Commons Chamber

                    The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.
                

House Of Commons

Tuesday, 20th April, 1926.

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

Private Business

PRIVATE BILLS [ Lords] (Standing Orders not previously inquired into complied with),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, namely:

Birkenhead Corporation Bill [ Lords].

Darwen Corporation Bill [ Lords].

Ascot District Gas and Electricity Bill [ Lords].

Bills to be read a Second time.

PRIVATE BILLS (Petitions for additional Provision) (Standing Orders not com-with),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the Petition for additional Provision in the following Bill, the Standing Orders have Orders are applicable, namely:

Southern Railway Bill.

Report referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (Standing Orders applicable thereto complied with).

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, namely:

Ministry of Health Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill.

Bill to be read a Second time Tomorrow.

PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (No Standing Orders applicable),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, namely:

Land Drainage Provisional Order (No. 1) Bill.

Bill to be read a Second time Tomorrow.

Oral Answers To Questions

Mercantile Marine

Deaths Of Seamen And Fishermen

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many members of the British Mercantile Marine lost their lives during 1925 while in the exercise of their calling, exclusive of fishermen; and how many British fishermen lost their lives in 1925 in pursuit of their calling?

The number of deaths from all causes reported as having occurred in 1925 among the crews of merchant vessels registered in Great Britain and Northern Ireland was 1,413. This figure includes fishermen, of whom I am not yet in a position to give separate particulars.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me the separate figures when he has them?

I shall get those in the analysis which is made each year, and when I get them I will give them to the hon. and gallant Member.

Engineering Examinations (Scotland)

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether in view of the representations made to him against the departmental decision to discontinue marine engineering students' examinations at Dundee, he will reconsider this decision with a view to ascertaining the inconvenience and additional expense to the students without any economy to the Department?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what economy would be effected if the Port of Aberdeen were discontinued as an examination centre for marine engineers; and what additional expense would he thrown upon young working men from the North of Scotland during their period of study when they are not wage earning?

I have considered the representations that have been made to the Board of Trade about the continuance of examinations of marine engineers at Dundee and Aberdeen, and I regret that I do not see my way to modify the previous decision, which was arrived at after careful consideration and with considerable reluctance.

The examination of engineers at these two ports could not be continued in an efficient manner except by the appointment of an additional Engineer Surveyor, involving an estimated annual expenditure of at least£500. The additional expense falling on candidates from the north of Scotland by the closing of examinations at the ports in question will be, speaking generally, the cost of travelling to Leith for the examination and back, and the cost of residence at that port during the examination.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the technical college in Dundee will be seriously hampered in their work, and that the town council is protesting against this being done?

I do not see how the technical college can be hampered in their work because the examination by the surveyor takes place at Leith rather than at Dundee.

But will not the students be inconvenienced by having to go to Leith and thus tend to he drawn from the technical college in Dundee?

I should not have thought so, because if the instruction given at Dundee is good, the fact that they are examined by a Surveyor in Leith will not stop them being educated or instructed in Dundee, and it is really very important that one should have a particular Surveyor for the examination work, otherwise you will not get the best results.

Arising out of the original answer, would the right hon. Gentleman not be prepared to consider further representations, which might take this form, that the examination should take place in the city which was the centre of the area, and not a point further south? Should not the examination take place in the largest city, which is Dundee, which is the centre of the area, and not compel the students to go from the north and centre to the south of the area?

I will consider any representations, but I do not think that that would be practicable, because the numbers coming either from Aberdeen or Dundee are, I think, comparatively small compared with the numbers from Leith. But if there are any representations that could be made, I would consider them. I should say that the reason why the port of Leith is fixed on is that at the port of Leith we. have two surveyors, and therefore, one of them is able to take the examination for the whole area, whereas at Dundee there is only one surveyor.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state whether this policy is part of the general policy pursued by the Government of economising on educational facilities?

Not the least: it has nothing to do with it.

Government Departments

Board Of Trade (Welfare Attendant)

asked the President. of the Board of Trade what are the functions of the welfare attendant. in his Department?

The duties referred to consist in keeping charge, under supervision, of the first-aid equipment and of the women's rest room, and in attending the members of the female staff.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his Depart meat is apparently the only one which has such an attendant, and will he commend that fact to the notice of his colleagues?

I think the description "welfare attendant" perhaps is not quite the most accurate one which might be given.

Civil Service (Bonus)

34.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that civil servants in receipt of over£500 a year are subjected to a super-cut on war bonus not applicable to other members of the Civil Service; that there is dissatisfaction in the service in consequence whether application has been made by the staff side of the Civil Service National Whitley Council for the official side to agree to terms of remit for the submission of the case to the Civil Service Arbitration Court; what are the reasons which are causing the official side to delay agreeing to the formalities necessary under the constitution of the court; and whether he will give assurances to expedite the submission of the case to arbitration?

The staff side of the Civil Service National Whitley Council have made repeated representations on the subject referred to in the hon. and learned Member's question, and on being informed that His Majesty's Government were not able to agree, in existing circumstances, to the cessation of the scheme for the payment of reduced rates of bonus to civil servants receiving basic salaries in excess of£500 a year, have asked that their claim should be submitted to arbitration. The matter is now under consideration, and there will be no avoidable delay in dealing with it.

Safeguarding Of Industries

Worsted Textile Trade

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the delay in making known the recommendations of the Committee which inquired into the application of the worsted textile trade for a protective duty on foreign imports under the safeguarding of industries procedure is causing considerable dislocation throughout the textile industry of the West Riding of Yorkshire; and whether, in view of this fact, he will state what are the intentions of the Government with regard to this question?

My information as to the worsted textile trade does not accord with that of the hon. Member; and as regards the policy of publishing reports, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to him on the 9th March.

In view of the importance of the evidence submitted to the Committee, and in view of the very large and important interests involved, does the right hon. Gentleman think it fair to withhold a statement as to what the intentions of the Government are, and will he name a. date when he will make a statement?

That is an argument.

Manufactured Woollen And Worstedyarns

10.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the large increase of imports of wholly or mainly manufactured woollen or worsted yarns and manufactures during the first three months of the year; and whether, in view of these facts, he is prepared to reconsider the question of safeguarding those industries?

Whilst the declared value of the imports of woollen and worsted yarns and manufactures imported during the first three months of the current. year was practically the same as in the corresponding period of 1925, the volume of imports was greater by about 6 per cent. An application for the safeguarding of one section of the industry has recently been the subject of inquiry by a Committee, whose report will be published in a few days.

Could the right hon. Gentleman tell us how much of this was single worsted yarn, which is not mainly produced in this country?

No, I should want notice of that.

Gloves

13.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can supply statistics as to purchases made by British glove factors from the wool staplers and leather manufacturers and as to the degree of prosperity now enjoyed by the industry?

I regret that statistical information of the particular kind asked for by my hon. Friend is not available. I understand, however, that there has recently been a decided improvement in the leather glove industry, and that over the industry as a whole employment is generally good.

Gas Mantles

14.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantity and value of gas mantles imported during the three months ended 31st March during the years 1924, 1925, and 1926?

The imports of gas mantles were as follow:

		Gross.
First quarter of 1924	…	48,000
First quarter of 1925	…	45,000
First quarter of 1926	…	12,000

The values of these imports were, respectively,£41,000,£48,000, and£14,000.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that British manufacturers of gas mantles and German manufacturers of gas mantles have agreed that the Germans shall not export gas mantles to this country and that this country shall not export gas mantles to certain countries with which Germany deals?

I am aware of an agreement which is to come into force in the future, but the figures which I have given relate to a time at which no such agreement was in force.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that an oral agreement had already been made long before the agreement was concluded to which I have referred?

That question should be put down.

Imports

16.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of key industry goods imported during 1925 and 1913, respectively?

The value of goods on which Key Industry Duty was paid in the year 1925 was£1,533,942. I regret that similar information is not available for 1913, when there was no duty in force and the statistics of such goods were not kept separately.

Trade And Commerce

Japanese Hair And Tooth Brushes

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that large quantities of Japanese hair brushes and tooth brushes of a very cheap quality have been recently imported into this country; if he can give the number and value of these brushes; and what steps he is taking to protect the public from the risk of anthrax and British brushmakers from being thrown out of employment thereby?

The answer is rather a long one, and contains a table of figures. I will, accordingly, with the permission of my hon. and gallant Friend, have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May we have an answer to the latter part of the question with regard to the steps taken to protect the public?

If there is any question to be asked really relating to that, it should be put to the Home Office.

Is it not a fact that the hairs of these brushes come out, and cause appendicitis?

I should require notice of that question, but I think it probably ought to be addressed to the Ministry of Health, and I certainly could not give an answer without notice.

Following is the reply

The imports of toilet brushes consigned from Japan in the first three months of

this year compare as follows with those in the corresponding period of 1925:

—	January March, 1925.	January March, 1926.
Tooth Brushes—Dozens	184,274	123,753
Value	24,308	17,349
Other Toilet—Dozens	19,149	16,598
Brushes. Value	18,066	14,015

In answer to the rest of the question, the necessity for action to guard against risk of anthrax is a matter for the consideration of the Home Secretary; whilst as regards employment, the Commit-tee of Inquiry which I recently appointed, reported after a very thorough investigation that the brush industry did not fulfil the conditions laid down in the White Paper relating to the Safeguarding of Industries.

Artificial Silk Manufactures

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the exports of artificial silk manufactures during the first three months of the year has been affected by the recent duties, or whether the value of such exports has increased; and, if so, what is the percentage increase in exports over the same three months of 1925?

The declared values of the exports of artificial silk manufactures (except apparel and embroidery) from the United Kingdom during the first quarters of 1926 and of 1925 were£1,357,489 and£742,178, respectively. The total for 1926 thus exceeded that for 1925 by 82·9 per cent.

May we take it on this evidence that the export trade of the country, rather than being adversely affected, has been benefited by the duties?

I think that is a very reasonable assumption to draw.

Would not the export trade be much greater but for these hampering duties?

No, Sir.

May we take it, in view of the successful result of pro- tective duties in this case, that the right hon. Gentleman will use his influence to increase them?

Europe (Exports And Imports)

12.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the value of exports of manufactures to Europe during the first three months of 1926; what was the value of the imports of manufactures from Europe in the same period; and what were the corresponding figures for 1913?

I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend a reprint of an article from the Board of Trade Journal giving the latest available figures of our imports and exports to and from Europe and elsewhere. These figures relate to the calendar year 1925, and are not divided so as to show separately manufactured and other commodities. Nevertheless, they give some general idea of the trade between this country and the Continent. Similar figures are published in the Board of Trade Journal at quarterly intervals. The labour involved in extracting particulars of our trade in manufactured and other goods with individual countries is such that it is only possible to compile them in respect of complete calendar years. The figures relating to 1925 will be included in the first volume of the Annual Statement of Trade for that year, which will be published towards the end of this year.

Is it not a fact that the exports of manufactures to this country now equal or are greater than the exports of manufactures from this country to Europe, and is this not a very serious fact, and, if so, will the right hon. Gentleman call the attention of the Prime Minister to it?

If my hon. and gallant Friend will put down a specific question as to the aggregate exports from Europe and imports to Europe, I think I might be able to answer it, but the difficulty is in dealing with specific countries. As regards the ratio of exports and imports of manufactured articles, those are, I think, published regularly in the returns of the Board a Trade.

Customs Import Duties

15.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the total imports during the first three months, respectively, of 1925 and 1926 of all the goods on which new Customs duties were imposed by the legislation of 1925 and also the total exports of the same commodities during the same periods?

As far as the information is available, the figures required are being collected, and I will forward them to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

17.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value of musical instruments on which duty is now chargeable and that have been imported during the first three months of 1925 as compared with the first three months of this year; and the amount of duty that has been collected during the latter period?

The total value of complete musical instruments imported during the period 1st January to 31st March, 1925, was£301,847. The total value of such articles imported during the corresponding period in this year was£77,337, and the net amount of duty collected£24,912.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the musical instrument makers in this country are working more regularly than they were in the same period during 1925?

I cannot say that.

In view of the success of this tax on foreign goods, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of approaching the Prime Minister with regard to his pledges for safeguarding other industries?

The fiscal Debates will come later.

18.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value of watches and clocks on which duty is now chargeable that have been imported during the first three months of 1925 as compared with the first three months of this year; and the amount of duty that has been collected during the latter period?

The total value of complete clocks and watches imported during the period 1st January to 31st March, 1925, was£610,453. The total value of such articles imported during the corresponding period in this year was£174,529 and the net amount of duty collected£53,255.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there has been any improvement in the jewellery trade of this country this year compared with last year?

Are the increases for 1925 not due to the fact, that there was a great rush of imports, in view of the imposition of this tax?

I can only give the facts; I cannot say to what they were due.

19.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value and the number of motor cars on which duty is now chargeable that have been imported into this country during the first three months of 1925 as compared with the first three months of this year; and the amount of duty that has been collected during the latter period?

The number of complete motor cars liable to duty imported during the period 1st January to 31st March of this year was 2,669 and their value£459,042. The net amount of duty collected during this period was£128,229. The number of complete motor cars of descriptions now within the charge of duty imported during the corresponding period in 1925 was 7,531 and their value£1,386,798.

rose—

Hon. Members must reserve their fiscal opinions.

Companies Acts (Committee)

20.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how long the Departmental Committee on the Companies Acts has been sitting; and whether he has made any representation to the Committee as to the expedition or retardation of their Report?

The first meeting was held on the 22nd January, 1925. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

In view of the fact that this Committee has now been sitting for 15 months, and that with every week of delay greater hauls are being obtained by financial plunderers and buccaneers in the City of London—

That is evidently in the nature of a speech.

British Army

Troops At Konigstein

22.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many British troops are now quartered at Konigstein, in the Rhineland; how many private houses have been requisitioned for their use; and whether any complaint has been made at a larger garrison than that of the French, whom they replace, being quartered on so small a town?

Twenty-seven officers and 721 other ranks are quartered at Konigstein. Eight private houses and eight flats have been requisitioned, and the families of four officers and 37 other ranks are accommodated in billets. As regards the third part of the question, no specific complaint as to the increase of the garrison at Konigstein has been received, but general representations, including a reference to Konigstein, have been made on the score of increased demand for accommodation. Every effort is made to reduce such demands to a minimum, but owing to the different circumstances and conditions of service of the two Armies, I cannot accept the principle that the British Army should requisition no more accommodation than the French Army.

Is there any particular reason for a larger garrison occupying this small town than when the French were in occupation?

It is a question of the most convenient disposition of the troops.

Would it he possible to reduce the number of our troops in the occupied area, in view of the difficulties of finding them accommodation?

They have already been very considerably reduced for that very reason.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information that civilian families have been turned out of their houses to provide accommodation for British troops?

No, I have no specific information of that kind.

Moss Litter

26.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether moss litter is now being used by cavalry and other regiments in place of straw; whether it is British or imported; and what is the amount of such purchases in the past year?

Peat moss litter is included in the local contracts for forage in home commands, being taken as a substitute for straw at the option of officers commanding units. The actual quantities as taken and the proportion of British to imported peat moss are not available on record, but the amount is not large. The only purchase made by the War Office during last year was for shipment abroad, and was of British origin. It value was£158.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in making purchases of this kind the Government is displacing British produce, and is it still the motto of the Government that we should buy British goods "?

My information is directly contrary to that statement. I have already said that the only purchase made by the War Office last year was of British origin.

I am referring to the purchases made during the present year.

If the hon. Member will let me know to what particular purchase he is referring, I will make inquiries and give him an answer, but I am. now replying to the general question

Would it be possible for the Department to give instructions that no goods of this kind shall be purchased from abroad? That would not require legislation, because it is purely a matter of administration.

My hon. and gallant Friend will realise that, as I have already said, the only purchase we can trace was of British origin. The other purchases in the actual commands are of a very small character, involving very small amounts.

Aden Garrison

21.

asked the Secretary of State for War who is responsible for the inspection, the training, and the administration of the garrison of Aden; whether the artillery is armed with mobile or immobile guns and, if with the former, whether they have any means of traction; to what Vote is the cost of the garrison debited; and who deals with the amount so debited?

Under present arrangements, which are now under review, India is responsible for the inspection, training and administration of the garrison of Aden and the cost is borne by Indian revenues, subject to a contribution from Army funds. The information regarding the artillery armament at this station, for which my hon. and gallant Friend asks, covers details of defence which it would be contrary to the public interest to disclose.

Australia (Naval Guns)

23.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, with reference to nine Mark 5 four-inch guns for Australia which were recently ordered through the War Office, together with the necessary mechanism, three principal firms of contractors all tendered at the same price, and that the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, tendered at£200 less per set, and was prepared to complete the work in the same time; what was the reason why the work was placed in the hands of a contractor; and whether the War Office or the Australian Government is to bear the cost of the additional price?

I have been asked to reply. No orders for these guns have yet been placed. I may acid that the decision of such a matter rests with the Commonwealth Government.

Secret Documents (Publication)

24 and 25.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether any person has been held responsible for the compilation of the document (referred to in the book entitled "As Others see Us"), which was produced in an affidavit of documents by the authoress, and which the Army Council, on 25th August, 1925. offered to recall; if so, what disciplinary action, if any, has been taken to obviate a similar occurrence in the future; and whether any inquiry was held concerning the matter of private and confidential communications being published in the book referred to;

(2) whether the book entitled "As Others see Us," written anonymously by a lady, and now withdrawn from publication, in which accusations and statements concerning an officer who held the position of Commandant, Auxiliary Division, Royal Irish Constabulary, during part of 1920 and 1921, was written and published with the consent or approval of any Government Department; and, if not, will he explain how the quoted documents some of which were secret and confidential, got into the hands of a private citizen in their original form?

The book referred to was not published with the knowledge, consent or approval of any Government Department, nor so far as I know did it contain any quotation from any secret or confidential document. The document stated in the question to have been disclosed in an affidavit of documents has already been the subject of correspondence with the officer concerned, and the course indicated in the Army Council letter of 25th August, 1925, has accordingly been taken, but without result, as inquiry has elicited that no copies of such document can be discovered as existing in any other Government office. It is regrettable that any such document should have found its way into un- authorized hands, but I cannot, on behalf of the War Office, admit any responsibility therefor. Every possible precaution is taken for safeguarding secret or confidential documents.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what particular document is referred to?

