislation is passed to perpetuate the powers of the Board, they would lapse, I think, within twelve months after the war. It is, therefore, proposed to introduce legislation in order to deal with that matter … I am glad to be able to say that a great measure of agree-meat has been already achieved. Commissions will be set up eider this Bill, if Parliament approves, and I an, very sanguine of being able to seen the assent of parliament for the setting up of these Commissions. The Bill is ready and will be introduced before Christmas—
That wee some twenty months ago, but the Bill has not yet seen the light.
"I trust that the Christian Churches will not be satisfied merely that you bring pressure to bear upon the Government, but that they will exercise all the necessary pressure upon Parliament to carry through the measure, to see that it is not emasculated in the course of its progress through Committee, and, if it is capable of improvements, that those improvements will be effected."
That was a very clear and specific undertaking that the Government intended to introduce legislation of a more far-reaching character than this measure embodies, and we have rested upon that, and acted to the best of our powers upon the advice which the Prime Minister gave.
That promise has not yet been fulfilled; we find no fault with that. The pressure of great affairs has been such as to render it practically impossible for Ministers in responsible positions in the Government to give adequate lime for the preparation of such a measure. Your Lordships will remember that when a. week or so ago we bad under discussion the question of the

343
business of this House, the main argument which the Government brought forward against an autumn session was that they needed time for the preparation of legislation which could not possibly be prepared while Parliament was in session. One of the matters to which, no doubt, the attention of the Government will be successfully given during the period of leisure will be the preparation of the larger measure which the Prime Minister promised. When leisure has been secured we shall await the result of the lucubrations of the Government. That further legislation is wanted to deal with this great question more thoroughly than this Bill deals with it is, I think, hardly disputed among reasonable and moderate men who look at the interests of the social life of our country as a whole. I have never ceased to urge that we need such legislation, and, while I have done so constantly, I hope I have also been consistent in approaching this matter in a spirit which avoids those extremes which in my opinion are prejudicial rather than helpful to our ultimately obtaining anything that wise men are likely to desire or that Parliament is likely to sanction.
I say deliberately, however, that no fair minded man will consider to-day the results of the restrictions which were made under the Liquor Control Board during the war without finding, as the Prime Minister found and said emphatically, that they were suggestive in a high degree of the lines upon which legislation could be usefully and permanently enacted; that they were greatly effective in bringing together the people who are usually far apart in matters of that kind; and that they pave the way in a remarkable degree for the larger legislation to which I, for one, look forward. The discussion which took place in your Lordships' House some ten days ago on the measure which was introduced by the Bishop of Oxford was evidence of the width of the subject, the variety of opinion which exists about it, and the attention which has been given to it by leading men. The speeches that were delivered in that debate by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Sumner, Lord Milner, Lord Astor, and others, are speeches which require consideration, and which undoubtedly show the necessity of treating the matter upon a large scale at no very distant date.
I am anxious that we should not be supposed to acquiesce now in the argument most powerfully, and indeed fiercely,
344
urged upon us from the Woolsack the other day, when the noble and learned Lord expressed his view as to the mischief of imposing upon the minority, by the vote of a majority, something which the majority believes to be for the common good, while the minority does not. That argument was fatal to a good deal of the law as it now stands on the Statute Book. I suppose all the Acts dealing with the closing of shops, and the like, are Acts which, by special provision, are made to depend upon the wish of the majority as against the wish of the minority. The compulsion is not due to universal opinion, but to opinion laid down by the majority as against the minority. The noble and learned Lord told us that he was going to devote the week, which elapsed before this measure was introduced, in an endeavour to reconcile his speech on that occasion with the measure which is before us tonight. We know that there is no mind more agile than that of the noble and learned Viscount, and no doubt he has succeeded in finding a reconciliation between his speech on that occasion and this measure.
At any rate, it does not affect the practical issue before us now, which is that the measure should receive a Second Reading. I hope it will. The whole subject needs more discussion and larger legislative endeavour, but that can be postponed. We are perfectly willing to acquiesce in the Government's desire to postpone further legislation, and to be content with this smaller measure, in present circumstances, for dealing with what is absolutely and imperatively necessary. When the time conies I have no doubt whatever of being able to show, in this House or elsewhere, that the lessons and experience gained during the war would, in a permanent measure, require to receive better treatment than, perhaps, they have received in this shorter and more temporary measure. I am anxious, to-day, simply to make sure that there is no supposition that we, who claim to be moderate and reasonable reformers in this difficult field, have accepted this measure as more than a temporary makeshift, although as a temporary makeshift we are ready to give it the fullest possible weight, and to see it read a second time in this House.
LORD CLWYD: My Lords, before this Bill is read a second time I should like to refer to a point in the measure which is of

