Sitting of 28 July 1926

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Guildford Corporation Bill,
Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Middlesbrough Corporation Bill,
Lords Amendments considered, pursuant to the Order of the House of 26th July, and agreed to.
Great Western Railway Bill (by Order),
London Electric and Metropolitan District Railway Companies Bill (by Order),
Southern Railway Bill (by Order),
Consideration of Lords Amendments deferred till To-morrow.
Dundee Corporation Order Confirmation Bill,
Greenock Corporation Order Confirmation Bill,
Considered; to he read the Third time To-morrow.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (NO. 11) BILL [Lords].
Read a Second time, and committed.
Ordered, That Standing Orders 211 and 236 be suspended, and that the Committee on Unopposed Bills have leave to consider the Bill forthwith.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  MECCA (BRITISH PILGRIMS).
  Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what are the relations between
  2076
  His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Sultan of Nejd as now established at Mecca; whether he is satisfied with the facilities for and treatment of pilgrims, who are British subjects, to Mecca and other holy places under the Sultan's rule; and whether a British representative is accredited to the Court of Ibn Saud?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): The relations between His Majesty's Government and the Government of His Majesty the King of the Hejaz and Sultan of Nejd are normal and friendly. I have not yet received a full report of the conditions in which the 1926 pilgrimage has been performed, but from the information in my possession I am satisfied with the arrangements made by the Hejaz authorities for the comfort and welfare of British pilgrims to the holy places of the Hejaz. No British representative is accredited to the Court of Ibn Saud, but relations are maintained through the British Agent and Consul at Jeddah.
  Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: May I ask whether, in view of the importance of the pilgrim traffic, the right. hon. Gentleman will consider accrediting a representative to the Court of this potentate, who will then be able to have a representative here?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I think I should have notice of that question.

  RUSSIA (BRITISH PUBLIC UTILITY LOANS).
  Mr. RILEYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House the approximate proportion of the sum total raised by the Russian Government from British nationals before the War for railway construction and other public utility loans in general, which was expended in Finland, Esthonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Bessarabia; and whether any approaches have been made to the Governments or municipal authorities of Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Roumania to secure a return of the capital so expended?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: In the case of Finland, which was an autonomous State within the Russian Empire, the loans in question were raised, not by the Russian, but by the Finnish Government, who have never repudiated their responsibility. The territories now occupied by the other countries mentioned formed an integral part of Russia. It is, therefore, impossible to ascertain what proportion of the loans raised by the Russian Government for the construction of railways, roads, telegraphs, etc., was devoted to these particular territories. In these circumstances, the latter part of the question does not arise.
  Mr. RILEY: May I ask if any correspondence has taken place between His Majesty's Government and the Governments mentioned in the Question with regard to the construction carried out by means on Brtish capital?
  Mr. TAYLOR: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government of Finland has paid the interest on these loans?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I must have notice of both those questions.
  Colonel WEDGWOOD: May I ask the Foreign Secretary whether it would not be possible to communicate with the Russian Government and find out from them the proportions of these loans spent in these States, so that we may have a chance of recovering some of the money which is due?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I think the Russian Government should deal with their own debts first.
  Mr. RILEY: Has any correspondence taken place between His Majesty's Government and the Governments of these States?
  Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I must ask the hon. Member to give me notice of that question. If he will do so, I shall be very glad to give him an answer, but I cannot pretend to carry in my head a list of the correspondence that takes place between His Majesty's Government and other Governments.

  TANGIER.

    INTERNATIONAL POLICE FORCE.
    Mr. RENNIE SMITHasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any inquiry has been made into the conduct of the international police force at Tangier with respect to the charge that prisoners have been tortured in order to extort confessions from them; and whether he can make any statement on the matter?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: On the 22nd July the International Assembly voted a resolution inviting the Mendoub to nominate a commission of inquiry. I hope that effect will be given to this request.
    Mr. SMITH: As the alleged cruelties were reported about three weeks ago, could not the right hon. Gentleman make some further statement as to the action which has been taken?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: As I say, on the 22nd July the Assembly passed a resolution inviting the Mendoub to appoint a Commission, and I hope the Mendoub will comply with that request. The Commission has not yet been appointed, and therefore it has neither inquired nor reported.
    Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is there any likelihood of an Englisman being on this Commission of Inquiry?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot say.
    Colonel WEDGWOOD: Has the right hon. Gentleman made any representations as to the desirability of an Englishman being on the inquiry?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir.

    CONVENTION.
    Dr. SALTER (for Mr. PONSONBY)asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what concessions were made by theGovernment of Italy in return for the support given by His Majesty's Government to their efforts to obtain for Italy an equal position as regards matters referring to Tangier with that of the States which signed the Statute m December, 1923?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: His Majesty's Government are anxious, in the general interest, that Italy should accede to the

    2079
    Tangier Convention, and they are prepared to give sympathetic consideration to any proposals from the Italian Government, but there is no foundation whatever for the hon. Member's suggestion that the matter has been the subject of a bargain between the two Governments.

    AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN DEBT (BRITISH CLAIMS).
    Sir CYRIL COBBasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that, according to the notice issued on 12th July by the Council of Foreign Bondholders, representing British holders of debts of the old Austro-Hungarian monarchy, no arrangements have yet been made about the Hungarian Four per cent. Consolidated State Rentes, 1910, held by British subjects; will he inquire of the Reparation Commission what the cause is for the delay in fixing the percentage of contributions to be distributed to the bondholders by the Caisse Commune in accordance with the Protocol of Innsbruck and the Accord of Prague; and will he instruct the British representative on the Reparation Commission to urge the fixing of the contributions without further delay, having regard to the fact that the negotiations have been in progress since 4th June, 1921?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): With regard to the first and second parts of the hon. Member's question, I am informed that the Reparation Commission has completed the arrangements for distributing the liability for the Hungarian Four per cent. Consolidated State Rentes, 1910, with the exception of the adjustment provided for in the third paragraph of Article 4 of the Agreement signed at Prague on the 14th November, 1925. As this adjustment depends upon certain operations, for the completion of which the Article referred to lays down a time limit as recent as 1st July, 1920, the full data which would enable the adjustment to be effected have not yet reached the Reparation Commission. It is, however, anticipated that the Reparation Commission will be in a position to complete its task under this Article in the near future. The British
    2080
    Delegate on the Reparation Commission is doing his utmost to expedite the matter.

    LIQUOR SMUGGLING.
    Rear-Admiral BEAMISHasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the conferences with the American prohibition officers are concluded; if so, what, if any, further facilities are to be provided by His Majesty's Government for assisting in the enforcement of prohibition in the United States of America; and if he can arrange for the publication of details of the recent conferences?
    Captain WEDGWOOD BENNasked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement as to the recent negotiations of representatives of the American Government in the matter of the prohibition of the illicit importation of alcoholic liquors into the United States?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I will answer these questions together. I would refer both hon. Gentlemen to the full statement made on this subject yesterday in reply to a question put by the hon. and gallant Member for Brentford.

    CHINA (RELATIONS WITH POWERS).
    Captain BENNasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the policy of His Majesty's Government is to adhere to the resolutions arrived at at the Washington Conference in respect to the relations between China and the Powers?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, Sir.

  GERMANY.

    DAWES ANNUITIES.
    Captain BENNasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the policy of His Majesty's Government in respect of the claim of the German Government to include payments made by the German Government to German nationals in calculations of the Dawes Annuities?
    Mr. McNEILL: The hon. and gallant Member is no doubt referring to the claim, presented in October, 1924, by the German Government to the Reparation Commission, that there should be charged against the Dawes Annuities the compensation paid by the German Government to their nationals in respect of the liquidation of property, rights and interests under the Economic Clauses of the Treaty of Versailles. This claim the Reparation Commission in February, 1925, declined to entertain, and the German Government propose to submit their claim, as they are entitled to do, to the arbitrator appointed under the provisions of the London Agreement of 30th August, 1924.
    Captain BENN: Supposing the Arbitration Commission allows the claim, what will be the effect on the Debt settlement?
    Mr. McNEILL: As I have told the hon. and gallant Member, the German Government have taken steps to appeal to the arbitrator, as they are entitled to do.
    Captain BENN: Would any decision in favour of the German Government he a default as contemplated in the Anglo-French Agreement?
    Mr. McNEILL: That I cannot say.

    DISARMAMENT.
    Dr. SALTER (for Mr. PONSONBY)asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any reply has been received from the German Government to the communication recently addressed to them by the Inter-Allied Control Commission on the subject of German disarmament?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. Rennie Smith) on the 21st July, to which I have nothing to add.

    ALLIED ARMIES OF OCCUPATION.
    Dr. SALTER (for Mr. PONSONBY)asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in accordance with the undertakings given at Locarno or shortly after, and with a view to clearing away outstanding points of difference before the meeting of the League of Nations Assembly in September, His Majesty's Government intend to propose to the
    2082
    other occupying States any steps for the reduction of the armies of occupation. In the Rhineland to the number which was maintained there by Germany before the War?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Gentleman who put the question on the Order Paper is, I think, under a misapprehension. No undertaking was ever given to the German Government that the troops of occupation in the Rhineland would be reduced to the number maintained there by Germany before the War. But His Majesty's Government naturally stand by the note of the Ambassadors' Conference of the 14th November last, the text of which has already been laid before Parliament in Command Paper 2527.

    LEAGUE OF NATIONS (NEW BUILDINGS, GENEVA).
    Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALLasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, with regard to the new building at Geneva which it is proposed to erect for the League of Nations at a cost of over £500,000, in view of the difficult financial conditions now prevailing, the British representative at the next session of the League will be instructed to recommend that the expenditure of this large sum should he postponed?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. At the last Assembly a cheaper scheme than that originally approved was adopted with the concurrence of His Majesty's Government. The scheme is now being put into execution, and I do not think that circumstances have so altered since March last that His Majesty's Government would he justified in asking for postponement, or successful in obtaining it.
    Sir F. HALL: May I ask whether the cost is to be divided pro rata amongst all the members of the League of Nations?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, Sir. It is partly met out of the accumulated funds of the League, and the balance is to be divided pro rata amongst the various nations.
    Sir F. HALL: Supposing, as has been the case in the past with regard to the

    2083
    expenses of the League of Nations, some members do not pay their proportion, shall we have to find the balance?
    Mr. SPEAKER: That is rather a hypothetical question.
    Sir HARRY BRITTA1N: May I ask what is to be the sum?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot answer that question without notice, bus it anybody has seen the hall in which we have to meet—anybody who has been a member of the delegation—will know that the accommodation is inadequate and ill-suited to the purpose.
    Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is the- right hon. Gentleman aware that even the larger sum of £500,000 is only one quarter of the cost of one of our light cruisers?
    Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot see what relevancy that has.

  ROYAL NAVY.

    WARSHIPS (PRESERVATION AS RELICS).
    Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the First Lord of Admiralty whether it is intended to preserve any types of the British men-of-war which took part in the late War as national relics and objects of interest to students and others; and, if so, which vessels it is proposed so to preserve?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Mr. J. C. Davidson): The answer is in the negative. As the hon. and gallant Member is aware, under the Washington Treaty no battleships, battle-cruisers, or aircraft carriers could be retained.
    Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: May I ask whether, in the case of His Majesty's Ship "Colossus," arrangements were made to saw her guns and otherwise render her useless for fighting purposes, and is she not now in use?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: Yes, that is so.
    Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: In that case, could not His Majesty's Ship "Colossus," as a type of vessel which took part in the War, be preserved?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: She is being employed economically and usefully at Devonport.
    Colonel DAY: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say what it would cost to keep His Majesty's Ship "Colossus" as a national relic?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: I should want notice of that question. The "Colossus" is at present being used for a purpose which would otherwise have to be served by some other vessel.

    EXCESS ALLOWANCES (RECOVERY).
    Colonel DAY (for Mr. N. MACLEAN)asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the number of officers against whom claims were made by his Department for recovery of over-payments of allowances during the War; the total sum so claimed; how many of those claims were paid; and the total sum received by his Department?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: The compilation of these particulars would necessitate the examination of the pay and allotment accounts of all officers who served during the War, and would involve an expenditure of time and labour which I think the hon. Member will agree, would not be justified.
    Colonel DAY (for Mr. MACLEAN)asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Deputy Accountant-General of the Admiralty invited Captain Ball, whom his Department had made bankrupt for overpayment of £190 of allowance during the War, to make an offer in clearance of the sum involved, and that Captain Ball sent a cheque for, £150, which was retained by the Admiralty for several days and then returned to the officer; and whether he can state the reasons for the return of the cheque and for the invitation to make the offer?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: During the course of an interview which Captain Ball sought with a representative of the Accountant-General of the Navy, with a view to disposing of the Admiralty claim, the question of an offer was discussed, but it was made entirely clear to Captain Ball that acceptance of any such offer would be subject to the

    2085
    approval of higher authority and to the concurrence of the Admiralty's legal adviser. A cheque for £150 was received with a covering letter stating that it was offered on certain conditions, which Captain Ball subsequently explained to the Official Receiver in Bankruptcy meant that if the Admiralty accepted the cheque the bankruptcy proceedings should be annulled. He was informed by the Official Receiver that before his bankruptcy could be annulled it would be necessary that the whole of his debts should be paid in full. In the circum stances, as the condition on which the cheque was offered could not be complied with; the Admiralty were advised that the cheque should be returned to Captain Ball
    Colonel DAY: Will the hon. Gentleman say what were the costs in this case?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: Not without notice.

    COAL TRADE DISPUTE (RAILWAY SUPPLIES, PORTLAND).
    Mr. KELLYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty how much coal has been unloaded from the three American vessels at His Majesty's Dockyard, Portland, for the railway company by dockyard labour from the naval store officers' department; and what is the cost to the Admiralty of this work?
    Mr. DAVIDSON: The reply to the first tart of the question is 23,501 tons. The entire cost of the work is being borne by the railway company.

  UNEMPLOYMENT.

    SEASONAL TRADES.
    Mr. H. WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Labour whether married women and others who only seek part employment of a seasonal nature for a few weeks in the year are regarded for statistical purposes as unemployed persons during the period that their names are registered just prior to the commencement of such seasonal work?
    The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): Persons registering in this way for hop-picking are not included in the returns prior to the
    2086
    commencement of the season. In other cases there are no express instructions and the practice may not be uniform, but, probably, those registering would be included in the returns.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: If I were to send the right hon. Gentleman the ease of 327 women registered for jam manufacture, would he look into it?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Yes, I am always ready to look into a, ease sent me by an hon. Member.
    Sir JOSEPH NALL: Is it the practice to allow benefit during the off season in trades which are essentially seasonal?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: No; that is a separate, quite distinct, and very intricate question. The question on We Paper is merely whether they are registered for employment.

    TRAINING CENTRES (CONTRACTS).
    Mr. VIANTasked the Minister of Labour the number of contracts for painting, bricklaying and carpentering that have been completed by training 0centres throughout the country, the number at present awaiting execution, and the comparative prices of such contracts as between competitive firms; and the wages paid and the hours worked by the trainees?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Twenty-three contracts for painting, bricklaying and carpentering have been completed at instructional centres for young unemployed men, and 11 are at present in hand or awaiting execution—all for a total sum of £463 19s. 1d. I am unable to quote the comparative prices of such contracts as between competitive firms, but the prices charged by the centres are based upon current, market rates for similar work. The trainees, who perform the work upon these contracts as part of their training, normally work a 44-hour week. They are not paid wages.

    SAFEGUARDED INDUSTRIES.
    Mr. H. WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Labour when he hopes to he able to publish information as to the number of insured persons recorded as belonging to each industry on 1st July; and whether he can arrange to publish at an early date that part of the statistics relating to safeguarded industries?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The estimates of the number of insured persons in each industry at the beginning of July will be based on the statistics obtained in connection with the exchange of unemployment books which is now proceeding. It is expected that the process of exchange will be sufficiently advanced to enable estimates to be computed by the middle of November. I regret that it will not be possible to give earlier figures in respect of such safeguarded industries as are separately classified.

    COAL SHORTAGE.
    Sir W. de FRECEasked the Minister of Labour if he can state the number of men on the registers of the Employment Exchanges whose unemployment is directly attributable to the coal shortage?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Precise figures on this point are not available. Having regard, however, to the downward course of the unemployment figures previously, I think it may fairly be assumed that the number of men on the Employment Exchange registers whose unemployment is due to the coal shortage is not less than the total increase in the number of men on these registers, viz., 445,900 between 26th April and 19th July.

    BENEFIT DISALLOWED.
    Mr. BARKERasked the Minister of Labour if his attention has been called to the case of George Higgins, 16, Darran Road, Abertillery, Monmouthshire, employed as a banksman at Gray Colliery, Abertillery, who was unemployed from 28th June to 10th July, then worked six days, and was again unemployed; and, seeing that Higgins has claimed benefit in the ordinary way and his claim has been refused, will he state why he is refused unemployment benefit?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am having inquiries made and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMS: How long is it likely to be before a reply to this question is available?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I cannot tell in any particular case, because there has to be correspondence to and fro, and it depends on how far there is any
    2088
    intricacy in a case, necessitating the passing of letters. All cases are dealt with as expeditiously as possible.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: I put a similar question three weeks ago and no answer has yet been received.
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If the hon. Member will give me his particular case, I will see that it is expedited, and I will communicate with him directly.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the practice generally followed by the Ministry of Pensions, that where a case takes any length of time the Member is informed that it is taking more than the ordinary length of time?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I will consider that suggestion.
    Mr. BARKER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a number of these cases have been within the ambit of this Department for three months?
    Mr. BARKERasked the. Minister of Labour if he is aware that Albert Way, 11, New Hall Street, Abertillery, was unemployed as a colliery banksman at Gray colliery, Abertillery (Mon.), from 10th July to 24th July; that he claimed unemployment benefit at the Abertillery Unemployment Exchange and was refused; and that Way has been unemployed one week out of every three weeks since 30th April and has been unable to get unemployment benefit; and will he state why this man is refused benefit?
    Sir A. STEEL - MAITLAND: I am having inquiries made, and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible. I am trying to get the cases expedited as much as I can. As a result of the strike and what occurred afterwards, the work has been abnormal.

    EXTENDED BENEFIT.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Labour how many applications have been made by men and women for extended unemployment benefit during the last three months for which figures are available; how many were successful: and how many were rejected?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: During the three months 13th April to 12th July, 1926, the applications for extended benefit considered by local employment committees numbered 707,394 in respect

    2089
    of men and 103,372 in respect of women. Of these numbers 621,665 applications from men were recommended for allowance and 85,729 for disallowance, while 72,224 applications from women were recommended for allowance and 31,148 for disallowance.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how these figures compare with those of any similar previous period?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I think I can get the figures for the previous periods, if the hon. Member wishes to have them for comparison, but I cannot give them to him from memory.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: Is any special consideration being given to people who were out of work previous to this stoppage, and who, at the moment, have little or no chance of obtaining employment so as to come within the meaning of the Regulation as to trying to find suitable work?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I cannot give an answer to any of these questions unless the hon. Member will give me notice. The test that is applied is the reasonable possibility, amongst the other criteria, of being able to obtain work.

  GENERAL STRIKE.

    RAILWAY EMPLOYÉS.
    Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKEasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that some of the juniors employed on the railways were instructed by their seniors to withdraw their labour at the time of the general strike; that these juniors have not been reinstated; and will he use his influence on behalf of these young people, who were influenced to act, as has been shown, against their own individual interests?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am not aware of the circumstances referred to in the question. If my hon. Friend has any particular cases in mind and will forward the details to me, I will have inquiries made.

    TRADE UNIONS (PENALTIES ON MEMBERS).
    Sir WALTER de FRECEasked the Minister of Labour whether any further
    2090
    reports have been made to his Department of cases where trade unions have imposed, or threatened to impose, penalties of fines, expulsion, or refusal of benefit to their members on account of their action during the general strike; and, if so, whether he will state the number and the action taken in each case?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I have received further reports of the kind indicated covering 22 individuals. One case has been settled. I am investigating the remainder.
    Sir F. HALL: May I ask whether in cases of this nature, where action has been taken prejudicial to the interests of a contributor to the scheme, that contributor would have a justifiable action against the officers of the union?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am afraid that I cannot give a legal opinion; it is not my business.
    Commander WILLIAMS: In how many cases has there been expulsion, and what are the different unions mainly concerned?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If the hon. and gallant Member will put down a question, I will give him an answer. So far as expulsion is concerned, I am not aware that there has been any case where expulsion has in fact been carried out, hut I am speaking from memory.
    Sir F. HALL: What redress would a member of a union have against the officers of the union in the event of his taking action.
    Mr. SPEAKER: The question cannot be argued.

  ALIENS.

    MUSICIANS AND ACTORS (ADMISSION PERMITS).
    Sir W. de FRECEasked the Minister of Labour the number of applications for admission of foreign musical and theatrical artists made since 1st January last and the percentages of admissions and refusals, respectively?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: 959 permits were applied for; 884 or 92 per cent. were granted, and 75 (8 per cent.) were refused.
    Sir W. de FRECE: Are restrictions imposed on similar British artists in foreign countries?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I could not answer that question without notice.
    Commander WILLIAMS: Why are so many foreign artists allowed in when British artists are obviously the best?
    Colonel DAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many of our British musicians are out of work, and that they are, if anything, superior to the musicians who are granted permits to come to this country?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am delighted to find this concurrence of opinion on both sides of the House, and the fact that there is such an opinion, which in many cases may be correct, is really another justification of the action which we took.
    Sir F. HALL: Will my right hon. Friend get into touch with some hon. Members and persuade them not to employ these foreign musicians?
    Captain BENN: Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that the National Gallery is full of pictures by foreigners?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Many of them were certainly not imported during the painters' lifetime.
    Mr. BECKETT: Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the British public are likely to go and see foreign artists if British artists are as good?
    Colonel DAY: On a point of Order. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall) pointed to me when he made that remark and asked that question. May I ask supplementary question of the Minister of Labour?
    Sir F. HALL: If the cap fits, the hon. and gallant Member can wear it, can he not?

    DEPORTATION ORDER (MICHAEL PROOTH).
    Mr. SCURRasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why Michael Prooth, a prisoner serving a sentence of five months' imprisonment for offences against the Emergency Powers Regulations, was taken by the police from Pentonville Prison on Wednesday, 14th July, and conveyed to Hay's Wharf,
    2092
    London, and placed on board a steamer bound for Russia, and upon refusal of the master of the ship to accept him as a passenger was re-conveyed to Leman Street Police Station and afterwards to Pentonville; if he is aware that this prisoner has a wife and children who wish to accompany him when he is deported after serving his sentence; and why no intimation of the removal on the 14th instant was given to his wife?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir William Joynson-Hicks): As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which was given yesterday to a question by the hon. Member for Cleveland (Sir Park Goff) regarding this case. The action referred to was taken in pursuance of the recommendation of the Court that the man should be deported from the United Kingdom. With regard to the second and third parts of the question, I was and am prepared to afford all facilities to enable the man's family to join him in Russia, and will communicate with the hon. Member on their behalf as soon as the arrangements for his departure are completed.
    Mr. SCURR: Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the wife was not communicated with, as she did not expect the deportation to take place before 1st October, when the sentence expires and will she be communicated with in the future?
    Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: The possibility of removing this man is being taken up with the representatives of the Soviet Government. Meanwhile I found a Russian ship, but the master of the vessel refused to take him.

    ENGLAND-AUSTRALIA FLIGHT (DEATH OF ME. ELLIOTT).
    Colonel DAYasked the Secretary or State for Air whether it is possible for an award or grant to be made to the mother of the late Mr. Elliott, engineer to Mr. Alan Cobham, with a view to commemorating the valuable work in which he assisted in connection with aviation?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Samuel Hoare): I regret that there are no funds at my disposal from which a grant could be made. It is under-

    2093
    stood, however, that the late Mr. Elliott was insured by the de Havilland Aircraft Company and that the claim has been paid.
    Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how Mr. Alan Cobham met his death?
    Sir S. HOARE: I think the hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. Mr. Alan Cobham, I am glad to say, is no injured.
    Colonel DAY: I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon. I intended to ask how Mr. Cobham's mechanic met his death.
    Sir S. HOARE: As far as we know, by a rifle shot wound.

    TRADE UNIONS (STATISTICS).
    Colonel WOODCOCKasked the Minister of Labour (1) if he can give the figures for the year ended 31st December, 1925, of the South Wales Miners' Federation, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members, other than dispute pay, respectively;
    (2) if he can give the figures for the year ended 31st December, 1925, of the National Union of Railwaymen, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members other than dispute pay, respectively?
    Commander FANSHAWEasked the Minister of Labour (1) if hit can give the figures for the year ended 31st December, 1925, of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members, other than disput pay, respectively;
    (2) if he can give the figures for the year ended 31st December, 1925, of the National Union of General Workers, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members, other than dispute pay, respectively?
    Captain CROOKSHANKasked the Minister of Labour (1) if he can give the figures for the year ended
    2094
    31st December, 1925, of the Electrical Trades Union, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members, other than dispute pay, respectively;
    (2) if he can give the figures for the year ended 31st December, 1925, of the Railway Clerks' Association, showing the total receipts, working expenses, officers' salaries, allowances and expenses, and benefits paid to members, other than dispute pay, respectively?
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: As the reply contains a number of figures I propose to circulate a table in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Colonel WOODCOCK: Was it not formerly the custom to publish periodically a return of the particulars of the 100 chief trade unions in the country and in this way to supply those particulars to the House; and is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to resume the publication of these particulars so that the House may have the information desired.
    HON. MEMBERS: And the Conservative clubs!
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If the hon. Member wishes me to reply to that question from memory, I think there used to be published a periodical return of information as regards trade unions. I think this information, or something similar, was published before the War. I am not certain whether it has been published since the War; if so, I think it was only on one occasion. If the information is obtainable in the same form, I am perfectly willing to consider the publication of a return of a, similar character to the return which used to be published as a regular custom.
    Mr. J. H. THOMAS: Will the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind that while the House, certainly, ought to have this information, it is already obtainable. Is he not aware that this information can be obtained in a public document from the Registrar, and that these questions can only be fishing questions put for an ulterior object?
    HON. MEMBERS: Withdraw!
    Mr. SPEAKER: I should like to look into that matter. If it be the fact that ibis information is available to Members in other ways, apart from the Question

    2095
    Paper, those other means ought to be used, but I have not, at present, knowledge on that point.
    Captain SHAW: On a point of Order. Is it in order for the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) to impute ulterior motives to hon. Members on this side?
    Mr. THOMAS: On the same point of Order. You yourself, Sir, have expressed some doubt as to whether this information could have been obtained elsewhere, and some of us were in doubt as to the legitimacy of these questions. I desire to say that I did not put my supplementary question until I was certain of the facts which I have stated, and it is within the knowledge of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on the Government Bench that this return to which I refer, is public property and can be obtained through the Registrar.
    Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I shall communicate with you, Sir, afterwards, when I have ascertained exactly how far this information is obtainable, apart from question and answer in the House.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I think that is the best way to deal with it. With regard to the point of order of the hon. and gallant Member for Westbury (Captain Shaw), I understand his objection is to the term "fishing questions."
    Captain SHAW: No, Sir. An ulterior motive was assumed to lie behind the questions asked by hon. Members on this side.
    Commander FANSHAWE: Arising out of the Minister's first reply, can we not. be given an answer on the Floor of the House to these questions? A similar question was asked on Monday and was answered in a very short way. Could we not have an answer in the House to these questions which have not been asked for any ulterior motive?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The Minister has undertaken to circulate an answer to these questions giving these statistics. After what has occurred, it is my duty to inquire whether this information is available by other means than question and answer in the House, but that applies to future questions and not to those which are to-day on the Paper.
    Commander FANSHAWE: Is it the case that this information is not circulated free?
    Mr. KELLY: Arising out of question 34—
    Captain SHAW: I put a point of Order.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I am about to deal with the hon. and gallant Gentleman's point of Order. I do not think there was anything in the question by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) to call for my intervention. Seeing the series of questions on the Paper I cannot see that it is my duty to take objection to it.
    Colonel WOODCOCK: May I point out, in reference to the suggestion of ulterior motives, that, as I have already stated, all this information was formerly supplied to the House, and it was with a view to obtaining this information as to the 100 chief trade unions, as it was formerly supplied to the House, that I put down the question.
    Mr. THOMAS: I certainly do not desire to pass any personal reflection, but if that was the object of the hon. and gallant Gentleman this is the tenth question and it has been intimated that each question costs something. If the hon. and gallant Member's object was as he has indicated, he could merely have asked for the former return, which, incidentally, could have been given.
    Captain GUNSTON: Is it not the case that the hon. Lady the Member for North East Ham (Miss Lawrence) pressed that a certain question should be answered in the House the other day; and could not that be granted to-day?
    Mr. SPEAKER: I think the House ought to pass to the next question.
    Mr. KELLY: With regard to question No. 34, the Minister states he is going to give a reply in detail. May I ask where is he going to get the information for that reply, in view of the fact that there is no such trade union in this country as the Amalgamated Society of Engineers.
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member had better wait and see what the answer will be.
    Mr. THURTLE rose—
    Mr. SPEAKER: Other hon. Members have questions on the Paper, and this
    Following is the table:

    The following FIGURES are compiled from the ANNUAL RETURNS made to the CHIEF
    REGISTRAR of FRIENDLY SOCIETIES for the YEAR ending 31st DECEMBER, 1925:—

    Union

    Total Rece pts.

    Working Expenses.

    Total

    Of which salaries and allowances of officers, etc., and branch
    secretaries.

    Benefits paid to members other than dispute pay.

    (1)

    (2)

    (3)

    (4)

    (5)

    £

    s.

    d.

    £

    s.

    d.

    £

    s.

    d.

    £

    s.

    d.

    South Wales Miners' Federation.

    173,889

    0

    4

    85,352

    15

    8

    31,396

    2

    5

    92,828

    11

    10

    National Union of Railwaymen.

    641,723

    17

    7

    230,810

    0

    0

    101,973

    12

    1

    201,289

    0

    3

    Amalgamated Engineering Union.

    1,264,290

    13

    7

    168,071

    8

    11½

    95,774

    18

    8

    935,861

    17

    10½

    National Union of General Workers.

    350,830

    0

    3

    181,538

    3

    9½

    123,178

    19

    5½

    42,775

    13

    10

    Railway Clerks' Association.

    141,694

    11

    3

    63,284

    8

    10

    29,169

    5

    2

    26,112

    3

    3

    In the case of the Electrical Trades Union the annual return for the year ended 31st December, 1925, has not yet been field.

  ROYAL AIR FORCE.

    KIDBROOKE DEPOT (COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA).
    Mr. TASKERasked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is now in a position to state what action he proposes to take with regard to the 11 known members of the Communist factory group stated in Document 33 of the Blue Book on Communist papers to be employed in the Air Force depot at. Kidbrooke?
    Sir S. HOARE: It is not in the public interest to make a statement on this matter, but I am satisfied that the steps that have already been taken are adequate to safeguard public interests.
    Major TASKER: Can some action not be taken to stop aspersions upon the honour and loyalty of the majority of the men engaged at this depot?
    Sir S. HOARE: I do not think there is any need to take any action. The great majority of the men have the best possible characters, and it is not necessary to afford them any further testimonial.
    matter has already taken up too much time.
    Mr. PALING: Is it the case that any steps which are being taken against these people are being taken because they are Communists?
    Sir S. HOARE: I have nothing to add to the answer I have given.
    Sir J. NALL: Is it not obvious that men holding these views are a menace to the safety of the force?

    TRAINING (KINGSTON AND WEYBRIDGE).
    Colonel DAYasked the Secretary of State for Air if his attention has been drawn to the inconvenience occasioned to residents in the Kingston and Weybridge area, during the early morning hours, owing to the noise from the double - engined Vickers - Napier long-distance bombing machines, with which home defence units are equipped; and will he cause such routine training to be carried out in less thickly-populated districts?
    Sir S. HOARE: As regards the first part of the question, no flying training is carried out by Service aircraft in the areas referred to, and the second part, therefore, does not arise.

    CASUALTIES.
    Mr. VIANTasked the Secretary of State for Air the number of British aeroplanes which have been wrecked during the last year from 30th June, 1925, to date; how many of these aeroplanes were new and how many were machines with reconditioned war-time engines; the estimated value of these machines; the number of men injured and the number of men killed during the same period: and how these casualties compare with those in the air forces of other countries?
    Sir S. HOARE: As the answer is somewhat long, and contains a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Following is the reply:
    As regards the first two parts of the question, 70 aeroplanes of post-War design and 192 of War design were written off Air Force charge after crashing during the period 30th June, 1925, to 30th June, 1926.
    As regards the third part, the undepreciated value of the machines involved in these crashes was roughly £500,000; the value of parts salved cannot be estimated without undue labour.
    As regards the fourth part, the numbers of Royal Air Force personnel killed and injured in flying accidents during the same period were 65 and 89, respectively. In addition, two Army officers and two officers of the Royal Air Force Reserve were killed.
    As regards the last part, these casualties compare favourably with those of other air forces.

    EAST AFRICA (AIR COMMUNICATIONS).
    Major ROPNERasked the Secretary of State for Air whether, in view of the fact that the Colonies of Kenya and Uganda and the Sudan are combining financially with the object of running a six months' survey between Kisimu and Khartum to establish a permanent air service between these places, and to connect up with the England to India air service, in view of the far-reaching importance of the Cairo to the Cape route, the Government will give financial help to encourage the Colonies in their efforts
    2100
    to speed up Imperial communication, in accordance with the declared policy of assisting air-line development?
    Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: On a point of Order. May I draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to this question, which refers to "the Colonies of … Uganda and the Sudan," one of which is a Protectorate and the other is held in condominium with the Egyptian Government. Is it proper to call these two territories "Colonies"?
    Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think there is any libel in doing so.
    Sir S. HOARE: The proposed 12 months' experimental air service between Khartum and Kisumu has been arranged without any guarantee of assistance from Air Votes. If, as I hope, this experimental service proves successful, and it is decided to institute a permanent service, the relation of this service to the projected Egypt-India service, the grant of financial assistance, whether in the form of a subsidy or otherwise, and the source from which such assistance shall be furnished, will, of course, receive careful consideration. In this connection, I may say that the question of Imperial air routes and their future development is one of the subjects to be discussed with the Dominion representatives, including those of South Africa and Southern Rhodesia, at the forthcoming Imperial Conference.

    AIRSHIP GUARANTEE COMPANY.
    Mr. VIANTasked the Secretary of State for Air what amount has already been paid to the Air hip Guarantee Company in respect of the £50,000 voted towards the capital expenditure incurred in the construction of the new 5,000,000 cubic feet airship R 100, and in respect of the actual cost of the construction of the airship, respectively: and how far the construction of this ail ship has advanced?
    Sir S. HOARE: As regards the first part of the question, the whole of the £50,000 voted towards the Airship Guarantee Company's capital expenditure on shed, plant, etc., together with £100,000 as a first instalment of the contract price of the airship, was paid to the company on the signature of the contract. As regards the second part, I am informed

    2101
    that the company have completed the tests considered necessary before, passing from the stage of design and research to that of construction, and are now snaking the girders for the hull of the airship.

    HORNSEY EDUCATION AUTHORITY.
    Captain WALLACEasked the President of the Board of Education whether he has addressed any further communication to the Hornsey Education Authority as a result of the deputation which he received on 26th July; and whether he has any statement to make on the character of the advanced instruction provided by that authority?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Duchess of Atholl): Yes, Sir. My right hon Friend has suggested certain lines of inquiry to the authority, and in doing so has explained that he does not desire to criticise the quality of the advanced instruction given in the authority's area, but only the method of its organisation.

    CROWN COLONIES (COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA).
    Sir PARK GOFFasked the Home Secretary whether he can give any information with regard to Communist propaganda in the Crown Colonies?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Amery): I have been asked to answer this question. It would obviously be contrary to the public interest for me to make a full disclosure of the information on this subject which is in the possession of the Government, but the hon. Member can rest assured that the Governments of the Colonies and Protectorates will not fail to deal with any activities of this kind that are serious enough to warrant their intervention.

  TRANSPORT.

    LONDON TRAFFIC (REGULATIONS).
    Sir F. HALLasked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the traffic delays which now occur in the vicinity of Victoria Station;
    2102
    and whether any measures are proposed to be taken to improve the existing state of things?
    The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Proposals for the erection of direction signs, with a view to inducing traffic passing between Hyde Park Corner and Vauxhall Bridge, and between Chelsea, Sloane Square and Westminster Bridge, to use alternative routes which would avoid Victoria Station, have been submitted to me by the London Traffic Advisory Committee and the necessary arangements for the erection of such direction signs are in hand. In addition, the Advisory Committee are considering whether any further steps can be taken to relieve the traffic congestion at Victoria Station itself.
    Colonel DAY: Is it not a fact that the greater part of the congestion is caused through the best part of the station being taken up by the bus station?
    Colonel ASHLEY: I do not think so.
    Commander BELLAIRS: Could not traffic be facilitated in the neighbourhood of Victoria Station if the road were widened round Grosvenor Gardens?
    Colonel ASHLEY: All these considerations are being gone into.
    Sir H. BRITTAINasked the Minister of Transport whether he has any information to give to the House with regard to the working of the new traffic plans in Piccadilly and at Hammersmith; and whether, if successful, other congested districts are to be dealt with in a similar manner?
    Colonel ASHLEY: The revised traffic arrangements in Piccadilly, Piccadilly Circus and neighbourhood, and also at Hammersmith Broadway, are reported to be working satisfactorily, but these experiments have not been in operation sufficiently long to enable definite conclusions to be reached as to the final form which the arrangements will assume. In the case of Piccadilly Circus, the full benefit of the new system will nor be secured until the street works in connection with the Underground Railway extensions and the various re-building operations in the neighbourhood are com-

    2103
    pleted. Proposals for somewhat similar alterations in the traffic working at Knightsbridge, Sloane Square, and other congested centres, are under consideration by the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee.
    Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the electric signals will be working?
    Colonel ASHLEY: On Monday next.

    FARNBOROUGH-SEVENOAKS ROAD.
    Sir FRANK MEYERasked the Minister of Transport when it is intended to resume work on the new arterial road between Farnborough (Kent) and Seven-oaks?
    Colonel ASHLEY: The position is that work in the neighbourhood of Farnborough is drawing to a close under the contracts already let, and tenders for surfacing operations are now being invited.
    Sir F. MEYER: Is the Minister aware that a- great deal of widening has been done beyond Green Street Green, and that now grass is growing over the place where the work was being done six months ago?
    Colonel ASHLEY: Probably this might happen when waiting for the surface.

    RAILWAY BRIDGE, NEWTON-LE-WILLOWS.
    Mr. ROBERT YOUNGasked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the fatal accident in Park Road, Newton-le-Willows, and the evidence given at the Coroner's Court regarding the danger arising to the public; whether he is aware that the tunnel of the railway bridge is only 12 feet wide, with no pavement for pedestrians; that the tunnel is at a different angle to the roadway; and that approaching vehicles cannot see through the tunnel, and have to judge of on-coming traffic by sound alone; and whether, in these circumstances, he will take steps to cause the parties concerned to widen and straighten the bridgeway for the safety of the road users?
    Colonel ASHLEY: My attention had not previously been drawn to this accident, hut I understand that the road in question is a non-classified district
    2104
    road. I have no power to cause the bridge. to be altered, and no application has been made to me by the responsible highway authority for assistance towards the cost of any such improvement.

    FILM INDUSTRY.
    Sir H. BRITTAINasked the President of the Board of Trade whether be is aware that the trade committee formed to consider the question of British film production has been unable to arrive at any common ground of agreement; and whether, having regard to the importance of this subject to the Empire as a whole, he will take action without delay with the object of bringing the cinema industry in this country into line before the subject comes up for discussion with the representatives of the Overseas Dominions at the Imperial Conference?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Burton Chadwick): I have not yet received the cinema industry's report; when I do, I shall take the earliest opportunity of considering what action I can take on it.
    Sir H. BRITTAIN: Is it not far more important than a commercial proposition? Would it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman himself to give a lead to the trade to get them together before the Imperial Conference meets? If they do not, the opportunity may have passed till the next Conference meets.
    Sir B. CHADWICK: Every conceivable encouragement has been given by the President of the Board of Trade to the various sections of this industry to come together on this very important matter. The importance of it is, I am sure, not lost on anybody concerned, but the President of the Board of Trade is not able to do more until the report of these meetings reaches him. He will then take such action as he thinks it necessary to take.
    Colonel DAY: Is not one reason for the delay the fact that the people engaged in the industry appreciate the fact that they cannot foist on the public something that the public do not want?
    Sir B. CHADWICK: I bad better not enter into that.

    HOUSING SUBSIDY.
    Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the Minister of Health whether it is the intention of the Government to make arrangements to abolish the existing subsidies on the building of houses?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): My right hon. Friend is at present in touch with representatives of the local authorities on this subject, but he is not yet able to make any statement.
    Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: When will a statement be made, in view of the importance of local authorities knowing exactly where they stand in the matter?
    Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend will endeavour to make a statement before the Recess, but I do not know whether it will be possible.
    Mr. THURTLEWill the hon. Member bring to the notice of his right hon. Friend the important statement made yesterday by the chairman of the London County Council Housing Committee, showing how acute the housing shortage still is in London?
    Mr. R. RICHARDSON: In my own area also they are very far from—
    HON. MEMBERS: Speech!
    Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend is fully aware of the circumstances, and also that considerable progress is being made.
    Commander WILLIAMS: Will the hon. Gentleman consider the necessity for continuing to encourage iron houses or steel houses, as well as ordinary houses?

    NURSING HOMES (REGISTRATION).
    Viscount SANDONasked the Minister of Health whether he has accepted the Report of the Select Committee on Nursing Homes; and, if so, when he intends introducing legislation and taking administrative action to carry out its proposals?
    Sir K. WOOD: I would refer my noble Friend to the reply to a similar question
    2106
    by the hon. Member for North-West Camberwell (Mr. Campbell) on the 22nd July.
    Viscount SANDON: In view of the appalling state of affairs revealed by this Report, does not the hon. Gentleman consider it a disgrace that the matter should be left as it is, a moment longer than necessary?
    Sir K. WOOD: Well, in any event, the Report will involve legislation and careful consideration on the part of my right hon. Friend.

  SCOTLAND.

    APARTMENT HOUSES.
    Mr. BUCHANANasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of single apartment houses and two apartment houses which have been built in Scotland since December, 1919?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): Reliable statistics are available only as regards the number of subsidised houses built in Scotland during the period mentioned. I am informed that from 31st December, 1919, to 30th June last, no single apartment houses were built with the aid of subsidy. During the same period, 3,958 two apartment houses with scullery, bathroom and other conveniences were built with the aid of subsidy. From returns made to the Board of Health by local authorities it appears that during the period in question the erection of 23 single apartment houses was consented to by the local authorities in terms of Subsection 1 of Section 44 of the Housing, Town Planning, etc. (Scotland) Act, 1919, as continued by Section 111 of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1925.

    STEEL HOUSES.
    Mr. BUCHANANasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the length of time which has been taken to erect steel houses under the extra grant for Scotland; and how that time compares with the ordinary type of house?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: As the contracts for the steel houses in question are still in their early stages, I am unable to state the length of time taken to erect the houses or to compare their rate of erection with that of the ordinary type of

    2107
    house. The first block of steel houses was commenced at mid-March and was completed at mid-May.

    HOUSING, GLASGOW.
    Mr. BUCHANANasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of houses erected in Glasgow and occupied since the operation of any form of State grant, the number at present building, and the number for which plans have been accepted hut not yet started; and how the rate of progress for the past year compares with previous years?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: As the answer involves a table of figures, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. In view of to-day's Debate, I am sending the hon. Member a special copy of the reply.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: I notice that the right hon. Gentleman made a speech the other day comparing the rate of progress in housing in Scotland this year with, last year. Could he not answer the last part of my question, which deals with that particular point?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: In 1925 the number of houses completed was 824, and in 1926 it was 1,441.
    Following r the reply:
    As at 30th June, 1926, 7,474 subsidised houses had been erected in Glasgow, 4,383 were under construction and tenders had been approved for 2,290 which had not been begun. The returns available do not show whether all the completed houses were occupied at the above date. As regards the rate of progress, the following table shows the number of subsidised houses completed at 30th June in each of the last five years:

    Glasgow.

    Year ended 30th June.

    Number of houses completed.

    1922

    …

    …

    …

    809

    1923

    …

    …

    …

    2,276

    1924

    …

    …

    …

    1,621

    1925

    …

    …

    …

    824

    1926

    …

    …

    …

    1,441

    TITHES (COST OF COLLECTION).
    Mr. LOOKERasked the Minister of Agriculture if the cost of collection of tithes by Queen Anne's Bounty will amount to 10 per cent.; and, if not, what the cost of collection will be?
    Major Sir HARRY BARNSTON (for Mr. GUINNESS): I have been asked to reply. As the transfer of ecclesiastical tithe rentcharge to Queen Anne's Bounty under the Tithe Act, 1925, does not take effect until the 31st March, 1927, it is not at present possible for the Bounty to state what the cost of collection will be.
    Mr. LOOKER: Is there any foundation for the statement which is commonly being circulated among the clergy that these costs will amount to 10 per cent., and that they will only get £90 for each £100?
    Sir H. BARNSTON: Not so far as I am aware.

    HIGHLAND RAILWAY COMPANY (LITIGATION).
    Mr. JOHNSTONasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the Government have given any undertaking to accept any financial responsibility for the legal expenses being incurred by the Highland Railway Company in a litigation at present before the Courts, in which three senior and one junior counsel have been briefed by the appellants?
    Colonel ASHLEY: I have been asked to reply. The answer is in the affirmative. As the hon. Member is doubtless aware, this litigation originated in a dispute as to the legality of certain rates charged during the Government's possession of the railways, and the Government has a financial interest in the result of the action.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Can the right lion. Gentleman say whether it is the fact that actually four senior counsel and one junior counsel have been briefed; whether it is the case that only two of those counsel will be permitted to speak in this case; and what is the Government's total liability in this extraordinary performance?
    Colonel ASHLEY: Obviously, I cannot say how many counsel will be

    2109
    allowed to speak in the ease when it comes before the higher Court, but I am quite satisfied in this case, although a comparatively small sum is involved, that on the decision quite a large amount of public money may be involved, and, therefore, it is necessary to have a full array of counsel to argue the case for the railway company, which means the Government.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the financial extent of the Government's liability for these counsel?
    Colonel ASHLEY: Obviously, I cannot.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: If I put down a question, will the right hon. Gentleman give the figures?
    Colonel ASHLEY: I have no doubt that if the hon. Gentleman puts down a question 1 may he able to answer it.

    INTER-IMPERIAL MILITARY PENSIONS.
    Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE (for Lieut.-Colonel GAULT)asked the Secretary of state for War whether he w ill at the forthcoming Imperial Conference obtain the opinion of the Dominion Governments on the feasibility of arranging inter-Imperial military pensions for those who have served in the military forces of the Crown in more than one part of the Empire, and of reckoning all such service as though it were continuous in the granting of these pensions?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King): The proposal in question has been considered in the past, and found to be impracticable. I do not, therefore, think that any useful purpose would be served by taking the step suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend.

    BETTING DUTY.
    Colonel DAYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether a bet made in respect to a race taking place on the Continent or in Ireland, but made on a racecourse in this country, between a backer and a bookmaker both attending
    2110
    the same race meeting in this country, will be charged on the higher or lower scale?
    Mr. McNEILL: The bet in question would be taxed at 2 per cent.
    Colonel DAY: May I ask, in the event of the race being declared off, whether the man who makes the bet, or the bookmaker, can reclaim the tax?
    Mr. McNEILL: I have not the least idea.
    Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say where the public can get the information?
    Mr. SPEAKER: Members must face their own risks.

    TAXATION, GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE.
    Sir F. HALLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is approximately the amount of annual taxation per head of the population in France and Great Britain, respectively?
    Mr. McNEILL: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. and gallant Member for South Hackney (Captain Garro-Jones) on the 22nd April last.

  GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

    PERMANENT MESSENGERS.
    Sir WILFRID SUGDENasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the number of patronage appointments to the permanent messenger class in the Civil Service by Departments for the periods 1914 to 1918 and 1919 to the latest date available?
    Mr. McNEILL: I am having the information asked for by my hon. Friend collected, and will circulate it as soon as possible.

