Sitting of 15 December 1926

Preamble
The House met at Twelve of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
Return ordered,
"of all the Draft Provisional Orders under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, which in the Session a 1926 have been reported on by the Commissioners; together with the names of the Commissioners; the first and also the last day of the sittings of each group; the number of days on which each body of Commissioners sat; the number of days on which each Commissioner has served; the number of days occupied by each Draft Provisional Order before Commissioners; the Draft Provisional Orders the Preambles of which were reported to have been proved; and the Draft Provisional Orders the Preambles of which were reported to have been not proved:
And also a Statement showing how all Draft Provisional Orders of the Session of 1926 have been dealt with."—[Sir John Gilmour.]

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  RHINELAND (ALLIED TROOPS).
  Mr. W. THORNEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state the policy of the Government with regard to the withdrawal of Allied military forces from the Rhineland?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): If the hon. Member is referring to an earlier withdrawal than that provided for in Article 429 of the Treaty of Versailles, I can only say that the policy of His Majesty's Government in this matter continues to be governed by the conditions laid down in Article 431 of the Treaty. Apart from this, the question is one in which His Majesty's Government are acting in consultation
  2904
  with the other Governments whose troops are in occupation of the Rhineland.
  Mr. THORNE: Would it not be better if joint representations could be made for the withdrawal of all military forces from the Rhineland? Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that this would create a better feeling between the different countries and the Germans?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: If the troops are to be withdrawn before the time fixed by the Treaty, it can only be as a result of an arrangement between the occupying Powers and the German authorities, to which arrangement the German Government would be willing to contribute their share.
  Mr. OLIVER: Will the right hon. Gentleman initiate proceedings with this object, and try to persuade the other Powers to take this action?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The matter has been the subject of discussion between the representatives of the different Powers, but time is required for steps of this kind, and not merely time, but the active co-operation of the Government of Germany with the other Governments, to find a solution.

  FALKLAND FILM.
  Colonel DAYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty what bookings have been received to the last convenient date for the film Falkland?
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Bridgeman): I am unable to give any information.
  Colonel DAY: As the First Lord has stated that the Admiralty are financially interested in this film, does he not think that the Admiralty ought to have some information as to their income?
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: The arrangement is in the hands of the commercial people who are arranging the film. We do not interfere in that.
  Colonel DAY: As the Admiralty are financially interested, is it not possible for them to know exactly what is taking place, so that they can know what their financial commitments are?
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: We know that we cannot lose anything by it, and we may gain something.
  Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: Does the right hon. Gentleman allege that it is in the public interest that ho is withholding this information from the House of Commons?
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: No, Sir.
  Captain BENN: No.

  UNEMPLOYMENT.

    CHEMICAL TRADES.
    Mr. KELLYasked the Minister of Labour the number of workpeople registered at Employment Exchanges as unemployed from the chemical trade in the months of October, 1924, October, 1925, and October, 1926?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton): The number of persons classified as belonging to the chemicals industry, and recorded at Employment Exchanges in Great Britain as unemployed at 25th October, 1926, was 11,219, as compared with 9,346 at 26th October, 1925, and 8,615 at 27th October, 1924.
    Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Are the figures based on the classification made last year or on the earlier classification?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I think they are based on the classification of last July, but I am not quite sure.

    PLAIN NET AND LACE TRADE.
    Mr. KELLYasked the Minister of Labour the number of workpeople registered at Employment Exchanges in October, 1926, as unemployed from the plain net and lace trade in Derby, Nottingham, Long Eaton, Somerset and Devon?
    Mr. BETTERTON: The numbers of persons classified as belonging to the lace industry recorded as unemployed at 25th October, 1926, in the areas in question were as follow:

    Derby

    …

    …

    …

    103

    Nottingham

    …

    …

    …

    885

    Long Eaton

    …

    …

    …

    525

    Somerset

    …

    …

    …

    65

    Devon

    …

    …

    …

    173

    Mr. OLIVER: Has the Department any figures to show that the inclusion of this industry under the Safeguarding of Industries Act has brought any material advantage to the particular districts mentioned?
    Mr. BETTERTON: No, Sir, but I think that had it not been for that Act, the figures would have been much larger.
    Mr. KELLY: Do the figures include plain net as well as lace?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I think so, but I should need to verify that statement. I think it includes both.
    Mr. HARRIS: Are we to assume that Tariff Reform means work for all"?

    BENEFIT DISALLOWED.
    Mr. BARKERasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that Edward Jones, of 87, Bournville Road, Blaina, has been employed as a clerk in the Blaina Employment Exchange; that Jones was discharged in January, 1926; that he has been refused unemployment benefit; and will he have this case investigated with a view to benefit being granted?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I am having inquiries made into this case, and will let the hon. Member know the result in due course.
    Mr. BARKERasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that John David, 25, Florence Road, Treowen, Newbridge, Mon., has been refused unemployment benefit; that he has been employed as a stoker at North Celynen Colliery at fixed periods during the coal stoppage; that he has always been available for work during the stoppage; that during certain periods of the stoppage he has been unemployed; that he is an ex-service man, with only a small disability pension to maintain his wife and family; and will he have this claim for unemployment benefit considered at the earliest moment?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I am having inquiries made, and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.
    Mr. BARKER: Arising out of the answers to this question and question No. 12, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he can expedite this business? I have had a number of cases in his office, and I am, waiting for a reply very anxiously, and so are the applicants.
    Mr. BETTERTON: Yes, I will do my best to see that there is no undue delay, but the hon. Member must realise that I received notice of this case only the day before yesterday.

    BLANESBURGH COMMITTEE.
    Mr. BUCHANANasked the Minister of Labour when the Report of the Blanesburgh Committee will be issued?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I have every hope that the Report will be issued early in the New Year.

    GLASGOW.
    Mr. BUCHANANasked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons at present unemployed in Glasgow, the number of male and female workers affected, and the figures for the same period in Glasgow in 1924 and 1925?

    NUMBER of Persons on the Registers of Employment Exchanges in the Glasgow area.

    Date.

    Men.

    Boys.

    Women.

    Girls.

    Total.

    6th December, 1926*

    …

    …

    …

    68,752

    2,658

    9,609

    1,865

    82,884

    7th December, 1925

    …

    …

    …

    59,595

    1,907

    11,136

    1,552

    74,190

    8tb December, 1924

    …

    …

    …

    55,951

    2,231

    14,422

    1,734

    74,338

    *The figures are exclusive of persons in the coal-mining industry in respect of whom there was a disqualification for unemployment benefit under the trade dispute provisions.

  ROYAL AIR FORCE.

    COOKE,SCHILOVSKY TURN INDICATOR.
    Colonel DAYasked the Secretary of State for Air the results of the tests of the gyroscopic fog-guide device; and whether any of these instruments have been ordered by the Ministry?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Samuel Hoare): On the assumption that the hon. and gallant Member is referring to the Cooke-Schilovsky Turn Indicator, recently referred to in the Press, the answer to the first part of the question is that this instrument has undergone satisfactory tests, and to the second part, that arrangements are being made to order a number for extended service trials and for training purposes.
    Colonel DAY: Will these instruments be made in Great Britain?
    Sir S. HOARE: I could not reply without notice, but I think it is the case that they will be so made.
    Mr. BETTERTON: As the reply involves a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: Can the hon. Gentleman state whether the numbers for 1924 or those for 1926 are the greater?
    Mr. BETTERTON: I can give those figures at once. In 1926, exclusive of persons in the coal-mining industry, the total was 82,884, and in December, 1924, the figure was 74,338.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: Does that not prove that the Conservative Government have brought unemployment to the workers in that industry?
    Following is the statement promised:

    FLYING ACCIDENTS (FRANCE AND EXGLAND).
    Colonel DAYasked the Secretary of State for Air the number of officers and men of the Royal Air Force killed in flying accidents during each of the three years preceding the last convenient date, together with the number of fatal accidents in the French Air Force during the same period?
    Sir S. HOARE: The figures as regards the Royal Air Force during the 12 months ending 9th December in each of the years named were as follow: 1926: 46 officers, 2 cadets, 28 airmen; 1925: 40 officers and 11 airmen; 1924: 48 officers, 1 cadet and 23 airmen. In addition the following naval, military or civilian personnel were involved in fatal accidents to Royal Air Force machines:—In 1926, 7; 1925, 4; 1924, 2. As regards the French Air Force, according to my information statistics of the number of fatal accidents are not made public by the French authorities. I may say, however, that in the course of a debate in the Chamber,

    2909
    at the end of November, it was stated that there had been 13 fatal accidents in the French Military Air Service on a single type of machine in the space of two months. Whilst this, no doubt, represents an exceptional period such as all air services must experience from time to time, it is apparent from this fact and other confidential information in my possession that figures which have recently been cited in this House purporting to suggest that the accident rate in France has, during the past two or three years, been more favourable than in this country, are totally inaccurate.
    Colonel GRETTONasked the Prime Minister if an independent inquiry, with a chairman not connected with the Air Force, will be set up immediately with full powers to investigate and report upon all the circumstances connected with flying accidents, both fatal and non-fatal, which have occurred recently in the Royal Air Force?
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): No, Sir. As I informed the House last Thursday, I am satisfied that every possible precaution is being taken, and an inquiry of the kind proposed would, in my view, serve no useful purpose.

    LERWICK OBSER VATORY.
    Sir GEORGE BERRYasked the Secretary of State for Air if he is aware that orders have been issued by the Meteorological Office that all meteorological work at the Lerwick Observatory is to be stopped on 31st December; if the opinion of the Scottish Advisory Committee has been asked as to the proposed stoppage: if so, what opinion has been given by the Committee; if he will state what are the reasons for the stoppage of observational work; and if he will consider whether it would be possible for the order to be held in abeyance until a Report on the matter has been received from the Scottish Advisory Committee?
    Sir S. HOARE: As the answer is somewhat long, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: Is it intended to close this station?
    Sir S. HOARE: I could not say without notice.
    Following is the to the Question on the paper:
    My hon. Friend is, apparently, under a misapprehension. Orders have been given for the meteorofogical work at the observatory to he reduced, not stopped, on 1st January next. Assuming that the references in the various parts of his question to a proposed stoppage are read as references to the proposed reduction, I can answer them as follows:
    The answer to the first two parts of the question is ill the affirmative; to the third that the Committee concurred in the proposal. As regards the fourth part, the Lerwick Observatory was established primarily to supplement Eskdalemuir Observatory in recording terrestrial magnetism and to study the relationship between terrestrial magnetism and the aurora. The original programme of work at Lerwick Observatory included a considerable amount of purely meteorological work which had no bearing on the magnetic observations, and as this programme has proved too large for the staff of the observatory, and as there is another meteorological station, distinct from the observatory, at Lerwick, the meteorological work at the observatory is being suspended until the arrears have been disposed of and the amount of work which the staff can deal with has been determined. The last part of the question does not arise, the Scottish Advisory Committee having already concurred in the proposal.

  SCOTLAND.

    ERBIBOF ESTATE (SALE).
    Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIRasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether the Report of the arbiter in the Erribol sheep stock valuation has yet been received; and, if so, what is the amount of the valuation to be paid by the purchaser for the sheep stock?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The amount declared by the arbiter to be the value of the sheep stock to be taken over by the purchaser is £9,388 11s.
    Sir A. SINCLAIR: Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that for a sheep stock,

    2911
    for which his Department seven years ago paid over £43,000, he has now received only a. little over £9,000?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: The price of sheep has not remained stationary. It has dropped by 50 per cent during that period. Further than that, the sheep actually taken over by the present purchaser are not the total sheep stock of the property, nor do they represent the total number bought originally.
    Sir A. SINCLAIR: Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's figures that the price of sheep has fallen only 50 per cent., whereas the value received for this farm shows a falling of 500 per cent. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Well, a fall from £43,000 to £9,000, and is the right hon. Gentleman receiving the value for the sheep which ought to be received according to the usual practice?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: As regards the question of the value of the sheep falling by 50 per cent., probably I am understating the fall in the value.
    Sir A. SINCLAIR: In view of these facts, does not the right hon. Gentleman see that it is essential that full information should be afforded to the House, and that we should have the minutes of reference to the arbiter and the arbiter's Report as well, so as to understand the meaning of the extraordinary loss which has been made in this transaction by the right hon. Gentleman's Department?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must not make a speech.
    Mr. STEPHENasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the cost of the Erribof Estate, Sutherland, the cost of the stock taken over with the estate, the price at which the estate was sold, and the stock disposed of, respectively, when the decision was taken that the estate was unsuitable for small holdings?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: As regards the first three parts of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies which I gave on the subject on the 11th and 16th November. With regard to the last part, I would refer him to the reply which I have given to-day to the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair), of which I am sending him a copy.
    Mr. STEPHEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction exists in connection with the disposal of this estate and stock; and will he consider setting up a Select Committee of this House to inquire into the matter?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir; certainly not.
    Mr. MAXTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this transaction is dragging the Government into even greater contempt in Scotland?
    Sir HARRY BRITTA IN: Would it not be better if all transactions of this kind were left to private enterprise?
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Arising out of the original reply, can the right hon. Gentleman now say when he is prepared to place the arbiter's Report on the Table of the House.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I think it would be perfectly intolerable if every transaction in which the Board of Agriculture happens to be involved were to be treated in that way. I have answered every kind of question on the subject, have given the fullest information to the House and, as I have said, on the Scottish Estimates there will be an opportunity of discussing the subject further.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Did not the right hon. Gentleman promise to lay the arbiter's report on the Table when he received it; and as he has now received it, what reason is there for refusing to give the House this information?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I have no recollection of any promise to lay the arbiter's report on the table, and, as I say, I think it would be most undesirable if we were to deal with every transaction of this kind in this way.
    Sir A. SINCLAIR: Having regard to the very serious and substantial loss of money involved in this transaction, cannot the right hon. Gentleman make any representation to the arbiter, as is often done in such circumstances, asking him to reconsider his award?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: This was a business transaction, and the matter was referred to the arbiter by agreement between the two parties, and his arbitration is final.

    PARISH BELIEF, GLASGOW.
    Mr. STEPHENasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of men and women, respectively, at present in receipt of able-bodied parish relief in the City of Glasgow?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: As the answer involves a statement of figures, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Following is the answer:
    The city of Glasgow which has a population of 1,034.174 is situated in several parishes, but the main portion is situated in the parishes of Glasgow and Govan, which have a total population of 968,195. In the parishes of Glasgow and Govan the number of able-bodied unemployed and miners' families in receipt of poor relief was:

    At 15th May (including 44,635 wives and children)

    62,980

    At 15th November (including 40,251 wives and children)

    59,052

    The numbers at 15th May consist of: —

    Men

    16,507

    Women (including 12,024 wives)

    13,862

    Children

    32,611

    62,980

    Detailed information is not available at 15th November, but from such information as is available it may be stated that the numbers chargeable at that date consist of, approximately:

    Men

    16,950

    Women (including 12,410 wives)

    14,260

    Children

    27,842

    59,052

    WEIR HOUSES, GLASGOW.
    Mr. STEPHENasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of Weir houses that have been built in the city of Glasgow and are ready for occupancy, and the number of such houses that are occupied?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: At the 30th November, with the aid of State funds, 296 Weir houses had been built in Glasgow. Of these, 150 were ready for occupancy, and all were occupied.

    SMALL HOLDINGS, ISLAND OF RUM.
    Colonel DAY (for Mr. NEIL MAC-LEAN)asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, seeing that portions of the Island of Rum have been recommended by Royal Commissions for small holdings or small sheep farms, he will say whether any action has been taken by the Board of Agriculture to provide such small holdings or sheep farms; and how many are now existing or in process of being opened up?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: The Board of Agriculture for Scotland has not received any applications for small holdings on the Island of Ruin, and no action has been taken by them with a view to the constitution of holdings thereon.

  WEST HAM GUARDIANS.
  Mr. H. WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Health whether he has received any report from the West Ham Board of Guardians; and, if so, whether any information as to their proceedings during the last six months can be laid before Parliament?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): My right hon. Friend has received a report, and he will be pleased to present it to Parliament.
  Mr. W. THORNE: Will that report deal with the charges of corruption or maladministration made against the late board of guardians?
  Sir K. WOOD: I think the hon. Member had better await the report. It shows a very big saving of public money.
  Mr. THORNE: Does it deal with the charges of maladministration or corruption against the late board of guardians? Such charges were made against them times without number.

  OLD AGE PENSIONS (REOULATIONS).
  Mr. W. BAKERasked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the new Regulation whereby an invalid old age pensioner is required to have his or her signature in the book of vouchers

  2915
  witnessed by a minister of religion or a doctor, in addition to possessing the official document certifying inability to apply for payment in person; whether he is aware that old persons who are not on the visiting list of ministers of religion are compelled to pay a doctor's fee in order to obtain the necessary signature; and whether, seeing that the new Regulation has been introduced as an official economy, he will increase the number of classes from which a competent witness may be drawn?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): Arrangements are under consideration which will remove the inconvenience to which the hon. Member refers.

  PRESERVATIVES ORDER.
  Captain ARTHUR EVANSasked the Minister of Health whether he has any statistics showing the extent to which stocks of commodities affected by the new Preservatives Order, Colning into force next January, are held by retail grocery firms; and whether, to enable these businesses, particularly in industrial districts affected by the recent troubles, to, dispose of their holdings, he will consider an extension of time wherein sales can be effected?
  Sir K. WOOD: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which was given to the hon. Member for the Waver- tree Division of Liverpool (Mr. Tinne) on Monday.
  Captain EVANS: Is it not the case that that answer referred to particular kinds of stock. I wanted to know as to the effect upon stocks of all kinds.
  Sir K. WOOD: Yes, but I think my hon. and gallant Friend will find that the answer stated that my right hon. Friend was suggesting to local authorities a course of procedure.

