Sitting of 22 February 1928

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before four of the clock, The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE on the Woolsack.
WARWICK CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a, and committted: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.

BASLE TRADING COMPANY.
VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN had given Notice to move to resolve, That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the matters so many years in dispute between His Majesty's Government and the Basle Trading Company.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: My Lords, with reference to the Motion which stands as the first Order on the Paper to-day, I desire to ask the Leader of the House, the Marquess of Salisbury, whether, having regard to the position in which the question stands, he has any statement which he is willing to make before the discussion is entered upon.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY): My Lords, in reply to my noble friend I shall be extremely careful, in answering a question of this kind, not to deal with the merits of the case, which would be entirely out of order, but I think in the public interest it is my duty to make an appeal to my noble friend Lord Temple-town and the House. May I say in the first instance that I am quite aware that he has great reason to complain of the delay in this matter. Although I cannot pretend that I can defend in all respects those who are responsible for the delay—I make that full admission to him—I do not want him or your Lordships to carry away the impression that. I am not aware of the position in which he stands and the apology which is due to him for the delay. But when I come to consider whether we shall be wise to enter upon this discussion I desire to make a very short statement to your Lordships.
I am not going into the merits of the case beyond saying that it is a very complicated matter. I am able to make a
222
statement on behalf of the Government and, so far as the Colonial Office is concerned, I am able to say on behalf of my right hon. friend the Secretary of State that negotiations took place throughout last summer and autumn on the basis of (a), a restoration of the share capital of the company plus interest; (b), restitution of their properties; (c), some additional compensation. We were not able to arrive at a settlement of (c)—that is the additional compensation—but are willing to continue the negotiations. So far as the Indian aspect of the question is concerned the matter is complicated by the regard which must be paid to the authority of the Indian Legislature, but in respect of both matters I would put it to your Lordships that those who are called upon to negotiate with a foreign company on behalf of His Majesty's Government will find their difficulties seriously increased by the discussion of Lord Templetown's Motion, and I would suggest to him not to proceed with it to-day. Your Lordships may say: "What is this death-bed repentance—this last moment appeal?" My noble friend Lord Temple-town is aware that, not many hours ago, but still some hours, I was in communication with him and did my best privately in the direction which I am now urging your Lordships. I will only say broadly and generally that the complications of modern government are so immense and the burden of work is so great upon the heads of Departments that delay which would be certainly very culpable in other circumstances may be looked upon with less severity when those difficulties are contemplated. I can only make this appeal in the matter. I have no control, of course, and I leave it in your Lordships' hands.
LORD OLIVIER: My Lords, may I ask permission to put a further question before the noble Lord, Lord Templetown, makes his statement. I have taken some interest in this matter and I should like to put a question to the noble Marquess with regard to the third item of his statement. The first two items appear to be thoroughly satisfactory, but as to the third item, is there any prospect of His Majesty's Government and the Swiss Government or the parties concerned being able to arrive at an agreement without reference to some kind of an arbitration, or have they in contempla