    Ex-SERVICE MESSENGERS, OVERSEAS TRADE DEPARTMENT.
    Sir W. SUGDENasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware of the continued retention of temporary non-service messengers in the Department of Overseas Trade; and will he give an assurance that, in accordance

    2111
    with the Government's policy of preferential treatment for ex-service men, they shall be displaced in order to make room for redundant temporary ex-service messengers?
    Sir B. CHADWICK: I have been asked to reply. The question of substituting ex-service men for the remaining non-service messengers at present employed in the Department has been repeatedly considered, but it has been decided to retain the non-service men on grounds of special efficiency, long service and private circumstances. Vacancies are filled by the appointment of ex-service men, but I am not prepared to give an assurance that the non-service messengers at present employed shall be displaced to make room for ex-service messengers whose posts are redundant in other Departments. I may add, that out of 34 messengers in the Department, only six are non-service.
    Sir W. SUGDEN: On account of the grave importance of my hon. Friend's reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.

    DANGEROUS DRIVING OF CHAR-A-BANC (POLICE PASSENGERS).
    Sir F. MEYERasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to a- recent case when the driver of a char-a-banc was fined £5 for dangerous driving, and in which it was stated that all the passengers, to the number of 35, were members of the Metropolitan Police Force; and whether he proposes to take; any action in the matter?
    Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: My attention had not previously been drawn to the incident, nor do I understand what action my hon. Friend desires me to take.
    Sir F. MEYER: Is it not obvious from this question that the police are not able to judge under the present law what is or what is not dangerous driving?
    Mr. HAYES: Is it not a fact that a police officer when off duty enjoys all the amenities of an ordinary member of the public, and this is the human touch whereby he enjoys his leisure?
    Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: That is why I answered the question that I did not
    2112
    know what action my hon. Friend desires me to take. These police were in holiday mood.
    Sir J. NALL: Is it not rather hard lines on the driver that he should have to pay for these amenities?
    Commander BELLAIRS: If a policeman off duty enjoys the amenities of the public, why was a policeman run in by an inspector for not paying his fare on an omnibus the other day?

    EMPIRE MARKETING BOARD.
    Mr. RAMSDENasked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether the Marketing Board has now met; and whether he is able to make any statement as to its decisions?
    Mr. AMERY: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; I hope to make a brief statement regarding the work of the Empire Marketing Board up to the present during the course of the Debate to-morrow afternoon.

    EMERGENCY REGULATIONS (PROCLAMATION).
    Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: May I ask the Prime Minister when it is proposed to take into consideration His Majesty's most gracious Message delivered yesterday?
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): I do not propose to take it at all.
    Captain BENN: May I put a point of Order to you, Mr. Speaker. I submit to you that the custom of this House is that we should take into consideration a Message delivered to this House under the sign manual. I observe that in May's "Parliamentary Practice" it states that these Messages
    "may be regarded, in short, as additions to the Royal Speech at the commencement of the Session, submitting other matters to the deliberations of Parliament."
    If they are in the same category as the Royal Speech, the same rights that we have of moving Amendments or considered Addresses in reply would be enjoyed by this House, and if we give up the right of moving a humble Address in reply to this Message we may have

    2113
    created a precedent subsequently for losing our right to move Amendments to. the major Message which takes the form of a speech. May further says:
    "This analogy between a Royal Speech and a Message under the sign manual is supported by several circumstances common to both."
    He goes on to say that Messages relating to important public events are answered by an Address, and he further states:
    "These messages are, according to usage, referred to the consideration of a Committee of the Whole House."
    Further, the Home Secretary himself said when we had the last Message:
    "The message is an old form of courtesy which has been in existence in this House from time immemorial."
    This particular Message was sent to us in pursuance of the Emergency Powers Act, 1920. have been looking at the precedents for Messages sent in pursuance of that Act, and I find that on every occasion but one a humble Address has been moved in reply to the Message, and I find that on every occasion, without any exception, the Prime Minister has given notice that the Message would be taken into consideration by the House—either the Prime Minister or the Home Secretary on his behalf. Therefore, I submit to you that the House should not part with this opportunity, provided by Statute and by His Majesty's most Gracious Message, to discuss in general the use of these powers, which, of course, are of an exceptional kind, and I respectfully submit. to you that when the House granted these powers to the Executive in the Act of 1020, it specifically hedged them about with these precautions in order that such opportunities for Debate might occur.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I do not find in what the hon. and gallant Member has submitted anything that calls for my intervention. What has been proposed on the present occasion is following the precedent of the 4th May, 1921.
    Captain BENIN: I do not know whether I should appeal to you, Sir, to know whether you can direct us as to how we should go to work to preserve our privileges, but I would respectfully submit to you that, whereas on that occasion, a Motion was made that the Message would
    2114
    be taken into consideration though not proceeded with. On every other occasion, to the number of six, the precedent stands that a humble Address should be moved, and if nobody else moves it, would it be in order for any other hon. Member to move a humble Address in reply to His Majesty's Gracious Message?
    Mr. SPEAKER: If he can find his own time for the purpose.
    Captain BENN: With great respect, Sir, I submit to you that the privilege of moving a humble Address is, apart from its ceremonial courtesy, an important opportunity for the expression of the opinion of the Members of this House. If I may submit a hypothetical case, supposing the Government pursued this procedure with the Gracious Speech from the Throne, and no Address were moved, we should then be deprived of most important Debates on general policy.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I think the hon. and gallant Member need not entertain that fear. The precedent of 4th May, 1921, is the one that has been followed.
    Captain BENN: I apologise for pressing this question. I should not do it unless I thought it were a matter of importance. May we take it now that the procedure has been changed, and that in future these Emergency Regulations will be brought into force without preliminary discussion for which a humble Address affords an opportunity?
    Mr. SPEAKER: There is no question of bringing them into force. They have force for seven days, not longer, unless confirmed by the House. The House, under the Statute, has power to confirm or not to confirm after the expiry of the stated period.

BILLS PRESENTED.
  GOVERNMENT OF SCOTLAND BILL,
  "to provide for the better government of Scotland," presented by Mr. BARR; supported by Mr. Adamson, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Duncan Graham, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Kirkwood, Mr. Neil Maclean, Mr. Rosslyn Mitchell, Dr. Shiels, Mr. Stephen, Mr. Westwood and Mr. Wright; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 172.]

  HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) BILL,
  "to promote the, provision of housing accommodation for agricultural workers and for persons whose economic condition is substantially the same as that of such workers, and the improvement of such accommodation, by authorising the giving of financial assistance towards the reconstruction and improvement of houses and other buildings," presented by Mr. NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN; supported by Secretary Sir John Gilmour, Mr. Guinness and Sir Kingsley Wood; to be read a
  Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 173.]

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Motion made, and Question put,
  "That the Proceedings on Report of Air Expenditure, 1929–25, and on the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]
  The House divided: Ayes, 252; Noes, 105.

  Division No. 408.]

  AYES.

  [3.46 p.m.

  Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

  Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

  Huntingfield, Lord

  Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

  Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil)

  Hutchison, G. A. C.(Mld'n & Peebles)

  Ainsworth, Major Charles

  Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

  Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

  Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)

  Davies, Dr. Vernon

  Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.

  Amery, Rt, Hon. Leopold C. M. S.

  Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

  Jacob. A. E.

  Applin, Colonel R. V. K.

  Dean, Arthur Wellesley

  Jephcott, A. R.

  Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.

  Drewe, C.

  Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William

  Atholl, Duchess of

  Duckworth, John

  Kennedy. A. R. (Preston)

  Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley

  Eden, Captain Anthony

  Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

  Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

  Edmondson, Major A. J.

  King, Captain Henry Douglas

  Barnett, Major Sir Richard

  Edwards, J, Hugh (Accrington)

  Kintoch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Beamish, Captain T. P. H.

  Elliot, Major Walter E.

  Knox, Sir Alfred

  Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

  Ellis, R. G.

  Lane Fox. Col. Rt. Hon. George R.

  Bettairs, Commander Carlyon W.

  Elveden, Viscount

  Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

  Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

  England, Colonel A.

  Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

  Bennett, A. J.

  Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

  Berry, Sir George

  Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

  Loder, J. de V.

  Bethel, A.

  Everard, W. Lindsay

  Looker, Herbert William

  Birchall, Major J. Dearman

  Fairfax, Captain J. G.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

  False, Sir Bertram G

  Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

  Blades, Sir George Rowland

  Fanshawe, Commander G, D.

  MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

  Blundell, F. N.

  Fielden, E. B.

  McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus

  Boothby, R. J. G.

  Ford, Sir P. J .

  Macintyre, Ian

  Bourne, Captain Robert Croft

  Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

  Macnaghten. Hon. Sir Malcolm

  Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.

  Forrest, W.

  McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

  Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.

  Foxcroft, Captain C. T.

  Macquisten, F. A.

  Brass, Captain W.

  Frece, Sir Walter de

  MacRobert, Alexander M.

  Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

  Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.

  Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel

  Briggs, J. Harold

  Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony

  Makins, Brigadier-General E.

  Briscoe, Richard George

  Ganzoni, Sir John

  Malone, Major P. B.

  Brittain, Sir Harry

  Gates, Percy

  Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

  Brocklebank, C. E. R.

  Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

  Margesson, Captain D.

  Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

  Glyn, Major R. G. C,

  Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

  Brown-Lindsay, Major H.

  Goff Sir Park

  Meyer, Sir Frank

  Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)

  Grace, John

  Milne, J. S. Wardlaw

  Burgoyne. Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

  Grant, Sir J. A.

  Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

  Burman, J. B.

  Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.

  Mitchell. W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

  Burton, Colonel H. W.

  Greene, W. P. Crawford

  Moles, Thomas

  Butler, Sir Geoffrey

  Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)

  Monsell, Eyres, Corn. Rt. Hon. B. M.

  Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

  Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

  Moore. Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

  Calne, Gordon Hall

  Gunston, Captain D. W.

  Moore, Sir Newton J.

  Campbell, E. T

  Hall. Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

  Morden, Col. W. Grant

  Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt.R,(Prtsmth.S.)

  Harland, A.

  Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

  Cecil. Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

  Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

  Murchison, C. K.

  Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton

  Haslam, Henry C.

  Colonel Sir Joseph

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn.SirJ.A.(Birm.,W.)

  Hawke. John Anthony

  Nelson, Sir Frank

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)

  Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.

  Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

  Chapman, Sir S.

  Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd,Henley)

  Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

  Charteris, Brigadier-General J.

  Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

  Nield. Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert

  Churchill. Rt, Hon. Winston Spencer

  Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.

  Nuttall, Ellis

  Churchman, Sir Arthur C.

  Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

  O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

  Cobb, Sir Cyril

  Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)

  O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

  Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

  Hilton, Cecil

  Oman, Sir Charles William C.

  Conway, Sir W. Martin

  Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.

  Pennefather, Sir John

  Cope, Major William

  Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard

  Penny, Frederick George

  Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Holland, Sir Arthur

  Perkins. Colonel E. K.

  Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

  Hopkins, J. W. W.

  Peto. Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

  Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

  Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)

  Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

  Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)

  Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster. Mossley)

  Plelou, D. P.

  Curzon, Captain Viscount

  Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.

  Pilcher, G.

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

  Power, Sir John Cecil

  Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton

  Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine,C.)

  Waddington, R.

  Price, Major C. W. M.

  Smith-Carington, Neville W.

  Wallace, Captain D. E.

  Radford, E. A.

  Smithers, Waldron

  Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.

  Ramsden, E.

  Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

  Waterhouse, Captain Charles

  Rawson, Sir Cooper

  Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

  Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

  Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

  Sprot, Sir Alexander

  Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

  Remer, J. R.

  Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E)

  Wells, S. R.

  Remnant, Sir James

  Stanley, Lord (Fylde)

  White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

  Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

  Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

  Wiggins, William Martin

  Rice, Sir Frederick

  Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

  Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

  Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

  Strickland, Sir Gerald

  Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)

  Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)

  Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

  Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)

  Ropner, Major L.

  Sugden, Sir Wilfrid

  Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

  Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.

  Tasker, Major R. Inigo

  Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

  Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

  Templeton, W. P

  Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

  Rye, F. G.

  Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)

  Wise, Sir Fredric

  Salmon, Major I.

  Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

  Wood, E. (Chost'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)

  Sandeman, A. Stewart

  Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)

  Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).

  Sandon, Lord

  Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-

  Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

  Savery, S. S.

  Tinne, J. A.

  Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.

  Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

  Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

  Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

  Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

  Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

  Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

  Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Skelton, A. N.

  Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

  Colonel Gibbs and Major Sir Harry

  Barnston.

  NOES.

  Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

  Grenfell, D. (Glamorgan)

  Scrymgeour, E.

  Ammon, Charles George

  Groves, T.

  Scurr, John

  Attlee, Clement Richard

  Grundy, T W.

  Sexton, James

  Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)

  Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

  Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

  Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

  Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Shepherd, Arthur Lewis

  Barnes, A.

  Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)

  Shiels, Dr. Drummond

  Barr, J.

  Hardie, George D.

  Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)

  Batey, Joseph

  Harney, E. A.

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)

  Beckett, John (Gateshead)

  Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)

  Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

  Bean, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

  Hirst, G. H.

  Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)

  Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

  Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

  Stamford, T. W.

  Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

  Hore-Belisha, Leslie

  Stephen, Campbell

  Buchanan, G

  Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

  Sutton, J. E.

  Cape, Thomas

  John, William (Rhondda, West)

  Thomas, At. Hon. James H. (Derby)

  Charleton, H. C.

  Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)

  Thomas, Sir Robert John (Analesey)

  Clowes, S.

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)

  Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

  Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

  Thurtle, Ernest

  Compton, Joseph

  Kelly, W. T.

  Townend, A. E.

  Connolly, M.

  Kennedy, T.

  Trovelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.

  Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

  Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.

  Viant, S. P.

  Dalton, Hugh

  Kenyon, Barne

  Wallhead, Richard C.

  Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

  Lawrence, Susan

  Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

  Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

  Lawson, John James

  Watts-Morgan. Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

  Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)

  Lee, F.

  Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

  Day, Colonel Harry

  Livingstone, A. M.

  Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah

  Dennison, R.

  Lowth, T.

  Welsh, J. C

  Dunnico, H.

  MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)

  Westwood, J.

  Fenby, T. D.

  Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)

  Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

  Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.

  Montague, Frederick

  Wilkinson, Elkin C.

  Gibbins, Joseph

  Morris, R. H.

  Williams, David (Swansea, East)

  Gillett, George M.

  Palin, John Henry

  Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

  Gosling, Harry

  Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)

  Windsor, Walter

  Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

  Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.

  Wright, W.

  Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)

  Potts, John S.

  Greenall, T.

  Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

  Saklatvala, Shapurji

  Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.

  Hayes.

  Third Resolution read a Second time.

  BILLS REPORTED.
  Southend-on-Sea Corporation [Lords],
  Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill [Lords],
  Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section A); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Ministry of Health Provisional Orders confirmation (No. 11) Bill [Lords]
  Reported, with an Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
  Shropshire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire Electric Power Bill [Lords],
  Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  ESTIMATES.
  Second Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, and Appendices, brought up, and read;
  Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 119.]

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to,—
  Finance Bill,
  Chartered Associations (Protection of Names and Uniforms) Bill,
  London County Council (Money) Bill, without Amendment.
  Dover Harbour Bill,
  Swindon Corporation Bill, with Amendments.
  Amendments to—
  Scottish Widows' Fund and Life Assurance Society Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
  That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to repeal the enactments providing for the protection of Wild Birds and to substitute other provisions therefor." [Wild Birds Protection Bill [Lords.]
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to regulate the sale on commission of horticultural produce." [Horticultural Produce (Sales on Commission) Bill [Lords.]
  And also, a Bill intituled, "An Act to amend certain enactments relating to mental defectives." [Mental Deficiency Bill [Lords.]
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Kilmarnock Corporation." [Kilmarnock Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
  And also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to the Church of Scotland Ministers' and Scottish University Professors' Widows' Fund (Amendment)." [Church of Scotland Ministers' and Scottish University Professors' Widows' Fund (Amendment) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]

  KILMARNOCK CORPORATION ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL [Lords].
  Ordered (under Section 7 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) to be considered To-morrow.
  CHURCH OF SCOTLAND MINISTERS' AND SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS' WIDOWS' FUND (AMENDMENT) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL [Lords].
  Ordered (under Section 7 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) to be considered To-morrow.
ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY.
  [20TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
  REPORT [26TH JULY.]
  Resolutions reported.

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
    CLASS II.
    1. "That a sum, not exceeding £102,609, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's Secretary for Scotland and Subordinate Offices, Expenses under the Inebriates Acts, 1879 to 1900, Expenses under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, a Subsidy for Steamer Services to the Hebrides, and Grants in respect of Unemployment Schemes."
    CLASS IV.
    2. "That a sum, not exceeding £3,680,342, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Public Education in Scotland, and for the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, including a Grant-in-Aid."
    CLASS VII.
    3. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,858,345, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Scottish Board of Health, including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, Grants to Local Authorities, etc., Grants in respect of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under the National Health Insurance Acts, certain Expenses in connection with the Widows', Orphans', and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act, 1925, and certain Grants-in-Aid."
    CLASS II.
    4. "That a sum, not exceeding £117,130, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927 for the Salaries and Expenses of The Mines Department of the Board of Trade."
    CLASS I.
    5. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,425,408, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class I of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926, cols. 1835–6.]
    CLASS II.
    6. "That a sum not exceeding £8,314,823, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IT of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926, cols. 1837–8.]
    CLASS III.
    7. "That a sum, not exceeding £6,152,136, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class III of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July. 1926, cols. 1841–2]
    CLASS IV.
    8. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,557,782, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IV of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July. 1926, col. 1847.]
    CLASS V.
    9. "That a sum, not exceeding £4,286,822, he granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class V of the Estimates for Civil Services.—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; col. 1848.]
    CLASS VI.
    10. "That a sum, not exceeding £64,071,749, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the suns necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VI of the Estimates for Civil Services.—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; cols. 1851–2.]
    CLASS VII.
    11. "That a sum, not exceeding £17,904,074, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VII of the Estimates for Civil Services.—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; col. 1852.]
    UNEMPLOYMENT GRANTS.
    12. "That a sum, not exceeding £85,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Grants to Local Authorities, etc., in Great Britain for assistance in carrying out approved Schemes of useful work to relieve Unemployment."
    RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYMENT.
    13. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,611,100 (including a Supplementary sum of £1,075,000), be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Relief arising out of Unemployment."
    GRANTS IN RESPECT OF UNEMPLOYMENT SCHEMES.
    14. "That a sum, not exceeding £800,000, he granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Grants to Local Authorities, etc., in England and Wales, in respect of Capital Works approved as Unemployment Schemes."
    EXPORT CREDITS.
    15. "That a sum, not exceeding £5, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the suns necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, to provide for guarantees in respect of Exports of goods wholly or partly produced or manufactured in the United Kingdom."
    SHIPPING LIQUIDATION.
    16. "That a sum, not exceeding £5, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the Salaries and Expenses in connection with Shipping Liquidation."

    RAILWAY (WAR) AGREEMENTS LIQUIDATION.
    17. "That a sum, not exceeding £90, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the
    2138
    year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, to meet Expenditure arising from the Government Control of Railways in Great Britain and Ireland under the Regulation of the Forces Act, 1871, Section 16."

    PRIZE CLAIMS.
    18. "That a sum, not exceeding £15,800, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Claims in respect of Ships or Cargoes condemned as Naval Prize or detained and certain Salaries for advisory Duties."
    COAL MINING INDUSTRY SUBVENTION.
    19. "That a sum, not exceeding £250,005 (including a Supplementary sum off £250,000), be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for a Subvention in Aid of Wages in the Coal Mining Industry."
    REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
    20. "That a sum, not exceeding £7,284,652, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for expenditure in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments."—[For Services included herein, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; col. 1867.]
    NAVY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
    21. "That a sum, not exceeding £36,583,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Navy Services."—[For Services included herein, see OFFICIAL. REPORT, 26th July, 1926; cols. 1867–8.]
    ARMY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
    22. "That a sum, Dot exceeding £21;159,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Army Services (including Ordnance Factories)."—[For Services included here, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; cols. 1871–2.]

    AIR FORCE ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
    23. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,650,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Expenditure in respect of the Air Force Services."—[For Services included herein, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1926; col. 1878.]
    Mr. WILLIAM ADAMSON: I beg to move, to leave out "£102,609," and to insert instead thereof "£102,509."
    I want, in the first place, to congratulate my right hon. Friend on the restoration of the office which he holds to the status of a Secretary of State. I think that is a change which meets with the approval of all sections of the people of Scotland. I also want to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman upon his decision to visit the islands of Orkney and Shetland in the autumn of this year. It is a very good thing for one holding the position which the right hon. Gentleman holds to make himself acquainted with as many of the problems facing the people he represents as he possibly can. In my first word I congratulated the Secretary of state for Scotland upon the raising of his office to the status of a Secretary of State. The abolition of that office in the far-off days which we have been hearing about during the discussion of this matter, was the first link in the chain of events which has led to a condition of affairs in a, large part of Scotland which I want to discuss with the Secretary of State and his colleagues in the Government for a brief time this afternoon. The struggle which culminated in the abolition of the office of Secretary of State for Scotland in those violent days not only meant the loss of the Crown to the ancient line of Scottish kings, but it also involved the breaking-up of a system of government under which a considerable section of our people lived, and which gave to people in that part of our country, which was purely pastoral, the same indefeasible right to the ownership of the land on which they lived and worked as was possessed by the chieftains under whom they lived.
    4.0 P.M.
    The next link in that chain of events was that that large section of people to whom I have already referred were deprived of their lawful inheritance and were driven off the land. Their place, in the first instance, was taken by sheep, and, later on, the sheep were largely displaced by deer. The result was that a portion of our people were driven off the land into the industrial centres, and in many cases bad to emigrate. To-day we have millions of acres of land lying idle, or at least converted into deer forests and kept in what I would describe as an idle condition for the sport of a few million-
    2140
    aires who, in many instances, do not belong to our country at all, but are foreigners. Not only had we a considerable section of our people in those days driven off the land, but those who were left have been compelled to live under conditions which are a discredit not only to this Government but to every Government that has been in office during the period with which I am dealing. This remnant of our people have been compelled to eke out a miserable existence on a few acres of land, while millions of acres have been reserved for the pleasure and the sport of a few wealthy men and women. That is a condition of affairs which not only places a heavy responsibility on the Secretary of State for Scotland, but also on every Member of this House who represents a Scottish constituency. It calls upon every one of us not to miss a single opportunity of discussing ways and means by which that condition of affairs can be changed and the land of our country restored for the use of our people.
    I do not mind confessing to my right hon. Friend and to the House that when I, for a brief period of time, occupied the office which he now fills, I saw visions and dreamed dreams which compelled me to take this very problem into consideration. During that very brief period of office I had under consideration the best method of changing our system of land tenure with a view, if possible, of re storing the land to our people for their use under easier conditions than has been the case for many years past. Not only had I under consideration the best method of changing our system of land tenure for making the land of the country available for our people, but at the same time I had under consideration the question of transport, because I recognised that, not only did we require to change the system of land tenure, but that, if our people were to develop agriculture and fishing in that part of the country to which I am referring, they would have to have the necessary facilities for doing so.
    I discussed with my colleague the Minister of Transport the ways and means for putting at the disposal of our people a better system of transport than exists to-day, and jointly we approached the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that Government and got from him a promise of £2,000,000 to enable us to make new

    2141
    roads right up to the western parts of the Highlands, beginning in the district of Tyndrum and going by Kings House, Glencoe, Balachulish and Far Lochaber to Inverness. Not only did we get our colleague the Chancellor of the Exchequer to agree to a sum of £2,000,000 being spent for the making of this necessary main avenue of transport, but we surveyed the ground beyond Inverness right through to the coast. In addition, we surveyed the ground between the nearest point on the railway going on to Caithness from Lairg to Lochinver on the coast with a view either to putting down an appropriate highway or to laying down a light railway. Not only did we do that, but, as my right hon. Friend knows, we also pushed on as rapidly as we possibly could with the resurfacing of the road in the eastern part of the Highlands from Perth through the Vale of Atholl to Inverness.
    These steps were being taken with a view of making it possible for us to restore our people to the land in that part of the country, and, having restored them to the land, placing them in a position to be able to bring their agricultural produce and their fishing produce from the harbours more easily to the industrial centres, where they would find a ready market, and so bringing them as near as possible under the same conditions as agriculture in the South of Scotland. Not only had I under consideration the system of land tenure and the question of transport, but I had also under consideration a scheme of co-operation that would enable our agricultural and fishing population in that part of the country to get the full fruits of their labours. We had under weigh a scheme of co-operation that would have banded together the fishing and agricultural populations and have placed them in the position of being able to get the full fruits of their labours.
    These were some of the schemes that we had under consideration during that brief period of office, and, had we been fortunate enough to have remained in office as long as some other Governments have done—I do not refer to my right hon. Friend, because he has not had a very long period of office—I can assure the right hon. Gentleman and my fellow Members who represent Scottish
    2142
    constituencies that everything possible would have been done to have carried out that programme. I can assure my right hon. Friend—it may be an encouragement to him to go and do likewise—that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that Government would have had no peace until he had provided the money necessary to enable us to redeem the position in that part of Scotland. I think it is the duty of every Member who represents a Scottish constituency, and particularly the man who fills the position of my right hon. Friend, to see that every step possible is taken to place the land in that part of the country at the disposal of our people to a far greater extent than has been the case up to now.
    My last word is to ask the right hon. Gentleman what his intentions are with regard to the problem in that part of the country. He has now an opportunity of doing good work on behalf of our people and our country, and I want to know what is his attitude towards this matter. I want to ask him if he knows what has become of that scheme for spending £2,000,000. I want to ask him also what has become of our ideas of a system of co-operation for the agricultural and fishing population—the people who are there now and the people who could he placed there if we had the Highland problem tackled in a proper way. I want, further, to ask what his intentions are with regard to making the necessary changes in our system of land tenure to place a far larger number of our people in the Highlands of Scotland on the land than has been possible for so many years. On his answers will depend whether I insist on trying to carry the Amendment to reduce his salary. I have no special desire to see his salary reduced. If we are going to make reductions in the salaries of Ministers, I think we require to begin somewhere else. But on his answers to the questions I have put to him depend the question whether I press my Amendment for a reduction of his salary.
    Mr. N. MACLEAN: I want to depart from the question which has been raised by the right hon. Gentleman who moved the reduction. I would rather have followed on the same lines, and tried to get from the Secretary of State for Scotland a statement on his general policy

    2143
    with regard to the improvement of the conditions in Scotland:, particularly in the Highland areas, but there is a point on which I have been at variance with the Secretary of State for Scotland for over a year, and, as this is practically the only opportunity one gets of expressing one's disappointment at the attitude he has taken up on the question, I am devoting the time at my disposal to the discussion of that particular point. The question to which I desire to refer is that of the Kilmarnock constables, which arose at about this time last year. I was able to get the Secretary of State for Scotland, after repeated refusals, to give a conditional consent to an inquiry being held. That inquiry has been held, and, to my mind, the Report that has been issued on that inquiry, and the subsequent action taken by the Secretary of State for Scotland, is a great disappointment, not only to myself but to a large number of people who are interested in this matter.
    The Report of the learned Sheriff who presided over the inquiry is a most contradictory and unsatisfactory document in the effect that it has brought about, and I have been doing my best for some time past to get the Secretary of State for Scotland to issue the shorthand notes of the inquiry, so that we can get actually what transpired set out in cold letterpress. The statements that have been made in the Sheriff's Report are most astounding when one considers what has transpired. The dismissal of the two constables is held to be in fact justified by the evidence, but I want to submit that the Report, which has been issued from the Office of the Secretary of State for Scotland, makes it perfectly clear that, if the two constables were justifiably dismissed from the Force, there is an equal justification for dismissing the Chief Constable as well. I am going to quote the Sheriff's Report in order to justify my assertion. In that Report the Sheriff, among the very startling statements that he makes referring to the Chief Constable's conduct, makes this statement in the last paragraph on page 35:
    "The distrust and suspicion of the Chief Constable having hostility towards the Constables' Branch Board—proved to have existed among the constables."—
    2144
    that was proved in the mind of the Sheriff—
    "had its inception in his arbitrary and high-handed conduct in dealing with the rest day grievance when legitimately submitted to him on 3rd March, 1925, and was aggravated by his lack of tact and judgment in dealing with subsequent events."
    I submit that that statement, coming from the chairman of the tribunal—the Sheriff of Ayrshire—regarding the Chief Constable's conduct, that the whole trouble had its inception in his arbitrary and high-handed conduct and lack of judgment, and the want of tact that he displayed in subsequent matters, is in itself a condemnation of the Chief Constable, and is in one way a slight justification of the attitude adopted by the two constables who were dismissed later.
    There is another point in the Report, at the top of page 34. The Chief Constable all through the inquiry denied the accusations, made against him by various constables, that not only was he tactless but that he was most abusive in language towards them when they were summoned to appear before him in his office. The Chief Constable denied that statement, and the Sheriff said:
    "The relations were manifestly strained, and I do not doubt that on that occasion the Chief Constable, in spite of his assertion to the contrary, expressed himself in somewhat strong language."
    On the occasion when he instructed his subordinates to take down certain statements from two constables, the Sheriff finds that the Chief Constable was actually responsible for getting his subordinate, the Inspector, to dictate those letters to the two constables, and that those letters, dictated by the Inspector, contained two most inaccurate statements, to which the two constables subsequently said they did not wish to put their names. The Sheriff, with regard to that, makes this statement. The Chief Constable made an effort to show that he was innocent of any attempt at dictation to these constables, and the Sheriff says:
    "The admission by the Chief Constable that when requesting the reports he reminded Constable Macdonald that he was not 'coercing' him, clearly shows that some sort of undue pressure was being used. This is confirmed by the part taken by Inspector McPhee in the drawing of Constable Anderson's report, for which the Chief Constable, must take full responsibility, as McPhee was presumably acting on his instructions."

    2145
    I submit to the Secretary of State for Scotland that these very references themselves prove that this Chief Constable is not the man for his position, that he has been responsible for all the trouble that has ensued in the Kilmarnock Police Force during the past two years, and that the Sheriff's report, in spite of the Chief Constable's statement on oath, is one of the most damning judgments that was aver delivered, not against the two constables who have been dismissed, but against the Chief Constable himself. The very first statement that the Sheriff makes with regard to the Chief Constable is on page 10, where he says:
    "I have formed the opinion that the action of the Chief Constable in failing to acknowledge Constable Hill's letter of the 2nd"—
    which was the first letter sent to him dealing with the original grievance of the rest day, and which was not acknowledged by the chief constable—
    "and at once, without attempting to discuss the matter with the Constables' Branch Board, issuing such a far-reaching Order as that of 3rd March, 1925, was both discourteous and arbitrary, and calculated, not only to convey the impression that he had prejudged the case, but also to cause strained relations between him and the force."
    I have read these points from the Report, and I could read others equally strong in their denunciation by the Sheriff of the conduct of the Chief Constable, but I do not want to weary the House by doing so, because hon. Members who are interested in the matter, or desire further confirmation, can find the document in the Library and can read the whole Report there for themselves. If the Chief Constable, according to the Sheriff, was by his conduct the inception of the whole trouble, why should these two individuals be singled out and made to hear the whole punishment? It is very curious that four of the five members of the Constables' Branch Board were all placed under some kind of disciplinary judgment, and these four individuals were looked upon as being against the Chief Constable's attitude. The fifth member of the Board has, I understand, since been promoted. Four of these men, who are looked upon as being opposed to the Chief Constable, have discipline imposed upon them, and a
    2146
    fifth receives promotion. It is very curious that two of them are dismissed—
    Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKE: Many are called, but few are. chosen.
    Mr. MACLEAN: This does not interest the hon. Member. He is an English Member—
    Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Oh, yes, it does.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Then, if the hon. Member will support me, I shall be quite willing to provide him with a copy of the Report. I have been trying to get these men reinstated, but the Secretary of State for Scotland says it cannot be done. He says it is against the Regulations. I have quoted cases where constables have been dismissed before and have been reinstated, and I want to read the Regulation upon which the Secretary of State for Scotland bases his claim that it is illegal to reinstate these two men. The Regulation says:
    "A candidate for appointment to a Police Force must produce satisfactory references as to character, and, if he has served in any branch of His Majesty's Naval, Military or Air Forces, or in the Civil Service or in any Police Force, must produce satisfactory proof of his good conduct while in such Service or Force. A person dismissed from any such Service or Force shall not be eligible for appointment."
    This particular Regulation deals with a new appointment, not a reinstatement. It deals with a candidate seeking an appointment. These two men are not seeking appointments; they arc asking to be reinstated, and this Regulation does no; cover their case in one iota.
    I want the House to observe what has followed from the Secretary of State for Scotland's interpretation of this Regulation. The Watching and Lighting Committee of Kilmarnock, by ten votes to two, decided to recommend to the Town Council of Kilmarnock the reinstatement of these two men, and the matter was to come up at a subsequent council meeting on the minutes of the Watching and Lighting Committee. In the interval, the town clerk of Kilmarnock had to come to London on some business, and was asked by the Provost of Kilmarnock to visit the Scottish Office and find out, if he could, the position with regard to reinstatement. He came back with an official pronouncement from

    2147
    the Scottish Office, and stated, not to the Watching and Lighting Committee but to the town council itself, that to reinstate these two men would be illegal, and no request by the town council to the Secretary of State for Scotland to have these men reinstated could be acceded to, as it would be illegal to reappoint them. Following upon that statement of the town clerk, repeating the pronouncement of the Scottish Office, the town council decided, as it would be illegal, not to go any further in the matter, not —as the Secretary of State for Scotland stated in reply to a question, and backed it up in a subsequent reply to a question I put to him yesterday—because they had fully considered the Report, but because the Scottish Office had made a pronouncement that it would be illegal. Purely, on this ground, the Town Council of Kilmarnock decided not to proceed any further in the matter. I want the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Lord Advocate to prove to this House that it will be illegal to reinstate these men, and, if they can prove that it is illegal, to justify the reinstatement of other members of the Police Force in Scotland who had been asked to resign or who had been dismissed. If the Lord Advocate declares that this is illegal, and that the Regulation I have read out makes it illegal on the part of the Scottish Office to reinstate them—
    The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. William Watson)indicated dissent.
    Mr. MACLEAN: The right lion. Gentleman seems to think it is not illegal.
    The LORD ADVOCATE: The Scottish Office has nothing to do with the appointment or re-appointment of constables.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Then why does the Scottish Office interfere and give advice which is not correct to the Kilmarnock Town Council? Why do they take upon themselves to set up a tribunal if they have no control over the Police Force in Scotland? Why do they reply to questions in this House dealing with the administration of the Police Force? It seems to me difficult to find what the Scottish Office do or can do. This incorrect interpretation of the Scottish Office of this Regulation forces the Town Council of Kilmarnock to do nothing else
    2148
    but follow their advice. I contend that that advice was wrong, and I want the Secretary of State for Scotland to justify it or to admit that it was incorrect, and give the Town Council of Kilmarnock a right to go back upon the decision, and agree that these two constables will be reinstated in the Police Force of Kilmarnock.
    Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: I want to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman as to the exercise of his powers under the Housing (Financial Provision) Act, 1924. Under Section 5 of that Act he is required to consider, on 1st October of this year, the amount of the subsidy, and he is required then, if he varies it, to make an Order. The Order under Section 6 cannot become operative until it has been confirmed by a Resolution of the House. The House in all probability will not be sitting on 1st October, and the first question I put is, will he say in advance what he proposes to do to cover the interim period between 1st October, when the subsidies are susceptible of revision, and such date as the Order can be laid before the House? Secondly, is it convenient to give any information as to what his intentions are in regard to the amount of the subsidy, because the matter has been engaging the earnest attention of the larger local authorities in Scotland.
    Mr. SPEAKER: That question should he raised on a subsequent Vote. The third Vote deals with the Scottish Board of Health, and housing can be raised thereon.
    Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: Following on the lines laid down by my hon. Friend, I want to put to the Secretary of State for Scotland that in Lanark, or at least in the industrial parts of the county, there is considerable feeling—and some justification for that feeling—that the administration of the law is not as it should be. When my right hon. Friend the Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) was Secretary for Scotland, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Rutherglen had occasion to ask that an inquiry should be held into the conduct of the police in Blantyre, and after some considerable trouble he was able to convince my right hon. Friend that there was a case for inquiry. An inquiry was practically agreed upon

    2149
    immediately before the Labour Government left office. After the change of Government he was induced by the present Secretary for Scotland to drop the matter and he did so hoping that some improvement would be made in the administration. Unfortunately I cannot see that there has been any great improvement, and on the last occasion the Scottish Estimates were discussed I raised the question of the prosecution of a man in the Hamilton Sheriff Court, where it is alleged that the constables who arrested him committed perjury That seems a strong statement but I make it quite emphatically. There has been apparently some sort of inquiry held into the matter and there has been a desire to hush the whole matter up. It may be that the case will not go any further, but that will depend largely upon the attitude of the Scottish Office. If the Secretary of State for Scotland is unwilling to do what I hope he will do, that will not remove the sense of injustice on the part of the man nor will it make us any more likely to believe that the course of justice runs as smoothly and fairly as it ought. The facts, as far as I am informed, are that the man was accused of being a bookmaker, that it was proved that he was not a bookmaker, and had never had anything to do with bookmaking. It is alleged that the policemen went into a particular house and, I understand, swore that they witnessed the act or acts that constituted the illegality. Evidence can be brought forward to show that they were never in the house at all. They went into the box and swore they were there, for the purpose of getting this man convicted and sent to prison. I do not think there is any other word in the language to describe their conduct than that of perjury. If constables in Lanark or anywhere else are encouraged to go into the witness box and swear that sort of evidence which will secure a conviction, it is time something was done by the House. I am very pleased that the Secretary for Scotland has been raised to the position of Secretary of State. It is not a question of personal feeling so far as the right hon. Gentleman is concerned, but I think there is a case for public inquiry and satisfaction being given to the people in that county that the Scottish Office will see that no such con-
    2150
    duct will be tolerated. I am making no charge against the present Chief Constable of Lanarkshire.
    In the case I am now going to put before the House, the late occupant of the position of Chief Constable was something of an arbitrary gentleman. He was a military man, and there are too many military men occupying the position of Chief Constable. He imagined he was of greater importance than the Sheriff of the county. I do not think he or anyone else occupying that position is entitled to arrogate to himself powers which render the decisions of the Sheriff of no effect. The case I want to bring is that of a constable who was accused of having committed a certain crime. He was brought before the Court, again the Sheriff Court of Hamilton, and after a very lengthy trial the case was found not proven. The man had been, for 14 years in the service, and had borne a good character as a constable, and as an efficient, competent and reliable man who had been in charge of stations in different parts of the county. After the case he was called before the Chief Constable, who demanded his resignation. The man refused on the ground that he was not guilty of the charge and that it had not been proven, and that his previous 14 years of good service should have shown that he was still competent to act as a constable. The Chief Constable was determined that he should go, and the man had to go. I understand there is some question of pension rights or payments that are made by constables that they are entitled to have returned in the event of their resigning. The man was warned that if he would not resign he would be deprived of this money. He acted as I think most hon. Members in the House would act. Being conscious of his own innocence, and being equally conscious that he was competent for his work, he refused to resign. I think everybody here will agree that the man was justified in doing so. I am sure that any hon. Member on the other side, if he felt that he was being unfairly and unjustly accused of a particular crime, would not admit that he was guilty. The late Chief Constable was guilty of arbitrary conduct by depriving this man of his position. I ask the Secretary of State for Scotland to consider the advis-

    2151
    ability of reinstating the man, or, if he is not prepared to do that, to see that the man receives the money to which he is entitled. The man went through a lengthy trial before the Sheriff, he was not found guilty of the charge levelled against him, and I think the treatment that has been meted out to him is unfair.
    I have had some correspondence with the right hon. Gentleman on this matter. I trust that he will now consider the question with a view either to reinstatement or to the man being paid the money to which he would have been entitled had he been willing to resign instead of preferring to accept dismissal. He was put in a very difficult and unfortunate position. The Sheriff had found that he was not guilty and, naturally, the man felt that the Sheriff was a greater authority, or that he ought to be looked upon as a greater authority, on the matter than the Chief Constable. To have resigned on the ground that he was guilty would have put the administration of the law in a peculiar position, and would have implied that the Sheriff is not a superior law officer as compared with the Chief Constable. In this case the Chief Constable acted arbitrarily and unfairly, and to a very considerable extent the man has suffered. I trust that what. I have said will influence the right hon. Gentleman in the direction either of reinstating the man or of paying him the money to which he is entitled.
    Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I should like to draw attention to the reduction from £150,000 to £120,000 in respect of unemployment schemes. I wish particularly to direct attention to a matter which we have had under consideration with the right hon. Gentleman, respecting Dundee. The Housing Committee there had promoted a scheme whereby they would produce a supply of concrete blocks which would have been available for the various housing schemes which the corporation have had in hand, and with which they have dealt so well for several years. The proposal was that by means of a grant towards that scheme they would be able to obtain the required plant, which was to cost not more than £3,000. If that plan had been adopted, it would have meant the withdrawal of a considerable number of men
    2152
    from receiving the unemployment benefit. The argument put forward by the right hon. Gentleman and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State is that owing to the subsidy given under the original housing scheme, it was not considered advisable to give this supplementary subsidy.
    The special phase which we emphasised on behalf of the corporation, which we thought would be of very great importance to the unemployed, was that a grant of this nature, or something approaching that figure, would enable the initiative to be taken by the Corporation for the production of the blocks, and substantial business could have been done. The figures regarding relief are significant in this connection. On the 21st June, 1925, the adults and dependents in Dundee amounted to 718. For the same month of this year the total was 2,396. Since then the expenditure has been steadily rising. The figures for those periods show that the relief given amounted to £168 and £510 respectively, which means that quite recently the parish council have had to face a very substantial increase of about 6d. per £ on the rates. A very little foresight in the direction I have suggested would have meant good business for the housing schemes which the Scottish Office themselves are anxious to expedite, and at the same time there would have been a reduction in the number of the unemployed. I hope that it will be possible to give the desired grants in order to help the Corporation.
    Sir ROBERT HORNE: The aspect of the House to-day reminds me of a remark which was made a few days ago by a distinguished ruling Prince of India when, after listening to the Indian Debate, he said: "The House was thin, even for an Indian day." I was able to reply to him that he ought to wait and see the condition of the House when Scottish Estimates were being taken.
    Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: So much more reason for Home Rule.
    Sir R. HORNE: I do not propose to discuss that question, but I am willing to go so far as to say that it is upon this day of the year that the House reaches its highest average of intelligence. Perhaps it will confirm the interpolation of the hon. Member opposite if I tell a remark of

    2153
    a Scotsman, who was not very well acquainted with England, and who came here in the course of the War. He was asked what he thought of the English. His reply was that they were the most extraordinary people he had ever come across; "They think that Scotland begins at Perth and that it is only open for three months in the year." In these circumstances, perhaps, we may be able to congratulate ourselves that we are allowed to discuss our domestic affairs, more or less, without the aid of the legislators from other parts of the Kingdom.
    I have listened to four speeches to-day dealing with the affairs of Scotland in the past year, and I confess that one is able to felicitate the new Secretary of State for Scotland upon the moderation of the speeches which have been made, and the lack of any attack upon the course of his administration. There have been three speeches dealing with matters entirely local. The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) raised a question in regard to the Kilmarnock police, and presented what seemed to me, from his statement of it, a very cogent argument: but I have no doubt that the Secretary of State has a reply to it. The hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) raised a question from Hamilton, and also made a case to which I have no doubt there is a sufficient reply. Then we had a case put by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Scrymgeour) about a stone contract. I am entirely incapable of making any reply to any of these speeches, but I have no doubt the Secretary of State has sufficient information at his command to give a completely satisfactory answer.
    There was however a speech by the right hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) which dealt with a somewhat bigger matter. It interested me, and in some respects it enchanted me. He gave an account of a journey from Glasgow to Balachulish, from Balachulish to Inverness, from Inverness to Lairg, and from Lairg to Lochinver, until one felt that one was taking part in the itinerary of Dr. Johnson and Mr. Boswell. The thought of one's native country at this time of the year excites many fancies in one's mind. As the right hon. Gentleman proceeded, one could almost see the lights dancing upon the hills of Scotland, and smell the bog myrtle coming up from the meadows.
    Mr. HARDIE: And see the landlord coming for his rent!
    Sir R. HORNE: His main theme, as far as I could gather his purpose, was that very much more cultivation was required in Scotland than at present was being devoted to the great spaces of our native land. That is a question in which every Scotsman is intensely interested. We have exactly the same problem there as is experienced not merely in other parts of Great Britain, but throughout the world, that there has been a great move towards the towns, that many of our country places are to-day becoming more or less depopulated, and that many people who form, the most virile section of our race have disappeared from the countryside in which they were reared. That is a matter which everyone deplores. All of us would be in favour of a policy which would bring more people to remain upon the land and to cultivate it. Once that has been said, it is also true to say that every effort has been made in recent years by all Governments which have been dealing with this problem to restore the people to the land and, wherever it has been possible, to create a rural population, thrifty, prosperous and virile.
    5.0 P.M.
    On the other hand, I would enter a caveat. The right hon. Gentleman, with enthusiasm, talked about millions of uncultivated acres, which he said were devoted to the pleasure of the rich in the way of deer forests and grouse moors. I have travelled over a good many of these. acres, and it is outside the region of common sense to talk of these places as being districts in which one can produce any ordinary form of cultivation. The Forestry Commission has been dealing with places in which timber can be grown, and they are developing the timber-growing districts in Scotland as fast as money can be provided, but to say that all the places in which there are deer forests and grouse moors are places on which one can grow wheat and corn and other things by which the life of the community is sustained is, as my hon. Friends know, a wild exaggeration of language.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Royal Commission has certified and scheduled

    2155
    the acreage which could be profitably used for crops which is at present used as deer forests?
    Sir R. HORNE: I am perfectly aware of what the Royal Commission said, but for anybody to talk about the millions of acres of deer forests as places where corn can be grown is completely refuted by the Royal Commission to which the hon. Member referred.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: No.
    Sir R. HORNE: It is absurd to say that these deer forests and grouse moors can all be used for raising crops, as some hon. Gentlemen appear to think. On the contrary, I am perfectly certain that everyone who knows the conditions of Scotland will agree that the amount of land which is devoted to sport at present is a very great source of revenue to the country, without which our resources would not be developed and without which it would be necessary to raise the rates in the country districts far beyond their present figure. One must realise the enormous amount of money brought to these sporting districts of Scotland by the shooting tenants. The amount which they contribute to the upkeep of local administration is something with which Scotland to-day could not dispense, and I only venture to put in this caveat against the assumption that it is possible suddenly to make the hill-tops of Scotland and its slopes and grouse moors blossom like the rose, or to grow crops of wheat and corn such as people can ordinarily grow on fertile land. That is a fallacy. It is one of the dreams which the right hon. Member talked about, but it is a dream that never can be realised. I only want to say, in a final sentence, that the right hon. Gentleman was rather unwilling to contemplate a reduction in the salary of the Secretary of State for Scotland. That was very natural, because he has been Secretary for Scotland, and there is every possibility that he may be Secretary of State for Scotland in due time again. I, on the other hand, having no hopes of that kind, nevertheless am entirely against any Motion to reduce my right hon. Friend's salary.
    Mr. MACLEAN: But you were Chancellor of the Exchequer and you had a higher salary.
    Sir R. HORNE: I do not think my salary then was any higher than the salary which my right hon. Friend is going to get now. If I am wrong I am still more disappointed, because I had hoped that at last the salary was going to be commensurate with the dignity of the post. If the Scottish Members will now take this matter in hand as assiduously as they take many other matters in hand we can easily see this matter put right. I do not know whether I shall get the support of my hon. Friends opposite, but if the opinion of the men of Scotland is firmly expressed on the matter we shall carry it through. I only wish to add that the work of the present Secretary of State for Scotland—as I am sure, all hon. Members will agree—has commended itself to the Scottish Members. He has shown patience and courtesy with regard to every complaint made to him and he has gained the esteem and admiration of us all. I would like to add also my tribute to the great services and help which his colleagues have rendered to all the Members for Scotland who have sought their aid. So far from seeking to reduce the salary in view of what has been said I should feel inclined to make a Motion for its increase.
    Mr. JAMES BROWN: I did not expect to intervene at this moment, because I had somewhat larger fish to fry, but I cannot allow all the statements of the right hon. Member to pass unchallenged. He surely is not right regarding depopulation. It is true that there is a great movement to the towns and to the great centres, but I think that every Scotsman knows that the depopulation of the Highlands was not due to the desire to go to the towns at all. Generally speaking, to-day the men and the women who leave the countryside for the towns do so in order to find employment, but it is not so regarding the depopulation of the Highlands. One of the saddest tales in the whole of the sad annals of our country is the depopulation of the Highlands. I am not going into, these matters very intimately, although I think I know something about them, having some little Highland blood in me. Consequently I am angry and disgusted not only at the depopulation, but at what has been done in order to repopulate the Highlands. I sat hours and hours in 1919–20 when we