  MINISTRY OF HEALTH (DENTAL OFFICERS).
  Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALLasked the Minister of Health whether it is proposed to appoint regional
  2916
  dental officers in connection with dental benefit treatment as administered by approved societies; whether it is intended that these appointments should be held only by registered dentists possessing a diploma recognised and registerable in this country; and, if not, whether he will give an assurance that practitioners holding these registerable diplomas will not come under the supervision of any regional dental officer not possessing these diplomas?
  Sir K. WOOD: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Applications for the posts have been invited by advertisement, which does not restrict applications to dentists holding any particular diploma. A Selection Committee has been set up, and, while no appointments have yet been made, my hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that every attention will be given to the considerations mentioned in the last part of his question.

  TINNED SALMON.
  Mr. JOHNSTONasked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the conditions under which tinned salmon is packed by some American firms; whether he is aware that syphilitic and other unclean persons pack the salmon into tins with their hands, and that there is still no adequate inspection as to health and cleanliness; and what steps he proposes to take to ensure the safety of the British working classes who consume this food?
  Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend has not received any reports as to the existence of the conditions mentioned in the question, and lie would be glad if the hon. Member would communicate to the Ministry of Health any information which may be in his possession.
  Mr. JOHNSTON: Has the hon. Gentleman's Department no information regarding the report issued three years ago by the grand jury of Valdez, Alaska, and if he has seen any further report since declaring that the conditions are even worse than they were three years ago?
  Sir K. WOOD: As I have said, my right hon. Friend has not received any report on the matter, and the hon. Member had better send me all the information which he has on the subject.
  Sir H. BRITTAIN: Would not the best safeguard be to buy salmon canned in Canada?

  POLICE PAY, MONMOUTHSHIRE.
  Sir F. HALLasked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the action of the Monmouthshire Standing Joint Committee in issuing instructions for the withholding by 50 per cent. in certain contingencies of the pay of the police under their control; and what action the Government propose to take to prevent the police force being penalised for carrying out their primary duty of protecting the public?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Captain Hacking): The answer to my hon. and gallant Friend's question appeared in the OFFICIAL REPORT this morning as a written answer, owing to an omission to notice that the question originally put down on the Order Paper for oral answer yesterday had been postponed by my hon. and gallant Friend until to-day. I regret any inconvenience caused to my hon. and gallant Friend owing to this oversight.

  STREET ACCIDENTS, GLASGOW.
  Mr. BUCHANANasked the Minister of Transport the total number of accidents caused by motor traffic in the city of Glasgow during the past 12 months, and the number for the same period last year?
  The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): I regret that I have not the information asked for. I am making inquiries, however, to see what statistics are available, and will communicate with the hon. Member.
  Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the ever increasing number of fatal accidents in the streets of Glasgow, and the need for legislative action in this matter, and if so what action is he prepared to take?
  Colonel ASHLEY: I hope that some provisions may be embodied in the Bill which it is proposed to introduce next Session.

  POST OFFICE.

    CHRISTMAS ARRANGEMENTS.
    Mr. ALBERYasked the Postmaster-General whether the Christmas mail arrangements will follow the same lines as last year?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Sir William Mitchell-Thomson): As regards administrative arrangements, the answer is generally in the affirmative. I have already stated, however, that it is not proposed to have a delivery on Sunday 26th, but to have a general delivery of letters and parcels on Boxing Day. I would appeal to the public to co-operate by paying special attention to the closing hours of posting for Christmas deliveries, which are, broadly speaking, early on the 22nd for parcels, and before noon on the 23rd for letters. The precise hours are intimated locally. If this co-operation is secured, I believe that arrangements will work satisfactorily; but I should add that no amount of precautionary arrangement can avert the consequences of late running of trains owing to fog or other causes.

    EMPLOYÉS (HALF-PAY).
    Mr. AMMONasked the Postmaster-General the number of Post Office employés who were liable to be placed on half-pay due to sickness extending over a period of six months, and the percentage of employés actually placed on half-pay or on pension rate pay, during the last six months of 1925?
    Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON: All established Post Office employés are liable to be placed on half-pay after a period of six months' continuous sick leave. 1 am unable to state the percentage of employés placed on half-pay or pension rate of pay in consequence of long continued illness during the second half of 1925, and the information could not be obtained without expense which I do not think would be justified.

    DAMAGES AWARD, BIRMINGHAM.
    Mr. W. THORNEasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a woman at Birmingham has been awarded £3,000 damages and £149 special damages for injuries caused through being run down by a Post Office motor van; and whether it is the intention of the Government to accept liability for payment of the said damages?
    Sir W. MITCHELL - THOMSON: Counsel's opinion is being taken as to the advisability of entering an appeal in this case on behalf of the defendant, who is a Post Office servant

  BRITISH ARMY.

    UNIDENTIFIED MAN, ROTTERDAM.
    Captain WATERHOUSEasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that an unidentified deaf-and-dumb man, suffering from loss of memory, is at present in hospital at Rotterdam and supposed to be a British soldier; and if any information is available?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Sir Laming Worthington-Evans): I am aware of the case, but after exhaustive inquiries it has been established beyond all reasonable doubt that, although the man served in the British Army during the War, he is not a. British citizen. Further, the evidence available indicates that. his loss of memory is quite recent, and that this is not a case of the reappearance of a British soldier reported missing during the War.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the fact that some people think that this man may be a relative of theirs, a view which seems to be common up and down the country, causing certain anxiety, could the right hon. Gentleman not get that report circulated in a fairly widespread fashion?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I hope the question asked and the answer given in the House will cause considerable publicity to the case. There have been a great many hopes raised in various people's minds that this man was one of their relatives, and I hope the inquiries that have been now answered will set doubts at rest.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the fact that in Scotland one of the newspapers gave great publicity to this case, and that large numbers of people thought it might be a relative, can the right hon. Gentleman not approach the broadcasting authorities with a view to the information being broadcast over the wireless?
    Mr. RAINE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that an independent person was in Rotterdam this last week-end, and that, after careful examination of
    2920
    this soldier, he believes that he is a British subject? I can confirm what has been said about the mental anxiety of many women in this country in this connection, from knowledge of such cases in my own constituency.
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: My information, of course, is based on inquiries made through the Foreign Office and the Consul, and so far as I know I have no reason whatever to doubt the information I have given in answer to this question.

    "FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE" FILM.
    Sir HENRY COWANasked the Secretary of State for War whether the War Office is granting facilities for the production of an American film portraying the life and work of Florence Nightingale by permitting British soldiers, in uniforms appropriate to the period of the Crimean War, to assist in the production of the film; whether he is aware that a film dealing with the work of this British heroine is being prepared for production by a British producing company; and whether, in view of the national character of this production, he can see his way to giving preference to British producers by granting such facilities to them rather than to a foreign producer?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part of the question, I understand that a British company has asked for facilities in connection with a film of this kind, and their proposals, when they reach me, will receive full consideration.

    INEANTRY RECORD OFFICE, HAMILTON (MR. A. J. UNSWORTH).
    Mr. KELLYasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that in connection with the introduction of grade 4 clerical rates of pay in the War Office out-stations, an increment of 2s 6d. per week was withheld from Mr. A. J. Unsworth, a clerk in the Infantry Record Office at Hamilton, from 1st April, 1925, to August, 1925, on the grounds that he had been promoted temporarily to deputy-superintending clerk during the financial year 1924–25; whether he is aware that clerks who had not been so promoted received the 2s. 6d. increment with effect

    2921
    from 1st April, 1925; and whether he will issue instructions that Mr. Unsworth be granted the increment for the period stated, and so ensure to him equality of treatment as compared with the clerks whom he supervised up to 31st March, 1925?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: As the answer is rather long, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Following is the reply.
    Under the Clerical Reorganisation Scheme, recently introduced for the clerical staff of War Department Outstation Offices, Mr. Unsworth was regraded as a Grade IV clerk, dated from 1st April, 1924. His regrading was effected in August, 1925, and in accordance with the provisions of the scheme he was then entitled to payment of the difference between the total amount he had actually received during the period from April, 1924, to August, 1925, and that to which he was entitled as a Grade IV clerk. But Mr. Unsworth had been paid as a deputy-superintending clerk from 1st April, 1924, to 31st March, 1925, and his actual total receipts for the period April, 1924, to August, 1925, were consequently in excess of the total amount to which he was entitled as a Grade IV clerk for the period. No payment of arreas was, therefore, due. The 2s. 6d. increment due from 1st April, 1925, was taken into account in calculating the total receipts to which he was entitled as a Grade IV clerk. His incremental date has remained unaffected.

  CHINA.

    TANKS.
    Mr. MARDY JONESasked the Secretary of State for War how many tanks have been supplied to the Shanghai Municipal Council and on what dates; what were the conditions of their supply; and whether tanks have been supplied to any other localities in China?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: No British tanks have been supplied to the Shanghai Municipal Council, or to anyone else in China.

    SIR CHARLES HARINGTON (SPEECH).
    Mr. MARDY JONESasked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the speech made by Lieut.-General Sir Charles Harington at York on 2nd December, in which he urged the issue of an ultimatum to China; whether this officer is General Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Northern Command; whether, in expressing these views, General Harington is expressing official views; and, if not, whether he will take steps to restrain expressions of opinion such as these, which are likely to jeopardise our relations with China?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I have not seen a report of the speech referred to, but Sir Charles Harington informs me that he expressed no such view as is attributed to him in the first part of the question.
    Mr. JONES: May I draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the report in the "Daily Telegraph" to that effect, and if that report be correct, is it not desirable that the Government should make it clear that such expressions are not the official view of the Government?
    Mr. SPEAKER: This is hypothetical.
    Mr. THURTLE: Do I understand that Sir Charles Harington denies the accuracy of the report in the "Daily Telegraph"?
    Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I have not called his special attention to that particular report, because I did not know of it, but Sir Charles Harington informs me that he expressed no such view as that attributed to him in this question.

    BRITISH FORCES
    Mr. JONESalso asked the Prime Minister what naval or marine, military, and Air Force units have been drafted to China and Hong Kong in the past two months, and for what purpose?
    The PRIME MINISTER: In regard to Naval and Air Forces, I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given by my right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty on the 1st and 8th December in reply to questions by my hon. Friend the

    2923
    Member for South-East Essex (Mr. Looker) and my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Hertford (Rear-Admiral Sueter). These forces have been sent to the Far East in order to ensure as far as possible the effective protection of British subjects in China.
    As far as military units are concerned, one heavy battery, Royal Artillery, and one battalion of Infantry have moved to Hong Kong during the past two months, but these moves were in the normal process of relief of similar units which have moved elsewhere.

  INTERNATIONAL MERCANTILE MARINE COMPANY.
  Viscount SANDONasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has examined the contract with the International Mercantile Marine Company with regard to the question whether he has powers under it to prevent the transference of the Leyland or other British lines to the United States flag, and what action he proposes to take?
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): Clause 3 of the Agreement with the International Mercantile Marine Company of 1st August, 1903, printed on page 4 of Parliamentary Paper Cd. 1704 of 1903, provides that
  "No British ship in the association, nor any ship which may hereafter be built or otherwise acquired for any British company included in the association, shall be transferred to a foreign registry (without the written consent of the President of the Board of Trade, which shall not be unreasonably withheld), nor be nor remain upon a foreign registry. Nothing shall be otherwise done whereby any such ship would lose its British registry or its right to fly the British flag."
  No application has been made for permission to transfer any of the lines in the Association to a foreign flag.

  STEAMSHIP "EASTWAY" (LOSS OFF BERMUDA).
  Mr. HAYESasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been specially called to the heroism of certain members of the crew of the steam-
  2924
  ship "Eastway," which foundered in -a hurricane off Bermuda, when the wireless operator remained at his post sending out S.O.S. messages until the ship sank, and the engineers and firemen refused to overload the remaining lifeboat and went down with the ship rather than endanger the lives of their comrades; and whether it is proposed to make any posthumous awards for gallantry or in any other way suitably to recognise the bravery of these members of the mercantile marine?
  Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The circumstances of the case will be fully investigated at the inquiry which has been ordered into the loss of the "Eastway," and when the report of the court of inquiry is available, I shall be in a position to consider whether the services of any member of the crew are such as to merit special recognition.

  TRADE BALANCE, 1925.
  Sir FREDRIC WISEasked the President of the Board of Trade if fuller information tends to confirm the estimate of £28,000,000 for the balance of trade of Britain for 1925?
  Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The £28,000,000 was a tentative estimate of our -income in 1925 available for investment overseas. My hon. Friend will remember that I have on several occasions ventured to express the opinion that this was a very conservative estimate. This view has been confirmed by further information, and the estimate will be revised when the preliminary figures for 1926 are being considered.

  ZEISS PLANETARIUM.
  Mr. W. BAKERasked the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to the planetarium invented by the firm of Zeiss which has been erected by the Dusseldorf Corporation; and whether, as the firm declines to supply these structures to anyone proposing to make a profit, and having regard to educational possibilities and the poverty of educational authorities, he will consider the purchase for educational purposes of at least one example of this invention?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Duchess of Atholl): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, the Board of Education have, my right hon. Friend believes, no power under the Education Act, 1921, to make a purchase of this kind.
  Mr. BAKER: Is it not remarkable that the Governments of defeated Powers are the only Governments which are able to keep abreast of the times?

  LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL TRAMCARS.
  Mr. DALTONasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the police, in licensing London County Council tramcars, satisfy themselves that the tramcars have been properly renovated and overhauled; whether any such tramcars are now running which have not been examined by the police for more, than 12 months; and whether he is aware that certain tramcars now running are in such a state of disrepair as to constitute a danger to the travelling public?
  Captain HACKING: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second and third in the negative. My right hon. Friend is satisfied that no tramcars are running in the condition suggested.
  Mr. DALTON: Do I understand that the police every 12 months satisfy themselves that every ear is in a proper condition from the point of view of the safety of the public?
  Captain HACKING: The hon. Member asks whether any such tramcars are now running which have not been examined by the police for more than 12 months. The answer is in the negative. They have been so examined.
  Sir H. BRITTAIN: Is not the last part of the question a very grave reflection on such a body as the London County Council?
  Captain HACKING: That is, of course, a matter of opinion.
  Sir F. HALL: It is not true, is it?
  Captain HACKING: Certainly not.
  Mr. DALTON: In view of the challenge from the hon. and gallant Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall), would the Under-Secretary be prepared to see some information which I have in my possession with a view to the further investigation of this matter?
  Captain HACKING: I am always quite willing to receive any information which may be in the possession of the hon. Member.
  Sir GEORGE HUME: I should like to challenge the statement in the question.

  LOTTERY ACTS.
  Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COCKEasked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the increasing difficulty of maintaining hospitals and other charitable institutions, he will consider so amending the Lottery Acts as to make it possible for this method of obtaining funds to be utilised, subject to official sanction, for the collection of money to be used exclusively for such undertakings without the management incurring the risk of a prosecution for acting contrary to law?
  Captain HACKING: I am afraid my right hon. Friend would not undertake to introduce legislation of the kind suggested. Apart from other considerations, he could not propose to cast upon any Department or official the duty of giving or withholding sanction.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that, under present conditions, some are taken and others left?
  Captain HACKING: As far as we are concerned, we treat everybody alike.

  MILK (IMPORTATION FROM IRISH FREE STATE).
  Colonel HOWARD-BURYasked the Minister of Agriculture the amount of milk that is being imported from the Irish Free State; and whether this amount has increased since the new Milk and Dairies Order?
  Sir K. WOOD: I have been asked to reply, and I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which was

  2927
  given to the hon. Member for Nottingham Central (Mr. Bennett) on Monday last.

  EMPIRE SUGAR (CUSTOMS DRAWBACK).
  Mr. H. WILLIAMSasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is now in a position to make any announcement with regard to the Customs drawback on goods containing Empire sugar?
  Mr. McNEILL: I regret that I am not in a position to add anything to my right hon. Friend's reply of the 2nd December. An answer to the representations which have been made on this subject will be sent at the earliest possible moment.

  FOREIGN FILMS (TAXATION).
  Lieut. - Colonel HOWARD - BURYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can see his way to tax the £5,000,000 paid to owners of foreign films who at present escape all taxation, and bring these sums into line with the tax on royalties paid to foreign patent owners, where the licensee of the patent who pays the royalty is authorised to deduct from the royalty the amount of the tax assessable upon it?
  Mr. McNEILL: My right hon. Friend is unable to anticipate the Budget statement.
  Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: Can my right hon. Friend see that it will be a tactful measure and one pleasing to the United States if such money derived from this source could go towards the repayment of the American Debt?
  Mr. McNEILL: That is a matter which might be considered by my right hon. Friend.
  Colonel DAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the £5,000,000 stated in the question is even a lesser sum than that which goes to the United States in this way?

  TRADE FACILITIES ACT.
  Sir F. WISEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if all the firms who have
  2928
  received guarantees under the Trade Facilities Act have paid the interest and sinking fund on their guarantees; and, if not, which are the firms that have had to have the assistance of the taxpayer?
  Mr. McNEILL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The total losses sustained to 31st October last were £29,174 4s. 11d. on guarantees amounting to £68,950,780. I do not think it is desirable to give details of the cases in default.
  Mr. TAYLOR: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether those losses are losses arising from the default of British firms, or do they also include losses arising from the default of foreign firms?
  Mr. McNEILL: I could not answer that question without notice, but I think I have already answered it in the House on a previous occasion.