223
tion the submission of such a matter to arbitration? The third point in the noble Marquess's statement seemed to be a little inconclusive as to what was likely to be done.
LORD BUCKMASTER: My Lords, I have come down to the House this afternoon intending to take part in this debate. I have made myself acquainted as well as I could with the circumstances which underlay the Motion in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Templetown. After what has been said by the noble Marquess I should certainly not in any circumstances say a word, but I should like to add a request, in accordance with that of the noble Marquess, to postpone this question because, having some little knowledge of the delicacy and difficulty of negotiations and realising as I do how much better it is that the thing should be carried through by negotiation than as a result of acute and often acrid argument, I do think that the interests of the persons concerned would be best met if the noble Marquess's suggestion were carried out. Perhaps the noble Marquess will not mind if I add, in conclusion, that I welcome any form of repentance on the part of the Government, even if it be on their death-bed.
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, may I add a hope that the noble Lord, Lord Templetown, will accept the suggestion that has been made. I am in the same position as my noble and learned friend who spoke last. I looked carefully in order to ascertain what the facts of the matter are with a view, if necessary, of intervening in the debate, but I sincerely hope, after what has been said by the noble Marquess and by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for India, that Lord Templetown will assent to the postponement of his Motion.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD): My Lords, with the permission of the House may I be allowed to say a few words on the Indian aspects of this matter? No one knows better than the noble Lord that we are no longer completely masters in dealing with a subject matter of this kind in our own household. It is the fact that I am at this moment, and have been for some time past, in correspondence with the Viceroy upon this matter. I think I would do more harm than good if I put the matter
224
higher than this, that I am sure the development of the situation in India and the conclusion ultimately reached must be very greatly affected by the agreement which has been announced to-day by the Leader of the House in relation to those claims which principally affect the Colonial Office. I cannot help thinking that the holding of a detailed debate to-day upon this Motion and, still more, the examination of these topics before a Committee at the time when the national case may require to be put before a neutral Committee, would not be helpful either to the difficult negotiations with which I am charged in India or to the ultimate presentation of this case, if it becomes necessary to present it. I need not add a word to what Lord Salisbury has said as to our realisation that there has been a very great delay in this matter and not always an avoidable delay. I think I could assure your Lordships that this period of delay will not be unduly protracted and that we have a very reasonable hope of being able to make a complete statement of the matter to your Lordships within a period not too remote in time.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: My Lords, I also had come down, like my noble and learned friend Lord Buckmaster, wishing to say something about this extraordinary case. My noble friend the Leader of the House has appealed to us saying how very hard worked the Departments of the Government are. Therefore, instead of saying that this delay has been most discreditable to the Government, I would say that it has been most discreditable to this country. I am overjoyed to hear that the Government are really at last going to approach this matter with the object of a speedy settlement. If they cannot do that, surely, as my noble friend the Secretary of State for India suggested, I think, a neutral tribunal is the right method of settlement. I thought the Hague Tribunal existed for the purpose of settling this kind of thing, but if the Government can deal with it even now at the last moment, by all means let them do so. But, if not, for goodness sake, remove this discredit from England and let it go to a neutral tribunal.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: My Lords, I want to make myself quite plain. I did not of course announce—I was not authorised in any way to

225
announce—that this matter would go be-for a neutral tribunal, because evidently, if you are engaged in negotiations which you hope it will be possible to carry to a successful conclusion, you do not think of ultimate tribunals. What I meant to convey, and what I think I did in fact only say, was that if we by a Select Committee of your Lordship's House were to approach any conclusion, and this matter eventually came before a Tribunal perhaps less friendly, the matter might to that extent appear to be prejudged. For that reason, I hope that the matter may be dealt with on the lines which the noble Marquess has suggested.
VISCOUNT TEMPLETON: My Lords, I have certainly listened with great interest to the speeches, so far as I have been able to hear them, made by various noble Lords. I wish to say, first of all, that my position is that I want to see the name of England cleared of this scandal which has been going on for ten years. When it is proposed once more to postpone the matter, I think it shows what a very weak defence the Government must have. I cannot conceive that if they had a strong defence, they would wish to put it off for an hour. Reference has been made to the first point in this memorandum—restoration of their share capital plus interest. Their share capital of £120,000 and interest was offered to the Basle Trading Company ten years ago, but there was a condition attached to it which no sane man could have accepted. It was that they should give up all claim to the balance of the property, which was somewhere about a million. That meant that they would have to admit themselves to be traitors to the country and to abandon claim to the balance of property which has been taken illegally. There was a question raised, I know, as to whether there was legal liability or not, but what I want to put to the House is that an agreement was made in May, 1916.
I will read one paragraph of it. I will not trouble your Lordships with the whole of it. The agreement says:—
"In order to ensure that the entire direction and control of the society's business is situated in the United Kingdom and that the persons responsible for its management are in and subject to the laws of the United Kingdom and to the control of the British
226
Government the society will have, immediately for that purpose a United Kingdom office with Messrs. J. P. Werner and Company as managers thereof and from that office Messrs. J. P. Werner and Company shall conduct the a whole business on behalf of the society, and they shall have the material for keeping and keep proper accounts to show the results of the whole business and such accounts shall at all times be liable to inspection by His Majesty's Government, Messrs. J. P. Werner and Company to be given notice forthwith of the arrangement now come to and instructed accordingly."
That was a definite agreement made in 1916 between the British Government and the Basle Trading Co. In 1918 what happened? The Government seized the property of the Basle Trading Co. Either they did that in violation of that agreement, or—I hesitate to put it so—they must have scrapped the agreement.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I am sure your Lordships will understand the difficulty in which I am placed by the noble Viscount. I do not complain of the noble Viscount, because he is placed in a difficult position, too, but he is now entering into the merits of the case which, except that your Lordships are so very considerate, would not be strictly in order until the matter is reached on the Order Paper. I am hoping that my noble friend, in view of what has been said in different quarters of the House, will be generous in the matter and not press the question, as he undoubtedly has the right to do. I do not deny for a moment his absolute right, but I do hope that my noble friend will accede to the suggestion that has been made.
VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN: I do not want to be out of order and I am going to do my level best to act in the spirit of the remarks made by the noble Marquess, but the trouble in my mind is that you say you are going on negotiating. Negotiations have been going on for years. Where is the finality? If the noble Marquess can give me any idea as to a date for finality—
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My noble friend the Secretary of State for India is directly responsible for one of the most difficult parts of the matter,