    2157
    were trying to frame schemes for Scotland in order to place our people upon the land again. We thought there was something which we could do, but we had to sit hours and hours again in order to get rid of that something which we had clone previously. I do not think my right hon. Friend the Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) thought that it was possible to make the hilltops blossom as the rose. We know perfectly well that there are large tracts where it will be humanly impossible to grown corn of almost any kind. But that is not what is wanted. What we want is that the valleys should be repopulated. My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten) knows that in his own constituency there are hundreds of homesteads that used to shelter virile men and women who were worthy of their country and who gave to their country something that ought to have been given to them in return when the time came when help was necessary. We want a reasonable view taken of this matter. I do, not know about the rents and the rates levied on these lands, but I do not think they come to anything like as much as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) says. I think Scotland can manage to stand for its own people, and I think if we could get rid of these other people who come in we could work together quite reasonably and Scotland would stand where she did. I cannot let this pass unchallenged. We know that the Highlands and the Islands have been depopulated, we know that there must have been migration. The very nature of the circumstances would have compelled that, but nothing like the wholesale migration that had to take place and did take place. We have thousands of Scotsmen throughout our Colonies whose grandfathers and great-grandfathers had to leave their country because they could not get a foothold in the country by reason of the land which was taken for the plutocrats of other nations and other districts who came in and took our land and used it for sport instead of for the raising of crops.
    The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): I should like at the outset to acknowledge most gratefully the very kindly remarks which fell from the right hon. Gentleman the Mem-
    2158
    ber for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson), when he conveyed congratulations to me upon the raising of the status of my office.
    I recognise that this is in no sense a personal matter, and that it is the restoration of an honourable office which has been long desired by Scotland, and I appreciate very much the many congratulations that I have received. I trust that I shall be able, apart from any increase of dignity accruing to the office, still to continue those happy relations with individual Members, which have been my lot hitherto. The right hon. Gentleman, who opened this Debate, spoke with a real understanding and a real knowledge of possible developments in our country. While it may be true to say that many of the points upon which he and other hon. Members have touched would be more appropriately discussed on the Vote for the Board of Agriculture for Scotland or on the Vote of the. Minister of Transport, I recognise that on the Vote for the salary of anyone holding my office in Scotland the policy which the holder of that office may adopt can properly be dealt with in the discussion on that Vote.
    I can only say that I have been anxious to familiarise myself with the actual conditions that exist in the various parts of the country. Reference has been made to the visit which I propose to make to Orkney and Shetland. Last year I had the pleasure of going round the Island of Skye and various other parts of the West Coast to familiarise myself with some of the difficulties and the problems which exist in that district. This year I shall go, as the House knows, to another part of the country. The right, hon. Gentleman the Member for West Fife said that he had seen visions and dreamed dreams. I suppose every one of us who takes up the reins of office visualises what he may be able to do to improve and to better matters, and I have no objection to hon. Members dreaming dreams and seeing visions, but I do ask, as I think the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) has done, that we should at the same time remember what is possible and practical. Since taking office, I have consistently pressed for the development of the roads and the improvement of communications in Scotland, and we are making material advance. I have spent many years of my

    2159
    life in the vicinity of Ballachulish and Glencoe, and therefore I know the conditions of the communications in those parts of the country, and we are pressing forward with that development, it may not be quite so rapidly as the right hon. Gentleman hoped to do when he was in office, but at least material progress is being made, and we have this year given Government assistance.
    During recent years those who have taken an interest in agriculture have supported co-operation in development in connection with agriculture and small holdings. Long before I had anything to do with this House or before I had any official position, I was working in that direction, but the House must remember that it is a slow process and that education is required to convince the larger number of those who are working on the land that it is a desirable development. At the same time I should not like the House to think that any efforts are being neglected or that we are not pressing on with these developments.
    The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) raised a question with regard to the police at Kilmarnock. He affected to be disappointed with my action, but I must remind him that when this matter was first raised I expressed the opinion that I saw no reason to differ from the view and the action taken by the chief constable in dismissing the two constables concerned. In view of the request which came to me subsequently from the police authority, that is the Town Council of Kilmarnock, I directed an inquiry to be held. I am sure any hon. Member who has read the report, which has been printed and submitted to the House, will agree that the inquiry was conducted in the fullest and most impartial manner. It is clear from the report that the inquiry sustained the action of the chief constable in dismissing these two men, and let me say at once that the sole control of appointments and dismissals lies in the hands of the chief constable of the burgh. It is not a matter within the jurisdiction of the Scottish Office or the town council.
    Mr. MACLEAN: May I ask this question? If the town council of any town recommends to the chief constable that a certain individual who has been dismissed should be reinstated, and the
    2160
    chief constable refuses, has not the town council certain powers in the matter?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir. It is not a question of reinstatement. These two men have been dismissed, and the jurisdiction of appointment and dismissal is in the hands of the chief constable.
    Mr. MACLEAN: I think we are misunderstanding each other. Has it not been the case in other towns where a constable has been dismissed that he has been reinstated? That is what is being asked in this case.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir; I am not aware of any case where a charge has been proved against an individual and he has been dismissed from the force, in which reappointment has taken place subsequently.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Did you not send in the name of one yourself?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir. If the hon. Member is referring to the case of the constable in Argyllshire, he will remember that dismissal never took place. It is true that an arrangement was subsequently made that he should remain in the force—
    Mr. MACLEAN: After his resignation was asked?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: He was never dismissed, and the cases are not similar.
    Mr. MACLEAN: He was asked to resign if he did not give up his membership of the policemen's union, and he handed in his resignation.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: He was not dismissed, and the arrangement was subsequently made that he should continue in the force.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Re-appointed.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: Not at all. He never left the force. The resignation which was asked for never took effect; the circumstances are totally different. The procedure which has been followed in this case has given the fullest and most impartial inquiry. It is perfectly true that the Sheriff, in addition to dealing with the case of the dismissal of these two constables, made certain remarks which the hon. Member has quoted regarding the action of the Chief

    2161
    Constable. When that report was submitted to me, I naturally drew the attention of the town council, which is the police authority, to its terms, and it remained in their hands to deal with a question of that kind. I find that, having considered this report, and the remarks made by the Sheriff, the town council came to the conclusion that there was no necessity to take any action with regard to the Chief Constable.
    Mr. MACLEAN: I am certain the right hon. Gentleman does not want to mislead the House. I have the report here—and that is not the case at all. The town council came to their decision purely upon the interpretation of the Regulation given by the Scottish Office to the town clerk.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: The hon. Member must realise that he is now referring to another point. I was referring to the, position of the Chief Constable. I drew the attention of the police authority of Kilmarnock to the terms of the Sheriff's report. The police authority considered that report and decided—I will read the letter:
    "I have now to inform you that the Town Council at Kilmarnock, having carefully considered the report on the inquiry by the Sheriff of Ayr into the allegations made against the chief constable, in connection with the dismissal of Constables Hill and Moore, in the employ of the Burgh Police, authority, agreed by a majority at their meeting held yesterday to take no further action in the matter."
    That is with regard to the Chief Constable. Let me turn to the other point, the action taken by the town council with regard to the two men who were dismissed; and I must again point out that the town council has no jurisdiction to dismiss or reinstate, or take any other action whatever in regard to these two men.
    Mr. MACLEAN: They can recommend.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: Yes, and their recommendation must be taken into consideration by the Chief Constable. There is nothing which the Scottish Office have said to the town clerk, or to anybody else, which does not bear out the clear facts as laid down in the Rules and Regulations. I would remind the hon. Member that these Rules and Regulations, which govern the dealings with the police force, have been arrived at after
    2162
    consultation with the representatives of the police. They are now Statutory Rules and Regulations, and are laid on the Table of this House. They cannot be departed from.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Did the representatives of the police agree that the Regulations cover reinstatement?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: This is not reinstatement. The men have been dismissed, and the Rule is perfectly clear, that a person dismissed from any such service or force shall not be eligible for appointment.
    Mr. MACLEAN: Read the first line of the Regulation. It says "a candidate for appointmen"—that is a new appointment.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: These men have been dismissed. They are not members of the force. The hon. Member must realise that this is governed by distinct Rules, and any deviation from them would be contrary to the Regulations. It is our duty so to advise anybody who asks our opinion on such a subject, and it is impossible for the Scottish Office to give any other advice than that which was given.
    Mr. MACLEAN: If these two constables receive a position in the police force again, would you call it reinstatement or a fresh appointment?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I should call it an illegal appointment. I can only say in conclusion that the hon. Member will, I believe, agree that I have given careful consideration to the whole of this case, and after such an exhaustive and highly impartial inquiry and Report, the findings of which are quite clear, I cannot say anything further upon it.
    With regard to what the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) has said, I am sorry to think that any impression should go abroad that the general administration of the law in Lanarkshire is other than fair, just and reasonable, and I regret that any hon. Member should make use of his opportunities in this House to cast reflections upon the late Chief Constable who has served his country through a very long period of years to the general acceptance of the community, and certainly without a blemish on his record, so far as the police administration is concerned.
    Mr. D. GRAHAM: This Chief Constable was something of a king in Lanarkshire, he apparently did what he pleased. This is the only opportunity we have of drawing attention to what we consider, and what the general public considers, arbitrary acts on the part of this more or less uncrowned king. I know the late Chief Constable well, and have done as much for the Country as he has done.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I do not know that that alters the position. Whatever the feelings of any hon. Member may be as to an individual case, it is very unfortunate that advantage should be taken to cast general reflections of that nature. On the other hand, the hon. Member has raised one or two cases in which he asserts that irregularities have taken place. When the matter was referred to the Crown Counsel, and investigated by the proper authorities, it was found that in their judgment there was not sufficient evidence to take further action. My duty, where there is any doubt in the cases brought to me either in this House or outside this House, is to submit them through the ordinary channels for consideration by the proper authorities, and I am hound, of course, to take their advice.
    Mr. GRAHAM: What is this Committee that come to this conclusion? Is it outside the functions of an hon. Member of this House to ask that an inquiry should be made into the definite charges I have made and made on the authority of men who are prepared to substantiate them?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I understand that this case is a case of alleged perjury. It was submitted to the Crown authorities, who are the prosecuting authority and who have to investigate such cases and to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with an action which may have any chance of success.
    Mr. GRAHAM: I quite understand the position of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and I do not want to appear to be persistent, but I would like to put one question to him. Did this inquiry include the man who was charged? Did it include anyone who was able to bring forward evidence that perjury was committed? Is it simply the ex parte opinion of the Crown Counsel? Here was a definite charge made. If it be true
    2164
    then no amount of argument from the right hon. Gentleman or anyone else can convince us that the administration of justice is fair or sound. If it be false the character of the police administrator ought to be cleared.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: It is rather unsatisfactory to discuss the details of a case like this across the Floor of the House, but I am quite willing to discuss the whole of the details with toe hon. Member afterwards. All I can say now is that the Scottish Office took the correct procedure of submitting this case to the Crown Authorities for their inquiry, and abided by their decision. Neither in this ease and in the other case where reference was made to a constable—the case in which a verdict was returned of "Not proven"—is it for me to express any opinion upon such a verdict. The verdict in the opinion of many people is a very unsatisfactory one, because it leaves a great doubt that the man is not fully acquitted of the charge when such a finding is taken. In these circumstances, as we want to have purity of administration and proper handling in connection with law and justice, it is absolutely essential that when the least doubt is cast upon the character of any of these individuals, those who are responsible should take steps to free the force from anyone who has the slightest doubt cast upon his character.
    Mr. GRAHAM: Let me put a simple and straight question. The Sheriff found the charge against this man "not proven." The Chief Constable asked the man to declare himself guilty, and on the ground that he was guilty he was told that he had to resign. I submit that that is not a fair decision. I would press the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider the whole matter, and I ask that the man should be reinstated.
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. James Hope): We are not in Committee, and I would remind the hon. Gentleman that he has exhausted his right of speaking.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: The most satisfactory way would be for me to discuss this matter with the hon. Member outside the House. The hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Scrymgeour) asked a question which would more properly come on the Housing Vote; but I would say that I

    2165
    took a great personal interest in the problem put before me by the City of Dundee, and that I was debarred from following the wishes of Dundee by the fact that it was outside my power to give a grant owing to the conditions attaching to the housing subsidy.
    Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Did not the Edinburgh Office support this proposal?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: Of course, I cannot go into all the details now. It is sufficient to say that we looked at the matter with every sympathy, and I regret that we were unable to find a solution of the problem. In conclusion, let me say that I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) for what he said this afternoon.
    Mr. T. KENNEDY: Before we leave this Vote, I would like the Secretary of State for Scotland or someone in his Department to say something with regard to the reduction in the amount voted this year for relief of unemployment. The reduction is something like £30,000. My experience is that to-day the local authorities who are promoting schemes of a local character for the relief of unemployment are finding the greatest difficulty in convincing those who are responsible that the scheme should rank for grant. Up to the end of last year the general principle upon which the grants were given was much more elastic than it appears to be now. The principle operating almost to the end of last year was that works promoted by local authorities were eligible for grant, not merely in the specific district where unemployment was severe, but in districts not seriously affected by unemployment, if the work promoted was likely to stimulate employment in the industries connected with the special scheme under consideration. I understand that now an instruction has been given by the Government that that wider provision for the relief of unemployment should lapse, and that authorities are being called upon to prove exceptional distress in their districts before any grant is given. I understand that, in addition to that restriction, there is another restriction of a more serious character; that is to say, that if a scheme is promoted by a local authority the Unemployment Grants Committee, acting on the specific instructions of the Government, is now
    2166
    saying, "Before any grant can be sanctioned or assistance given to this scheme, you must prove that this work would not have been undertaken normally within a period of five years from the date of the application for the grant." That is a most unreasonable restriction, and one which did not apply before this year. Would the right hon. Gentleman explain the reason for it?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: The actual reduction in this case is not very material, and, indeed, a part of it is due to closer estimating. But, on the rather wider subject which the hon. Gentleman has raised, it is quite true that the Government feel that more and more we must get back into the ordinary channels of working, and that it is imperative, from the point of view of the finance of the country as a whole, that there should be some limit upon the development of schemes. As the hon. Gentleman has said, this money cannot in future be given as freely for the development of some of these local schemes, unless we can be assured that they are schemes which would not be proceeded with in the ordinary conditions by the authorities. I think that that is a reasonable and wise arrangement, particularly when one has to take into account the general financial position of the country.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: I rise only to make a reference to the speech of the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne)—a speech which I understood the Secretary for Scotland to endorse; I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he was pleased with the remarks made by the right hon. Member for Hillhead, and that he agreed with them. I have taken the trouble to go to the Library, and I have here three Reports made by Government Committees and by Royal Commissions, and those Reports prove that the pleasing picture drawn by the right hon. Member for Hillhead is scarcely accurate. For example, the Royal Commission of 1844, on page 87 of the Report, declares that 395,000 sheep could be grazed upon land that was then solely occupied by deer. Then we have the Royal Commission of 1892, which on pages 8 and 9 of its Report specifically refers to land in the deer forest area of Scotland which it has scheduled as suitable for profitable cultivation or for advantageous cultivation.

    2167
    I was the more amazed at the speech of the right hon. Member for Hillhead as it is perfectly well known to everyone who is following the operations of the Forestry Commission that that body is busy—not to a very great extent, unfortunately—in carving out small holdings and profitable small holdings from lands that until a year or two ago were solely under deer. I see the hon. and learned Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Macquisten) in his place. My remark applies to the big scheme being carried out in his constituency. It is simply bunkum for the right hon. Member for Hillhead to declare that the land presently covered by deer in Scotland is fit for nothing else. That statement is known by hon. Members on all sides of the House to be rubbish, and it can be disproved by Royal Commission after Royal Commission and by Committee after Committee. I simply rose for the purpose of taking the strongest possible exception to the statement of the right hon. Member for Hillhead.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: I wish to concur in much that has been said in admiration of the work which the Secretary of State for Scotland has done in the past year; but there are one or two matters in which I wish that we could have seen greater activity. We have heard from the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. J. Brown) and the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) about the possibilities of small holdings in the Highlands. All the work that could be done in the way of settling people on the land or assisting the crofter and the crofter fishermen will be of no avail in the Highlands until the question of transport is settled. The present system of transport, as I have stated on more than one occasion, is perfectly hopeless. The Government distribute a considerable subsidy, in the shape of a postal subsidy so called, which is supposed to be a subsidy in support of transport. One hears rumours that of three steamboat companies only one gets any subsidy, and there is a suspicion that part of that subsidy is used to prevent the other companies from getting into serious competition with their rival.
    The result is that steamer transport in the Western Islands is perfectly hopeless. It may be that the fares and freights now charged are necessary because the amount that is to be conveyed is so small, but the
    2168
    business is getting into a vicious circle. If the freights and fares were lowered substantially there would be a heavy loss and it would be a long time before there was a reconstitution of the community sufficient to give adequate supplies of cargo and make the transport a reasonable commercial proposition again. That is the result of long years of the present vicious system. It has reached such a point that I am informed by the hon. Member for the Western Isles (Mr. M. Livingstone) that in his constituency, in the outer islands, commodities can come at much less cost in steamers from the North of Ireland which have no subsidy at all. Questions which I have put in the House on this matter have been met by statements which I do not think have received sufficient investigation. I raised a question about a little boat called the "Cygnet" which sails to the Island of Tiree and I pointed out that the third-class passengers, who have little or no accommodation provided for them, when they are driven back into the cabin are immediately told that they had to pay cabin fares. [HON. MEMBERS: "There is no cabin!"] There is practically no cabin but when I put this question I was met with a description by the then Solicitor-General for Scotland of a very suitable steamboat which nobody who had ever travelled in the "Cygnet" could recognise at all.
    I do not wish to be severe on the steamboat companies. They are, perhaps, doing their best in the situation in which they are placed. They have an annual subsidy, not a permament contract, and the position which they ought to take up is that they cannot afford to enter into long-term commitments unless they get long-term contracts. We have no right to give a Government subsidy to a private enterprise, unless that private enterprise submits itself to the Railway and Canal Commission or some body which is able to review the way the money is being spent and the charges which are being made. The roads are free to all—as far as they are roads, and a great many are not roads at all. The ordinary crofter, however, can get on to the roads, but these unfortunate people on the islands are simply stranded. Yet, if the question of transport were properly dealt with, there is a fairly comfortable living to be made there. I know a man in Coll, and

    2169
    I have a latter from him in my pocket asking me if I can dispose for him of some very fine lobsters. He can supply any customer with whom I put him in touch with over half a ton a week; but in such a case transport delays prevent business, because it is essential that the lobsters should arrive alive. That is the reason why people are crying out for transport facilities. It is impossible for a man such as I have described to get his lobsters into the market where there is a demand for them. All round the coast of Argyllshire there is fishing for these valuable commodities, and many crofters and fishermen could make a satisfactory living if they were able to place the stuff in the market quickly and at a reasonable charge.
    The Secretary of State for Scotland has appointed a Departmental Committee—which means that a number of officials have gone up there and had a look at some of the boats. I believe they looked at the "Cygnet" when it was lying comfortably in harbour, instead of going out on it during a wet and stormy day. I do not know whether we are entitled to their Report. At all events, we have never got it, but I wish we could have the information it contains as to the state of affairs. I think the correct procedure would have been to have appointed some outside parties who have knowledge and sympathy with the Highlands to carry out this investigation. There are plenty of men acquainted with the Highlands and with shipping, both in Glasgow and London, who have come from these parts, who have suffered under the present regime, who know the struggle which those they have left behind have to carry on, and who know that if prosperity were to come to these particular people, it would inevitably be absorbed in the cost of transport. I thought the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. J. Brown) spoke rather disparagingly about the possibilities of the tourist traffic. If sufficient enterprise and skill were shown to make this steamboat service attractive to the tourists, I believe visitors would go there in great numbers and it would be possible to get sufficient summer tourist traffic to make a better service possible.
    Mr. J. BROWN: I did not mention tourists at all. I was speaking about
    2170
    rents and about those who take the deer forests.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon, but I thought it was he who made some reference to tourists. If the steamboat companies would develop this particular enterprise it would be an advantage. Why should people go away every year in large numbers to see those rocky and barren places which they call the fjords in Norway, when you have more beautiful places in the Highlands? There is enormous scope for development in the Highlands in regard to this particular matter, if it were taken up, but it cannot be done, because one steamboat company is getting from £36,000 to £50,000 a year of subsidy. If anybody tries to cut in, this company has got the piers and the ferry boats and it can choke them off. It is not worth the while of anyone to compete with them on the ordinary commercial plane. Private enterprise does not get a chance there. We are under an autocratic despotism which makes it impossible. [HON. MEMBERS: "Capitalism!"] No, it is not capital, it is the want of capital. At all events it is the backing of capital by Government subsidy which is wrong in that particular place.
    Mr. BROWN: The boats are bad.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: Some of them look as if they had been tenders for the Ark. With regard to forestry settlement, there is no doubt that is what is wanted in the Highlands. There is an abysmal difference between consumption farming and industrial farming. The man who is growing for his own consumption can hardly lose, because it is his own work and he has the whole profit. The man who is going to sell is in a different position. The Highlander very largely grows for his own consumption and not much for sale. You will never get a man south of the Highland line who wants to be industrialised—and you will not get a man who is not a Highlander to understand that attitude. Lord Leverhulme found that as David Neal found it long ago. The Highlander will serve and follow a chief, but he will not serve a master. He is an individualist who wants to live his own life, and to be interfered with by nobody, and he is able to do that if he is only given some

    2171
    reasonable facilities. In the old days the main portion of the population of Scotland lived very close to the hunger line, and in the early part of the 17th century, after three bad harvests, one-fifth of the population of the most fertile county in Scotland lay down by the roadside and died of sheer starvation. That was because there was no proper capital, no export, no import, no industry, no means of keeping the people alive. It is no use, in the remote parts, trying to effect anything unless you give the people proper transport for such commodities as they produce. The Highlander, given a little instruction in the use of silo and in one or two agricultural matters, with fishing and forestry, and with the small holdings which are springing up in many parts, could make a reasonable living.
    I say at the end as I said at the beginning that if this question of transport were developed as it has been developed in Norway much could be done. In Norway ever pier has its own steamer with proper supervision and reasonable charges, and so reasonable is it that if a man is travelling with his wife, she can go at half fare and children can go at quarter fare. Unless an adequate transport service is provided, all the efforts that have been made for the Highlands will have been made in vain. All the Acts of former Liberal Governments, land courts, and so forth, have simply had the effect of planting the Highlands with officials, but if you can give him reasonably cheap transport, the Highlander is quite capable of saving himself and of making a good living in his own country.
    Mr. CLARK HUTCHISON: I desire add a few words to what the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten) has said on the question of transport. I spoke last year on the want of transport in the Highlands, and I wish to emphasise the necessity for improvement in this respect. I would remind the hon. and learned Member for Argyll, however, that in regard to the places which have been mentioned in connection with the "Cygnet," it is not possible for a larger vessel to do that run. I suppose I know the West coast of Argyll just as well as the hon. and learned Member—perhaps better—and I do not think any ship larger than the
    2172
    "Cygnet" to go into Arinagour, the landing place in Coll, or Scarinish, the landing place in Tiree, or Bunessan, the landing place at Ross of Mull. These places are very difficult to navigate. At the same time, I hope something will be done to improve the type of vessel rather than allow these ancient tenders to the Ark, as the hon. and learned Member has termed them, to continue to float about the West Coast of Scotland. Reference has been made to Ballachulish, and I would draw attention to one difficulty which exists in that district as regards transport. It is an agricultural district, but transport by road has to use the bridge at Connel Ferry, which cannot be done except at a large payment. A motor car costs 10s. a time, unless you purchase a book of 20 tickets, when it costs at the rate of 7s. 6d. a time. Something might be done by the Scottish Office to force the railway companies to reduce that charge, which is very injurious to transport by motor car. If I remember aright, a farmer taking a bull by road down to Oban has to pay a cost of something like 5s. to walk it across the bridge. That is ridiculous, and places great difficulties in the way of the farming industry and in the conveyance of farm produce from Ballachulish to the markets at Oban.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: What about sheep?
    Mr. HUTCHISON: I believe there is a charge of so much a score of sheep. I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland will help in some way in this matter and thus do something for the resuscitation of rural life which we all want so much to see on the West Coast of Scotland.
    6.0 P.M.
    Mr. SKELTON: I am going to say only a few words and I would not have said them, except to back up what has been, in my opinion, so admirably said by the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten). This is not the time to go into such a subject in great detail, but I would like to suggest that, if one looks round modern Scotland and takes a general survey, he will see no rural problem of so urgent and large a scope as the whole question of that huge district called the West Highlands. I have myself the strongest belief that, if that question were tackled, first of all,

    2173
    on the lines suggested by the hon. and learned Member for Argyll, on the question of the water transport, and, secondly, on the lines on which the most kindred country in Europe has already tackled her problem, namely, the question of encouraging and developing in every possible way the fishing industry, I believe there is, in the West Highlands, a very considerable untapped source of possible wealth, and the possibility of maintaining either a larger population, which I believe to be possible, or at all events the existing population under far more satisfactory conditions. What I would plead for in very general terms is that the question should be approached by the Scottish Office, not as a series of small, detailed questions, but as one large, general, national question, deserving most careful and scientific study and inquiry, deserving a large and general policy, and deserving, above all things, treatment as a large national problem. That it is a large national problem I do not think anyone can doubt.
    The only matter of detail to which I wish to refer is the reference which the hon. and learned Member for Argyll made to Norway. There is, I suppose, in the Northern latitudes no contrast more extraordinary than that of travelling along the West Coast of Scotland and travelling along the West Coast of Norway. Geographically they are singularly similar, but where it is a question of the organisation of transport, of modern appliances, or of the application of modern thought and science, they are totally and utterly different. Go to the smallest village in Norway, and you feel at once that the State is dealing with the problems there. Go to the West Highlands, and you transport yourself back immediately to the 13th or the 14th century. The contrast is due to this cause, that in Norway it is a matter of necessity to face up to their problems, whereas in Scotland it is only a matter of choice, and there is no people, I suppose, like the British for neglecting things until they become matters of necessity.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: How does the hon. Member account for the Orkneys?
    Mr. SKELTON: I account for the Orkneys because you have there a very fertile soil, a population that has
    2174
    always worked that soil carefully, and a population too that has far better communications than the West Coast of Scotland. Nobody who knows the great bulk of the Orkney Islands can doubt that the questions there are not nearly so complicated as they are in the West Highlands. I want to press upon the Scottish Office the view that here is a national problem which is worth consideration, that it must be approached in no Departmental way, but in the way, for instance, in which Stein approached the German problem in the early part of the 19th century, as a big national problem. If you will do that, and do it by means of transport, by means of the closer cultivation of the fishing industry, and so on, you will find in the West of Scotland to some extent an untapped source of wealth. If I may say this in conclusion, you will find that a Unionist Government under the present Secretary of State for Scotland will have shown the people of Scotland that the Unionist party does understand Scotland and its larger problems, and want, in a bold, determined, vigorous, constructive way, to apply its force and imagination to those problems.
    The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Major Elliot): The Secretary of State for Scotland has exhausted his right to speak, but he has asked me, out of courtesy to the hon. Members who have spoken subsequently, to say that the problem of transport in the Western Highlands and Islands is engaging his attention, and that he is going into it with the Postmaster-General. In regard to the report asked for by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten), he has not yet himself received it, but he has had several conferences on the subject, and he hopes that developments will result.
    Mr. WESTWOOD: I beg to move, to leave out "£3,680,342" and to insert instead thereof "£3,680,242."
    I move this Amendment in the same spirit as that which animated the Amendment which has just been disposed of. I do not do so, of course, with any

    2175
    desire to reduce the money available for education in Scotland, but with an earnest desire to submit to the Secretary of State for Scotland, who is responsible to this House for education in Scotland, several things which I believe ought to receive his attention. As he knows, we have power in Scotland to-day, without any new Act of Parliament, to increase the age for children attending school to 15 years. We have the power to raise the age by Order in Council under the 1918 Education Act, and I desire to know what action the right hon. Gentleman is taking towards that end. I am not foolish enough to believe that, without making any necessary preparations, but merely by passing an Order or fixing an appointed date, you could raise the school age. New school buildings would have to be built, you would require a bigger number of teachers, and, because of the advanced division courses which we have now got in Scotland, you would require even to train a special class of teachers. I recognise the difficulties in raising the school age, but I believe it would be a wise policy definitely to fix a date at which the school age would be raised to 15. It might be five years hence, or it might be 10. My own view is that three years hence would be sufficient, but, whatever the period, I believe that we ought now to decide the date on which we are going to raise the age to 15. That will allow the education authorities to make the necessary arrangements so far as providing accommodation is concerned, and it will allow the training authorities the requisite time in which to train the additional teachers required for the purpose of teaching the additional number of pupils that would be retained in our schools. As I have said, there is the need for special training of teachers whom we require for our advanced division courses. What inducements are the Department going to offer to males for coming into the teaching profession? I believe we require teachers with special aptitude so far as the training of the advanced division courses are concerned, and also so far as the special classes, which must be set up for the purpose of dealing with over age pupils in our schools, are concerned.
    I wish also to draw attention to the need for calling upon education autho-
    2176
    rities in Scotland to take special advantage of that footnote put to the Code in 1924. The Secretary of State for Scotland will remember that in that Code there is a footnote which gives the opportunity to pupils who have not completed the whole of their education in the day school to complete the course in the evening continuation classes. Then, if they have reached the same standard of education that they would have reached through being in the day school, they are now allowed, under that footnote, to sit for an examination, and, if they pass it, to be awarded the higher day school certificate, on the same lines as if they had completed their education in the day school. I may here and now give a word of thanks to the Education Department for having approved of the Fife Education Authority's scheme. That scheme has been very successful, although merely in its beginning, so far as the first year is concerned. Out of four pupils submitted for examination for the purpose of being awarded higher day school certificates, three have succeeded in passing and have been awarded the certificates, who never could have been awarded them, but for that footnote to the 1924 Code. Therefore, the scheme having been a success, even on its inception, in Fife, I want to know what action the Department will take to get other authorities, that are not nearly so progressive as that of the County of Fife, to adopt such schemes. I think the Secretary of State for Scotland will agree about Fife being progressive, because we have given Scotland three Secretaries for Scotland in succession, which is greatly to the credit of Fife, and I am hopeful that we shall get still more progress in Fife as a result of this Debate to-day.
    The other point to which I wish to draw attention is the question of the feeding of the children during this great industrial dispute. There are several education authorities in Scotland that refuse to feed the children during the holidays, and it is rather regrettable that in some instances the lead in the education authorities to refuse feeding the children during the holidays has been taken by ministers of the Gospel. There has been some doubt in the minds of the education authorities as to their power to feed children during the holidays. I under-

    2177
    stand that at least one education authority and certain parish councils asked for the opinion of the Dean of Faculty. The Dean of Faculty gave the opinion, which is very definite, that the power to feed children is there for the education authorities, and not only is it in their power, but it is their duty to feed children during the holidays. I want to draw the attention of the Secretary of State to a letter which has been sent from the Scottish Education Department to the Fifeshire Education Authority. It is dated 15th July, and I will quote the following from it:
    "It has been represented to the Board of Health, on behalf of certain parish councils which are acting loyally on the Board's advice, that those councils which have hitherto declined to do so are adopting this attitude (the attitude of refusing to pay allowances for children of school age) largely because they are convinced of your authority's readiness to accept responsibility for the relief of destitution, so far as the children of school age are concerned, a responsibility which the law, as it stands, precludes an education authority from assuming."
    May I say the Fifeshire Education Authority do not accept the responsibility for relieving destitution? We claim that we know what our powers are, and we submit that they are exactly what the Dean of Faculty suggests. We do not inquire, as far as the child is concerned, whether relief is or is not being granted by the parish council. Our concern is with the ability of the child to benefit by the education. We have made an arrangement with one parish council to provide one good meal a day, because, according to the Circular, the education authorities can settle in their own mind what is best. If we are too extravagant in any allowance we make, then recourse can be had to the Sheriff by individual ratepayers to put the authority right, but the Fifeshire Education Authority claim that 3d. ought to provide a meal for a necessitous child. We are able to provide three meals a day for seven days a week, and on holidays, and we have decided that the cost is, approximately, 5s. 3d. a week. In one case where our attention was drawn to the fact that the child could not benefit by the education because of the mere payment of 4s. by the parish council, we came to an agreement with the parish council that we would provide one good mid-day meal over and above the allowance made by the parish council.
    2178
    This letter which was sent by the Department, however, seriously suggests that we are considering the question of the relief of destitution. That is not our business. It is our business to see that children are in a fit state to benefit by the education. It is only the Education Authority who have the right to come to the conclusion to which we have come. Not even the Secretary of State for Scotland has the right to challenge us as far as that is concerned. If we are satisfied that the child cannot benefit by the education given, because of lack of food, and that voluntary agencies cannot meet the situation, we are bound by Act of Parliament to provide food necessary for those children. The letter from the Department goes on to say:
    "The Department are satisfied that this conviction must rest upon a misapprehension—it is certainly quite inconsistent with the impression left upon their own minds at the interview—and they are confident that, as soon as your authority are apprised of the misunderstanding, they will take whatever steps may be necessary to ensure its immediate removal."
    While we are engaged in this Debate today, the Fifeshire Education Authority are considering this letter, and I am sure that they will have decided to continue to feed the children as long as the industrial dispute lasts, because the children have no responsibility in the matter of this dispute. We are only seeking to apply the law. But what is the right hon. Gentleman going to do about other local authorities who are not exercising their powers and duties with regard to necessitous children? I have seen communications sent by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, and as far as those communications are concerned, I at least, have no objection to offer. I believe there is an earnest desire on the part of the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary to see that there is no unnecessary suffering to our people during this great industrial struggle in which we are involved at the present time. But I do appeal to the Secretary of State to see that his Department do not only send letters to those who believe they are doing their duty, but that letters are sent to those, who, some of us believe, are not doing their duty—such as the East Lothian Authority and the Midlothian Authority, which have refused to feed the children during the holidays. We believe that they are not carrying out

    2179
    the Act of Parliament or doing their duty to the children, and are sacrificing what is the best interest of the children by refusing to feed them during the struggle in which we are engaged. I hope, if there be any difficulty with these authorities, we shall have the whole-hearted support of hon. Members opposite.
    I am reminded of an incident which took place in 1912, when I was on strike —if you like to put it that way. We were fighting for a minimum wage. I played in a strike band which went round, and which reached a place called Strathvithie, where we saw what was a real, manly action. The hon. and gallant Member for North Lanark (Sir A. Sprot) emptied his pockets, placing the money in the box which some of our colleagues were carrying, and I can remember a real colonel's ejaculation coming from him when he wished us "God speed" in our fight against the coalowners at that time. I trust we shall have the same support as far as this question is concerned, because the coalowners do not, come into this Lebate at all. It is a question of children requiring sustenance, because their parents are locked out, and it is for the Secretary of State to see that no barriers are placed in the way of these children being supplied with food. If we can get behind the mass of Toryism and Liberalism, and get to the heart of mankind, even as far as this House is concerned, I believe we shall have unanimity upon this question.
    Mr. STEPHEN: I desire to support the Amendment for the reduction, and I welcome the opportunity to say something uopn the subject of public education in the past year and the year to come. I have gone pretty carefully through the Report of the Committee of the Council of Education in Scotland, and I notice at the outset the Report states that public administration has again been dominated by the urgent need of national economy. It is a pity with regard to education that the circumstances of the nation as to economy are possibly carrying greater weight than they ought to have. I notice that the total amount for education for Scotland will be, approximately, the same as for the preceding year, plus the estimated amount for a full year for additional pensions and contributions under the Superannuation Act of 1925. In this
    2180
    connection, we have arrived at what is a stationary position with regard to the educational opportunities to the children of Scotland.
    I know that our grant is determined by the amount of money which is spent in England, and, along with some of my colleagues, I have always felt it is a pity that we have not been able to take the Debate as a whole, and have the two Departments answering. To my mind, education in Scotland is one of the few things in which Scottish people have an advantage over people south of the border. If you take housing, or almost anything else, when one comes to England one has the feeling that the standard of life here is higher than the standard of life in Scotland. Education, on the other hand, is one of the few things where Scotland can be put alongside England, and take comfort in the comparison
    I want, however, to draw attention to certain matters mentioned in the Report. First of all, I want to deal with the accommodation in Scottish schools. The capital expenditure for the six years to May, 1914, amounted to £2,793,445. For the six years to May, 1920, the capital expenditure amounted to £935,260, and the Report states that the arrears of capital expenditure amounted to some £4,000,000. If we take the five years to 1925, we find that the capital expenditure has been £1,780,000, and the Report estimates that there are arrears amounting to about £2,250,000. I would put it to the Secretary of State for Scotland that he should signalise the advancement of the office he holds by trying to get some additional grant, in order that these arrears may be made up. We have got classes far too large for one teacher to control. The other day a teacher told me of 63 scholars being in a qualifying class, and anyone who has had experience of teaching knows that in a qualifying class to manage 63 pupils is to put too great a strain upon the teacher, and is also taking from the children the opportunities which they should have. The buildings also require a great deal of attention. The fact that we used to have annual elections gave candidates an opportunity of knowing something about the kind of schools which were in existence. It would be wise expenditure to meet the need for better accommodation and for a

    2181
    reduction in the size of classes. There is one other small matter, which will not cost very much, and which I would like to bring to the notice of the Secretary of State. Although in many schools there are a large number of pupils, sometimes as many as 1,000, no accommodation is provided for a child who may be taken ill in class, fainting, perhaps, and is not able to go home for an hour or two. I think the Secretary of State might make a note of that, and see whether we could not have a couch in the headmaster's room, or something of that kind, for use on such occasions.
    I wish to say a word on the subject of the advanced divisions. The Report rightly devotes a good deal of attention to this subject. I think the advanced divisions will not work out successfully in Scotland, unless the Board of Education impresses on the authorities that as large an allowance for expenditure should be made in the case of advanced divisions as was made for the intermediate course in secondary schools in former times. The Report states that the success of the advanced divisions must depend very largely on the quality and sufficiency of the teaching staff, and also points out that in this respect the advanced divisions are not getting what they ought to have. One of His Majesty's Chief Inspectors doubts whether the teachers in the two-year courses all possess that wide knowledge of their subjects which is needed to interest boys and girls of 14 years of age. I think the replacement of the intermediate department by the advanced divisions was a retrograde step. Making inquiries among teacher colleagues of mine, I find that the advanced divisions are tending to be simply the old supplementary divisions under another name.
    It has been pointed out in the Report that secondary schools contain too many pupils who never finish the secondary course, but desist after two or three years, if not earlier, and that there can be no question that the interests of such pupils would be far better served in an advanced division, where the courses are designed expressly for such pupils. From my own experience, I would question that contention. I have had experience as a pupil. I passed through the elementary school system in Glasgow, and through the secondary school system, and
    2182
    I have also had experience as a teacher in an elementary school and in a secondary school and in the intermediate department, and I am confident, from my experience both as a pupil and a teacher, that in the secondary school the child gets something in the way of educational training that is not supplied lit the advanced divisions. This is a very serious matter, because it will react upon the children of the working class. The children of the middle class go to secondary schools in large numbers, and I hope there will be no limitation in this respect on the expenditure on education for working-class children. When they went to secondary schools they had the advantage of the most highly qualified teachers, teachers with the Chapter 5 qualifications, and it would comfort me greatly if the Board of Education laid down a rule that the teachers in these advanced divisions should have the Chapter 5 qualifications.
    I want to say a word regarding children who are allowed to drift out of school. I see that 94,921 pupils left the primary schools after having passed the qualifying examination, and 77,768 qualified for the advanced divisions. Of these 77,768, 12,590 left before completing one full year in an advanced division, and I suggest to the Secretary of State that he must take steps to see that these numbers are reduced. I believe a way to reduce the numbers would be to increase the amount of money spent on bursaries in connection with the advanced courses. In the Report we are told that £238,000 was spent on bursaries, as compared with £225,000 in the previous year. I would like to see the amount multiplied by four, and the number of children in receipt of bursaries increased, the amount received by each child gaining a bursary being doubled.
    In future this country will have to depend upon its citizens being well educated, and if we spend money upon giving children an efficient education it will bring in a good return. I hope the Secretary of State will use his influence to encourage the authorities to increase the amount per child and also to increase the number of bursaries. Ever so many children would stay longer at school if the amounts were larger. When speaking in different part of the country I have

    2183
    noticed that there is still a passion in the hearts of the mothers in Scotland for educational opportunities for their children, but the circumstances of people have become so difficult that in many cases they cannot afford to keep their children at school; and I want to see every child encouraged to remain at school until 16 or 17 years of age, and provided with more opportunities for training at a university than occur at the present time. On the subject of adult education, I would point out that the education authority of Glasgow have refused to let a room to the Scottish Labour College for their classes, and, although that college has a distinct partisan basis, I think that educational effort is all to the good. Believing in working-class education, I hope the Secretary of State will use his influence to see that rooms which are not being used should be let to this educational institution, in order that there may be a development of adult education.
    The LORD ADVOCATE: I think it will be convenient if, at this stage, I deal with the legal points raised by the hon. Member for South Midlothian (Mr. Westwood) as to the opinion recently given by the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, a report of which appeared in the Scottish newspapers a few days ago. That opinion deals with two important points, the first of which is whether the parish council or the education authority has the primary liability for feeding what are called necessitous school children, and the second point relating to the obligation or power of the education authority to feed these necessitous school children during holiday times. May I say at once that I agree entirely with the opinion on the latter point expressed by the learned Dean, but I regret that I find myself quite unable to agree with the conclusion at which he arrived on the former point. It will be borne in mind that the relief which it is the duty of parish councils to provide in respect of a child may not necessarily be the same as the relief in the shape, of meals which an education authority is to provide under the Act of 1908; that is to say, circumstances which apply to both cases are not necessarily existent. The education authority's, duty arises where they find a child is not in a condition, owing to lack of food or
    2184
    clothing, to take full advantage of the educational course; then, after certain inquiries and after providing temporary feeding if they choose, they may have a duty to feed the child. It will be seen at once by those who are familiar with the Poor Law that there might be cases in which there was a duty on the parish council to provide relief in respect of a child although the child would still be perfectly capable of receiving and taking in proper education, and therefore the two cases do not necessarily meet.
    Let me assume, for convenience and simplicity, the case of a child in respect, of which it is the duty of the parish council to provide relief; it being also a case which provides the circumstances demanded by the Education Act of 1908. In my opinion, it seems clear that the duty of the parish council to provide that relief arises while the child is at home, so to speak, and before it ever gets near the school, and that if the parish council discharges its duty to it, that child will arrive at school to take its educational course in a condition in which it is perfectly fit to receive education, and therefore the duty of the education authority will not and cannot arise.
    Mr. WESTWOOD: May I submit exactly what has taken place. The parish councils have not done what the right hon. Gentleman has suggested.
    The LORD ADVOCATE: I think it would be better if I were allowed to make my statement. It seems to me clear that the stage at which the discharge of the parish councils' duty arises is really antecedent and prior to the stage at which the consideration of the education authority can arise, and if the parish council discharges its duty then the occasion for the exercise of those obligations by the education authority cannot and should not arise. In that view, I find myself unable to agree with the opinion expressed on that general point by the learned Dean of Faculty. That is the line throughout adopted by the Scottish Office and the Department over which my right hon. Friend presides.
    There is another point that I would like to deal with. It may be that parish councils have not carried out their duty, and then, of course, the education authorities may have discovered a case

    2185
    arriving at school where the parish council has not discharged its duty, but neglect of administration does not alter the construction of the Statute and legal opinion, and I am still of opinion that the parish council was neglecting its duty which it ought to carry out under its statutory obligation. Of course, circumstances may arise which would alter cases.
    I would demur, from the legal point of view, to this habit of educational authorities passing general resolutions that they are not going to deal with a certain class of case with regard to school feeding. It is the duty of the education authority to deal with each case individually, and not to say that they are going to grant relief in this or that class of case. That is a misapprehension of their duty. The duty of the education authority under the Act of 1908 is to deal with the individual case, whether it is brought to their notice or discovered by them, and treat it as an individual case throughout. It may well be the inquiry shows that it belongs to a class which may be identical with cases with which they have already dealt, but it is wrong to anticipate what is going to happen during the holidays by passing any general resolution of that kind. That is not a correct discharge of their statutory duties, which are clearly laid down under the 1908 Act.
    Mr. WESTWOOD: In the event of a parish council refusing to do what the right hon. Gentleman has stated, is its statutory duty to relieve destitution, is it suggested under those circumstances that the education authority should stop feeding the children until the Scottish Board of Health brings pressure to bear on the parish councils to carry out their statutory duty?
    The LORD ADVOCATE: When you find a particular person in charge you may find that he is not carrying out his statutory duty through some misapprehension, and consequently you get these awkward intervals. If that did happen you would find perhaps a case arriving at the school where in effect the child was not in a fit condition.
    Mr. D. M. COWAN: With regard to what has been said about Scottish education I have not much to add that is new, but there are certain points which I think might very well be emphasised.
    2186
    It would be a mistake and it would be unfair to enter into any captious criticism of the action of the Scottish Education Department during the past year. Those who remember the bad old days know well that there is now a new spirit of co-operation in the conduct of Scottish educational affairs. We find the education committees, the education authorities, and the teachers working together for one common object. At the same time that does not mean that we are all of the same opinion. Even the most humble person has the right to think for himself.
    I do not intend to survey the whole field, but I will call attention to one or two points. My first point deals with a matter which I am quite well aware the Scottish Education Department has very little control over—I refer to the question of the teachers' salaries. I know that it is only within a very limited range indeed that the Scottish Education Department has any power whatever in regard to this question. At the same time I must say that I have noticed with great regret that many authorities are cutting down the salaries of teachers in a way that will certainly not encourage the recruitment of the proper class of teachers in Scotland. While it is not possible for the Education Department to take any direct action in this matter, I think they should emphasise the necessity of something being done in this direction in order to provide for the national needs of Scotland.
    The hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) hats referred to what is being done in connection with school buildings, and what preparation is being made in those buildings for instituting the kind of classes which we have been promised. I trust that when the year 1928 comes we shall not be told that the matter has again been postponed. I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland will be able to inform us that this matter is receiving the careful attention of his Department. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Camlachie to a large extent in what he said in regard to advanced opinion, but I am afraid that the parents of this advanced Committee are praising up rather too early the quality of their offspring. It will take some years before you can form any definite opinion as to the value of this new division of the school.