345
special interest to Wales, and that is the inclusion of the County of Monmouth in Wales for Sunday closing purposes. I wish in a few sentences to express not only my great personal satisfaction that this is so, but to assure your Lordships that the great majority of the people of Wales share that feeling of satisfaction.
If I may be allowed to refer to it for a moment, I would like to remind your Lordships of what has taken place in regard to this question. This proposal has had the unanimous recommendation of two Royal Commissions. It may be of interest to your Lordships to remember that the first Commission which was appointed to inquire into Welsh Sunday closing was presided over by the late Lord Balfour of Burleigh, and in 1889 it unanimously recommended that Sunday closing should be extended to Monmouth. Ten years later the Licensing Commission, presided over by the late Lord Peel, also unanimously recommended the saint thing. The County Council of Monmouthshire, on more than one occasion, has passed resolutions in favour of this proposal, and only last week, with one dissentient voice, that County Council passed a resolution in favour of the inclusion of the county in Wales for all legislative purposes.
I will conclude with one personal reference, if I may be allowed to do so. I take a very special hereditary interest in the Welsh Sunday Closing Act, and I suppose I have had an experience somewhat unusual in the other place with reference to this proposal for the extension of Sunday closing to the County of Monmouth. I had the privilege of introducing a Bill for this purpose in the other place in twenty-one successive Parliamentary sessions, and your Lordships will appreciate my personal satisfaction that, at last, there seems to be every expectation that this proposal will find its way on to the Statute Book.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, it is a matter of common agreement, no doubt, with the whole House, that there could be no question of opposing the Second Reading of this Bill, and I am one of the last people who would be likely to offer it opposition, because since I have had an opportunity of watching from the outside the work of the Control Board I have reached the conclusion that, for some time to come, the better line of advance for
346
the regulation of our system of the sale of alcoholic drinks ought to proceed in the direction of limiting the hours of sale and of limiting the strength of the liquor supplied. Both these objects are sought in the Government Bill, with some modifications front what was considered necessary in war time, but with considerable and marked changes from what existed before 1914. Therefore, I welcome the provisions of the Bill in both those respects.
As the most rev. Primate has truly stated, this does not profess or pretend to be a final measure for the regulation of the drink traffic in the country; but he himself, I think, must admit that the passing of a measure of this kind, and the prolongation of the experiment in those two directions which I have indicated, are likely to defer for a time the attempt to enact what he describes as the larger dealing with the question. It may, I think, reasonably be said that it is desirable to see what the effect of the continuance of the restriction on hours and of alcoholic strength is for a little time longer, before proceeding to wider and larger schemes, whether those schemes take the shape of what I understand the most rev. Primate favours—an extension of the principle of Local Option,—or whether they take the shape of what it was understood that the Prime Minister was at one time so ardent an advocate—namely, that of the acquisition by the State of the whole industry of making and selling alcoholic drinks. It would be altogether out of place now to attempt to discuss the merits or demerits of either of those schemes.
The most rev. Primate alluded to the vivid speech which the noble and learned Viscount, who is not in his place on the Woolsack, made on this subject. I do not think that he went so far on that occasion as to deny the right of a majority to dictate locally to the minority in the same locality on a great number of subjects. What he did was, I take it, to express more than a doubt as to whether the sale of alcoholic drinks was one of the subjects on which the opinion of the majority ought to be allowed to preponderate. And I am bound to say that I think that is a matter requiring a closer investigation than it has hitherto received, and that it cannot be taken so far to be proved either one way or the other.
The only point in the Bill itself on which I might say one word is the extension of