  COAL MINING INDUSTRY.

    SOUTH WALES (MINES RE-STARTED).
    Captain A. EVANSasked the Secretary for Mines the number of mines which have re-started in the South Wales area and the number of men they now employ, together with the corresponding figures for April last; and whether he has any statistics showing the comparative output now, as compared with the period specified?
    The SECRETARY for MINES (Colonel Lane Fox): At the 4th December, 1926, the latest date for which information is available, 443 mines in South Wales had restarted, and 107,400 persons were employed. At the end of April last 461, employing 215,700 persons, were at work. As work was only in process of being resumed in South Wales during the week ended 4th December, it is not possible to give figures of output which are comparable with those in April.
    Mr. MARDY JONES: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many miners have been refused employment when work has been available?
    Colonel LANE FOX: That does not arise on this question.

    SHAFT ACCIDENT, WILLIAMTHORPE COLLIERY.
    Mr. TAYLOR (for Mr. PALING)asked the Secretary for Mines if his attention has been drawn to a colliery shaft accident which occurred at William-thorpe Colliery, near Chesterfield, a few days ago, and in which eight men were injured; and whether his Department have submitted to a practical test any of the various safety devices brought to their notice and which it is claimed would prevent such accidents?
    Colonel LANE FOX: This accident has been fully investigated, and the possibilities of preventive measures are being explored. The accident was due to the cage being lowered, when it dashed into the bottom, instead of being raised. There was no breakage of the winding-rope, and the devices planned to deal with that contingency do not apply to this accident.
    Mr. TAYLOR: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Ross Patent Safety Device for Colliery Cages has been submitted to him for examination, and, if so, what were the results of the examination?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The Minister ought to have notice of that question.

    DOMESTIC SUPPLIES.
    Mr. BARNES(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary for Mines whether he is aware that there is at present a grave shortage of domestic supplies of coal throughout the country, and that delays of 12 to 14 days are being experienced in transport of supplies from the pithead to merchants with consequent dislocation of business due to fluctuating prices; whether this delay is not due to the shortage of railway trucks caused by the movement of foreign coal at the expense of British supplies; and whether, in consequence, he will take steps to remedy this state of affairs which will lead to large numbers of domestic consumers of coal being without supplies at Christmas?
    Colonel LANE FOX: My information does not bear out the hon. Member's suggestion about a shortage of domestic coal. If he is aware of a shortage in any locality, I shall be glad to look into it, if he will give me particulars. As regards
    2930
    the rest of the question, I am aware that the railways are at present finding some difficulty in the transport of coal, and that their difficulty is increased by the arrival of foreign coal ordered before the stoppage ended. But I do not understand in what respects he suggests that it is within my power to remedy this. Government importation of coal ceased some time ago.
    Sir H. COWAN: The right hon. Gentleman says he will be glad to look into any case of a shortage of coal. In my district in North Islington the shortage is very great indeed, and only yesterday I made representations on the subject to the Minister of Transport, who, I believe, is the Minister concerned.
    Mr. B. PETO: Arising out of the latter part of the reply, in the event of the Government having made a profit by the purchase of foreign coal, would it not be better to apply some portion of the profit to cancelling unexecuted orders for foreign coal, which are now congesting our railways, and preventing miners continuing in work?
    Colonel LANE FOX: I can assure my hon. Friend that all powers of cancellation have been carried out by the Government, and also by private importers. As regards the other part of the question, if he will give me particulars, I will look into it and see what can be done.
    Mr. BARNES: I understood the Secretary for Mines to say that he had no power in this matter. If that be the case, is there any possibility of improvement if we give him direct and definite information about the shortage?
    Colonel LANE FOX: No, Sir; what I said was that I had no powers to deal with the difficulty of the shortage of railway wagons, due to the importation of foreign coal as mentioned in the question. I do not know how I can affect that.
    Mr. HARRIS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that not a sack of coal is obtainable in Bethnal Green from any of the coal merchants?
    Colonel LANE FOX: My information does not exactly tally with what the hon. Gentleman says, but I will certainly inquire to see whether his statement is correct.
    Mr. BATEY: Are we to understand that foreign coal is being imported into this country, and can the Minister tell us how much is being imported per week?
    Colonel LANE FOX: No, Sir, not, offhand. Of course, there are certain contracts that have been made in the past by private importers, by railways and so on, under which deliveries are still being made, and that will go on for a short time.
    Mr. BATEY: Can the Secretary for Mines say whether the Government are selling the coal that is being imported at a loss, in order to compete with British coal?
    Colonel LANE FOX: I have already said—and if the hon. Gentleman had listened to my answers he would have heard—that Government importation ceased some time ago.
    Mr. HARRIS(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that in the Bethnal Green area there is no domestic coal available of any kind, and whether he will make arrangements with the railway companies to give priority to domestic coal until the immediate demands are satisfied?
    Colonel ASHLEY: I was not aware of the fact stated in the hon. Member's question. I will communicate with the railway company.

  BRITISH MUSEUM (SUNDAY OPENING).
  Mr. TREVELYANasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that this last Sunday the British Museum was not. opened b the public because there was some fog in the afternoon; who decides whether the Museum shall be opened or not; how often in the last few years the Museum has not been opened on Sunday for that reason; and whether arrangements can me made in future for the proper lighting of the Museum on Sundays so that the public need not have to suffer from occasional exclusion?
  Mr. McNEILL: The answers to the first three parts of the question are as follows: It is the fact that the Museum was not opened on the afternoon of Sunday, December 12th, on account of
  2932
  fog. The decision to close in such circumstances rests with the resident keeper on duty. The Museum has been closed on account of fog five times in the course of the six years that have elapsed since the resumption of Sunday opening. As regards the fourth part of the question, I am not prepared, in order to meet such rare contingencies, to incur the considerable increase of expense which would be involved by the employment of additional Sunday labour.
  Mr. TREVELYAN: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the fog was not very serious on Sunday afternoon, and that large numbers of the public must have gone there expecting admission?
  Mr. McNEILL: It is a question of degree—of comparison. I do not know how thick the fog was.
  Mr. TREVELYAN: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman knows what the additional cost would be of carrying out the suggestion in the question?
  Mr. McNEILL: Of course, the right hon. Gentleman must see that it would be necessary to have the extra staff there invariably. You cannot get them at a moment's notice by telephone; you must have them there all the time. It would mean something like doubling the present staff.

  CROSS-RIVER TRAFFIC, LONDON.
  Mr. B. PETO (for Colonel VAUGHAN - MORGAN)asked the Minister of Transport what steps he proposes to take to give effect to the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Cross-River Traffic in London; and whether he is prepared to receive a deputation representative of the localities concerned?
  Colonel ASHLEY: The Report of the Royal Commission on Cross-River Traffic in London raises issues of the greatest importance. The Government are considering very carefully the recommendations contained in the Report.
  Mr. PETO: May I ask for a reply to the latter part of my question—whether he is prepared to receive a, deputation representative of the localities concerned?
  Colonel ASHLEY: No: I think a deputation would be. premature. The Government must consider this important question before they receive a deputation.

  INDIA OFFICE (MINISTER IN CHARGE).
  Mr. THURTLE(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he can state who will be in charge of the India Office in the absence of the Secretary of State for India in Madeira and of the Under-Secretary of State and the Parliamentary Private Secretary in India?
  The PRIME MINISTER: The Secretary of State for Scotland (Sir J. Gilmour) will be in charge of the India Office during the short absence of my Noble Friend (the Earl of Birkenhead).
  Mr. STEPHEN: May I ask the Prime Minister who will be looking after the affairs of Scotland while the Secretary of State for Scotland is looking after the affairs of India?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I do hope that in Scotland they can look after themselves over the New Year.

  VOTE OF CENSURE (PRIME MINISTER'S SPEECH).
  Mr. J. HUDSON(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he authorised the alteration in the OFFICIAL REPORT of his statement in the Vote of Censure Debate, on the 8th December, that in certain eventualities the Leader of the Opposition would have had with him a large number of the Members of Parliament who are now with the Prime Minister.
  The PRIME MINISTER: Until my attention was drawn to it by the hon. Member, I had not seen any report of my speech either in the OFFICIAL REPORT or in the Press.
  Mr. HUDSON: May I then take it that the report which appeared in the "Times," that "a large number of those who are now with me" may be used by us as correctly expressing the Prime Minister's view at the time he spoke in the House of Commons, and made a gesture?
  Mr. SPEAKER: This is a question of a newspaper report. 1 do not think we can touch the report of the "Times" or any other newspaper.
  Mr. HUDSON: Might I ask the Prime Minister whether he will complain if we use reports of his speech other than the OFFICIAL REPORT, which, in our judgment and recollection, does not represent actually what he said.

  PARLIAMENT (TITLE).
  Mr. HUGH O'NEILL(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether, in connection with the proposal-to amend the King's Title, consideration has also been given to the question of amending the title of Parliament?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Yes, Sir; the point has been considered, and when legislation is introduced next Session to enable the contemplated change in the King's Title to be effected, the Government will take the opportunity of proposing that the title of Parliament should in future be "The Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland."
  Sir JOHN MARRIOTT: May I ask my right hon. Friend if the same style and title will apply to His Majesty the King as to Parliament?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I should not like to give an answer to that question without notice.

  BURGH POLICE (SCOTLAND) BILL,
  "to amend the Burgh Police (Scotland) Acts, 1892 to 1911, the Town Councils (Scotland) Acts,)900 to 1923, and the Law relating to the administration of Burghs in Scotland," presented by Sir JOHN GILMOUR, supported by the Lord Advocate, the Solicitor-General for Scotland, and Major Elliot: to he read a Second time To-morrow, and to he printed. [Bill 215.]
  TRAMWAYS AND LIGHT RAILWAYS (STREET AND ROAD) AND TRACKLESS TROFLEY UNDERTAKINGS.
  Order [14th December] for a Return relative thereto read, and discharged.—[Colonel Ashley.]

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to,
  Amendments to,
  Legitimacy Bill [Lords],
  Sale of Food (Weights and Measures)
  Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
  Electricity (Supply) Bill,
  That they do not insist on their Amendments to the Electricity (Supply) Bill to which the Commons have disagreed.
  That they agree to the Amendments made by the Commons to one of their Amendments, and to the Amendments made by the Commons to the Bill in lieu of certain other of their Amendments, without Amendment.

  MONEYLENDERS BILL.
  Minutes of the Proceedings of Standing Committee A on the Bill; to be printed. [No. 166.]
  CONSOLIDATION BILLS.
  Special Report from the Joint Committee in respect of the Poor Law Bill [Lords] (pending in the Lords), brought up, and read; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 167]
ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  MERCHANDISE MARKS (IMPORTED GOODS) BILL.
  Order for Consideration of Lords Amendments read.
  Motion made, and Question, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered," put, and agreed to.—[Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister.]
  Lords Amendments considered accordingly.

  MERCHANDISE MARKS (IMPORTED GOODS) BILL.

    CLAUSE 1.—(Imported goods bearing name or trade mark of British manufacturer or trailer not to be sold unless accompanied by indication of origin.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In page 1, line 7, leave out "distribute by way of advertisement," and insert, "by way of advertising goods of some other kind distribute."
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    The object of this Amendment is to make sure that samples of goods which it is proposed to sell later are not included.
    Mr. BASIL PETO: I would like the President of the Board of Trade to elaborate what he has said. It certainly seems to me that these are very limiting words. We ought not to agree to this Lords Amendment, because to leave out the words "distribute by way of advertisement" in order to insert "by way of advertising goods of some other kind" would seem to leave out what it was part of the purpose of the Bill to prohibit.
    Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I can assure my hon. Friend that the words as printed in another place exactly express what was the intention of this House. There are cases where a firm of distillers, say, may send out matchboxes and so forth, and if the words had stood as they were when the Bill left this House, it
    2966
    might possibly be contended in a Court of law that this Clause also applied to an ordinary trader sending out samples of his own goods. The words put in in another place make it quite clear what was intended.
    Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: A printer sending out advertisements of his publications could send out foreign printed matter to advertise his own goods, or a man making an article might take a similar article of foreign manufacture and use it as an advertisement. I am glad to sec that the Lords have made a considerable widening in the much too restricted terms of the Clause.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Subsequent Lords Amendments down to page 7, line 26, agreed to.

    CLAUSE 5. —(Offences.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In page 8, lines 5 and 6, leave Jut "draft of the Order is laid before Parliament" and insert "Order was made."
    Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    This is a point of substance. It was represented, and I think with reason, that the period of time allowed in the case of advertisements in the course of preparation was inadequate. This Amendment gives the date when the Order is made, which is not less than 20 Parliamentary days after the Order has been laid. I think it is a not unreasonable compromise, and I ask the House to accept it.
    Mr. HARRIS: We are truly grateful for this concession, for which, on this side of the House, we fought right through the Committee and the Report stage.
    Captain BENN: In connection with this Amendment, I would like to remind the President of the Board of Trade of the extremely convincing argument which carried with him the whole mass of the Conservative party, and proved that this Amendment was necessary.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Subsequent Lords Amendments down to page 12, line 15, agreed to.

    CLAUSE 10.—(Interpretation.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In page 12, line 16, at the end, insert:
    "Provided that, in the case of goods produced or manufactured in the United Kingdom which have undergone in any particular country abroad any treatment or process resulting in a substantial change in the goods, the indication of origin may at the option of the person applying it be given either by using in conjunction with the word 'foreign' or the word 'Empire,' as the case requires, words descriptive of that treatment or process or by a definite indication that the treatment or process was undergone in that particular country."
    Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    I think this is quite a reasonable provision. It is to the effect that, if after their manufacture, there has been any treatment or process abroad resulting in a substantial change in the goods, the indication of origin may, at the option of the person applying it, be given in conjunction with the word "foreign," by using words descriptive of the process, or the word "Empire," as the case may be.
    Mr. HARRIS: Apparently this is a concession as a result of the outcry of public opinion on this point—
    Sir P. CUNLIFFE - LISTER: I promised this Amendment when the Bill was before the House.
    Mr. HARRIS: That may be so, but the concession has been made as the result of a general outcry, because it was found that a substantial injury to trade was going to be the result in the case of the textile trades of Lancashire and Yorkshire. I am still very doubtful as to the value of this concession, and, after all, it is only a paper concession. Is it likely that a textile manufacturer is going in for a long lecture on the method of construction and processes which have been gone through in various countries? That would only mean giving an advertisement to that particular process; it would not help the sale of the article in question. A man will not be likely to buy velveteen which has two or three sentences of description upon it.
    A trader will not be compelled to put on this description, but I am sure if he does he will interfere with the sale of the article. Although apparently this seems to be a concession I doubt whether it
    2968
    will have any commercial value, and I do not think it will protect Lancashire very much from this interference with the Lancashire trade. At the present moment Lancashire is going through a very bad time indeed, and December will probably be the worst month for that county. Notwithstanding this the only message of hope which comes from the President of the Board of Trade is that in future, in regard to goods dyed abroad, they will have a long rigmarofe of descriptions to go through. I do not think this will help industry, and if this is the way in which the President of the Board of Trade expects to give assistance to British industries, then I am afraid there is very little hope for British trade being helped at all.
    Captain BENN: Has the right hon. Gentleman consulted any of the Lancashire interests as to whether this meets the case raised by them in connection with trade in the East?
    Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I do not think that point matters very much in this connection, but we have tried to meet the desires of those who spoke for the trade. The Bill will not be operative if the objections are serious.
    Captain BENN: I think this is precisely the type of legislation to which this House ought to take exception The other day the Lord Chief Justice drew attention in a recent speech to this class of legislation, and he said too much power was being left to Government Departments. We had the other day an amusing appeal case because an Order in Council had not been made under the terms of an Act. I maintain that the answer given by the right hon. Gentleman is very unsatisfactory. Practically he says: "There may be objections to this proposal, but I may tell you that the Bill will not become operative if those objections are serious." That is not a proper attitude to take up on this question, and I suggest that he should find words which would really meet this very serious difficulty, or else drop this part of the proposal altogether. No one will deny that in the case of dyed goods it would be very hard for Lancashire if throughout the East dyed goods were distributed with the words upon them, "Dyed in Germany." That must necessarily have the

    2969
    result of diverting trade from this country to Germany. I think this is a very unsatisfactory way of dealing with a matter of such importance.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Remaining Lords Amendments agreed to.

  HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) BILL.
  Order for consideration of Lords Amendments read.
  Motion made, and Question, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered," put, and agreed to.—[Mr. Neville Chamberlain.]
  Lords Amendments considered accordingly.

  HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) BILL.

    CLAUSE 2.—(Power of local authorities to make grants or loans.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In line 27, at the end, insert:
    "Provided that—

    (i) where loans are to be made to the same person in respect of two or more dwellings, those loans may, if it is so agreed between that person and the local authority, be secured by a single mortgage charged on all the dwellings jointly, and where two or more loans are so secured this Sub-section shall have effect as if the several loans constituted a single loan and as if the expression 'the dwelling' included a reference to the several dwellings in respect of which the loans are made; and

    (ii) if so agreed as aforesaid, a loan may be secured on lands of which the site of the dwelling in respect of which the loan is being made forms part, but nothing in this provision shall authorise the local authority to lend more than the sum which they would have been authorised to lend had the loan been secured only on the dwelling."

    The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Chamberlain): I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    The Amendment is divided into two parts. The first part arises out of a point which was raised in Committee upstairs, and is designed to enable the owner who is applying in respect of more than one dwelling to offer a single mortgage, instead of a number of mortgages. The second part follows the practice in Scotland, and allows land which is not part of the curtilage of the dwelling to be brought in as additional security for the local authority.
    Question put, and agreed to.