It was the document to which the right hon. Gentleman referred in his question.

In view of the fact that an old soldier who served in the Army for many years is involved, will the Secretary of State for War institute inquiries as to how this document got into unauthorised hands, and try to trace the responsibility?

I know nothing about the document, and I do not know where I can commence to inquire.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it would be impossible to compile these records without official documents of importance, and that there must have been a leakage somewhere? Is it not due at least to the honour of the War Office that an inquiry should be made?

That is a matter for argument, and it is very difficult to deal with it in answer to a question. I do not really know how this document got out or through what agency, and I do not know where to begin inquiries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the authoress of this book had a relative working in the propaganda department in Dublin Castle, and will he state whether any inquiry was made as to whether he was responsible?

No such inquiry has been made. All this took place some time prior to 1921, and, as the hon. Gentleman will realise, it is extremely difficult to pursue any inquiry that would be of any use.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not know now that there is a place where he can begin his inquiries, after the hint which has just been given by my hon. Friend.

I authorised hands, but I cannot, on behalf do not think that such an inquiry would of the War Office, admit any responsibility be in the least fruitful.

Scotland

Crops And Grass (Acreage)

27.

asked the Secretary for Scotland What was the number of acres in Scotland under crops and grass in the year 1908 and the figures for the latest available date?

In 1908, the area under crop was 3,398,331 acres, and under grass 1,474,142 acres. In 1925, the area under crop was 3,229,359, and under grass 1,475,838 acres.

Co-Operative Egg Marketing, Orkney Islands

28.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is now in a position to lay upon the Table a copy of the recent Report supplied to the Scottish Board of Agriculture upon the practice of co-operative marketing of eggs in the Orkney Islands?

I have asked the Board of Agriculture for Scotland to prepare a statement respecting agricultural co-operation in Orkney, based upon information collected by the officer who made the Report referred to in the question and upon later information so far as available. Publication of the actual Report made by the officer to his Department would not be appropriate because some of the matter contained in it was given confidentially, and because in some respects it does not include the latest information. When the statement is ready I shall be glad to furnish a copy to any hon. Member who may desire to have one.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take some steps to let it be known when the Report is ready for publication, so that we may apply for it?

Yes, Sir.

Agricultural Workers (Statistics)

29.

asked the Secretary for Scotland, if he can give the figures showing the number of regular and casual male workers employed in agricul- tune in Scotland in the year 1908 and the figures for 1924 or the latest available date?

In 1908, 119,000 regular male workers and 15,000 casual male workers were employed in agriculture in Scotland; the corresponding numbers for 1925 were 82,650 and 10,450. These figures do not include occupiers.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any explanation of the extraordinary fall in the number of persons regularly employed in agriculture in Scotland from 119,000 to 82,000?

I should not like to venture on an explanation of it in reply to a question.

Is not the explanation contained in the right hon. Gentleman's previous answer as to the decreased number of acres under cultivation? Is not the decrease in the number of men a direct result of that, and, in view of that, will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to bring this land under cultivation again, in order to find work for these people in their own country?

This does not arise from the question.

Land Raids, Harris

34.

asked the Secretary for Scotland what the position now is regarding the recent land raids in Harris?

Since I gave my reply on this subject a week ago, I have been informed that on Wednesday last the men concerned in the case of Borve Deer Forest had returned home, after placing pegs or small cairns on the ground, and were not in actual occupation of land. I may add for the information of the V Member, of whose interest in this matter I am aware, that, prior to the raids made on Scarristaveg and Borve Deer Forest, the Board of Agriculture had succeeded in securing the settlement of 41 applicants on two farms in Harris, with the co-operation of the proprietors.

Small Holdings

31.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he will consider the advisability of obtaining powers to grant, as a subsidy to men desiring small holdings in Scotland, a sum equal to the amount paid as subsidy in assisted passages to emigrants from Scotland, and thereby induce people to colonise vacant land in Scotland?

The average contribution made by the State towards the cost of settling smallholders in Scotland is already greatly in excess of the subsidy for assisted passages to which the hon. Member refers. In the circumstances, I see no reason for proceeding in the manner suggested in the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a certain sum was set aside to assist emigration, and that only about one-fifth has been spent? Could not the other four-fifths be used in this direction?

32.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, as he has applications for small holdings from 12,000 people who are still waiting for land to cultivate, he will state when he intends putting into operation the compulsory powers he possesses to obtain sufficient land to satisfy the claims of the applicants in full?

The number of applications outstanding for new holdings, as opposed to enlargements, is 6,839, The progress of land settlement depends to a very large extent on the funds available rather than on the use compulsory powers. As I indicated in my reply to the hon. Member for Dundee on the I4th April, land settlement is proceeding and will proceed in suitable areas as the means at my disposal will permit.

Coal-Mining Companies (Profits)

36.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he can inform the House as to the total amount of profit earned by British coal-mining companies during the year ending 31st March, 1926, and the total amount disbursed in dividends for the same period; and the total paid-up capital in British coal-mining companies, and the portion thereof due to bonus shares allocation, since December, 1914?

I regret that the particular figures for which the hon. Member asks are not available, but he will find much information in Appendix 38 in the third volume of the Report of the recent Royal Commission, where the subject is fully discussed.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think, having regard to the fact that this House voted something like£16,000,000 for the relief of this industry, that we are entitled to know, before we go any further, what the actual position of the industry is?

I cannot give figures that I have not yet got. I am asked for figures up to the 31st March, but I have not yet got them.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman, as Secretary for Mines, ask the mineowners of this country to give him such information, in order that the House of Commons may have it when it is called upon to discuss the matter of the subsidy?

The figures for profits will come in in time, hut I have not got them up to the 31st March.

If the Minister does obtain that information, will he at the same time give the House information as to those coal-mining companies which paid no dividend, and also those which went into liquidation last year?

Is it not possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give the figures from 1914 to the 31st December, 1925, which are available and are in that Report?

Yes, Sir; if the hon. and gallant Gentleman asks me for those figures, he can have them. With regard to the other supplementary question, I am not sure that I can give the information, but I should be very glad to do so if I could.

Is not the information asked for in the last part of the question available, and, if so, could it be published in the OFFICIAL REPORT?

No, Sir, I have no information on that head.

Transport

Sea Wall Road, Sidmouth

38.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the length and classification of the road at Sidmouth adjoining the new sea wall classified under Section 17 of the Ministry of Transport Act, 1919, for the purposes of a grant from the Road Fund; at what date the classification was made; and whether the road is used as a through route for traffic between Sidmouth and any other place or is it used only as an access for houses fronting the Esplanade?

The length of the classified road at Sidmouth adjoining the new sea wall is approximately 238 yards. It was classified as part of Route B3176, five years ago. It forms part of an indispensable link between the two principal roads leading into Sidmouth from the north.

39.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will state separately the amounts of the respective estimates for the new sea wall at Sidmouth and the road in respect of which he has offered a Road Fund grant of£15,935; what is the length of road for the purposes of grant; and whether he will give a specific description of the road works in respect of which this grant was offered as distinguished from the work of constructing the sea wall?

The estimate for the repair of the sea wall and of the road which it supports was not subdivided, and the figures do not lend themselves to dissection under these heads. The length of classified road which needed reconstruction is approximately 580 feet. The roadway itself has been reconstructed with concrete and tar-macadam.

Omnibuses (Alternative Routes)

40.

asked the Minister of Transport, whether he has been able to find alternative routes for those privately-owned omnibuses that have been ordered to give up their normal routes; and if he can give the number of omnibuses so transferred and the number which have ceased to run?

The proprietors to whom my hon. and gallant Friend refers have been informed that my Department are prepared, in conjunction with the Commissioner of Police, to examine concrete proposals for the extension of existing omnibus routes, and for the establishment of new routes not directly competing with other passenger transport services, so as to enable these proprietors to retain in service any of their omnibuses which might otherwise be displaced. So far I have only received one such application. I am not aware that any of the omnibuses belonging to the proprietors have yet been withdrawn from service.

Post Office

Parcels (Customs Examination)

42.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that his Department did not answer the queries in a letter from the Huddersfield Chamber of Commerce, dated 1st January, until 28th January, and even then the only information elicited was that inquiries relating to parcels delayed in the post for search by the Customs Department are referred to that Department; and whether he can explain the long delay of the Post Office in sending answers of this sort?

Receipt of tile letter of the Huddersfield Chamber of Commerce was duly acknowledged by the Post Office on 5th January, and it was explained on 28th January, in reply to the Chamber's further letter of 25th January, that the matter had been referred to the Department of Customs and Excise. I regret that the Post Office was not in a position to send a full reply, but the matter was one in which the Department of Customs and Excise were primarily concerned, and their inquiries had not then been completed.

Would it not have been possible for the Post Office to give that piece of simple information at a much earlier date than the 28th January?

The Post Office were unaware precisely how long it would take the Department of Customs and Excise to make their detailed inquiries.

Letters (Morning Delivery)

43.

asked the Postmaster-General how many local authorities have asked, since November, 1924, for an earlier delivery of letters in the morning; and what steps have been taken by his Department to meet such demand?

I have no record of the number of such applications. There are very serious practical difficulties in the way of any general advancement of the time of beginning or completing the morning deliveries. Where it is possible to improve facilities in special cases, the most careful consideration is given to any applications.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what progress has been made towards substituting road transport in place of railway transport, where the former would give an earlier delivery?

That is a continuous process.

Trans-Atlantic Telephony

44.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, following the recent successful trans-Atlantic telephonic communications, any further developments are taking place; and, if so, whether he is able to give the House any further particulars?

I am not in a position to give the House any further information in regard to these tests at present. Experiments continue to be conducted with a view to solving the numerous technical difficulties involved in simultaneous two-way radio-telephone transmission, where land telephone lines must be associated with the radio link at both the transmitting and receiving ends.

Imperial Penny Postage

59.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the fact that, following the example of New Zealand, the Dominion of Canada is proposing to re-introduce Imperial penny postage; and whether he is now able to suggest any approximate date when this country may again enjoy the same benefit?

The postage on letters from South Africa to other parts of the Empire is 2d. per ounce; from Canada it is 4 cents (2d.) for the first ounce and 3 cents (1½d.) for each additional ounce; and I have no information of any proposal to reduce those rates. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Suspension Of Members (Allowances)

45.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will introduce a provision in the Standing Orders for the suspension of Members salaries, simultaneously with the suspension of their services?

Before the Chancellor of the Exchequer replies to this question, may I ask him also whether, simultaneously with considering this question, the Government have considered the circumstances arising out of the absence of service due to the shift system?

In answering this question, I will at the same time answer the preliminary interpolation of the right hon. Gentleman. The proposal of my hon. Friend is a matter for the decision of the House, and, until the Prime Minister is convinced that it is the general wish of the House that such a rule should be laid down, he does not propose to take any action.

May I take it that that is also the answer to my question?

The greater includes the less.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider it fair that the British taxpayer should have to pay the salaries of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who have been suspended? [Interruption.]

What about those opposite who come only twice a week, and some who do not attend at all?

Disarmament

46.

asked the Prime Minister what stage of progress has been reached in the negotiations of disarmament proceeding under the auspices of the League of Nations?

I am at a loss to understand to what negotiations the hon. and gallant Member is referring. By decision of the Council of the League in December last, a Preparatory Committee on Disarmament was appointed to prepare the way for an eventual conference on Disarmament. The first meeting of that Committee is fixed for May 18th.

Enemy Action Claims

47.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much of the sum of£5,300,000 allocated by the Government to meet the claims of those who suffered loss and damage through enemy action has been distributed to claimants; and what is the amount of outstanding claims to date?

The total amount distributed to claimants up to the present is£4,886,000. It is impossible to state what is the amount of outstanding claims as some 2,000 claimants have not yet returned the forms issued to them.

Antique Silk

48.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will permit antique silk to be admitted without duty or, failing that, for it to be readmitted free into Great Britain when it has been taken abroad for exhibition or profession purposes?

Silk articles, whether antiques or otherwise, taken abroad for such purposes as exhibition, and not remanufactured abroad, would be admitted free of duty on return to this country, subject to any drawback paid on export being repaid to the Exchequer.

In what period does silk become antique?

I think I have replied to the question on the Paper, and for the purpose of this question I am not called upon to distinguish between what is and is not an antique.

Treasury Bills

49.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total amount of Treasury bills issued for each of the three years 1922–23, 1923–24 and 1924–25; and what was the amount of

Information is given in the Finance Accounts for the years in question as follows:—
—				Raised by Three Months Treasury Bills.	Paid in Redemption of Three Months Treasury Bills.	Interest on Treasury Bills.
				£	£	£
1922–23	…	…	…	2,851,096,000	3,117,109,000	16,222,146
1923–24	…	…	…	2,470,746,000	2,498,435,000	17,355,304
1924–25	…	…	…	2,400,647,000	2,413,395,000	20,802,233

Super-Tax

50.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what amount of Super-tax remained unpaid at the close of the last financial year, and by how many persons?

The amount of Super-tax for the year 1925–26 which was assessed by 31st March last was£47,500,000, and of this sum£32,500,000 was paid by 31st March. The figure of£47,500,000 represents, I may say, a much higher proportion of the year's charge than was attained in previous years. I regret that the information asked for in the latter part of the question is not available.

Is it not possible to get the number of persons in arrear?

I could not answer that without notice.

I understand that the right hon. Gentleman said the amount of Super-tax last year was£30,000,000 odd. Can he explain the discrepancy between the sum assessed and the much larger sum collected?

No, I said the amount of Super-tax for the year 1925–6 which was assessed. by 31st March last was£47,500,000, and of that amount£32,500,000 was paid by 31st March.

As the difference between the figures is still very large, can the right hon. Gentleman explain?

money allowed in discount on these hills for the same periods?

With the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the figures promised:

We are comparing different things. It would be more convenient to deal with a matter of that kind in Debate.

Was it the fact that these wealthy people had not paid their taxes that determined the right hon. Gentleman to bring an Economy Bill to rob 15,000,000 workers?

52.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that, as the law now stands, a company may make a bonus distribution of debenture shares to a person liable for Super-tax, and that such debentures may afterwards be redeemed for cash, and the cash thus received is not liable to Super-tax and if he intends to take any steps to fill this gap in the law governing Super-tax?

I am aware that the effect of recent judicial decisions is that a bonus distribution by a company in the form of an issue of its debentures does not in certain circumstances constitute income of the recipients for Supertax purposes. Where this is the position it would appear that the subsequent redemption of the debentures would not normally entail liability. I am not prepared at the present time to express an opinion as to the desirability of legislation on the subject.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give a, general assurance that in this and in all other respects he will press the attack home on the Super-tax payers with the same vigour as he has pressed it on the insured persons?

I think the increasing efficiency of the collection of Super-tax should be a complete answer to that question.

Is not this a method of securing evasion of the payment of proper taxation; and what steps does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take in order to put an. end to this new method of evading legitimate taxation?

At regular intervals, on the presentation of the Finance Bill, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is accustomed to propose certain measures for stopping such leakages as from time to time make their appearance in our system of taxation. Whether this particular leakage is of sufficient dimensions to require immediate treatment is a matter on which I have nothing to say at present.

As the leakage for the last financial year amounts to 25 per cent., will the right hon. Gentleman consider closing this very wide door in his next Budget?

The hon. Member is under a misapprehension when he says the leakage amounts to 25 per cent. Super-tax and Income Tax are collected as expeditiously as possible throughout the year, and the rapidity of collection is increasing every year.

United States (British Debt)

51.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the loan which is now being repaid to America was contracted for the use of the British Government exclusively or in part; and whether it was lent directly to the Continental Allies by America with the guarantee of the British Government, or whether it was borrowed by Great Britain from America and then lent to the other Allies?

The hon. Member's description of these transactions is not correct. Our debt to the United States is formally independent of the debts of the Allies to us. It is nevertheless true, as I stated in this House on the 10th December, 1924, that"if we had not lent to the Allies£2,000,000,000, we should not have had to incur£1,000,000,000 of debt to the United States."

France (Debt Negotiations)

53.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether M. Raoul Péret has yet specified any date for his visit to this country; and, if not, what steps does he propose to take to hasten the re-opening of negotiations?

I propose to deal with those matters in the Budget speech, which I would ask the hon. Member to await.

As it is not possible to persuade the French Finance Minister to come here, owing to a succession of accidental reasons, can the right hon. Gentleman at least prevent him in the meantime conducting an intensive propaganda—

This is clearly a very improper question.

I hope I may be allowed, as it has been asked, not to answer it, but to say that nothing in the relations I have had with various financial Ministers who have represented France affords the slightest warrant for such an attack.

rose—

I must see any questions that deal with other Governments than our own on the Paper before I allow them to be put.

On a point of Order. The right hon. Gentleman has made a suggestion to the effect that I have no ground, if I understood him correctly, for the assertion that intensive propaganda is being conducted—

That is the sort of question I have already said I cannot allow without notice.

Charges On State Funds

57.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he will give the names of all as yet unrepealed Acts of Parliament passed since the 1st January, 1916, which imposed charges upon State funds directly or indirectly; and whether he can estimate the total financial burden placed upon the taxpayers by such direct and indirect charges imposed by those statutes?

I am afraid it would be impossible in reply to my hon. Friend's question to give any accurate idea of the extent to which legislation in the last 10 years, including the greater part of the War period, has added to the burden of the taxpayer. It would require laborious investigation even to state the amounts paid out of the Exchequer in respect., for example, of grants or subsidies specifically authorised by Act of Parliament, and such a statement would not include the consequential expenditure on the administration of such legislation, of which no estimate could be given; nor would it take account of the cost of administering Acts of Parliament not primarily financial in character. My hon. Friend will, however, find valuable information on the subject in Command Paper 2613.

Trade Unions (Political Levy)

58.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the Lancashire and Cheshire and North Wales Colliery Engineers', Boilermen's, and Brakesmen's Federation (Milnrow Branch) insist upon members who wish to claim exemption from paying the political levy having this sum paid to their funds, to be returnable on demand at the end of the year; that the Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies states that he cannot prevent this, but can only deal with specific complaints from individual members; and, seeing that this action of the federation is not in accord With Section 6 of the Trade Union Act, 1913, what steps does he propose to take in the matter?