227
and he has told your Lordships the matter will be proceeded with with despatch. What more can be said than that?
VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN: I was not referring to the part of the matter that concerns the Secretary of State for India. I was thinking of the whole property. We say the Government have taken this thing from us and we are entitled to its return. We are only asking to be given back what belongs to us. Under heading (a) of this memorandum there occur the words: "restoration of their share capital plus interest" and it goes on to refer to "some additional compensation." May I ask what "some additional compensation" means?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The noble Lord and his friends have always contended that return of share capital plus interest would not be sufficient and they make a further claim. This third heading is intended to cover what ought to be the balance. How much it ought to be is a matter that is in negotiation.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: My Lords, may I say, in view of the expression of feeling on both sides of the House, that I think it would be very much to the advantage of the noble Viscount if he accepted the suggestion which has been made. I feel quite sure, if he will allow me to say so, that he would find himself in the end better satisfied if he postponed this matter. I say that with more confidence because that was not my opinion until I came into the House and heard what was said by the noble Marquess. I am sure, after what he has said and after what the Secretary of State for India has said, that the noble Viscount has everything to gain by postponing discussion of the question. I venture to make this suggestion, with which I think the noble Marquess the Leader of the House will readily agree, that if at some subsequent stage in the Session the noble Viscount should wish to raise the matter again, the noble Marquess would give him every possible facility to raise the question on a day convenient to him. If it became necessary to adjust the business of the House, I am sure the noble Marquess would do everything in his power to see that the noble Viscount on the Cross Benches had the opportunity to bring the matter forward at a moment convenient to himself.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I most readily give that assurance, most readily.
VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN: All I have to say is that I had intended to raise this matter and take a Division because I thought the differences left between the Government and the Basle Trading Company were now so small that it was best to get rid of them as soon as we could by arbitration rather than fail to arrive at an agreement by negotiation, which has happened so often. In view, however, of what the noble Marquess has said and the undertaking that he has now given and of the observations of my noble friends in the House, I am willing to put off this Motion for a Select Committee to a day not named and to leave it to the noble Marquess to suggest a date some time during the Session when it may be discussed again.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: If the noble Viscount will approach me again a little later we can arrange it between ourselves.
VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWN: Very well. I will postpone the matter then.