    CLAUSE 3. — (Conditions attaching to dwellings in respect of which assistance has been given by way of grant.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In page 7, line 3, at the end, insert
    "and any tenant of the dwelling shall, on being so required in writing by the owner, furnish to him such information as he may reasonably require for the purpose of enabling him to comply with this condition;"
    Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    This Amendment also confirms an undertaking which I gave in Committee, Without this Amendment, it would be impossible, where there is a sub-tenant, for the owner to get the information which is necessary to enable him to give the local authority the certificate required by the paragraph.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Remaining Lords Amendment agreed to.

  JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS (REGULATION OF REPORTS) BILL.
  Order for Consideration of Lords Amendments read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered."—(Major Kindersley).
  Captain BENN: Would I be in order in calling attention to the very hurried procedure which has been adopted in connection with this Bill and which has called for special comment in another place?
  Mr. SPEAKER: No, the hon. and gallant Member must wait for his elevation to another place.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Lords Amendments considered accordingly.

  JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS (REGULATION OF REPORTS) BILL.

    CLAUSE 1.—(Restriction, on publication of reports of judicial proceedings.)
    Lords Amendment:
    In page 2, line 21, at the end, insert
    "printing of any pleading, transcript of evidence or other document for use in connection with any judicial proceedings or the communication thereof to persons concerned in the proceedings, or to the printing or."
    Major KINDERSLEY: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
    This is little more than a drafting Amendment. It was felt that the Clause as it stood would not protect the printer who printed the pleadings and other documents in connection with the proceedings, and that he might be liable for a technical offence. Therefore, the Home Office asked that this Amendment might be inserted in another place.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Remaining Lords Amendment agreed to.

  BETTING OVERSEAS (PROHIBITION) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged; Bill withdrawn.
  The remaining Government Orders were read and postponed.
  Mr. SPEAKER: A Royal Commission is appointed for half-past Two o'Clock, and I will leave the Chair until that hour, unless a message be received earlier requiring the attention of the House to any further Lords Amendments. But in any case I will cause the bells to be rung.
  Sitting suspended at Thirteen Minutes after One o'Clock.
  Mr. SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Twenty-five Minutes after Two o'Clock.

  ROYAL ASSENT.
  Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
  The House went, and, having returned,
  Mr. SPEAKER(standing in the Clerk,' place at the Table): I have to acquaint the House that the House has been to the House of Peers, where a Commission under the Great Seal was read, authorising the Royal Assent to

  1. Industrial Assurance (Juvenile Societies) Act, 1926.

  2. Parks Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1926.

  2972

  3. Lead Paint (Protection against Poisoning) Act, 1926.

  4. Local Government (County Boroughs and Adjustments) Act, 1926.

  5. Horticultural Produce (Sales on Commission) Act, 1926.

  6. Indian and Colonial Divorce Jurisdiction Act, 1926.

  7. Naval Reserve (Officers) Act, 1926.

  8. Workmen's Compensation Act, 1926.

  9. Public Health (Smoke Abatement) Act, 1926.

  10. Supreme Court of Judicature of Northern Ireland Act, 1926.

  11. Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1926.

  12. University of London Act, 1926.

  13. Rating (Scotland) Act, 1926.

  14. Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1926.

  15. Expiring Laws Continuance Act, 1926.

  16. Burgh Registers (Scotland) Act, 1926.

  17. Electricity (Supply) Act, 1926.

  18. Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1926.

  19. Merchandise Marks Act, 1926.

  20. Wireless Telegraphy (Blind Persons Facilities) Act, 1926.

  21. Roman Catholic Relief Act, 1926.

  22. Housing (Rural Workers) Act, 1926.

  23. Prisons (Scotland) Act, 1926.

  24. Penal Servitude Act, 1926.

  25. Coroners (Amendment) Act, 1926.

  26. Legitimacy Act, 1926.

  27. Judicial Proceedings (Regulation of Reports) Act, 1926.

  28. Palestine and East Africa Loans Act, 1926.

  29. Sale of Food (Weights and Measures) Act, 1926.

  30. Perth Corporation Water Order Confirmation Act, 1926.

  31. Stornoway Harbour Order Confirmation Act, 1926.

  32. Forth and Clyde Navigation (Castlecary and Kirkintilloch Road Bridges) Order Confirmation Act, 1926.

  33. Glasgow Goldsmiths Company Order Confirmation Act, 1926.

  34. Barnet District Gas and Water Act, 1926.

  And to the following Measures passed under the Provisions of the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919:

  1. Episcopal Pensions Measure, 1926.

  2. Benefices (Ecclesiastical Duties) Measure, 1926.

  PROROGATION.

    HIS MAJESTY'S MOST GRACIOUS SPEECH.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I have further to acquaint the House that the Lord High Chancellor, being one of the High Commissioners, delivered His Majesty's Most Gracious Speech to both Houses of Parliament, in pursuance of His Majesty's Command, as followeth:
    My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
    I have had great pleasure in acceding to the wishes of My Ministers in the Commonwealth of Australia that My Son and Daughter-in-Law should visit Australia for the inauguration of the new Federal Capital at Canberra. They will extend their visit to New Zealand at the invitation of My Ministers in that Dominion, and in the course of their journeys will also be able to see several of the Colonies. The occasion of thus Personally renewing the ties of affection which unite My Family with the peoples of the different parts of the Empire will, I know, be as welcome to the Duke and Duchess of York to-day as it was to the Queen and Myself more than twenty-five years ago.
    I have rejoiced at the opportunity given by the recent meeting of the Imperial Conference to welcome in London so many of My Ministers from the Dominions, and the Representatives of the Empire of India. The report of the proceedings of the Conference, which has recently been presented to you, bears eloquent testimony to the spirit of good will and mutual understanding which marked its deliberations. I am confident that its work will prove of lasting value to all parts of My Empire.
    The situation in China is being watched by My Government with the closest attention. Our Country is animated by strong sympathy for that vast majority of the Chinese people whose aspirations are for settled conditions, for a new era of prosperity and
    2974
    for friendly relations with the foreign Powers.
    Members of the House of Commons,
    I thank you for the provision you have made for the public service.
    My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
    During the greater part of the present year the Nation has lived in the shadow of the most protracted and ruinous industrial conflict in its history. When last addressing you I expressed the earnest hope that the Report of the Commissioners upon the economic condition of the coal industry would, with the willing co-operation of all concerned, pave the way to a. peaceful solution of this great social and economic problem. This hope was not fulfilled. It remains to us now to unite in effacing all bitter memories of the past, and to set our eyes steadfastly upon the future, inspired by a common impulse towards genuine fellowship and sustained endeavour, upon which alone the prosperity and happiness of My People can be firmly based.
    The improvement in housing accommodation continues. A larger number of new houses have been completed than in any previous year. In order to make available to rural workers further and better accommodation at rents adapted to their means Parliament has provided from public moneys grants for the reconstruction of existing houses and buildings in rural areas.
    By the passing of the Electricity (Supply) Bill an important and overdue step has been taken towards extending the provision of electrical energy throughout Great Britain.
    I have given assent to a measure to provide in suitable cases for marking imported agricultural produce and manufactured goods with an indication of origin. This measure will enable the purchasing community to give a preference to goods and produce of this country and of other parts of the Empire.
    A Bill has also been passed for preventing short weight and measure in the retail sale of foodstuffs.
    Bills have also been passed to unify and simplify the rating system of Scotland and to extend the right of appeal in criminal cases in Scotland.
    A number of Bills relating to the agricultural industry have received My assent, including a measure to extend facilities for small and cottage holdings.
    It is My earnest prayer that the blessing of the Almighty may rest upon all your past and coming labours.
    Then a Commission for Proroguing the Parliament was read in the House of Lords.
    After which The LORD CHANCELLOR said:
    MY LORDS AND MEMBERS,—By virtue of His Majesty's Commission under the Great Seal, to us and other Lords directed, and now read, we do, in His Majesty's Name and in obedience to His Majesty's Commands, Prorogue this Parliament to Tuesday, the Eighth day of February, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven, to be then here holden; and this Parliament is accordingly Prorogued until Tuesday, the Eighth day of February, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven.
    End of the Second Session (opened Tuesday, 2nd February, 1926) of the Thirty-fourth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in the Seventeenth year of the Reign of His Majesty King George the Fifth.

ROYAL AIR FORCE.
  MACHINES (DESIGNS).
  MACHINES (DESIGNS).
  ITALIAN PARACHUTE.
  ITALIAN PARACHUTE.
  ACCIDENTS.
  ACCIDENTS.
  WEATHER FORECASTING.
  WEATHER FORECASTING.
BRITISH ARMY.
  KING'S OWN SCOTTISH BORDERERS (PRIVATE ARTHUR'S DEATH AND BURIAL).
  KING'S OWN SCOTTISH BORDERERS (PRIVATE ARTHUR'S DEATH AND BURIAL).
ROYAL NAVY.
  HIS MAJESTY'S SHIP "VINDICTIVE" (CATAPULT APPARATUS).
  HIS MAJESTY'S SHIP "VINDICTIVE" (CATAPULT APPARATUS).
  DOCKYARD EMPLOYES (LEAVE).
  DOCKYARD EMPLOYES (LEAVE).
  WELFARE CONFERENCE (ELECTION OF DELEGATES).
  WELFARE CONFERENCE (ELECTION OF DELEGATES).
  WILLESDEN EDUCATION AUTHORITY (GRANT).
  WILLESDEN EDUCATION AUTHORITY (GRANT).
SCOTLAND.
  SLAUGHTER-HOUSE, FORT WILLIAM.
  SLAUGHTER-HOUSE, FORT WILLIAM.
  SCHOOL TEACHERS' SALARIES.
  SCHOOL TEACHERS' SALARIES.
  EMERGENCY REGULATIONS (PROSECUTIONS, GLAMORGAN).
  EMERGENCY REGULATIONS (PROSECUTIONS, GLAMORGAN).
  LADIES' CLOTHING SHOPS (TOUTING).
  LADIES' CLOTHING SHOPS (TOUTING).
  HOME EMPLOYMENT (ADVERTISEMENT).
  HOME EMPLOYMENT (ADVERTISEMENT).
  CRIMINAL STATISTICS (MURDERS).
  CRIMINAL STATISTICS (MURDERS).
  VOTERS' REGISTERS, KINGSTON-UPON-HULL.
  VOTERS' REGISTERS, KINGSTON-UPON-HULL.
  ALIEN DOMESTIC SERVANTS.
  ALIEN DOMESTIC SERVANTS.
  BETTING DUTY.
  BETTING DUTY.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.
  TEMPORARY CLERICAL AND WRITING ASSISTANTS (WOMEN).
  TEMPORARY CLERICAL AND WRITING ASSISTANTS (WOMEN).
  SICK LEAVE.
  SICK LEAVE.
  WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS.
  WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS.
  ESTABLISHED SITUATIONS (MARRIED WOMEN).
  ESTABLISHED SITUATIONS (MARRIED WOMEN).
  ATTENDANTS (NIGHT DUTY).
  ATTENDANTS (NIGHT DUTY).
  BONUS (SUPER CUT).
  BONUS (SUPER CUT).
  ENTERTAINMENT DUTY.
  ENTERTAINMENT DUTY.
  LEGISLATION, 1926 (COST).
  LEGISLATION, 1926 (COST).
  AGRICULTURE (OCCUPYING OWNERS).
  AGRICULTURE (OCCUPYING OWNERS).
TRADE AND COMMERCE.
  IRON AND STEEL WIRE (IMPERIAL PREFERENCE).
  IRON AND STEEL WIRE (IMPERIAL PREFERENCE).
  BRITISH COTTON YARNS, TURKEY (TRADE MARE).
  BRITISH COTTON YARNS, TURKEY (TRADE MARE).
  STATISTICS (FOODSTUFFS).
  STATISTICS (FOODSTUFFS).
  FOOD PRICES.
  FOOD PRICES.
  DOMINIONS (TAXATION AND DEBT)
  DOMINIONS (TAXATION AND DEBT)
  ARREST OF BRITISH SUBJECT, ATHENS.
  ARREST OF BRITISH SUBJECT, ATHENS.
PUBLIC HEALTH.
  TUBERCULOSIS (SPAHLINGER TREATMENT).
  TUBERCULOSIS (SPAHLINGER TREATMENT).
  FOOD PRESERVATIVES (BRYNITE).
  FOOD PRESERVATIVES (BRYNITE).
  VENEREAL DISEASES ACT (CHEMISTS).
  VENEREAL DISEASES ACT (CHEMISTS).
HOUSING.
  HOUSES COMPLETED.
  HOUSES COMPLETED.
  BUILDING MATERIALS (PRICES).
  BUILDING MATERIALS (PRICES).
  NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE.
  NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE.
  SAFEGUARDING OF INDUSTRIES (CARD MATERIAL).
  SAFEGUARDING OF INDUSTRIES (CARD MATERIAL).
UNEMPLOYMENT.
  INSURED PERSONS.
  INSURED PERSONS.
  BENEFIT DISALLOWED.
  BENEFIT DISALLOWED.
  BOROUGH EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE.
  BOROUGH EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE.
  INSURANCE BENEFITS.
  INSURANCE BENEFITS.
  ROSYTH NAVAL BASE (WOMEN WORKERS).
  ROSYTH NAVAL BASE (WOMEN WORKERS).
  WILD BIRDS PROTECTION BILL.
  WILD BIRDS PROTECTION BILL.
TRANSPORT.
  WILTSHIRE MAIN ROAD (WAGES).
  WILTSHIRE MAIN ROAD (WAGES).
  RAILWAY ACCIDENT, EDINBURGH.
  RAILWAY ACCIDENT, EDINBURGH.
  COAL MINING INDUSTRY.
  COAL MINING INDUSTRY.
  TELEPHONE SERVICE (RURAL AREAS).
  TELEPHONE SERVICE (RURAL AREAS).

Preamble
The House met at eleven of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
LEIGHTON BUZZARD GAS ORDER, 1926.
REDDITCH GAS ORDER, 1926.
BRIDGWATER GAS ORDER, 1926.
Report from the Special Orders Committee that no Petition has been presented praying to be heard against the Special Orders, that they have received and considered reports from the Board of Trade upon the Orders, and that there is nothing to which they think it necessary to call the attention of the House: Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
LEIGHTON BUZZARD GAS ORDER, 1926.
REDDITCH GAS ORDER, 1926.
THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH: My Lords, on behalf of the noble Viscount, Lord Peel, I beg to move the Motions standing in his name on the Paper.
Moved, That the Special Orders which were presented on the 25th of November last be approved.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
TORQUAY GAS ORDER, 1926.
LLANERECHFA UPPER ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
TRURO ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
TYNEDALE ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
Report from the Special Orders Committee that no Petition has been presented praying to be heard against the Special Orders, and that there is nothing in these Orders to which they think it necessary to call the attention of the House: Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
BRIDGWATER GAS ORDER. 1926.
TORQUAY GAS ORDER, 1926.
LLANERECHFA UPPER ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
TRURO ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
TYNEDALE ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH: My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the Special Orders which were presented on the 30th of November last be approved.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE EARL OF BALFOUR): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion, of which Notice has been given, relating to the order of business to-day.
Moved, That Standing Order No. XXI be suspended in order that Bills and the consideration of Commons Amendments to Bills may have precedence this day of the Notice standing in the name of the Lord Askwith.—(The Earl of Balfour.)
On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

PATRINGTON SMALL HOLDINGS COLONY.
EARL BEAUCHAMP EARL BEAUCHAMP asked His Majesty's Government whether they are aware of the strong sense of injustice felt by the colonists established at Patrington under the Small Holdings Colonies Act, 1916, as a result of the Government's decision to close down the colony; whether, in view of the large capital loss that will be involved by disposing of the estate and the pledges already given to the ex-Service men by previous Governments, they are prepared to reconsider their decision; or, in the event of their decision being maintained, whether they have made provision for obtaining satisfactory alternative employment or small holdings for the colonists and for paying just compensation where necessary?
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I am much obliged to His Majesty's Government for allowing me to ask this Question at this particular moment. It would be a poor requital if I were to delay your Lordships with a long speech and I do not intend to say anything regarding the policy of having this settlement for ex-soldiers. A good deal might be said if we began to express our opinion on the