    2187
    I hope everything that is possible will be done to encourage higher education throughout the length and breadth of Scotland. With regard to advanced education, and as to the teachers who are to be qualified or recognised as having qualifications for teaching, while it is only proper that every care should be taken that suitable people only are to be placed in charge of the classes, we must not have hard and fast regulations which will cut out teachers who have given proper service, and they should be allowed to continue those services. So far as I have been able to gather there is a difficulty in this respect, and the matter has been discussed between the Department, the technical Committees and the representatives of the teachers. I hope there will be a generous recognition of the claims of the teachers, so that no person will feel that they have been unduly cut off from any prospect of promotion. There is nothing checks enthusiasm in education so much as the thought that you are prevented for a time from being able to advance from one position in the school to the very highest position.
    There is another matter which I should have brought up under agriculture. It is a question which does not really require legislation, and it refers to the County Advisory Committees which have been set up in connection with the teaching of agriculture in the schools. Those Committees are composed of the representatives of the education authorities and representatives from the agricultural colleges. In this respect there has been a very grave omission on those advisory Committees, and I think there ought to be some direct representation of the teaching staff of the schools. You have such direct representation in the training colleges which deal with the training of teachers, and every one admits that that representation has been a very valuable element on those Committees.
    I know, of course, that that is not a matter with which the Scottish Education Department can deal, but if the Secretary of State, as the head of the agricultural colleges and the Board of Agriculture, would confer with the Scottish Education Department they might be able to come to some arrangement whereby this suggestion of mine could be given effect to. There is not,
    2188
    in my view, any very serious charge to bring against the Scottish Education Department—rather, I think we have to congratulate them on the smoothness and harmony which has characterised Scottish education administration during the past year. I trust that there will be no apathy in these matters, and that we shall have some assurance with regard to school accommodation, the training of teachers, the size of the classes and the maintenance of children from the spokesman for the Government that these things are being kept in mind, and that there is no intention of standing still with regard to any of them.
    7.0 P.M.
    Sir HENRY CRAIK: The subject we are discussing is one in which I have always taken a deep interest, and with regard to which I find myself very largely in agreement with my hon. Colleague in the representation of the Universities, although on certain important points, I am compelled to differ from him, and from many of my Scottish colleagues. We all attach importance to the subject, but as soon as we get the word "education" into our mouths we occupy ourselves is talking upon something in regard to which we do not agree, and I make bold to say that it is a subject which I can confidently say that not one single Member of this House will be ready at this moment to stand up and attempt to define. But the moment you speak of this mysterious and indefinable word "education," the next step is that you insist upon spending more and more money and you consider any attempt to check that expenditure to be a sort of sacrilege.
    Having spent the larger part of my life in the work of education, I would not like to decry what lies behind. So far as education means anything, it merely means the training that one generation will try, blindfolded, mistakenly, haphazardly to give to its second generation to help it to carry on better than it has done itself. Do you think that all children are sure to get the best training inside the four walls of a school? Is it not likely that if you took them earlier into contact with nature they would learn a great deal and develop forces which lie dormant? I myself took part in drafting the Bill to which reference has been made. I am perfectly well conversant with what took place about the establishment of com-

    2189
    pulsory education then. I remember talking to Mr. Forster. We all thought then that, if compulsory education was really to do its work, it would become, after a certain time, useless. It has not become useless. It has done, on the contrary, a great deal of harm. It has killed out the real impulse, the real determination, the real inner individual energy, which; after all, is 10 parts out of a dozen of the advantages of education. People are not so zealous, so keen, or so enthusiastic about a thing when you take it out of their hands and tell them every step that the children are to take, tell them the Regulations they are to follow, and every period through which their life is to pass.
    7.0 P.M.
    If other people's experience is like mine, there is growing up in this country a great deal of distrust of this over-built and over-elaborated scheme of education. Extravagance does not mean success. Extravagance is very often a real accompaniment of inefficiency. Do let us be careful that every penny spent is spent wisely and well. The hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) said, I think, that a quarter of a million was all that was spent on bursaries, and he insisted that it should be increased to one million. There are about 600,000 children in all in attendance at schools.
    Mr. STEPHEN: There are, according to this Report, issued by the Committee of the Council of Education in Scotland, nearly 820,000 children on the registers.
    Sir H. CRAIK: On the registers, but not in average attendance. The numbers have fallen off. Is it proposed that £1,000,000 should be spent on bursaries for some 600,000 children? Where is your expenditure on education going to end if you do not check it, and watch the growth of its over-elaboration, and if you do not soothe people's anxieties? You may arouse— I think I see signs of people being already roused— distrust and suspicion for education. I am absolutely against the hon. Member opposite in wishing that there should be an increase of the school age. I think it would be an evil. Just now there are not very many boys who leave at 14. There are many temptations, including the £1,000,000 of bursaries to attract them. Remember, every six months and every year that they spend after 14 years of age in school on their
    2190
    own initiative by their own choice is worth half-a-dozen years spent under compulsion.
    Dr. SHIELS: Every Member of the House listens with pleasure to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Scottish Universities (Sir H. Craik), especially when he speaks on educational matters, because we know that he, was for many years engaged in the administration of education in Scotland. Therefore, he is an authority on that aspect of the subject. At the same time, some of us cannot follow him in his description of what ought to be the position of education among the working classes in Scotland. It is rather a habit of people who are themselves well educated to pooh-pooh the advantages of school and college training, to say that real education is more than. book learning, that attendance at educational institutions is not important, and that true education means something bigger and wider, back to nature, and all that sort of thing; and that, therefore, it is not necessary to spend a great deal of money on working-class education when, after all, these things are not ultimately important. We would be more impressed by these statements if we saw those who make them sending their own sons and daughters out to nature and failing to give them every advantage of an educational kind which they are able to give. We in this party simply claim that any education and any opportunity at all which will help boys and girls on in life should be available to every class of the community. We have no doubt that, whether because of the system of education that we have just now or in spite of it, the character of our Scottish people will be best maintained if that education is free to every class of the community. Therefore, we welcome the bursary system; we welcome the raising of the school age to 15. We do not believe, because a child is of working-class parents, that, whenever it reaches the age of 14, it should be let loose upon the world without the further opportunities of enlarging its mind which are available for others.
    There is another consideration. While we realise that in the present state of the country the raising of the school age to 15 is not likely, and perhaps not possible, it is, as the hon. Member for Midlothian and Peebles (Mr. Westwood) said, very desirable to keep it in mind.

    2191
    Apart from the educational aspect, there is the matter of unemployment. It is one of the tragedies of the present day that we have boys and girls up to 16 and 18 years of age who have never worked at all. Undoubtedly, the raising of the school age or allowing the Act, already passed, to come into operation in that connection, would be of very great advantage. Nothing can be more demoralising than that boys and girls should be running about with no occupation and no prospect of getting a situation. While that is quite an interesting theme to develop, I want rather to say a practical word in regard to the Lord Advocate's observations about the feeding of school children. The Lord Advocate seemed to indicate that the legal position was that parish councils were responsible for feeding the necessitous child, and only in the event of their failing to do so should education authorities take action. While that may be the position from the legal point of view, I think we ought to reflect that here we have two public bodies, each having the power of feeding children of school age. That being the case, I would much prefer that the education authority should feed the child of school age. I would like the Poor Law kept out of this altogether if possible, and certainly, as regards the child of school age, I think the education authority would be very much the better one to take charge. It is one of the present tragedies in Scotland that the legislation and administration of recent years have compelled so many people to take advantage of the Poor Law whose parents and grandparents and themselves would formerly have done anything rather than submit to the necessity for parish relief, and we ought to keep the children out of that atmosphere as much as possible. I would also point out that the feeding of school children by the education authority is normally much more economical than the handing out of individual tickets by a parish council. Where communal feeding in the school is given, the actual expense to the ratepayers—and that, after all, is the real test—is very much less. I trust, therefore, that, whatever be the legal position, the education authorities will continue to be empowered to feed the children of school age, and that the hint which the Lord Advocate gave in regard
    2192
    to holiday feeding will be observed by the authorities.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Midlothian and Peebles made a slight mistake in regard to the East Lothian authority, which is feeding the school children in the holidays. It is the Midlothian and West Lothian authorities which were not going to carry that out, but I am glad that in the case of Midlothian there has been a reconsideration of the position, and I understand that they will now carry on. I do not intend to say any more on this subject, as I hope to speak on a later Vote, but I trust that the Government will do everything in their power to maintain our educational system in Scotland, and will increasingly ensure to the "lad o'pairts" the chance which he used to have, and which I am afraid he has not now so much as he had, to develop his talents and abilities, which he can then ultimately put, as so many sons of Scotland have done, at the service of the community.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: At the outset I would like to say that, on a question like education, I speak with some hesitation. I realise that there are many points of view in dealing with a problem of this magnitude, and, indeed, it is clear, from the remarks to which we have listened, that there are different points of view even on one side of the House. The Lord Advocate has dealt with the legal aspect of the problem of feeding the school children, and I would only like to, say, in addition to what he has said on that subject, that I understand that Midlothian, to which reference has been made, have decided to continue feeding during the holidays. The hon. Member for East Edinburgh {Dr. Shiels) said lust now that he preferred the Education authority to feed the children of school age. As I understand it, there is nothing to prevent close co-operation between the two authorities, and arrangements can very often be made more economically, after consultation with the parish council, so that the actual feeding shall take place at the school. There ought, however, to be no alteration in the carrying out of the law in the terms in which the Lord Advocate has explained it, and the responsibilities of the parish council ought to be fully accepted.
    I have been asked to say what the attitude of the Department is with regard to

    2193
    the raising of the school age. All that I think I can usefully say about that at the moment is that, as, indeed, more than one hon. Member has indicated, the present time is not one from a financial point of view, or, indeed, from the point of view of finding the necessary accommodation, at which anyone could make a definite statement on that matter. In addition to that, I am awaiting the Report of the Committee on the question of juvenile unemployment, to which reference has been made, and that has a bearing on this question. I would only say that, as everyone knows, this is a problem which anyone concerned with this Department must always keep before him, but I think it would be, to say the least of it, foolish to make any statement which would prejudge a question of this kind in the position in which the country finds itself at present.
    Various references have been made to the experiment which has been made in the advanced division. This experiment —because, after all, it is an experiment—is being very carefully considered by the authorities concerned. Like all other fresh departures, it requires, no doubt, careful watching, and I am in agreement with those who think we must be sure that we have the right class of teacher to deal with these classes. I am not going to express any opinion myself at this moment as to the quality of the teachers. I am satisfied that we get very loyal service from these men and women. If, in course of time, we can improve the class and raise the standard, so much the better, but I must also put in a plea, as a very plain and humble individual, for some recognition of the fact that, in all these matters of education, in addition to and running concurrently with the raising of the standard of education, we should not forget the necessity of turning attention towards teaching children to use their hands in a manipulative capacity in our schools. I am satisfied that that is one of the problems which face the Department. Then, with regard to the question of the County Advisory Committee—
    Mr. SULLIVAN: Before the right hon. Gentleman leaves that subject, may I point out that we are giving manual instruction in the schools?
    Sir J. GILMOUR: I am aware that that is being done. I am only taking
    2194
    this opportunity of drawing the attention of those who are interested in educational matters to the fact that that side of education should not be forgotten, as I think it is desirable that it should be emphasised. Reference was made to the county advisory committees and to their composition. That is a matter which will be watched very carefully. I think it is at any rate a matter for congratulation that this step forward has been made, and, although these committees are only in their initial stages, those of us who are interested in these matters hope that this co-operation between the agricultural side and the school side may lead to very satisfactory results. With regard to school buildings, the Department, of course, are doing what they can to see that deficient buildings are improved and replaced. This, again, is a problem which is governed, as the House will know, by financial considerations. On the other hand, I would like to emphasise this, that I believe considerable progress may be made in the provision of these new buildings, particularly where the authorities are wise enough to adopt a system of building which cuts out a great deal of what I would call the question of external appearance, and concentrate their efforts upon producing a building which will give light and air and plenty of space. I think that in these buildings, as in many others, a great deal of the ratepayers' money, and, possibly, of public money, may be unduly sunk owing to extravagance in external buildings. Indeed, we ought to build more for the temporary period in which we live, and, as the time passes, buildings can be scrapped which fall out of step with the new period and the new requirements. I think I have dealt with the main questions that have been raised. I would only say, in conclusion, that one is very sensible of the difficulties, and I can well realise that the remark made by the senior Member for the Scottish Universities (Sir H. Craik) is one which we should do well to remember. It does not follow that extravagance in expenditure always gives the best results. I agree—
    Mr. STEPHEN: Surely, no one suggests that I would stand for extravagance in expenditure. What is the good of the Secretary of State for Scotland suggesting that anyone stands for ex-

    2195
    travagance in expenditure? We want efficient economic expenditure, but plenty of it.
    Sir J. GILMOUR: Of course, what extravagance may be is a matter of opinion, but I think the hon. Gentleman himself wished to increase the bursaries four-fold, or even eight-fold. That, in my view, is extravagance. I am very anxious to see the development and progress of education, and, indeed, I think the action of the Department within this last year has shown that that progress is being made. Indeed, I am in agreement with one hon. Member who said that our system of education in Scotland was superior to those of our neighbours across the Border. [HON. MEMBERS: "Question!"] If that be true, then I think we are right to say that the Department has been alive to the future, and is making progress.
    Mr. SULLIVAN: There are one or two further points that I should like to put to the right hon. Gentleman. I want to know what progress has been made in connection with housing—
    Mr. SPEAKER: That is the next Vote.
    Mr. SULLIVAN: Then I will deal with the second point, and get that information later. I also want to know what is being done with regard to the treatment of defective children or adults. As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, there is not the accommodation in Scotland that we require for cases of that kind. There is the child that is mentally weak, but not to such an extent that it requires to be sent to a lunatic asylum, and, if it is properly treated and cared for, the probability is that much can be done. I know that efforts have been made in some cases, but it is very slow, and the danger is that it will take so long that quite a number of these children will be outwith our authority by that time. With regard to adults, there was—
    Major ELLIOT: If I may say so, that would come in the discussion on the next Vote—the Health Vote. We are on education now, and, at the moment, to discuss the treatment of adults would be out of order.
    Mr. SULLIVAN: I am sorry if I was out of order. I am pressing that point
    2196
    in connection with children, and I hope attention will be paid to it by the authorities.
    I have not much to say in connection with education on our side of the Border. I believe the present administration is doing very well within limits. Every system can be improved, but we are living in a very difficult time, and I know the difficulty that education authorities have in trying to get through their work. I think, on the whole, the Education Department has been assisting them as far as it can. There is the problem lying in front of us of more schools if we raise the age. I do not see why we should have any difficulty in a time like this in raising it, because I take the view that it is a tragedy that we have so many boys and girls who have left school and have never done any work, and have no chance of any work. We are simply bringing them up to be a danger to a future generation, and I would much rather see an effort being made to educate them and guide them along some lines where in the future they would have an opportunity of helping themselves.
    I know an attempt was made some time ago to form classes in the County of Lanark for boys who have left school and were idle, but the centre was fixed too far away and the boys themselves had to pay their travelling expenses to that centre. I made some inquiries as to the sort of education they were getting and I regret to say I was not satisfied at all. My idea of education for boys of that kind is that they should advance from the point at which they were when they left school. They should get some of that manual instruction or training that the right hon. Gentleman mentioned, but they were only going over what they had previously had at school. They were simply marking time. That is not what we are out for, and it will not make any improvement in the long run.
    In connection with school buildings, I have great sympathy with the statement made by the Secretary of State. I believe in the past we built too strong buildings. We put up a mass of buildings and we did not always look to the accommodation side. A building was there. It would last hundreds of years. One of the faults we had was that we built too strongly, and it would be much better if our buildings had not lasted so

    2197
    long, because we could have the advantage of changed ideas in connection with school erection. The system adopted now, while it might not be suitable for very populous areas or for a big city. I think is eminently suitable for country districts. We are getting the maximum amount of accommodation for a minimum amount, of expense and some of the schools I have seen have shown a great improvement in lay-out as compared with some of the schools they superseded. If we carry on in that way there is no doubt at all that our people will get the advantage, and if it is possible to get the advantage and at the same time to keep down the cost it is something that should satisfy everyone.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move to leave out "£1,858,345" and to insert instead thereof "£1,858,245."
    Before I offer a few observations on housing I should like to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that in future years, when he is issuing his annual Report on the Board of Health, it would be highly advantageous if there were an index. As it stands now, with this bulky document of over 300 pages, it is exceedingly difficult to lay one's finger upon the exact point one wants, particularly when we get the Report handed to us a day or two before the Debate takes place. The position of housing in Scotland is rendered doubly unsatisfactory because of the hesitancy of His Majesty's Government in informing the municipalities exactly what form of subsidy they are likely to have in October next. Everything is being held up. No sane municipality is going to make continuous preparations for house building unless it can be assured of the subsidy it is going to get from the Government. The right hon. Gentleman and the Minister in England have been repeatedly appealed to. Yesterday they were met, by representatives of all the housing bodies of the country and they declined to state what was going to be the policy of the Government when the present subsidy period expired in October next. We are not making up on the housing shortage in Scotland. We require 20,000 houses per annum. We
    2198
    are getting less than 8,000, and in face of a situation like that it is simply an impossible position for the Government, by hesitancy and delay, to prevent the municipalities putting forward their utmost efforts to cope with the situation.
    The city I represent is in this position. We have 11·3 of our population living more than three to one room. We have 4,000 houses where the people are living more than three to one room. We have 4,000 persons living in houses which have been officially scheduled as unfit for human habitation, and we have 1,000 families living in a share of a room—two or more families for one room—and, indeed. the condition of affairs is such that the Prime Minister himself, when he last visited Dundee, expressed himself as horrified with the conditions he saw there, and wondered what kind of consciences the people had who owned these buildings and took rent for them. Our sanitary inspector puts the matter in this way. He says:
    "There are hundreds of properties within the city occupied as human dwelling-places which had not the slightest right to be thus named, but they are tolerated. The inmates suffer in health and comfort, the young generation is reared in squalor, filth and conditions leading towards immorality which should make the authorities charged with the welfare of the community blush."
    The medical officer of health repeats this in other words, and urges a great development in house building. If the Government withdraw the subsidy and throw us back on what is called, falsely, an economic rent, that means, according to figures worked out by the sanitary inspector in Dundee, that this alleged economic rent will be £1 per week for a working-class house. Who is to pay this £1 a week? I have here a schedule of the wages rates in Dundee. I take the shipyard labourer at £1 17s. 10d. for a full week's work when he gets it, and he is not getting it. He cannot pay £1 rent. The foundry labourer for a full week's work gets £1 17s. 3d. He cannot pay £1 rent. Jute workers and workers engaged in the textile industry get £2 0s. 7½d. for a full week's work. They cannot pay £1. I take the widow woman bringing up a family. Her wage in a jute factory works out at £1 6s. a week. She cannot pay an economic rent of £1. I find from the Report of the Scottish Board of Health that the cost for food

    2199
    alone, on the poor-house basis, buying in bulk, comes to 3s. 11d. per head, clothing 1s. 3¼d., fuel 1s. 8¼d., and light 5d., making 7s. 11¼d. per head per week for the barest necessities of life. Take a family of five and you have £2 per week on a poor-house basis, buying in bulk, as the minimum amount required to keep a family on the barest, meanest, skimpiest level. They cannot pay £1 a week in rent out of £l 17s. 10d. of wages when it costs £2 a week, apart from house rent, on a poor-house basis. That is the dilemma with which the right hon. Gentleman and we are faced if they withdraw the subsidy.
    It is no use baying at the moon. I will make three definite suggestions to the Secretary of State for Scotland, by which he can reduce the cost of housing in Scotland, and do it now. Why is it that he does not take steps to get cheap money for the municipalities? Why cannot we have municipal banks? Our people are putting their money into the Post Office Savings Bank and getting 2½ per cent. for it from the Government; per cent. is allowed for working expenses, so that the Chancellor of the Exchequer gets that money at 2¾ per cent., and he loans it back to us, back to the same people, at 5 per cent., and makes a profit of 2¼ per cent. on the deal. Why cannot we be allowed to start municipal banks? In some places we do it, without statutory powers. We have done it in defiance of the Government, and we are saving 2 per cent. or 11½ per cent, on our money, reducing the local rates and cheapening local administration. I offer that suggestion to the right hon. Gentleman. If he is beaten and baffled by the housing situation, let him consider how municipal banks could be used to promote an adequate supply of cheap money in order to cheapen house building in Scotland.
    A further offer was made to the right hon. Gentleman by the City of Dundee, but he turned it down. The local town council offered to take 200 men, as a minimum, off the employment exchange and to set them to work making cement blocks for house building. They asked the Government to give them the money that was actually being given to these men through the employment exchanges for doing nothing. They asked that that money should be given to the town
    2200
    council, and they would set these men to work making cement blocks for the purpose of cheapening building material. It is simply because His Majesty's present Government stands committed to the building rings and—the right hon. Gentleman need not laugh. He cannot give me any other reason why he goes on with this wasteful method of dealing with unemployment and house building. It is because he is afraid to face up to the manufacturers of building material, that he will not give a chance to a, municipal experiment such as that suggested by the Dundee Town Council—a council not composed of Labour men with a majority, but with Liberals and Conservatives. The council pleaded with the Government to give them some little financial grant towards the cost of taking these 200 men off the dole and setting them to manufacture something which would cheapen houses and enable us to go on with house-building on a bigger scale.
    There is one further suggestion which I will make to the right hon. Gentleman, and he will find it in his own Report, on pages 48 and 49, in the story of experiments in guild building. The most remarkable thing is that an anti-Socialist Government, the defenders of private enterprise, should say what they do in this Report about guild building. They have had three experiments. They have permitted the guilds to go ahead building houses without the intervention of the exploiter of labour called the boss. What has been the result? In Dunfermline on the Brucefield site, 160 houses have been built at an estimated tender cost, after deduction for reduced wages and prices, of £68,000. The actual ascertained cost, including the 10 per cent. paid to the Guild, amounted to £56,341, showing a saving of £12,127, or £76 per house, in two trades only. A net saving to the local authority, after the allocation of the gross saving between themselves and the Guild, of £8,700. The Report goes on to say:
    "The quality of the work has been the subject of much praise and compares very favourably with the average produced by other contractors on similar schemes throughout the country."
    A better job, better workmanship, a cheaper job and a saving to the community! That has not happened merely at Dunfermline. We also read in the Report of schemes at Renton and Alex-

    2201
    andria, in respect of which the Report says:
    "From the above figures it will be seen that the cost of the work to the local authority under the Guild form of contract worked out at no less than 41 per cent. under the estimate in the case of Renton, and 34 per cent. in the case of Alexandria, results which are rather remarkable, especcially having in view the fact that a scarcity of labour was experienced in the locality, and labour at additional cost had to be imported."
    Within this Report of the Scottish Board of Health we get. a clue as to one method by which the cost of house building could be brought down and rents brought down within the ambit of the working-class purse. Abolish the exploiter, abolish the profiteer, abolish the money-maker contractor, set up guilds, allow the workers to do the job, and on the admission of the Scottish Board of Health, which is a Conservative, anti-Socialist administration, you will get a better job, a cheaper job, and you will save 41 per cent. If the Secretary of State for Scotland will only put his anti-Socialist prejudices in his pocket for a week and allow the municipalities to go ahead producing building material, to take off the Employment Exchange men who are at present eating out their hearts because they can get nothing to do, he will go some way towards solving the problem. The Dundee Town Council offered these men a decent wage, but the Secretary of State for Scotland refused to give the council a monetary grant towards the necessary expenditure.
    I say to the right hon. Gentleman: Give us municipal banks, encourage us to set up municipal banks, let us have cheap money, let us have cheap materials by abolishing the exploiter in building materials, let us have cheaper production by abolishing the exploiter in production. By these three methods the Secretary of State could stimulate and double the output of houses in Scotland. He cannot do it by stopping the subsidy. By stopping the subsidy he simply sentences hundreds of thousands of our people to an early death.
    Mr. HILTON YOUNG: I was interested by the suggestion of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) as to obtaining cheap money for housing by the foundation of municipal banks. I have been turning the suggestion over in my mind and wondering whether it would
    2202
    provide that assistance. I very much fear, after considering the suggestion, that it does not, and I would like to suggest the reason to the hon. Member. He has referred to the fact that the Government takes money on deposit through the Savings Bank at 2¾ per cent. and lends it out for house building at 5 per cent., or whatever the higher rate may be. The hon. Member suggests that this profit might be avoided and that the money might thus be made more cheaply available for housing. I fear that that must be an illusion, because when one comes to consider it the money that is taken on deposit through the Post Office Savings Bank is money which is practically at call and which commands, naturally, the lower rate of interest. On the other hand, the money which is lent out for housing is lent out for long terms and commands, therefore, in the market the higher rate of interest. The State, as I understand it, is only able to afford any rate of interest at all on the money which it receives practically at call from the Savings Bank depositors, because it has behind it the tremendous asset of the credit of the State. Any similar institution which has not that tremendous asset cannot afford the same rate of interest. It is the common experience of commercial banking that a commercial bank can afford no rate of interest at all upon money at call. The commercial bank that tries to give a rate of interest on money at call comes to a bad end. The municipal bank, which the hon. Member suggests, would not command the same overwhelming credit that the State commands.
    Mr. JOHNSTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the results of the Birmingham Municipal Bank, founded by the present Minister of Health? Is he not aware that we have 11 banks in Scotland which are highly flourishing and getting money?
    Colonel WOODCOCK: Birmingham is the single instance.
    Mr. YOUNG: I am well aware of the Birmingham Municipal Bank, but I am not as well aware of the experience of the Scottish municipal banks as is the hon. Member. I am aware of no instance that is contrary to the facts, because I believe they are facts, which have mentioned. If I may complete the argument which I was making when the hon. Member interrupted, I would say

    2203
    that the municipal banks to which he refers cannot possibly command the same overwhelming credit as the State. They could not, therefore, possibly afford in accordance with the principles of sound finance, the same rate of interest upon deposits of savings bank depositors. To make their banks safe, I do not think they could afford any rate of interest upon the deposits at call. I am afraid, therefore, that the hope of cheaper money for housing from that source is a delusion. The trouble at the bottom of these suggestions is that you cannot get cheaper money for any capital purpose at less than the market rate, without some form or other of concealed subsidy.
    Mr. BARR: I desire to speak, first of all, on the very serious situation that is arising in Lanarkshire and elsewhere in Scotland in connection with the parish councils. In my own district we have had an interdict served by all the large employers against continuing aliment to those who are placed in need of relief by the present industrial dispute. It is true that that interdict has not been granted in the case of Hamilton, but there is still pending a case in my own constituency. I would like to mention the action that has been taken by one parish council in my own constituency in regard to the reduction of relief. Formerly, the sum given for the wife of a man in need who sought relief was 12s. This was reduced to 10s., and it is now 7s. 6d. For a child, the amount originally was 4s., which was reduced to 2s. 6d., and last week it was further reduced to 1s. 6d. Therefore, the situation with which we are confronted is that these people who have been struggling along for months are now to have for a wife 7s. and for each child 1s. 6d. From the pronouncement that has been made from the Front Bench opposite, that is a state of things which I should be very much surprised if the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary can approve.
    I pass on to the more, general subject of health, in the ordinary sense of the word. In the Report of the Board of Health reference is made to the Report of the Hospital Services (Scotland) Committee, which was presided over, I think, by Lord Mackenzie. That Report reveals a very alarming state of things in regard to public health in Scotland and in
    2204
    regard to the inadequacy of hospital services. We find, for example, that, generally, the hospital accommodation is exceedingly inadequate. That means for all requiring hospital treatment the prolonging of their suffering, for some it means that they are obliged to await admittance until it is much too late for them to have any chance of recovery, and for many it means that they die before admission to the hospital can be secured.
    8.0 P.M.
    I grant that much has been done in regard to hospital accommodation. I find that in 1841 in the city of Glasgow, 17 per thousand of the population were admitted to hospital, and that in 1924 it had risen to 44·9. But when you come to the waiting list at these hospitals, as revealed in the Report, you find that there are often more people on the list than there are beds in the hospital. If you take the six teaching hospitals, as they are called, in the four principal cities of Scotland, you find that there are beds there to the number of 3,256 and that there is a waiting list of 5,854. It is true that the waiting lists have to be sifted, but there still remains the fact that the Committee calculated that there was need for 3,600 new beds in Scotland to meet the urgent demands of sick people. When you come to hospitals for incurables, they point out that there is the greatest dearth of such institutions. There are only eight in Scotland and only 602 beds. They make reference to the children's hospitals, one in Glasgow, one in Edinburgh and one in Aberdeen; but these again they declare to be quite inadequate. Then we have the question of the Poor Law hospitals, in regard to which two remarks may be made; first, that these hospitals are in many cases carried on in buildings that were originally constructed, not as hospitals, but as workhouses or for the housing of the poor. While it is true that we have, as in Glasgow, some splendid hospitals conducted by the parish council authorities, taking it as a whole, they suffer very greatly in equipment and buildings, and they are inferior in every way. In the Minority Report on the Poor Law in 1909, it was asserted that two-thirds of the sick poor were being tended in what were really workhouses, although used as hospitals.
    The second point brought out very clearly, and which is very important,

    2205
    is the stigma of the Poor Law that attaches to the sick poor. The idea seems to prevail that you must give them something inferior, that there must be something disciplinary in the treatment of disease for them, I am glad to say that the Report recommends the transfer of these Poor Law hospitals to the general system of hospitals, that that taint should be completely taken away, and that the very best treatment should be given to the poorest in the land. I think that is a most important recommendation to come from the Committee. In regard to the hospitals of local authorities, these are confined to certain specific diseases, but the list of diseases has now been expanded until, I think, it amounts 37. In regard to certain forms of disease, such as pulmonary tuberculosis, they think that, with the schemes that are in view, as well as those that exist, there is, not to say ample, but sufficient to be going on with. In regard to other forms of disease, such as non-pulmonary tuberculosis, they believe and argue that there is a great inadequacy and a great urgency. In regard to these local authorities, I believe that the whole responsibility should be thrown upon them in a new way and the whole system broadened out. As to finance, they calculate, and I should like to know what the intentions of the Scottish Board of Health are in this matter, that to provide 3,600 beds a sum of £1,800,000 would be required, of which they recommend that a half should be a State grant.
    I am well aware that I would not be in order in mentioning large questions of policy in regard to the future of the hospitals, but I may be in order in saying that to me it is pathetic that these hospitals should depend on appeals of a varied character, on street collections, and even in some cases on appeals to the gambling instinct. I hope that the Government itself is looking forward, and I think they are, judging from this Report, to a much more comprehensive scheme, in which the very best treatment will be given to all without distinction. We are continually emphasising, in the matter of education, that the humblest and the poorest in the land should have equal access to education; surely they ought to have equal access to the very best treatment that is possible. Considering the inadequacy of our medical equipment. I think it is remarkable what
    2206
    has been done and the progress that has been made. We find, for example, that last year's death-rate for Scotland was 13·4, which is one per cent. less than in 1924. We find that the infantile death rate is 90·5, a figure which has only been twice reached in Scotland, in 1921 and 1923. We find that the death-rate for boys and girls under five years is down to 12, a figure which I think it has only once before touched in Scotland. The pulmonary tuberculosis rate is down to 76, which I believe is a record not only for Scotland but for the United Kingdom, and the non-pulmonary rate is down to 34. I think social reformers can take great heart and hope and courage from a long-stretched consideration of the way in which the death-rate has been brought down. In 1855, a normal year in Glasgow, the annual death-rate was 32 per thousand; now it is down to 13·25, or less than one-half. I find, also, in regard to the infantile death-rate, that in 1860, a normal year in Glasgow, it was 182, and now it is 101, and for the whole of Scotland it is less than one-half of what it was in Glasgow in 1860. But a great deal remains to be done.
    It is significant to look at the death rates of other countries, although we have to bear in mind certain considerations, such as differences of climate and the like: but I think it is far more due to advance in sanitary and medical service. We find that the death-rate in Sweden is 11·4, in Norway 11·14, in Canada 9·8, and in New Zealand 8·29. If you take the infantile death-rate. which stands in Scotland at 90·5, you find that in Sweden it is down to 56, in Norway 50·66, and in New Zealand 40·23. We do not need to go so far abroad to get figures of that kind. Taking the City of Glasgow, you find an enormous disparity between one ward and another. You find, for example, a death-rate in Cathcart of 9·33 and in Mile End 17·93. The infantile death-rate is 27 in Langside, 31 in Cathcart, and 137 in Mile End. Last year, in Mile End it was 162. As a temperance reformer, I cannot help but notice that the multitude of public houses in the various wards very largely conforms to the death-rate. But it would be unfair to say that it is all due to that. There are a vast number of other social evils, that are interlaced at every point, and that determine the death-

    2207
    rate. To further the interests of public health, we have to seek to equalise the social conditions in a city, and you will save a multitude from death. If you removed poverty itself, and you could, you would enormously diminish the death-rate for the city and for the whole country.
    Housing reform would be a most effective means of improving health and diminishing the death-rate, and in this connection I will give some most significant figures from the Report of the Royal Commission on the Housing of the Industrial Classes in Scotland, 1917. The figures are taken from the census of 1917, and we find these staggering statistics. Taking the death-rate among boys under five years, you find that, in the one-roomed houses, it was 40·56, in the two-roomed houses, 30·2; in the three-roomed houses, 17·9; and in the houses of four rooms and upwards 10·27. That means that, for every boy that died in a house of four rooms and upwards there were four boys dying in the single apartment house. The Report goes on to say that when a family passes into the one-roomed house, the children enter the valley of the shadow of death. I think we have to recognise that we are advancing because of a new mental attitude towards disease, a recognition that it is not inevitable in many quarters, that it is not part of the providential system of the world. I have been struck by some of the entries in the town records of Glasgow, where they speak of the plague as being the "pleasure of God." They say they are
    "waiting till it would please God to remove the heavy hand of the pestilence."
    It was a new landmark in social advance when Charles Kingsley, at Bristol on the 5th of October, 1857, spoke these brave words, referring to large cities:
    "They fasted, they prayed; but in vain. They called the pestilence the judgment of God; and they called it by a true name. But they knew not (and who are we to blame them for not knowing) what it was that God was judging thereby—foul air, foul water, unclean backyards, stifling attics, houses hanging over narrow streets till light and air were alike shut out—that there lay the sin; and that, to amend that, was the repentance which God demanded."
    This practical repentance is demanded of us to-day. We on this side of the House desire to see the whole health service a public service; the best medical
    2208
    skill available to all persons without distinction. The health of the nation is its greatest asset. Nay, more. We are seeking a better order of things which will strike at the root causes of many of the diseases which afflict the mortal frame. Though "Pain and passion may not die," we have already driven out many forms of foul diseases. We say with Tennyson:—
    "Ring out old shapes of foul disease."
    We have already done that. When the first bridge was built over the Clyde in 1350, it was in part to establish a leper house on the other side of the river. They said lepers there always would be, it was the Will of God, and now a hundred years have passed without leprosy being known in our country. So other diseases will be driven out, and it will be realised that the prophet's vision is more true of the new Jerusalem we are seeking to build up than of the Jerusalem which he foreshadowed and saw:
    "There shall yet old men and old women dwell in the streets of Jerusalem, and every man with his staff in his hand for very age.
    And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets thereof."
    Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: My colleague in the representation of the City of Dundee (Mr. Johnston) has presented the figures to the House which we have been urged by the municipal representatives to put before the Government, and it is not necessary, therefore, to go over that ground again. Let me refer to the national situation. The National Housing Council have been very much occupied in recent years in promoting housing schemes all over the country, but they are alarmed as to the possibility of the Government discontinuing the subsidy. They are most anxious that this step should not be taken. The Secretary of the National Housing Council says:
    "While it is realised that economy in both Imperial and local finance is of paramount importance at the present time, it is difficult to believe that any thoughtful student of economics would venture to endorse a policy of retrenchment at the expense of aggravating and prolonging the present housing shortage."
    That shortage, so far as Scotland is concerned, amounts to something like 12,500 houses annually. We have to make up that number. Dundee is entitled to considerable credit in this respect. They have expedited their housing scheme,

    2209
    and considering the wages paid to the general body of workers in the city, it is proper to reflect that only now is our municipal council getting properly on the lines of dealing with the cases of the poorer people who are less able to pay higher rents. It is only now that we are reaching that stage, and if the Government discontinue the subsidy, it would mean great suffering to this class of the community. The chairman of this housing council, Mr. Elwood, has made this statement, which I consider of the utmost importance at the present time:
    "When the Wheatley Act of 1924 was introduced it was stated that it provided for the erection of 2,500,000 houses in fifteen years. The number so far put up is nowhere near the number required to meet national needs, and if the amount of the subsidy is reduced, many of the authorities will at once be confronted with these alternatives. Either they will be compelled to raise a much larger sum through the local rates, or they must consider an increase in the rents of the working-class type of house. To me it appears that both alternatives are impossible at the present moment, for already the authorities are over-burdened with rates, while comparatively few houses have been built for rents that the working classes can afford to pay."
    Any increase in the rents will simply stultify the efforts that have been made to get on with this housing problem, and do still more in Scotland than we have done in the past. Any reduction in the subsidy, and particularly if it is dropped altogether, will stop the process of meeting the clamant needs of these people; and any idea of drawing upon the rates for this purpose is also impossible. Already parish councils are so over-burdened that the question of their rates will in itself become a big problem to be faced by the Government. The report of the sanitary inspector for Dundee, which has already been quoted, is worth while considering, because Dundee is well to the front in comparison with any other city in Scotland or in England. In his Report the sanitary inspector says:
    "The wants of the community are in 1926 about as rampant as when the town council started out to solve the problem through the various housing schemes—the houses provided have only in a slight degree eased the situation. Within recent years the call for the demolition of houses unfit for human habitation has been more acute, and it has now reached a crisis that a deaf ear can be no longer turned thereto—the day of ignoring has passed."
    About 8,000 houses are immediately required in the City of Dundee. Two
    2210
    thousand of the present houses are uninhabited, and that is a rather striking factor in the situation. No less than 3,527 houses have been promoted, 1,334 completed, and there are under construction 2,203. What may be the eventual interpretation of the phrase "substantially begun" has yet to be ascertained. That is so far as Dundee is concerned. On the general question of housing, and the reference made by my colleague in the representation of Dundee on the question of municipal banking, I think there should be recognition of the power already possessed to proceed in that direction. My colleague has been identified with the advocacy of such a scheme in that part of the country which he represented municipally. He alluded to the composition of Dundee Town Council, and I would say that with the Coalition of Labour and other forces in power, they should be able to get a move on with the Municipal Banking scheme.
    In considering the areas of industrial constituencies where the poorer people are gathered, the congestion and the intensifying of the social evils undoubtedly are of very great importance; but it is only right to say that the basis upon which that system is sustained is, according to the law, what is meet and convenient—that is the phrase used—for the requirements of the community. The idea seems to be that where there is the larger number of people gathered together there should be all the more facilities for sustaining this particular trouble. I do not recognise the housing question as a root question at all. With all the promotion of better housing by this or any other Government, so long as these social evils exist and produce substantial profits, even at this very hour, with our most important industries down in the dust, you can spend all the money that you choose on one-roomed or four-roomed or 10-roomed houses, and yet you are maintaining one of the most formidable factors for blocking the progress of housing or anything else that is desirable. It is a huge wastage in every sense of the word. With reference to the hon. Member for Motherwell speaking as a temperance reformer I say that so long as that social evil is sustained and protected, there will be no settlement of the housing problem, because as fast as you make good houses you will find them turned into slums. We

    2211
    must face the facts and get down to the heart of the evil.
    Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: I wish in a few sentences to direct the attention of the Secretary of State for Scotland to a question which is arousing a great deal of interest in Scotland and has not yet been mentioned. We have heard from the other side, particularly from the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Barr), statistics of progress in meeting the requirements of health. Those statistics are highly satisfactory, but it seems to me that, however greatly we may try to meet the requirements of an ever-growing population, we shall fall short of doing al that is necessary unless we can take some steps to restrict unnecessary immigration from other parts of the Kingdom into Scotland. It is well known to all Scottish Members that for a considerable number of years past there has been a constant stream of immigrants from Ireland into the South-West of Scotland. The result is, of course, that the available housing accommodation is hard pressed, that the demand becomes greater and greater, and that there is an adverse influence on the health of the population. I am aware of the great difficulties in dealing with the case, but I hope that the Secretary of State will give us an assurance that the matter is receiving the close attention which it deserves. The figures are very alarming. Whole areas are, in fact, changing their character. Parts of the South-West of Scotland are becoming more and more Irishised—if I may coin a word—and unless something is done the situation will become more serious.
    Even in agricultural areas we find the same thing going on to a certain extent. People from the neighbouring island come over for the harvest and spread over Scotland. A certain number of them go back, but others remain. There is no particular reason why Scotland should be so burdened with what is the surplus population of another portion of the United Kingdom. It is obvious that so long as unemployment exists every unnecessary immigrant makes the situation worse. I ask my right hon. Friend, or whoever replies for the Government, to give us an undertaking that this very serious matter is receiving attention. It is probably well known to Members from Scotland that the matter received the
    2212
    earnest and close attention of the General Assemblies of the Churches in Scotland this year. That is an aspect with which it is unnecessary to deal here; but we can assure the Secretary of State for Scotland that it is a problem which is attracting the earnest attention of all Scottish people at the present time. We hope that it will be dealt with, and that, if possible, steps will be taken to prevent it getting graver than it is at the present time.
    Mr. WELSH: I do not propose to follow the hon. and gallant Member in his somewhat anti-Irish attitude. One with his military career must know that we have been greatly indebted to the Irish people, and I know that this country cannot disregard the contribution that the Irish people have made to civilisation. I want to draw attention to two points in the Report of the Scottish Board of Health. The question of housing has been raised, but the question of parish council administration has not yet been mentioned. Before I mention the question of housing I would like to emphasise the suggestion already made of adding to the convenience of Members by including an index in the report next year. Otherwise I would like to pay a compliment to those permanent officials for their very painstaking work in producing such a fine report. It was admitted on all sides at the end of the War that on the question of housing, whilst there was a very considerable difficulty in this country, Scotland particularly was much more in need, and had a greater leeway to make up, than her Southern neighbour. In the last five years I find the total number of houses produced in Great Britain has been 548,286, and of that number the southern half of the island has had 511,282, or 93·25 per cent., whereas the northern half of the island has only had 37,004, or 6·75 per cent. I should like to ask the Under-Secretary if he considers that to be a fair share for Scotland and, if it is not, will he give a fuller explanation of the reasons than that contained in the Report. The suggestion is made that the trade unions are chiefly responsible. I submit that is merely an excuse and not a reason. Coming to the question of housing subsidy, I find that during the last five years the amount expended has been £27,000,000, and of this

    2213
    amount private enterprise has received £10,000,000. A writer in the "Edinburgh Review" in April of this year, dealing with this question, makes the following statement:
    "The stimulus of the subsidy of £75 has been fully justified by the way it has encouraged the speculative builder to undertake the erection of housing once again, and there would be an undoubted outcry among the supporters of private enterprise if Mr. Chamberlain proposed the total abolition of this sum."
    One can almost hear the writer of that article declaiming against any suggestion that a subsidy should be given to the mining industry which is of paramount importance to this country; but a subsidy can be given to housing, and private enterprise can come in and take £10,000,000 out of £27,000,000 of that subsidy and, he says, a great outcry would be the result if the Minister of Health dared to abolish the subsidy, as is being suggested in some quarters. It is estimated that from 1940 to 1964 the nation will require to find £34,500,000 each year from the Treasury and local rates, if the programme is to be carried out which has been sketched. Private enterprise houses are built mostly for sale and this seems to be another means of burdening the people locally and nationally and also of providing vested interests with something very material out of the national life.
    I am much interested in the question of coal, and I should like to deal particularly with the subject of housing in the coal mining areas of Scotland. In the Coal Commission's Report, Vol. III, page 249, we find that in 1913 there was in Scotland only one colliery-owned house paying a rent of over 10s. a week, but in 1924 there were 1,359 such houses. We find that in 1913 there were only 846 colliery-owned houses in Scotland paying over 5s. a week, but in 1924 the number had increased to 16,962, an increase of 1,905. per cent. A great deal has been heard about collieries which are not paying, but here is a side-light on the mining industry, showing one respect in which it has been paying very handsomely. In 1913 the number of colliery-owned houses rented at over 5s. per week was only 3'23 per cent, of the total; but in 1924 it was 55'76 of the total, and yet only 4,000 more colliery-owned houses were erected between 1913 and 1924. There are no
    2214
    arrears of rent in connection with colliery-owned houses because the rents are deducted from the wages of the men. The colliery owners get the rent before the men receive the wages. I should like more attention to be given, not only to the question of the scarcity in Scotland as compared with England, but also to the scarcity in the mining areas and the huge increases of rent which have been piled upon people who are quite unable, even when they are working, to meet the heavy demands ordinarily made on them.
    On the question of unemployment I notice on: page 270 of the Report of the Scottish Board of Health the following statement:
    "Parish Councils have continued to bear a heavy burden of expenditure in relieving the destitute able-bodied unemployed. During the financial year ending 15th May, 1925, the total expenditure by parish councils in connection with the relief to the able-bodied amounted to £799,498, of which £638,766 was paid in outdoor relief and £13,815 was expended on indoor relief. The remaining £146,847 was made up of £44,741 for administrative expenses and £102,106 for interest on loans and overdrafts."
    This means that the banks have got one-eighth of the total amount borrowed, or, roughly 2s. 6d. in the £ If some method of cheapening money to the local administrations could be found, it would mean a considerable reduction in the burden of rates which the people have to bear. The right hon. Gentleman knows that this question of industrial parishes has been a clamant one during the last few years. Since the great depression began in 1921, representations have been made again and again of the unfairness of the burdens which they have had to hear because unemployment has been so rampant. Men whose stamps are exhausted at the Exchange have been turned off, and work cannot be found, and the parish councils have to bear the burden. Yet when they are compelled to borrow money, 2s. 6d. in the £ is taken by the banks for the mere loan of the money which is to relieve the poor people in areas suffering from depression.
    That all means that the standard of life is still further depressed in meeting the burden of extra rates, and, with the meagre amount of work that is going, the increased burden of rates is bound to lower the standard of health as well The burden gets greater and greater, because we find from the Report that

    2215
    there has been an increasing number of unemployed turned from the Employment Exchanges right over to the parish councils, in an increasing ratio every quarter of the last year. It stands higher at the end of 1925 than it did at the beginning, and, from the statistics we have been able to gather since, even this year shows a still further increase in the burdens that the parish councils are bearing. I should like the Scottish Board of Health and the Secretary of State to take these points into consideration. because the burden which the industrial parishes particularly are bearing is beyond their capacity to carry. We ask that these things will be given more consideration than they have been given hitherto, and we ask that they shall be given at least a semblance of fair play in comparison with that extended to the monied and vested interests that are living on the depression of the people.
    Sir SAMUEL CHAPMAN: I do not wish to raise the general question of the subsidy for houses, but I wish to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, when he is coming to a final decision, that he will not draw an absolutely fast line from which there shall be no deviation. When the Government were anxious to build a large number of steel houses, they asked various corporations to provide them with land. Some corporations cheerfully responded, and others found that it was not convenient. Among the corporations that willingly and cheerfully responded was that of the City of Edinburgh. I will not presume to mention the other cities that did not see their way to respond—
    Mr. BUCHANAN: No, but you can hint!
    Sir S. CHAPAM: —but I wish the Secretary of State for Scotland to remember that because the city of Edinburgh did give up land, for which they them slaves had a scheme cut and dried, that scheme has been postponed for more than a year; and it is thus possible—nay, it is certain—that if on the 1st October any announcement is made that the subsidy is made that the subsidy is stopped, the corporation of the City of Edinburgh will not have cut a sod and will not, if a hard and fast line is drawn, be entitled, through having made contracts—as we presume all contracts
    2216
    will be recognised for the subsidy—to that subsidy. It will not be their fault; it will be on account of the great generosity of the City of Edinburgh, always marked, on all occasions when the interests of the State are at stake. They will have to suffer, and so, what I wish the Secretary of State to bear in mind is this, that if, on the one hand, the City of Edinburgh have given up a large piece of land—indeed, there were 1,400 houses already planned—which undoubtedly, had they been put in operation to-day, would have been entitled to the subsidy—the city should not be penalised because of their foresight and the cheerfulness with which they responded to the wishes of the Government in order that the steel houses should be proceeded with immediately. I will not do the Secretary of State the injustice to say that he will not consider this question. I rise only to say that I am quite sure it only needs to be mentioned for the Secretary of State to remember the great services which Edinburgh has rendered to him with the steel houses, and that he will, on his side, remember that we in Edinburgh are entitled to the subsidy whenever it ceases.
    Mr. T. KENNEDY: I wish to refer to something which has not yet been raised in this Debate. It is a matter, I think, of considerable importance, and I believe that the Scottish Office will be able to give an answer to the questions that I wish to address to them. I refer to the future of the health insurance administration in Scotland through the local insurance committees. I think I am right in saying that the whole matter of public health administration on this side is now in the melting pot, or, if that is going too far, I think I am right in saying that in those matters we stand very near to important changes and very far-reaching developments. The Royal Commission, which was appointed in 1924 and which reported this year, makes very definite reference to this matter of the status, work, and future of those committees. The Commission indeed definitely recommends that those local insurance committees should cease to function at an early date, and that their functions should be transferred to some appropriate municipal or county committee. That proposal is made on the ground that there is

    2217
    need for a concentration of local health administration, and with that concentration and unification of administration, of course, the committees will naturally cease to exist. The Commission is very definite in its statements that, so far as this change is concerned, nothing at all can be said in the way of adverse criticism as to the manner in which these committees have done their work up to the present time. Indeed, their work is referred to in warm terms of appreciation. They say that the work has been done with a notable degree of success, and that there is no evidence at all of any failure on the part of those committees to perform the tasks which they have had to undertake. The officials connected with those committees are complimented in the same terms, and if the House will consider the nature of the work that those committees have been doing, I think the reasons for an immediate consideration of this matter will be apparent.
    The committees are charged with responsibility for the arrangement of health insurance benefit and for inquiries into complaints by insured persons; they are charged with very serious responsibilities—and they have undertaken those responsibilities—in regard to inquiry into general health affairs in the areas in which they function; that is to say, in cases of abnormal sickness, the insurance committees have had the responsibility of inquiry and action; and they have, also discharged what, I think, is a very important function in health affairs, in that they have organised health lectures and health propaganda generally, which would have been very greatly extended had the committee had the necessary funds at their disposal. All these are important functions, and when to-day we are asked to consent, as the Commission asks us to consent, to their practical abolition, on the grounds that unification is necessary and that the duties they are now called upon to perform are of a merely routine character and have diminished in quantity, I think we should take stock of the situation and seriously consider it before we make up our minds what we are going to do. At the moment, I believe, the matter is being considered, not only by the Scottish Office, but by the Ministry of Health on this side of the Border, but,
    2218
    so far as I have been able to ascertain, no indication has yet been given of what action the Government are to take in this matter.
    In this matter of health administration, as in other matters, I should be very sorry to see Scotland simply dragged at the tail of England. There are certain things which I think we can do in Scotland better than they can do them on this side of the Border, and in this matter of health administration, I repeat that I should like to see Scotland adopt its own policy, as it has on many matters relating to insurance administration up to now. I should be sorry to see unification in this matter assume the proportions it has in War pensions' administration. I am convinced that the local element, the personal touch with the insured person, or the person on whose behalf the committee is functioning, is a valuable element, and although I am not prepared on this occasion to dogmatise as far as the future is concerned, I maintain that a very strong case can be made out, for the continuance of these local committees, and the avoidance of that bureaucratic tendency which has not worked out well where it has been tried in the matter of War pensions' administration.
    The present committees, I think, are representative of those whose interests in this matter should be regarded as paramount. They are in close touch with the insured person; they are familiar with local conditions, and I beg humbly to submit to anybody who is favourable to the Commission's recommendations in this matter, that the local authorities have already plenty of administrative work to do if only they would do it. Besides, in this matter of insurance administration, we have to remember that the money to be administered is not exactly public money in the came sense that other moneys which are raised for instance, by local rating can be regarded as public moneys. I believe that the approved societies are almost universally opposed to this new recommendation, and I believe I am right in saying that not only is there a deep feeling of unrest in the insurance committees up and down the country, but that the whole of the insurance committees are practically agreed that this step recommended by the Commission should not be taken.