THE WAR OFFICE AND SURREY COMMONS.
EARL RUSSELL EARL RUSSELL rose to ask if the War Office will make a statement giving the terms of the settlement arrived at with regard to the Surrey Commons. The noble Earl said: My Lords, you will recollect that last Session I ventured to raise the question of the Surrey commons which the War Office was at that date anxious to acquire and about which there was a great deal of public anxiety both in Surrey and in London. I have since seen in the public Press that an agreement has been come to between the War Office and the Committee presided over, I think, by the noble Earl, Lord Midleton, which, I believe, represents not only the interests of the landowners but, through representatives of the Commons and Footpaths Preservation Society, to some extent those of the public also. I am happy to think that to-day it will not be necessary to raise any discussion. I have merely put this Question down in order that your Lordships may have an official statement from the War Office as to what the exact arrangement is. In asking that Question I think I ought to

229
say one word more with which I am sure that all of your Lordships will concur—namely, that those who are interested in this matter owe a debt of gratitude to Lord Midleton for the trouble that he and his Committee have taken and for what appears to be the quite successful issue of their negotiations.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (THE EARL OF ONSLOW): My Lords, when my noble friend opposite asked this Question last year he was good enough to say that after the observations that had fallen from my noble friend behind me (the Earl of Midleton) and myself he hoped that a satisfactory solution of this question would be reached. I gather that he has seen that which has appeared in the Press and thinks that such a solution has, in fact, been reached. As the noble Earl has said, a Committee was formed at the instance of my noble friend Lord Midleton to confer with the representatives of the War Office in regard to the whole of this question and to endeavour to arrive at a suitable and satisfactory settlement. That Committee has met and has discussed the question, and I think I shall not be wrong in saying that the solution at which it has arrived is one that is satisfactory to all parties and from every point of view.
In the first place, the boundaries of the area to be used for military training have been settled and the War Department are to have the area within those boundaries during certain parts of the year for the purpose of carrying out military training. The lords of manors will allow the commons to be used for this training between April and September. In this connection there is one point that I should like to mention. I refer to the possibility of Easter occurring during the last few days of March. As a matter of act, that contingency does not arise until 1931, and by that time we may have a fixed Easter, which will take us into the middle of April. Nevertheless, when the agreement is finally considered, and its terms settled, perhaps my noble friend will take that small point into consideration. It is not in any way pressing, but I mention it in passing.
The use of the commons in normal years for brigade training with tanks will be confined to the period between
230
June 1 and August 15. During the remainder of the period the training of smaller parties will be permitted. The lords of manors have given this permission to the War Department for ten years, and they have also agreed that at the expiration of that period the renewal of the agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld. I speak of "terms" because the agreement is not in the shape of a lease, since the lords of manors have granted these privileges to the War Department free of charge. Naturally, when we desired to acquire these rights in the manors, we offered to pay for them, but since the owners have been so patriotic and public-spirited as to offer them free of charge all that we can do is to express our sincere appreciation and gratitude.
The actual terms are as follows: (1), No camps are to be erected on the commons, except in one or two areas, such as the sites near Frensham Pond, which are the areas where camps have in the past been erected. Any other camps that may be required will not be erected on the commons but on the freehold land acquired by the War Office adjoining the commons. (2), It is agreed that no buildings either temporary or permanent are to be erected on the commons, nor are any buildings to be erected on unenclosed freehold land except temporary buildings, which are to be removed at the end of each training season. (3), No trenches are to be dug on the commons, and at the end of each training season any damage that may be done by wheeled vehicles or tanks is to be made good. (4), Due regard shall be taken to prevent injury to trees, shrubs and vegetation. I may point out that on War Department lands at Aldershot and elsewhere great care is always taken to avoid damage to plantations. They are put out of bounds for troops and the men are well accustomed to looking after these places, so that I do not think there will be any difficulty in this condition being satisfactorily carried out. (5), No part of the commons is at any time to be enclosed or used as a rifle range. (6), The public shall have free access to the commons in accordance with their legal rights, and free access, subject to appropriate regulations, to the unenclosed lands adjoining the commons which are acquired or are being acquired by the War