1667
judgment of those who originated this settlement at this particular place. Nor do I wish to criticise His Majesty's Government for their decision to close this particular settlement in view of the need for economy, and I confess there is a good deal to be said for their action in this matter. The point on which I wish to lay stress, however, is the compensation which is to be given to these men who, at the invitation practically of His Majesty's Government, went down to Patrington and tried to make that movement a success.
The Minister of Agriculture has been good enough to express on more than one occasion his sympathy for these men and has promised to do what he can to find them suitable employment. I should be very much obliged if the noble Lord, the Parliamentary Secretary, would be good enough to tell me what progress has been made in helping these men, how many men definitely have been helped to other positions, and whether there is a good prospect that the remaining men will be found suitable occupations, so that they may be engaged in employment such as they really desire and that they may be able to leave this settlement to find other engagements without a rankling sense of injustice. I beg to ask the Question of which I have given Notice.
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY of AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (LORD BLEDISLOE): My Lords, the noble Lord's Question has narrowed itself down to a much smaller issue than I thought I should have to deal with to-day. When he says that he does not desire to criticise the closing of the settlement it relieves me of what might have been a somewhat onerous task in explaining to your Lordships the true reason why it was thought desirable to close it. May I say quite frankly, putting it shortly, that we do not in the least contest the view that this settlement has been a failure and a costly failure?
Perhaps I may say, in passing, that I take personal responsibility to a large extent for it because I was asked by the then Minister of Agriculture, Lord Selborne, to get, if possible, a suitable site for a large scale experiment in settling ex-Service men upon small holdings out of which they might have a fair chance
1668
of making a living. This original scheme of a small holdings settlement was, after a few months, and if I may say so after I had ceased personally to have anything to do with it, altered to a scheme of profit-sharing farming; that is to say, farming on a large scale with a prospect and an undertaking to the men that if there were profits they should share in those profits proportionately to their remuneration. Unfortunately, there were no profits, except, I think, for two years; after that there was a series of increasing losses, the losses being due, I may say incidentally, very largely to the rent which, after equipment, had to be charged. When we add to the rent payable by the Ministry to the Commissioners of the Crown Lands the cost of equipment at a very expensive time the total charge is considerably larger than could possibly be charged to the settlement itself per acre.
As regards these men, I should like quite frankly to express on behalf of the Government and on behalf particularly of the Ministry of Agriculture our deep and very genuine regret that the men should find themselves in such an embarrassing position as the result of this costly and unsuccessful experiment. But what I should like to tell the noble Earl—and I believe the men fully understand it—is that even as regards the original settlers the personnel has very largely changed in recent years. There was no Government pledge of permanent employment. Such undertaking as there was was to the effect that these men should have a good farm training and share in the profits if there were any. A good many of these men were in no sense skilled agricultural workers. On the other hand quite a considerable number of them were handymen, who gave good promise of becoming skilled workers with proper training. Moreover, they were not men who had capital sufficient to set themselves up, at any rate at that time, on small holdings of their own.
I do not know whether the noble Earl has seen the very interesting Report of Mr. William Gavin, a man of great experience both in farming and accountancy, who was employed last year by the Ministry of Agriculture to make an independent survey and report upon the settlement to the Ministry. It has been published and I think the noble Earl has

1669
probably seen a copy of it. We cannot leave wholly apart from this issue the question of the cost of continuing the settlement, because, as men of business, we have to consider that to some extent while taking into due account the position of these men who will be displaced by the closing of the settlement. Mr. Gavin estimates that there would be a continuous cost to the Exchequer of something like £4,000 a year to keep the settlement going—that is, for the continued employment of sixty men. Two-thirds of those men, being local men and men of fair experience, should have no difficulty in finding employment with the new tenants who will come to occupy these farms, as used to be the case under the Crown before this settlement was established. In other words, for the employment upon these farms of only twenty men more than would normally be employed, there would be involved an expenditure of something like £200 per man in addition to their normal wages.
I think I can best answer the noble Earl by telling him that a deputation some weeks ago waited upon the Minister of Agriculture from Patrington. It was representative of the Yorkshire branch of the British Legion, and they were invited to inquire and they under-took to inquire amongst the Patrington workers, first of all, how many men desired assistance to obtain employment after Lady Day next when the settlement would be closed down, and, secondly, how many desired to remain in their present houses with the addition of extra land in order to make it an economic proposition if they worked it themselves. As a result of this inquiry the British Legion has recently put forward ten names out of the fifty-five men then employed at Patrington as persons requiring assistance with a view to future employment, and has sent a list of seven or eight men—I think, as a matter of fact, it is eight—who desire to retain their houses with extra land varying from one acre to ten acres. The names of these have been forwarded to the Commissioners of Crown Lands, who have promised to do their best to meet the wishes of these men. One of the ten men I have mentioned has already secured another post.
I think I ought to state that a certain number of these men are not agricultural
1670
workers at all. They are men who are skilled in what I may call non-agricultural employment, such as engine drivers, motor drivers, a carpenter, a wheelwright, a blacksmith and a clerk, all of whom should have no difficulty in securing suitable employment according to their qualifications. The number of the original settlers who are purely agricultural workers is twenty-two only, and the remaining workers, apart from the original workers who have come on to the settlement in recent years, were informed by the present director when they commenced employment that they were taken on as ordinary workers and were not regarded as being on the same footing as the original workers. The total number of the farm workmen whose future employment is uncertain is about ten only, and in relation to these the Ministry is making inquiries through its outdoor officers scattered over the country with a view to obtaining offers of employment with houses for them to occupy.
Moreover—I am sure what I am going to say now will satisfy the noble Earl; this assurance will probably ease his mind more than anything else—we have received authority from the Treasury to pay the removal expenses of any settlers and their families who have the opportunity of securing employment in other parts of the country and this fact has already been notified to each workman living in Patrington. The noble Earl will see that at any rate we are doing our best to secure employment for these men elsewhere and are asking the Commissioners to help us as far as possible in settling on land those who desire to remain and farm on their own account.
LORD OLIVIER: My Lords, in view of what has been said here and in view of some comment in the public Press and elsewhere, which has been unjust, I should like to add a few words to what the noble Lord the Parliamentary Secretary has said. When this scheme was taken in hand it was one of three schemes which were definitely intended to test various kinds of settlements. The Ministry of Agriculture were being pressed at that time to settle more men upon the land and this was one of the three schemes which wore very carefully examined by the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, and the noble Lord opposite. This experiment was to be undertaken in

1671
accordance with a certain method. It was not intended to be in any sense an eleemosynary scheme for persons not able to work in agriculture, and according to my recollection the land was selected very carefully by the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, and my noble friend opposite, with the assistance of advisers, as being land that was not unsuitable. I do not think myself, so far as I can judge, that it was unsuitable land for a settlement such as the noble Lord has suggested. After that scheme had been launched its intention was changed and the system on which it was worked was changed, and that is a matter which I think should be remembered in any criticisms that are passed upon this scheme. It was intended as an experiment on definite lines for a definite purpose and that intention was not carried out.
THE MARQUESS OF LINCOLNSHIRE: My Lords, I should not have pressed this matter upon your Lordships' attention further if it had not been for something that fell from my noble friend the Parliamentary Secretary, who, with his usual chivalry, took some of the responsibility for this ghastly fiasco on his own shoulders, stating that he had selected the land. He could not have selected a better bit of land for small holdings in England. I remember going down there myself eighteen years ago and I concluded that it was the most perfect bit of land in England for small holdings. It is very good land and is intersected with roads on which cottages might be built. It is like an Australian town, intersected with straight roads and it seemed to me an ideal place.
The moment I got there I was met by a gentleman who came up to me and said: "Oh, Lord Carrington, I am glad to see you have come down to see the Crown tenants." It was on Crown land, that portion of England which is nationalised for the use of the State. I asked him: "What sort of land is this?" and he said: "It wants knowing." Well, everybody and everything wants knowing. He volunteered the statement, "It won't grow mustard," and then he took himself off. There was a man sitting under the hedge. I gave him 5s. and I said to him: "What sort of land is this?" He replied: "It is good rich land." I said: "I am told it won't grow mustard." He said: "It
1672
will grow pepper and salt if it is put in at the right time." If this land had been worked on proper principles it must have been a success. I am sure my noble friend will agree with me that no blame can possibly be attached to the officials of the Ministry of Agriculture.
What happened? They put in a man—I will not mention his name, everybody knows it at the office and at Sunk Island. I would like to call your Lordships' attention to a statement made by this gentleman in his Report in 1921. He says:
"There is one aspect of the Ministry's administration to which it is impossible to attach too much importance, and that is that until this work was undertaken the philosophy of small holdings had been incomplete."
He admits that there had been some loss of public money in conducting this experiment, but he was satisfied
"that it had given a new tone and direction to the whole policy of land settlement in this country and would hereafter be found to have been abundantly justified."
There is only one thing to which I want to call the attention of the House. Those who live on the land and by the land and from the land have no use for philosophy. They have no use for agricultural Mussolinis and no use for bucolic Diogenes. If this scheme had been put into the hands of the officials of the Agricultural Department, if it had been worked through the county councils and properly administered by the county councils, and if it had been looked after also by the Commissioners and by the Minister for Agriculture, this ghastly fiasco would not have occurred.
We have heard a great deal about the iniquities of poor old Mr. George Lansbury and his merry men at West Hans. The newspapers have rung with the story of all the money they have wasted. But Mr. George Lansbury did not get £3,000 a year as the administrator received who was put into office over the heads of all the permanent officials. The money at West Ham went into the pockets of those men who were seeking work and finding none. The country is very much indebted to my noble friend, the noble Earl, Lord Beauchamp, for having brought this before your Lordships' House. It has shown how bad a plight the ex-soldiers might have been in if it had not been

1673
for the very satisfactory statement of Lord Bledisloe on the subject. It shows how wrong it is to put ignorant, inefficient men into high places over the heads of men who have forgotten more than these men ever knew. I think the country is indebted to my noble friend Lord Beauchamp for the way in which he has brought forward this dreadful scandal, which I hope will be the last of this sort of thing.
LORD BLEDISLOE: My Lords, I think perhaps with your Lordships' leave, I ought in make one thing perfectly clear. I do not want to suggest for a moment that this land was, as the noble Marquess has been good enough to suggest, wholly suitable for the purposes for which it was originally intended, In fact, I must frankly tell the noble Marquess that it is what is called "silt land," which can produce very line crops in a good season. In fact, although somebody said it would not grow mustard, I found a good crop of mustard growing on some of it. It is quite good land, but inclined to be heavy and liable to run together in wet weather. The great problem was as to whether it would grow potatoes. I discovered before leaving the district that on an adjoining small holding potatoes were being grown, and being grown well, but I still have doubt in my own mind as to whether on a good deal of that land—which, although rich, was nevertheless stiff—potatoes could properly be grown. Potatoes, of course, are a most important crop as far as small holders are concerned.
As regards roads, it is perfectly true that there were roads intersecting the property, but they were soft and had not much metal, and were found to be wholly unsuitable for modern traffic. The result was that at very considerable expense they had to be metalled. I know nothing about the philosophy of small holdings, but I should think that probably if one indulged too much in that sort of philosophy one might lose a great deal of money. Although my own habitation is humble, I have not, like Diogenes, taken to a tub, and I cannot believe that Diogenes at his best would have turned out a very successful farmer.

SMOKE OF ROAD VEHICLES.
THE EARL OF DENBIGHhad given Notice to call attention to the nuisance caused by the volumes of smoke emitted
1674
by steam lorries and tractors and to the dangerous conditions constantly caused Thereby, particularly in foggy weather, and to ask His Majesty's Government why regulations cannot be enacted compelling such engines to use smokeless fuel. The noble Earl said: My Lords, I do not want to detain your Lordships more than a very few minutes, but before the Session closes I do wish to call attention to what I consider to be not only a public nuisance but also, with the present day great increase of motor traction on the roads, an absolute public danger. Anybody who motors about the country or watches the traffic in the streets will have noticed the tremendous growth of steam traction of all sorts in the country. You notice steam tractors going about pulling enormous furniture vans, and trains of two, three or four vehicles with a steam engine in front, which completely block the road. There do not seem to be any regulations with regard to them. They emit most tremendous clouds of smoke; in fact, they leave behind them very often a smoke-cloud which would do justice to a destroyer engaged in naval manæuvres.
The result is that anybody following behind cannot see what is coming. You cannot pass them except at great danger and you get constantly involved in this cloud of smoke. In wet, clamp, foggy weather, when there is not much wind, this smoke hangs about and you get a state of affairs in which you simply cannot get across the road. Personally, I have had one car smashed up—near Bushey—and I have had several narrow escapes. Only two or three days ago, when trying to pass one of these engines, I could not see anything and I had to wait until the clouds blew over, running the risk of being run into meanwhile. These engines are a danger, not merely to motorists but to cyclists and pedestrians. You see people on the tops of omnibuses, in a stream of traffic following behind these engines, putting their heads down to try to avoid the smoke and sparks which are emitted. I was following one of them the other night and the sparks were worthy of a miniature volcano. I think this sort of thing constitutes a real danger to inflammable matter in hay-carts, or anything of that sort, that may be passing. Going through the villages, too, one sees that upper rooms with the

1675
windows opened are filled with smoke. In fact, the whole thing is a public nuisance.
Nobody wishes to interfere with cheap and effective transport in the streets and about the country, but I submit that this nuisance is absolutely unnecessary, that there are forms of smokeless fuel which can be enjoined by regulation and that something can be done to obviate what I regard as a continual and growing danger. I want to ask His Majesty's Government whether the authorities cannot take the matter in hand and issue appropriate Regulations.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (VISCOUNT PEEL): My Lords, the law respecting mechanically-propelled road vehicles is somewhat complicated, owing to there being one law for the heavier types of vehicles, which are known as locomotives, and another law for the lighter types of vehicles, known as light locomotives, which are again subdivided into motor cars and heavy motor cars. As regard locomotives, vehicles exceeding 7¼ tons in weight unladen are locomotives and are invariably vehicles of the tractor type and in most cases use solid fuel—that is, coal. As regards use and construction, these vehicles fall within the purview of the Locomotives Acts. Section 30 of the Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878, enacts:—
"that every locomotive used on any turn-pike road or highway shall be constructed on the principle of consuming its own smoke; and any person using any locomotive not so constructed, or not consuming, so far as is practicable, its own smoke, shall be liable to a fine not exceeding £5 for every day in which such locomotive is used on a turnpike road or highway."
Similar provision is made as to Scotland by the Locomotives (Amendment) (Scotland) Act, 1878.
In a prosecution for this offence, if the emission of smoke is proved the defendant can say that the locomotive is constructed on the principle of consuming its own smoke and can proceed to submit that it does so, so far as is practicable. This involves proof that the apparatus to secure the consumption of the smoke is in order and properly operating, and that the fuel is of the proper description and quality. If he can establish both these facts, the prosecution must fail.
As regards light locomotives, until the passing of the Locomotives on Highways
1676
Act, 1896, all mechanically-propelled road vehicles were "locomotives." That Act withdrew from the operation of the Locomotives Acts the lighter types of vehicles and these vehicles were designated "light locomotives." The definition was altered to "motor car" by the Motor Car Act, 1903, and, by subsequent Orders, motor cars were again subdivided into "motor cars" and "heavy motor cars." Steam vehicles falling within the definition of light locomotive are all, in fact, heavy motor cars and comprise, (1), the familiar steam wagon such as the Foden or Sentinel, and (2), the lighter forms of tractors or traction engines. These vehicles use coal as fuel. Under Section 1 of the Act of 1896, a light locomotive is defined as—
"a vehicle which inter alia is so constructed that no smoke or visible vapour is emitted therefrom, except from any temporary or accidental cause."
It is clear that, unless the vehicle is so constructed as to emit no smoke or visible vapour under normal conditions, it will be outside the definition of light locomotive and will be, in consequence, a locomotive and subject to all the laws governing ordinary heavy locomotives.
It will be seen that the existing law as regards the emission of smoke by road vehicles, though clumsy, is not inadequate. The law possibly requires strengthening to deal with the correlated subject of the emission of sparks. The Minister of Transport proposes to deal with the matter in the Bill for the better regulation and control of road vehicles which he hopes shortly to introduce. It is proposed under this Bill to repeal the older Acts dealing with locomotives on highways and to substitute simpler and more effective machinery for the control of road vehicles generally.
Coming to the use of bad fuel, I may say that Regulations could hardly be directed towards compelling the owners of steam lorries and tractors to use any particular type of fuel. A Regulation must deal with effects rather than causes. In the event of a prosecution the owner of the vehicle may be called upon to show that he used, so far as was practicable, the most suitable fuel for his engine. As regards the number of complaints during the past few months about smoky and objectionable road locomotives and heavy motor cars driven by

1677
steam, it is understood that normally all steam road vehicles using solid fuel, whether locomotives or heavy motor cars, use the class of fuel known as "smokeless coal," but during the recent coal stoppage the owners of steam vehicles have had to make shift with whatever coal they could obtain. As a result these vehicles have undoubtedly been causing considerable inconvenience to other road users, but there is every reason to suppose that this state of affairs will rapidly improve as supplies of suitable coal become procurable. It is possible, therefore, that the noble Earl who has raised this subject has been another of the unconscious victims of the coal strike.
The Public Health (Smoke Abatement) Bill which has passed your Lord ships' House and is now before the Commons would, as at present drafted, apply to railway locomotives and to road vehicles burning solid fuel. If the Bill becomes law it will be possible to take action under it regarding road vehicles which emit smoke or sparks to such an extent as to constitute a nuisance. Procedure under the Bill is not, however, suited to vehicles which move from place to place, and any amendment of the existing law which may be necessary will probably be most conveniently and appropriately effected under the proposed Road Vehicles Bill.
LORD NEWTON: My Lords, I do not know whether my noble friend is satisfied with the answer which he has just received, but it appeared to me to be as striking a specimen of an unsatisfactory official utterance as anybody could well imagine. What my noble friend the First Commissioner of Works has done, with his usual artfulness, is to read out a lot of matter connected with obsolete Acts which have really very little bearing upon the point and to tell my noble friend, as I expect many other people will be told in connection with many other questions in the future, that the whole fault lies with the recent coal strike. I have no doubt that this will form a convenient excuse for doing nothing whatsoever for years to come.
The question to which my noble friend Lord Denbigh has called attention really represents an almost intolerable nuisance. These vehicles are triple offenders: they break up the roads, they impede traffic
1678
and they produce a smoke which is much more objectionable than any other smoke because it is emitted on a level with the other users of the road. One would have thought that this was the kind of thing that would have been dealt with in a Smoke Abatement Bill, and, in a Bill which I introduced a good many years ago and which, I think, was a much better Bill than that which has just been passed by the Government, this particular nuisance was dealt with. I did not attempt to move an Amendment to the present Bill because I knew perfectly well that I should only meet with opposition, prompted, no doubt, by some obstructive official at the Ministry of Health.
It is perfectly obvious that this is a matter which ought to be dealt with by the Ministry of Health, and yet it will be gathered from the statement of my noble friend that it has been shuffled on to the. Ministry of Transport in consequence of two obsolete Acts, dating, I think, from 1878 and 1896. Obviously my noble friend is going to get very little satisfaction out of the Ministry of Transport. If he will condescend to take my advice, he will not rely upon the somewhat nebulous promises that he has received from inv noble friend, but he will introduce a simple Bill himself—a very easy thing to do—and keep on worrying them with his Bill until eventually his views are adopted. That is the best advice I can give to my noble friend on the present occasion, and I trust that he will not be daunted by the cold water thrown upon his proposal to-day, but will continue his crusade.
LORD OLIVIER: My Lords, the noble Viscount is singularly unfortunate if he thinks that this evil only dates from the time of the coal strike. An intolerable nuisance has grown up not only in London but on the country roads from these vehicles which throw out volumes of impenetrable smoke and sparks from their engines, and we are not able to do anything with them under the law because it is said that they are fitted with proper appliances for consuming their own smoke. They do not do so, and if the present laws do not give adequate power to prosecute the law should be amended so as to make the actual emission of this thick impene-

1679
trable smoke and sparks an offence, and so prevent it. It is a matter to be dealt with immediately, and not dealt with on the presumption that the vehicles have proper machinery, because they have not.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I was under the impression that I had given a satisfactory answer, but apparently I entirely failed in that respect. I will certainly report to my right hon. friend the Minister of Transport the strong feeling which exists in your Lordships' House on this question.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I should like to assure the noble Viscount that his answer was most unsatisfactory. I have had all sorts of complaints from many people who have strongly urged me to bring the matter up, and to press it, and we shall not allow the matter to rest here.