    2219
    9.0 P.M.
    I simply rose to state these questions to the Minister, in order to extract from him, if he is able to tell us at the present time, what exactly the present attitude of the Scottish Office is in this matter, and when we may expect legislation if the recommendations of the Commission are to be adopted. I would like to safeguard my general position in this matter by saying that if the unification pleaded for by this Commission is to be applied on grounds of administrative economy. if it is to lead really to more efficient management of insurance funds, and if that can be proved, I should not be prepared rigidly to oppose a new departure on that line. But if any departure is to be made, I suggest that it should not merely take the form of abolishing the present insurance committees, and vesting their powers and duties in a public committee, but that you should proceed on the lines of making your health service a completely public service, that is to say, that your health service should be completely maintained out of public money so that everyone in the community should benefit freely and openly through it. If the present policy were even a small step towards that, I should not be inclined to criticise it so severely as I do to-day, but I do appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland, not only for the benefit of the House, but for the benefit of those carrying on the work of the insurance committee, to tell us what the attitude of the Government is on this question, and what the future status of the insurance committees, in his opinion, is to be.
    Mr. BUCHANAN: I desire to raise one or two questions with regard to Scotland. First of all, as this is the first Scottish Debate which has taken place since the right hon. Gentleman opposite has received his new honour, I think he ought to be all the more ready to please those who are opposed to him politically in Scotland, and to meet their desires more readily than he has hitherto done. Most people when promoted from one position to another usually celebrate it in some form or other. The form which some of us on this occasion would like best, would he that of granting some of the many reforms asked for to-day. I want to-night to raise a two-fold question, namely, the question of venereal disease and the ques-
    2220
    tion of the blind. Venereal disease and the blind usually go hand in hand, or, at least, that is accepted by the medical authorities, and I want to urge on the Scottish Office the need for more rapid expansion in the treatment of venereal disease. One cannot but be shocked at the proportion of the population, especially in large industrial areas, particularly Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee, affected by this disease. It used to be this, custom, because it was a filthy thing, not to talk about it, but to allow it to grow up in a hidden fashion. That has been reversed, and the policy of all reformers now is to try to force the disease into treatment as much as possible.
    I am quite aware that some steps have been taken in the treatment of this terrible disease, but I do not think the Scottish Office even yet has gone right into this question. I understand that medical attention in Glasgow and Edinburgh, for instance, is not sufficient to give the, sufferers from that disease the attention they ought to get. I understand that in Glasgow it is not uncommon to have 30 and 40 cases in a night, and it is impossible to give each of those sufferers anything like the medical attention necessary. The worst feature now is that because these persons are not given the attention that is possible, very often they will not go back. Therefore, I do hope the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary will spend a little time and money, if possible, in equipping these hospitals, both from the surgical and medical points of view, with nurses, and doctors, and also appliances for the treatment of the disease.
    In connection with blind persons in Scotland, I would ask if the Secretary of State could not take action on their behalf. It is true, according to the Annual Report of the Scottish Board of Health, that there has been set up a consultative committee representing the various interests—the blind societies, the local authorities, education and municipal. How often is that consultative body called together? I have had complaints, I do not know how well founded they may be, that it has not met frequently enough during the past year. Another complaint I have is that throughout Scotland, with Dundee as a bright exception, there is a long waiting list of blind persons anxious to receive train-

    2221
    ing which they cannot get at the present time. It is a terrible affliction to be blind, and it is much worse to be blind and not able to get the little encouragement that is given by training. I hope the Secretary of State will take steps to see that more is dune for the care and education of the blind, and especially for the education of those beyond the age of 18, because there are a large number of blind people over 18 for whom the education authorities have no responsibility who are anxious for training in some art and craft. In the West, of Scotland area more than 100 blind persons have had their names on the waiting list for more than two years; and there must be hundreds in Scotland as a whole. The only reason I know of for progress not, being made with this training is this glorious word "economy"—it would cost money to train them. hope the Secretary of State will put the welfare of the blind before the consideration of saving a few hundred pounds.
    Reference has been made to the housing question by the two hon. Members for Dundee. At question time to-day the Secretary of State was good enough to supply me with the figures of house building in Glasgow since State aid was first given, following the War. Since 1919, Glasgow has built something like 7,300 houses—those now occupied; 4,300 houses are under construction; and plans are out for 2,200 more. I remember when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) and myself were on the Glasgow Town Council that it was estimated by the Medical Officer of Health that Glasgow needed 100,000 new houses at that time, in 1919. Seven years have passed since then, and the total production of houses in the city—occupied houses—is no more than 7,300. The supply of houses is not the only problem; the rent question is equally acute. I know of people in Glasgow who have had their names down for years waiting for houses, though it has been admitted by the local authority that they were in clamant, urgent need of them. What happens? They wait patiently for two, three or four years, and then one morning the local authority sends a letter to say that a new house is available for them. A case from Pollokshaws was sent to me last week. It is a case of a decent hard-working man, who, I am sorry to say, voted for
    2222
    the Secretary of State for Scotland. He has had his name on the Glasgow Corporation's list for more than three years, and the corporation admit that in the interests of his family, and of sanitation, he ought to have a new house. When at last the welcome letter came to say that he could get a house, he went to see it. As a matter of fact it is a few closes away from where I live. He is a man earning £2 14s. a week, and he found that for this two-room-and-kitchen house he would have to pay, rent and rates inclusive, 16s. a week. The man cannot afford to do that and to travel to and from his work; and so we have the callous, cruel position of a man being offered a house and not being able to take it because the rent is too high.
    That occurred in Glasgow, but this is a common problem all over Scotland. You can go on building Weir steel houses, you can build 200,000 houses in Scotland, but unless you can find some method of building them so that they can be let at a rent which the tenant can afford to pay you arc not meeting the housing problem. I read in to-day's "Daily News" two articles presenting the contrast of the records of two cities in housing. One records the progress in Birmingham, and the other article, dealing with Glasgow, is headed "Worse than five years ago. One-room houses in Glasgow." It is stated in that article that the medical officer of Glasgow declares that the position in Glasgow to-day is worse than it was five years ago. I hope the Secretary of State will not say it is all the fault of the building trades. Even assuming, which I am not going to admit, that the building trade may have been somewhat to blame—even if we admit that measure of blame and double it and treble it, it cannot account for the grave situation existing in Scotland at the present time. We want a new spirit, a new resolution, in the tackling of this problem. If it had been shells we needed, as was the case in the War, Glasgow would have been adapted to producing shells in three months, or at most in 12 months. But nobody is prepared to tackle the question of providing houses in the same resolute way that we dealt with the production of ammunition.
    I hope, also, the Secretary of State will not refer us to what is being done in erecting steel houses. Are steel houses being built more rapidly than brick

    2223
    houses? I understand that in Garngad, where some of these steel houses are being built, the time taken to build them is no less than is taken in the building of a brick house in Glasgow. The question of the subsidy has been raised. It is not a question of whether the subsidy can be stopped, but rather of whether it ought not to be increased. Scotland cannot afford to have the subsidy taken away. I hope the Secretary of State will turn his attention to this problem and will celebrate his new title by seeing that the housing question is handled in a more satisfactory way than during the last two years of his office.
    Mr. JAMES BROWN: If I do not touch on the question of housing or on the other questions regarding health which have been raised, I must not be considered as not being interested very deeply in them. I have risen to call the attention of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and the Under-Secretary, to the fact that we now have parishes refusing to pay a single penny to relieve women and children. Less than a week ago I raised the question of one parish council in my constituency which was refusing to pay anything to the people of that town, and on this matter I got into communication with the Under-Secretary of State, and I confess he gave me a letter which assisted me very materially. The hon. and gallant Gentleman sent a letter to that authority which, if I had dictated it myself, it could not have been more to my own satisfaction, but my point is that we have not had any result from it. Since that letter was sent I have received a telegram that they have reaffirmed their decision and are not going to pay anything to those women and children.
    In the neighbouring borough of Prestwick they have done much the same thing, and I know sufficient about this matter to know that before the machinery that has been suggested can be put into motion, the people may be dead from starvation. I do not say that the members of these particular councils are very much worse than the members of other councils, and what they are faced with is the fact that huge deficits are accruing, and they are afraid that ultimately there will be such a Bill to pay that they will be unable to meet it when the time comes. I suggest that the Government should seriously
    2224
    take into consideration doing something to get over this difficulty, because our parish councils in Scotland will not be able to avoid these deficits. There has been issued a document by the National Farmers' Union of Scotland, which is not a reactionary but a very conservative body, and they deprecate the huge amount of money which is being spent for the purposes of relief. They declare quite explicitly that this expense ought to be shared or shouldered by the Treasury itself.
    That was the sole purpose for which I got up, and I wish to say that this thing is spreading. We said it would spread and it has done so, and it is going to spread more rapidly in the future. I am informed that there is one council which has already said that they are not going to assist the miners to win this fight, or words to that effect. That, I am afraid, is at the bottom of the action of some of the parish councils, and I trust that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Under-Secretary will assist us still further, and not only ask these public bodies to do a thing, but order them to do it, and if the law is not powerful enough to compel those parish councils to do their duty, I hope the Government will get further powers as soon as possible, and thus save an amount of misery which is bound to increase if the present situation continues.
    Mr. WHEATLEY: In the earlier part of our discussions this afternoon one or two references were made to the desirability of having Scottish Home Rule. If one may judge from this Debate, I am afraid the Scottish forum would be one of the dullest and most monotonous bodies in Christendom, and it would not contain a large number of Conservatives and not a solitary Liberal. I do not intend to make any attempt to raise the House from the lethargy into which it has fallen, but I would like to make one or two remarks, particularly on the general character of the discussion. I wish, as someone speaking from the Government side of the House said, that hon. Members from Scotland could take the opportunity of an occasion such as this to take a large and comprehensive view of the national requirements of that country in order to see how far it is possible by our united efforts to force our views on the majority of the Members of this House.

    2225
    There are two views we might take of Scotland, and I think our choice determines to a large extent our policy. There are those who regard Scotland as a country that is done for. They say that agriculture has been ruined, that industry, with the exception of the industrial belt from the Clyde to the Forth, has never been properly developed, that there is not an adequate supply of hospitals, that the coal mines are now obsolete, and, therefore, we are not justified in spending all this money on housing, and other things, and in this way wasting the accumulated wealth of the country as a whole. I hope no Scottish Member is going to subscribe to that view. I hope all Scottish Members will take the view that Scotland has a great and a glorious future before it, and that it is the duty of this house, as well as its business, to provide for the people who, by their industry, have contributed to the greatness of the country and to the greatness of the Empire.
    A good deal has been said about the question of housing, and I only want to cross the t's and dot the i's in regard to what has been said by my colleagues on this side of the House. If we are to take the view that Scotland has a future, we agree also that Scotland must have a decent standard of housing accommodation. I think it is generally admitted that Scotland at the moment requires 100,000 working-class houses, indeed I think I could find that estimate in a Report issued by the Scottish Board of Health within the past two or three years. I have been informed by the Secretary of State for Scotland this afternoon that the total number of houses approved under the Act of 1924 is approximately 20,000. It is not an unreasonable assumption that the 100,000 houses we require are required by the rent-paying as apart from the house-owning section of the population. There has never been a housing problem for the people who can afford to buy their own houses. The housing problem has always existed for the people who were too poor to buy and consequently had to rent. The houses that are being erected under the Act of 1924 are almost the only houses that are being erected for renting purposes. Therefore I am taking the view that with the total requirements of 100,000 working-class houses for letting purposes we have already
    2226
    approved—not constructed, not completed, not even started—up till now 20,000 houses. That does not indicate that the housing problem has been solved in Scotland. It indicates that we have only touched the fringe of the housing problem, and that if we are going to provide for a healthy and prosperous Scotland we require to put all our energies and resources to the provision of one of the basic necessaries of life.
    Something is being done, and a good deal is being made of it, in the way of slum clearances. I put it to the representatives of the Government that it would be utterly wrong to regard a slum clearance policy as being an adequate national policy in housing. It would be wrong to assume that Scotland is a great slum and that you are doing your duty towards it when you remove ananually a certain number of the people firm slum houses to houses of a better quality. Even then if you take into account the rate at which new houses are being provided, and the rate at which houses depreciate, I make bold to say that slums are growing in Scotland at a more rapid rate than they are being removed. Therefore I want to remind the Government that we have something even more important to do than deal with slums. We want to raise the whole standard of housing in Scotland. The standard of housing in Scotland is notoriously lower than the standard of housing in England. The evidence of that is to be found in the vital statistics for Scotland. The death-rate among infants in Scotland is always, or nearly always, higher than it is South of the Border, and if, as is generally argued, there is a close connection between housing and infantile mortality then we require more quickly in Scotland to raise the standard of housing to what it is in England to save the destruction of infants born North of the Tweed
    If I had the time and disposition I would ask the Government to, consider this. I wish they would set up a Committee to consider the actual value of the infant males whose lives are lost in Scotland by conditions that could be removed. If these were lives of animals they would be considered very seriously. If we had conditions that were destroying our cattle we would appoint the Royal Commission to see how they could

    2227
    be removed, but they are human beings, and because, for capitalistic purposes we have abundance and a surplus of them, you take no interest in them equivalent to that which is taken in animals of the lower orders of creation. We all admit the greatness of the housing problem. I sympathise with those who, particularly in Scotland, are trying to grapple with it. We have a shortage of building materials, due to the fact that in the old days we erected houses of stone and did not develop brickworks to the extent they were developed in England. There are other reasons, but these accumulate only into one reason, and that is that we should put greater energy into finding a solution in Scotland than is being put into finding a solution South of the Border.
    The hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) referred to the importance of making an effort to get cheaper money for the local authorities who have to deal with the housing problem, and he referred to what was being done through local saving banks in Birmingham and in several of the small boroughs in Scotland. A great financial authority the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Norwich (Mr. Hilton Young) made little of the suggestion that was thrown out by the hon. Member for Dundee. He said, when you get that money in Scotland at 2¾ per cent. and you hand it over to the Government, who obtain 5 per cent. for it and thereby make a profit of approximately 2¼ per cent., you are doing something which, if stopped, and diverted into another course, would not give you the financial assistance that you contemplate. The reason he gave was rather a peculiar one. He said this money in the savings bank is money on call. You must, therefore, have that money at your disposal, because any morning there may be a run on the bank, and no private barking company would erect its system on a payment of interest for money that was on call. I want to assure the right hon. Gentleman, with all due respect to his authoritative pronouncement, that he is entirely and absolutely wrong. The savings bank in Glasgow alone has always a surplus year after year, month after month, of about £12,000,000. There is frequently a surplus of £14,000,000. The £14,000,000 or the £12,000,000 which that
    2228
    Savings Bank carries is just about equal to the financial liabilities of the Glasgow Corporation. Here then you have Glasgow Corporation borrowing £12,000,000 at 5 per cent., while the Glasgow people are actually lending £12,000,000 at 2¾ per cent.
    Lieut.-Colonel GADIE: One is daily and the other a longer period.
    Mr. WHEATLEY: No system will conduct its business on averages. The minimum of deposits here is never less than £12,000,000. Any Member on the other side of the House, or anyone outside the House, who has at his disposal week after week and year after year £12,000,000 would find it safe to carry on a business on the security of the utilisation of that. The right hon. Gentleman referred to the fact that Birmingham was a solitary case. I agree that, as far as that is concerned, Birmingham is a solitary case. Why is it solitary? You have a chain of these savings banks, of which Glasgow is one, all over the country, and the Government is getting a flow of money from these institutions. It so happened that there was none in Birmingham, and so Birmingham was granted statutory authority to establish a savings bank in that city, and they are deriving benefits from that savings bank of which all the other cities are deprived. While there may have been good reason, in the days when the corporations and city councils had less financial difficulties and embarrassments than they have today, for supporting a, financial system of that kind, I submit that to-day, when city councils, parish councils, and all the branches of local authorities are being embarrassed, largely because of our national policy in dealing with unemployment and with poverty generally, we should no longer seek to impose upon them a policy that takes their money at 2 per cent., at least, less than they have to pay for that money when they want to use it themselves. That is one aspect of housing which is very important, because anyone who has studied the housing problem at all knows that at the root it is largely a financial problem, and that the burden of interest is one of the very heaviest contributions to the determination of what the rent of a house will be.
    I would submit to the Secretary of State for Scotland that the other sugges-

    2229
    tion which was put to him by the hon. Member for Dundee is also a very important one. I think he is justified in going to the local authorities who are obtaining national grants, who are using "We arc not going to allow the money Treasury money, and saying to them, which you get from the Government to be spent in giving unnecessary profits to building contractors or manufacturers of building material." It can be demonstrated, as we have heard this afternoon, that, either by encouraging direct labour in the form of building guilds, or under a corporation department, you can obtain houses for £50, £60 or £70 less per house than you can from the private contractor. I see no reason at all why any political prejudice should be allowed to stand in the way of our getting better value for the money that we are paying out of the taxpayer's pocket. I do not think it is a question of politics at all. In England, the Ministry of Health does not allow it to be a question of politics. The Ministry of Health, even under a Conservative Government, presses much harder the question of direct labour, with more encouragement of the use of direct labour in the erection of houses where it can be shown to be profitable, than is, I fear, done by the Scottish Board of Health. I wish the Secretary of State would use his influence with the local authorities in Scotland to get rid of the idea that political prejudices should be allowed to stand in the way, either of the erection of houses or of their production at the lowest possible price. I think that, acting on these two suggestions, the Secretary of State could do a great deal to stimulate housebuilding in Scotland, and I hope that, as a result of our Debate to-day, a stimulus will he given to it that will place before us better results when we next discuss the Estimates of the Scottish Board of Health.
    Dr. SHIELS: I understand that the Under-Secretary is to rise at a quarter to ten, so that I have only five minutes in which to deal with a great many intricate matters. I had intended to speak on the Report of the Scottish Board of Health, and I should at least like to say how much I appreciate the quality of that Report. I do not think that there is a finer Government document anywhere than the Report of the Scottish Board of Health; it is a perfect mine of material. As I have said, I have
    2230
    not the time to deal with it at all adequately, but there are one or two points that I should like to put to the Under-Secretary, so that he might, perhaps, mention them when he replies, and I pass over a good many other interesting points. One is in regard to light treatment for tuberculosis and rickets and for child welfare generally. There is a very interesting chapter in the Report on rickets on which I should have liked to speak. I would be glad if the Scottish Board of Health would continue to encourage our local authorities to go in for the installation of artificial sunlight, because, in regard to surgical tuberculosis and rickets and general debility, the results have been very remarkable. I am glad to think that the Scottish Board of Health does encourage local authorities in this connection, and I should be very glad if the Under-Secretary would indicate, perhaps broadly, the attitude of the Board to the subject. I quite agree with the criticism of the Board that light is not to be regarded as a panacea for all ills, but I think we shall find that its scope will be more and more extended, and that it will ultimately become one of our most useful therapeutic agents.
    I should also like to ask the Under-Secretary a question associated with the new milk legislation, which we are very glad to have. I should like to ask him what he thinks of the nomenclature of the present graded milk sold under licence from the Board of Health. I have found that a great many people think that Grade A is the best standard of milk, whereas that is not really the case. It is only the third standard, and it is possible for Grade A milk to he actually tuberculous. Certified milk is the first quality, and Grade A, tuberculin-tested, the second quality. I would suggest that simply to describe the qualities as A, B and C, or something of that kind, would be very much simpler for the public, and I should be glad to know the hon. and gallant Gentleman's opinion on that. I was intending to say something about the Scottish Hospitals Report, and to deal with the medical inspection of school children, but the time has almost gone. I would like, however, to point out, in regard to the medical inspection of school children, that we have apparently 50,000 of these school children insufficiently nourished, and about 1,300 who are certi-

    2231
    fled as being very much under-nourished. I think that that is a condition of affairs in Scotland which is very unsatisfactory, and which ought to make us feel ashamed. I would also invite the hon. and gallant Gentleman's attention to the large number of children who are suffering from enlargement of tonsils, especially in connection with the later chapter in the Report in regard to rheumatic fever. We know that tonsils in a bad condition are a frequent cause of rheumatic fever—one of the most disabling of diseases, and one which is of great economic importance. I would invite the Under-Secretary to make some comment on that, but I cannot go any further or I shall leave him no time to reply. We must have more treatment centres, in the interests of humanity and economy both.
    Major ELLIOT: There is some difficulty in reviewing the extensive course the Debate has followed in the short time at my disposal, and the House will excuse me if I do not follow it into some of its more recondite aspects, such as the controversy between the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Norwich (Mr. H. Young) as to the exact position of call money and the exact security which is offered by money invested in housing or other activities of the municipalities. I should be willing to take a lower rate of interest for my money if it were in a savings bank and were not exposed to some of the attacks which it seems to me are launched upon real property from time to time by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston. That may only be my personal prejudice, and I do not wish to stress that aspect of the ease, but I would bring it to his mind that that is, possibly, one of the reasons why people are willing to take a lower rate of interest for money in a bank than money which is invested in some sort of getatable property The Debate has divided itself into three sections, the question of Poor Law administration and parish relief, the question of housing and the general questions of health. As to Poor Law administration, which is, perhaps, one of the most insistent, and which was raised in particular by the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. James Brown), we
    2232
    have done our best, as he admitted, to bring to the notice of the local authorities their statutory duty towards the relief of distress in addition to the letter which he said he could not have wished better if he had himself dictated it. There is the letter of the 27th of this month which we wrote to the parish of Carnwath, where a similar difficulty has arisen, where we not only draw the attention of the local authority to its statutory duty to relieve distress, but also point out in the concluding paragraph:
    "I am also to point out that you, as inspector of poor, have a personal responsibility to ensure that there is no acute suffering or destitution in eases in which the facts have been brought to your notice, and that any general resolution by the parish council would probably not protect you in a Court of law if a question arose as to the serious consequences of the refusal of relief in the case of any particular applicant. I am to ask that the parish council should reconsider carefully their attitude on this question in the light of the above remarks at the meeting which the Board understands is being held to-morrow."
    Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: Has there been any reply from the parish council?
    Major ELLIOT: I could not say at the moment as to the nature of the reply, but I think in that, as in the other letters, we have done our utmost to bring to the notice of the parish council the view the central Government take of the statutory responsibilities of these bodies. We have to remember undoubtedly that we have to regard this against the background of the enormous burden the community is hearing as to part of the situation arising out of the coal stoppage. The part which the community has borne, has met with, perhaps, less recognition than it might have received. I notice that in the parish of Beath the number of persons in receipt of Poor relief per 10,000 of the population has risen from 350 before the stoppage to 3,100 now. In Bathgate the number has gone up from 398 to 1,600. In Torpichen it has gone up from 811 to 3,200, and undoubtedly the strain upon the whole community which these figures represent is meeting a certain reflection in action such as the parish councils have taken. We are doing our utmost to ensure that the parish councils are made aware of their statutory duties and their responsibilities, and in the letter I have quoted I think it will be admitted that we have gone to the utmost in bringing home not

    2233
    merely the general but the personal responsibility of local authorities and their officers in this matter.
    The hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) spoke of the necessity of pressing on with housing in Scotland. I do not think anyone could deny that the present Secretary has worthily earned his title of Secretary of State if only by the energy he has thrown into the increased campaign for better housing, not merely in his attitude towards the local authorities but in his pressing on of particular schemes. When I hear hon. Members say, "Let nothing interfere with housing, let no prejudice of any kind weigh for a second in the balance against the necessity for an increase of housing," that is a reproach from which no section of the House, I am afraid, can hold itself entirely free. We made special reference to guild housing in the Report. It is from the Report published by the Scottish Office that these figures are drawn. There is no prejudice in the mind of the Board, or of the Secretary, against housing by guild or housing in any way which will produce a better and a cheaper job, but when it comes to saying, "Let nothing be done except by the guild, let us go to the building trade of the country and say, abolish the contractor,'" for that is one of the suggestions brought forward, I must again say the need for expedition is so great that it would not lie in any way in our desire to abolish anyone who is actually delivering the goods or producing houses for us. The difficulties with regard to housing are still great, but I think there is no doubt that progress is being made. The monthly delivery of houses has gone up very greatly in the last three years. In 1924, the delivery of houses in May was 429; in 1925 it was 865, and in 1926 it was 1,175. It rose from 1924 to 1926 from 429 to over 1,100. In June, 1924, the deliveries were 380; in 1925, 940, and in 1926 the last delivery was 1,342—the greatest number of houses ever built in a month.
    Mr. D. GRAHAM: For sale or for letting?
    Major ELLIOT: For all purposes, houses for sale, houses to let under the 1924 Act and the 1923 Act. 1,342 door-keys were delivered over to the housewives of Scotland. It was suggested by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr.
    2234
    Buchanan) that the alternative houses were not perhaps being delivered with the expedition the House had been led to expect. In the first year of the Addison scheme, 148 houses only were delivered. In the first year of the Chamberlain scheme, 487 houses only were delivered. In the first year of the Wheatley scheme, only 168 houses were delivered, of which 118 were transfers from the other Act, so that only 50 houses were actually delivered, not in three months but in 12 months from the date of that Act. We have a guarantee, signed and sealed, from the companies that they will deliver 2,000 houses in that time, and we say, on the progress made up to the present time, that there will be no material slowing of the deliveries, according as our contracts lie.
    The strict ration which is imposed on all persons speaking in a Scottish Debate is now weighing upon me. It was suggested by the hon. Member for Gorbals that we should celebrate the creation of the Secretary of State's new office in some fitting manner. I consider that it has been celebrated in a fitting and proper Scottish mariner to-night by an attempt to cut down the amount of money which is being paid to him. We must stand fast against that. The Secretary of State for Scotland and myself will resist any attempt of that kind with all the power at our disposal, and we hope that there will be a substantial majority of the House in support of us.
    Another subject which has been reviewed was that of health. The hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Mr. T. Kennedy) raised the question of Insurance Committees. I agree with him that the question of Insurance Committees cannot be settled by the dictum of the Commission, and that a strong case will have to be made out before the Government consents to the abolition which has been outlined in the Royal Commission's Report. With respect to the hospital report, I would call attention to the very specific declaration which was made by my right hon. Friend in the last Debate, that the Board of Health were taking this matter into their closest scrutiny, and that they hoped to be able in the course of time to make considerable developments in the direction of providing an increased number of beds, as suggested in the Commission's Report. The hon. Member for Gorbals also raised the question of

    2235
    venereal disease. He spoke of the situation of the Broomielaw centre. I agree that the situation at that centre is not entirely satisfactory. Further building is going on there, however, and we hope to considerably improve the situation. The International Convention with respect to the treatment of venereal diseased has recently been ratified, and in future the disease among seamen will be dealt with in accordance with the terms of the International Convention.
    One suggestion which was made by many Members was that, in general, the situation in Scotland demanded that the housing subsidy should not be abolished.
    I think I may say on behalf of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and on behalf of His Majesty's Government, that the question of the abolition of the subsidy is not one which the Government is considering at the present time. The Secretary of State for Scotland has fought many battles on behalf of housing, even though it involved at times applications for special treatment for Scotland from the Treasury of the United Kingdom, and he will not he backward, if the need comes before him, in fighting another battle for Scotland.
    Question put, "That £1,858,345 stand part of the Resolution."
    The House divided: Ayes, 315; Noes, 129.

    Division No. 409.]

    AYES.

    [10 p.m.

    Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

    Churchman, Sir Arthur G.

    Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.

    Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

    Clarry, Reginald George

    Greene, W. P. Crawford

    Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)

    Cobb, Sir Cyril

    Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)

    Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)

    Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

    Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John

    Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.

    Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips

    Grotrian, H. Brent

    Applin, Colonel R. V. K.

    Conway, Sir W. Martin

    Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)

    Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.

    Cooper, A. Duff

    Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

    Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.

    Cope, Major William

    Gunston. Captain D. W.

    Atkinson, C.

    Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.

    Hacking, Captain Douglas H.

    Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley

    Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.

    Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

    Balfour, George (Hampstead)

    Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)

    Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)

    Balniel, Lord

    Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.

    Hanbury, C.

    Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

    Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

    Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

    Barnett, Major Sir Richard

    Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

    Harland, A.

    Barnston, Major Sir Harry

    Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)

    Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)

    Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

    Cunliffe, Sir Herbert

    Harrison, G. J. C.

    Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.

    Curzon, Captain Viscount

    Hartington, Marquess of

    Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

    Bennett. A. J.

    Dalziel, Sir Davison

    Haslam, Henry C.

    Berry, Sir George

    Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

    Hawke, John Anthony

    Bethel, A.

    Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.

    Headlam, Lieut -Colonel C. M.

    Betterton, Henry B.

    Davies, Dr. Vernon

    Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd, Henley)

    Birchall, Major J. Dearman

    Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)

    Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

    Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

    Davies, .Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

    Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.

    Blades, Sir George Rowland

    Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

    Henn, Sir Sydney H.

    Blundell, F. N.

    Dawson, Sir Philip

    Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

    Boothby, R. J. G.

    Dean, Arthur Wellesley

    Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)

    Braithwaite, A. N.

    Drewe, C.

    Herbert, S. (York,N.R.,Scar. & Wh'by)

    Brass, captain W.

    Eden, Captain Anthony

    Hills, Major John Waller

    Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

    Edmondson, Major A. J.

    Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.

    Briscoe, Richard George

    Elliot, Major Walter E.

    Holland, Sir Arthur

    Brittain, Sir Harry

    Ellis, R. G.

    Hopkins, J. W. W.

    Brocklebank, C. E. R.

    Elveden, Viscount

    Hopkinson. A. (Lancaster, Mossley)

    Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

    Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)

    Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.

    Broun-Lindsay, Major H.

    Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith

    Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

    Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)

    Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

    Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney,N.)

    Buckingham, Sir H.

    Everard, W. Lindsay

    Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)

    Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James

    Fairfax, Captain J. G.

    Hume, Sir G. H.

    Bullock, Captain M.

    Falle, Sir Bertram G.

    Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer

    Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

    Fanshawe, Commander G. D.

    Huntingfield, Lord

    Burman, J. B.

    Fermoy, Lord

    Hurst, Gerald B.

    Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.

    Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

    Hutchison. G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)

    Burton, Colonel H. W.

    Foster, Sir Harry S.

    Hiffe, Sir Edward M.

    Butler, Sir Geoffrey

    Foxcroft. Captain C. T.

    Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

    Butt, Sir Alfred

    Fraser, Captain Ian

    Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.

    Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

    Frece, Sir Walter de

    Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)

    Calne, Gordon Hall

    Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

    Jacob, A. E.

    Campbell, E. T.

    Gadie, Lieut.-Colonel Anthony

    Jephcott, A. R.

    Cassels, J. D.

    Galbraith, J. F. W.

    Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)

    Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City).

    Ganzoni, Sir John

    Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)

    Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)

    Gates, Percy

    Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

    Cazalet, Captain Victor A.

    Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham

    King, Captain Henry Douglas

    Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

    Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

    Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

    Chapman, Sir S.

    Glyn, Major R. G. C.

    Knox, Sir Alfred

    Charteris, Brigadier-General J.

    Gower, Sir Robert

    Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.

    Chilcott, Sir Warden

    Grace, John

    Little, Dr. E. Graham

    Christie, J. A.

    Grant, Sir J. A.

    Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

    Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

    Perkins, Colonel E. K.

    Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.

    Locker-Lampson, Com.O.(Handsw'th)

    Perring, Sir William George

    Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

    Loder, J. de V.

    Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

    Strickland, Sir Gerald

    Looker, Herbert William

    Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

    Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

    Lord, Walter Greaves-

    Pielou, D. P.

    Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

    Lougher, L.

    Plicher, G.

    Styles, Captain H. Waller

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Power, Sir John Cecil

    Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser

    Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere

    Pownall, Lieut,-Colonel Sir Assheton

    Sugden, Sir Wilfrid

    Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

    Preston, William

    Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.

    MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

    Price, Major C. W. M.

    Tasker, Major R. Inigo

    McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus

    Radford, E. A.

    Templeton, W. P.

    Macintyre, Ian

    Raine, W.

    Thom, Lt.-Col, J. G. (Dumbarton)

    Macmillan, Captain H.

    Ramsden, E.

    Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

    Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm

    Rawson, Sir Cooper

    Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell

    McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

    Rees, Sir Beddoe

    Tinne, J. A.

    Macquisten, F. A.

    Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

    Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

    MacRobert, Alexander M.

    Remer, J. R.

    Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

    Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-

    Remnant, Sir James

    Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough

    Makins, Brigadier-General E.

    Rentoul, G. S.

    Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

    Malone, Major P. B.

    Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

    Waddington, R.

    Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

    Rice, Sir Frederick

    Wallace, Captain D. E.

    Margesson, Captain D.

    Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

    Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.

    Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

    Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)

    Warrender, Sir Victor

    Meller, R. J.

    Ropner, Major L.

    Waterhouse, Captain Charles

    Merriman, F. B.

    Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.

    Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

    Meyer, Sir Frank

    Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

    Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

    Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-

    Rye, F. G.

    Watts, Dr. T.

    Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

    Salmon, Major I.

    Wells, S. R.

    Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

    Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)

    White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

    Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.

    Sandeman, A. Stewart

    Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

    Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

    Sanders, Sir Robert A.

    Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)

    Moore, Sir Newton J.

    Sanderson, Sir Frank

    Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

    Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.

    Sandon, Lord

    Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)

    Morden, Colonel Walter Grant

    Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)

    Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

    Moreing, Captain A. H.

    Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

    Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

    Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

    Wise, Sir Fredric

    Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

    Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

    Wolmer, Viscount

    Murchison, C. K.

    Skelton, A. N.

    Womersley, W. J.

    Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph

    Slaney, Major P. Kenyon

    Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)

    Nelson, Sir Frank

    Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)

    Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich. W.)

    Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

    Smith-Carington, Neville W.

    Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)

    Newton, Sir D. G C. (Cambridge)

    Smithers, Waldron

    Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

    Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert

    Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

    Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.

    Nuttall, Ellis

    Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

    Wragg, Herbert

    O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

    Sprot, Sir Alexander

    Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

    O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

    Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)

    Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)

    Oman, Sir Charles William C.

    Stanley, Lord (Fylde)

    Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

    Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

    Pennefather, Sir John

    Storry-Deans, R.

    Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain Bowyer.

    NOES.

    Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

    Duncan, C.

    Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)

    Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')

    Dunnico, H.

    Kelly, W. T.

    Ammon. Charles George

    Fenby, T. D.

    Lawrence, Susan

    Attlee, Clement Richard

    Gardner, J. P.

    Lawson, John James

    Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)

    Gibbins, Joseph

    Lee, F.

    Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

    Gillett, George M.

    Lindley, F. W.

    Barnes, A.

    Gosling, Harry

    Lowth, T.

    Barr, J.

    Graham. D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

    Lunn, William

    Batey, Joseph

    Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)

    MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)

    Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

    Greenall, T.

    Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)

    Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

    Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

    March, S.

    Briant, Frank

    Grenfell. D. R. (Glamorgan)

    Montague, Frederick

    Broad, F. A.

    Griffiths, T. (Monmouth. Pontypool)

    Morris, R. H.

    Bromfield, William

    Groves, T.

    Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

    Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

    Grundy, T. W.

    Naylor, T. E.

    Buchanan, G.

    Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)

    Oliver, George Harold

    Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel

    Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)

    Palin, John Henry

    Cape, Thomas

    Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

    Paling, W.

    Charleton, H. C.

    Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)

    Cluse, W. S.

    Hardie, George D.

    Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.

    Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

    Harris, Percy A.

    Potts, John E.

    Compton, Joseph

    Hayday, Arthur

    Purcell, A. S

    Connolly, M.

    Hayes, John Henry

    Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

    Cove, W. G.

    Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)

    Riley, Ben

    Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

    Hirst, G. H.

    Saklatvala, Shapurji

    Dalton, Hugh

    Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

    Salter, Dr. Alfred

    Davies, David (Montgomery)

    Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

    Scrymgeour, E

    Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

    Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)

    Scurr, John

    Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

    John, William (Rhondda, West)

    Sexton, James

    Day, Colonel Harry

    Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)

    Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

    Dennison, R.

    Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

    Shiels, Dr. Drummond

    2238

    2239

    Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)

    Taylor, R. A.

    Westwood, J.

    Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John

    Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)

    Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

    Sitch, Charles H.

    Thurtle, Ernest

    Whiteley, W.

    Smillie, Robert

    Tinker, John Joseph

    Wilkinson. Ellen C.

    Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)

    Townend, A. E.

    Williams, David (Swansea, East)

    Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)

    Trevelyan, At. Hon. C. P.

    Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

    Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

    Varley, Frank B.

    Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)

    Snell, Harry

    Viant, S. P.

    Windsor, Walter

    Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)

    Wallhead, Richard C.

    Wright. W.

    Stamford, T. W.

    Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

    Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)

    Stephen, Campbell

    Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

    Sullivan, J.

    Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

    Sutton, J. E.

    Welsh, J. C.

    Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Charles Edwards.

    Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.

    It being after Ten of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Question necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution under consideration.
    Mr. SPEAKER then proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No.15, to put forthwith the Questions, That this House doth agree with, the Committee in, the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Classes I to VII of the Civil Services Estimates, and of the Navy Estimates, the Army Estimates, the Air Estimates, the Revenue Departments Estimates, and other outstanding Resolutions severally.

    CIVIL SERVICES ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.

      CLASS I.
      Question,
      "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class I of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS II.
      Question,
      "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class II of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS III.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution
      reported in respect of Class III of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS IV.
      Question,
      "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class IV of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS V.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class V of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS VI.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class VI of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      CLASS VII.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class VII of the Civil Services Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      NAVY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
      Question put,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of the Navy Estimates."
      The House divided: Ayes, 325; Noes, 130.

      Division No. 410.]

      AYES.

      [10.12 p.m.

      Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

      Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.

      Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

      Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

      Atholl, Duchess of

      Barnett, Major Sir Richard

      Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)

      Atkinson, C.

      Barnston, Major Sir Harry

      Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)

      Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley

      Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

      Applin, Colonel R. V. K.

      Balfour, George (Hampstead)

      Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.

      Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.

      Balniel, Lord

      Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

      Bennett, A. J.

      Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

      Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere

      Berry, Sir George

      Foster, Sir Harry S.

      Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

      Bethel, A.

      Foxcroft, Captain C. T.

      MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

      Betterton, Henry B.

      Fraser, Captain Ian

      McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus

      Birchall, Major J. Dearman

      Frece, Sir Walter de

      Macintyre, Ian

      Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

      Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

      Macmillan, Captain H.

      Blades, Sir George Rowland

      Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony

      Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm

      Blundell, F. N.

      Galbraith, J. F. W.

      McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

      Boothby, R. J. G.

      Ganzoni, Sir John

      Macquisten, F. A.

      Bourne, Captain Robert Croft

      Gates, Percy

      MacRobert, Alexander M.

      Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.

      Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham

      Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-

      Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.

      Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Makins, Brigadier-General E.

      Braithwaite, A. N.

      Glyn, Major R. G. C.

      Malone, Major P. B.

      Brass, Captain W.

      Goff Sir Park

      Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

      Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

      Gower, Sir Robert

      Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

      Briscoe, Richard George

      Grace, John

      Meller, R. J.

      Brittain, Sir Harry

      Grant, Sir J. A.

      Merriman, F. B.

      Brocklebank, C. E. R.

      Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.

      Meyer, Sir Frank

      Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

      Greene, W. P. Crawford

      Milne, J. S. Wardlaw

      Broun-Lindsay, Major H.

      Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)

      Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

      Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)

      Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John

      Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

      Buckingham, Sir H.

      Grotrian, H. Brent

      Monsell, Eyres, Com, Rt. Hon. B. M.

      Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James

      Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)

      Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

      Bullock. Captain M.

      Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

      Moore, Sir Newton J.

      Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

      Gunston, Captain D. W.

      Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.

      Burman, J. B.

      Hacking, Captain Douglas H.

      Morden, Col. W. Grant

      Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.

      Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

      Moreing, Captain A. H.

      Burton, Colonel H. W.

      Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)

      Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)

      Butler, Sir Geoffrey

      Hanbury, C.

      Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

      Butt, Sir Alfred

      Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

      Murchison, C. K.

      Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

      Harland, A.

      Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph

      Calne, Gordon Hall

      Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)

      Nelson, Sir Frank

      Campbell, E. T.

      Harrison, G. J. C.

      Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

      Cassels, J. D.

      Hartington, Marquess of

      Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

      Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)

      Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

      Nield, Rt, Hon. Sir Herbert

      Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt.R.(Prtsmth.S.)

      Haslam, Henry C.

      Nuttall, Ellis

      Cazalet, Captain Victor A.

      Hawke, John Anthony

      O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

      Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

      Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.

      O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

      Chapman, Sir S.

      Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd, Henley)

      Oman, Sir Charles William C.

      Charterls, Brigadier-General J.

      Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

      Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

      Chilcott, Sir Warden

      Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.

      Pennefather, Sir John

      Christie, J. A.

      Henn, Sir Sydney H

      Perkins, Colonel E. K.

      Churchman, Sir Arthur C.

      Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

      Perring, Sir William George

      Clarry, Reginald George

      Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)

      Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

      Clayton, G. C.

      Herbert, S.(York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)

      Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

      Cobb, Sir Cyril

      Hills, Major John Waller

      Plelou, D. P.

      Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

      Hoare. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.

      Pilcher, G.

      Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.

      Holland, Sir Arthur

      Pilditch, Sir Philip

      Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips

      Hopkins, J. W. W.

      Power, Sir John Cecil

      Conway, Sir W. Martin

      Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)

      Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton

      Cooper, A. Duff

      Horlick, Lieut,Colonel J. N.

      Preston, William

      Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.

      Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.

      Price, Major C. W. M.

      Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)

      Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

      Radford, E. A.

      Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)

      Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)

      Raine, W.

      Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.

      Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)

      Ramsden, E.

      Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

      Hume, Sir G. H.

      Rawson, Sir Cooper

      Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

      Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer

      Rees, Sir Beddoe

      Crookshank, Col. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)

      Huntingfield, Lord

      Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

      Cunliffe, Sir Herbert

      Hurst, Gerald B.

      Remer, J. R.

      Curzon, Captain Viscount

      Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)

      Remnant, Sir James

      Dalkeith, Earl of

      IIiffe, Sir Edward M.

      Rentoul, G. S.

      Dalziel, Sir Davison

      Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

      Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

      Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

      Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.

      Rice, Sir Frederick

      Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.

      Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)

      Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

      Davies, Dr. Vernon

      Jacob, A. E.

      Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)

      Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)

      Jephcott, A. R

      Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs, Stretford)

      Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

      Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)

      Ropner, Major L.

      Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

      Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)

      Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.

      Dawson, Sir Philip

      Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

      Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

      Dean, Arthur Wellesley

      Kindersley, Major G. M.

      Rye, F. G.

      Drewe, C.

      King, Captain Henry Douglas

      Salmon, Major I.

      Eden, Captain Anthony

      Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

      Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)

      Edmondson, Major A. J.

      Knox, Sir Alfred

      Sandeman, A. Stewart

      Elliot, Major Walter E.

      Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.

      Sanders, Sir Robert A.

      Ellis, R. G.

      Lister, Confine-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

      Sanderson, Sir Frank

      Elveden, Viscount

      Little, Dr. E. Graham

      Sandon, Lord

      Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)

      Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

      Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)

      Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith

      Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

      Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

      Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

      Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)

      Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

      Everard, W. Lindsay

      Loder, J. de V.

      Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

      Fairfax, Captain J. G.

      Looker, Herbert William

      Skelton, A. N.

      Falle, Sir Bertram G.

      Lord, Walter Greaves-

      Slaney, Major P. Kenyon

      Fanshawe. Commander G. D.

      Lougher, L.

      Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine,C.)

      Fermoy, Lord

      Lowe, Sir Francis William

      Smith-Carington, Neville W.

      2242

      2243

      Smithers, Waldron

      Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

      Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

      Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

      Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)

      Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)

      Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

      Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell

      Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

      Sprot, Sir Alexander

      Tinne, J. A.

      Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

      Stanley, Col. Hon. G F. (Will'sden, E.)

      Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

      Wise, Sir Fredric

      Stanley, Lord (Fylde)

      Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

      Wolmer, Viscount

      Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

      Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough

      Womersley, W. J.

      Storry-Deans, R.

      Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

      Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)

      Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.

      Waddington, R.

      Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)

      Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

      Wallace, Captain D. E.

      Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)

      Strickland, Sir Gerald

      Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.

      Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

      Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

      Warrender, Sir Victor

      Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.

      Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

      Waterhouse, Captain Charles

      Wragg, Herbert

      Styles, Captain H. Walter

      Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

      Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

      Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser

      Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

      Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)

      Sugden, Sir Wilfrid

      Watts, Dr. T.

      Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.

      Wells. S. R.

      TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

      Tasker, Major R. Inigo

      White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

      Major Cope and Captain Viscount Curzon.

      Templeton, W. P.

      Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

      Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)

      Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)

      NOES.

      Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

      Groves, T.

      Scrymgeour, E.

      Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')

      Grundy, T. W.

      Scurr, John

      Ammon, Charles George

      Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)

      Sexton, James

      Attlee, Clement Richard

      Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)

      Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

      Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)

      Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

      Shiels, Dr. Drummond

      Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

      Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

      Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)

      Barr, J.