I have been asked to reply. The Chief Registrar received a complaint from a member of the branch in question to the effect stated and dealt with it in accordance with his powers under the Trade Union Act, 1913, in January last. It is open to any member or members who have a similar complaint to refer it to the Chief Registrar in order that, if necessary, he may take steps to remedy the complaint. This is the procedure provided by the Trade Union Act, 1913, and I have no power to take other action.

Is the hon. Member aware that this procedure is not followed by other trade unions?

No, Sir; I am not aware of that.

Sexual Offences (Custody Of Children)

60.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of a man named Flint who has been sentenced to nine months' imprisonment with hard labour for criminal offences against his daughter, aged 14 years, who has now been removed from his control, and to the statement made at his trial that he has a second daughter, aged eight years, but that no similar order could be made with regard to her; and will he take the necessary action to save this child from coming under her father's control after his release from prison?

The Home Secretary is unable in the present state of the law to take any steps in regard to the younger daughter, but he has ascertained that the Director of Public Prosecutions is in communication as to her future with those to whom the elder daughter has been entrusted under an order of the Court before which Flint was convicted, and that he is satisfied that every care has been, and is being, taken of the children by their relatives.

If our law is so imperfect that only the child against whom an offence was committed can be transferred to the custody of other people in whose care she will be safe, is it not the duty of the Home Secretary to take steps to have the law altered, so that the other child may be similarly protected?

Is it not possible that children can be adopted by boards of guardians under a magistrate's order where the parents are unsuitable to have control, and is not this a method by which this and similar cases could be got over?

That is a legal point of which I must have notice.

Housing, Devonport

61.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has satisfied himself that the repairs to the municipal houses in Devonport, to which his attention was called by the hon. Member for Devonport, have now been completed?

My right hon. Friend is informed by the Town Council that these repairs have been completed.

62.

asked the Minister of Health how many houses have been completed in Devonport in connection with State-assisted schemes, specifying which schemes since 1st February, 1926; and how many are now being built?

My right hon. Friend is unable to give separate statistics for Devonport, but in connection with State-assisted schemes in the county borough of Plymouth, which includes Devonport, 54 houses were completed between the 1st February last and the 1st April—46 by the corporation under the Housing Act of 1924 and eight by private enterprise under the Act of 1923. 200 houses are at present under construction in State-assisted schemes and 351 have been arranged for but not commenced, while authority has been given for an additional 250 for which arrangements have not yet been made.

Is the hon. Member aware that these figures are very small, and that owing to the influx of population from Rosyth and Pembroke, the situation is very grave? Is not his Department prepared to deal with it?

Naturally I would like to see an improvement in the figures. For some years large numbers of houses have been erected or repaired, and a large number of houses are now in course of erection. I hope the number will be materially increased.

Do these figures mean that there has been no extra effort made to meet the influx of these people?

I have answered that the Council are making efforts in connection with housing schemes generally, but, unfortunately, there, has been a large influx of persons, and the Council, like other people, are largely dependent upon the number of skilled persons available for building houses.

A difficult situation arises because there is a waiting list of over 3,000, and if these men from Rosyth and Pembroke are given preference, over those who are waiting, there will be a riot in the town. Therefore, no arrangements can be made for these people.

There is very great difficulty. The matter depends upon the number of men available for building houses.

Is it not a fact that, if the Government would give some assistance, the Town Council would guarantee to get the houses put up in respect of the men from Rosyth?

I cannot assent to that. I do not think the Town Council or anyone else can put up houses unless there be men available to build them.

63.

asked the Minister of Health whether he can now say if his Department is making any special provision for housing the increased population of Devonport, owing to the influx of personnel from the closed dockyards of Rosyth and Pembroke?

At the moment, my right hon. Friend has nothing to add to his reply of the 25th March to a similar question by the hon. Member.

Will the hon. Member seriously consider utilising Dockyard labour for the purpose of building these houses? Is he aware that all the trades necessary for building the houses are in the Dockyards, and that it would provide employment in the town if he would seriously consider this perfectly practicable suggestion?

I wish the matter could be disposed of so easily. Directly the Government attempt to bring in extra labour from other sources in connection with this scheme, the hon. Member knows what difficulties confront them.

Local Authorities (Loans)

64.

asked the Minister of Health how much money has been raised in the form of loans by local authorities year by year since 1918?

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

The amount raised in the form of loans by local authorities in England and Wales in each of the under-mentioned years was as follows:

Year ended 31st March.		Amount of loans raised.
		£
1918	…	4,064,214
1919	…	4,306,053
1920	…	24,308,257
1921	…	116,056,859
1922	…	127,375,530
1923	…	61,077,230
1924	…	46,534,526
1925	…	Figures not yet available.

These amounts do not include temporary loans and overdrafts raised under the Local Authorities (Financial Provisions) Act, 1921, to meet current, expenses.

Employment Exchange, Finsbury

65.

asked the Minister of Labour whether land has been purchased to build a new Exchange in the Borough of Finsbury; if so, whether the plans for the new building are already prepared; and how soon it is expected that the building will be ready for occupation by the staff?

:. Yes, Sir. Plans are now in preparation, but I am afraid that I cannot give a date for the completion of the building.

Film Industry (Blind Andblock Booking)

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he intends to introduce legislation dealing with both blind-booking and block-booking in the film trade; and, if so, when?

I am in communication with representatives of the cinematograph industry on this subject, and am not at present in a position to make a statement.

His Majesty's Cable Ship "Monarch" (R Allen)

41.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Mr. R. Allen, late chief engineer of His Majesty's cable ship "Monarch"; whether he is aware that this man was on board the "Monarch" when it was torpedoed and sunk in 1915 and was off duty for a considerable period afterwards, suffering from nervous breakdown; that later he was put on shore duty, and eventually was again sent to sea in spite of medical opinion that he was not fit; that as a result Mr. Allen's health completely broke down and he has been retired; and that, although whilst Mr. Allen was on shore duty he was paid compensation in respect of an injury sustained on the "Monarch," this compensation has been stopped and Mr. Allen is now receiving pension only for his years of service; and whether, in view of all the circumstances, he will have this case reconsidered with a view to the claim for compensation being properly met?

I am looking into the case, and will communicate with the hon. Member.

Imported Pictures (Customsfine)

55.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that a British artist, resident in Venice, arriving at Victoria Station on 15th February with a small portmanteau containing a number of water-colour pictures painted by himself, was there and then fined by the Customs the sum of£6 for having brought these pictures by passenger train on the ground that they were imported merchandise; and whether, in view of the alarm felt by British artists residing abroad lest their pictures should be similarly treated in the future, he will issue instructions that the fine imposed in this case shall be refunded and that no such fine shall be imposed in future?

I am aware of the circumstances of the case to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. As the pictures in question were imported merchandise, a Customs entry before landing should have been made, the legal penalty for non-compliance being forfeiture. As an alternative a fine was imposed, which in the special circumstances of this particular case has now been remitted. I cannot, however, give any undertaking in regard to future cases of the same kind.

Bills Presented

Roadside Petrol Pumps Bill

"to provide for the licensing of petrol pumps by highway authorities," presented by Sir FRANK MEYER; supported by Captain Brass, Lieut.-Colonel Horlick,

Division No. 174.]	AYES.	[3.41 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Christle, J. A.	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Goff, Sir Park
Albery, Irving James	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Clayton, G. C.	Greene, W. P. Crawford
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Cobb, Sir Cyril	Gretton, Colonel John
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Cope, Major William	Grotrian, H. Brent
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Couper, J. B.	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Apsley, Lord	Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry	Gunston, Captain D. W.
Astor, Viscountess	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Hacking, Captain Douglas K.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)	Hammersley, S. S.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Barrett, Major Sir Richard	Crookshank, Col. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)	Cunliffe, Sir Herbert	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Harvey, Major S. E. (Bevon, Totnes)
Bennett, A. J.	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Haslam, Henry C.
Betterton, Henry B.	Dalkeith, Earl of	Hawke, John Anthony
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Blundell, F. N.	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.	Davies, Maj. Geo. T. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Henn, Sir Sydney H
Brass, Captain W	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Hills, Major John Waller
Briggs, J. Harold	Dixey, A. C.	Hilton, Cecil
Briscoe, Richard George	Drewe, C.	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Brittain, Sir Harry	Eden, Captain Anthony	Holland, Sir Arthur
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Holt, Captain H. P.
Brooks, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Edwards, John H. (Accrington)	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Brown, Maj. D.C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Hopkins, J. W. W.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Elvedan, Viscount	Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Buckingham, Sir H.	England, Colonel A.	Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Burman, J. B.	Everard, W. Lindsay	Hudson, Capt. A.U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Hurd, Percy A.
Campbell, E. T.	Finburgh, S.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.	Forrest, W.	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Frece, Sir Walter de	Jacob, A. E.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Gadie, Lieut.-Col Anthony	Jephcott, A. R.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Ganzoni, Sir John	Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Gates, Percy	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Chapman, Sir S.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	King, Captain Henry Douglas
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

Lieut.-Colonel Assheton Pownall, and Mr. Benjamin Smith; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 86.]

Access To Mountains Bill

"to secure to the public the right of access to mountains and moorlands," presented by Mr. TREVELYAN; supported by Sir Martin Conway, Mr. Johnston, Mr. MacKenzie Livingstone, Lieut.- Colonel Assheton Pownall, and Mr. Cecil Wilson; to be read a Second time upon Thursday, and to be printed. [Bill 87.]

Business Of The House

Motion made, and Question put,

"That the Proceedings on Government Business 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, 240; Noes, 110.

Knox, Sir Alfred	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Lamb, J. Q.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. sir Philip	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)	Pielou, D. P.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Pilcher, G.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Loder, J. de V.	Pilditch, Sir Philip	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Lougher, L.	Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Price, Major C. W. M.	Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Radford, E. A.	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Lumley, L. R.	Raine, W.	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)
Mac Andrew, Major Charles Glen	Ramsden, E.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Tinne, J. A.
Macintyre, Ian	Rees, Sir Beddoe	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
McLean, Major A.	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm	Remnant, Sir James	Waddington, R.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Rice, Sir Frederick	Wallace, Captain D. E.
MacRobert, Alexander M.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Malone, Major P. B.	Ropner, Major L.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Margesson, Capt. D.	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Watts, Dr. T.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Salmon, Major I.	Wells, S. R.
Meyer, Sir Frank	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Williams, Herbert G, (Reading)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)	Sandon, Lord	Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Moore, Sir Newton J.	Savery, S. S.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)	Womersley, W. J.
Morrison H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	Wood, E. (Chester, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Olive	Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)	Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)
Murchison, C. K.	Skelton, A. N.	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Smithers, Waldron	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Nuttall, Ellis	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Oakley, T.	Sprot, Sir Alexander	Major Sir Harry Barnston and Major Hennessy.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayday, Arthur	Scrymgeour, E.
Ammon, Charles George	Hayes, John Henry	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Barr, J.	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Batey, Joseph	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Sitch, Charles H.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hirst, G. H.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Briant, Frank	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Broad, F. A,	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Stamford, T. W.
Bromley, J.	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Stephen, Campbell
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Buchanan, Q.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Sullivan, Joseph
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Sutton, J. E.
Cape, Thomas	Kelly, W. T.	Thomas, Rt. Hon, James H. (Derby)
Clowes, S.	Kennedy, T.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Cluse, W. S.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Kenyon, Barnet	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Kirkwood, D.	Thurtle, E.
Connolly, M.	Lee, F.	Tinker, John Joseph
Cove, W. G.	Livingstone, A. M.	Townend, A. E.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Lowth, T.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Lunn, William	Viant, S. P.
Dennison, R.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Mackinder, W.	Watson, W, M. (Dunfermline)
Fenby, T. D.	March, S.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Maxton, James	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Gillett, George M.	Montague, Frederick	Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Gosling, Harry	Murnin, H.	Westwood, J.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Naylor, T. E.	Whiteley, W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Owen, Major G.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Palin, John Henry	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Paling, W.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Groves, T.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Grundy, T. W.	Ponsonby, Arthur	Windsor, Walter
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Potts, John S.	Wright, W.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hall, G. H. (Marthyr Tydvil)	Riley, Ben
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Ritson, J.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Harris, Percy A.	Rose, Frank H.	Mr. Warne and Mr. A. Barnes.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Salter, Dr. Alfred

Juvenile Courts (Scotland)

I beg to move,

"That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the appointment of women justices of the peace to act as assessors in Juvenile Courts in Scottish burghs."

In asking leave to introduce this Bill, I am not asking the House to accept any principle which it has not already accepted. All I ask is that the principle accepted by this House in 1920 in relation to juvenile courts in the Metropolis, shall be extended to the Scottish burghs. As the Memorandum of the Bill, if I am allowed to introduce it, will explain, it is intended to provide for the appointment of women justices of the peace to act as assessors in juvenile courts in the Scottish burghs, and the magistrates, in nominating a panel of such women, would have regard to their experience in dealing with the problem of juvenile delinquency and their special interest in the training of young people here is only one Clause in the Bill. I believe it will he non-contentious, and if permission be given for its introduction, the Bill will be backed by members of all parties in this House. In the four great burghs of Scotland at the present time—in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Greenock and Stirling—we have women magistrates, but they are not always called in to the Juvenile Courts. If this Bill is introduced and passed through its various stages, it will give effect to the principles contained in a circular which was issued by a predecessor of the present Secretary for Scotland and a Conservative Secretary for Scotland, namely, Lord Novar. He issued Circular 1933, Clauses 18 and 19 of which contain a special plea for the appointment of women Justices of the Peace in connection with the work of Juvenile Courts in Scotland. With the permission of the House I will quote from that circular:

"It is generally admitted that the problem of the delinquent child is different from that of the adult, and needs special treatment. Success in dealing with children who are charged with offences, depends largely on the personality and experience of the Judge. It is therefore, desirable that except where such cases are extremely few, there should be assigned to a juvenile court, where the number of Magistrates or Justices who ordinarily attend the Court admits of it being conveniently done, a separate rota of Magistrates or Justices which should include those who have gained experience in the problem of juvenile delinquency as social workers or teachers or who are otherwise specially interested in the training of young people."

The purpose of this Bill is to use such means as lie to our hands to try to bring back into the paths of rectitude juveniles in Scotland who have gone astray. I believe the help and guidance of women magistrates in these Courts will help to bring back many of these children.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Westwood, Mr. Thomas Henderson, Dr. Drummond Shiels, Mr. William M'Lean Watson, Major-General Sir Robert Hutchison, Mr. Barr, Sir Harry Hope, Mr. Macintyre, Mr. William Adamson, Mr. Johnston, and Mr. Scrymgeour.

Juvenile Courts (Scotland) Bill

"to provide for the appointment of women Justices of the Peace to act as assessors in Juvenile Courts in Scottish burghs," presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 88.]

Local Authorities (Emergency Provisions) Bill

Reported, without Amendment, from Standing Committee B.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.

Bill, not amended ( in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Monday next.

Selection (Standing Committees)

Standing Committee B

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee B: Mr. Oliver; and had appointed in substitution: Lieut.-Colonel Watts-Morgan.

Standing Committee C

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee C: Captain Arthur Hope and Sir Frank Nelson; and had appointed in substitution Mr. Sandeman and Mr. Womersley.

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON further reported from the Committee; That they had added the following Members to Standing Committee C: Brigadier-General Sir William Alexander, Major Astor, Mr. Clarry, Mr. Fenby, Lieut.-Colonel Gault, Mr. Grant, Mr. Grotrian, Mr. John Guest, Mr. George Hall, Mr. Hannon, Mr. Harmsworth, Mr. John, Mr. Lamb, Mr. Macintyre, Sir John Pennefather, Mr. Townend, Mr. Viant, Brigadier-General Warner, Mr. Waterhouse, and Mr. C. P. Williams.

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON further reported from the Committee; That they had added the following Thirty-five Members to Standing Committee C (in respect of the Electricity (Supply) Bill): Mr. A. V. Alexander, Lord Apsley, Colonel Ashley, Mr. Attlee, Mr. Attorney-General, Mr. Balfour, Mr. Barclay-Harvey, Colonel Burton, Mr. Clayton, Colonel Crookshank, Sir Philip Dawson, Captain Elliot, Mr. Ellis, Mr. Gosling, Mr. Arthur Greenwood, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Frederick Hall, Mr. Hanbury, Mr. Hartshorn, Mr. Dennis Herbert, Mr. Robert Hudson, Captain Garro-Jones, Mr. Johnston, Major Kindersley, Mr. Lansbury, Mr. WardlawMilne, Mr. Stephen Mitchell, Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon, Mr. Nuttall, Mr. Radford, Mr. Spoor, Sir Alexander Sprat, Mr. Trevelyan Thomson, Mr. Waddington, Sir Charles Wilson, and Mr. Hilton Young.

Reports to lie upon the Table.

Chairmen's Panel

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON reported from the Chairmen's Panel: That they had appointed Sir Robert Sanders to act as Chairman of Standing Committee C (in respect of the Electricity (Supply) Bill).

Report to lie upon the Table.

Orders Of The Day

Economy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Money (No 2)

Resolution reported,

"That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to make provision for reducing in respect of certain servises the charges on public funds and for increasing, by means of the payment into the Exchequer of certain sums and otherwise, the funds available for meeting such charges, and to amend accordingly the law relating to unemployment insurance and certain other matters and for purposes related or incidental thereto, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of a contribution under the Acts relating to unemployment insurance of such an amount as would be produced if, so far as relates to exempt persons, the rates of weekly contributions on the basis of which the said amount is calculated were the same as respects the part (if any) of the extended period after the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight, as the rates applicable theretofore."