LEGITIMACY BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day read for the consideration of Commons Amendment.
Moved, That the Commons Amendment be now considered.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENT.
[The reference is to Bill No. 91.]
Clause 6, page 4, line 4, at end insert as as a new subsection:
("( ) Where the marriage leading to the legitimation of a child took place before the fourth day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-six, and the father of the child died before that date, the child shall, for the purpose of determining rights to pension or additional allowance under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act, 1925, be deemed to have been a child of the marriage living at that date:
Provided that nothing in this subsection shall confer any right to claim any payment in respect of any period prior to the date of legitimation.")
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT CAVE): My Lords, there is only one Commons Amendment to this Bill. I think it is quite a reasonable one, but it requires a little explanation. Its object is to provide for a difficulty which might arise under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act of 1925. That Act, which applies both to England and Scotland, does provide in
1680
Section 44 (4) that where a child has been legitimated by the subsequent marriage of its parents, the child shall, for the purposes of the Act, be taken as a child born of the marriage, but a difficulty might arise as to the rights of a widow in a particular case. The Act of last year provides for the payment of a pension to a widow of a man who died before the commencement of that Act—namely, January 4, 1926, bat only in certain conditions, and one of those conditions is contained in paragraph (c) of Section 18 of the Act of last year. That section says:
"A widow's pension shall be payable only if the widow has not remarried before the commencement of this Act, and if, at the commencement of this Act there is living at least one child of the marriage, or of any former marriage of either parent, under the age of fourteen."
Therefore in order that the widow may be entitled to a pension there must have been living at the date of the commencement of that Act at least one child of the marriage under 14, and legitimation under this Act cannot come into operation until the commencement of this Act—namely January, 1927, and the presumption would be that the widow would not become qualified for pension under the Act of 1925 in respect of an illegitimate child living in January, 1926 although that child would become legitimated under this Bill. That is the difficulty which this Amendment is intended to meet, and it is provided that in that case the child shall, for the purpose of determining the rights to pension under the Act of 1925, be deemed to be a child of the marriage, living at that date. It is a reasonable proposal, and I move that this House doth agree with the Commons Amendment.
Moved, That this House cloth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) BILL.
Order of the Day read for the consideration of Commons Amendments and Commons Reasons for disagreeing to certain of the Lords Amendments.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I move that these Amendments and Reasons be now considered. The House of Commons

1681
have accepted thirty-eight of the Amendments that your Lordships made in the Electricity Bill; they have made Amendments to three of your Amendments; and they have declined to accede to four. On the whole I think, therefore, that the bulk of your Lordships' Amendments have been accepted, and I do not propose myself to quarrel with any of the changes made in another place. I only express my regret on one. With regard to the financial clause, Clause 27, some of your Lordships were very anxious that a strengthening phrase should be inserted as regards the guarantee of £33,500,000 to be given by the Treasury. They therefore inserted the words "and subject to such conditions." I think they are very sensible words, and could do no possible harm, but for some reason they were claimed to be a breach of privilege. Another place stood quite stiffly on its privilege, although I think it might well have accepted the suggestion made by your Lordships. Of course I could not ask your Lordships, on the grounds I have mentioned, to disagree with the Commons. I move that the Commons Amendments and Reasons be now considered.
Moved, That the Commons Amendments and Reasons be now considered.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
[The references are to Bill No. 168.]
Page 1, line 25, leave out ("which he may hold for his own benefit") and insert ("in which he may be beneficially interested").
The Commons disagree to the above Amendment but have made the following Amendment to the words so restored to the Bill:
After ("hold")insert("in his own name or in the name of a nominee").
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I move that your Lordships do not insist on this Amendment. It is rather a small matter, but I understand that the proposition which your Lordships made possibly goes a little too far. It might affect securities comprised in a marriage settlement and the trustees might not sell and therefore an individual, entirely against his will, would be prevented from sitting on the Board.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon its Amendment and agrees with the
1682
Commons in the Amendment proposed in lieu thereof.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 3, line 8, at, end insert:
("(11) Where the chairman or other member of the Board becomes disqualified for holding office or is absent from the meetings of the Board for snore than six months consecutively, except for some reason approved by the Minister of Transport, or fails to comply with the foregoing provisions, of this section, the Minister of Transport shall forthwith declare the office to be vacant, and shall notify the fact in such manner as he thinks fit, and thereupon the office shall become vacant.")
The Commons disagree to the above amendment and propose the following Amendment in lieu thereof:
Page 2, line 17,
("( ) Where the chairman or other member of the Board becomes disqualified for holding office or is absent from the meetings of the Board for more than six months consecutively, except for some reason approved by the Minister of Transport, or fails to comply with the foregoing provisions of this section, the Minister of Transport shall forthwith declare the office to be vacant, and shall notify the fact in such manner as he thinks fit, and thereupon the office shall become vacant.")
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, this Amendment is not at all important. It is only putting a paragraph in another place, and is therefore really a matter of drafting. I move that your Lordships do not insist on your Amendment, and agree to the Commons Amendment.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon its Amendment, and agrees with the Commons in the Amendment proposed in lieu thereof.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 23, line 39, after ("manner") insert ("and subject to such conditions")
The Commons disagree to the above Amendment for the following Reason:
"Because it would affect the administration of public funds and the Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting the above Reason may be deemed sufficient"
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, this Amendment is the one that I have just commented upon—namely, the insertion of the words "and subject to such conditions". I do not wish to add anything

1683
to the observations which I have made, and I move that your Lordships do not insist upon your Amendment.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon the said Amendment.—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD ASKWITH: My Lords, I should like to say a word upon this. I moved the Amendment for my noble friend Lord Danesfort. He had pressed it very hard before and it was accepted here by the Government. It then goes down to the Commons, the question being the power of the Treasury to guarantee loans to the Board. The words previously in the Bill, before the Amendment was inserted, were "in such manner" and my noble friend Lord Danesfort proposed to insert "and subject to such conditions." What happened? The Attorney - General moves and says that he desires, with the concurrence of the Government, to accept the Amendment. The Speaker then interposes as follows:
"I wish to call the attention of the House to this Amendment. It is a privilege Amendment. It proposes to vary the conditions on which the guarantee of the loan can be given".
Immediately the Attorney-General says:
"I beg to move that this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment".
This is one of those cases where, in regard to what appears to be a perfectly innocuous Amendment, the Speaker—of whom. I wish to speak with all the great respect due to him—appears to have a Bill gone through and to nose around and to smell out a breach of privilege.
It is almost impossible for this House to make sensible alterations in any of these Bills which at all touch upon finance even in the most remote manner, without this question being brought up in this way, whereupon everyone at once runs away from what is supposed to be a breach of privilege. It only shows the importance of the matter being settled as between the two Houses and some opportunity being given for reasonable Amendments to be moved in this House.
VISCOUNT ULLSWATER: My Lords, I regret that the noble Lord should have made the observations which he did, which seemed rather to reflect upon the Speaker of the House of Commons.
LORD ASKWITH: No.
VISCOUNT ULLSWATER: The noble Lord talked about smelling and nosing round to find out something. Why, that is the Speaker's duty, that is what he is there for. He is there to protect the privileges of the Commons against the Lords, and it is his duty, and always was my duty, as soon as Amendments came down from the Lords, to investigate them very carefully to see whether they did or did not violate the old privileges and traditions of the House of Commons, which were that they, and they alone, had to deal with questions of grants of money. I can assure Sour Lordships' House that as long as you endeavour to impose shackles, or conditions, or restraints upon the grants of money which come from the Treasury, and which are voted by the other House, you are beating your heads against a stone wall; and it has been the duty, and it always will be the duty, of the Speaker of the House of Commons to protect the House of Commons against such Amendments as those, even though they may be accepted by the Government.
LORD OLIVIER: My Lords, I supported the Amendment of Lord Danesfort, but on both occasions I expressed a doubt whether it was not entirely a matter far the other House. Consequently, in view of the position that has been taken, we on these Benches cannot for a moment dissent from the view taken by the Commons.
LORD GAINFORD: My Lords, it was open to His Majesty's Government, in another place, in a case of this kind, to move to have the privilege of the Commons waived, if they thought it expedient, and I think it is rather a pity on the present occasion that they did not exercise that right.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD): My Lords, I rise, not to take part in a discussion of the merits of this question, of which, I am afraid, I am not in a position to speak, but merely to say that I entirely agree with what has just fallen from Lord Gainford on the general principle. It would be almost impertinent to disagree with the noble Viscount, Lord Ullswater, on any question of procedure in the House of Commons,

1685
of which, of course, he is a past master. It is perfectly true, no doubt, that it is the duty of the Speaker to call the attention of the House of Commons to any Amendment which is, in his judgment, a breach of their privileges, but it is also, as I am sure Lord Ullswater will agree, quite a common practice for the House of Commons to say that in the circumstances they do not propose to insist on their privilege, and that they will agree to any Amendment which has been suggested from this House. So far as I know there is no limit to their power of not insisting in a particular case. It is not a question whether the Government, should do it or should not do it; it is a question entirely for the House itself to take whatever action it likes on the Motion to any member.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I will not comment on, or criticise, what has been said by my noble friend Lord Ullswater about the privileges and rights of the House, about which he knows much more than I do, but I do criticise and venture to differ from the observations that he has made as applying to some action that I took as regards this Amendment. He says this House will always fail if it attempts to put shackles on the rights of another place to deal with finance. I never attempted anything of the kind, but I affirm the right, of this House to make Amendments and suggestions, which can go to the other House, and the other House then has the right to deal with them as it likes, or to assert its privilege; but it ought not to be supposed that, this House has no right to deal with these things. It has a right to put in the Amendments. And, moreover, I most carefully stated my position when I dealt with the Amendment. I did not say exactly that I accepted it on behalf of the Government; what I said was that I was quite ready that the Amendment should go in and take its chance in another place. I used those words advisedly, and they are not open, I think, to the criticisms of my noble friend.
LORD ASKWITH: My Lords, may I ask leave, in view of one phrase in Lord Ullswater's speech, to say that I must entirely disclaim any suggestion that I was disrespectful to the Speaker in what he has done. I purposely used words
1686
which showed that I was not attacking the action of the Speaker from a personal point of view.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 29, line 14, leave out from ("supply") to ("is") in line 16.
The Commons disagree to the above Amendment for the following Reason:
"Because it is not expedient that the provision in question should apply except in cases where the area of supply is a large area, and it is expedient to give the Electricity Commissioners some guidance as to what area is to be deemed adequate by indicating that an area of supply comprising an area less than the whole of the districts of two local authorities is not to be treated as adequate."
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I beg to move that this Howe doth not insist on its Amendment. The House of Commons want to put in again the words deleted by your Lordships, and I think their Reasons are fairly substantial. They want to put in these words again because the clause applies to certain new purchasing terms for new companies, and they want to be quite certain that these are only applied to rather large companies, because obviously they want to get away, as we want to get away, from the parochial system. The words, as now restored, give some guidance to the Commissioners, and direct them as to what companies, in respect to the size and the areas which they cover, are to be subject to these new conditions.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon the said Amendment.—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD ASKWITH: I am not going to object to the changes that have been made. It seems to me that it is not very satisfactory, and that the definition of area is rather crude; but, as this Bill undoubtedly will require many amending Acts for many years to come, it is no use pressing any alteration at this late stage of the Session.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 30, line 23, at end insert:
("(ii) where the area of supply is not situate wholly or mainly within the district of a joint electricity authority but is situate wholly within the district of a single local authority, the right of purchase shall be exercisable by that local authority.")
The Commons disagree to the above Amendment for the following Reason:
"Because it is consequential on the last preceding Amendment to which the Commons have disagreed."
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist upon the said Amendment.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon the said Amendment.—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 33, line 16, at end insert as a new clause:
Supply of electricity to railway companies, &c.
(". Where any authorised undertakers may supply and are supplying within their district or area of supply electricity for haulage or traction to any company or authority being the owners or lessees of a railway, tramway, dock, harbour or canal undertaking situate partly within and partly without that district or area, such authorised undertakers may, subject to such limitations and conditions (if any) as the Minister of Transport may prescribe either generally or in any particular case, so supply electricity to be used for any purposes of such undertaking, whether within or without such district or area of supply, and such company or authority may, subject to such limitations and conditions (if any) as the Minister of Transport may prescribe either generally or in any particular case, use the electricity so supplied for any purposes of their undertaking for which they are entitled to use electricity:
Provided that so such supply shall, without the consent of the Minister of Transport, he used by such company or authority for purposes of lighting, other than the lighting of vehicles or stations and other premises in the occupation of such company or authority.")
The Commons propose to amend the above Amendment as follows:
line 5, leave out ("tramway")
line 7, after ("subject") insert ("to the consent of the Minister of Transport and")
line 8, leave out ("the Minister of Transport") and insert ("he")
line 13, after ("subject") insert ("to the consent of the Minister of Transport and")
lines 13 and 14, leave out ("the Minister of Transport") and insert ("he")
line 18, leave out from ("that") to the end of the clause, and insert ("the Minister of Transport shall not in any case give any such consent until notice
1688
of the application for the consent has been given by advertisement or otherwise in such manner as the Minister may direct, and an opportunity has been given to any person who appears to the Minister to be affected of making representations thereon")
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, these Amendments are not of very great importance. The Amendment made by your Lordships was originally moved by the late Lord Emmott, and the effect of the Commons Amendments is to require that in certain cases the consent of the Minister should be necessary, and to give an opportunity to make representations.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon its Amendment, but agrees with the Commons in the Amendments proposed to the said Amendment—(Viscount Peel.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LORDS AMENDMENT.
Page 35, line 17, at end insert new clause:
Use of electricity by port undertakings, &c.
(". Notwithstanding anything contained in any Act or Order, electricity supplied by any authorised undertaker to any company, body or person owning or working an undertaking being a port, dock or harbour may be used for all or any of the purposes of such undertaking or any part thereof.")
The Commons disagree to the above Amendment for the following Reason:
"Because the provisions of the new clause taken in conjunction with the provisions for the inter-connection of the systems of various electricity undertakers are sufficient to safeguard the interests of dock and harbour authorities.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, the next, and I think the last, Amendment has reference to the use of electricity by port undertakings. I accepted this clause, as the noble Lord knows, on the understanding that it must take its chance in another place. It affects London only, I believe. There were special sections in the Acts of 1925, and I am informed that this Amendment would have the effect of over-riding those sections and upsetting, therefore, a settlement which was made only last year. On that account I am inclined to ask your Lordships not to insist upon the Amendment. On the technical ground of distribution, as the

1689
stations in London under the scheme will be interconnected there is really no necessity to safeguard the Port of London in any other way, and in case of a break-down supplies could be received by it from the general system. On these grounds I move that your Lordships do not insist upon your Amendment.
Moved, That this House doth not insist upon the said Amendment.—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD RITCHIE OF DUNDEE: My Lord, I moved this clause into the Bill on the Committee stage on behalf of the Dock and Harbour Authorities Association generally, but particularly on behalf of the Port of London. The object was to relieve dock and harbour authorities and particularly the Port of London Authority from the monopoly enjoyed by certain municipalities in regard to the supply of electricity in clock areas, a monopoly which was grossly abused in the General Strike last May. I did not think that the railway clause which is referred to in the Commons Reasons would apply to dock and harbour authorities, but the opinion is expressed here that it does so apply. Although I still think that, the provisions of the railway clause do not give proper safeguards to dock and harbour authorities I must be content with this expression of opinion on behalf of the Government and I shall not press the matter any further.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