      Hardie, George D.

      Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Batey, Joseph

      Harris, Percy A.

      Sitch, Charles H.

      Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

      Hayday, Arthur

      Smillie, Robert

      Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

      Hayes, John Henry

      Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)

      Briant, Frank

      Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)

      Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

      Broad, F. A.

      Hirst, G. H.

      Snell, Harry

      Bromfield, William

      Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

      Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)

      Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

      Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

      Stamford, T. W.

      Buchanan, G.

      Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)

      Stephen, Campbell

      Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel

      John, William (Rhondda, West)

      Sullivan, Joseph

      Cape, Thomas

      Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)

      Sutton, J. E.

      Charleton, H. C.

      Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

      Taylor, R. A.

      Cluse, W. S.

      Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)

      Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)

      Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

      Kelly, W. T.

      Thurtle, Ernest

      Compton, Joseph

      Kennedy, T.

      Tinker, John Joseph

      Connolly, M.

      Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.

      Townend, A. E.

      Cove, W. G.

      Lawrence, Susan

      Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.

      Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

      Lawson, John James.

      Varley, Frank B.

      Crawfurd, H. E.

      Lee, F.

      Viant, S. P

      Dalton, Hugh

      Lindley, F. W.

      Wallhead, Richard C.

      Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

      Lowth, T.

      Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

      Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

      Lunn, William

      Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

      Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)

      MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)

      Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

      Day, Colonel Harry

      Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)

      Welsh, J. C.

      Dennison, R.

      March, S.

      Westwood, J.

      Duncan, C.

      Montague, Frederick

      Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

      Dunnico, H.

      Morris, R. H.

      Whiteley, W.

      Edwards. C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)

      Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

      Wilkinson, Ellen C.

      Fenby, T. D.

      Naylor, T. E.

      Williams, David (Swansea, E.)

      Gardner, J. P.

      Oliver, George Harold

      Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

      Gibbins, Joseph

      Palin, John Henry

      Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)

      Gillett, George M.

      Paling, W.

      Windsor, Walter

      Gosling, Harry

      Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.

      Wright, W.

      Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

      Potts, John S.

      Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)

      Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)

      Purcell, A. A.

      Greenall, T.

      Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

      TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

      Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

      Riley, Ben

      Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Allen Parkinson.

      Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)

      Saklatvala, Shapurji

      Griffiths, T. (Monmouth. Pontypool)

      Salter, Dr. Alfred

      ARMY ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
      Question put,
      "That this house doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding resolution
      reported in respect of the Army Estimates (including Ordnance Factories Estimate).
      The House divided: Ayes, 326;Noes, 131.

      Division No. 411.]

      AYES.

      [10.23 p.m.

      Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

      Applin, Colonel R. V. K.

      Atkinson, C.

      Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

      Apsley, Lord

      Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley

      Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)

      Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.

      Balfour, George (Hampstead)

      Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)

      Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.

      Balniel, Lord

      Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.

      Atholl, Duchess of

      Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

      Barnett, Major Sir Richard

      Everard, W. Lindsay

      Looker, Herbert William

      Barnston, Major Sir Harry

      Fairfax, Captain J. G.

      Lord, Walter Greaves-

      Beamish, Captain T. P. H.

      Falle, Sir Bertram G.

      Lougher, L.

      Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

      Fanshawe, Commander G. D.

      Lowe, Sir Francis William

      Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.

      Fermoy, Lord

      Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere

      Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

      Fielden. E. B.

      Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

      Bennett, A. J.

      Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

      MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

      Berry, Sir George

      Foster, Sir Harry S.

      McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus

      Bethel, A.

      Foxcroft, Captain C. T.

      Macintyre, Ian

      Betterton, Henry B.

      Fraser, Captain Ian

      Macmillan, Captain H.

      Birchall, Major J. Dearman

      Frece, Sir Walter de

      Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm

      Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

      Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

      McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

      Blades, Sir George Rowland

      Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony

      Macquisten, F. A.

      Blundell, F. N.

      Galbraith, J. F. W.

      MacRobert, Alexander M.

      Boothby, R. J. G.

      Ganzoni, Sir John

      Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-

      Bourne, Captain Robert Croft

      Gates, Percy

      Makins, Brigadier-General E.

      Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.

      Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham

      Malone, Major P. B.

      Braithwaite, A. N.

      Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

      Brass, Captain W.

      Glyn, Major R. G. C.

      Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

      Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

      Goff, Sir Park

      Meller, R. J.

      Briscoe, Richard George

      Gower, Sir Robert

      Merriman, F. B.

      Brittain, Sir Harry

      Grace, John

      Meyer, Sir Frank

      Brocklebank, C. E. R.

      Grant, Sir J. A.

      Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-

      Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

      Grattan- Doyle, Sir N.

      Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

      Broun-Lindsay, Major H.

      Greene, W. P. Crawford

      Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

      Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)

      Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John

      Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.

      Buckingham, Sir H.

      Grotrian, H. Brent

      Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

      Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James

      Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E.(Bristol, N.)

      Moore, Sir Newton J.

      Bullock, Captain M.

      Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

      Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.

      Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

      Gunston, Captain D. W.

      Morden, Col. W. Grant

      Burman, J. B.

      Hacking, Captain Douglas H.

      Moreing, Captain A. H.

      Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.

      Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

      Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)

      Burton, Colonel H. W.

      Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)

      Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

      Butter, Sir Geoffrey

      Hanbury, C.

      Murchison, C. K.

      Butt, Sir Alfred

      Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

      Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph

      Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

      Harland, A.

      Nelson, Sir Frank

      Calne, Gordon Hall

      Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)

      Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

      Campbell, E. T.

      Harrison, G. J. C.

      Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

      Cassels, J. D.

      Hartington, Marquess of

      Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert

      Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)

      Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

      Nuttall, Ellis

      Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth, S.)

      Haslam, Henry C.

      O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

      Cazalet, Captain Victor A.

      Hawke, John Anthony

      O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

      Cecil. Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

      Headlam, Lieut-Colonel C. M.

      Oman, Sir Charles William C.

      Charterls, Brigadier-General J.

      Henderson, Capt. R.B. (Oxf'd, Henley)

      Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

      Chilcott, Sir Warden

      Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

      Pennefather, Sir John

      Christie. J. A.

      Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.

      Perkins, Colonel E. K.

      Churchman, Sir Arthur C.

      Henn, Sir Sydney H.

      Perring, Sir William George

      Clarry. Reginald George

      Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)

      Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

      Clayton, G. C.

      Herbert,S. (York. N.R.,Scar. & Wh'by)

      Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

      Cobb, Sir Cyril

      Hills, Major John Waller

      Plelou, D. P.

      Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

      Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.

      Pilcher, G.

      Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.

      Holland, Sir Arthur

      Pilditch, Sir Philip

      Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips

      Hopkins, J. W. W.

      Power, Sir John Cecil

      Conway, Sir W. Martin

      Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)

      Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton

      Cooper, A. Duff

      Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.

      Preston, William

      Cope, Major William

      Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.

      Price, Major C. W. M.

      Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.

      Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

      Radford, E. A.

      Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)

      Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)

      Raine, W.

      Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)

      Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)

      Ramsden, E.

      Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.

      Hume, Sir G. H.

      Rawson, Sir Cooper

      Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

      Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer

      Rees, Sir Beddoe

      Crookshank. Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

      Huntingfield, Lord

      Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

      Crookshank, Cpt.H.{Lindsey,Gainsbro)

      Hurst, Gerald B.

      Reid, D. D. (County Down)

      Cunliffe, Sir Herbert

      Hutchison, G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)

      Remer, J. R,

      Curzon, Captain Viscount

      IIiffe, Sir Edward M.

      Remnant, Sir James

      Dalkeith, Earl of

      Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

      Rentoul, G. S.

      Dalziel, Sir Davison

      Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.

      Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

      Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

      Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)

      Rice, Sir Frederick

      Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.

      Jephcott, A. R.

      Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

      Davies, Dr. Vernon

      Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)

      Roberts, E. H, G. (Flint)

      Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)

      Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)

      Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)

      Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

      Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

      Ropner, Major L.

      Davison, Sir W H (Kensington, S.)

      Kindersley, Major Guy M.

      Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A

      Dawson, Sir Philip

      King, Capt. Henry Douglas

      Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

      Dean, Arthur Wellesley

      Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

      Rye, F. G.

      Drewe, C.

      Knox, Sir Alfred

      Salmon, Major I.

      Eden, Captain Anthony

      Lamb, J. Q.

      Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)

      Edmondson, Major A. J.

      Lane Fox, Col Rt. Hon. George R.

      Sandeman, A. Stewart

      Elliot, Major Walter E.

      Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

      Sanders, Sir Robert A.

      Ellis, R. G.

      Little, Dr. E. Graham

      Sanderson, Sir Frank

      Elveden, Viscount

      Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

      Sandon, Lord

      Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)

      Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

      Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)

      Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith

      Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)

      Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

      Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

      Loder. J. de V.

      Sheffield Sir Berkeley

      2246

      2247

      Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

      Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.

      White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

      Skelton, A. N.

      Tasker, Major R. Inigo

      Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

      Slaney, Major P. Kenyon

      Templeton, W. P.

      Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)

      Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)

      Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G (Dumbarton)

      Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

      Smith-Carington, Neville W.

      Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

      Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)

      Smithers, Waldron

      Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)

      Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

      Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

      Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-

      Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

      Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

      Tinne, J. A.

      Wise, Sir Fredric

      Sprot, Sir Alexander

      Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

      Wolmer, Viscount

      Stanley, Col. Hon, G. F. (Will'sden, E.)

      Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

      Womersley, W. J.

      Stanley, Lord (Fylde)

      Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough

      Wood, E.(Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)

      Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

      Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

      Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)

      Storry-Deans, R.

      Waddington, R.

      Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)

      Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.

      Wallace, Captain D. E.

      Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

      Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

      Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.

      Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.

      Strickland, Sir Gerald

      Warrender, Sir Victor

      Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

      Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

      Waterhouse, Captain Charles

      Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)

      Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

      Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

      Styles, Captain H. Walter

      Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

      TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

      Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser

      Watts, Dr. T.

      Major Hennessy and Captain Margesson.

      Sugden, Sir Wilfred

      Wells, S. R.

      NOES.

      Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

      Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)

      Salter, Dr. Alfred

      Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')

      Groves, T.

      Scrymgeour, E.

      Ammon, Charles George

      Grundy, T. W.

      Scurr, John

      Attlee, Clement Richard

      Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)

      Sexton, James

      Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)

      Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)

      Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

      Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

      Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

      Shiels, Dr. Drummond

      Barr, J.

      Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

      Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)

      Batey, Joseph

      Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)

      Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

      Hardie, George D.

      Sitch, Charles H.

      Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

      Harris, Percy A.

      Smillie, Robert

      Briant, Frank

      Hayday, Arthur

      Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)

      Broad, F. A.

      Hayes, John Henry

      Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)

      Bromfield, William

      Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)

      Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

      Bromley, J.

      Hirst, G. H.

      Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)

      Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

      Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

      Stamford, T. W.

      Buchanan, G.

      Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

      Stephen, Campbell

      Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel

      Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)

      Sullivan, Joseph

      Cape, Thomas

      John, William (Rhondda, West)

      Sutton, J. E.

      Charleton, H. C.

      Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)

      Taylor, R. A.

      Cluse, W. S.

      Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

      Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)

      Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

      Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)

      Thurtle, Ernest

      Compton, Joseph

      Kelly, W. T.

      Tinker, John Joseph

      Connolly, M.

      Kennedy, T.

      Townend, A. E.

      Cove, W. G.

      Lawrence, Susan

      Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.

      Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

      Lawson, John James

      Varley, Frank B.

      Crawfurd, H. E.

      Lee, F.

      Viant, S. P

      Dalton, Hugh

      Lindley, F. W.

      Wallhead, Richard C.

      Davies, David (Montgomery)

      Lowth, T.

      Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

      Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

      Lunn, William

      Watts-Morgan. Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

      Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

      MacDonald, Rt Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)

      Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

      Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)

      Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)

      Welsh. J. C.

      Day, Colonel Harry

      March, S.

      Westwood. J.

      Dennison, R.

      Montague, Frederick

      Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

      Duncan, C.

      Morris, R. H.

      Whiteley, W.

      Dunnico, H.

      Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

      Wilkinson, Ellen C.

      Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)

      Naylor, T. E.

      Williams, David (Swansea, E.)

      Fenby, T. D.

      Oliver, George Harold

      Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

      Gardner, J. P.

      Palin. John Henry

      Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)

      Gibbins, Joseph

      Paling. W.

      Windsor, Walter

      Gillett, George M.

      Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.

      Wright. W.

      Gosling, Harry

      Potts, John S.

      Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)

      Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

      Purcell, A. A.

      Greenall, T.

      Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

      TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

      Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

      Riley, Ben

      Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. A. Barnes.

      Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)

      Saklatvala, Shapurji

      AIR ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
      Question put
      "This House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution
      reported in respect of the Air Force Estimates."
      The House divided: Ayes, 326; Noes, 119

      Division No. 412.]

      AYES.

      [10.39 p.m.

      Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

      Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.

      Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.

      Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

      Applin, Colonel R. V. K.

      Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)

      Alexander, E. E. (Layton)

      Apsley, Lord

      Atholl, Duchess of

      Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)

      Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon, Wilfrid W.

      Atkinson, C.

      Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley

      Elveden, Viscount

      Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

      Balfour, George (Hampstead)

      Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)

      Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

      Balniel, Lord

      Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith

      Locker-Lampoon, Com. O.(Handsw'th)

      Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

      Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

      Lacier, J. de V.

      Barnett, Major Sir Richard

      Everard, W. Lindsay

      Looker, Herbert William

      Barnston, Major Sir Harry

      Fairfax, Captain J. G.

      Lord, Walter Greaves-

      Beamish, Captain T. P. H.

      Falle, Sir Bertram G.

      Lougher, L.

      Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

      Fanshawe, Commander G. D.

      Lowe, Sir Francis William

      Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.

      Fermoy, Lord

      Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere

      Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

      Fielden, E. B.

      Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

      Bennett, A. J.

      Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

      MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

      Berry, Sir George

      Foster, Sir Harry S.

      McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus

      Bethel, A.

      Foxcroft, Captain C. T.

      Macintyre, Ian

      Betterton, Henry B.

      Fraser, Captain Ian

      Macmillan, Captain H.

      Birchall, Major J. Dearman

      Frece, Sir Walter de

      Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm

      Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

      Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

      McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

      Blades, Sir George Rowland

      Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony

      Macquisten, F. A.

      Blundell, F. N.

      Galbraith, J. F. W.

      MacRobert, Alexander M.

      Bourne, Captain Robert Croft

      Ganzoni, Sir John

      Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-

      Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.

      Gates, Percy

      Makins, Brigadier-General E.

      Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.

      Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham

      Malone, Major P. B.

      Braithwaite, A. N.

      Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

      Brass, Captain W.

      Glyn, Major R. G. C.

      Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

      Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

      Gower, Sir Robert

      Meller, R. J.

      Briscoe, Richard George

      Grace, John

      Merriman, F. B.

      Brittain, Sir Harry

      Grant, Sir J. A.

      Meyer, Sir Frank

      Brocklebank, C. E. R.

      Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.

      Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-

      Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

      Greene, W. P. Crawford

      Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

      Broun-Lindsay, Major H.

      Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)

      Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

      Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)

      Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John

      Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.

      Buckingham, Sir H.

      Grotrian, H. Brent

      Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

      Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James

      Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)

      Moore, Sir Newton J.

      Bullock, Captain M.

      Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

      Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.

      Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

      Gunston, Captain D. W.

      Morden, Colonel Walter Grant

      Burman, J. B.

      Hacking, Captain Douglas H.

      Moreing, Captain A. H.

      Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.

      Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

      Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)

      Burton, Colonel H. W.

      Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)

      Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

      Butler, Sir Geoffrey

      Hanbury, C.

      Murchison, C. K.

      Butt, Sir Alfred

      Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

      Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph

      Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

      Harland, A.

      Nelson. Sir Frank

      Calne, Gordon Hall

      Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)

      Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

      Campbell, E. T.

      Harrison, G. J. C.

      Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

      Cassels, J. D.

      Hartington, Marquess of

      Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert

      Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)

      Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

      Nuttall, Ellis

      Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S)

      Haslam, Henry C.

      O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

      Cazalet, Captain Victor A.

      Hawke, John Anthony

      O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

      Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

      Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.

      Oman, Sir Charles William C.

      Charterls, Brigadier-General J.

      Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd, Henley)

      Ormsby-Gore, Hon. Willliam

      Chilcott, Sir Warden

      Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

      Pennefather, Sir John

      Christie, J. A.

      Heneage, Lieut.-Col, Arthur P.

      Perkins, Colonel E. K.

      Churchman, Sir Arthur C.

      Henn, Sir Sydney H.

      Perring, Sir William George

      Clarry, Reginald George

      Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

      Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

      Clayton, G. C.

      Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)

      Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

      Cobb, Sir Cyril

      Herbert, S. (York, N.R.,Scar. & Wh'by)

      Plelou, D. P.

      Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

      Hills, Major John Waller

      Pilcher. G.

      Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.

      Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.

      Pilditch, Sir Philip

      Colfax, Major Wm. Phillips

      Hopkins, J. W. W.

      Power, Sir John Cecil

      Conway, Sir W. Martin

      Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.

      Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton

      Cooper, A. Duff

      Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.

      Preston, William

      Cope, Major William

      Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

      Price, Major C. W. M.

      Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.

      Hudson. Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)

      Radford, E. A.

      Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn. N.)

      Hudson, R S. (Cumberl'nd,Whiteh'n)

      Raine, W.

      Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)

      Hume, Sir G. H.

      Ramsden, E.

      Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.

      Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer

      Rawson, Sir Cooper

      Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

      Huntingfield, Lord

      Rees, Sir Beddoe

      Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

      Hurst, Gerald B.

      Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

      Crookshank,Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)

      Hutchison,G.A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)

      Reid, D. D. (County Down)

      Cunliffe, Sir Herbert

      IIiffe, Sir Edward M.

      Remer, J. R.

      Curzon, Captain Viscount

      Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

      Remnant, Sir James

      Dalkeith, Earl of

      Jackson, Lieut-Col, Rt. Hon. F. S.

      Rentoul, G. S.

      Dalziel, Sir Davison

      Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)

      Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

      Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

      Jacob, A. E.

      Rice, Sir Frederick

      Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.

      Jephcott, A. R.

      Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

      Davies, Dr. Vernon

      Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)

      Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)

      Davies, Maj. Geo.F.(Somerset,Yeovil)

      Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)

      Robinson. Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)

      Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

      Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

      Ropner, Major L.

      Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

      Kindersley, Major Guy M.

      Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.

      Dawson, Sir Philip

      King, Captain Henry Douglas

      Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

      Dean, Arthur Wellesley

      Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

      Rye, F. G.

      Drewe, C.

      Knox, Sir Alfred

      Salmon, Major I.

      Eden, Captain Anthony

      Lamb, J. Q.

      Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)

      Edmondson, Major A. J.

      Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.

      Sandeman, A. Stewart

      Elliot, Major Walter E.

      Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

      Sanders, Sir Robert A.

      Ellis, R. G.

      Little, Dr. E. Graham

      Sanderson, Sir Frank

      2250

      2251

      Sandon, Lord

      Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser

      White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

      Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)

      Sugden, Sir Wilfrid

      Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

      Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

      Sykes, Major.-Gen. Sir Frederick H.

      Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)

      Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

      Tanker, Major R. Inigo

      Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

      Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

      Templeton, W. P.

      Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)

      Skelton, A. N.

      Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)

      Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

      Slaney, Major P. Kenyon

      Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

      Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

      Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine,C.)

      Thomson. F. C. (Aberdeen, South)

      Wise, Sir Fredric

      Smith-Carington, Neville W.

      Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-

      Wolmer, Viscount

      Smithers, Waldron

      Tinne, J. A.

      Womersley, W. J.

      Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

      Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

      Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)

      Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

      Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

      Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).

      Sprot, Sir Alexander

      Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough

      Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)

      Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)

      Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

      Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

      Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

      Waddington, R.

      Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.

      Storry-Deans, R.

      Wallace, Captain D. E.

      Wragg , Herbert

      Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.

      Warrender, Sir Victor

      Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

      Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

      Waterhouse, Captain Charles

      Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)

      Strickland, Sir Gerald

      Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

      Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

      Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

      TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

      Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

      Watts, Dr. T.

      Lord Stanley and captain Margesson.

      Styles, Captain H. Walter

      Wells, S. R.

      NOES.

      Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

      Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)

      Saklatvala, Shapurji

      Alexander. A. V. {Sheffield, Hillsbro')

      Griffiths, T (Monmouth, Pontypool)

      Salter, Dr. Alfred

      Ammon, Charles George

      Groves, T.

      Scrymgeour, E.

      Attlee, Clement Richard

      Grundy, T. W.

      Scurr, John

      Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)

      Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)

      Sexton, James

      Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

      Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)

      Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

      Barnes, A.

      Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

      Shiels, Dr. Drummond

      Barr, J.

      Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

      Short, Alfred (Wednesday)

      Batey, Joseph

      Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)

      Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

      Hardie, George D.

      Sitch, Charles, H.

      Briant, Frank

      Hayday, Arthur

      Smillie, Robert

      Broad, F. A.

      Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)

      Smith. H. B. Lees- (Keighley)

      Bromfield, William

      Hirst, G. H.

      Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

      Bromley, J.

      Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

      Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)

      Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

      Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

      Stamford, T. W.

      Buchanan, G.

      Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)

      Stephen, Campbell

      Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel

      John, William (Rhondda, West)

      Sullivan, J.

      Cape, Thomas

      Johnston, Thomas {Dundee)

      Sutton. J. E.

      Charleton, H. C.

      Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

      Taylor, R. A.

      Cluse, W. S.

      Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)

      Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)

      Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

      Kelly, W. T.

      Thurtle, Ernest

      Compton, Joseph

      Kennedy, T.

      Tinker, John Joseph

      Connolly, M.

      Lawrence, Susan

      Townend, A. E.

      Cove, W. G.

      Lawson, John James

      Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.

      Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

      Lee, F.

      Varley, Frank B.

      Crawfurd, H. E.

      Lindley, F. W.

      Viant, S P.

      Dalton, Hugh

      Lowth, T.

      Wallhead, Richard C.

      Davies, David (Montgomery)

      Lunn, William

      Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

      Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

      MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J. R.(Aberavon)

      Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

      Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

      Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)

      Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

      Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)

      March, S.

      Welsh, J. C.

      Day, Colonel Harry

      Montague, Frederick

      Westwood, J.

      Dennison, R.

      Morris, R. H.

      Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

      Duncan, C.

      Morrison, R C. (Tottenham, N.)

      Whiteley, W.

      Dunnico, H.

      Naylor, T. E.

      Wilkinson, Ellen C.

      Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)

      Oliver, George Harold

      Williams, David (Swansea, E.)

      Fenby, T. D.

      Palin, John Henry

      Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

      Gardner, J. P.

      Paling, W.

      Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)

      Gibbins, Joseph

      Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)

      Windsor Walter

      Gillett, George M.

      Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.

      Wright, W.

      Gosling, Harry

      Potts, John S.

      Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)

      Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

      Purcell, A. A.

      Greenall, T.

      Richardson, R (Houghton-le-Spring)

      TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

      Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

      Riley, Ben

      Mr. Hayes and Mr. B. Smith.

      REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1926–27.
      Question,
      "That, this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of the Revenue Departments Estimates,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      UNEMPLOYMENT GRANTS.
      Question,
      "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution
      2252
      reported in respect. of the Estimate for Unemployment Grants."
      Put, and agreed to.

      RELIEF OF UNEMIPLOYMENT.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Relief of Unemployment."
      Put, and agreed to.

      GRANTS IN RESPECT OF UNEMPLOYMENT SCHEMES.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Grants in respect of Unemployment Schemes,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      EXPORT CREDITS.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Export Credits,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      SHIPPING LIQUIDATION.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Shipping Liquidations,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      RAILWAY (WAR) AGREEMENTS LIQUIDATION.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution
      reported in respect of the Estimate for Railway (War) Agreements Liquidation,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      PRIZE CLAIMS.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate, for Prize Claims,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      COAL MINING INDUSTRY SUBVENTION.
      Question,
      "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Coal Mining Industry Subvention,"
      Put, and agreed to.

      EMERGENCY SERVICES.
      Question put,
      "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Emergency Services,"
      The House divided: Ayes, 331; Noes, 127.

      Division No. 413.]

      AYES.

      [10.47 p.m.

      Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel

      Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan

      Dawson, Sir Philip

      Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.

      Burman, J. B.

      Dean, Arthur Wellesley

      Ainsworth, Major Charles

      Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.

      Drewe, C.

      Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)

      Burton, Colonel H. W.

      Eden, Captain Anthony

      Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)

      Butler, Sir Geoffrey

      Edmondson, Major A. J.

      Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.

      Butt, Sir Alfred

      Elliot, Major Walter E.

      Apollo, Colonel R. V. K.

      Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward

      Ellis, R. G.

      Apsley, Lord

      Calne, Gordon Hall

      Elveden, Viscount

      Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.

      Campbell, E. T.

      England, Colonel A.

      Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.

      Cassels, J. D.

      Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)

      Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)

      Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)

      Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith

      Atholl, Duchess of

      Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt.R.(Prtsmith.S.)

      Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)

      Atkinson, C.

      Cazalet, Captain Victor A.

      Everard, W. Lindsay

      Balfour, George (Hampstead)

      Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)

      Fairfax, Captain J. G.

      Balniel, Lord

      Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton

      Falle, Sir Bertram G.

      Barclay-Harvey, C. M.

      Charteris, Brigadier-General J.

      Fanshawe, Commander G. D.

      Barnett, Major Sir Richard

      Chilcott, Sir Warden

      Fermoy, Lord

      Barnston, Major Sir Harry

      Christie, J. A.

      Fielden, E. B.

      Beamish, Captain T. P. H.

      Churchman, Sir Arthur C.

      Forestier-Walker, Sir L.

      Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)

      Clarry, Reginald George

      Foster, Sir Harry S.

      Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.

      Clayton, G. C.

      Foxcroft, Captain C. T.

      Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)

      Cobb, Sir Cyril

      Fraser, Captain Ian

      Bennett, A. J.

      Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.

      Frece, Sir Walter de

      Bethel, A.

      Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G K.

      Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

      Betterton, Henry B.

      Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips

      Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony

      Birchall, Major J. Dearman

      Conway, Sir W. Martin

      Galbraith, J. F. W.

      Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)

      Cooper, A. Duff

      Ganzoni, Sir John

      Blades, Sir George Rowland

      Cope, Major William

      Gates, Percy

      Blundell, F. N.

      Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.

      Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Boothby, R. J. G.

      Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)

      Glyn, Major R. G. C.

      Bourne, Captain Robert Croft

      Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)

      Goff, Sir Park

      Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.

      Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.

      Gower, Sir Robert

      Boyd-Carpenter. Major Sir A. B.

      Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)

      Grace, John

      Braithwaite, A. N.

      Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)

      Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.

      Brass, Captain W.

      Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)

      Greene, W. P. Crawford

      Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive

      Cunliffe, Sir Herbert

      Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)

      Briscoe, Richard George

      Curzon, Captain Viscount

      Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John

      Brittain, Sir Harry

      Dalkeith, Earl of

      Grotrian, H. Brent

      Brocklebank, C. E. R.

      Dalziel Sir Davison

      Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N)

      Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.

      Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)

      Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.

      Broun-Lindsay, Major H.

      Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.

      Gunston, Captain D. W.

      Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks,Newb'y)

      Davies, Dr. Vernon

      Hacking, Captain Douglas H.

      Buckingham, Sir H.

      Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil)

      Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)

      Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James

      Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)

      Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)

      Bullock, Captain M.

      Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

      Hanbury, C.

      Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

      Malone, Major P. B.

      Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)

      Harland, A.

      Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn

      Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

      Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)

      Marriott, Sir J. A. R.

      Shepperson, E. W.

      Harrison, G. J. C.

      Meller, R. J

      Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)

      Hartington, Marquess of

      Merriman, F. B.

      Skelton, A. N.

      Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)

      Meyer, Sir Frank

      Slaney, Major P. Kenyon

      Haslam, Henry C.

      Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-

      Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine, C.)

      Hawke, John Anthony

      Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

      Smith-Carington, Neville W.

      Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.

      Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)

      Smithers, Waldron

      Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd, Henley)

      Moles, Thomas

      Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)

      Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)

      Monsell, Eyres, Corn. Rt. Hon. B. M.

      Spender-Clay, Colonel H.

      Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.

      Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)

      Sprot, Sir Alexander

      Henn, Sir Sydney H.

      Moore, Sir Newton J.

      Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)

      Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

      Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.

      Stanley, Lord (Fylde)

      Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)

      Morden, Col. W. Grant

      Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

      Herbert, S.(York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)

      Moreing, Captain A. H.

      Steel, Major Samuel Strang

      Hills, Major John Waller

      Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)

      Storry-Deans, R.

      Hoare, Lt.-Col, Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G

      Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

      Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.

      Holland, Sir Arthur

      Murchison, C. K.

      Streatfeild, Captain S. R.

      Hopkins, J. W. W.

      Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph

      Strickland, Sir Gerald

      Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.

      Nelson, Sir Frank

      Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.

      Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.

      Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)

      Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)

      Howard, Captain Hon. Donald

      Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

      Styles, Captain H. Walter

      Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)

      Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert

      Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser

      Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)

      Nuttall, Ellis

      Sugden, Sir Wilfrid

      Hume, Sir G. H.

      O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)

      Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.

      Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer

      O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh

      Tasker, Major R. Inigo

      Huntingfield, Lord

      Oman, Sir Charles William C.

      Templeton, W. P.

      Hurst, Gerald B.

      Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

      Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)

      Hutchison, G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)

      Pennefather, Sir John

      Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

      IIiffe, Sir Edward M.

      Perkins, Colonel E. K.

      Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)

      Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.

      Perring, Sir William George

      Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-

      Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.

      Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)

      Tinne, J. A.

      Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)

      Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)

      Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

      Jacob, A. E.

      Plelou, D. P.

      Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement

      Jephcott, A. R.

      Plicher, G.

      Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.

      Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)

      Pliditch Sir Philip

      Waddington, R.

      Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)

      Power, Sir John Cecil

      Wallace, Captain D. E.

      Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)

      Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton

      Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.

      Kindersley, Major G. M

      Preston, William

      Warrender, Sir Victor

      King, Captain Henry Douglas

      Price, Major C. W. M.

      Waterhouse, Captain Charles

      Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

      Radford, E. A.

      Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)

      Knox, Sir Alfred

      Raine, W.

      Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)

      Lamb, J. Q.

      Ramsden, E.

      Watts, Dr. T.

      Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.

      Rawson, Sir Cooper

      Wells, S. R.

      Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip

      Rees, Sir Beddoe

      White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple

      Little, Dr. E. Graham

      Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

      Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)

      Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)

      Reid, D. D. (County Down)

      Williams, Com. C. (Devon. Torquay)

      Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)

      Remer, J. R.

      Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

      Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)

      Remnant, Sir James

      Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)

      Loder, J. de V.

      Rentoul, G. S.

      Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George

      Looker, Herbert William

      Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.

      Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl

      Lord, Walter Greaves-

      Rice, Sir Frederick

      Wise, Sir Fredric

      Lougher, L.

      Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)

      Wolmer, Viscount

      Lowe, Sir Francis William

      Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)

      Womersley, W. J.

      Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere

      Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)

      Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)

      Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

      Ropner, Major L.

      Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)

      MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen

      Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.

      Wood. Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)

      Macintyre, Ian

      Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)

      Woodcock, Colonel H. C.

      McLean, Major A.

      Rye, F. G.

      Wragg, Herbert

      Macmillan, Captain H.

      Salmon, Major I.

      Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

      Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm

      Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)

      Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)

      McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John

      Sandeman, A. Stewart

      Macquisten, F A

      Sanders, Sir Robert A.

      TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

      MacRobert, Alexander M.

      Sanderson, Sir Frank

      Colonel Gibbs and Captain Margesson

      Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-

      Sandon, Lord

      Makins, Brigadier-General E.

      Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)

      NOES.

      Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)

      Buchanan, G.

      Dennison, R.

      Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')

      Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel

      Duncan, C.

      Ammon, Charles George

      Cape, Thomas

      Dunnico, H.

      Attlee, Clement Richard

      Charleton, H. C.

      Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)

      Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)

      Cluse, W. S.

      Fenby, T. D.

      Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)

      Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)

      Gardner, J. P.

      Barnes, A.

      Compton, Joseph

      Gibbins, Joseph

      Barr, J.

      Connolly, M.

      Gillett, George M.

      Batey, Joseph

      Cove, W. G.

      Gosling, Harry

      Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

      Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)

      Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)

      Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.

      Crawfurd, H. E.

      Greenall, T.

      Briant, Frank

      Dalton, Hugh

      Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)

      Broad, F. A.

      Davies, David (Montgomery)

      Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)

      Bromfield, William

      Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)

      Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)

      Bromley, J.

      Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

      Groves, T.

      Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

      Day, Colonel Harry

      Grundy, T. W.

      Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)

      Montague, Frederick

      Stephen, Campbell

      Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)

      Morris, R. H.

      Sullivan, J.

      Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)

      Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)

      Sutton, J. E.

      Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)

      Naylor, T. E.

      Taylor, R A.

      Hardie, George D.

      Oliver, George Harold

      Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)

      Harris, Percy A.

      Palin, John Henry

      Thurtle, Ernest

      Heyday, Arthur

      Paling, W.

      Tinker, John Joseph

      Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)

      Parkinson. John Allen (Wigan)

      Townend, A. E.

      Hirst, G. H.

      Pethick-Lawrence, F. W

      Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.

      Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

      Potts, John S.

      Varley, Frank B.

      Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)

      Purcell, A. A.

      Viant, S. P.

      Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)

      Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

      Wallhead, Richard C.

      John, William (Rhondda, West)

      Riley, Ben

      Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)

      Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)

      Saklatvala, Shapurji

      Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

      Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)

      Salter, Dr. Alfred

      Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney

      Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)

      Scurr, John

      Welsh, J. C.

      Kelly, W. T.

      Sexton, James

      Westwood, J.

      Kennedy, T

      Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

      Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.

      Lawrence, Susan

      Shiels, Dr. Drummond

      Whiteley, W.

      Lawson, John James

      Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)

      Williams, David (Swansea, East)

      Lee, F.

      Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John

      Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)

      Lindley, F. W.

      Sitch, Charles H.

      Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)

      Lowth, T.

      Smillie, Robert

      Windsor, Walter

      Lunn, William

      Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)

      Wright, W.

      MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)

      Smith, Rennie (Penistone)

      Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)

      Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)

      Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)

      March, S.

      Stamford, T. W.

      TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

      Mr. B. Smith and Mr. Hayes.

      Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time," put, and agreed to.

      AIR EXPENDITURE, 1924–25.
      Resolution reported,
      "Whereas it appears by the Air Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1925, that the aggregate expenditure on Air Services has not exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for these Services, and that, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the net surplus of the Exchequer Grants for Air Services over the net expenditure is £261,178 12s. 4d., namely:

      SCHEDULE.

      No. of. Vote.

      Air Services, 1924–25, Votes.

      Deficits.

      Surpluses of estimated over actual gross
      Expenditure.

      Excess of actual over estimated gross Expenditure.

      Deficiencies of actual as compared with estimated Receipts.

      £

      s.

      d.

      £

      s.

      d.

      £

      s.

      d.

      1

      Pay, etc., of the Air Force

      143,485

      8

      0

      —

      —

      2

      Quartering Stores (except Technical), Supplies, and Transport.

      —

      150,334

      14

      11

      239,328

      6

      3

      3

      Technical and Warlike Stores (including Experimental and Research Services)

      389,829

      18

      3

      —

      —

      4

      Works, Buildings, and Lands

      —

      145,703

      8

      9

      549,178

      2

      10

      5

      Medical Services

      —

      38,809

      16

      11

      36,847

      13

      8

      6

      Educational Services

      —

      5,131

      9

      11

      25,058

      3

      5

      7

      Auxiliary and Reserve Forces

      —

      373

      17

      9

      71,198

      8

      4

      8

      Civil Aviation

      —

      —

      152,044

      19

      2

      9

      Meteorological and Miscellaneous Effective Services.

      —

      18,206

      8

      8

      42,675

      15

      9

      10

      Air Ministry

      —

      —

      8,283

      16

      5

      11

      Half-Pay, Pensions, and other Non-Effective Services.

      —

      403

      13

      2

      32,738

      2

      7

      —

      Amount written off as Irrecoverable.

      3,895

      19

      9

      —

      —

      537,211

      6

      0

      358,963

      10

      1

      1,157,353

      8

      5

      Total Deficits £896,174 16 1

      Total Surpluses £1,157,353 8

      Net Surplus £261,178 12 4

      £

      s.

      d.

      Total Surpluses

      …

      1,157,353

      8

      5

      Total Deficits

      …

      896,174

      16

      1

      Net Surplus

      …

      £261,178

      12

      4

      And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Air Services as is necessary to make good the said total deficits on other grants for Air Services."
      That the application of such sums be sanctioned.

      WAYS AND MEANS [26TH JULY].
      Resolution reported,
      "That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1927, the sum of £248,279,395 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."
      Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by the Chairman of Ways and Means, Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Ronald McNeil.

      CONSOLIDATION FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL,
      "to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this Session of Parliament," presented accordingly, and read the First time: to he read a Second time To-morrow, and to he printed. [Bill 174.]

      ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS) BILL.
      Considered in Committee.
      [Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.]
      Clause 1 (Duties on tobacco) ordered to stand part of the Bill.
      CLAUSE 2.—(Duties on ale or beer.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      11. P.M.
      Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: I should like to ask what is the rate of duty upon beer in the Isle of Man, as compared with the rate in this country? It is on record that in passing the 1918 Act the Financial Secretary at that time, the present Prime Minister, gave the House an explanation of the variation at that time in the Beer Duty. We have a Report of the Committee of the Privy Council, and it states in the Appendix—[interruption.] When I am out of order the Chairman will call me to order. I do not need to be called to order from the Government Bench. In the Appendix to the Report we have the statement that the total gain of revenue by applying the British scale of tax to the Isle of Man would be, amongst other things, "Beer, £10,000."
      2260
      Before we pass this Clause I should like to have information as to what is the differentiation in the duty which leads to that difference in revenue.
      The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): The Beer Duty in the Isle of Man is £3 14s., as compared with £3 15s. in this country.
      Clauses 3 (Duties on spirits), 4 (Duties on cocoa), and 5 (Duties on hops) ordered to stand part of the Bill.
      CLAUSE 6.—(Duties on motor cars, etc.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Mr. ALEXANDER: This Clause imposes upon the inhabitants of the Isle of Man apparently the same duties with regard to motor cars as have been imposed in this country.
      Mr. McNEILL: On a point of Order. The hon. Member says this Clause imposes this duty on the inhabitants of the Isle of Man. May I point out that it does not do anything of the sort. It only confirms a duty which has been imposed on themselves by their own Legislature. In the circumstances, I should like to know whether the hon. Member is in order in challenging the action of Me Legislature of the Isle of Man?
      The CHAIRMAN: I cannot say the hon. Member is out of order. As I understand the position the Isle of Man Legislature, by Resolution, imposes certain charges on the inhabitants of the Isle of Man which have validity for a defined space of time, and then lapse unless confirmed by this House. Anyone challenging the duties must show why this House should override the Tynwald of the Isle of Man.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: I am glad to have that ruling, otherwise I should have had to go into detail. It is clear from the 1887 Act, Section 2, and this supports your decision—
      Major STANLEY: Is the hon. Member in order in giving us the reasons why your ruling is right?
      The CHAIRMAN: It is a matter of supererogation.
      Captain BENN: Inasmuch as the Isle of Man was purchased from the family of the Stanley's by this House, is not the hon. and gallant Member for Westmorland (Major Stanley) financially interested in the matter?
      The CHAIRMAN: That has long ago lapsed.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: Section 2 is perfectly clear that the power to impose duties by the Tynwald is a provisional power, and is subject in every case to the approval of the Imperial Parliament. It is a great pity that there should be any procedure in this House which would tend to take away in any degree the right of Members in dealing with any Public Bill. A Public Bill introduced into this House has to pass through the procedure of Second Reading, Committee stage, Report stage, and Third Reading. If the constitutional position as between this Parliament and the Isle of Man Parliament is such that certain Acts or Resolutions of theirs require the confirmation of this House, it is surely in Order for a Member of this House to assert his right to raise a point on a Public Bill introduced for the purpose of confirmation by this House. It hardly seems to me to be a good plan for a Minister to raise an objection on that ground.
      Clause 6 ratifies—I will use that phrase to satisfy the right hon. Gentleman—the imposition of Motor Car Duties in the Isle of Man at the same rate as they are imposed upon the people of Great Britain. It seems to me perfectly clear from the way that this Clause and the way the remaining Clauses of the Bill are drawn, that it is the desire of the Government, acting on behalf of the. Crown, that the Customs Duties for the Isle of Man should as nearly as possible be brought into line with the Customs Duties operating in this country. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] I am glad to have that note of approval from hon. Members opposite, because it will lend considerable point to the argument I propose to lay before the Committee. I am confirmed in that view because of the Appendices to the Report of the Committee of the Privy Council, which lead up to the general recommendation from that Committee that there shall be a larger contribution in future from the
      2262
      Isle of Man to the Imperial Exchequer. In that connection we ought to give consideration to what, is the taxable capacity of the Isle of Man, in dealing with this Customs Bill.
      The CHAIRMAN: This Customs Duty has been imposed by the Legislature of the Isle of Man, and the only question before the Committee is whether there is or is not sufficient reason for this House over-riding the decision of the Isle of Man Legislature.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: That is the point to which I was trying to address myself. That is why I refer to taxable capacity, because, as a result of the Customs Acts, which were passed by the Isle of Man, our view is that the indirect taxation raised from the inhabitants of the Isle of Man is altogether out of proportion to the direct taxation.
      Mr. DENNIS HERBERT: On a point of Order. Is it in order to discuss the general question of the contributions by the Isle of Man in Committee stage on a particular Clause, which merely ratifies the imposition of certain duties on motor cars?
      The CHAIRMAN: It is not. I do not know whether it might have been in order yesterday, or whether it may be in order to-morrow.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: Are we not entitled' to discuss on a Bill of this kind, which taxes His Majesty's subjects, whether too much is imposed in the way of indirect taxation?
      The CHAIRMAN: Not on a particular Clause.
      Mr. ALXANDER: In that ease, I will leave that part of the argument, although it does not mean that it cannot be raised on Third Reading. The only other word I want to say is, that, although we are prevented by the procedure of this House from expressing our views upon that argument, we think it is the initiative of the Government, acting under the Crown, which is seeking to impose upon the inhabitants of the Isle of Man these new dunes of a Protective character.

      CLAUSE 7.—(Duties on musical instruments, clocks, films, etc.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Captain BENN: I notice that these Clauses 6 and 7 are simply to impose a tariff in the Isle of Man equivalent to our own tariff. Is it not a fact that motor cars in the Isle of Man were at some time exempt and are they not now exempt from the McKenna taxes?
      The CHAIRMAN: We are now beyond the motor car taxes.
      Captain BENN: It is precisely because Clause 7 has a bearing on the McKenna tariff that I am asking this question.
      The CHAIRMAN: When I am considering the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill I know nothing about the McKenna tariff or any other British tariff. All I am concerned with is that these duties have been imposed by the Manx Legislature and the only question before us now is whether the Acts of ale Manx Legislature are to be confirmed or not.
      Captain BENN: But surely it is an Imperial matter. We are considering how far this tariff corresponds with our own tariff. I submit that I may ask the Financial Secretary for information on this point.
      The CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member may certainly ask for information on that point.
      Mr. McNEILL: The hon. and gallant Member wants to know what the Motor Car Duties are in the Isle of Man as compared with those in this country. The answer is the same. In view of what the hon. and gallant Member has said, and also what the hon. Member for Hillsborough (Mr. A. V. Alexander) has said about these duties being imposed upon the people of the Isle of Man, I may mention that the Resolution and the duties proposed in the Resolution in the Isle of Man were proposed there without any previous communication with the British Government at all. I presume they get our Parliamentary papers there; I do not pretend that they did not act upon our example, but so far from there
      2264
      being anything in the nature of pressure from us, there was no communication at all.
      Captain BENN: That is not the question I was asking. I was asking rather how long is it since the two tariffs have been similar, because for some time motor cars in the Isle of Man were free, whereas motor cars in this country were taxed.
      Mr. McNEILL: I am afraid I cannot tell the hon. and gallant Member at the moment.
      Brigadier-General Sir HENRY CROFT: They have seen the error of their ways.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: With regard to the reply of the Financial Secretary, may I ask whether the authorities do not show clearly that the initiation of taxation is with His Majesty's 'Government? I quote from the "Enclycopædia Britannica"[Interruption]:
      "The Imperial Government, after intimating its intention, fixes the rates of Customs Duties."
      It is quite clear that the initiation does lie with the British Government in suggesting to the Isle of Man authorities what the rates of the Customs Duties shall be.
      Mr. McNEILL: I will try to remove the delusions of the hon. Member. Perhaps he does not know that I myself am largely responsible for the production of the book of reference to which he has referred, and with great pains he has found a point of inaccuracy. If he has accurately quoted it, I am afraid it is inaccurate, because it is not the case that the initiation comes from His Majesty's Government. If the hon. Gentleman will look at a more direct authority, the Report of the Departmental Committee on the Constitution of the Isle of Man, published even more recently than that great work, he will find these words:
      "The impression prevalent in the Isle of Man in some quarters that the items in the Statement—
      that is, the Financial Statement—
      are approved by the home Government before its presentation is inaccurate. From time to time the Lieutenant-Governor or the Treasurer may confer informally on some

      2265
      doubtful point with the Home Office or the Treasurer, but no formal authority is sought or given until the resolutions have been passed by the Tywald."
      Mr. CAINE: Is it not a fact that the Lieut.-Governor is the representative of the Crown in the Isle of Man?
      The CHAIRMAN: We are getting very far from the Bill.
      Clauses 8 (Duties on silk) and 9 (Duties on wines) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

      CLAUSE 10.—(Duties on Lace.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill?"
      Mr. HARRIS: This Clause is in an entirely different category from the previous Clauses. The others have some pretence of being imposed for revenue purposes, but this Clause cannot be assumed to be for that purpose, even by the wildest stretch of imagination. The idea was invented under the Safeguarding of Industries Act and the duty is not imposed for revenue purposes. On the contrary, it was deliberately intended by the Treasury—
      The CHAIRMAN: Can the hon. Member say of his own knowledge that the Tynwald, when discussing this duty, did not regard it as a revenue duty?
      Mr. HARRIS: I assume a high intelligence on the part of the Isle of Man authorities. We have a Manxman in this House, and if he is a sample of the intelligence of the Tynwald, then we must assume that they knew these duties could not be imposed for revenue purposes. These duties are not imposed for revenue but in order to safeguard particular industries that do not exist on the island and to prevent importation. I, therefore, say that the island is rather travelling outside the scope of an ordinary Finance Bill. We should be careful in passing in Clause of this kind and in encouraging this island on the downward path of Protection. The Clause ought not to pass without protest.
      Mr. McNEILL: I felt greatly afraid that the success of the hon. Member last night would impose upon him a temptation that he would be unable to resist tonight, but, honestly, I do not think that the matter under discussion is quite a suitable one for the debate that the hon. Member tries to introduce. I want to enter a protest against these Debates on these Clauses. I feel very strongly that these Debates, however much they may amuse the House for a. few moments, are very much out of place. Certainly it is a very extraordinary circumstance that hon. Members opposite, who belong to a party that for years past has been devoting itself to the task of imposing Home Rule on those of His Majesty's subjects who do not want it, are now engaged in trying to fetch away rights which have been traditionally enjoyed by the people of the Isle of Man. An hon. Member mentioned the Act of 1887, and said that that Act clearly showed that this House was entitled to control and to debate the whole of the proposals of this Bill. I take exactly the opposite view of that Act. That Act appears to me to lay down perfectly plainly that the function of the House of Commons is to confirm the Resolutions, if it thinks fit to do so. Of course, that carries with it the implication that this House may refuse to confirm them.
      The CHAIRMAN: We are now getting into a very wide discussion, remote from the specific proposals of this Clause.
      Mr. McNEILL: With great respect I contend that, in answer to the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris), who has made an attack on this particular duty, I am entitled to say that a constitutional question is involved in this matter, and that I do not intend, for deliberate reasons, to defend, one way or the other, the proposals of this Clause. That is the only answer to the hon. Member's argument in so far as it was an argument. I can assure the Committee that very considerable misunderstanding may arise in the Isle of Man when they find that we are adopting the unprecedented course of discussing and weighing the pros and cons of proposals which have been carried by the local Legislature. So far as I can ascertain there is no precedent for taking excep-

      2267
      tion to what has been done by the local Legislature. I respectfully request the Committee to understand that there is something more at stake here than the mere question of spending a little time in an amusing discussion of these matters, and I think if the Committee understand that this is a rather serious matter they will not introduce a procedure which may give rise to a great deal of resentment.
      Mr. KELLY: I can hardly be charged with treating that part of the world with any want of courtesy and respect. Some six of my colleagues sit in that particular assembly, but to be told here that we have no right to discuss this Measure because somebody else has passed a resolution upon it is certainly asking too much from us. If we have no right to discuss it, then it should not be placed before us, and I am sure the people of the Isle of Man would look upon us with anything but respect, if we were simply to pass this Measure through because it happens to be printed and placed before us. I do not know whether this Clause has been carried in the Isle of Man in such a way as warrants us in saying that it meets with the acceptance of the people of the Isle of Man. Nothing has been said by the right hon. Gentleman as to when this matter was dealt with and how it was carried through the two Houses in the Isle of Man. I object to being asked to obey the Government blindly when they say "You must not discuss this, but yon must accept it."
      Mr. D. HERBERT: On a point of procedure. Is it not the case that the Isle of Man has a certain amount of independence, and that the Government of the Isle of Man is friendly to the Government of this country? In these circumstances I submit it is within the competence of the independence of the Isle of Man that its own Government should take. steps provisionally to impose these taxes, and the only power which is properly left to this Parliament is to consider whether these taxes are in any way harmful to this country and not to oppose them unless it can be shown that there is some good reason in the interests of this country for interfering with the otherwise independent powers of the Isle of Man.
      The CHAIRMAN: I cannot say that an argument against these taxes is necessarily out of order, but obviously it is incumbent to show sonic reason why this Committee should override the judgment of the properly constituted Legislature of the Isle of Man.
      Captain BENN: I do not resent the serious note which has been introduced by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. I have seen many Isle of Man (Customs) Bills passed, and the point behind this one is, that this so-called spontaneity and similarity and simultaneity is not real. The fact is that a protectionist Government in this country decides that this country shall become protected and among its victims are the residents of the Isle of Man. That is the situation, and it is wrong to say that this is a spontaneous act. Why these people in the Isle of Man refused to have anything to do.
      Captain CROOKSHANK: On a point of Order. What has this to do with a duty on lace?
      The CHAIRMAN: If the hon. and gallant Member for Leith means to say that undue influence has been brought to bear on the Legislature of the Isle of Man, he would only he in order if he can bring some evidence of that in regard to the lace duty. A discussion on the general constitutional question cannot take place on this Clause.
      Captain BENN: I plead that something might be said in answer to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, which ranged from Home Rule right away through the whole category of political topics. As regards this lace, this is an imposition on the Isle of Man by a Protectionist Government of a measure of Protection, and that is the serious answer to the serious speech of the right hon. Gentleman.
      Captain GARRO-JONES: The right hon. Gentleman stated that it was an affront to the autonomy of the Isle of Man to discuss whether or not this Lace Ditty should be imposed. When we granted autonomy to the Isle of Man, it was subject to the confirmation or rejection of any tariff proposals of this kind that they should propose, and I do not see how we can confirm or reject a tariff proposal if we are not allowed to argue its merits and to know what the objec-

      2269
      tions are to it and what the Government have to say in support of it. If it is an affront to the autonomy of the Isle of Man to discuss it, it is a greater affront to the House of Commons to say we are not to discuss it. It is obvious that we have a. perfect right to discuss the merits of this and every Clause.