347
hours in favour of theatre-goers and the like. That, I think, met with some opposition in another place, on the ground that it was a form of class legislation, in that it gave a benefit to the well-to-do which was not conferred on the poorer classes in the country. I am afraid that cannot be disputed. I am afraid it is a discrimination in favour of the better-to-do classes. Whether it ought to be completely put aside on that ground I certainly, for one, am not prepared to assert. It seems to me that, as a matter of fact, it will meet the convenience of a great many very harmless people, even though they be well-to-do, and I do not suppose that it is therefore likely to be seriously objected to in your Lordships' House. But, of course, it cannot be disputed that in that matter, as in a great ninny other matters, the better-off classes have a series of advantages over those who are less well endowed, and I think it is simpler in this case frankly to admit it, and not to attempt to produce an artificial equality where the conditions themselves are unequal. On the whole, I am inclined to congratulate His Majesty's Government on the manner in which this Bill has been framed and dealt with in another place, and apart from the specific and local points, such as that mentioned by the noble Lord who has just sat down, it is not likely, should think, to receive any degree of hostile criticism in your Lordships' House.
LORD HARRIS: My Lords, I should like to make one observation, not so much about the Bill itself, but as regards tine very loose phraseology which is used about the Bill in the public Press and elsewhere. It is constantly referred to as a"closing movement." It is not a"closing movement." The Bill does not give any power to close a public house; it simply limits the hours during which intoxicating liquors may be sold. The experience of Justices during the war was, no doubt, the sane as mine—namely, that the publican assumed that he had the right, to close his house. Perhaps it did not matter very much during the war. The traffic on the roads was very much reduced, so far as the ordinary public was concerned. But now that the roads are in constant use I must deprecate the idea which is getting about that it is the right of the publican to close his house at all hours of the day. All that this Bill does is to limit his right to sell intoxicating liquors, and his licence
348
is given to him on condition that he keeps his house open for the use of the public, not necessarily for the supply of intoxicating liquors, but that the public may get shelter as well as food and non-intoxicants during all reasonable hours of the day. It is just as well to call attention to that.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

GLASTONBCRY GAS ORDER, 1921.
LORD SOMERLBYTON LORD SOMERLBYTON rose to move, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on t he application of the Glastonbury Corporation which was presented on the 26th July (Cmd. 1420) be approved. The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Motion is really necessary because, under the provisions of Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, the Board of Trade has power to make special Orders with respect to various matters relating to gas undertakings, but the section provides that before any such Order is made it shall be laid in draft before both Houses of Parliament, and it shall not be made unless both Houses, by Resolution, approve the draft, either without modification or addition or with modifications or additions to which both Houses agree. One Order under the section has already been approved by Parliament, and made by the Board of Trade, and in addition to the one which I now submit to your Lordships for approval there are seven others standing in my name.
Moved That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Glastonbury. Corporation which was presented on the 26th July (Cmd. 1420) be approved: — (Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

HARPENDEN DISTRICT GAS ORDER, 1921.
LORD SOMERLEYTON: My Lords, with regard to the Motion standing in my name with respect to this Order, perhaps ought to say one word as there are several Amendments which it is necessary to submit for the approval of Parliament.

349
All but one of these are rendered necessary by the fact that the Draft Order was presented to Parliament on June 14, and it was anticipated that the approval of both houses would have been obtained before the Order applied for by the Company, under Section 1 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, was made. It became necessary, however, to issue the latter Order before the end of June, and, as that Order alters the basis on which the company are authorised to charge for their gas, certain consequential drafting Amendments are required in the present Order The Amendment to Clause 33 has been asked for by the Hertfordshire County Council, for whose protection the clause is inserted. It is agreed to by the company, and the Board sees no objection to the omission of the words in question. I hope that, having explained the reason for these Amendments, and the reason for the introduction of the whole of these Orders, it will be for your Lordships' convenience that I be allowed to move them en bloc. I therefore beg to move the Motion which stands in my name.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Harpenden District Gas Company which was presented on the 14th June (Cmd. 1364) be approved subject to the following Amendments: —
Claus 1, subclause (2), after"1914"insert"the Harpenden District Gas (Charges) Order, 1921 (S.R. & O., 1921, No.1142)."
Clause 2, subclause (1), after '' 1914"insert"the Harpenden District Gas (Charges) Order, 1921."
Clause 3, at end, omit '' section 65 (Dividend dependent on price charged) of the Act of 1901 as, amended by."
Clause 17, snbclause (1), line 5, after '' 1901"omit '' or," and after"1914" insert."or the Harpenden District Gas (Charges) Order, 1921."
Clause 17, subclause (1), line 7, omit"four shillings and ninepence per one thousand cubic feet"and insert "seventeen decimal four pence per therm."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para. (a), lines 2 and 3, omit"one penny or part of a penny."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para, (a), line 5, omit "penny or part and insert "one-fifth," and after"of a penny insert"or part thereof."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para, (a), line 6, omit"standard," and after"in-creased"insert"above the standard price."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para. (b), line 3, omit"one penny or more."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para. (b), line 5, after"each"insert"one-fifth of a"and omit"standard."
Clause 17, subclause (1), para. (b), line 6, after"reduced"insert"below the standard price."
Clause 17, subclause 3, line 5, omit '' one shilling and sixpence per one thousand cubic feet"and insert"three decimal sixpence Per therm."
Clause 18,omit the clause.
Clause 33, subclause (3), line 16, omit lines 16, 17, and 18.—(Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