SALE OF FOOD (WEIGHTS AND MEASURES) BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day read for the consideration of Commons Amendments.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, rather numerous Amendments have been made by the other House to the Sale of Food (Weights and Measures) Bill, but I think none of them is in any opposition to the general principle of the rill as it passed through your Lordships' House. What I understand is that until it had passed through your Lordships' House and the different interests and so on knew that you meant business they do not seem to have awakened: but they made a number of representations as the Bill
1690
was going through another place to which attention has been paid, and Amendments have been moved and inserted in the Bill to meet the difficulties of these different interests. So now it comes before your Lordships again almost in the nature of an agreed Bill.
I think the simplest course would be if, instead of going through these rather tedious Amendments, I summarised quickly what the different Amendments dealt with. There are, for instance, Amendments dealing with the scope of the Bill; that is to say restricting the Bill to retail dealings except as regards pre-packed goods. Obviously, retail dealers cannot be held responsible for pre-packed goods which come from the wholesaler. Then there are different Amendments dealing with allowances for weighing. There are many difficulties, I understand, when no allowance is made; for instance, when people have in their shops just one set of scales they cannot first weigh butter in it and then cheese without deplorable results both for the cheese and the butter. A great many difficulties of that kind have been met owing to representations from different, traders. Then as regards the scale of fixed quantities, That scale, as your Lordships will observe in reading The Amendments, has been considerably extended because certain objects of importance such as self-raising flour and, more important still, oatmeal were sold in quantities that were not included in the Bill and unnecessary complications would have resulted if traders had to change their practice.
Then there is one Amendment of which I think the House will entirely approve; that is, that in cases where Regulations have to be made the Order shall lie upon the Table of both Houses and shall only become valid if it is confirmed by affirmative Resolutions; so that all your Lordships will have an opportunity of speaking on these cases whether they refer to oatmeal, butter or any other substantial commodity of that kind. There is also a certain limitation on the power to prosecute. A great many retail dealers have represented that it is very hard if somebody who is annoyed with them for having done this, that or the other drags them into court on some comparatively frivolous pretext. Therefore, the right of prosecution is confined to the proper

1691
authorities. Subject to these Amendments, I really think that almost everybody is pleased with this measure, which as your Lordships will agree, is a most extraordinary state of things. I beg to move that the Commons Amendments be now considered.
Moved, That the Commons Amendments be now considered.—(Viscount Peel.)
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, perhaps the noble Viscount will tell us what these proper authorities are to whom the right of prosecution is to be confined. It sometimes happens, as I dare say the noble Viscount is aware, that in small boroughs in the country there are a good many local forces at work which do not always make such a person as the local inspector quite free from bias in prosecutions, and I think it might load to unfortunate results if a member of the public were unable to prosecute. Incidentally, the noble Viscount said that the Bill was now a very good Bill. I think it would have been a still better one had he accepted the Amendment I proposed in regard to putting a notice in shopkeepers' windows when they had been fraudulent.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I dare say it would have been a better Bill but it would have been, of course, a much severer one. The local authorities who have some part in the administration of the Bill and have the power of prosecution are such local authorities as borough councils and all those who have the administration of the Weights and Measures Acts. As regards the right of some member of the public to prosecute, no doubt that is taken away under the Bill; on the other hand, if you gave everybody the right to prosecute there would, I suppose, be the difficulties which I have noted. The Bill includes the police authorities as well.
EARL RUSSELL: The police can also prosecute?
VISCOUNT PEEL: Yes.
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS.
[The references are to Bill (No. 147).]
Clause 4, Page 2, leave out lines 4 to 9, and insert ("except that, in the case of articles specified in Part II and Part III of that Schedule, where the article is weighed
1692
for sale in a wrapper or container the weight puported to be sold may include the weight of the wrapper or container if the weight of the wrapper or container does not exceed—

(a) in the case of an article specified in Part II of the Schedule, two-and-a-half drams; and

(b) in the case of an article specified in Part III of the Schedule for parcel not exceeding three pounds in weight, four-and-a-half drams, for a parcel exceeding three pounds but not exceeding seven pounds in weight, three-and-a-half drams, and for a parcel exceeding seven pounds in weight, three drams,

per pound of the article sold.")
Clause 4, page 2, line 14, leave out from the first ("ounces") to ("and") in line 18, and insert ("or in multiples of two ounces up to a limit of eight ounces, in multiples of a quarter of a pound up to a limit of two pounds, in multiples of half a pound up to a limit of four pounds, or in multiples of one pound").
Clause 4, page 2, line 21, leave out from ("the") to the end of line 24 and insert ("minimum net weight of the article contained therein, or, in any case where the weight of the wrapper or container is permitted by the preceding subsection to be included in the weight purported to be sold, of the minimum weight of the article with its wrapper or container").
Clause 4, page 2, line 31, at end insert as a new subsection:
("(3) Any such statement as aforesaid shall not be deemed to be untrue if it is shown that it was true at the time of packing or of importation, whichever was the later, and the original wrapper or container has remained intact.")
Clause 4, page 2, line 32, leave out ("by retail").
Clause 4, page 2, line 41, leave out ("net").
Clause 4, page 2, line 44, leave out ("the net weight thereof") and insert ("a statement of weight").
Clause 4, page 3, line 2, leave out ("export") and insert ("shipment to a place outside Great Britain")
Clause 5, page 3, line 4, leave out ("by retail")
Clause 5, page 3, line 7, leave out ("retail")
Clause 5, page 3, line 8, after ("weight") insert ("on which the purchase price is based")
Clause 5, page 3, line 11, at end insert:
("Provided that where at the request of the purchaser the meat is boned, trimmed, or subjected to any other process involving loss of weight before delivery, and the bones or other material thus removed are not delivered with the meat, or where at the request of the purchaser delivery of the

1693
meat is deferred, such statement as aforesaid shall include a statement of the net weight of the meat as sent out for delivery as well as the net weight on which the purchase price is based.")
Clause 5, page 3, line 27, leave out ("in Scotland")
Clause 5, page 3, line 29, after ("that") insert ("in Scotland")
Clause 5, page 3, line 35, leave out ("by retail")
Clause 5, page 3, line 36, leave out ("by retail")
Clause 7, page 4, line 7, leave out ("by retail")
Clause 9, page 4, line 20, leave out ("trade")
Clause 9, page 4, line 40, at end insert ("and the manner of re-sealing wrappers open under this Act")
Clause 9, page 5, leave out lines 1 to 9 and insert as a new subsection:
("( ) Before any regulations other than regulations under paragraph (d) of subsection (1) of this section are made the draft of the proposed regulations shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, and the regulations 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, but upon such approval being given the regulations may be made in the form in which they have been so approved.
Regulations made under paragraph (d) of subsection (1) of this section shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after they are made").
Clause 9, page 5, line 10, after ("regulations") insert ("made").
Clause 10, page 5, leave out Clause 10.
Clause 11, page 6, line 15, after ("Act") insert ("then, where the wrapper or container can be re-sealed without injury to the contents, the inspector shall re-seal the wrapper or container with a label certifying that the weight or measure of the contents has been proved to be correct, and if the inspector does not so re-seal the wrapper or container")
Clause 11, page 6, line 17, at end, insert as a new subsection:
("( ) All weights, measures, weighing and measuring appliances used by an inspector of weights and measures in pursuance of this Act shall be made of such material, and in such form, as may be approved by the Board of Trade, and shall be verified and periodically reverified in such manner as the Board of Trade may from time to time direct.")
Clause 13, page 7, line 7, after ("accident") insert ("or other causes beyond his control and")
Clause 13, page 7, line 14, leave out ("butchers' meat") and insert ("article of food")
Clause 13, page 7, line 32, after ("him") insert ("and on giving not less than three days notice of his intention to the prosecution")
Clause 13, page 7, line 39, leave out ("knowledge, consent or connivance") and insert ("consent, connivance or wilful default")
Clause 13, page 7, line 42, at end insert ("Provided that the prosecution shall have in any such case the right to cross-examine the employer or principal if he gives evidence, and any witnesses called by him in support of his charge and to call rebutting evidence")
Clause 13, page 8, line 8, leave out ("sent to") and insert ("served on or sent by registered post to")
Clause 13, page 8, line 9, at end insert ("nor unless in the case of any alleged deficiency the person against whom the allegation is made has been given reasonable opportunity to check the weight, measure, or number of the article or articles in respect of which such allegation is made.
(7) A prosecution under this Act shall not be instituted except by or on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions, a police authority, or a local authority")
Clause 14, page 9, line 12, leave out subsection (3) and insert:
("( ) Any powers or duties conferred or imposed by this Act on an inspector of weights and measures may, in any case where the local authority so determine, be exercised or performed by any other officer of the local authority appointed by them to act on behalf of an inspector of weights and measures for the purposes or this Act, and all references in this Act to inspectors of weights and measures shall be construed accordingly.")
Clause 14, page 9, line 23, at end insert:
("(b) nothing contained in section twenty-seven of the Milk and Dairies (Scotland) Act, 1914, shall be construed as limiting or affecting the application of the provisions of the Second Schedule to this Act to proceedings in respect of pre-packed milk;
(c) for any reference to the Director of Public Prosecutions there shall be substituted a reference to the Lord Advocate.")
After Clause 14, page 9, line 23, at end, insert as a new clause:
Application of Act.
(".This Act, except so far as it applies to pre-packed articles of food, shall apply only to retail dealings.")
Clause 15, page 9, line 31, leave out ("October") and insert ("July"), and leave, out ("twenty-six") and insert ("twenty-seven")
First Schedule, page 10, leave out lines 4 to 12 and insert:

Tea.

Cocoa.

Coffee beans.

Cocoa powder.

Ground coffee, including chicory mixtures.

Chocolate powder.

Potatoes.

PART 11

  ARTICLES REQUIRED TO BE SOLD BY NET WEIGHT, EXCEPT WHERE WEIGHED FOR SALE IN A WRAPPER OR CONTAINER, AND THE WEIGHT OF THE WRAPPER OR CONTAINER DOES NOT EXCEED TWO AND A HALF DRAMS PER POUND OF THE ARTICLES SOLD.
  Bacon.

  Lard.

  Ham.

  Suet.

  Butter.

  Margarine.

PART III.

  ARTICLES REQUIRED TO BE SOLD BY NET WEIGHT, EXCEPT WHERE WEIGHED FOR SALE IN A WRAPPER OR CONTAINER, AND THE WEIGHT OF THE WRAPPER OR CONTAINER DOES NOT EXCEED THE SPECIFIED NUMBER OF DRAMS PER POUND OF THE ARTICLE SOLD.
  Flour of wheat, rye, maize, pea or bean, including self-raising flour and cake flour.

  Sago.

  Tapioca.

  Sugar.

  Dried beans.

  Dried peas.

  Cornflour.

  Dried currants.

  Oatmeal.

  Dried raisins.

  Rolled oats.

  Dried sultanas.

  Rice.

  Second Schedule, page 10, line 20, leave out ("net")
  Second Schedule, page 11, line 9, at end insert ("unless the defendant proves that he had taken reasonable steps to ascertain, and did in fact believe in, the accuracy of the statement contained in the warranty")
  Second Schedule, line 35, after ("therewith") insert ("or a statement contained in an invoice")
  Second Schedule, line 35, at end insert ("an invoice describing the weight or measure or number of the article shall be a sufficient warranty notwithstanding that it contains no words of express warranty or was delivered after the purchase of the article").
  VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I do not know whether you would allow me to put the Amendments en bloc. I move that we agree with these Amendments.
  Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendments.—(Viscount Peel.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to.

BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION.
LORD ASKWITH LORD ASKWITH rose to call attention to the proposed Charter of the British Broadcasting Corporation, and to ask His Majesty's Government for information on the subject. The noble Lord said: My Lords, it seems to me, in view of the intense interest that is taken throughout the country in broad-1696
casting, one of the great industries of the future, that everyone would like to know when this Charter is going to be produced and what its contents are likely to be, or some information about it. Any holding it over for any length of time by the governing authority in this great industry is to be deprecated. There are a great many questions that have to be decided. There is, for instance, the question of beam wireless stations. Beam wireless for South Africa, I understand, has been practically completed but the question of rates as between the cable companies and other wireless communications has broken down. I understand that the question of beam wireless with Canada has also been mooted.
Further, it is very important to know whether this body will have full Government authority and support in its wave length negotiations and wave band protection in relation both to other British services and to other broadcasters, and also that the service will be protected against demands from the Treasury in regard to anything that it may have over. Then the question of interference is one of a very important character. There has not been for some time, I think, an attempt made on a broad scale to see whether the Continental stations can have a relay programme upon a good basis. That is a matter which only an authority doing bold work without restriction can hope properly to settle. Many other questions there are which I dare say will be touched upon in answer to my Question or in debate, if there be any debate upon this subject. I beg to ask my Question.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, perhaps it would be convenient if I gave a short statement on behalf of the Post Office in reply to my noble friend. The subject of broadcasting is a very wide one and my noble friend has covered a broad field, having wandered as far as Africa. I do not propose to go into any technical details in giving your Lordships information this morning, but shall simply make a short statement covering what is practically the conversion of the British Broadcasting Company into the British Broadcasting Corporation, which is to take place under the Charter that will come into force on January 1 next. I may say that when I was first