231
Department. I speak of this access being subject to regulations because, though the legal rights of the public on the commons are well known, with regard to private land there will have to be bylaws or something of the kind laying down exactly how they may be used.
EARL RUSSELL: This will be an access as of grace rather than of right?
THE EARL OF ONSLOW: Yes, it will be part of the agreement. It is also agreed (7), that strict orders are to be given to drivers of tanks not to turn abruptly or in a short circle. This is done to prevent the tearing up of vegetation. I may add that what is called "waltzing" a tank, or turning it on its axis, does do damage, and is already forbidden on War Department land, and this prohibition will continue. (8), No vehicles of over an agreed weight—I will not mention the exact weight, because at the moment I am not quite sure what it will be and I had better wait until the agreement is finally settled—are to be driven on the commons. (9), We have agreed to reconsider the whole question of the use of the commons for tanks in a couple of years' time. That is the substance, I think, of the agreement that has been reached, and I hope that it will be satisfactory and will serve to calm any apprehensions as to the intentions of the War Department that have arisen. I know that this matter has caused a great deal of anxiety, especially in my own County of Surrey. I can only conclude my observations by expressing, on behalf of my right hon. friend, my colleagues on the Army Council and myself, great gratitude for the public-spirited manner and the generosity with which the lords of manors and all those interested in the commons have met us in arriving at an agreement which I hope your Lordships will admit to be satisfactory to all parties. The War Department gets the land, no charge is incurred upon the public Exchequer, and I think the rights of the public and of the lords of the manors are fully safeguarded to their own satisfaction.
THE EARL OF MIDLETON: My Lords, I rise on behalf of those who have co-operated with me in this matter to thank my noble friend for the account
232
which he has given of the arrangement that has been come to, and I should wish to take this opportunity of expressing my thanks to him for the generous acknowledgment which he has made of the conduct of the landowners and those who negotiated with the War Office. I am also very grateful to my noble friend opposite for having originally raised this question. Although a most satisfactory arrangement has been come to I do not flatter myself that that has been solely due to those who have had to negotiate. The difference between the original proposal and the present arrangement is a very marked one. I give all credit to the War Office, with whom I so long served, for their desire to do the best thing for the public, but there was undoubtedly a very strong feeling that to hand over these open commons for the use which the Army must put them to throughout the year—for encampments, for continual trampling of troops and all the disturbance which exists where large bodies of men are placed—would have been really fatal to the amenities of the commons and destructive of bird life, and would have certainly rendered the commons much less useful and enjoyable to the public.
By the arrangement to which we have come the time has been restricted, but we have been able, I am glad to say, to meet in almost all respects the necessities of military training, which it is our greatest desire to do. My noble friend thanked us for our part of the business, and I should like to say this, that if it had not been for the strong expression of opinion in this House, in which we reechoed what has been said by the Press, and for the strong efforts made by such societies as the Commons Preservation Society, which owed its greatest initiative to the oldest member of this House, Lord Eversley, who has been associated with it for fifty or sixty years and has done untold service to the public during the whole period—if it had not been for those things I am not sure that even under my noble friend's influence the War Office would have been found so amenable to what seemed to us to be a reasonable settlement. We are, however, very grateful to him for what he attempted to do to make that settlement possible, and I think the public may now rest assured that the best has been done for all parties.
LORD OLIVIER: Might I ask the noble Earl whether we are to expect that Frensham Common will be occupied for six months every summer, for camp?
THE EARL OF ONSLOW: What I said was that commons would not be occupied except where they had hitherto been occupied. At Frensham there have been camps hitherto, and I understand that it is not proposed to give up what has been done in the past. My noble friend behind me (the Earl of Midleton) really knows more than I do, because he has been over the ground so recently as Saturday last, but I think I am correct in the answer which I have given.