HAVANT GAS ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to hi made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Havant Gas Company which was presented on the 21st June (Cmd. 1379) be approved.—(Lone Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

HINDLEY GAS ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Hindley Urban District Council which was presented on the 21st June (Cmd. 1378) be approved.—(Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

OSSETT CORPORATION (GAS) ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Ossett Corporation which was presented on the 24th May (Cmd, 1299) be approved.—(Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

PONTYPOOL GAS ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas

351
Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Pontypool Gas and Water Company which was presented on the 21st June (Cmd. 1369) be approved.—(Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

STOKE-ON-TRENT GAS ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Stoke-on-Trent Corporation which was presented on the 26th June (Cmd. 1421) be approved.—(Lord Somerleyton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

STAFFORDSHIRE POTTERIES GAS ORDER, 1921.
Moved, That the Draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the British Gas Light Company with respect to the Staffordshire Potteries undertaking of that Company which was presented on the 26th July (Cmd. 1426) be approved.—(Lord Somerleytott.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT BILL. [H.L.]
Message from the Commons: That they have agreed to the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, with Amendments.
House adjourned at five o'clock.

Preamble
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table, the Certificate from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Stoke-on-Trent Extension).
The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (BARNSLEY ENTENSION) BILL.
Reported with Amendments, and recommitted to a Commintee of the Whole House to-morrow.
MANCHESTER (POLICE, & c.) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
  Reported, without amendment, recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House to-morrow.
METROPOLITAN WATER BOARD (VARIOUS POWERS) BILL.
Reported, With Amendments.
LEICESTER CORPORATION BILL.
The King's consent signified, and Bill reported with Amendments.
SALMON AND FRESHWATER FISHERIES BILL.
To be read 2a, to-morrow (The Earl of Ancaster).
PILOTACE PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL—(Bristol Order).
A witness ordered to attend the Select Committee.
GLASGOW UNIVERSITY (DUNDONALD BURSARIES) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
To be read 3ato-morrow.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (STOKE-NO-TRENT EXTEN SION)BILL
Committed: The Committee to be proposed the Committee of Selection.
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Five Lords appointed a Select Committee on the Ministry of Health Provisional Orders (Aberavon and Neath Extension) Bill do form a Select Committee for the consideration of the Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Stoke-on-Trent Extension) Bill; read, and agreed to: All Petitions refeared to the Committee, with have to the Petitioners praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bill to be heard as desired, as also Counsel for the Bill.
Report from the Committee of Selection That the Earl of Kintore be proposed to the House as a Member of the Select Committee on the said Bill in the place of the Earl of Wemyss and that the Earl of Kintore be Chairman of the said Committee; read, and agreed to.

WAR PENSIONS BILL.
Committed for Thursday next.
LICENSING (No. 2) BILL.
Committed Friday next.
HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.
Third Report from the Select Committee made, and to be printed, and to be considered on Monday next.
ZION CONGREGATIONAL CHAPEL (FRAMPTON COTTERELL) CHARITY BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read la; to be printed; and to be read 2a to-morrow (The Lord Stanmore).
BRIDGE OF ALLAN WATER, & c., ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL.
  ABERDEEN CORPORATION (ELECTRICITY WORKS RAILWAY) ORDER CONFIR MATION BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read la; to be printed; and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) deemed to have been read 2a (The Lord Stanmore), and reported from the Committee.

CORN SALES BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
LEE CONSERVANCY BILL.
SOUTHAMPTON CORPORATION WATER BILL.
THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN RAIL WAY (HOLYHEAD HARBOUR LEASING) BILL. [H L.]
DE TRAFFORD ESTATES BILL. [H.L.]
STOCK CONVERSION AND INVESTMENT TRUST BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with amendments; The said amendments considered, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (CARDIFF EXTENSION) BIIL.
Brought front the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.
GREENWICH HOSPITAL BILL.
To be read 2a on Thursday next (The Lord Lee of Fareham).