Resolution read a Second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

There is no desire on this side of the House to delay this Resolution, but I should like to say a few words upon its history. This Resolution will, I suppose, regularise the, Second Schedule to the Economy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. After that Schedule had been in the Bill for some time, the Government evidently discovered—and the hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour yesterday confessed—that some mistake had been made. Accordingly certain Amendments were placed upon the Paper for the purpose of altering the part of the Schedule affected and repairing the mistake. This Money Resolution, however, goes back to the original position and the mistake will not be rectified. The reason of the Government for these repeated changes of policy is now perfectly clear. A sum of about£28,000 a year is involved in this Resolution, and it simply means that in order to avoid a Report stage on the Economy Bill, the Exchequer is to be penalised to the extent of£28,000 a year for several years to come.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY ORDERS OF THE DAY. to the MINISTRY of LABOUR

(Mr. Betterton)

After January, 1928.

Question put, and agreed to.

Economy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

Considered in Committee. [ Progress, 19th April.]

[Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.]

Clause 14—(Operation Of Section 118 Of Education Act, 1921)

I beg to move, in page 10, line 3, after the word "any" to insert the word "new."

4.0 P.M.

This Clause, as the Minister has put it before the Committee, is based on the assumption that there are doubts to be removed. The object of this Amendment is to render as small as possible any doubt that may exist in the minds of those who will have to put this Clause into operation. There can be no doubt as to who are the people who are entrusted with the duty of looking after education. There is no doubt as to whose job it is to provide proper accommodation. It is the work of the local education authorities, and, apparently, by this Bill the Minister proposes to put restrictions in their way in doing their work. You cannot interfere with teachers' salaries and you cannot interfere with the number of pupils that a teacher may teach, and really it comes to what I call education proper that these restrictions are to apply. In other words, it is the child who is going to suffer under the restrictions which the Minister proposes. Yesterday, the Minister spoke of the large number of new schools which it was proposed to build, but, if new schools are not to be built, then the existing schools must of necessity be put into a state of repair fit for the children to attend them. According to the report of the Minister's own inspectors, there are schools in the county of Durham which the local education authority have asked should be put right long ago, and which in many cases should be replaced by new schools. May I urge that nothing should be done to prevent them going on with the work? [interruption.] Of course, hon. Gentlemen can afford to sneer at the children. They cannot speak here for themselves. As I have said before, it is only cowards who sneer at people who cannot help themselves; a man of soul would not do it.

I would urge that no further restrictions should be imposed upon local authorities. There is no necessity for them. I would ask the Minister if he knows of any case in his own constituency where work has been done which he himself would veto. I venture to say that he would never say that any work has been done of a character that was not desirable. If that be so, is there any necessity for any further restriction I But this Clause would never have been placed in this Economy Bill if some restrictions were not intended. There would have been no necessity for it. If the right hon.. Gentleman merely wants to remove any doubt as to what the Act means, why does he not bring in an amending Bill to settle those doubt? Not only has he at present power to veto anything that is outside the Act, but he has power to veto anything that is inside the Act, and, if a dispute arises under the Act, not only is he one of the parties to the dispute, but he has the power to settle it in his own way. I do mot know what further power he requires in the matter, and I do urge the Committee to support the Amendment, because, after all, the work of the local education authorities to-day is very much in arrear owing to the Geddes axe and other things, and the men who have given their time to the work and who have received more kicks than praise are asking the House of Commons to sanction what they can do in the interests of the children of this country.

I feel obliged to say one or two things. First, I want to say, quite clearly and definitely, that our Amendment to insert this word "new" does not mean that we, as the Labour party, are committed to the principles and policy embodied in Clause 14. We only seek now to insert this word "new," because we have learned during the discussions upon this Bill that the Government are using their docile majority to force the Measure through without any Amendment at all. We want to make it perfectly clear that this is a sort of forlorn Amendment so far as the principles embodied in the Clause are concerned, and that we desire to limit the application of these principles to future expenditure. The President of the Board of Education has indicated in his Circular to local authorities, following Memorandum 44, that he is not yet satisfied with the reductions that have been made. He says that the authorities have sincerely reviewed their estimates and that expenditure has been cut down, but that there are still items of expenditure which might be cut down and there are still authorities who have not obeyed the instructions or the implications involved in Circular 1371 and Memorandum 44. We want to be perfectly certain that Memorandum 44 and the statement of policy following that Memorandum completely wipes out any cutting down of the estimates which have been drawn up under the inspiration and guidance of Memorandum 44. In short, we want to be perfectly clear that there is to be no retrospective action so far as this Clause is concerned.

The authorities are already in great uncertainty as to what they are going to receive. This authority is afraid to embark on new ventures in education and that authority is afraid to increase its staffing, and we would like a clear statement from the Noble Lord as to what are his intentions with regard to the estimates he has already received. My right hon. Friend the Member for Central Newcastle (Mr. Trevelyan) pressed him last night to tell us the estimates of the authorities with which he is not yet satisfied. Will he give us a list of those authorities? Will he tell us what he is going to do with them? Will ho tell this Committee and the authorities that the estimates which he has received at the Board of Education will be accepted by him and that the policy and the principles involved in Clause 14 will not be applied to those estimates which have already been drawn up, but that, if they are to be applied at all, they will be applied to some future estimates that will be drawn up after he has had consultation with the authorities? It is a very grave charge to level at the Noble Lord that he is taking this action in spite of the fact that he has asked the local authorities to come into consultation with him. What purpose is there in the local authorities conferring with him if he is to take this high- handed attitude not only towards future expenditure, because, so far as I understand the power this Clause will confer upon him, that high-handed attitude might quite easily be applied to expenditure and estimates to which the authorities have already committed themselves. I ask the Noble Lord in fairness to this Committee and in fairness to the local authorities to let us have a, clear, simple straightforward statement in order that this Committee may know where it stands and where the local authorities stand so far as the Grant-in-Aid is concerned.

When I first saw this Amendment, I did not feel in any degree enamoured of it, and my first inclination certainly was to oppose it, but the explanation which has been just given by the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Cove) is, I think, an expression of a legitimate action on the part of an Opposition which, so far from agreeing with this Clause in any degree whatever, is anxious to avail itself of every opportunity of pointing out its defects. There is, however, one point which may be urged with considerable force even in support of the Amendment as it stands. The Noble Lord, in the course of some very excellent speeches, made a very eloquent appeal to local education authorities to prepare their programmes of a progressive character extending over a large number of years. It is only fair to the local education authorities to say that many of them, acting under considerable difficulties, responded to his appeal. I would like to ask the Noble Lord how many local education authorities responded to his appeal, and how many of those authorities who responded are going to be disappointed by any subsequent action? There is no doubt that in many districts in this country the education authorities, partly out of their own desire to promote the cause of education and partly in response to the right hon. Gentleman's eloquence, did prepare programmes of a progressive character. How many of those authorities are going to be stultified by reason of the new action of the Board of Education, by reason of the Circular to which reference has been made, and by reason of this Clause which really is the culmination of the policy incorporated in that Circular?

This Clause, it seems to me, does provide a way out by which the Noble Lord can fulfil the expectations which he himself has created. Whatever may be the case in the future—and I object to this discretion for which the Minister is asking —let the Noble Lord say, in regard to programmes that were put forward in response to his appeal, he will undertake that not one of them shall be curtailed by reason of the new policy which the Board has now undertaken. I think it is only fair to ask that, because the Prime Minister has made speeches—even the Chancellor of the Exchequer did—and a manifesto was issued on behalf of the Conservative party before the election declaring that education was one of the matters in which we really could not afford to economise in so far as economy would injure the cause of education in this country.

Therefore, when the authorities act upon all those pledges and promises, it is only fair that their disappointment shall not be accentuated by the introduction of a Clause of this character. I know very well that the Noble Lord has claimed credit—and I hope he will believe me when I say I do not wish at all to minimise the credit which he takes to himself—that the Estimates for this year are larger than they were last year; but the whole point is that the Estimates for which he now claims credit are not sufficiently large to enable local education authorities to carry out programmes which they prepared under the inspiration of his own eloquence. Therefore, it seems to me the Noble Lord, in fairness to those local authorities which have responded to his appeal, ought to undertake—whatever may be the power for which he is asking in respect of new expenditure—to fulfil in the letter and in the spirit the promises and the expectations which he held out to local education authorities, and upon which they have acted.

The hon. Member who spoke last said that he wanted an assurance from me that I would not cut down any programme which I had asked local authorities to submit, and he said that these estimates for the current year were not sufficient to cover those programmes which I have asked local authorities to submit. He has forgotten that those programmes are programmes expenditure on which will fall due as from 1st April, 1927, onwards, and, therefore, this Amendment will not apply to anything in those programmes. If this Amendment were passed, I should still be free to stop any programme, to stop any expenditure, I may point out to the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Cove), even in this current year which has not yet been incurred. I should be at liberty to stop all this, and all the rebuilding of unsatisfactory schools in Durham, but I should not be at liberty to question the expenditure of any authority on its general level of expenditure in the past.

That is the power the Clause gives you.

That is the position as it will he left with this Amendment. There is no doubt whatever that the Board has always in the past exercised the power of disallowing existing expenditure. Let me remind the Committee again, that when the original Burnham scales were brought into operation, the Board disallowed the expenditure of the authorities in excess of those scales, not because those authorities had not been paying salaries in excess of those scales before, not because that was not existing expenditure, but because it was in excess of a general standard agreed and laid down. Therefore, the Board has always had power to disallow existing expenditure, and I clearly cannot accept an Amendment which would take away from the Board powers which every President of the Board has exercised in the past.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that we have to base the expenditure in Durham upon the rate in Northumberland? As the right hon. Gentleman knows, in Northumberland they get twice as much for a shilling compared with the number to educate, as in Durham. Does he mean to cut all down to a standard?

That really arises on a subsequent Amendment. I will answer the question when we come to that Amendment. Then, I cannot accept this Amendment for the reason I indicated to the Committee in my concluding words last night. The real character of the present position is the vast commit- meats of capital expenditure which face local authorities in the future, and to propose that I should have full powers as I have at the present moment to stop local authorities making improvements involving new expenditure, but that I should have no power to question the level of expenditure of an authority which has been spending high in the past, that I should have no power to question and discuss with it whether it was necessary expenditure or not, whether it was not attracting grant from me which ought to go to authorities which have large commitments in the matter of education —to suggest that is to misconceive the whole position, and the whole problem of educational reform. Therefore, I cannot accept the Amendment.

Listening to the Noble Lord in defence of a policy in which he does not believe is almost like listening to "Alice in Wonderland." Those of us who have been members of education committees for a considerable number of years recognise quite frankly what the difficulties are. The right hon. Gentleman is "holding the baby" in this connection. I represent a district which has done its best to try to educate the children to the best of their advantage. The Noble Lord realises that, I think, as far as the West Ham Education Authority is concerned. We started a new line in educational development—the feeding of children. We are limited to a halfpenny rate; but, we have gone beyond it, and we are prepared to face the risks. In addition, we have started what might be called an open-air recovery school. The Noble Lord's predecessor in the office he now occupies gave us permission to spend a considerable amount of money in developing the open-air recovery school.

We have taken the most delicate children in our schools into the country on an estate bought by the Education Committee for the purpose of trying to make them physically and mentally capable. The Board have not asked for powers under this Bill, but they have already told us we cannot go on. Is this a forerunner of the possible future? Are we to be told in the next two years that we cannot go any further in the matter of education? Then, what does the right hon. Gentleman mean by an average level of education? Does he mean that Slocum-on-the-Mud is going to be the level of education in London and outer London? Because we may have progressive ideas of education, we are going to be told, "Thus far shalt thou go, and no further." The average number of children in our classes is about 40; the average number of children in the classes at Eton and Harrow is 15. Supposing we decide as an education authority that the number of children in our classes shall be 15, will we be allowed to incur the necessary expenditure?

I think this would be more relevant on one of the later Amendments where we come to the

"circumstances of the area of the authority or the general standard of expenditure in other areas."

The only point now is whether the powers of the Board of Education shall not be extended to new expenditure.

Yes, but the power of the Noble Lord in the matter of administering education will be to cripple all expenditure beyond the present level of the lowest education authorities in the country. What is going to be the level? We have not yet been told what the basis shall be. Which authority is he going to take? We want to know if the progressive education authorities are going to be handicapped by the administration of this Clause. It is called an Economy Bill, and properly so. It is economy in education. I would like to know exactly where we stand. Already the Board have started to cut down. They are crippling certain local authorities who are wanting to advance. If we are paying half the expenditure, surely we are entitled to half the consideration. It is only 50–50 now.

Not in West Ham.

Oh, yes. As far as West Han: is concerned—

I cannot help thinking these arguments could come later on. At the moment it is only a question whether new expenditure should be disallowed or not.

Of course, I quite appreciate the fact that you know more about the Rules than I do. But new expenditure, after all, means expenditure on the education of the children. We are not going to stand still in educational development, and we object to any Minister having power to restrict that development. If we are paying half the expenditure, we are entitled at least to half the consideration, which we are not getting now. This Bill is going to allow the Minister to become a dictator in the matter of education, and we object to dictators either on that side or on this.

I should like to make quite clear what the attitude of the Opposition is in supporting this Amendment. We do not want to give the right hon. Gentleman any extra power at all, but if he is going to have new powers, we wish to limit those powers as far as we possibly can. We shall vote gainst the whole Clause, but it being understood that the Government are going to accept no Amendment, and are not going to renounce the Clause, we propose in this Amendment a limitation, which would deprive the right hon. Gentleman of a good deal of the harm we expect he might otherwise do.

I think the Committee will agree that the autocratic powers which the Minister himself has described are too much responsibility for any one man. The object of this Amendment, while it is not very clear, is, I understand, to limit that power to some extent. I am very anxious that new expenditure in one special direction should not be prevented from going on by the action of the Minister. I refer to an aspect of education which is not so much emphasised—I mean the physical side. I Have not heard in any of the right hon. Gentleman's speeches what his views are as regards the development of the medical service in connection with education. While all the speeches to which wt have listened on the technical subject of education have been very interesting and very important, I consider that the thing of first importance is the health of the child, and after that the education of the child. The medical services of the educational system, both in England and Scotland, are still very unsatisfactory. I wish to know what are the Minister's views in regard to additional expenditure, for instance, in regard to the feeding of necessitous children. It is very difficult from the Board's report on the school medical services to get details about the medical services. I would commend to the attention of the Noble Lord the Report of the Scottish Board of Health, which gives a very much more detailed and better description of the results of the examinations of school children.

What are the Minister's views in regard to new expenditure for the development, say, of the dental service We know that some authorities have given a good deal of attention to this subject, and have had very successful results—London, for instance, and some other large towns. Dental disease is being reduced to a very large extent owing to the activities at these centres. It is commonplace to say that many of the diseases from which children suffer arise from bad teeth. That is, more or less, widely recognised but while in the upper classes of society these things are attended to, it is equally desirable that the children of our poorer classes, whose parents are either ignorant or too ill off to afford dental treatment, should be taken in hand by the education authorities. The charges can be recovered where the parents are able to pay. I would draw attention also to the numerous cases of enlarged tonsils and adenoids in school children. It is not merely a physical matter, for the mental development of these children is kept back considerably when they are in this condition. Even from they educational point of view it is a very foolish policy to be spending money on expert teaching of children who are not in a. position to profit by it. One or two places have made a beginning with treatment centres, or made arrangements with hospitals, to attend to these physical defects, but there are many reactionary authorities by whom nothing has been done. I wish to know whether such authorities are stimulated to action in this connection, and urged to put forward a programme which may involve entirely new expenditure, and what the Minister's attitude is to them.

Enlarged tonsils and adenoids are very often a cause of rheumatic fever, and rheumatic fever is one of the most disabling of children's diseases. It involves a tremendous loss of school time, and the child arrives at the end of its school days badly educated, apart from the permanent physical damage which it has sustained otherwise. The Board's Report on the Medical Services in Education, with which I have no doubt the Noble Lord is familiar, definitely calls attention to the importance of these things. It acknowledges that the advance in the connection on previous years towards adequate services is very small indeed. It says, in regard to public elementary schools:

"Three hundred and eight local education authorities made provision for treatment of minor ailments; 250 for dental defects."

That is out of 318 authorities. We have actually 68 education authorities in England and Wales who are making no provision for dental treatment. In Scotland we have only five defaulters. Taken together, the figures represent a very large amount of neglect of this condition. There are 303 authorities giving treatment for visual defects, 234 for enlarged tonsils and adenoids, and 163 for ringworm, which is also a very time-wasting disease.

That is a very interesting argument, but I ought to point out that by this Amendment the Minister would still have power to disallow authorities to incur any new expenditure. Therefore, it does not seem to me that the hon. Member is arguing in the sense of the Amendment.

I understand that the Amendment is to restrict the Minister's power to disallow expenditure.

No, it will allow power to disallow expenditure.

Might I, at any rate, ask, Sir, if it permits him to allow or disallow new expenditure, what is his view in regard to the importance of the subject I am discussing? It is the only opportunity I have had to raise the question. However, if you rule that it is not in Order on this amendment I shall not pursue the matter further, in the meantime, but bring it up again on a more appropriate occasion.

It would be more appropriate on the Education Estimates. The hon. Member's argument does not seem to be quite in consonance with the Amendment.

I do not understand the reason for the Amendment at all. I do not understand why the Minister should not have accepted it. I understand it less in that it has been put forward from the Labour benches. The effect of the Amendment would be the direct opposite of what is intended by the Mover, for it would increase the power of the Minister with regard to expenditure. If the Amendment were carried, the Minister would have complete powers with regard to any new expenditure proposed by local education committees. The Minister curtail such expenditure. The Amendment would give him statutory authority to do so. I suggest that the Amendment should be withdrawn. We desire to curtail the power conferred on the Minister by Clause 14.

I trust that nothing will be done by the Committee that will give the Minister power to discourage new schemes in connection with education, because in Scotland—I shall not apologise for intervening as a Scottish Member—we have to depend on the expenditure in England, and the more you curtail the expenditure on education in England the less we shall get for education purposes in Scotland. Quite recently we had a conference of the Scottish education authorities, and we dealt especially with the subject that has been raised by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Dr. Shiels). That conference was unanimously in favour of dealing with the physically defective in our schools in Scotland, and even more with the mentally defective, those who were unfortunate and required special treatment in education. I especially appeal that all those services in England should get all the encouragement possible. I may do so from a selfish point of view, but it is because we are desperately anxious in Scotland as education authorities—I am a member of the Executive of Scottish Education Authorities—to make a real move forward for dealing with physically and mentally defective children. But if you are going to stop experiments in England, if you are going to reduce the money available for education in England, you are going to make it trebly difficult for us to deal with this problem in Scotland.