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: My Lords, I am grateful to Lord Clwyd for once again reminding me of the desirability of appointing a Standing Joint Committee on Indian Affairs, and also for acceding, on the ground of the convenience of the House, to my suggestion that it would be economical of your Lordships' time if he withdrew the Question which he had put on the Paper, in order to enable me to move this present Resolution. Your Lordships are aware of the work done by the Committee in previous years, and I need not, I think, employ any argument in favour of this Motion, the terms of which are identical with that of last Session. I hope that the labours of the Committee will be sufficient to occupy such leisure time as they are able to afford, while not too pressing in their incidence.
Moved, That it is desirable that a Standing Joint Committee on Indian Affairs of both Houses of Parliament be appointed to examine and report on any Bill or matter referred to them specifically by either House of Parliament, and to consider with a view to reporting, if necessary, thereon any matter relating to Indian Affairs brought to the notice of the Committee by the Secretary of State for India.—(The Earl of Birkenhead.)
LORD CLWYD: My Lords, I rise only to express my satisfaction at the announcement which has been made by the Secretary of State for India. As he well knows, I do take a rather particular interest in this matter of setting up every
234
Session a Standing Joint Committee on Indian Affairs. I feel, and I think he will agree with me, that whether any business be referred to the Committee or not it is important that every Session this Committee should be set up, so that machinery should be available for the purpose if necessity arises. I think it is possible that dining the present Session some business may have to be referred to it, but in any event I am glad that the Government, through the noble Earl, have again announced their decision to set up the Committee.
VISCOUNT CHELMSFORD: My Lords, I, too, am grateful to the noble Earl for the Motion which he has moved, but may I hope that he will not exclude from his mind the possibility of calling this Committee together to receive from him, in the privacy of the Committee-room, information with regard to affairs in India? When Mr. Montagu and I made the suggestion of this Committee in our Report, we had not any idea of setting up any addition to the machinery which deals with India in this country, but we were impressed by the desirability of keeping Parliament informed with regard to the trend of affairs in India, and we regarded this Committee as a stage in the educative process. Even to those of us who have been in India the veil comes down when we leave that country, and I can imagine that the Secretary of State might find great usefulness in having a nucleus of members in each House who were abreast of the latest information with regard to India. It would not be fair to ask the Secretary of State, in a matter like this, which requires some consideration, to give an answer now, but I hope he will not exclude the possibility of considering some such course as I suggest.
THE EARL OF BIRKENHEAD: I certainly will do so, and indeed I may add that if at any period during the last three and a half years it had been conveyed to me, on behalf of the Standing Joint Committee of the moment, that it would be of interest to them to hear the impression which at the particular moment I had formed of existing Indian affairs, I would most gladly have attended to give them such information. Even apart from my own initiative—because I may not be aware of the difficulties

235
pressing upon the minds of the Committee—if they extended to me any such intimation they would undoubtedly find me at their service.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Ordered, That a Message be sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith, and to desire their concurrence.

PROTECTION OF LAPWINGS BILL. [H.L.]
Amendment reported (according to Order).
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I understand that it is proposed to put down the further stage of this Bill for to-morrow. In that event the House will sit to-morrow, but otherwise there is no Order to be considered.
LORD BUCKMASTER: My Lords, the last thing I would desire is to inconvenience your Lordships, and I think it would have been possible to avoid it by having no Amendments on the Committee stage, but it was not thought possible, and I really cannot, without running the risk of sacrificing this Bill, avoid putting it down to-morrow for Third Reading.

OLDBURY GAS ORDER, 1928.
Special Order proposed to be made on the application of the Urban District Council of Oldbury:
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and referred to the Special Orders Committee.

BRADFORD CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
A Petition of Messrs. Rees and Freres of 7, Victoria Street, Westminster, Parliamentary Agents, praying for leave to present a Petition of the Bradford and District Chamber of Trade, the Bradford and District Horse and Motor Owners Association, and the Bradford and District Commercial Motor Vehicles Association, praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bill, although the time limited by Standing Order No. 92, for presenting such Petition has expired: Read, and ordered to lie on the Table, and Standing Order No. 92 to be considered to-morrow in order to its being dispensed with in respect of the said Petition.
House adjourned at twenty minutes before five o'clock.