      CLAUSE 11.—(Remission of Customs Duties in. case of antique articles.)
      Ordered to stand part of the Bill.

      CLAUSE 12.—(Duties on matches.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Mr. KELLY: Will the right, hon. Gentleman explain whether this duty is to be imposed upon matches that are manufactured in England?
      Mr. McNEILL: This is a duty to equalise the import duty here with that on matches imported into the Island.
      Captain GARRO-JONES: In pursuance of the undoubted right of every hon. Member to discuss the merits of this Bill, I desire to ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury a question in connection with this Clause. This is the last of the Clauses which contains the words "removed or imported into the Isle of Man." The wording of the Clause makes it appear as if there were a right to charge a double duty. Of course, that is not the intention, but is there not a more explicit form of words which could better meet the case?
      Mr. MACLEAN: I wish to press the question put by my colleague, to which no reply has been given by the right hon. Gentleman. The question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Mr. Kelly) was whether this duty applied to matches manufactured in this country and exported to the Isle of Man?
      Mr. McNEILL: It is quite true, in that case. I did not quite catch what was in the mind of the hon. Gentleman. The answer is, in those circumstances, of course not. It is only a duty on matches coming into Great Britain.
      Captain GARRO-JONES: Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to my question, whether this empowers the Isle of
      2270
      Man to impose a duty if it has already been paid by importers in this country, and whether a better form of words could not be chosen which would not empower the Isle of Man to charge a duty on goods imported into this country and re-imported into the Isle of Man?
      Mr. McNEILL: I think this form of words does very well.
      Captain GARRO-JONES: This is a very serious point. It has been found time and again that ambiguity in the wording of a Statute has led to endless legislation. The Clause says
      "On and from the twenty-second day of June, nineteen hundred and twenty-six, there shall be charged, levied and paid on matches removed or imported into the Isle of Man"—
      Under the wording of the Clause there is, obviously, a charge of duty already paid in this country. If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to tell me that he will consult his advisers on the matter, and deal with it at a later stage. I am perfectly prepared to sit down.
      Captain BENN: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would extend the courtesy of a reply to my hon. and gallant Friend?
      Mr. McNEILL: I do not want to do anything which may appear to be discourteous, but, unfortunately, hon. Members took so mach more interest in conversations among themselves than in the speech of the hon. Member that I could not hear a word of it.
      The CHAIRMAN: I think the progress of business will be expedited if hon. Members will keep silence.
      Mr. MACLEAN: Name them!
      Captain GARRO-JONES: The point is an extremely simple one. The Clause says that en matches
      "removed or imported into the Isle of Man"
      a certain duty shall be paid. Supposing matches had been imported into Great Britain and subsequently exported to the Isle of Man—[Interruption]—or supposing a motor-car is imported into Great Britain— [HON. MEMBERS: "Matches."] Supposing certain things are imported into this country and a duty is paid on them, and then they are exported to the Isle of Alan, is a further duty charged on them?
      Mr. R. HUDSON: Can we modify one of these Resolutions passed by the Tynwald? We can reject it or confirm it, but can we modify it?
      The CHAIRMAN: In any case the Committee cannot modify this Clause, because the Question proposed is "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Mr. TAYLOR: Is it in order for an hon. Member rising to a point of Order to address the Chairman with both hands in his pockets.
      The CHAIRMAN: It may be a question of taste, but it is not out of order.
      Mr. McNEILL: I think I have twice already answered the point put by the hon. Member for South Hackney (Captain Garro-Jones). Of course, under those circumstances, no second duty would be paid.

      CLAUSE 13.—(Duties for safeguarding key industries.)
      The CHAIRMAN: An Amendment to this Clause has been submitted, but it have the effect of increasing the charge on the people of the Isle of Man, and therefore it is not in order.
      Mr. CAINE: May I suggest that the charge has already been imposed through the resolutions having been passed through this House in connection with the Finance Bill? May I suggest this further point—that the Act of 1765, the reinvesting Act, under which the British Crown bought from the Atholl family the sovereign rights and the Customs revenue of the Isle of Man, gave the Crown and the British Parliament the right to impose Customs duties on the Isle of Man. I put it to you, Sir, that the constitutional authority on this subject is the Speaker of the Old House of Keys, who said most definitely, and all practice in the Isle of Man has proved it, that all financial resolutions of this kind—Customs duties—are brought in by the Lieut.-Governor of the Isle of Man, who is directly representing the Crown. He having brought them in, the position is that the Isle of Man can abolish, vary or impose them, but only for a limited time, for six months, and then the action has to be ratified by this House or be turned down by a Treasury minute. All I am
      2272
      suggesting is that the House should do what it has a perfect right to do, that is, impose a Customs duty; otherwise, I suggest to you that confusion will become worse confounded if duties are to be imposed by this House, and varied from time to time in the Isle of Man.
      The CHAIRMAN: I am not quite sure whether the Amendment would have the effect the hon. Member wishes it to have. But assuming that that were so, I understand the hon. Member wished that any tax passed by this House and imposing a charge should automatically apply to the Isle of Man. The answer is that the Resolutions authorising that charge in the Finance Bill of this year or the former year do not extend to the Isle of Man. Had they done so, there would be no necessity for this particular Clause.
      Mr. CAINE: The Act of 1877, called the Isle of Man (Customs) Act, makes it unnecessary for the Finance Bill to contain any such Clause, because that Act enables the Imperial Government to impose duties, and it distinctly states in the Act that it only gives power to vary those duties for a limited period. Therefore, I submit that my Amendment is in order, because I wish to urge the Government to impose this duty.
      The CHAIRMAN: We cannot get over the fact that a charge cannot be imposed in that way. I will not say that repeal of the Act of 1887 would also be necessary, but no such duty can be extended by an Amendment varying this Clause.
      Captain BENN: On what Money Resolution is the Isle of Man (Customs) Act based?
      The CHAIRMAN: We have passed no such Resolution.
      Captain BENN: Clause 13 apparently deals with a permanent duty, and I submit that it must be based upon a Financial Resolution passed in Committee of Ways and Means.
      The CHAIRMAN: That is beside the question. The Resolutions have been passed by the Tynwald, and if they had not, a Court could presumably set any proceedings taken under Resolutions of this House aside. With regard to the, point of Order on the Amendment, it is quite clear that there has been no recom-

      2273
      mendation of the Crown and no Resolution of this House to justify what is proposed.
      Mr. REMER: Shall we be allowed to have a general debate on the Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      The CHAIRMAN: Certainly not.
      Mr. HARRIS: The Financial Secretary to the Treasury waxed very indignant at me because I venture to criticise this Clause, but it is quite clear that the Isle of Man has no choice and cannot initiate new taxes. It seems to me that whatever the political complexion of the Government may be—
      The CHAIRMAN: That question is more appropriate on the Third Reading and it is not in order on this Clause.
      Mr. HARRIS: Nobody can deny that this tax is imposed for political purposes—
      The CHAIRMAN: We cannot go into the motives of the Tynwald when it passes these duties.
      Captain BENN: I am not quite certain that this House has the power to impose Customs duties on the Isle of Man.
      The CHAIRMAN: That is not the point on the Clause. The Tynwald has passed a resolution safeguarding key industries. Whether they have done it in their wisdom or not is not for us to say. The only question is whether, in what has been done, there is any reason why we should override them.
      Mr. HARRIS: The point is that they have not justified it, and it is grotesque to make it anything else.
      Captain BENN: It provides a definite sort of case, and it is a serious case against this Bill. Apparently the Tynwald has power to continue these duties for ever. You are going to have scientific instruments in the colleges and drugs in the hospitals in the Isle of Man made dearer.
      The CHAIRMAN: The Tynwald has passed this, and the hon. and gallant Member would only be in order in giving good reason why this House should override the constitutional decision of the Tynwald.

      CLAUSE 14.—(Duties on cutlery, gloves, and mantles for incandescent lighting.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Captain BENN: I propose to make this same argument a little clearer. Here we have duties imposed in this country at the expense of certain small industries, and these unfortunate individuals in the Isle of Man arc to be subjected to higher taxes because we have a Protectionist Government in this. country.
      Mr. McNEILL: In what the hon. and gallant Member has stated he will not think it discourteous if I say that the last time he addressed the House he talked sheer nonsense.
      Mr. HARRIS: That is not argument; that is merely abuse.
      The CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member may have talked nonsense on a previous Clause, but he did not talk it on this.
      Mr. McNEILL: It is sheer nonsense to say with regard to many of these duties that there was any coercion used from this country. In regard to the Wrapping Paper Duty, which duty is included in our Finance Bill, they did exercise their rights, and refused to have it.
      Captain BENN: The right hon. Gentleman has used strong language. It is perhaps just as well to point out that it is sheer nonsense to pretend that this catalogue of incandescent gas mantles, cutlery, etc., sprung up spontaneously in the minds of the Isle of Man Legislature.

      CLAUSE 15.—(Duties on Playing Cards.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
      Captain GARRO-JONES: I desire to draw the attention of the Committee to a matter in connection with this Clause, which shows that these taxes are going to be imposed, not only on goods imported into the Isle of Man from abroad, but also on goods imported into the Island from this country. The proviso to Sub-section (1) reads:
      "Provided that where the Commissioners of Customs and Excise are satisfied that

      2275
      any pack so removed or imported has been manufactured in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, the duty of Customs to be charged on any such pack shall be at the rate of threepence per pack."
      That appears to me to be cutting off our own nose to spite our face. What is the use of bringing in an elaborate system of Protection for the industries of this country when you bring in a subsidiary Bill to impose taxes on manufactured goods exported from this country to one of its Dominions, namely, the Isle of Man? It is not only that the duties in this Bill and in this Clause are the same, but the very wording of the Clause is the same as that of the Clause in which these duties are imposed on goods imported into Great Britain. The Clauses are the same and the words are the same. It is obvious that, while the hand may be the hand of the Tynwald, the voice is the voice of the British Government.
      Clause 16 (Short title) ordered to stand part of the Bill.
      Schedules agreed to.
      Bill reported, without Amendment.
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."
      12 M.
      Mr. CAINE: I wish to dissociate myself from the expressions that have fallen from hon. Members on the Liberal benches with regard to the effect of the safeguarding duties on the inhabitants of the Isle of Man. I think it is very much to their interest that they should impose safeguarding duties, because, being largely dependent upon visitors, they are largely dependent upon the prosperity of the workers and the people in general in this country. I notice that there is a serious omission from this Bill. On the Second Reading yesterday, I pressed the Financial Secretary, and I venture to press him again, with regard to it. The Wrapping Paper Duties, which were passed in the Financial Bill, have been omitted from this Billߞ
      12 M.
      The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Commander Eyres Monsell): On a point of Order. If, as my hon. Friend says, there is an omission from the Bill, can it be discussed on the Third Reading?
      Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. James Hope): It is not in order on the Third Reading. The discussion then must be confined to what is in the Bill.
      Captain BENN: On a point of Order. Is it in order for the Chief Whip to closure his own followers?
      Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: It may, on occasion, even be desirable.
      Mr. CAINE: If it is forbidden to me to discuss something which has been omitted from the Bill, of course I can say nothing. I am afraid my hon. Friends do not realise the danger of the point I was raising. They have supported certain Measures in the Finance Bill, and now are going to leave an open door by which these goods can be sent into this country. I regret to see that they take the matter in such a way. I am sorry that there has been this omission, but I think the Treasury and this House have a perfect right to point out to the Manx Legislature that a serious omission has been madeߞ
      Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: This might have been taken on the Second Reading, or on the Motion that Clause 13 stand part of the Bill, but I do not think it can be taken on the Third Reading.
      Mr. REMER: I want to raise a constitutional issue which I think arises on this question. It appears to me to be quite open to the Isle of Man to eliminate the whisky duty from its taxes, so that we might have a sort of bootlegging importation into this country. I hope the Financial Secretary will look into this point and see by what means, before this Bill comes forward next year, some negotiations may be undertaken so that the taxes in the Isle of Man may coincide with those imposed in this country.
      Mr. HARRIS: This discussion has revealed certain curiosities in the method of imposing taxes which are almost unique. When we had a Free Trade Government in 1924, the tariff proposals of the Isle of Man were on an entirely different basis and principle. They then, by a curious coincidence, avoided all taint

      2277
      of Protection. Now that there has been a change of Government, we have an elaborate attempt to experiment on a small scale with Protection. Apparently it draws the line at laces and silk stockings, and does not go as far as the hon. Member for East Dorset (Mr. Caine) would like. We want to clear our minds of cant and face the fact that the suggestion that this island has a responsible Government is not borne out. If it had a responsible Government, which could be turned out if its action were disapproved of, I should be the last to criticize—
      Mr. BLUNDELL: On a point of Order. Is it an order to suggest that the Tynwald is not a responsible Government?
      Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I should not like to say the hon. Member is not in order until I have got a grasp of the full consequence of his remarks.
      Mr. HARRIS: The suggestion by the Financial Secretary is that the Isle of Man Legislature have a free choice as to their taxes and that this House has no right to intervene. They have not a free choice. They are strictly limited by the policy prevailing at the Treasury at a particular period. If it is a Free Trade Treasury, they can only pass Free Trade taxes; if it is a Protectionist Treasury, they must choose Protectionist taxes. Therefore, to pretend that we must not criticise or interfere with these taxes on the ground that is is an invasion of the rights of a Dominion or other Legislature is pure fiction. The right hon. Gentleman, with all his superiority and patronising airs, knows that what I am saying is true. He may display the dignity of a Treasury official and try to ride the high horse over private Members, but I can assure him that he deceives nobody, not even himself.
      Major COLFOX: What is a Free Trade Customs duty?
      Mr. ALEXANDER: I should like to say that I have been associated in some measure with the opposition to this Bill, because I believe that the Government have a great responsibility in regard to the Customs duties which are levied in the Isle of Man. It is true that they are imposed, varied or abolished by the Tynwald, with the consent of the House of Keys, but they are introduced through the initiative of the representative of the
      2278
      Crown. It is obvious what has happened under different Governments, and that this procedure has been followed. Therefore we are entitled to ask in respect of the people in the Isle of Man upon whom these taxes are levied, what is their capacity to pay. I observe from the Report of the Privy Council Committee that a very much larger proportion of the revenue of the Isle of Man is raised from indirect taxation therein from direct taxation. The main object I have had in view in drawing attention to the question of capacity to pay has been to remind the House that there must be a large number of the poorer people in the Isle of Man who will suffer great hardship by the imposition of these duties, in addition to the indirect taxes which are recounted in the Report of the Privy Council Committee. The Report says that the Exchequer revenue from Customs duties was £278,600 in the year with which the Report deals. The whole population of the Isle of Man is less than 50, 000.
      Mr. WOMERSLEY: They charge the trippers with it.
      Major COLFOX: On a point of Order, is not the whole argument of the hon. Member calling in question the discretion of the Manx Legislature as to how they shall apportion taxation between direct and indirect taxes?
      Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I do not think the hon. Member is out of order.
      Mr. ALEXANDER: I am definitely speaking my views in regard to the poorer people of the isle of Man. It is no answer to say that they can put the charge on the trippers to the Isle of Man. If the hon. Member for Grimsby (Mr. Womersley) had read the Report, he would have found a statement by the Committee that they cannot find that more than three-eighths of the total duties can be passed on to the trippers. My point is that we are, by passing this Bill, levying dutiesߞ[HON. MEMBERS: "We are not; they are levied by the Isle of Man Legislature."] Hon. Members who interrupt me must surely know, if they have listened to the arguments, that to have the duties in this Bill for a period longer than six months, it is necessary for this House to pass this Bill. To continue for more than six months, it is

      2279
      necessary for us to pass a Bill through this House. Therefore it is true to say that for a period exceeding six months we impose a duty. By passing this Bill to-night, you are increasing indirect taxation in the Isle of Man, which already amounts to £5 10s. per head. I ask hon. Members what they would think if that could be said of all the working classes in Great Britain l When the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Kelly) spoke just now I was strengthened in my own case for raising this point. He said that six colleagues of his own workers' union are Members of the House of Keys. They are concerned with the position of working-class consumers in the Isle of Man. We have had no evidence from the Government as to whether the Bill was debated in the House of Keys or whether there was any opposition from the workers' representatives. If we look up the Debate of 1918 in which a reply to the Government was given by the present Prime Minister, we find that he drew attention to the poverty of the Isle If
      2280
      Man owing to the War and said that it may be we were asking as much as ever the people of the Isle of Man could stand. Now we have the recommendation of a Privy Council Committee to increase the charge and, inter alia, we get this Bill, which increases the amount of revenue to be raised by Customs duties.
      Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.
      The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
      It being after Half-Past Eleven of the Clock upon, Wednesday evening, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
      Adjourned at a Quarter alter Twelve o'Clock.

  AFRICAN DEPENDENCIES (TAXATION).
  AFRICAN DEPENDENCIES (TAXATION).
  COAL MINERS (EMIGRATION).
  COAL MINERS (EMIGRATION).
  EMPIRE SETTLEMENT.
  EMPIRE SETTLEMENT.
ROYAL NAVY.
  SICK-BERTH STAFF.
  SICK-BERTH STAFF.
  WARRANT OFFICERS (RETIRING AGE).
  WARRANT OFFICERS (RETIRING AGE).
  OFFICERS (MARRIAGE ALLOWANCE).
  OFFICERS (MARRIAGE ALLOWANCE).
  CHINA (SHAMEEN SHOOTING AND ANTI-BRITISH BOYCOTT).
  CHINA (SHAMEEN SHOOTING AND ANTI-BRITISH BOYCOTT).
  ROYAL AIR FORCE (HENDON PAGEANT).
  ROYAL AIR FORCE (HENDON PAGEANT).
SCOTLAND.
  ERIBOLL ESTATE.
  ERIBOLL ESTATE.
  NON-STATE-AIDED HOUSES.
  NON-STATE-AIDED HOUSES.
  FISHERIES (MORAY FIRTH).
  FISHERIES (MORAY FIRTH).
  AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATION, ORKNEY.
  AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATION, ORKNEY.
  GENERAL STRIKE (ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION).
  GENERAL STRIKE (ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION).
  INDUSTRIAL PEACE.
  INDUSTRIAL PEACE.
  BETTING DUTY.
  BETTING DUTY.
  OLD AGE PENSIONS (AGED PAUPERS AND PRISONERS).
  OLD AGE PENSIONS (AGED PAUPERS AND PRISONERS).
  TEXTILE INDUSTRY (EXPORT TRADE).
  TEXTILE INDUSTRY (EXPORT TRADE).
  STREET ACCIDENTS, ANGEL, ISLINGTON.
  STREET ACCIDENTS, ANGEL, ISLINGTON.
  SOLICITATION.
  SOLICITATION.
Preamble
The House met at a quarter before four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
LORD LLOYD.
The Right Honourable Sir George Ambrose Lloyd, G.C.S.I., G.C.I.E., D.S.O., having been created Baron Lloyd of Dolobran in the County of Montgomery—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
Read 3ª, with the Amendments: Further Amendments made: Bill passed and returned to the Commons.
MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL STAFF (SUPERANNUATION) BILL.
Read 3ª, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

BRISTOL CORPORATION BILL.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE): My Lords, with reference to this Bill, consideration of which, as your Lordships will remember, was adjourned yesterday, I should like to say that the further Amendment to which I then referred is now in proper form and I beg to move that it he agreed to.
Moved, That the Amendment be agreed to.—(The Earl of Donoughmore.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

MINING INDUSTRY BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1ª; and to be printed.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 6) BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with an Amendment.

GAINSBOROUGH ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Peel with reference to this Order.
Moved, That the Special Order which was presented on the 22nd of June last be approved.—(The Earl of Lucan.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LLANTARNAM ELECTRICITY SPECIAL ORDER, 1926.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Peel, I beg to move.
Moved, That the Special Order which was presented on the 1st instant be approved.—(The Earl of Lucan.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

KILMARNOCK CORPORATION ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3ª (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND MINISTERS' AND SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS' WIDOWS' FUND (AMENDMENT) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3ª (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
LAND DRAINAGE PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 2) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on re-commitment of the Bill: Bill reported without amendment.

INDIAN AFFAIRS.
LORD OLIVIER LORD OLIVIER had given Notice to ask the Secretary of State for India to give this House information on such aspects of Indian affairs as he may consider to be of general and immediate public interest., and in particular with regard to the apparent diminution in
292
some quarters and recent exacerbation in others of turbulent or unconstitutional manifestations of popular feeling.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I placed this Notice upon the Paper some months ago for the simple purpose of enabling your Lordships to receive, as you are always anxious to receive, from the Secretary of State his account of the fortunes of that Dependency during the last twelve months, and I included in my Question some of the subjects in which I thought that your Lordships would be interested. In addition to those subjects I have privately given notice to the noble Earl of one or two other points upon which I shall be very glad if he will give us some information. I read the statement that was made in another place by the Under-Secretary of State for India and I did not see in that statement any reference to our relations with the Kingdom of Afghanistan or to the difficulties which are continually confronting us with regard to the frontier tribes between India and that country.
I shall be very glad if the noble Earl can tell us how our relations with the Amir are proceeding with regard to those difficult questions of the allegiance and employment of the frontier tribes about which we have had constant correspondence with him, desiring, as we do, to retain their loyalty to us whilst not interfering with their occasional employment in Afghanistan. The position of these tribes is well known to your Lordships. There is continual unrest among them and a continual disposition to seek employment and a means of livelihood outside their own country and, owing to that economic fact, difficulties arise both on our side and on the side of Afghanistan. In that connection I notice that this point is referred to in a Notice that has been given by the noble Earl, Lord Mayo, with regard to the establishment of our hold upon that part of the country by the building of roads. This is a point to which the noble Earl in another place did not refer, and upon which I think that your Lordships would be interested to have some information.
Another point which I gave the noble Earl private Notice of my intention to raise concerns the administration of Indian gaols. In August last I called his attention to that subject in connection with a case that had arisen in which a

293
charge was made against the administration of Indian gaols and which became the subject of a judicial decision. The noble Earl, in replying to me upon that subject, said that the Government of the Punjab, on the publication of the article containing charges against the administration of Indian gaols, ordered an investigation by the Inspector-General of Prisons, and that inquiry reported that the allegations were without foundation and were false. The Government thereupon were advised that a suit should be brought, and the gaoler in the case brought a suit which was filed in the Court of the Sub-Judge claiming damages, and the Local Government bore the cost of the suit. On the whole, judgment was in favour of the defendant, and an appeal was entered, again at the cost of the Government, and the noble Earl could not give us further information as to the costs of the case at that time.
I urged that some general inquiry should be made by the Government of India into the administration of gaols and I have learned that since that time a much more searching inquiry has been made by a Commission appointed for the purpose. The Report has been published and I have seen a copy of it. No doubt the Secretary of State for India has also seen it, and I think he will agree with me that the facts with regard to the administration of gaols revealed in that Report, contrary to the impression conveyed by the Report of the Inspector-General, is exceedingly scandalous. I have no doubt it will receive the attention of the Government of India as well as of the Government of the Punjab. What I wish to know is whether that Report has been brought to the attention of the noble Earl, and if he can assure your Lordships that careful attention will be drawn, not only in the Punjab but in the rest of India, to the fact that scandals are proved to be prevailing in the Punjab precisely of the kind alleged in the Report—an organised system of corruption of the lower ranks of the prison administration whereby practically any prisoner whose relations would pay for him, would get anything he desired except, possibly, female society, while those persons who did not submit to blackmail were subjected to punishments. I have no doubt whatever that those matters will receive most careful attention, but I trust we shall have a further assurance
294
that there will be a further general inquiry into the rest of the administration the gaols.
I have read a statement made by the noble Lord in another place with regard to the Akali disturbances. Two or three years ago the condition of things in the Punjab with regard to the Akali disturbances was most unsatisfactory, and as the late Leader of the House, Lord Curzon, observed, when I brought matters to his notice in this House:—
"…it is evident there must have been regrettable mismanagement somewhere to have brought about a state of affairs in which you have bodies of Sikh fanatics marching about the country and having to be shot down because they are resisting the legitimate decrees of Government."
All of us who have taken an interest in Indian affairs note with great satisfaction that recently there appear to have been none of these unfortunate conflicts between the Akali Sikhs and the Government which we were accustomed to hear of nearly every month two or three years ago. Seeing that the previous state of affairs was credited to mismanagement, we ought to be satisfied that affairs in the Punjab are now being administered in an efficient manner, and we ought to be glad of that fact. The noble Earl said that the final condition of affairs was at present satisfactory but that the Sikhs were disputing among themselves with a certain amount of liveliness as to how their differences were to be settled. I hope he will be able to tell us that the liveliness is not at all likely to break out again in practical action, such as occurred in the Punjab previously, and has occurred in other parts of India, arising out of religious differences.
In connection with matters which have interested your Lordships in former debates I shall be glad if he can give us information with regard to the upshot of the operation of what is known as the Bengal Ordinance, where special powers are given to the Government to deal with the organisation of anarchic crime. We have not heard lately of any recrudescence of that crime, and I shall be glad if he will give us a statement as to how that Ordinance has worked—whether there has been recently any necessity to take further action under it, and whether, among those persons who were interned or imprisoned under it, it has been found possible to release any number on giving satisfactory assurances.
Then I come to the question of the disturbances about which we have heard a good deal lately in the Press—disturbances arising largely out of antagonism between the Moslem and Hindu communities. Those reports come to us in the Press in a manner which does not convey very much real information as to their significance and origin. We are told there was an organised band which attacked a Hindu procession, or that the Hindus organised a disturbance in front of a mosque. I wish the noble Earl would give us, if he is able to do so, some deeper diagnosis of what is really the origin of these disturbances. We had in this House yesterday an interesting little commentary on the question of riots in connection with the Criminal Justice (Increase of Penalties) Bill, and it was pointed out that a riot in English law is really analysable into three processes—unlawful assembly, then rout, and then riot. I want to go back to the origin and cause of the riot. Where is the unlawful assembly? Where are these things concerted, and by what instigation? There is some kind of understanding that a disturbance shall take place, which results in a body of persons with long staves appearing in the streets, prepared to beat any one belonging to an opposing faction. I wish to know if the noble Earl has any information as to the sources of the disturbances.
Are they religious and proselytising or are they political, aimed at destroying members of the electorate of the opposition? Or are they of a wider character? That is to say, are they really disturbances got up for the purpose of criminal disorder, for the purpose of creating disorder in which there can be robbery or old grudges can be paid off?—because I have seen some indications in the communications from India that the Government of India are taking the view that there is now in Calcutta a large body of rather turbulent, disorderly and criminal people, who flock in from the country, prepared for any kind of disorder and disturbance. Therefore it seems possible that those are the three sources of the instigation of these riots and I shall be glad if the noble Earl has been able to discern and diagnose in what respect those various causes contribute. I will say no more upon the question of disturbances. I have indicated the points
296
on which I shall be very glad if we can have information.
Finally, the noble Earl will, I hope, be able to tell us something with regard to what I may call strictly the political situation. When the noble Earl last addressed your Lordships on the subject of India he made a very straightforward and in my opinion a very proper and liberal statement of his position with regard to the constitutional questions. I had urged that the Government should take into consideration at an early date, in view of the Report of the Muddiman Committee, the question whether the Constitution could not be made more workable, because it was obvious on the face of it that there were elements of that Constitution which really it was almost impossible to work for the purposes for which, and in the spirit in which, it was unquestionably designed. My colleagues in the late Government and myself, in all the public utterances and writings which we have given vent to on this subject, have invariably taken the view that although there might be unsatisfactory features in the. Montagu-Chelmsford Constitution the best policy for the Nationalist Party in India was to go in and make the best of them, that by doing so they would be able to use the existing Constitution for such purposes as it could be used for, and that bona fide co-operation in its working would be the best demonstration and the best test of those elements in which it was really defective and unworkable.
In response to that the noble Earl said that the question of the further consideration of this matter was entirely open, but that for his part he urged that there should be responsive co-operation and that the best service which Indian Nationalists could do to their country was to co-operate responsibly in working the present Constitution. That was a perfectly fair demand to make. I should be very glad if the noble Earl can tell us whether there has really been any material response to that and whether he sees in the present situation any signs of encouragement that the response will go on. That is the point upon which I should be glad if he can give us some information. I am not moving for Papers. I have raised this Question simply for the pur-

297
pose of eliciting information for your Lordships, and possibly others of your Lordships will contribute further inquiry upon subjects on which they desire information.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD): My Lords, the noble Lord, following his usual very courteous and I think very convenient practice, acquainted me with the particular questions upon which he desired information. I am therefore, as a preliminary to the few general observations that I shall find it proper to make, able to deal so far as I can with the inter-rogations which the noble Lord has put to me. First in the order of his questions I will place that which he addressed to me with reference to the coercive action taken against the Bengali terrorists. I have never concealed my view that the whole country, and indeed the Empire, owes a considerable debt to the Labour Government at the moment, when the noble Lord discharged the responsibility which I undertake to-day for the courageous action which, acting in concert with the late Viceroy, Lord Reading, they undertook. I inherited that policy from the noble Lord as hereditas perhaps damnosa, but certainly necessary, and I have attempted in this particular matter to carry on the policy which the noble Lord bequeathed to me and in the wisdom of which I was, and am, entirely acquiescent.
I will now give the noble Lord the information on that point for which he asks. At the end of 1924 there had been made 46 arrests under the Regulation of 1818 and 65 under the Ordinance of 1924. Pram that date up to June 30, 1926, there have been 42 further arrests, of which one was under the Regulation and the rest were under the Ordinance or the Act which continued the Ordinance. Nineteen of these were made after October 1 last year. The noble Lord is naturally anxious to know how these 153 captives have been treated, and I will give that information. Of the 47 State prisoners under the Regulation, 31 have been transferred to detention under the Ordinance—a step which I know meets with the approval of the noble Lord, and which was taken so that they might be domiciled in villages instead of being confined
298
in gaols. The remaining 16 are still in prison. I have, therefore, to account for 137 prisoners under the Ordinance and the Act of 1925, that is to say, 65 arrested in 1924, 41 arrested later, and 31 transferred from being State prisoners. Of these, only 59 are now in gaol; 54 are required to live in specified villages other than their own homes; 12 are obliged to live in their own homes; 9 have been released: one killed himself; and two have been convicted of ordinary offences under the law and are undergoing normal sentences. There were thus on June 30 of this year 125 persons remaining under control under the Act of 1925.
I may be told—though I doubt whether I shall be told from any responsible source—that nine releases are very few. But I have to remind the House that within the period covered by the brief survey I have attempted there have been many incidents which must make any Government cautious in its decisions. Some members of the conspiracy have been discovered in possession of a technically very complete apparatus for forging currency notes, others have been convicted of dealing in smuggled weapons with Chinamen—a purpose which seems remote from any legitimate aspirations; nine of them were convicted of conspiracy and the possession, for purposes of that conspiracy in or near Calcutta, of revolvers, cartridges, bombs, and chemicals; and a tenth, an associate of the nine, of being concerned in importing arms from overseas. These ten men after conviction, in the Alipur Gaol, murdered a police officer who had done special service in fighting this terror. As long as I discharge these responsibilities I am not, in the face of these facts, much moved by criticisms of my conduct in hesitating to release or advise the release of men belonging to such associations.
But the Government of India has throughout, in my judgment, exhibited in this matter every quality of reasonableness. It has shown itself ready to use clemency whore clemency is safe. It has, for instance, lately remitted the remainder of the sentence on five men convicted in the years 1913 and 1916 of offences committed under the direction of these same organisations, and the only condition attached to the remission was that the convicts should keep clear of the terrorist movement and report imme-

299
diately to authority any attempt made to draw them into it. Moreover, I think I ought to add that seven of the nine releases have been made in the three months from February to April of this year and the process of transfer from gaols to villages is always in progress. It is, therefore, I think quite clear, and will be so to the noble Lord, that each case is under constant examination and that detention is not extended beyond the time and the degree required. I have only to add upon this particular matter that the present Viceroy is fully acquainted with my views in this matter and will, I am sure, take such action or make such inquiries or proposals as may seem to his Government to be desirable and not to be dangerous to the public.
I will deal next with the question which the noble Lord put to me with reference to the Sikh disturbances. The prolonged struggle over the management of Sikh gurdwaras, which had at one time the unfortunate effect of putting a large body in that community in open strife with the Government, has at last been terminated, we may hope, by the enactment of a law passed without any opposition for controlling Sikh endowments and religious property in the Punjab. So far as I can judge at this distance from the scene, only a few irreconcilables are still fighting against the will of their leaders, being bent on keeping the grievance open and preventing the peace which might be expected to follow the settlement and the release, upon promise of co-operation, of almost all the men who were under trial for their acts of lawlessness during the agitation. We may, therefore, I feel sure, safely congratulate the Governor of the Province on the success with which he and his officers have contributed to this happy ending, if I am not too sanguine in seeing in the restoration of order an end of the crisis which has occasioned great anxiety not only to the Government of India but to the Government of this country.
Now I approach a graver topic to which the noble Lord has specifically requested my attention. It is that of the outbreak of renewed communal disturbance in an embittered and violent form in so many different parts of India. It would indeed be true to say that this
300
recrudescence has been the most marked circumstance to which I ought to draw attention now, twelve months almost to a week since I last addressed your Lordships upon the general topic of Indian affairs. When I made my first speech as Secretary of State there was no alarming situation so far as the bitterness of communal disturbance was concerned, and quite other topics engaged almost the whole of the speech to which I found it necessary to ask the attention of your Lordships. In the last twelve months undoubtedly there has been a renewal in the bitterest form of disturbances, violence and bloodshed, which must always occasion the deepest anxiety to those who are charged with the responsibility for order and good government in India.
The noble Lord invited me to a somewhat profound and difficult analysis of this topic. I will certainly not refuse as far as I can, though fully conscious of its difficulties, to afford to the noble Lord any assistance which it is in my power to give in the researches which he has recently made upon this subject. But, if I sought for hours by every ingenuity of speech of which I could make myself the master to explain what is fundamental in British policy upon this matter, I could not equal or in any way attempt to discharge my task so completely as by citing the famous passage from Queen Victoria's Proclamation on the assumption, in 1858, of the Government of India by the Crown—a great and memorable moment. If your Lordships will be so patient, the passage is not long and I will read it, because it is expressive of the spirit and the only spirit in which the government of India, in so far as it duties are undertaken in this country, is approached:—
"Firmly relying Ourselves on the truth of Christianity, and acknowledging with gratitude the solace of Religion, We disclaim alike the Right and the Desire to impose Our Convictions on any of Our Subjects. We declare it to be Our Royal Will and Pleasure that none be in any wise favoured, none molested or disquieted by Reason of their Religions Faith or Observances, but that all shall alike enjoy the equal and impartial protection of the Law: and We do strictly charge and enjoin all those who may be in authority under Us that they abstain from all interference with the Religious Belief or Worship of any of Our Subjects on pain of our highest Displeasure."

301
That alone was, and is, the high purpose with which those who have responsibility in the Government of India and those who have responsibility in this country approached what surely has front time to time proved one of the most difficult problems which in the East have ever baffled and perplexed Western civilisation
An observation falls to be made upon the circumstance that it should have been found necessary to make these matters so plain seventy years ago. Its inclusion in the Proclamation reminds us that seventy years ago, no less than to-day, the possibility of antagonism based upon differences of religious view was one of the live and formidable issues which the Administration of that date had to face, for the disclaimer in the first sentence of the passage which I have road (though no doubt fears had been expressed of an official proselytising Christianity and, indeed, were in part the cause of the Mutiny) was not the main, and certainly not the most important, purpose of the announcement; but it was nevertheless thought prudent to explain what was the view taken by the British Government of that day on these matters.
Having regard to the fact that on the Continent of Europe even toleration is a plant of comparatively recent, and not even yet of too robust a growth, it would be astonishing if it were a well-established rule of life in India, where, moreover, it must constantly be remembered, the conflict lies, not as it has lain in Europe through the centuries between doctrinally separated sects of the followers of Christ, but between the adherents of two fundamentally different and in many respects opposite systems of religion, whose religious differences practically—and this is the gravity of the point—are conterminous with racial differences.
The superficial grounds for friction between the Hindu and the Moslem in the practice of their respective rites are obvious and well known. It is sufficient for us only to mention the duty enjoined at certain festivals to engage in animal sacrifices, with a particular preference for the sacrifice of oxen, and to contrast this with the Hindu's passionate conviction of the sanctity of that animal and the unutterable sacrilege involved in causing its
302
violent death. Or you may take the Hindu's duty to worship idols and contrast it with the Moslem abhorrence of any action or practice savouring of idolatry. Or again, you may examine the boisterous rites which form so conspicuous an element in much of the Hindu worship with the solemnity of Moslem prayer. Nor, indeed, can the Moslem be expected to forget that the Raj—which the British Raj displaced not so very long ago in the immemorial memories of the East—was a Moslem Raj, and that with the collapse of the Mogul Empire the followers of his creed in India have fallen, for reasons it would take me too long to analyse here. They have fallen from a condition of political domination to that of a minority which is at a clear disadvantage in the competitive struggle for existence under modern conditions not merely in the matter of numbers, but also, and more markedly, of efficiency in the political field. In the old days of paternal administration, when the British Government was in fact as in name the father and the mother of its Indian subjects, this status of the backward child caused the Moslem no great concern. He was content to trust to parental impartiality to see that he received reasonable treatment the Hindu quickly realised that an happen to him when, if ever, the state of pupilage came to an end had not emerged in his mind into the field of practical polities.
In these conditions religious or communal antagonisms have always been one of the causes which have tended to lead to riots or to mob violence in India and, naturally, the tendency has been greatest on those occasions when the revolutions of the Moslem calendar have brought together into one season the chief feast and fast of the two creeds—a condition which happily only recurs at intervals of about thirty years—or, again, when Hindu marriage processions, with their attendant music, happen to collide with Moslem mourning processions or even disturb Moslem worshippers in their mosques; or, again, when the Hindus of a village have combined to endeavour to prevent the cow sacrifices of the Bakr-Id.
Although during the last forty years there have been several occasions on which Hindu-Moslem conflicts have been on a serious scale leading to a consider-

303
able loss of life, it is on the whole true to say that until the last five years their occurrence has been sporadic and, with one exception, probably fortuitous. And when I say fortuitous in this connection, I mean not the result of organisation. The exception which I have in my mind was the serious cow-killing riots of 1893 in the eastern districts of the United Provinces and in Bihar, which seem to have been due, if you examine their intensity and scope, to propaganda of the curious native-Indian kind which has sometimes, though rarely, proved to be recurrent in Indian history. If I may make my summary of this period complete, I would say that the Pax Britannica and the watchful care of the police and magistracy were, in co-operation, adequate to keep in check the mob-violence which proceeded from this particular cause no less than that which proceeded from the other chief cause for organised violence in India—disputes about the ownership of land.
Such was the condition of affairs in this matter, as I read the history of the period, until the War; though even before the War signs had not been wanting that the Mahomedan had begun to realise, some years before 1914, that the political future of India was not static and that he could no longer afford to leave the political future of his own community to the care of chance and of a benevolent and unprejudiced Government Hitherto he had consistently declined to associate with the Congress, and indeed had held rather conspicuously aloof from political agitation of all kinds. But in 1906, with the Morley-Minto reforms looming into sight, he took the first steps towards forming his own Congress—the All-India Moslem League—and in October, 1906, a deputation of the principal men of the community, headed by the Aga Khan, obtained from Lord Minto an assurance that the Moslem community was entitled to separate representation on the Councils and, by reason of its political importance, to representation greater than mere numerical proportions could justify—a promise or admission, not to be disputed because it is indisputable, to which the community has grappled itself as to a sheet anchor ever since.
Two years of the War and of the Indian sacrifice of life and treasure involved were sufficient to produce in
304
India, as they produced elsewhere, much ferment of ideas in men's minds, and when it was known that changes must be looked for in the system of government the Hindu quickly realised that an essential condition of successful political activity in this direction was that he should carry the Moslem with him in his demands. He realised, too, that this condition could not be secured unless the two communities could come to terms as to their respective claims to representation. Hence the much advertised "Lucknow Pact" of Christmas, 1916, which was an agreement between the All-India Congress Committee and the Committee of the All-India Moslem League to give Mahomedan minorities in certain Provinces enhanced representation in Legislatures and other elected bodies at the expense of the Mahomedan majorities in Bengal and the Punjab. Hence also the apparent agreement of advanced Hindu and Mahomedan opinion upon the Congress-League scheme of reform which was formulated as the demands of United India for political advance in almost the same month of the same year.
But the Lucknow Pact of 1916, like Mr. C. R. Das's more recent Bengal Pact, brought with it not peace but a sword. A few months sufficed to show that the Moslem League was not unanimous as to the soundness of the policy of furthering the agitation for Swaraj, and that the advanced section was far from representing general opinion in the League and still less general Moslem opinion outside it. The Pact was attacked from both sides—by Hindus as an unjustified surrender to Moslem obstinacy and by Moslems as a wholly inadequate recognition of their claims—while the attempts which the more advanced Moslem leaders had made to persuade their followers to abandon the sacrifice of cattle (surely, I should have thought, a hopeless crusade) produced no response. Mean-while the fall of Baghdad in March, 1917, and other events in the War were greatly exercising Moslem opinion and providing material which the more extreme leaders were able subsequently to organise into what became known as the Khilafat movement.
In this tense state of opinion serious Hindu-Moslem riots occurred in September, 1917, in Bihar and the United Provinces, and again in March. 1918, when

305
the outbreaks, within your Lordships' recollection, at Khartarpur and Shahbad Were exceptionally violent. In September, 1918, again there were serious Hindu-Moslem disturbances in Calcutta, where fire-arms proved to be necessary in the hands of the police to restore order. With the termination of the War the Moslems found renewed cause of anxiety in the Peace terms for which at that period the Turkish nation was agitating, while the future of the Moslem Holy Places and the Khilafat continued equally to be agitated. Within six months from the date of the Armistice the feelings of both communities were lacerated by the measures taken to suppress the Punjab disturbances of April, 1919.
This was the situation—and I thought it worth while somewhat laboriously to read this to you—which gave Gandhi and the Ali brothers their opportunity. For the next three and a half years the non-co-operation campaign, though it was accompanied by widespread disorder and considerable bloodshed, united the two communities against the Government and diverted them from attacks upon each other, though even during this period there were communal disturbances at Agra and Pilibit and in Rangoon in the year 1920. Early in 1922 Gandhi, whose influence, as I read the history of those days, had been on the wane for some months, was incarcerated, and in September of that year the Mahomedans made violent assaults upon the Hindus in Multan. Since then hardly a month has passed without the occurrence somewhere—and quite often at several places simultaneously—of serious trouble, each out-break of which, not excluding, of course, the appalling Moplah rebellion, has left an increasing legacy of bitterness and, among the less responsible elements, a determination for reprisal.
It would be tedious, even if it were possible within any margin of time open to me, to enumerate the various platforms upon which during the last three years the leaders of both communities have expressed their abhorrence of these occurrences, and their recognition of what is, after all, a plain truism, that their occurrence is an insuperable bar to future political progress. Yet, at the same time that these admissions have been made, responsible persons in both communities have been either fostering, or
306
at all events not discouraging, a kind of militant revivalism on the part of their co-religionists, the first result of which is effectively to prevent any return to tolerance and harmony and which inevitably means reaction in the outlook of both communities. It is, in consequence, impossible to deny that the present state of communal relations is—to some extent which I cannot precisely define; but I make the affirmation quite plainly—connived in by the leaders of the two communities, and this circumstance involves a distinction as novel as it is sinister between the out-breaks of to-day and the outbreaks of the early period.
It would, therefore, in my judgment, be untrue, for the reasons that I have given, to deny all connection between the reforms and the present state of tension between Hindu and Moslem. But at the same time it is a grossly inadequate explanation to attribute it either to the existence of the reforms or to their nature. The historical sketch that I have hurriedly attempted should be sufficient to dispose of that conception. So far as a tangible cause can be assigned—attempting the analysis to which the noble Lord invited me—it is to be found in the general unsettlement of ideas and of material conditions which followed in the wake of the War and which gave—for good or for ill; who knows?—its final quietus to the system of paternal government which the British Government had carried to high perfection during the preceding half century, and which thereby led the component elements of the Indian population, Hindu and Moslem, Brahmin and non-Brahmin, landlord and tenant, outcast and caste-man, to take stock of their new position in relation to their neighbours, and to insist with growing and particular vehemence on their own rights and claims.
It is, no doubt, true that the system of communal representation upon which the present—as was the last—Indian electoral system is based tends to stereotype this particular line of cleavage, but there is not the slightest ground for the assertion that, had Parliament insisted, in the teeth of the violent opposition which would have been aroused, in framing the reforms of 1919 without that feature, the relations between Hindu

307
and Moslem would have become more amicable than of late they have been. The strong probability, almost the certainty, is that they would have become much more violently embittered. One result of the democratic ideals disseminated in India as elsewhere as the outcome of the War—that vague and devastating post-War sentiment to which we owe so much disaster—was the realisation that the principle of majority rule has now to be reckoned with, and that in politics, as in warfare, victory tends to lie with the big battalions. To this, I am sure, is due the proselytising tendencies which both communities have so markedly shown during the past three years.
I regretted a little that the noble Lord—whose language has been so moderate in the years in which I have held this trust and whose attitude in this House and elsewhere has invariably been so helpful—should have used an expression which, unless I misunderstood him, indicated the view that there had been in the past years some partiality or predilection, on behalf either of the Government of India or the Government here—
LORD OLIVIER: May I interrupt? Is the noble Earl referring to anything that I said in my speech?
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: No, I was referring to a letter that the noble Lord wrote, and if the noble Lord tells me that the construction that I place upon it is wrong I will not add another word on the topic, because I do not desire—why should I?—to pursue it. I will tell the noble Lord quite plainly what I have in my mind. I read an interesting letter which the noble Lord contributed to The Times, and I certainly placed upon it this construction—and he will tell me whether I was right or wrong—that the Government of India or the Government here had in the past few years shown some partiality to the Moslem in this long rivalry which I have attempted historically to reconstruct to-day. I do not often make mistakes on such points, and I should be surprised if the noble Lord disputed the estimate that I have formed of the impression which he desired to give. I would assure your Lordships and the noble Lord that it really is not true. The noble Lord
308
would certainly not advance the claim that, while he was Secretary of State for India, he showed any preference for the Moslems as against the Hindus. The noble Lord, so far as my information extends—and I have access to many documents—was scrupulously impartial between both communities, as was his duty. Nor, indeed, do I think that the noble Lord will charge against me, in anything that I have said or anything that I have done, any deviation from the same exact standard of impartiality.
Of this I am certain, that the noble Lord would be the last man in the world to say this of those who have been Viceroys through that time, of Lord Reading, whom we welcome here to-day in this House, and who discharged so many important duties and confronted so many great anxieties during his Vice-royalty. No one, I am sure—certainly not the noble Lord—would say of him that any such partiality was ever exhibited. As for the present Viceroy, whose elevated speech on these topics, couched in high and noble language, has made, I believe, a profound impression in India and breathed in every sentence the highest conceptions of idealism, which have run like a golden thread through the whole of our historic associations with this peninsula—certainly the noble Lord will not accuse him of that partiality.
I affirm plainly two things. In the first place, there never has been a moment when the Government of India has addressed itself to these difficult questions in any spirit except that of holding the scales equally, justly and impartially between the disputants. And I affirm in the second place—and this is not less important—that Moslems and Hindus alike realise this truth, and it may interest your Lordships to know—I give you no precise figures, though I could do so if time served—that over and over again, when there has been the gravest alarm because of the recrudescence of these outbreaks, both parties have approached the British authorities and asked that they should send representatives to deal with the disturbances that have arisen. I could afford your Lordships many striking illustrations, some of them couched in very dramatic language, of this circumstance.