1697
approached on the subject I spoke to the Postmaster-General and he welcomed such a discussion taking place in your Lordships' House. The growth of broadcasting, as your Lordships know, has been one of the great romances of scientific invention. Four years ago it was practically only a toy and now, to-day, it is a great power, not only nationally but internationally. It is chiefly for that reason that this change is now taking place.
In that short period—that is in the last four years—the number of listeners has increased so rapidly that at the end of November last there were no fewer than 2,130,000 licences in force. Some measure of State or even international regulation of this new service is essential in order that the various users of the wireless wave bands may be mutually protected from overlapping and from interfering with each other. This control is already exercised by tire. Postmaster-General under the Wireless Telegraphy Acts, 1904–1925, The policy adopted in this country was to allow broadcasting in its infancy to be guided and developed by those having a direct interest in the successful development of the service. Accordingly, the British Broadcasting Company was formed, under Post Office licence, as an association of wireless manufacturers and limited as to profits. If the British Broadcasting Company had limited their consideration merely to the trade aspect of the question, broadcasting in this country would not have achieved the great development which has taken place in the last few years. Fortunately, the men in control exercised a wise vision and set broadcasting upon a plane of high ideals.
I might quote from the Report of the Committee of which the noble Earl, Lord Crawford, was Chairman. I am sorry not to see him in his place this morning. He was Chairman of a very strong Committee that Was appointed and it is upon that Committee's proposals and recommendations that the conditions of the present Charter have been based. This Committee, at the beginning of their Report, make the following remarks in regard to the British Broadcasting Company and their performance in four years:—
1698
"Progress has been rapid and noteworthy. And at the outset of our remarks we wish to record our admiration for the work accomplished by the British Broadcasting Company. Formed at a moment when broadcasting was still embryonic—regarded by many as a toy, as a phantasy, even as a joke—the Company by strenuous application to its duties, aided by loyalty of its staff, has raised the service to a degree which reflects high credit on British efficiency anti enterprise."
That was the epitaph of that Committee upon the British Broadcasting Company. This Committee was formed to advise as to the proper scope of the broadcasting service and as to the management, control and finance thereof after the expiration of the company's licence. The Committee recommended, generally speaking, that while the Postmaster-General must always remain with the ultimate responsibility, the conduct, the general control and the day-to-day administration of the service should be entrusted to a semi-public body operating as trustees in the national interest.
It is in pursuance of this recommendation that the Government decided that the British Broadcasting Corporation should be set up by the grant of a Royal Charter, a draft of which has been submitted to Parliament as Command Paper No. 2756. This Corporation will consist of five governors. The Chairman is to be the noble Earl, Lord Clarendon, and the Vice-Chairman the noble Lord, Lord Gainford. There are three other members whose names are Sir John Nairne, Dr. M. J. Rendall, and Mrs. Snowden, while Mr. J. C. W. Reith, the managing director of the existing company, is to be the chief executive officer. Command Paper No. 2756 also includes a copy of the licence and agreement which the Postmaster-General and the governors-designate of the Corporation have mutually agreed to abide by if the Charter is granted. An agreement has also been made with the British Broadcasting Company which provides that the company shall liquidate itself and transfer its assets, plants and copyrights in January 1 next to the Postmaster-General, free of charge and all encumbrances, in return for certain payments to enable the company to repay at par the subscribed capital, amounting to £71,536.
EARL RUSSELL: Transferred to the Postmaster-General or to the new Corporation?
THE EARL OF LUCAN: To the Postmaster-General, who will transfer to the new Corporation this sum of £71,000 to repay the subscribed capital at par. There are also further sums, but I am not going into the finance, because although I could give my noble friend the actual details I do not think it is quite within our province to discuss that. The plant and buildings will be re-transferred by the Postmaster-General to the Corporation free of charge. The Charter, as previously mentioned, will embody the appointment of the first governors. They are selected as persons of wide and varied interests and the Postmaster-General and the Prime Minister are confident that in recommending them they have chosen individuals who will carry out the work in the most efficient manner.
The Charter is for a term of ten years and the tenure of office of the governors is for five years, at the end of which time they can be re-elected if they so wish. The Charter is drawn up in the widest possible terms as regards the objects and powers of the Corporation and includes power to acquire copyrights and collect news. The Crawford Committee specially stressed the point that the new authority should not be fettered in its ability to acquire news, but on the other hand it was not to be specially privileged. The Corporation is also empowered to appoint committees and sub-commitees to represent the interests of education, the entertainment industry, music, literature, science, etc. It is understood to be the intention of the Corporation to take over the existing staff of the British Broadcasting Company. The financial clauses of the Charter provide that there shall be established a reserve and sinking fund and they give borrowing powers to the governors up to £500,000. The financial provisions for carrying out the service and for exercise of the powers conferred by the Charter are included in the licence and agreement published as the Command Paper of which I have given your Lordships the number.
During the past two years it has been left to the Postmaster-General to determine what in his opinion was a reasonable expenditure for the Company. By agreement with the governors-designate the licence lays down the broad lines on which their finance can safely be
1700
regulated. In effect, the Corporation are to receive an agreed proportion of the revenue derived from licence fees after deducting 12½ per cent., representing the cost of issuing licences and of enforcing the licensing system, the proportion being fixed on a sliding scale varying with the total number of licences issued. This scale, I may say, goes down as the number of licences increases, because it has been found that the cost of broadcasting does not rise directly in proportion with the increase in the number of licences. The effect of these financial provisions will be approximately as follows: If, as is anticipated, the number of licences on March 31 next amounts to 2,200,000 the Corporation will receive in its first financial year £805,000, and if the number of licences increases by 200,000 during the year thy will receive £866,000 in the following year. The financial arrangements are subject to revision in the light of experience at the end of two years.
Much of the licence and agreement with the Corporation refers to technical provisions, which represent practically no variation from the existing licence under which the company works. The condition that the Corporation must broadcast Government communiqués is not new and will not be used for broadcasting contentious propaganda on behalf of Government Departments. Although the Postmaster-General intends to lay down general rules to prohibit the Corporation from expressing as their own opinion views on matters of public policy and from broadcasting by speech or lecture matters on topics of political, religious or industrial controversy, it is his intention with these exceptions to allow the Corporation the widest possible latitude in the presentation of programmes. The Crawford Committee, in one of their concluding paragraphs, say:
"The prestige and status of the Commission should be freely acknowledged and their sense of responsibility emphasised; that, although Parliament must retain the right of ultimate control and the Postmaster-General must be the Parliamentary spokesman on broad questions of policy, the Commissioners should be invested with the maximum of freedom which Parliament is prepared to concede."
The Postmaster-General contends that the Charter and licence have been drawn up with the object of giving effect to the Crawford recommendations both in the spirit and the letter.
EARL RUSSELL: Lords, when the noble. Earl kindly acceded to my request for a debate on this Question, I recognised that that was all that was possible at a late sitting of the Session. The misfortune that we are debating this in so thin a House and at so cold and cheerless an hour of the morning is due to my fault and not his, for I should have approached him earlier on the subject. Still, I am glad that your Lordships are going to have an opportunity for discussion, and I only wish it were a fuller one because it is a subject which does interest very much a large number of people in this country. The first thing one notices in looking at the Command Paper to which the noble Earl who has just sat down has referred is that the Earl of Clarendon is to be the Chairman of the new Corporation. I can say—as I think we all can say—that he enters upon his office with the good will of every member of your Lordships' House.
The noble Earl, in reply to my suggestion that we could not discuss finance, corrected me and reminded me that we are in a position in this House to discuss finance, although we have been rather sharply reminded this morning how very ineffective such discussion may be. I do propose to say one or two words about finance, and there is one point in particular to which I should like to call your Lordships' attention, among the points to which the Earl of Lucan has alluded, and that is the proportion of the licence fees which is going to be put into the pocket of the Postmaster-General. The whole of the money upon which this business is founded and upon which the enormous expenditure involved depends, is the money received from individuals who pay a licence fee of 10 s. to the Postmaster-General for the privilege of infringing his monopoly by having receiving sets. That is how it arises. That 10 s. is a fee in respect of a broadcasting receiving licence. Out of that money the broadcasting system has been established and built up.
Of course, apart from the financial aspect of the Postmaster-General's monopoly, what these people really pay for is entertainment, and very cheap entertainment at the price, but there was
1702
a complaint last year that the Postmaster-General, who I think originally retained 2s. 6d. of the 10 s., retained rather more than that, and did not give the whole proceeds to the existing British Broadcasting Company. Now it is laid down that he is to retain, first, 12½ per cent. for collection. That is one-eighth. I should think it would very amply cover the cost of collection and leave a very handsome profit. Then, when you come to the fourth million licences, he is only to pay them 60 per cent., that is to say, having first retained—I think I am putting it correctly—12½ per cent., he is then to retain 40 per cent. of the balance. I think that this is undesirable from many points of view. It is undesirable because, in my view, it is a very bad method of indirect taxation. It somewhat recalls the sums that were made during the War through controllers' licences. Your Lordships will remember the long discussions that we had about milk licences and the action that was taken.
It is perfectly true that the Postmaster-General, in virtue of his monopoly—a monopoly granted only in the public interests—is able to impose any fee that he thinks proper upon people who infringe that monopoly under licence, but here the fee is imposed for a particular purpose, for the provision of services, and it seems to me that, if any surplus arises—assuming that he is right in the supposition that they do not want more money than is demanded—surely it ought properly to be applied to the reduction of the licence fee and, as a constitutional matter, ought not, to go to the general reduction of taxation. This seems to me to be very analogous to the raid that was recently made upon the Road Fund, where money raised for a particular purpose was seized for general taxation and thereby, by a doubly indirect method, a general tax was imposed in a way not set out in the Taxing Statute as such. I have always felt that this consideration applies not only to this particular provision but to the whole of the Post Office administration, and that the surplus from the Post Office ought to be applied either to the betterment of the service or to the reduction of postal charges, and should not be taken in aid of general Revenue. I have already said that your Lordships

1703
cannot effectively deal with that point, but I think attention ought to be called to it.
There are one or two other points to which I should like to direct your Lordships' attention. The one that seems to me to be next in importance relates specifically to this Corporation. It is the power which is given to them under Clause 3, which sets out their objects. These are, among other things:—
"To compile and prepare, print, publish, issue, circulate and distribute, whether gratis or otherwise, such papers, magazines, periodicals, books, circulars and other literary matter as may seem conducive to any of the objects of the Corporation."
That sounds rather innocent, like a general clause in a memorandum of association, but by the very virtue of their existence this body has the monopoly of the programmes. That is to say, they, and they only, know what programmes are coming forward, and they have the copyright. They use that monopoly, as your Lordships probably know, to issue a weekly paper called the Radio Times, and that paper has an enormous circulation, not in the least upon its merits, but simply because it is the only paper which contains the official programme. No other paper has the right to publish that information, although, as a matter of fact, it is accorded to other newspapers, and it is published fairly fully in many of them, including The Times. This is a business which is totally different from their other business, and they are so pleased with it and they have drawn such a very large revenue from advertisements—I think they get something like £100,000 a year from advertisements in the Radio Times—that they are now issuing a second paper which, I think, is devoted to foreign programmes.
This is a totally different business, and it seems to me that it is very undesirable that it should be embarked upon by this Corporation. It competes with the legitimate Wireless Press, and very bitter complaint was made about this before the Crawford Committee. That Committee—I do not quite know why—turned down that complaint and paid no attention to it, but it seems to me that we are allowing the Corporation to embark upon a very large public business, that of the
1704
publication of books, magazines, circulars and other literary matter. Why that business rather than any other kind of business? There are many other businesses which they might conduct. I think it is rather unfortunate that they should be encouraged to take this course, and I think that the monopoly in these programmes should not be turned to financial account.
With the next clause, which enables them to collect their own news and broadcast it, I am in very great sympathy because, as I ventured to say when I gave evidence before the Crawford Committee, the news bulletin which they are now by their agreement compelled to accept from the newspapers or the telegraphic agencies, and which also they are not allowed to broadcast before a certain hour—they are not allowed to transmit any definite news before seven o'clock—is generally of the most deplorable character and an extremely dull production. Very often it has all the unimportant news in it and very few important things, even the results of by-elections; and I think that if they are allowed to collect their own news and, of course, to transmit it at any time they think fit, that service will be very much improved. Moreover, the result will probably be that they will be able to make a very much more favourable agreement with these distributing agencies for securing the benefit of their services—for, of course, it is not suggested by the Postmaster-General, nor was it suggested by the Crawford Committee, that they should have the right of infringing the copyright of Reuter's or the Exchange Telegraph Company, and it was not suggested by anybody that they should take their news without paying for it.
I notice that any vacancies which arise are to be filled up by the rather cumbersome method of Order in Council, but I suppose that in the case of a company under Royal Charter that is necessary, though I should have thought that the Postmaster-General might have done it. I should like to add a word about the remuneration. I think I am right in saving that the Crawford Committee recommended that the remuneration should be ample. There is, perhaps, no complaint concerning the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, but I notice that the

1705
ordinary members are to have only £700 a year. In a business of this magnitude, which expends something like £800,000 a year, it seems to me that £700 a year is a very modest remuneration when you consider the amount that actually enters a man's pocket after the Exchequer has bad its say. Personally I should have been very glad to see £1,500 a year for the Vice-Chairman and £1,000 a year for the others. I am sorry that His Majesty's Government did not think fit to be a little more generous in that matter.
Turning to the draft licence which is to be given by the Postmaster-General, there are one or two matters to which I should like to call attention. There is a provision which, I am sure, will meet with universal public approval in this country. I need not read it to your Lordships, but, in effect, it amounts to the prohibition of the use of broadcasting facilities for advertising. The Corporation are not to receive money for advertisements, and that condition, I am sure, will meet with general approval.
I do not take any exception to the limitations of their powers as to broadcasting that which the Postmaster-General thinks fit to prohibit or proscribe, because I am quite sure, as all your Lordships will be, that those powers will be exercised in a reasonable manner and for the public good Nor, I think, can any exception be taken to the obligation to broadcast official news when required, when we have so recently in memory the events of the General Strike. I am glad to see that in subsection (7) of Clause 18 there is a provision that after 1929 the Postmaster-General will give consideration to an application for an increase in the amounts payable, but I should like to see the principle accepted that the Post Office shall not recover appreciably more than the reasonable cost of collection of these licences and that the balance, if any, shall go to the improvement of the service or to the reduction of the licence fee.
I may pause here to say that the Postmaster-General might usefully expend some additional money in more actively prosecuting unlicensed receivers. There are still, I am afraid, a very large number of these, and it really is his
1706
public duty to bring them into line. I think a good deal more might be done in that way. Incidentally, I hope that the noble Earl, Lord Clarendon, the new Chairman, will take some steps about this remarkable committee which has been teaching us to pronounce words, and telling us to pronounce them in a way which I think would shock the members of your Lordships' House. I am very glad to have had this opportunity of discussing these matters, late as it is in the Session and difficult as it is to discuss these matters very fully in this House, and I wish the utmost success to this new plan. Obviously it is impossible that so vast an undertaking should go on any longer under private control, and it was only because those in charge did not manage it as a profit-making concern that it went on so well. It is due to the English spirit which makes us refrain from sticking so strictly to the letter of the law.
LORD ASKWITH: My Lords, it is interesting to note that the noble Earl on the Front Opposition Bench does not consider that £700 for an ordinary director is sufficient, and I agree as to the balance that it is very important that the Treasury should not raid it. I thank the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, for the clear answer which he gave to my statement, and I will ask him whether he can say if all the Papers are going to be printed as Parliamentary Papers, so that they can be circulated, and whether in this Charter there is sufficient provision made for protecting the prior rights of British broadcasting to scientific inventions made in the future.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, if I may I will answer the noble Earl, Lord Russell, on one matter. As regards his proposal that the surplus should be devoted to the Post Office, and not paid into the Exchequer, that is an old question which has arisen before on other points, and I could not offer him any hope that that will be done. I can only tell him that the agreement between the governors-designate and the Postmaster-General has been discussed between them, and they think that the funds which they are going to have will be sufficient. For the first million they are going to have 90 per cent.—it is calculated rather like

1707
Super-Tax—80 per cent. for the second million, 70 per cent. for the third, and then after the third 60 per cent. They have only just got into the third million now, and it is not likely that they will have got beyond it at the end of two years, when it is all going to be revised. I will make known the noble Earl's objection as regards publishing. With regard to the question of Lord Askwith, these Command Papers have been published for some time now.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE EARL OF BALFOUR: My Lords, there is no immediate business before the House, and I think it will be for the general convenience if the sitting is suspended and noble Lords would return at twenty-five minutes past two o'clock, so that if any incidental circumstance occurs in connection with another place, we may be able to deal with it before half-past two, when the Royal Commission will take place.
[The sitting was suspended at a quarter before one o'clock and resumed at twenty-five minutes past two o'clock.]

HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments agreed to.
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS (REGULATION OF REPORTS) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments agreed to.
MERCHANDISE MARKS (IMPORTED GOODS) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments agreed to.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The following Bills, and Measures passed in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Church of England
1708
Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, received the Royal Assent:—
Industrial Assurance (Juvenile Societies),
Parks Regulation (Amendment),
Lead Paint (Protection against Poisoning),
Local Government (County Boroughs and Adjustments),
Horticultural Produce (Sales on Commission),
Indian and Colonial Divorce Jurisdiction,
Naval Reserve (Officers),
Workmen's Compensation (No. 2),
Public Health (Smoke Abatement),
Supreme Court of Judicature of Northern Ireland.
Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs,
University of London,
Rating (Scotland),
Births and Deaths Registration,
Expiring Laws Continuance,
Burgh Registers (Scotland),
Electricity (Supply),
Small Holdings and Allotments,
Merchandise Marks (Imported Goods),
Wireless Telegraphy (Blind Persons Facilities),
Roman Catholic Relief,
Housing (Rural Workers),
Prisons (Scotland),
Penal Servitude,
Coroners (Amendment),
Legitimacy,
Judicial Proceedings (Regulation of Reports),
Palestine and East Africa Loans (Guarantee),
Sale of Food (Weights and Measures),
Perth Corporation Water Order Confirmation,
Stornoway Harbour Order Confirmation,
Forth and Clyde Navigation (Castle-cary and Kirkintilloch Road Bridges) Provisional Order Confirmation,
Glasgow Goldsmiths Company Order Confirmation,
Barnet District Gas and Water,
Episcopal Pensions Measure, 1926,
Benefices (Ecclesiastical Duties) Measure, 1926,

HIS MAJESTY'S SPEECH.
And afterwards His Majesty's most gracious Speech was delivered to both Houses of Parliament by the Lord Chancellor (in pursuance of His Majesty's Command) as followeth—
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
"I have had great pleasure in acceding to the wishes of My Ministers in the Commonwealth of Australia that My Son and Daughter-in-Law should visit Australia for the inauguration of the new Federal Capital at Canberra. They will extend their visit, to New Zealand at the invitation of My Ministers in that Dominion, and in the course of their journeys will also be able to see several of the Colonies. The occasion of thus personally renewing the ties of affection which unite My Family with the peoples of the different parts of the Empire will, I know, be as welcome to the Duke and Duchess of York to-day as it was to the Queen and Myself more than twenty-five years ago.
"I have rejoiced at the opportunity given by the recent meeting of the Imperial Conference to welcome in London so many of My Ministers from the Dominions, and the Representatives of the Empire of India. The report of the proceedings of the Conference, which has recently been presented to you, bears eloquent testimony to the spirit of goodwill and mutual understanding which marked its deliberations. I am confident that its work will prove of lasting value to all parts of My Empire.
"The situation in China is being watched by My Government with the closest attention. Our Country is animated by strong sympathy for that vast majority of the Chinese people whose aspirations are for settled conditions, for a new era of prosperity and far friendly relations with the foreign Powers.
"Members of the Hove of Commons.
"I thank you for the provision you have made for the public service."
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
"During the greater part of the present year the Nation has lived in the
1710
shadow of the most protracted and ruinous industrial conflict in its history. When last addressing you I expressed the earnest hope that the Report of the Commissioners upon the economic condition of the coal industry would, with the willing co-operation of all concerned, pave the way to a peaceful solution of this great social and economic problem. This hope was not fulfilled. It remains to us now to unite in effacing all bitter memories of the past, and to set our eyes steadfastly upon the future, inspired by a common impulse towards genuine fellowship and sustained endeavour, upon which alone the prosperity and happiness of My People can be firmly based.
"The improvement in housing accommodation continues. A larger number of new houses have been completed than in any previous year. In order to snake available to rural workers further and better accommodation at rents adapted to their means Parliament has provided from public moneys grants for the reconstruction of existing houses and buildings in rural areas.
"By the passing of the Electricity (Supply) Bill an important and overdue step has been taken towards extending the provision of electrical energy throughout Great Britain.
"I have given assent to a measure to provide in suitable cases for mar King imported agricultural produce and manufactured goods with an indication of origin. This measure will enable the purchasing community to give a preference to goods and produce of this country and of other parts of the Empire.
"A Bill has also been passed for preventing short weight and measure in the retail sale of foodstuffs.
"Bills have also been passed to unify and simplify the rating system of Scotland and to extend the right of appeal in criminal cases in Scotland.
"A number of Bills relating to the agricultural industry have received My assent, including a measure to extend facilities for small and cottage holdings.
"It is My earnest prayer that the blessing of the Almighty may rest upon all your past and coming labours."
Then a Commission for proroguing the Parliament was read.
After which the LORD CHANCELLOR said:
My LORDS, AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS,—By virtue of His Majesty's Commission, under the Great Seal, to us and other Lords directed, and now read, we do, in His Majesty's name and in obedience to His Commands, prorogue this Parliament to Tuesday, the eighth day of February, One thousand
1712
nine hundred and twenty-seven, to be then here holden; and this Parliament is accordingly prorogued to Tuesday, the eighth day of February, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven.
End of the Second Session of the Thirty-fourth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in the seventeenth year of the Reign of His Majesty King George V.