To my own county of Fife only last Tuesday night, I went from this House to take part in a meeting of the education authority of the county. There we practically unanimously agreed to carry through an experiment for dealing with physically, and particularly mentally, disabled children. It will mean an enormous expenditure for that county. But we had hopes that with the increasing expenditure on education in England we at least should get our share of that increase. Therefore I trust that we shall do nothing in this House that will give to the Minister power to limit new experiments in connection with education. I have the courage of my convictions, and I am going to ask that the Amendment. be withdrawn, and that we shall have a general discussion on the power which has been asked for by the Minister to deal with the question of educational expenditure. Speaking with a good many years' experience from the administrative point of view, I trust that we shall not pass the Amendment.

Amendment negatived.

With regard to the Amendments which immediately follow on the Paper, I suggest. doing what I have done on former occasions for the convenience of the Committee, and that is that where the arguments naturally dovetail one into the other, the discussions should take place on one or more together, without prejudice, of course, to separate divisions if so desired. The Amendments in the name of the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris), the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones), and the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Cove), are all in order as separate propositions, but I imagine that there will be considerable difficulty in keeping the discussions of them apart. Therefore I propose to allow a Debate covering all the words

"expenditure which in the opinion of the Board is excessive, having regard to the circumstances of the area of the authority or the general standard of expenditure in other areas,"

and so on, to be taken together. I do not know whether that would he for the convenience of the Committee? If so, I will call Mr. Harris.

I beg to move, in page 10, line 3, to leave out from the word "expenditure" to the word "which" in line 6.

Perhaps the President of the Board of Education will accept this Amendment. I am not going to be unreasonable. I understand that he has a very difficult position. I can imagine cases where he finds himself committed to approve expenditure that might be excessive. So I am leaving in the words at the end of Sub-section (1)

"which in the opinion of the Board unreasonably exceeds any estimate of expenditure made by the authority."

If, for instance, a proposal for an elementary school were put before the Board, and it was then found that oak panelling had been used instead of deal panelling, or that marble had been used where concrete was ample, I would, certainly, permit the Minister to veto that expenditure. I am all against extravagance and any unnecessary expenditure, and I want to eliminate unreasonable proposals. The Minister is to have a roving commission to restrict the expenditure of some authorities because certain other authorities have not been able to keep their figures lower, and the authority which will be the first to suffer, undoubtedly, is London. When the figures are taken per child, London easily heads the list. London pays more per child than any other authority, I suppose, within the United Kingdom.

Do not talk nonsense!

London has been under the control for the last 18 years of an authority which is entirely in sympathy with the President of the Board. It has had a majority that has been most careful in its administration. The right hon. Gentleman was a member of the Council for a good many years himself, and I think he could bear witness that there was not a suspicion of extravagance. On the contrary. in my experience they have erred, if anything, in the direction of economy. Every penny has been scrutinised and every pound possible has been cut down. I maintain that the London educational institutions as a whole, whether elementary, secondary or technical, are carried on with the most careful economy. There is not a single instance of extravagance that can be brought home to the London authorities. They have been, and are, most willing co-operators with the President of the Board of Education in the campaign of economy. During the last two months they have been cutting down in every direction in order to meet the demands of the President of the Board. They are making a considerable reduction in the total expenditure based on their estimates. But even a worm will turn; even the London County Council, the Moderate London County Council, the Conservative London County Council, the most economical London County Council, finds the proposals embodied in this Clause too much for them to swallow, and they have sent to all London Members—I am sorry to see so few London Members present—a request to get these words amended. Lower on the page there is an Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Fulham (Sir Cyril Cobb), who is a very distinguished follower of the right hon. Gentleman. I am not sure that he is not the Chairman of the Primrose League, and is moving on behalf of the London County Council a proposal to modify these words.

The proposals we are considering actually suggest that London, with its heavy costs, with its concentrated population, with its overcrowded areas, with its high price of land, may be compared with some rural authorities, say in Cornwall or in some district where the cost of both administration and of construction is small. That is not a power one ought to put into the hands of any Minister. It would mean that the London Education Authority is to be hampered and hindered because of the constant shadow hanging over them, that the President of the Board is to say that the cost of education here is so much higher than in Cornwall, and to claim the right to refuse to give it the 50 per cent. grant. It is not fair to compare the cost of a Ford car with a Rolls-Boyce; the two articles are quite different. In London, where the cost of land is high and the cost of building is high, where they have to build several storeys high, and it would not be fair to compare the cost in this case with the cost in a rural area where they can use timber and where land is cheap. That is obviously unreasonable. But there is another and a more serious thing. There is a Committee sitting to consider standard costs—it is a kind of conference of all education authorities—and they have been trying to provide some standard of reasonable comparison. It does not seem fair, while this conference is going on, to prejudice its findings and put this power into the hands of the President of the Board of Education.

Elementary education in one place is very often an entirely different thing from what it is in another. In London elementary education includes central schools which cost very much more for each child than education in the ordinary elementary schools, because in the central schools something nearly equivalent to secondary education is provided, while in the provinces the work that is done in the London central schools is done in the secondary schools and comes under the classification of secondary schools. In the last Memorandum on education published by the Board, attention was called to the fact that over 200 education authorities made no provision for the education of defective children, for the blind, for the mentally defective, the deaf and so on, whereas in London a large provision is made for defective children in special schools. They cost far more per head than the education in the ordinary elementary schools. The building has to be on more ample lines; there have to be more teachers compared with the number of children and more technical and handicraft work. In London the whole of that work may be lumped into the elementary school; but in the provinces where there is no provision of this kind, where they have neglected their duties and the Board has allowed them to neglect their duties, they are able to show a very much less cost because of their neglect of their responsibilities to those unfortunate children. It is not fair, or reasonable, or just, or right to give this power to the Board of taking an apparently low figure in one area to compare it with what seems to be a very high figure in another area.

Speaking for London, speaking, I believe, for a great number of provincial education authorities who are resenting the inclusion of these words in this particular Clause, I say there is perhaps a more serious aspect of these proposals. The Minister, for some reason or another which I have not been able to discover, has a special antipathy to the work of evening education. He has singled it out for special attack. In his Memorandum he has laid emphasis on the heavy cost of the work done in the evening classes, and in a statement of policy on

"Education Grants, 1926–27," he says:

"In the third place, technical education shows an increase of rather more than 500,000 over 1923–24. No one will wish to minimise the importance of further education of children in evening classes for the children leaving elementary schools, but the provision which is being made for this service in some areas can perhaps hardly be recognised as a substantial contribution to the problem of technical education."

Then it goes on to say:

"In many cases local authorities have little control over the automatic expansion in the number and cost of these classes, and without wishing to lay down any general rule, this tendency seems to be one which should be carefully watched."

In other words, everybody knows that, owing to the fact that attendances in evening institutes are not compulsory, there are many classes on this comparative basis that can be proved to be costly. It is very difficult to get tired children, after a hard day's work, to attend any place of education at all. They are already exhausted, and in order to induce them to attend, classes have to be made attractive and amusing. Physical exercises, gymnasium and dancing are always appreciated, and where these are provided the standard set by the Board can be adhered to. If the education is to be of real value, no one knows better than the President that there must be some work done in the schools of more educational value—something like a literary class, a Shakespeare class, history or literature, or something else that is likely to stimulate the minds of the children.

5.0. P.M.

It is always difficult to get children to attend these classes, and the President knows only too well that the reason why so many of these classes are below the standard set by the Board is because they cannot be made attractive enough to the children. To come down under these powers and shut these schools will be a serious blow to all educational advance; it would he an attack on the work which many social reformers have been carrying on for years to stimulate the attendance of children at these evening institutes, which tends so much to the moral and mental advance of young people in towns. That, at any rate, is the impression that people have got outside. Less than 30 per cent. of the children leaving elementary schools go to these evening institutes, and now the Minister is taking power to shut down dozens of these classes because they are expensive. He is doing a bad day's work for the great child population who leave school at 14 years of age in our great towns. I hope these words will not remain in the Bill. They are too large powers to give to any Minister, and they are the wrong kind of powers. We do not want him to set one authority against another. We do not want a constant competition in the wrong kind of economy. What these authorities want who administer carefully and are doing good work to carry out the powers entrusted to them, is not to find the Minister a constant enemy and a constant handicap, but a colleague and a friend. Clothed with these powers, the Board will be put in the position of the fifth wheel of the coach. It will be clothed with special powers which will constantly irritate, handicap and worry the education authorities in doing their onerous duties. These proposals are reactionary, and I am strengthened in that view by the knowledge that the London Education Authority, a Conservative authority composed largely of members of the Noble Lord's own party, are opposed to it. I am satisfied that if this Amendment of mine were left to the free will of the House it would be carried.

I gather from your ruling earlier in the proceedings, Mr. Chairman, that it will be convenient to you and to the Committee if we take the general discussion now on the three Amendments you have enumerated rather than confine ourselves to the discussion on the first standing in the name of the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris). The Amendments we are now in course of discussing raise the main principle around which controversy ranges on the part of those who object to this Bill. In the course of the discussion yesterday several speakers on this side of the Committee invited the Noble Lord to be precise in his reply as to why it was he sought these powers. He was invited to say what particular standard of judgment he would set up in order to decide what in his view would be excessive expenditure or what would be expenditure which he could approve. As far as I was able to hear the Noble Lord, although I did not hear his remarks fully, I was not able to gather from him that he gave to the Committee an adequate reply to those questions which were addressed to him.

The first point which I want to discuss is the point in regard to the proviso concerning the circumstances of the area of the authority. I happen to represent in this House a Division which I admit is not educationally autonomous, but which might be quite hard hit under the provisions of this Bill were my Division an autonomous area from the standpoint of education. I mean this. From what the Noble Lord said yesterday when the right hon. and learned Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) said to him, "You are speaking of necessitous areas," and he replied, "Yes, this is a reference to necessitous areas," I presume that necessitous areas would have special significance to him under the provisions of this portion of the Clause. My area is an area which at this moment has a local rate of about 28s. in the£. I presume, therefore, that, if that local authority were an autonomous area, the Noble Lord, considering any educational proposals from an area such as that, would say to them immediately, "Your proposals may be good or they may be bad educationally, I may personally approve of them or I may not, but your position, having regard to your rates of 28s. 1d. in the pound, is so precarious that on other grounds than educational grounds I must reject your proposals." I want to ask the Noble Lord if that is what he has in mind when he seeks these exceptional powers under this Clause. Is he going to abrogate his powers as President of the Board of Education and assume powers which belong to some other Department of the Government? Is he going to sit in judgment upon the local authority from the standpoint of expenditure on general services, rather than upon this expenditure upon a particular service with which he has some special connection? It is important that we should know what this means because, if we examine this question, we shall find this. What in the main are these necessitous areas that would come under the ban of the Noble Lord as President of the Board of Education?

The hon. Member will remember, what I pointed out yesterday, that, as far as necessitous areas are concerned, there is no doubt that I have these powers already, because they are actually in the Board of Education Regulations applying to these areas.

Yes, I quite understand that, but the Noble Lord says at the beginning of the Clause in effect, "To remove any possible doubt in this matter, I warn you now that, when you come to me, I am going to use the big stick in future and if in my judgment your rates are exceptionally heavy, you may talk as long as you like and as eloquently as you like because to my mind they seem to involve you in too great a local expenditure from that point of view." May I ask the Noble Lord, if he already feels he has the powers which he is now asking for in this Clause, to tell us why he is wasting the time of the House in asking for the re-statement of those powers in this Clause? If he has them already, why not be content with them? The real reason, I presume, is that the Noble Lord wants to be able to avoid any question at all on the part of the local authorities as to his exercise of his powers. He wants to be able to say, "There it is, re-asserted in the Bill in express terms. I am the monarch of all I survey, there is no one who can dispute with me, I am the arbiter. Since I have decided this, take it or leave it." He is simply asking for himself absolute dictatorial powers which will enable him to refuse even to receive deputations to discuss the matter if he chooses. He can absolutely rely on the power in this Clause to say that he is not called upon to discuss it with them, that he has decided what is good for them, and not their local authority at all.

There are 318 local education authorities in this country. Why has the country got 318 local education authorities? Is it not because the country has decided and Parliament has decided that it is in the best interests of these local areas that people who are cognisant of the need of the local authorities shall be in charge of the educational machinery? They are the people who know. They have to have regard to the rates, but they have the duty imposed upon them to provide for the education in their respective localities. But under this Clause the noble Lord proposes to he local education authority for everybody. For these 318 areas, up and down the country, he is to be the person who shall finally decide this, that, or the other thing. It may very well be that the Noble Lord's assurance to us may be well-founded. He may say, "I shall not be arbitrary, I shall not be unfair, I shall use my powers rightly, I shall use my powers discreetly." What assurance have we got that he is going to remain where he is? He may be promoted to some other office under the Government. We may have a more reactionary President than the Noble Lord, and the consequence may be that the assurance that the Noble Lord is able to give us on his own account may have no relation whatever to any possible successor of his in this office. But once we have handed over these powers to the President of the Board of Education it belongs to his successor as completely as to him, and may not be used with the same wisdom as that with which we hope he will use them in his time.

The next question I want to raise is that of making this somewhat unsual and dangerous precedent of judging the expenditure of a local authority, not on its own intrinsic merits, but judging it in comparison with the expenditure of some other authority. I asked the Noble Lord yesterday, by way of interjection, what precisely he meant when he used the phrase "comparable areas." He said that he was going to judge this expenditure as between one area and an area which is comparable with it. Very good. If I did not misunderstand his argument, he said, "I have had powers already given to me of that. nature in another regard," and he argued that the parallel presented by the scale of salaries for teachers is a good parallel to adopt in this regard. I suggest to him that it is not quite the same. In the case of salaries of teachers you have some four scales of salaries. You have a scale that is applicable to purely agricultural areas; you have a scale that is applicable to half agricultural and half industrial areas; you have a scale which is applicable to industrial areas or city areas, and then there is the fourth or London Scale. You are able to arrive at a general standard in regard to salaries for teachers because you have certain well-ascertainable data on which to pro- ceed in fixing your scales of salaries. Moreover, your scale of salaries was only arrived at by agreement between the parties concerned. The teachers were there represented, the local authorities were there represented—the Board was not, of course, except in a watching capacity—and the two sides, the employés and the employers were represented on that committee which determined the scale of salaries for the country. But in the case of this particular Clause you provide no such machinery. There is no attempt to introduce any kind of discussion. The only person who is allowed to determine finally is the Noble Lord himself.

You cannot fairly compare every agricultural area with other agricultural areas. For instance, there are rural areas which are contiguous to areas of a more progressive type. I am thinking of two in particular, and in taking these two I want it clearly understood that I am making no reflection upon either of them. I am thinking, let us say, of authorities like the Herefordshire county authority and the Monmouthshire county authority, or, let us say, the Breconshire county authority and the Glamorganshire county authority. There you have the Glamorganshire authority, extremely progressive and very rich, and contiguous to it is the Breconshire authority, a rural authority. The same applies to Monmouthshire and to Herefordshire. I want to know from the Noble Lord, Is he, under this proposal, going to say to a progressive authority like Glamorganshire: "You are spending money far in excess of the standard of expenditure applied and practised in Breconshire, and I must, therefore, invite you to reconsider your position in the light of the expenditure of an authority which is adjacent to your own''? I want to drive that point right home, if I may, because it is rather important, à propos of this Clause.

If the Committee cares to look at the return given of the cost per child of elementary education for the year 1923–1924, it will find that the average expenditure per elementary school child for that year was£11 Ss. 9d., but if you take the expenditure of the highest authority, the heaviest expenditure, it is£17 8s. 10d., and if you take the expenditure of the lowest, it is only£7 7s. 5d. Between those extremes is an infinite variety of programmes and of policies. The progressive authority may have provided for the sort of expenditure of which an hon. Friend of mine was speaking last night, expenditure upon physical training for children, medical benefits for children, and so on. There may even be an authority which has provided very lavishly for some form of adult education, whereas another authority may never have dreamed of such a thing. The question we have the right to ask the Noble Lord is this: Is an authority which embarks upon this newer form of educational policy to be told that it must either stagnate and mark time, or retrogress to the standard of a less progressive authority, or is the policy to be to tell the less progressive authority to come up to the standard of the more progressive body? If it is that the Noble Lord will tell the less progressive authority to come up to the standard of the more progressive, then obviously he is not embarking upon a campaign of economy at all. What he should provide for in that case is more expenditure and a far greater measure of increased expenditure than the Noble Lord adumbrated yesterday.

Obviously, that is not the policy. The only policy, therefore, which the Noble Lord can have in mind is the policy of calling upon the more progressive authority to scale down its standards to the standards of the less progressive authority. I ask the Noble Lord whether we cannot have from him a full, complete and precise answer on those specific points? What is to be the standard judgment? Is it to take the average expenditure throughout the country and call upon every one of the less progressive authorities to come up to it and on the more progressive to come clown to it, or is it to call upon the least progressive to come up to the standard of the most progressive, or is it to call the most progressive to come down to the standard of the least progressive? There are three alternatives before the Noble Lord, and I think we should have a precise reply from him. He cannot have it both ways. The Noble Lord has been complaining for some time that he has been misrepresented in the country. He told some fellow-countrymen of mine last week-end in North Wales, if I did not misunderstand the report of his speech, that while he has been actually practising and encouraging progress, he has been accused—I am using my own words, not his—of stinting educational expenditure.

We ask the Noble Lord: Are we to understand that it is his policy, in spite of these Clauses, that local authorities who want to embark upon a progressive policy will be allowed, and not merely allowed but encouraged, to do so? If not, then how can the Noble Lord complain of misrepresentation? All that we accuse him of is of going back on an announced policy, a policy announced by himself and his leaders at the last Election, and propounded by him from a score of platforms in the country since the last Election took place. If the Noble Lord tells us that he wants to carry that policy into actual effect, well and good—he will get no one more sympathetic and more helpful than ourselves—but he cannot have it both ways. That is the point that I am making. He cannot ask for a reduction of educational expenditure on the one side, and then claim that he is advancing the interests of education on the other. I think I have indicated to the Noble Lord generally what sort of answer we would like from him on this particular issue. I merely want, in conclusion, to put this last point to him.

