I beg to move,

" That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Railway Regulation Acts; and for other purposes relating thereto."

The object of the Bill will be to increase the statutory obligations now laid upon the railway companies. I propose in three short Clauses that these obligations shall be stated. The first Clause will make it compulsory on railway companies 13 provide third-class sleeping accommodation where first-class sleeping accommodation is already provided. The second Clause will provide that return tickets shall be available at any time. The third Clause will make compulsory the provision of automatic locks on railway carriage doors.

In regard to sleeping accommodation, I hope the proposal will elicit the friendly interest of hon. Members on the benches opposite, as I know it will hon. Members on this side of the House. I may be told later on that the reason why the railway companies cannot provide third-class sleepers is that they do not pay. My answer would be that they have never tried them. I believe that if we had third-class sleepers it would not only meet a great need of the travelling public, but it would save a great deal of time on the part of people who now travel. In order to carry out the business of -the country there is always a flow of travellers between long distance points in Great Britain. If you take the 7 o'clock train from Aberdeen, it means that a traveller by that train does not reach London until 12 hours later. During the journey he cannot sleep because he is constantly awakened for his ticket, and usually he is in a crowded third-class compartment. The railway group in this House, including the right hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury) might look with a friendly eye upon this proposal, and if they have any doubt as to the discomfort of third-class travelling, I would invite the right hon. Baronet to share the compartment of my hon. Friends from Glasgow on one of the occasions that they have to make the journey from that city to London. Though he might be kept awake by the political theories of my hon. Friends, he would discover by the time he got to London that there was a case for providing sleeping accommodation for people who have to use third-class carriages. I believe that the Great Western train from Plymouth last Monday night left Plymouth with only half the first-class sleeping accommodation occupied. There were many people in the third-class carriages who would have been glad of the opportunity to pay the sleeping fee if they had had the accommodation.

The second point relates to the immoral action of the railway companies in robbing people of their fares when they do not use their return tickets. These return tickets are issued under all kinds of conditions. If you take a short railway journey the day, the return ticket is only available for the same day. In other cases a longer time is given, but in all cases the railway companies say that in the event of that ticket not being used, they will not recognise any obligation upon them to return the fare. [HON. MEMBERS: "Not so!"] I have a copy of the Regulations here, and I am certain that that is so. That means that the railway companies are not content with keeping your money without paying any interest on it, but they will not recognise any obligation to the man who has paid his fare, to have his contract carried out. The third point., relates to the necessity of providing some security against the facility with which railway carriage doors are opened during a journey. During the last week or so we have had one or two examples of that. I am told that the reason why no auto- matic appliance has been adopted is because the inventors cannot elicit the interest and attention of the railway companies. I am told that there is already an automatic appliance on the market which automatically locks a railway carriage door when the train is in motion, and automatically releases the door when the train stops.

These three much-needed reforms, which I propose to embody in this Bill, will mee, I hope, not only with a friendly reception by hon. Members, but will encourage the Government to provide facilities later on for passing the Bill as a non-contentious or a non-party Measure, because it affects all classes. It is high time that the railway companies, which have had granted to them a great monopoly by the nation, should recognise that they have obligations to discharge to the community in return for the monopoly that. the community has given to them. I hope, therefore, that the House will give me the First Reading of this Bill.

I beg to move,

" That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prevent the teaching of seditious doctrines or methods to the young; and for other purposes connected therewith."

The object of this Bill is to prevent the teaching of seditious matter to children under 16 years of age, and the dissemination of seditious literature among children. Let me make two points perfectly clear. First, no teaching or literature is interfered with by this Bill unless it be seditious according to the common law of England, and therefore illegal; and, secondly, this Bill in no way affects propaganda among adults. The teaching and literature at which this Bill is directed is of the recognised Communist type, which aims at destroying the existing Constitution and order of things, by force if necessary, and the setting up in its place of a revolution on the Russian model. For this purpose, class-hatred, a rebel spirit, and hatred and disaffection against the King and the Constitution are preached. Love of country and patriotism are denounced. [HON. MEMBERS: "No! "] Yes. Private property is anathematised as robbery, and owners of property—I wonder if hon. Members will cheer this—are held up to execration as "robbers and Judas Iscariots." I am quoting their words. Revolution on the Russian model is glorified, and, to use their own language, "Russia is the one bright spot," Let me say a word or two upon the object of this movement. The movement is the outcome of the First Congress of the Young Communist International, held at Berlin in November, 1919. That Congress issued a manifesto to the proletarian youth of all nations, which was published in England and Scotland, and which advocated the subversal of the existing order of things and—these are their words—for that purpose

" the use of every instrument of revolutionary class warfare, including armed resistance."