309
No, my Lords, there has been in our past no partiality. There will be no partiality, nor do I think it even worth while to make more than a passing observation upon an even baser charge which has been made. It is the charge that the Government of India, or we in this country, do not contemplate with disfavour the accession to our anxieties which these disturbances produce. Indeed, the expression has been quoted, as if it were part of our policy, Divide Little have they studied the history of our association with India if they think that it was in that spirit that we have discharged the responsibilities into which we almost accidentally drifted. Little indeed, upon a wider stage, have they appreciated the political genius of this nation, which has created and maintained that loose and amazing structure the British Empire,, if they think it was by petty and squalid maxims of this kind, by low and cunning tricks, that our forefathers established, and those who came after maintained, and we still discharge, our inherited duties.
Does any sensible or experienced person believe that we who are trustees of order in that sub-continent—does any one believe that it can reflect anything but discredit upon our fiduciary duties if we cannot even induce those who live with us there to maintain order and avoid violence and bloodshed? The power which is responsible in India has nothing but discredit to reap from the spread of these disorders, and if I have even thought it necessary to say a word upon this topic it is because it has been brought to our notice quite recently that these defamatory charges still continue to be made by those who ought to know, and in my suspicion do know better.
LORD OLIVIER: If the noble Earl has finished with that passage, I shall have to ask him at the conclusion of the debate to allow me to say a word in reply.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: I should gladly have given way if the noble Lord had told me that I had misconceived the object of his observations, and I should not have pursued the topic.
LORD OLIVIER: To interrupt the noble Earl while he was in full career would have been a little difficult.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: I shall be glad to listen, as I am sure your Lordships will, to any observations which the noble Lord wishes to make on the subject. He asked me to deal with another specific subject, and that was the Punjab Commission's Report on the gaols. He is correct in saying that on an earlier discussion I had not full information, and I do not think the noble Lord himself had. I ought, I think, frankly to deal with the matter. Attention was publicly drawn to the treatment of prisoners in Punjab gaols by some allegations made in the newspaper Bande Mataram in October, 1923, that prisoners in the Multan Gaol were subjected to indignities and cruelties, notably those of "Gidar Kut." It was alleged that there was indiscriminate beating by convict warders. A suit for defamation was brought against the newspaper by the gaoler, and the Court of the Sub-Judge awarded him nominal damages, but held the greater part of the libel to be true.
The case formed the subject of the Motion which the noble Lord made in the month of August, 1925. Thereafter, with my concurrence, a Committee was appointed by the Punjab Government in November last to inquire into the allegations of the practice of unauthorised punishments and indulgences in the Punjab gaols and generally into the state of discipline among the staff and inmates and the adequacy and effectiveness of the supervision over both and proposed remedies for defects and the means of stopping the malpractices. The Committee consisted of a member of the Indian Civil Service, Mr. Lumsden, an Indian Judge of the Lahore High Court, and an Indian barrister. The Committee reported in the early spring of this year, and some of its findings were, I confess, of a very disquieting character. The most important of its general conclusions was that unauthorised punishments were frequently awarded and that there was ample evidence of the existence of unauthorised indulgences. It stated that the discipline of the gaols visited was merely superficial, and while various causes of this were set out, the root cause was held to be that a prisoner could, by mere payment of money, provide himself

311
with all sorts of luxuries. It was also stated that overcrowding was prevalent and that various improvements of the staff were needed, while the classification of prisoners was found to be defective.
It was naturally agreed between myself and the Viceroy that this was a Report which ought to be published. It was so published on May 28, the Resolution of the Punjab Government being published at the same time showing the action taken or contemplated upon the Report. While warning has been issued against unauthorised punishments and indulgences, the Punjab Government recognises that radical measures for the improvement of the supervising and executive agencies in the gaols are necessary. I imagine that the noble Lord has read that Report. Unless he has any doubt as to the completeness and the drastic character of the recommendations made I do not think it necessary to pursue the topic in detail, but the Viceroy is in complete agreement with the Secretary of State that almost all those recommendations must be carried out, and I am sure that the noble Lord will realise that those who have been responsible have realised how grave was the state of affairs disclosed and that every conceivable step that can be taken to set that particular house in order will be taken.
Now I approach the last topic but one with which I must shortly deal. The noble Lord asked me whether I have any observations to make on the subject of our relations with Afghanistan and the Amir. For many generations this topic has been one of delicacy and of difficulty, and I must deal with it as so important a topic in our foreign affairs must be dealt with by any Minister even though he be the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and with an infinitely greater degree of caution when he who addresses your Lordships has no such responsibility. In the first place, let me say that our relations with the Amir continue to be of the most friendly character and I take this opportunity of saying with as much formality as I can that the excellence of the relations which at this moment subsist between that Monarch and ourselves is in no small measure due to the tact and ability which have been shown by Sir Francis Humphrys, our representative in Afghanistan. He has indeed deserved
312
well of this country. Many changes have taken place in Afghanistan and in the general character of the problems jointly founded upon Afghanistan which have from time to time engaged the attention of British Governments. But this at least I may make plain. The concern of Great Britain and India in Afghanistan is not less than it was in 1885. It is not less than it was in 1907, when it brought us to an agreement with Russia, or in 1921, when we made a Treaty of good neighbourliness with Afghanistan. If such interests as we have in Afghanistan were ever seriously threatened we should not, I believe, find ourselves without the means of safeguarding them.
Now I have only one subject upon which the noble Lord invited me to make some observations. He spoke in kindly terms of the observations I made a year ago upon the subject of the effect, as far as it was clearly discernible at that period, of the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms. The noble Lord did me no more than justice when he said it was my purpose in speaking a year ago to exorcise, as far as any words of mine could do it, the spirit of distrust which had misguided and perverted so many intelligent men into an attempt to make the Constitution absolutely unworkable. That was a strange mood for a nation to pass through. It could, indeed, be made the subject of debatable argument either that the constitutional reforms went too far or that the constitutional reforms did not go far enough; but it surely was a strange policy for those who held that the reforms had not gone far enough to render, if they could, ridiculous and futile that which had been given in an experiment which was certainly one of the most novel and one of the boldest that any country, the centre of an Empire, had ever, in my reading of human history, attempted. But such was the strange fact to which we had to accommodate ourselves. There was no method of dealing with the difficulties which emerged except by reliance upon the precautionary measures which we had not omitted to introduce into the legislation which gave the Constitution. And so the attempt to destroy and render ridiculous the Constitution failed.
But when I spoke a year ago, I plainly indicated that, so far at least as I was concerned—and so far as I could read

313
the minds of my colleagues, I believe it would have been true also of them—we were always open to conversion and to conviction if and when we saw among the men, able men, who take part in politics in India a genuine desire to make the best of the existing Constitution. We did not, indeed, ever desire, expect, or invite that they should say it was the Constitution which satisfied them. We never asked them to deprive themselves of any one of the legitimate rights of an ordinary Parliamentary opposition, if they chose in bitter invective to disparage the adequacy of that which we had given them. After all, bitter invective has been used in many Western Parliaments without doing any one any particular harm. But it was, indeed, futile to expect that we should treat a general scheme of non-co-operation, which carried in its womb the clear determination to wreck the Constitution which, with painful construction, had been formed in this country—that we should treat this as a claim for making prematurely, according to the terms of that Constitution itself, changes and developments in it. Well, if anybody expected that of an English Government he had indeed given inattentive study to the history of the British people.
What I said a year ago I say again to-day, subject only to one observation which I will presently make. I do believe that I discern to-day a realisation in many quarters in India not lacking in influence that this policy was ill-conceived, that it was predestined to failure, that it is failing, if it has not already failed, and I think that I see, though neither confidently nor dogmatically do I proclaim it, the growth of a realisation that the only sensible and patriotic course to follow at the moment, for a citizen of India who believes that there are potential qualities which will one day make the inhabitants of that country qualified to take in hand their own responsible destinies, is one of sympathetic co-operation with those in this country who have asked for sympathetic co-operation and for nothing else.
I said that the observations that I made upon this point must be read with a single caution. I have already spoken at considerable length upon the existence of communal disturbance in India. It is necessary to bring that topic into relation
314
with the subject with which I am at this moment concerned. You cannot divorce one from the other. And, indeed, even those who are most enthusiastic in the belief that the date fixed in the constitutional instrument for the revision of that Constitution ought to be accelerated—they, I think, themselves cannot be blind to the relevance of that other topic to which I have adverted. It is plain that any impartial and competent tribunal that was set up in order to revise the Constitution, in order to advise Parliament as to whether the powers already conceded should be extended or not, must be most vitally affected by the question: What at the present moment is the relationship between these two great dominant sects? Is it of such a kind as to suggest that at this moment it would be wise in their own interest and in relation to their own desires to accelerate the moment at which a decision fraught with consequences so grave and perhaps so durable should be taken?
Therefore, on all these grounds, I am brought back to the topic which, indeed, has principally engaged me in the course of the observations for which I have asked your Lordships' indulgence. Not only for the credit of the Empire, but in the very interest which they most loudly profess, those who have an influence in both communities would be, indeed, well advised if they set their house in order by composing their bitter differences. If they enable those of us who would gladly restore better and kindlier feelings with all sections of Indian thought to put forward a case which would have some element of plausibility for that acceleration of the statutory date, they would do a great service to that cause in which they vehemently believe and they would at the same time render it easier for those of us who in this country and in India have responsibility, to restore a kindlier and friendlier basis to our mutual relations.
THE MARQUESS OF READING: My Lords, I trust that it may not be thought inopportune that I should at the present moment, occupying a position of greater freedom and less responsibility with regard to India, make some observations, although they will necessarily be brief especially after the speech of my noble friend the Secretary of State

315
and the very exhaustive examination that he has made into the causes, in particular, of the Hindu-Moslem disturbances. I should have troubled you but for a moment or two had it not been that I was deeply concerned at noting a disposition in a quarter from which I least expected it to attribute favouritism on the part of British officialism, as the phrase was.
LORD OLIVIER: My Lords, if the noble Marquess is going into that point I think, if your Lordships will allow me, I had better reply at once to the question raised by the noble Earl. I am in a position of some difficulty because the noble Earl referred to something which was written in The Times and I have not with me the extracts from The Times to which he referred. But the noble Earl stated, and I gather that the noble Marquess was also taking the same view, that I had imputed to the Government of India that it had exercised favouritism in its dealings as between Moslems and Hindus. I have made no such suggestion and I entirely disclaim any feeling or belief to that effect. I am perfectly confident that every official has set himself and every Government of India has deliberately and of set policy set itself to deal fairly as between those two communities. I make no such charge and it never entered my mind to make such a charge.
Having said that much, I am rather under the obligation of dealing, and I hope very slightly, with what I actually did say. May I say that I may perhaps have used words which, had I had an opportunity of revising the proof of my letter, I might have modified slightly. But what I did say—and it is based upon what I have heard from a great many Englishmen who have served in India and from a great many Indians who have a very good reputation in India—was that there is an official bias in favour of the Mahomedan community. I did not in the slightest degree mean that there was a bias which was exhibited in the action of the Government of the country. What I meant—and this is more or less an impression which I have received, as I say, from what Englishmen have told me and what Indians have told me—was that the British official classes, both civil and military, in India have a higher appreciation of the virtues of the
316
Mahomedan section of the population than they generally feel about the Hindus. I wrote a further letter to The Times in which I hoped that I had made that clear. I think the grounds of sympathy are what I would call the martial and other virtues and many otter grounds of sympathy. I do think it is a fair statement to make that predominantly Englishmen who serve in India have a higher appreciation of the Moslem community and think them more capable of dominion than they think the Hindus and especially the Bengalis are. That is what I meant by official bias.
There is another thing to which I wish to refer. The noble Earl referred to the suggestion—I do not know whether he imputed it to me—that the Government of India had followed out the policy of Divide et impera. I did not make that suggestion at all; but the feeling which I had encountered and which I had underlined in my mind in that letter was something of which I will give you an example. When the Hindu-Moslem pact was made it was a pact which strengthened the probability of an advance towards Swaraj policy in India. A very large number of persons, officials and others in India, regard the advance towards the self-governing Swaraj policy as a movement deleterious to British interests in India, and I say confidently that when the Hindu-Moslem pact broke up there was a considerable amount of satisfaction felt, and was expressed in what I may call the anti-Swaraj Press in India that the pact had broken up. I do not think it went further than that. I will not now go into the question of these faction fights, but there was a distinct satisfaction on the part of those persons both in this country and in India who were opposed to the Nationalist movement that the pact had broken up and that there should be political dissensions among those affected. I will not carry it further than that.
THE MARQUESS OF READING: I am sure your Lordships will have heard with pleasure and with some satisfaction the disclaimer on the part of the noble Lord of imputing anything in the nature of favouritism or of official bias for the Mahomedan interest or element in India. Whatever is said by the noble Lord as to his intention carries convic-

317
tion beyond all question, and I do not pause for a moment to discuss what was in his mind inasmuch as he has told us and that disposes of the matter. I am now only concerned with what the noble Lord said, not what, he intended, and not for the purpose of striving to cast the faintest doubt upon the noble Lord's meaning as intended by him, but in order that I may refute a statement in writing which appeared in a letter in The Times subscribed by one who had held the position of Secretary of State for India and whose words, therefore, carry great weight in India notwith-standing that he is not now in office.
If your Lordships will permit me, I will read his words in order that I may offer to your Lordships a few observations which I think it necessary to make and which I hope may be transmitted to India as my own views. This is the noble Lord's statement:—
"But there are other causes of the increasing faction fighting. No one with any close acquaintance of Indian affairs will be prepared to deny that on the whole there is a predominant bias in British officialism in Italia in favour of the Moslem community, partly on the ground of closer sympathy, but more largely as a make-weight against Hindu nationalism."
Now I cannot but think that the words, as used, although not so intended, will be of assistance to those extremists in India who are desirous of instilling into the minds of both Hindus and Moslems that there is undue favouritism, that there is official bias in the mind of the British official and that, consequently, a quality of administration upon which in my opinion we rightly pride ourselves, and especially in relation to India—that is, of justice and fairness to all irrespective of creed or race—has ceased to be practised. It becomes necessary that I should tell your Lordships that this is a charge—not in these words, of course, not so moderately framed or so carefully qualified as the noble Lord's observation in the letter to The Times—frequently made against the Government of India; consequently, also, against the Government of this country. My noble friend in a few observations dealt with the charge—and, as he rightly said, it merited but slight notice—that these communal disturbances were instigated very often by British officials or for British interests. Throughout the five years of my life in India I not only most
318
carefully watched but sought every opportunity of ascertaining whether there was the slightest foundation for this charge, and I never found even the merest breath of evidence to support it.
I am not now criticising what the noble Lord intended to say. I am dealing with the spirit that underlies it and with the sense in which it will be understood until this disclaimer of the noble Lord is read. I hope it will be transmitted to India and understood by those who will not have lost time in taking advantage of an observation of this character.
LORD OLIVIER: I do not think there was anything in what I wrote which could have suggested—
NOBLE LORDS: Order, order.
LORD OLIVIER: May I give an explanation? I do not think there was anything in what I wrote that could have suggested that I had the idea that any British official had ever instigated any riot.
THE MARQUESS OF READING: I did not mean to suggest that. I quite agree. I do not think the words convey that, but they go near it when it is said that on the whole there is a predominant bias in British officialism in India in favour of the Moslem community and when, at the same time, it is known that there is an extremist section in India very adept at reading meanings into language which we in England did not intend to convey. From this very language they will argue—I can almost see the articles penned upon it or hear the speeches which will be made in consequences of it—"This proves what we have said—namely, that there is an official bias." And, of course, it is not a very far step to instigating or conniving in some form or other at the Hindu-Moslem disturbances. Because of my life for five years, and because of my knowledge that every word used by any one in authority in this country is liable sometimes to innocent misconception or misinterpretation—unfortunately also sometimes, to deliberate misconception and misinterpretation—I have been anxious that it should be made quite plain in your Lordships' House what the noble Lord meant to convey by the language he used.

319
I also desired, speaking as one who was the head of the Government of India during five years, to give my testimony that I might refute any such suggestion or insinuation from any quarter and to assert—as I do beyond all possibility of doubt—that there is no truth in the suggestion. May I say, not in reference to the noble Lord, who has told us what he meant, but in reference to charges or suggestions in India—that I doubt very much whether you who are listening to this debate realise to the full how insidious these suggestions are. The mind of the Oriental is very subtle. He is not accustomed to put into plain, precise language exactly what he means and to mean nothing more. He is rather in the habit of finding meanings which may not have been intended, and would baffle perhaps any of us. Therefore I thought it desirable to make these observations upon a matter which might seriously affect British rule in India.
I do not intend to travel over the same ground as my noble and learned friend. I am glad that I shall have the opportunity of studying it hereafter and understanding the causes of the present Hindu-Moslem disturbances. If I were to add anything, it would merely be to say, what perhaps is already implied in some part of his observations on the later period, that the growth of Hindu societies and Mahomedan societies has tended to promote these disturbances and to intensify them. I recall a passage I read in some observations of my noble friend Lord Sinha, who speaks with special knowledge on this subject and who is himself inclined to attribute much of the present tension to the foundation of those societies. I will not go into detail with regard to them; it would take too long. Sufficient be it to say that there are leaders of political thought among Hindus who are leaders of the Hindu societies and there are leaders of Mahomedan political thought who are leaders of the Mahomedan societies. The result is societies formed with the avowed object of increasing the strength, influence and authority of a particular religion. The adherents of that religion become members of these societies for the very purpose of augmenting the power of their creed.
320
I do not wish to travel further into this subject, save that I would ask if any one, not here but in India, still thinks that British officialism or officials are interested in fostering Hindu-Moslem disturbances. I would ask, of what advantage it is to the British Government, or to the Government of India, or to the civil servant, or to the military officers who have perhaps to take part in these disturbances. I may deal with the civil servant in a word. His duty is to preserve peace. His objective is that he may have a clean sheet to hand to his Government. His main desire is to avoid trouble, and necessarily so. He is there for the purpose of preserving order and of doing all he can for peaceful administration. So far as he is concerned, if there is any trouble it means not only grave responsibility for him if the conditions become serious, but it means endless agitation and excitement and he may not be quite sure that he will emerge successfully from the difficulties—stupendous difficulties sometimes—he has had to encounter.
Of the military officer I suppose there is no greater truth than that he detests having to intervene in civil disturbances. He does it because it is his duty. He is called upon to perform it, he takes his part and he strives to do it as well as he can. The one indisputable feature that I have found in India was that the military officers exercised this very unpleasant duty when called upon with the greatest restraint, and only took steps by virtue of the position they occupied when there was no other course open if peace was to be preserved or a disturbance was to be set at rest. The military officer has an additional anxiety as to what is to happen if he has taken a step which may have involved loss of life. He has to trust, and rightly trust, to the authorities at the head of the Government to see that when he does his duty he is properly protected from all responsibility that may hereafter ensue.
I need not take up your Lordships' time as to the position of the Government of India. I speak there with knowledge, inasmuch as I was familiar with all that happened in the Government of India of any importance. I pass from the reference with the observation

321
that never during the whole of the time I was entrusted with the responsibilities of India have I seen a charge that was even worth examining, in relation to officials of the Government of India or of the Provinces, of having done anything which was unfair, or of having shown a bias either to the one creed or the other, or of having taken any step which could by the greatest stretch of imagination be described, as conniving at or wilfully shutting their eyes to any disturbances about to be created. I hope your Lordships will forgive me for having taken up your time on this subject. It may be perhaps that I feel more strongly on it than you would understand, for the reason that I know how serious is an insinuation or suggestion of this kind when it travels about amongst ignorant people in India in the villages, in the mofussil as it is called, and in various districts where, there is need of spreading the light.
May I take the opportunity that presents itself to me of a reference to one of the most gallant men I have eves met in my life? Your Lordships are aware that unfortunately some months ago Commandant Handyside, of the North-West Frontier, lost his life in one of the many encounters he had with tribal raiders. It was not more than a few days before I left India that I went to Peshawar and the North-West Frontier for a last visit. On that occasion I met him again. I must not detain you with a recital of his various exploits; he was a marvellous man, whose courage, resourcefulness, magnanimity and highmindedness were loved and admired throughout the North-West Frontier and by the tribes against whom he had to act almost as much as by the tribes with whom he was for the time being associated.
I ventured to say to him, knowing his history, that it was time he gave up going out himself. He was then at the head of the Frontier Constabulary. I suggested that he should content himself with giving directions, and that he had run enough risks in his life. His answer was: "Well, I do not think I could ever refrain from going if the opportunity came." I regret to say it was not many days after that he met his death in one of these raids. I was glad to read the observations made by the Under-Secretary of State in
322
another place, and I could not resist the opportunity of paying my own testimony to one for whom I, in conjunction with all those who came in contact with him on the North-West Frontier of India, had great admiration.
On the general situation it is not uninteresting to consider how the experiment—as it was called—made by Parliament in 1919, which began to take effect in 1921 when the reforms were first inaugurated in India, has stood the test of time. It is far too late to discuss this question at any length, but I desire to state to your Lordships that when I went, to India in 1921 I was not too sure that this new system of government would be capable of working. I was charged with the special mandate of setting it on its feet, of piloting it, so far as I could, and helping it on its way. That was part of my instructions.
I have had anxious times in connection with the reforms. I have had to use the emergency powers vested in me by Parliament as Viceroy and Governor-General. I took the view, from all I had read and from all I knew, that these powers were given, not for the purpose of being looked at, but in order that they might be used if the emergencies occurred; and, when these happened, I felt bound, in certain cases only, to resort to them. There were conflicts between the Assembly and myself, by virtue of the position that I occupied, but they were infrequent and I do not pause to discuss them further. Apart from those clashes of opinion the Central Legislature have done a considerable amount of very useful work. Looking back upon it and remembering statements made in the past by Secretaries of State of the different Parties who have addressed you upon affairs in India, there is every reason, so far as we can judge from the evidence at present before us and collected during these five years, for satisfaction with the momentous step taken to initiate a new era of relations between the Government and India.
It is too early to say more. Speaking from observation as the result of my own experience in India, I have returned with a greater faith in the value of those reforms and their prac-

323
ticability than I had when I left for India. In the difficulties that have been encountered the cause has largely been suspicion and distrust of the ultimate intentions of the British Government and of the Government of India. I believe that the time is now fast approaching, if it has not already been reached, when India will recognise that there is every intention to carry out the promises in the spirit and in the letter; they will be generously interpreted, as they were in their inception generously conceived, and all that is asked in this country—and surely it is worth India's while to ponder it and give effect to it—is that there should be a response from India which will show that India has at last appreciated the value and the benefit of the reforms instituted under this Act. It is for her to take action and to manifest the spirit necessary to enable her to go further forward and realise her ultimate aim. I believe—I may perhaps be speaking a little rashly, but I am prepared to take the risk—that if India will only devote herself to showing good will, she will attain the position she desires, she will become a full partner in the British Empire, she will attain responsible Government and she will be able to work with the British Government and, I trust, with all the British Empire for the happiness and contentment of her people.

ADOPTION OF CHILDREN BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly:
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:
Restrictions on making adoption orders.
2.—(1) An adoption order shall not be made in any case where—

(a) the applicant is under the age of twenty-five years, or

324

(b) the applicant is less than twenty-one years older than the infant in respect of whom the application is made.

Where the applicant is related to such infant by blood within the prohibited degrees of marriage the provisions of subsection (1) (b) shall not apply, and an adoption order may be made subject to the discretion of the Court.
(3) An adoption order shall not be made except with the consent of every person or body who is a parent or guardian of the infant in respect of whom the application is made or who has the actual custody of the infant or who is liable to contribute to the support of the infant:
Provided that the Court may dispense with any consent required by this subsection if satisfied that the person whose consent is to be dispensed with has abandoned or deserted the infant or cannot be found or is incapable of giving such consent or being a person liable to contribute to the support of the infant has persistently neglected or refused to contribute to such support.
(4) An adoption order shall not be made upon the application of one of two spouses without the consent of the other of them:
Provided that the court may dispense with any consent required by this subsection if satisfied that the person whose consent is to be dispensed with cannot be found or is incapable of giving such consent.
(5)An adoption order shall not be made in favour of any applicant who is not resident and domiciled in England or Wales or in respect of any infant who is not a British subject and so resident.
LORD DESBOROUGH LORD DESBOROUGH moved, in sub-section (1), to leave out all words after paragraph (b), and to insert:
"Provided that where the applicant and the infant are within the prohibited degrees of consanguinity, it shall be lawful for the Court, if it thinks fit, to make the order notwithstanding that the applicant is less than twenty-one years older than the infant."
The noble Lord said: This is a drafting Amendment and is considered to be an improvement on the subsection as it appears in the Bill.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, leave out lines 4 to 8, and insert the said proviso.—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD DESBOROUGH LORD DESBOROUGH moved, in the proviso to subsection (3), after the second "infant," to insert "either." The noble Lord said: This Amendment must be taken in conjunction with that

325
which immediately follows it upon the Paper. It does not alter the sense of the Bill in any way, but it does give the Court a little more discretion in a matter which is of great importance.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 26, after ("infant"') insert ("either").—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 27, after ("support") insert ("or is a person whose consent ought in the opinion of the Court and in all the circumstances of the case to be dispensed with").—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD DESBOROUGH LORD DESBOROUGH moved, at the end of subsection (4), to insert "or that the spouses have separated and are living apart and that the separation is likely to be permanent." The noble Lord said: The consent of both spouses is necessary under the Bill, but this is inserted to meet cases where the spouses have separated and are living apart, and the separation is likely to be permanent.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 34, after ("consent") insert ("or that the spouses have separated and are living apart and that the separation is likely to be permanent").—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: Before leaving this Clause 1 should like to call attention to subsection (2), which provides:—
"An adoption order shall not be made in any case where the sole applicant is a male and the infant in respect of whom the application is made is a female unless the Court is satisfied that there are special circumstances which justify as an exceptional measure the making of an adoption order."
I should like to ask whether the noble Lord does not think that the subsection as it stands casts a rather unnecessary slur upon the morals of the male sex. It seems to indicate that it is an exceptional matter for any man to want to adopt a child, except for immoral purposes. The whole object of the Bill is to safeguard the interests of the child and it leaves complete discretion to the Court, but in this subsection the Bill goes out of its way to declare that it must be exceptional for any man to want to adopt a child, or to happen to prefer
326
to adopt a little girl rather than a little boy. I do not know whether the noble Lord is prepared to modify the subsection, or to omit it altogether, in view of the complete discretion given to the Court.
LORD DESBOROUGH: My Lords, the last thing which I want to do is to cast a slur upon the male sex. I do not think the office that I represent takes that view of the subsection, but if the noble Lord can insert, at a later stage, an Amendment to protect the sex, we shall be only too ready to give it every consideration.
Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 3:
Matters with respect to which Court to be satisfied.
3. The Court before making an adoption order shall be satisfied—

(a) that every person whose consent is necessary under this Act and whose consent is not dispensed with has consented to and understands the nature and effect of the adoption order for which application is made, and in particular in the case of any parent understands that the effect of the adoption order will be permanently to deprive him or her of his or her parental rights; and

(b) that the order if made will be for the welfare of the infant, due consideration being for this purpose given to the wishes of the infant, having regard to the age and understanding of the infant; and

(c) that the applicant has not received or agreed to receive, and that no person has made or given, or agreed to make or give to the applicant, any payment or other reward in consideration of the adoption except such as the court may sanction.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH moved, in paragraph (a), before "consented," to insert "by oral evidence or by affidavit." The noble Lord said: This is a small Amendment, but the point is not an unimportant one. As the Bill stands consent must be obtained from both parents of the child, and of course from the adoptive parents. That is, of course, perfectly right. The object of my Amendment is merely to make sure that the Court will have discretion to take the evidence of the real parents by affidavit. The point is that it is sometimes rather objectionable that the real parents should know where the child is going. I know that the Report of the Tomlin Committee

327
on which the Bill is founded rather expressed doubt that secrecy was necessary and thought that objection would vanish when a legal right was given to the adoptive parent, but I do not think the objection does vanish, because already the adoptive parent has in certain cases a legal right; but harmful consequences might follow if the real parent got into touch with the child and worked upon its feelings, and perhaps asked for money, and so forth. If the clause were left as it is an undesirable precedent might arise, and the result would be that it would diminish the number of adoptions which would come under the Bill, and therefore irregular unofficial adoptions would continue, in which the safeguards provided in the Bill would not be found. I am informed that in South Australia the suggested clause works satisfactorily, and if the noble Lord is not able to put this Amendment into the Bill perhaps he will give an assurance that he can, in the Rules of Court, meet the point.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 43, after ("has") insert ("by oral evidence or by affidavit").—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
LORD DESBOROUGH: My noble friend by his Amendment wishes to introduce the practice of giving evidence by affidavit. I am afraid that my instructions are that the Home Office con-consider that the practice would be very objectionable. The object with which people appear before the Court is to enable the Judge, or other person who presides, to see the actual people and take their evidence. They need not necessarily meet each other. It is perfectly possible for the Judge to see them separately, and perhaps even privately. Therefore we consider that it would be ill-advised rather to incite people to give evidence by affidavit rather than in person. I think, however, I see a way out, in pursuance of the last remark of my noble friend. As your Lordships are aware, under this Bill Rules will be made—they will be made by the Lord Chancellor—for the guidance of the Court, and there will be nothing, either by Rule, or practice of Court or the discretion of the Judge, to prevent him from dispensing in certain cases with the presence of the witness and taking the evidence in writing. We do object to the
328
Amendment very strongly, and do not want it to be placed in the Bill. I give the noble Lord every assurance, however, that as far as possible his wishes will be carried out wherever the facts of the case warrant it.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I am much obliged to the noble Lord, and ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH THE EARL OF DENBIGH moved to leave out "and" at the end of paragraph (b) and to add the following new paragraph to the clause:—
"and
"(d) that where the infant is in the custody or under the guardianship of a public or local authority or body no objection on the ground that the applicant is not of the same religion as the infant is taken to such order by a person who in the opinion of the court is reasonably interested in taking such objection whether on the ground of natural relationship to the infant or as a minister of religion or otherwise."
The noble Earl said: The Amendment which stands in my name is not to be construed as being put forward in the interests of any one community, although I may say quite frankly that the Catholic community attaches a great deal of importance to it. When this Bill was in another place an Amendment was moved in somewhat different terms, and objection was taken to it in regard to its, perhaps, rather too one-sided character. The other day when this Bill was before your Lordships for Second Reading I drew attention to the matter, and intimated that I was going to put down an Amendment to this effect. I pointed out that the Amendment would be of a general nature and equally applicable to infants of all denominations. I am aware of the fact that in the High Court due regard would probably be had to this matter, and that every care would be taken that children of any particular denomination should be entrusted to people of the same denomination, but I am afraid that in many cases in the smaller courts of summary jurisdiction, where there might be a certain amount of jealousy and ill-feeling, the same kind of care might not be taken. Therefore we think that the words I have put down should be inserted in the Bill, in order to make the situation clear. I again wish to emphasise that the Amendment is of an entirely

329
general nature. I am well aware that it is somewhat difficult to define a matter of this kind in the clause of a Statute, but I cannot see that any objection can be taken to the Amendment in the terms I have put down.
THE LORD CHAIRMAN: I understand the two Amendments of the noble Earl hang together.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: Yes. The first is only a drafting Amendment.
Amendments moved—
Page 3, line 11, leave out ("and")
Page 3, line 17, at end insert ("and—
"(d) that where the infant is in the custody or under the guardianship of a public or local authority or body no objection on the ground that the applicant is not of the same religion as the infant is taken to such order by a person who in the opinion of the court is reasonably interested in taking such objection whether on the ground of natural relationship to the infant or as a minister of religion or otherwise.")—(The Earl of Denbigh.)
LORD ASKWITH: I hope the noble Earl will not press this Amendment. If he does I shall be obliged to oppose it. The Amendment says that objection can be taken on the ground that the applicant is not of the same religion as the infant, and that objection may be taken by any one who in the opinion of the Court is reasonably interested in taking such objection, whether on the ground of natural relationship to the infant or otherwise. Surely that would allow any cantankerous relative to come forward and say that the child could not be adopted because he did not approve of the religion of the person who proposed the adoption. It would allow an atheist to say that he would not have the child put into any religion at all, or a person of the complexion of the famous Captain Kettle to say that the child was only to go into a particular nonconforming sect to which he belonged. In the same way a cantankerous person, either in the Catholic or the Protestant or in any of the Nonconformist churches, could come forward and stop the child from being adopted.
Supposing the natural relation does not come forward, there is an opportunity given under this proposed Amendment for any minister of religion to come forward and make an objection to the child being adopted. I think it would
330
bring in a sort of test which would be of a most difficult and unpleasant character, and would have far-reaching effects possibly, which it would be well to avoid. I would also put my case upon the ground that under the Guardianship of Infants Bill there were two Joint Committees of both Houses where somewhat similar clauses were brought up with regard to the guardianship of infants, and the joint Committees by large majorities—I do not think they even went to a Division—decided that clauses of this test character should not be inserted in these Bills dealing with children, but that it should be left to be decided at the discretion of the Court what was the best for the child, and not bring in what was possibly a disputed religious question.
VISCOUNT HALDANE: I, too, think that this Amendment goes too far. The mere making of an objection is sufficient to prevent the Court from acting. The law as it stands at present is, I think, strong enough. Under the recent Act what is to be considered is not merely the old-fashioned rights of the parent, but what is most for the benefit of the infant, and the Court will take these things into account. It will take into account, if necessary, questions of religion. The religion of the infant is prima facie the religion of its father, but that is not any more binding on the Court. It can take what view it likes of what is for the benefit of the infant, and act accordingly. If this is put in, then any cantankerous person, as has been said, can prevent the Court acting, and I think it is very undesirable that matters should be left to such a state of contingency.
LORD DESBOROUGH: I find myself much more in agreement with the two noble Lords who have spoken last than I do with the mover of this Amendment, although I sympathise very strongly with his concern for the interests of religion. But surely the whole idea of this Bill is that in most cases the adopter and the adopted will come to some agreement, which would include religion, in which case this provision would be absolutely unnecessary. I quite agree also that it is a very great deal too wide. Almost anybody can make an objection under this proposal—not only ministers of religion,

331
for I see in the Amendment the ominous words "or otherwise"—and it seems to me that any fanatic could stop the adoption of a child if the Amendment were passed. The child is fully protected because a guardian is appointed ad litem, and the question of religion is one which might well be left to the Courts, who will certainly have the interest of the child as one of their first objects in carrying out their duties. An Amendment was moved on the Report stage in another place in the interest of one particular religion, but, of course, it would be impossible to introduce provisions in such a Statute in the interests of a particular religion, although any religion, I admit, is better than none. I am afraid I cannot accept the Amendment.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: Can the noble Lord give any undertaking that the matter will be dealt with by the Rules of the Lord Chancellor, so as to give full protection in this matter?
LORD DESBOROUGH: I would much rather the noble Earl asked the Lord Chancellor himself, but I have no doubt that this matter will be most seriously considered when the Rules are drawn up.
LORD SHANDON: I understand that the object of the Amendment is to deal with cases where a child has not any parents living, and is under the control and custody, say, of a board of guardians. There seems to me to be considerable difference between such a case and the general class of case with which the Bill was intended to deal. A board of guardians naturally only looks to the provision of a home for the child, and it would not be expected to look after the question of the child's religion in the same way that parents and relatives would. I do not say that the Amendment is very happily worded, but there is a distinction and a question that ought to be dealt with in the Bill.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I am afraid I was not able to catch the tenour of the noble Lord's remarks, owing to the unfortunate acoustic properties of your Lordships' House. I do demur, however, to what was said by the noble and learned Viscount opposite that the operation of this Amendment would unnecessarily block the Court, because the Amendment contains the words that the person making the objection "in the
332
opinion of the Court is reasonably interested in taking such objection." A good deal would depend on the interpretation of the word "reasonably," but I should have thought that the Court would be able to deal with that.
VISCOUNT HALDANE: He may make an unreasonable objection, then the Court is paralysed.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: But I do not see that it would hopelessly block it. I regret very much that the Government cannot adopt this Amendment, but I am willing to withdraw it after having brought the matter forward publicly. I only hope that the Home Office will represent the matter to the Lord Chancellor, and will represent also that it is the very earnest wish of a very large section of the community that this matter should not be lost sight of.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 3 agreed to.
Clause 4 agreed to.
Clause 5:
Effect of adoption order.
5.—(1) Upon an adoption order being made all rights, duties, obligations and liabilities of the parent or parents, guardian or guardians of the adopted child, in relation to the future custody, maintenance and education of the adopted child, including all rights to appoint a guardian or to consent or give notice of dissent to marriage shall be extinguished, and all such rights, duties, obligations and liabilities shall vest in and be exercisable by and enforceable against the adopter as though the adopted child was a child born to the adopter in lawful wedlock, and in respect of the same matters and in respect of the liability of a child to maintain its parents the adopted child shall stand to the adopter exclusively in the position of a child born to the adopter in lawful wedlock:
Provided that in any case where two spouses are the adopters such spouses shall in respect of the matters aforesaid stand to each other and to the adopted child in the same relation as they would have stood if they had been the lawful father and mother of the adopted child, and the adopted child shall stand to them respectively in the same relation as a child would have stood to a lawful father and mother respectively.
(2) An adoption order shall not deprive the adopted child of any right to or interest in property to which, but for the order, the child would have been entitled under any intestacy or under any will, settlement or other disposition, whether occurring or made

333
before or after the making of the adoption order, or confer on the adopted child any right to or interest in property as a child of the adopter, and the expressions "child," "children" and "issue" where used in any instrument disposing of property whether made before or after the making of an adoption order, shall not, unless the contrary intention appears, include an adopted child or children or the issue of an adopted child.
LORD DESBOROUGH LORD DESBOROUGH moved, in the proviso in subsection (1), after "aforesaid," to insert "and for the purpose of the jurisdiction of any court to make orders as to the custody and maintenance of end right of access to children." The noble Lord said: The Amendment gives the Court further powers of which. I hope your Lordships will approve.
Amendment moved—
Page 3, line 40, after ("aforesaid") insert the said words.—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD DESBOROUGH LORD DESBOROUGH moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "under any will, settlement or other". The noble Lord said: This is a drafting Amendment.
Amendment moved—
Page 4, lines 6 and 7, leave out ("under any will, settlement or other").—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD DESBOROUGH: The next Amendment on the Paper is also purely drafting. I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 4, lines 11 and 12, leave out ("instrument disposing of property") and insert ("disposition").—(Lord Desborough.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.

PARKS REGULATION (AMENDMENT) BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (VISCOUNT PEEL): My Lords, this Bill is intended to amend the Parks Regulation Act, 1872, and its essence is contained in subsection (1) of Section 2,
334
which gives the Commissioners of Works power to make regulations for the proper management of the parks and the preservation of order and the prevention of abuses in the parks. It applies, of course, to the parks under the jurisdiction of the Department. It applies also to Kew Gardens, which for some reason that I do not quite appreciate was transferred in the past to the care of the Ministry of Agriculture. I need hardly say that any regulations made under this Bill will be laid upon the Table of both Houses of Parliament and can be objected to in the usual way by Resolution.
I must say a word or two as to why I am introducing this Bill. The old Act under which the Office of Works has been operating for some time was passed in 1872, 54 years ago. The object of that Act was to give power to the Office of Works to preserve order in the parks and generally to make everything easy and comfortable for law-abiding persons. The method adopted was to draw up regulations and embody them in the Schedule to the Act. Any one infringing those regulations could be brought before a court of summary jurisdiction. That was a very useful Act at the time because before its passing the Commissioners had only a, very vague and ill-defined power of removing from the parks any person whose conduct appeared to be unsatisfactory. The fact that these regulations were once and for all drawn up and put into a Schedule has, of course, tied the hands of the Commissioners. The regulations prohibit certain things altogether and they prohibit other things except in accordance with the rules of the park. Other additional and supplementary rules were contemplated and the Commissioners have from time to time made such rules, but the Act was so worded that it has been held that such rules can be enforced by summons before the magistrates only when they relate to matters specifically mentioned ill the Schedule. If they relate to other matters there remains only that ill-defined power which existed before the passing of the Act of 1872 of removing the offender.
When the Act was passed over 50 years ago naturally all the conditions that might prevail to-day were not foreseen. I do not wish to give a list of subjects or the directions in which the powers of the Department are curtailed because

335
that would probably be an invitation to ill-disposed persons to try to infringe them, but. I will give one instance which I think is fairly familiar. It is in connection with litter in the parks. There is a rule against scattering litter, but this rule, like other rules, depends ultimately for its sanction on prosecution and in the last resort is a dead letter. There is no effective remedy at all. There is no effective remedy even against persons who defy the park-keepers and persist in repeating the offence. Those who are familiar with our parks—and it is not necessary at this time of day for me to descant on the beauty of the parks—will realise in what an absurd position that places our park-keepers. The Department also is placed in the humiliating position of having no real power to prevent people coming into the parks and defacing them with litter. I have spoken about the central parks, but these rules would apply, if passed, to Regents Park, Victoria Tower Gardens, Greenwich Park, Richmond Park, Hampton Court and Bushey Park, and in Scotland to Holyrood Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh, and Lin-lithgow Peel. They would apply also, of course, to Kew Gardens under the Ministry of Agriculture.
What I feel is that in the interests of the public and in order to keep the parks in a fine condition it is really necessary that the Department should have power to manage them in a proper manner. The London County Council have full power to make by-laws generally for the good rule and government of the parks, gardens and open spaces with which they are concerned, and, subject to the approval by Parliament of the rules themselves, we are really asking that we should have as much power as the London County Council have in regard to their own parks. The only point I should like to add is this. It has been suggested that these powers are necessary in order to curtail the privileges of public speaking in the parks. I can only say that under the Act of 1872 we have ample power, if we wanted to do it, either to regulate or to put a stop to public speaking in the parks. Therefore, in this Act we are not taking any more power and we shall get no more power under it than we have at present. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships will give this Bill a Second
336
Reading in order to confer the powers upon us that we really require to enforce effectively our rules for good conduct in the parks.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2ª—(Viscount Peel.)
LORD ARNOLD: My Lords, the noble Viscount has explained to your Lordships some of the reasons for this Bill. I should like him, if he would be good enough to do so, to give us a little more information. The specific instance which he named as leading the Government to desire this Bill was the problem, I think, of litter about the parks. That is not a new problem and I shall be glad to know whether, apart from that, there are any other new specific circumstances or facts which have led to the introduction of this Bill. I was very much relieved to hear what he said in his concluding observations with regard to speaking or speakers in the parks and to have, as I understand it, from him an assurance that there is nothing in this Bill and that it is not intended to do anything under this Bill with regard to speaking or speakers in the parks; because if there had been any such intention I think that a very smooth passage could not have been expected for the Bill. A further question I should like to ask is this. I do not quite understand why the Bill is introduced now. Is it intended to send it down to another place before the Recess? I should imagine not, and if it is not intended to do that why is it introduced now? Why cannot we wait until after the Recess? There may be some explanation for this, and I think we are entitled to have it. The last question I would put to the noble Viscount is this. Assuming that the Bill receives a Second Reading at your Lordships' hands when would he suggest taking the Committee stage?
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, the noble Lord first asked me why the Bill is introduced at this time. I think it is always rather difficult to give a direct answer to a question of that kind. I have been looking for an opportunity to introduce this Bill for some months and this is the first occasion on which I have found it possible to do so. I hope, of course, that the Bill will go as soon as possible to another place. I cannot possibly hope to pass it through all its stages before the

337
Recess, but the noble Lord knows enough of Parliamentary business to know that you must seize an opportunity whenever you can to get your little Bill in, otherwise it is swamped by larger measures. After the Recess this House will be occupied with very large measures coming up from another place and that is my general answer. Then the noble Lord asked me about the Committee Stage. I had hoped to take the Committee Stage, if possible, on Monday, but that is a matter that perhaps can be arranged between the authorities concerned.
The noble Lord further asked me if I could give a number of other reasons for introducing this Bill. I gave one example, which I thought might be a comparatively harmless example. I do not want to give a list of the cases where it might be necessary to bring in rules, for this reason. We have had a rather interesting example lately in connection with tipsters. Statements appeared in the Press that they were enabled to go into the park and make their speeches urging people to engage in such and such speculations and were able to go outside and do their business. Of course, as soon as attention is called to this nuisance there is a considerable increase of it and for that reason the noble Lord will, perhaps, forgive me for saying anything further until these matters appear
338
in the rules. When they appear in the rules, which have to be laid on the Tables of both Houses, your Lordships and members of another place will be able to discuss them and consider whether they ought to be passed or not.
On Question, Bill read 2ª, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

HEATHER BURNING (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
PENAL SERVITUDE BILL, FORMERLY
CRIMINAL JUSTICE (INCREASE OF PENALTIES) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).

SALE OF FOOD (WEIGHTS AND MEASURES) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3ª (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

HOME COUNTIES (MUSIC AND DANCING) LICENSING BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading (which stands appointed for to-day) deferred.
House adjourned at a quarter before seven o'clock.

Preamble
COLWYN BAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL. [H.L.]
FORMERLY
COLWYN BAY AND COLWYN URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL. [H.L.]
MARGATE CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
WEST HAMPSHIRE WATER BILL. [H.L.]
MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL. [H.L.]
READING UNIVERSITY BILL. [H.L.]
Commons Amendments considered, and agreed to.

WOLVERHAMPTON CORPORATION BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
GUILDFORD CORPORATION BILL.
MIDDLESBROUGH CORPORATION BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.

PARK REGULATION (AMENDMENT) BILL. [H.L.]
House to be in Committee on Monday next.