From my experience of a local education authority for some short time, and indeed from experience elsewhere, I think I can say that those people up and down the country who have charge of the administrative machine of education have been somewhat disheartened of recent years by the constant vacillations in policy for which the Board of Education has been responsible. Sometimes it has been progress, then it became reaction, then it became progress again, and then it became reaction again. It breaks the hearts of those administrators to find that their work is being hampered in this most unfortunate way, and I ask the Noble Lord, for the sake of the encouragement of those responsible for the administrative machine educationally, to let us know precisely what they are to expect. Is the policy of the manifesto of the Conservative party the policy still, or are Circular 1371 and Memorandum 44 the policy? What is the policy? People have a right to know for when they know they will be able, to use a common phrase, to cut their coat according to the cloth available. I hope the Noble Lord, before this Debate closes, will find it possible to give us precise answers to these questions as to what is in his mind. What is he going to cut down? Is it the education of children under five'? Is it scholarships? Is it secondary school provision? Is it adult education? What is going to suffer? Which branch of the educational tree is to be lopped off? Perhaps the Noble Lord will be good enough to tell us, and, if he does, we shall know, in the light of that reply, what reliance is to be placed upon the pretension of the Government that it is in favour of educational advance for the country.

I do not know that my hon. Friend the Member for Southwest Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris) expects the actual Amendment which he has moved to be taken seriously as a proposal, or whether he puts it forward merely as an indication of his general dissatisfaction.

It is a serious Amendment.

Then let me tell the Committee what the effect of it would be. The effect of it would be that the Board of Education would have no power to refuse to recognise any expenditure of a local authority, provided it did not unreasonably exceed any estimate of expenditure made by the authority. However high the estimate of the authority might be, the Board of Education would be obliged to recognise it for grant. If the authority, in the instance given by the hon. Member, sent in an estimate providing for the marble halls of which he talked, then the Board of Education would be obliged to recognise it for grant, but the only case in which they would be able to refuse recognition would be if afterwards the authority found that it had not, after all, provided quite enough, and it therefore exceeded its estimate.

Has not the Noble Lord got those powers now?

Yes, I have got those powers now. Nobody thinks that under a percentage grant system under which the taxpayer can be taxed automatically by the expenditure of a local authority the expenditure of a local authority can be uncontrolled by Parliament through the Minister responsible, yet the Amendment of the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green would make the authority wholly uncontrollable by Parliament, and it might spend any amount of money it pleased, as long as it estimated liberally enough beforehand. Therefore, that Amendment is clearly impossible, and yet it is the only Amendment before the Committee. The hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones) has quite clearly pointed out that he wants the Amendment which stands in his name and the Amendment which stands in the name of the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Cove), that they are not satisfied with cutting out either the circumstances of the area or the general standard of expenditure, and, therefore, we are left in this position by all three Amendments, that the only power of the Board is to disallow expenditure if an estimate is exceeded, that it will have no power whatever to refuse to recognise expenditure as long as the authority estimates liberally enough what it is going to spend. In these circumstances, I do not think I need waste very much time—

Is it not true to say that the expenditure of local authorities upon which the Noble Lord may base grant is approved expenditure, that is, approved by the Board of Education, expenditure which he has accepted as legal expenditure, as necessary expenditure, and as expenditure upon which he and his Department are prepared to pay grants? Therefore, is it not further true to say that that approved expenditure gives the Board the power which the Noble Lord says we are now cuffing out?

The hon. Member is wrong, and if he will refer to the Act, he will find that I am right. I do not want to deal with the nature of a percentage grant, but the Act of 1918 provides a system by which grant is payable not on expenditure approved by the Board in advance, but on expenditure recognised by the Board retrospectively, after it is incurred. Grant is paid on expenditure which has been incurred and there is no approval in advance. I need not take up much time in arguing against this Amendment, but I will answer one or two questions which have been put to me. The hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones) referred to, necessitous areas, and he asks, is it to deal with necessitous areas that the Government propose to take these powers? My answer is that as far as necessitous areas are concerned, our Regulations already provide for them. Necessitousness is not one of the things I had in mind at all in this connection. The same hon. Member asks me whether I propose to disallow expenditure on other than educational grounds., The answer to that question is, "No."

In these matters there has always been co-operation between the Minister of Health and the Board of Education, and if the Ministry of Health decide that a bankrupt area cannot be allowed to raise new loans, the Board of Education must co-operate. Subject to those reservations, the object of this proposal is that the Board should act in recognising or not recognising expenditure entirely on educational grounds. On that point there is an essential difference between these proposals and the provisions of the Economy Bill of 1922, which was introduced by the Coalition Government. That Bill proposed that the President of the Board of Education should have power to refuse to recognise expenditure merely on the ground that the Board of Education had not asked Parliament for a sufficient amount of money to cover that expenditure. I am confining my proposals to the power to disapprove expenditure on educational grounds and on the actual merits of the proposed expenditure. I do not think anyone can really suggest that in deciding whether or not to recognise expenditure we can altogether ignore the circumstances of the area. The hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris) has pointed out the peculiar position of London, but his Amendment would rob me of any chance of considering the special circumstances of London areas.

As regards the general standard, I am asked what are my intentions. In this respect my intentions are not different from those of the right hon. Member for Central Edinburgh (Mr. Graham) and Mr. Fisher, who have urged that the Government should establish a general standard of expenditure in order to control the expenditure of local education authorities. The hon. Member for Caerphilly asks, am I to bring down the highest authority to the lowest or vice versâ, or am I to take some medium line? The only way in which a maximum standard can be arrived at is to take something in the neighbourhood of the maximum of expenditure in progressive and efficient areas which are comparable and to lay down that that expenditure shall not be exceeded but shall be the maximum standard. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Central Newcastle came to the conclusion that 6s. per head was too small for the maintenance allowance and he put it up to 9s., but he never proposed to bring everybody up to the level of Bradford. Therefore I think the attempt to prove that there is something sinister about this Clause really breaks down from every point of view and partakes of an attempt really to create prejudice. Anybody who has had anything to do with our educational administration knows that all these considerations are common form.

I asked the right hon. Gentleman if he would give us only one instance of the thing which he actually wants to do, and for which he has brought in this Clause.

I am in communication with various authorities about this expenditure, I am questioning the expenditure in certain cases, hut I am not going to discuss the affairs of any particular authority.

You cannot give one case.

I am not going to give one case. The Debate on this Amendment might very well extend to a repetition of what happened yesterday, and I am sure the Committee does not wish the Debate to he extended. I think there has been an arrangement made by which a large part of our proceedings on this subject as a whole should terminate by 7 o'clock, and I suggest that we should now come to a decision.

I do not think the speech which the Noble Lord has just made will really tend to the shortening of the Debate. This subject I know is very complicated and very technical, and only those who have had special knowledge of the subject can speak with authority upon it. I listened to the Noble Lord's speech with a sincere desire to be instructed about the administration of the Board of Education, but, in my opinion, the Noble Lord's proposition can be decided without any special knowledge. He stated that if the Amendment of the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green was inserted, the effect would be to impose upon him as Minister of Education a complete disability to disallow any item of expenditure which was not in terms defined by the positive language of the Clause as it would then be altered.

If the Amendment is incorporated it will declare that, for the purpose of removing doubt, it is hereby declared that the Board of Education shall not be bound to recognise any expenditure described in a particular way. That would not put any prohibition or restriction upon the action of the Noble Lord. This is not a matter for educational experts but it is one for plain thinking and ordinary commonsense, and the Amendment does not do what the Noble Lord says it does. The real question is whether or not the Committee would be well advised in defining in these positive terms the discretion of the President. of the Board of Education.

As the right hon. Gentleman challenges my interpretation on this point, may I say that the Amendment will make the Clause read that the Board of Education shall not be bound to recognise

"any expenditure which, in the opinion of the Board, unreasonably exceeds any estimate of expenditure made by the authority."

Is not the implication that by leaving out the intervening Clauses I am bound to recognise any other expenditure?

I have never before heard that in a case where by the present law the Minister has a discretion to say "yes" or "no," the fact that you limit the particular occasion on which he shall be bound to say "yes" is the same thing as limiting the occasions when he is bound to say "no." Of course, that is not so. If you choose to define some particular case where he shall not be bound he is still free to say "yes" or "no" in every other case. However, I do not care anything about that argument, except that, while it is all very well for the Noble Lord to ask that these Debates should be abbre- viated, I must point out that he began his own speech by a statement as to the meaning of some very simple English words which was the exact contrary to what anyone can conceive to be their meaning.

Now comes the matter of substance, which is whether or not it is desirable to include the words which my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris) suggests should he left out. It is certainly a most remarkable fact that the Noble Lord, up to the present, has not thought it right, whether it be within his power or not, to give any single instance, or even any single illustration in any detail, of what he means by referring to the circumstances of the area of the authority. He has really left the Committee entirely in the dark about that. I am not in the least speaking because I claim to be an educational expert; I am not an educational expert; but I do speak as one who is most sincerely devoted to the cause of the education of the people, and I should have thought that the true way in which our present educational system works was this.

There are two checks, really, upon expenditure. The one check is the check provided by the fact that locally raised expenditure involves the raising of rates; and the other check is the check to which the Noble Lord refers, and which, no doubt, does exist within limits, namely, the check which the central authority exercises in one way or another—a supervising check. I do not doubt that. The real question is, which of these two checks, in a well-appointed system of national education, ought to come into operation first? That is the real question —which of the two checks, the rate check or the central departmental check, comes into operation to slow up the machine first; which ought to be the handle which really, when it is turned, stops the raising of more steam in the educational boiler?

I should have thought that the true view was this: If you have a responsibly elected local education authority, like, for instance, the great authority of London, for which the hon. Member for West Fulham (Sir C. Cobb) speaks with such authority, I should have thought that, if that locally elected authority, responsible to the ratepayers, in the closest touch with its constituents, exposed to a very great deal of reproach if it raises the rates, comes to the conclusion that, either for the sake of the essential service of education in its area or because it is the real wish of the ratepayers, it is prepared to expose its citizens to a rate of so much, that, on the whole, is the best possible indication that the amount of steam which is being raised in the educational boiler is not excessive; and, except in the rarest cases, I should have said that the other handle in the hands of the Minister really does not come into operation, because the rate check is the substantial and effective check which prevents absurd extravagances in expenditure. The other is the emergency handle.

There may be a case, I quite agree, where, in a special emergency, or for some special reason, the Minister finds, or his expert advisers find, that there is some local authority so foolish, so utterly reckless, that it is doing something for which he has to pull them up; but I should have thought that, as a matter of practical working, the real check in this business is the check of the rates. I do not believe you will find a responsible authority cheerfully sailing into educational extravagance when it has this very serious practical check pressing upon it day by day and week by week. That seems to me to be the real point that is raised. When the Noble Lord says, "My Department is anxious to have in express terms the power to consider the circumstances of the area of the authority," does not the local education authority know the circumstances of the area of the authority, and has it not this thing night and day at its side as the principal thing that it has to consider? I do not find it possible to believe that it is wise to put in these words

There is another observation of the Noble Lord's that I would like respectfully to criticise. I really do not understand what he meant when he said, in answer to something that was said on this side, that the work of the Board of Education, as far as local expenditure is concerned, is all after the event. Is it? Does the Noble Lord seriously represent to this Committee and to the country that that is how the thing works? He has been inviting local education authorities to submit schemes to him in advance, in order that he may discuss those schemes with these people, and indicate the view which he is disposed to form. Surely, technicalities apart, that does in substance mean that the Board of Education, in proper circumstances, is informed of, and indicates at any rate a provisional view about, expenditure in this locality or in that— not after it has been incurred, but before it has been incurred.

It takes us months to build a new school.

The hon. Member, in that remark, is referring to capital expenditure, and I must do the Noble Lord justice; he made an exception in regard to capital expenditure. Surely, before the Board of Education called upon the local education authorities to recognise the Burnham scale, they had lots of discussions with local education authorities—with, for instance, the London County Council—as to whether or not the Burnham scale was a scale which the Board on their side would be prepared to accept if the London County Council accepted it. I do not want to claim to be an expert about these matters I am not; but I have followed them as well as I could for many years, and I cannot believe that the Board of Education does not, under the Noble Lord's control, do what previous Boards have done, and that it has not constantly had before it, as a matter on which the Board expresses its opinion, not expenditure which has been incurred, but a scheme of expenditure which it is proposed to incur. The whole point here is, are you not doing a very dangerous thing to the cause of national education if you here advertise in this Clause of this Economy Bill, if you inform every public authority in the country concerned with education and warn them, that for the future there is no knowing what the Minister of Education is going to do in respect of expenditure which they have incurred, although the expenditure is in pursuance of a scheme of which the Board of Education has approved?

I was sorry just now to hear the Minister say that he thought a good deal of this discussion was for the purpose of raising prejudice. He used an expression of the same character yesterday when he described the Debate as a sham fight. I can assure the Minister and the Committee that the Debate, so far as we are concerned, is certainly not for the purpose of raising prejudice, and is certainly not a sham fight. We are engaged in a very difficult real fight, the real fight being to get from the Minister some specific information which he has consistently refused up to the present moment. Also, may I say that the Minister is quite wrong in thinking that local authorities feel no perturbation or distress with regard to this proposal. They feel the very greatest perturbation and distress. The whole of the London Members of Parliament have received a most elaborate document from the London County Council, an authority which is controlled by people of the right hon. Gentleman's own political colour. The London County Council are most disturbed as to the effects of this particular proviso, for the reasons which have just been set forth with very great eloquence by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon). At the present time, putting aside for the moment the actual technicalities as to the time of approval, a local education authority does know what its educational budget is going to be, and it can make its rate but the education authorities are very much disturbed indeed to know how they are going to be able to budget in the future with regard to their educational expenditure, with this emergency hand of the Minister held over their heads.

This is really not quite so much of a sham fight as the right hon. Gentleman would lead us to think. Let me put to him one specific point. If the right hon. Gentleman is not willing to give us even one little instance of how he proposes to use this power—an actual instance of an actual local authority—he might at any rate, with regard to one particular service, let us say the special services, give ail example of how he proposes to compare, with regard to any particular two authorities, their expenditure on one particular department of education. How is he going to do it? I put it to the right hon. Gentleman that the reason why he does not give us a specific reply is, because he does not know—that he does not give us a specific reply because, I venture to say, he does not understand the precise wording of this Clause, and how he is going to apply these comparisons.

Let me ask him this precise question. Suppose that a new service is to be started. There was a time when in London there were no dental clinics at all. I am speaking of something which is within my own immediate knowledge, and in regard to which my mind is sufficiently full without referring to any notes. There was a, time in London when there were no dental clinics at all. There are now dental clinics over the whole of London. They began at an institution which I know very well, by a certain little experiment, which experiment, having proved successful, was extended by the. London County Council to one school after another, until finally it has extended over the whole London area. Suppose that in the future there is a new service which is thought by educational or medical experts likely to prove of great value to the children in the schools. How is the Minister going to rank a proposal for expenditure on that head, and how is he going to compare expenditure on a quite new proposed service with something in the past?

I think that in practice it will be found to be impossible to compare standards of expenditure. Supposing, let us say, it is suggested that the London County Council should instal artificial sunlight lamps in a number of schools, and should follow the extensive use of artificial sunlight for improving the life of children, as is being done at the present time in Germany. How is the Minister going to view a proposal of that kind? How is he going to compare the expenditure on that, which is a new service, with the expenditure of other years, when, of course, nothing of that kind existed? I suggest that the only real way of comparing one area with another is to compare the needs of the area from the point of view of the children as individuals, as human beings, and not from the point of view of the money expenditure. The comparison which the Minister tried to draw with regard to the proposal made by my hon. Friend the Member for one of the Divisions of Edinburgh, as to setting up standards of expenditure, is, when applied to education, a particularly difficult comparison to snake, because the Minister knows quite well that there are many heads of expenditure in education in the case of which it is impossible to make accurate comparisons. There are some in which yon can make accurate comparisons, but there are others in which you cannot make any comparisons at all.

If the Minister had given us any information at all as to what he proposes to do, we might be very much less doubtful as to the future than we are at the present time; but, as he has withheld all information, and has assumed at the last moment, in answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Central Newcastle (Mr. Trevelyan), an air of mystery, and said that he will not reply, that he will not give us one single instance, I can assure him that we feel a very great disquiet indeed on this matter, and the educational authorities in the country will also feel a very great disquiet. I earnestly suggest to him that, for the sake of educational administration in this country, he should attempt to-night to lay down at least some general principle on which he is going to act with regard to standards of comparison as between the services which he is going to cut clown or push up, or do something which he has not described to this Committee. What we really want to know, and what I think the Committee has a right to know, when the Minister is asking us to give him very great powers, is what he proposes to do with those powers, and he can hardly ride off and say, "I will not tell you even one single thing."

6.0 P.M.

I listened with interest to the Noble Lord, who rather suggested that we ought not to revert to a general Debate on the Amendment. I think he said the Amendment really overlooked the whole question unless we were prepared to honour any agreement that had been made and bring our Debate to a very early conclusion. If some arrangements are made the whole party ought to abide by them but this is a matter that affects so many people in such a, wide area that we should do less than justice to our various constituents unless we did offer some observations where educational difficulties are arising at the moment. It might be righteous indignation of the Noble Lord when he suggests that the effect of the Clause is going to be little or nothing so far as any educational authority is concerned, and that may very well be felt in his own heart of hearts, but I think he would agree, since I have the good fortune to know that he himself has inspected the Division I endeavour to represent and knows the conditions prevailing there, when I say that whatever he may say in this or any other education Debate, whatever his hopes and desires and aspirations are with regard to providing educational facilities, without imposing further limitations on the possibilities of further expenditure there are hundreds of children in my Division for whom there has been no accommodation provided at all. I do not, of course, attribute this to the Noble Lord, whose period of office is much too short for that, but he will he the first to admit that we are suffering to-day from a legacy that has been handed down by some of his predecessors. I would suggest perhaps the Geddes Committee, which placed its hand over a wide area more or less responsible for many districts having fewer schools than they require merely to give the ordinary lowest and most common form of elementary education.