As a result, Young Communist Leagues have, been established in Great Britain and in many other countries. Schools have been established, and much literature has been published and circulated for inculcating these doctrines. The chief organ of the Young Communist League of Great Britain is a monthly paper called the "Young Communist," which is widely issued and distributed in the schools, and in the first number of that paper of December, 1921, there is announced—to use its own words—

" an intensive campaign to inspire the communist rebel spirit in the young people of our class."

At a later stage of the Bill, I hope to give illustrations of their preaching and literature, but it is not possible to give, or at least I cannot give at the moment, the exact number of these schools in Great Britain.

Name one.

My information is that there are somewhere near 100 of them.

Name one anywhere.

They are very numerous, and it is worthy of note that some of the schools Which have been lately known as Socialist Sunday Schools have been captured and turned into Communist Sunday Schools. The reason given by the promoters of this movement for inculcating these doctrines among the young is significant. The reason, in their own language, is this:

" Boys and girls are not so afraid of anything of a revolutionary nature as grown-up people."

What does that mean? It means that these people are prepared and desire to trade on the experience and helplessness of youth in order to poison their minds. I say that is a base act, and it is to be noted that resolutions have been passed and petitions have been sent by almost innumerable societies in this country, representing hundreds of thousands if not millions of people, calling for legislation on this subject.

The provisions of the Bill are exceedingly simple. Those who teach seditious matter to children under 16 or publish and disseminate seditious literature for the purpose of giving 'instruction to such children are guilty of an offence under the Bill, and on summary conviction are liable to a maximum fine of £50 or to a maximum term of imprisonment of three months. The Bill creates no new offence. The only change effected by the Bill is one of procedure. It provides that, instead of prosecution by indictment, people who offend under the Bill may be brought. before the magistrates and sentenced, subject, of course, to an appeal to Quarter Sessions.

There is only one other point that I wish to make. Complaints have been made from sonic quarters that this Bill is an infringement of freedom of speech. There could not be a greater misapprehension. The object of the Bill is the protection of children. The State has already recognised its obligation to protect children from long hours, from overwork, and from physical contamination and assault. That refers to their bodies. Can it be maintained that the State, which has recognised its obligation to protect the bodies of children, is not bound to protect their souls and their minds from contamination in their early and impressionable years?

I am reminded of two lines by a poet of the past—

" Never let your zeal outrun your charity.

The former is but human; the latter is divine."

It does seem to me that the promoter of this Bill is allowing his zeal to outrun his charity and to sonic extent also his judgment. T want to call attention also to the fact that in the petitions presented by various hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House, there are 72,718 signatures, and I find that those petitions are irregular to the number of 26 in the first. case, 28 in the second, and 11 in the third, thus discounting to a considerable degree their value. It seems to me that there has been a considerable attempt to manufacture opinion in regard to these Sunday schools, and that the promotion of this Bill is largely political spite in place of political wisdom. It is not at all in the interests of the nation or in the interests of fair play between Sunday school and Sunday school. The innocent ignorance of the hon. and learned Member who introduced the Bill is shown when he says that there are about 100 schools of the character he indicates in this country. When challenged, he failed to name even one.

I was not challenged to name one. [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes!"]

It seems to me that the Bill is a general attack upon what may he termed democratic Sunday schools, as distinct from Sunday schools connected with our churches and our chapels. This country has had a variety of Sunday schools for ages past. In the early days of last century, there were Sunday schools in which children were taught the three "R's "—reading, writing and arithmetic—and in my young days we were taught to read and to do sums and so forth at our Sunday school. T have not a single word to say against either church or chapel or any other Sunday school. Let them all come. Those Sunday schools which are teaching wrong will die, because truth is eternal, and will alone stand the test. of time. It therefore seems to me that some of the opposition has not been manufactured and engendered out of any desire to pre- vent sedition being taught, because there has been more sedition taught in clubs and institutions connected with organisations of hon. Gentlemen opposite than has ever been taught in any Sunday school. [Interruption.] I would like to challenge any criticism upon what I am going to assert are the doctrines taught by Sunday schools on the lines indicated by my observation just now. The first is:

" Love your schoolfellows who will he your fellow-workmen in life. Love learning which is the food of the mind. Be as grateful to your teachers as to your parents. Make every day holy by good and useful deeds and kindly practices. Honour the good. Be courteous to all. Bow down to none. Do not hate or speak evil of anyone. [Interruption.] Do not be revengeful, but stand up for your rights, and resist oppression. Do not be cowardly. Be a friend to the weak and love justice. Remember that all the good things of the earth are produced by labour. [Interruption.] Whoever enjoys them without working for them is stealing the bread of the workers,"—

and do not forget that there are workers by hand and by brain. We do not exclude any of these sections by these doctrines which we are teaching now. Every person who gives service is a worker. Then it says:

"Observe and think in order to discover the truth. Do not believe what is contrary to reason and never deceive yourself or others. Do not think that those who love their own country must hate and despise other nations, or wish for war, which is a remnant of barbarism. Look forward to the day —[Interruption].

On a point of Order. [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down!"] This is extremely interesting, but it is not in the proletarian—[Interruption>].

It has nothing to do with the communist doctrines. [Interruption.]

If hon. Members on both sides do not observe order, I shall decline to allow the Question to be put. There is no cause for interruption, and I shall not allow the interruption of anybody.

My final quotation is

"Look forward to the day when all men and women will be free citizens of one Fatherland and live together as brothers and sisters in peace and righteousness."

I ask my hon. Friends if that is seditious teaching. [HON. MEMBERS "No!" and " Eyewash! "] Then I wish there were more eyewash taught to-day. That does not include all the teaching. It teaches us so to guide the human soul that we shall have an understanding of the Beatitudes when they say, "Blessed are the peacemakers," and it teaches the principles of the 13th Chapter of Corinthians which are love, faith and justice. Then again the hymns include Longfellow, Morris, Shelley, Whittier, Montgomery and many others. The last observation which I have to make is in these declarations of the Sunday schools we say we desire to be just and loving to all our fellow-men and women, to work together as brothers, to be kind to every living creature, and so to help to form a new society with justice as its foundation and love as its law.

This Motion is one to which the House is accustomed in the last week of the first Session of any Parliament, and while there are not in this case the same grounds for complaint against the Government with regard to the time of the House, as on former occasions, still there are one or two points which are worth while raising again, so as to get some information from the Government In previous Sessions the time of private Members has frequently been taken by the Government for many more days than this Motion proposes to take. On this occasion I think, with the exception of one or two instances, for which the Government were not responsible, when the Chairman of Ways and Means took away the time of private Members, the Government themselves have not taken any of the private Members' time except Tuesday and Wednesday of this week. In previous Sessions this point has been raised. I remember that the Patronage Secretary interested himself in this particular question. The point is as to whether instead of meeting those difficulties by a purely ad hocMotion on the Paper when the occasion arises, the, time has not arrived when a Committee of the House of Commons, composed of some of the older Members, with greater experience of how the business of the House is conducted, should not be formed to try to come to some better arrangement as to the use of Government and private Members' time from Session to Session.

It raises. in addition to the questions which I have touched upon, the allocation of Government Bills to different periods of the Session. For instance, we have now reached Easter, and have not yet had introduced any of the first-class Measures for which the Government are responsible this Session. That probably means that after Whitsuntide we shall be run again into late nights. I always think that the Government meet too late in the year to cover their business before the end of March. There is, of course, a point as to whether we meet too late in the day, but that is a separate question from the allocation of business. We usually find that up to the 31st March the Government have got to surrender what amounts to two days every week, and there is considerable pressure to get through Government business by that time. The

We cannot discuss that matter under this Motion. The general form does not arise here.

I am not putting that, Mr. Speaker. On this Motion we are entitled to discuss—

Hon. Members must not remain standing in the Gangway.

This Motion is taking away private Members' time. I was suggesting that the way out of that difficulty was not by attacking the Standing Orders, but by setting up a Committee of the House. It is time we went into the matter to see if Government business could not be allocated in such a way as to make such Motions as this unnecessary. I should like to know if we may expect anything being done.

The matter raised by my hon. Friend has been engaging the attention of the Patronage Secretary and he and T have had some discussions on it. We arc giving it our full consideration.