He knows that the West Riding Education Committee regard the new mining area in South Yorkshire as nothing more nor less than a nightmare because of the Ministers who preceded him, except, of course, the Minister in the Labour Government, who restricted the opportunities for building new schools where they were required in new mining districts, and because of these penalisations and restrictions in the years that, have gone by we find ourselves in this position, that in my division there are six new mining districts, and in not a single one of them are the facilities for the accommodation as large as is the demand from the children. I could bring, and I think I have in private conversation and in other ways brought individual cases which could be multiplied many times of people who have migrated from some other district to one of these new mining districts. They had children who had been struggling to secure a secondary education. They had won scholarships in the district they had left, but because of the lack of elementary educational facilities in the new district they have had to be left in a district probably 100 miles away, while the children who are brought along, who are anywhere from 10, 11, 12 to even 13 years of age, have been walking about the streets for months on end since there is no school, either temporary or permanent, for them to attend. It seems to me this is creating two problems. First of all, it prevents the child who is capable of winning a scholarship and securing extended education having the opportunity of doing its best during the years from eight up to 11 when they want to be preparing for the scholarship. Secondly—and this is the part that affects the Clause—the schools that exist are so overcrowded that it is a problem for the teachers, not to teach them, but merely to keep the children in hand. The size of the classes is extraordinarily big. The schools, which are temporary, where they exist at all, are in no way convenient for the best form of education, and to that extent the teachers are securing no comfort at all. The children who are going to school are not getting the quality and quantity of education they are entitled to. There are children strolling about the streets for whom no accommodation has been provided at all.

What does the Noble Lord intend to do in extraordinary districts similar to the new mining area of South Yorkshire? I know he has said more than once that in new mining areas the restrictions shall be as few as possible, but in speaking last evening his last few words were a reference to Durham. He said:

"Durham has sent in a programme of building for this year, strictly within the limits of Memorandum 44, and it involves the building of no fewer than 25 new elementary schools. And that is not untypical of other counties. When you have got demands of that kind, it is absolutely essential, from the point of view of local authorities, of the central government, and of everyone concerned; to husband your resources in current expenditure as far as you can without hurting educational efficiency, in order to he able to provide for those demands which face local authorities." —[OFFICIAL, REPORT, 19th April, 1926; col. 993, Vol. 194.]

But, surely, he must know that, be he ever so generous to the education authorities, the normal difficulties in the way of building new schools, put on their own restrictions, and make the expenditure of public money on elementary or secondary schools a very small proportion of the actual needs of any one district. Thousands of men and women in my division, who have attended meetings expressly to deal with this educational problem, have recently sent a message here demanding that their children should have the same rights as other children in any part of the country. They merely want their children to be educated.

Is the Noble Lord facilitating the West Riding Education Committee in building all the new schools that are needed in South Yorkshire or is he going, under this economy Clause, to cause them to hesitate in the building of new schools so that they may expend money in other directions that they know to be necessary? With all the goodwill in the world, the very' fear of this economy is going to have an adverse effect upon districts similar to that I have named. The shortage of schools in new districts is due largely to economy which has been practised in the past, and the Noble Lord is now suffering from that legacy, but not to the extent of the child who only gets the maximum privilege of going to school till he is 14. There will be one or two years taken away from that and he is starting his race in life at a very great disadvantage. The Noble Lord cannot complain very bitterly if some of us attempt to express what we think our constituents believe. Their desire is merely for that education that their parents have to pay for, and if they are going to be restricted at all, even if the fear of restriction for their children enters their hearts, we are justified in putting no more power into the Noble Lord's hands to restrict the expenditure on new buildings or the ordinary current expenditure because of the large classes, fewer schools and indifferent equipment from which teachers and children have been suffering from in the past. The power already vested in the Minister is ample to meet the needs for every economy or anything else. I think instead of retarding the development of education he ought to be devoting his time to giving it a real impetus and assisting lively authorities to do for their people what they know their people require and are prepared to pay for.

The Noble Lord has resorted to a practice which is common in the case of a Member of any Government who are resisting Amendments to a particular Bill in which they are interested. The practice is that of arguing that an Amendment has an effect quite contrary to that which its sponsors intend. That, I think, has been effectively disposed of by my right hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon), who has pointed out that this Clause does not do that. It does not say the Board of Education shall recognise or shall refuse to recognise any particular expenditure. All it says is that the Board shall not be bound to recognise expenditure of a particular description and class. It seems to me the attitude of the Noble Lord towards this Amendment affords a reliable test of the true significance of the Clause. The attitude he has taken up all through these discussions is this. "I have ample powers already. This Clause is not going to give me anything I do not already possess." It is a very remarkable fact that the greater part of yesterday and a great part of to-day are being devoted to a discussion that arises out of a Clause which, according to that argument, is of no avail and of no purpose at all. I think by this time it has become apparent to all who have followed the discussion that unless this or a similar Amendment is accepted the Noble Lord, in fact, is having a very considerable addition to the powers the Board of Education now possesses. It certainly now assumes it has the authority even, whether it strictly has it or not, to refuse to sanction expenditure in the case of a local education authority here and there. That discretion hitherto has been exercised in regard to the programme of each local education authority under consideration at the moment. In this Clause the right hon. Gentleman is going to do more than that. He is introducing two additional tests or considerations. In the first place, there is

"the circumstances of the area of the authority."

I would ask any hon. Member who has had experience of the interpretation of Acts of Parliament by the Courts, what more mischievous phrase could be introduced into any Act of Parliament than a vague phrase such as,

"having regard to the circumstances of the area of the authority."

It is inviting trouble and difficulty all over the country. The other consideration is:

"or the general standard of expenditure in other areas."

What possible meaning can be attached to that? The Noble Lord has used once or twice the phrase "comparable authorities." I do not know whether that helps the matter very much. As another test of the sincerity of the defence which the Noble Lord has put up, I would ask him what has he in mind when he talks about comparable authorities? There is an Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Fulham (Sir C. Cobb) to introduce the word "similar."That is not the word which the Noble Lord has used, but in effect it is not very far removed from it. If he is sincere in saying that he is prepared to limit the discretion for which he is asking in this Clause in regard to his power to curtail the expenditure of any particular local education authority by reference to the expenditure of other education authorities, is he prepared to accept the Amendment standing in the name of one of his own supporters, the hon. Member for Fulham?

I understand that there is some arrangement that this debate shall finish before long. What I have to say will apply to my own particular area. What effect is this Clause likely to have on the developments which have been talked about for some years in my neighbourhood? Like the hon. Member for the Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams), mine, is a mining neighbourhood largely, which is expanding very rapidly, and for years we have had the utmost difficulty in building schools sufficiently fast to keep pace with the incoming population. Only a few months ago, in a district that is fairly well supplied, not a new area in the sense that there has been a pit sunk within the last few years, but an area where there has been a pit for 10 or 12 years, we had a meeting of protest by the people over the question of school premises which had been promised for two years, but had been held up for one reason or another. The accommodation in the existing schools was so bad that the people in the neighbourhood called the protest meeting, and they felt so keenly about the matter that they decided that if the school was not started to be built within two months, they would withdraw every child from every school in the neighbourhood.

That is the kind of problem that affects nay neighbourhood. Where elementary schools have to be built by such authorities, the Noble Lord probably will not apply restrictions: I hope not. There are other questions connected with the locality. A few weeks ago I was approached by a number of persons as to the possibility of getting a school built or some accommodation provided for mental defectives. I believe the accommodation in the West Riding is none too good in this respect. There are a great number of children for whom there is little or no provision made with regard to their education. I was asked what was going to be done. I approached the responsible authorities through the usual channels and was informed that it was intended to make provision within the next 12 months in the neighbourhood for these children. I would ask the Noble Lord whether under this Clause there is a possibility of that provision being ruled out. There is another question. For the past six years we have been agitating to get some kind of central school in this rapidly growing district. It has been promised for five or six years. Nothing has been done in so far as making a start is concerned, but I believe that a central school is anticipated at Bentley. Now that there seems some possibility of getting the place built, I would like to know whether this Clause will mean that in this neighbourhood we are to be penalised and that this will be considered excessive expenditure.

All who have had experience in the West Riding, and who have knowledge of the educational affairs there, will agree that there is great need for schools of the description I have mentioned, and I hope that the Noble Lord will do nothing to hinder the development of the building of such schools. There is also a tremendous need for more secondary school accommodation. The Don-caster Grammar School during the last four or five years has had huts of every description added to it. There has been no permanent building put up. War-time huts have been used until nearly the whole of the land around the school is occupied with these temporary buildings. Even now the accommodation is not sufficient. Is this Clause likely to be used to the detriment of the provision of further secondary school accommodation in this rapidly expanding neighbourhood? If the Noble Lord can promise us that there is no intention that it shall be used to stop developments on the lines I have mentioned, perhaps some of the fears that we have about the powers for which he is asking may be dissipated to a slight extent.

I protest against the Minister's oft-repeated statement that the fight from our side is a sham fight. It is a real fight on behalf of the children against the reactionary policy of the President of the Board of Education. It is not only we on this side who regard this business with great misgiving. The London County Council also regard this Clause with very serious misgiving. They have issued a circular, and I want to put on record what they have said, so that the Noble Lord may ponder over the words:

"The principle of comparing an education authority's expenditure with that of another or with the average for the whole country or for some particular area, is a dangerous principle."

That principle has been embodied in this Clause, and it is the considered opinion of the London County Council that it is a dangerous principle, a principle which cannot be put into operation, and a principle which will reflect itself in grave injustice to many authorities. The Noble Lord has said that expenditure on education is quite uncontrollable. He knows that that statement is not correct. He knows that he has control of the expenditure upon teachers' salaries. He has controlled it to the extent that he has accepted scales of salaries for a period of five or six years. He has controlled expenditure on the feeding of school children by fixing the limit. He has controlled expenditure on school buildings and on the development of secondary schools by compelling the local education authorities to submit plans and programmes to him, which he can veto or accept at his discretion.

What expenditure is left? Here I think I have come to what the Noble Lord is after, namely, the expenditure on copy books for children, expenditure on school stationery, expenditure on the heating of the schools, and expenditure on the wages of cleaners. Those are the things I believe the Noble Lord is after, with a view to curtailing expenditure. But he will find it a, very difficult task, because there have been different standards as far as equipment, stationery and books are concerned. He will have to take into consideration the response of the individual authorities to the cry of the Geddes Committee. I plead with him not to ask the Committee to accept this Clause. He is negotiating with the authorities. He has been in conference with them, and he is now in conference with them, I understand, on the whole system of the grants that are to obtain in the future. If he passes this Clause he prejudges the whole position. He gets standards and powers which, if they are to come at all, ought to come out of a conference with the local education authorities. If only to keep good faith with the local educational authorities, and to obtain their continued good will, I ask him as a last appeal to withdraw this Clause. He says he has the powers already. If so, he will suffer nothing by withdrawing the Clause, but he will gain everything by getting the hearty co-operation that is desirable in educational administration.

The Noble Lord has plunged me and the Committee into the utmost confusion, which is a curious way of making a speech explanatory of a Clause which professes to remove doubts. I do not profess to be an educational expert, but the people in my constituency who are interested in educational matters have not had their doubts removed, and I desire to ask the Noble Lord one or two specific questions. In the first place, how is it that what he says this afternoon does not tally with what he said last year? The Amendment proposes to leave out the words:

"which in the opinion of the Board is excessive, having regard to the circumstances of the area of the authority or the general standard of expenditure in other areas."

He was asked yesterday, but he did not answer, why it was that he said last year:

"I do not want any education authority to think that it cannot put forward a programme representing all that it really does want to do, for fear that the Board will try to cut it down in order to equal it to some less progressive authority."

Those words are entirely contrary to what the Noble Lord said this afternoon. In the speech from which I am quoting, he went on to say:

"There is no such suggestion or intention in our minds at all."

There is a very definite suggestion of it in this Clause. The local education authority of Plymouth happens to be one of the most progressive authorities in the country. I say that, fully recognising that it happens to be under Conservative administration. The education committee there is under wise and prudent direction. It is under the direction of a man of great imagination. Plymouth has put forward certain proposals which will enable secondary education to be received free, and to make certain other ameliorations in the system prevailing. That scheme is now before the Noble Lord. Quite apart from whether or not he is going to give approval to that scheme, I would ask him to observe that the Borough of Plymouth spends very much more money on education than the comparable City of Portsmouth.

There you have two identical areas— as far as you can compare one area with another. Plymouth spends 250s. per child on education as compared with 200s. in Portsmouth. It spends much more on its teachers. In every way it is superior to the Borough of Portsmouth, as far as you can compare one figure with another, and I want to know—and I hope the Noble Lord will answer me because he wishes to remove doubts—whether, having regard to this great superiority of Plymouth over Portsmouth in the matter of education, the greater wisdom of its direction and its greater expenditure per child, he is now going to turn round on Plymouth and say that he is going to reduce their standard in accordance with the powers given in this Clause. This Clause means that he is going to take the average of the lower authorities and cut all the higher expenditure of the more progressive authorities down to that average. Every time he does that, that standard ipso facto becomes law. In order to remove doubts, I ask him whether it is his intention, in a practical instance such as this, to penalise the progressive authority. He has refused to give any specific instances, he says it would be invidious, but I have had the temerity to give him a specific case, and, representing as I do an important constituency, I ask for a definite ruling from the Noble Lard. Will he be good enough to tell me whether in the case of Plymouth, which has a better standard of education than Portsmouth, which spends more on its teachers, which is going to give secondary education free and which spends much more per child than Portsmouth, he is going to penalise Plymouth, which is so progressive, and refuse to countenance any further expenditure.

Let me answer one or two of the questions that have been addressed to me. In reply to what has been said by two hon. Members representing divisions in the West Riding, I would point out that the case of an area like the West Riding, where the whole of the progress in education depends on capital expenditure, falls entirely outside the scope of this Bill, it is entirely irrelevant. The actual position in the West Riding is that I am approving capital expenditure on elementary and other schools quite as fast and rather faster than the authority can get on with the actual work. I assure the hon. Member that there is no hold-up in that area where the position is very serious.

Will the Noble Lord tell me what the position is with regard to the provision of schools for the mentally deficient?

That is a new point to me, and perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to look into the matter. I am rather surprised that the hon. Member for Devon-port (Mr. Hore-Belisha) should have put his question. To the best of my recollection, I have told the Plymouth authority what I propose to do. They have put a programme before me which, over a period of eight or nine years, reduces in the ultimate result their expenditure on elementary education, at the same time greatly increasing its efficiency. It is a sign that expenditure and efficiency do not necessarily go together. I have discussed that programme with them, and informed them fully of my views on their revised forecast. I will discuss with the hon. Member the matter more in detail if he will give me time to refer to the actual correspondence.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'cir- cumstances' in line 4, stand part of the Clause."

Division No. 175]	AYES.	[6.27 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Locker-Lampton, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Elveden, Viscount	Loder, J. de V.
Albery, Irving James	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston.-s-M.)	Looker, Herbert William
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Lord, Walter Greaves-
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Everard, W. Lindsay	Lougher, L.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Fairfax, Captain J, G.	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vers
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Apsley, Lord	Fermoy, Lord	Lumley, L. R.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Fielden, E. B.	Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Astor, Viscountess	Ford, Sir P. J.	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Foster, Sir Harry S.	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I, of W.)
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Balniel, Lord	Frece, Sir Walter de	Macintyre, Ian
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	McLean, Major A.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Macmillan, Captain H.
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Galbraith, J. F. W.	Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Ganzoni, Sir John	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Bonn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Gates, Percy	Macquisten, F. A.
Bennett, A. J.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	MacRobert, Alexander M.
Betterton, Henry B.	Gee, Captain R.	Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R. Skipton)	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Margesson, Captain D.
Blundell, F. N	Goff, Sir Park	Marriott, Sir J. A, R.
Brass, Captain W.	Grace, John	Mason, Lieut.-Colonel Glyn K.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Briggs, J. Harold	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Briscoe, Richard George	Gretton, Colonel John	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Grotrian, H. Brent.	Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Moore, Sir Newton J.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Buckingham, Sir H.	Hall, Capt. W. D. A. (Brecon & Rad.)	Moreing, Captain A. H.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Hammersley, S. S.	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Burman, J. B.	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Murchison, C. K.
Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.	Harmsworth, Hon, E. C. (Kent)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Harrison, G. J. C.	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Hartington, Marquess of	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W.G.(Ptrsf'ld.)
Campbell, E. T.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Nuttall, Ellis
Cautley, Sir Henry S.	Haslam, Henry C.	Oakley, T.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, city)	Hawke, John Anthony	O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Cazalet, Captain victor A.	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Purring, Sir William George
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Herbert, S. (York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Chapman, Sir S.	Hills, Major John Waller	Pielou, D. P.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.	Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.	Plicher, G.
Christie, J. A.	Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)	Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Preston, William
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Holland, Sir Arthur	Price, Major C. W. M.
Clarry, Reginald George	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Radford, E. A.
Clayton, G. C.	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Raine, W.
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hopkins, J. W. W.	Ramsden, E.
Conway, Sir W. Martin	Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper
Cope, Major William	Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Couper, J. B.	Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Remer, J. R.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington,N.)	Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Rentoul, G. S.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Rice, Sir Frederick
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Ropner, Major L.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Hurd, Percy A.	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Rye, F. G.
Curzon, Captain Viscount	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Salmon, Major I.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Jacob, A. E.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.	Jephcott, A. R.	Sandeman, A. Stewart
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William	Savery, S. S.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	King, Captain Henry Douglas	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Davison, Sir Philip	Kinloch-Cooke, sir Clement	Skelton, A. N.
Dixey, A. C.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Drewe, C.	Lamb, J. Q.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Eden, Captain Anthony	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Sprot, Sir Alexander

The Committee divided: Ayes, 275; Noes, 142.

Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)	Tinne, J. A.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)	Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Steel, Major Samuel Strang	Waddington, R.	Withers, John James
Stott, Lieut-Colonel W. H.	Wallace, Captain D. E.	Womersley, W. J.
Strickland, Sir Gerald	Ward, Lt.-Col.-A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)	Wood, E. (Chester, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)	Waterhouse, Captain Charles	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid	Watts, Dr. T.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Templeton, W. P.	Wells, S. R.	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)	Major Hennessy and Captain Bowyer.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayes, John Henry	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Simon, Ht. Hon. Sir John
Ammon, Charles George	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hirst, G. H.	Sitch, Charles H.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Barnes, A.	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Barr, J.	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)
Batey, Joseph	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Briant, Frank	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Broad, F. A.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Bromley, J.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Stamford, T. W.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Kelly, W. T.	Stephen, Campbell
Buchanan, G.	Kennedy, T.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Sullivan, Joseph
Cape, Thomas	Kenyon, Barnet	Sutton, J. E.
Charleton, H. C.	Kirkwood, D.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Clowes, S.	Lee, F.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Cluse, W. S.	Lindley, F. W.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Livingstone, A. M.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Connolly, M.	Lowth, T.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Cove, W. G.	Lunn, William	Thurtle, E.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Tinker, John Joseph
Crawfurd, H. E.	Mackinder, W.	Townend. A. E.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	March, S.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Dennison, R.	Maxton, James	Varley, Frank B.
Duckworth, John	Montague, Frederick	Viant, S. P.
Duncan, C.	Morris, R. H.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
England, Colonel A.	Murnin, H.	Warne, G. H.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)	Naylor, T. E.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Fenby, T. D.	Oliver, George Harold	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Forrest, W.	Owen, Major G.	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Palin, John Henry	Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Gillett, George M.	Paling, W.	Westwood, J.
Gosling, Harry	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Whiteley, W.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Wiggins, William Martin
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Ponsonby, Arthur	Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Potts, John S.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Ribs, sir Beddoe	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Grovel, T.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliff)
Grundy, T. W.	Riley, Ben	Wilson, R. J. Narrow)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Ritson, J.	Windsor, Walter
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)	Wright, W.
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Rose, Frank H.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Salter, Dr. Alfred	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Harney, E. A.	Scrymgeour, E.	Mr. Percy Harris and Sir Godfrey Collins.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Sexton, James
Hayday, Arthur	Shiels, Dr, Drummond

Amendment proposed: In page 10, line 4, to leave out from the first "the" to the word "general" in line 5.— [ Mr. Morgan Jones.]

Division No. 176.]	AYES.	[6.48 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Apsley, Lord	Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Beamish. Captain T. P. H.
Albery, Irving James	Astor, Viscountess	Benn, sir A. s. (Plymouth, Drake)
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Bennett, A. J.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Balniel, Lord	Betterton, Henry B.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Blades, Sir George Rowland

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'or,' in line 5, stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 270; Noes, 140.

Blundell, F. N.	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Oakley, T.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.	Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)	O'Connor, T. J, (Bedford, Luton)
Brass, Captain W.	Hammersley, S. S.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Briggs, J Harold	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Briscoe, Richard George	Harrison, G. J. C.	Perring, Sir William George
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Hartington, Marquess of	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Pielou, D. P.
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Haslam, Henry C.	Pilcher, G.
Buckingham, Sir H.	Hawke, John Anthony	Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Preston, William
Burman, J. B.	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Price, Major C. W. M.
Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.	Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.	Radford, E. A.
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Raine, W.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Ramsden, E.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)	Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Campbell, E. T.	Hills, Major John Waller	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.	Remer, J. R.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)	Hogg, Rt.Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)	Rentoul, G. S.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Rice, Sir Frederick
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Holland, Sir Arthur	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Ropner, Major L.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J.A. (Birm.,W.)	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Hopkins, J. W. W.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Chapman, Sir S.	Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Rye, F. G.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.	Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Salmon, Major I.
Christie, J. A.	Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Sandeman, A. Stewart
Clarry, Reginald George	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)	Savery, S. S.
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'I, Exchange)
Conway, Sir W. Martin	Hurd, Percy A.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Cope, Major William	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Couper, J. B.	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Shepperson, E. W.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington,N.)	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Skelton, A. H.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Jacob, A. E.	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon, Cuthbert	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Jephcott, A. R.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)
Curzon, Captain Viscount	King, Captain Henry Douglas	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Dalkeith, Earl of	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Knox, Sir Alfred	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.	Lamb, J. Q.	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Loder, J. de V.	Sugden, Sir Wilfred
Dawson, Sir Philip	Looker, Herbert William	Templeton, W. P.
Dixey, A. C.	Lord, Walter Greaves-	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Drewe, C.	Lougher, L.	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Eden, Captain Anthony	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Lumley, L. R.	Tinne, J. A.
Elveden, Viscount	Lynn, Sir R. J	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Waddington, R.
Everard, W. Lindsay	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Wallace, Captain D. E.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Macintyre, Ian	Ward, Lt.-Col.A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.	McLean, Major A.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Fermoy, Lord	Macmillan, Captain H.	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Fielden, E. B.	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Ford, Sir P. J.	Macquisten, F. A.	Watts, Dr. T.
Foster, Sir Harry S.	MacRobert, Alexander M.	Wells, S. R.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Frece, Sir Walter de	Margesson, Captain D.	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Galbraith, J. F. W.	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Ganzoni, Sir John	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Gates, Percy	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Wise, Sir Fredric
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Withers, John James
Gee, Captain R.	Moore Sir Newton J.	Womersley, W. J.
Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Goff, Sir Park	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Grace, John	Morrison-Belt, Sir Arthur Clive	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Murchison, C. K.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Greene, W. P. Crawford	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Wragg, Herbert
Gretton, Colonel John	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Grotrian, H. Brent	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Nuttall, Ellis	Major Hennessy and Lord Stanley.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayes, John Henry	Sexton, James
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Ammon, Charles George	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hirst, G. H.	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Barr, J.	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Sitch, Charles H.
Batey, Joseph	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Broad, F. A.	Jenkins, W, (Glamorgan, Neath)	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Bromley, J.	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Buchanan, G.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Slivertown)	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Stamford, T. W.
Cape, Thomas	Kelly, W. T.	Stephen, Campbell
Charleton, H. C.	Kennedy, T.	Stewart. J. (St. Rollox)
Clowes, S.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Sullivan, Joseph
Cluse, W. S.	Kenyon, Barnet	Sutton, J. E.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Kirkwood, D.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Lee, F.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Connolly, M.	Lindley, F. W.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro., W.)
Cove, W. G.	Livingstone, A. M.	Thorne. G. R. (Wolverhampten, E.)
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Lowth, T.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Crawfurd, H. E.	Lunn, William	Thurtle, E.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)	Tinker, John Joseph
Dennison, R.	Mackinder, W.	Townend, A. E.
Duckworth, John	March, S.	Trevelyan, Bt. Hon. C. P.
Duncan, C.	Maxton, James	Varley, Frank B.
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)	Montague, Frederick	Viant, S. P.
England, Colonel A.	Morris, R. H.	Wallhead. Richard C.
Fenby, T. D.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
Forrest, W.	Murnin, H.	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Naylor, T. E.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Gillett, George M.	Oliver, George Harold	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Gosling, Harry	Owen, Major G.	Wedgwood, Rt. Hon Josiah
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Palin, John Henry	Whiteley, W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Win. (Edin., Cant.)	Paling, W.	Wiggins, William Martin
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Groves, T.	Ponsonby, Arthur	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Grundy, T. W.	Potts, John S.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Rees, Sir Beddoe	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Riley, Ben	Windsor, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Ritson, J.	Wright, W.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Harney, E. A.	Rose, Frank H.
Harris, Percy A.	Sakiatvala, Shapurji	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Warne.
Hayday, Arthur	Scrymgeour, E.

Amendment proposed: In page 10, line 5, to leave out from the word "authority" to the word "or" in line 6.—[ Mr. Cove.]

Division No. 177.]	AYES.	[6.58 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Briggs, J. Harold	Christie, J. A.
Albery, Irving James	Briscoe, Richard George	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Clarry, Reginald George
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Clayton, G. C.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C (Berks,Newb'y)	Conway, Sir W. Martin
Apsley, Lord	Buckingham, Sir H.	Cope, Major William
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Couper, J. B.
Astor, Viscountess	Burman, J. B.	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Balniel, Lord	Burton, Colonel H. W.	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Barnett, Major Sir R.	Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Campbell, E. T.	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Curzon, Captain Viscount
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Dalkeith, Earl of
Bennett, A. J.	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Betterton, Henry B.	Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Davies, Dr. Vernon
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm.,W.)	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Blundell, F. N.	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Brass, Captain W.	Chapman, Sir S.	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'areas,' in line 6, stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 274; Noes, 140.

Dawson, Sir Philip	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Remer, J. R.
Dixey, A. C.	Hurd, Percy A.	Rentoul, G. S.
Drewe, C.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Rice, Sir Frederick
Eden, Captain Anthony	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'I)	Ropner, Major L.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Jacob, A. E.	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Elveden, Viscount	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Jephcott, A. R.	Rye, F. G.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Salmon, Major I.
Everard, W. Lindsay	Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.	King, Captain Henry Douglas	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Falie, Sir Bertram G.	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Sandeman, A. Stewart
Fermoy, Lord	Knox, Sir Alfred	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustavs D.
Fielden, E. B.	Lamb, J. Q.	Savery, S. S.
Ford, Sir P. J.	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)
Foster, Sir Harry S.	Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Loder, J. de V.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Frece, Sir Walter de	Looker, Herbert William	Shepperson, E. W.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Lord, Walter Greaves-	Skelton, A. N.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Lougher, L.	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Galbraith, J. F. W.	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Ganzoni, Sir John	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Gates, Percy	Lumley, L. R.	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Lynn, Sir R. J.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Gee, Captain R.	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Goff, Sir Park	Macintyre, Ian	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Grace, John	McLean, Major A.	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Macmillan, Captain H.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Greene, W. P. Crawford	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Gretton, Colonel John	Macquisten, F. A.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Grotrian, H. Brent	MacRobert, Alexander M.	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Templeton, W. P.
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Margesson, Captain D.	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Hall, Lieut. Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen. South)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)	Merriman, F. B.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Hammersley, S. S.	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw.	Tinne, J. A.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Harland, A.	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Harmtworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Waddington, R.
Harrison, G. J. C.	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Wallace, Captain D. E.
Hartington, Marquess of	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Haslam, Henry C.	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Hawke, John Anthony	Murchison, C. K.	Watts, Dr. T.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Wells, S. R.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Nuttall, Ellis	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)	Oakley, T.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Hills, Major John Waller	O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Hilton, Cecil	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Withers, John James
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Womersley, W. J.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Perring, Sir William George	Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Holland, Sir Arthur	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich. W.)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Pielou, D. P.	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Hopkins, J. W, W.	Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Preston, William	Wragg, Herbert
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Price, Major C. W. M.	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.	Radford, E. A.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Raine, W.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Ramsden, E.	Major Hennessy and Captain Bowyer.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper
Hume, Sir G. H.	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Cape, Thomas	Dennison, R.
Ammon, Charles George	Charleton, H. C.	Duckworth, John
Attlee, Clement Richard	Clowes, S.	Duncan, C.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Cluse, W. S.	Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Barr, J.	Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	England, Colonel A.
Batey, Joseph	Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Fenby, T. D.
Broad, F. A.	Connolly, M.	Forrest, W.
Bromley, J.	Cove, W. G,	Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Gillett, George M.
Buchanan, G.	Crawfurd, H. E.	Gosling, Harry

Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Mackinder, W.	Stamford, T. W.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	March, S.	Stephen, Campbell
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Maxton, James	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Groves, T.	Montague, Frederick	Sullivan, Joseph
Grundy, T. W.	Morris, R. H.	Sutton, J. E.
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Murnin, H.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Naylor, T. E.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Oliver, George Harold	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Owen, Major G.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Harney, E. A.	Palin, John Henry	Thurtle, E.
Harris, Percy A.	Paling, W.	Tinker, John Joseph
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Townend, A. E.
Hayday, Arthur	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Hayes, John Henry	Ponsonby, Arthur	Varley, Frank B.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Potts, John S.	Viant, S. P.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Bees, Sir Beddoe	Wallhead, Richard C.
Hirst, G. H.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Riley, Ben	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Ritson, J.	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs, Stretford)	Westwood, J.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Rose, Frank H.	Whiteley, W.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Sakiatvala, Shapurji	Wiggins, William Martin
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Scrymgeour, E.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Sexton, James	Williams. Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Kelly, W. T.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Kennedy, T.	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Kenyon, Barnet	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)	Windsor, Walter
Kirkwood, D.	Sitch, Charles H.	Wright, W.
Lee, F.	Slesser, Sir Henry H.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Lindley, F. W.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Livingstone, A. M.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Lowth, T.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)	Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Warne.
Lunn, William	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip

I beg to move, in page 10, line 6, after the word "other," to insert the word "similar."

This Amendment is far too important to allow it to lapse by the failure of the hon. Member for West Fulham (Sir C. Cobb), who is entrusted by the London County Council to raise this point. Therefore, I have been asked, as an ex-member of the education committee of the London County Council, to move this Amendment. Evidently, the council must have been suspicious whether the hon. Member would go forward with the Amendment in view of the whip of his own party. I hope the Noble Lord will see his way clear to accept the Amendment. It is for the purpose of carrying out and making quite definite that which he professes in the Clause now before us. It seeks to make quite sure that comparisons are made between areas which are quite comparable so far as economic and educational issues are concerned. If the Clause be amended with this and the following word, it would read—

"or the general standard of expenditure in other similar areas whore conditions are comparable."

Under existing arrangements, in addition to the 50 per cent. grant a grant to each authority—

The hon. Member is on the wrong Amendment.

In this connection we are asking that words shall be inserted which will give exactly what the Noble Lord says it is his intention to give, namely, that there shall be grants made that shall be in connection with authorities which are clearly comparable. If this be so, then we ask him to accept the Amendment which will show he is sincerely meaning that which he proposes to do.

I think I ought to explain, as a Member of the County Council, that I have been requested to move this Amendment and all London Members have been asked to support it. I can say that it is the result of very careful consideration and thought by the Education Committee supported by the Finance Committee of the London County Council. They consider it essential, in order to feel sure, that this word should be added. The hon. Member for Fulham West (Sir C. Cobb) would have moved it, but pressure has been brought to bear on him not to press the Amendment because of the fear that a Report stage of this Bill may become necessary. Instead of this Amendment being moved in the House of Commons in the proper place for dealing with a financial matter, it is going to be put in another form in another place. I think this is most improper. I protest, first as a London Member, and secondly as a member of the London County Council.

I cannot accept the Amendment. I remember Mr. Asquith on a famous occasion criticising the word "similar" in a Bill and asking what degree of remoteness from identity it signified. It is an expression which means practically nothing. As I pointed out, you cannot get any two areas which are precisely similar, and therefore this Amendment is really an Amendment to secure precisely the same object as the previous Amendment. We have discussed the whole question of this comparison very fully, and I do not think the Committee wish to consider it further.

Really the Noble Lord, I suppose, has some information to give to the very important body that has specially asked that this Amendment should be put forward. The Noble Lord is informed that the London County Council is concerned lest the Clause, as it stands, might have, a serious effect upon them. It may be quite true that there is a difficulty in determining precisely what you mean by "similar," but there is an equal difficulty in determining what the Noble Lord means by

"the general standard of expenditure in other areas."

I ask the Noble Lord, before this Bill passes from the House, whether the Government do not intend to give any information, publicly or privately, to a great authority like this as to whether the conditions in question are conditions that are comparable or similar to the conditions of the particular authority?

Unfortunately, some of us represent constituencies which are not part of London, although in the London area, and our difficulty is exactly the same as that of the London County Council in this particular connection. We have gone in for advanced education as far as we are able. Are we going to discover that our future position will be judged, not by our own activities with regard to education, but by what may happen in some Outlandish part of the country where they are not so keen about education as we are? Some people have been given the gift of language to hide their thoughts, but evidently the President of the Board of Education has decided, as far as he is concerned, to use as many words as possible to say the least he can to explain exactly what he means. We want to know exactly where we stand so that local education authorities should know in the future to what kind of comparison they are to be subjected. What will be justifiable expenditure? Those of us who are members of education committees have to present our budgets annually to our own authorities. Some hon. Members seem to be under the impression that we are a lot of people who are looking for means to spend money. As a matter of fact, we cannot spend more than our people will allow us to spend, and we have to submit our budget every year, the same as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has to undergo severe criticism if he touches people where they do not want to be touched. After all, the Government are not paying all the costs of education. The local authorities have to bear their share, and the members on local authorities are just as keen in their criticisms as Members in this House.

In spite of all the talk about extravagant expenditure and squandermania, you will find in the poorer parts of the country we, who are suffering severely from industrial depression, are looking at every shilling before we spend it, and, therefore, we ought to know how far we can go. In our own district we have had turned down an open-air recovery school. The doctors went through the schools and picked out a certain number of children who would be benefited by being in an open-air recovery school which we have in Essex in a beautiful spot, and where those children have benefited as a result of that experiment. There their health as been improved, and their possibility of education has been made greater. And now we are told this will he cut down. Even before this Clause was introduced, we were told we could not go on, and these children have got to remain in the slum districts. Because any education authority looks upon education as being more a matter, not of putting something into children's heads, but of bringing out of them all they are capable of giving, mentally and physically —and is that not as much education as telling them that two and two make four?—are the more advanced authorities which come forward with new ideas of education to be told in future, "Oh, no, you cannot have these ideas carried out in practice, because there is a little place 50 miles beyond nowhere whose education authority believes that children were born, not to go to school, but to go to work, and were born with spades in their hands instead of golden or silver spoons in their mouths "?

We ought to know with what the comparison is to be. We want the son of the docker in my constituency to have the same chance as the son of the duke has got on the opposite side. The son of the docker deserves it more, because he has a harder struggle to live, whereas the other is already provided for. Are our people to have the worst kind of education, and yours the best every time? You can fool all the people some of the time; you can fool some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. We want to know where we stand. Who is going to make the comparison? It is not the President of the Board of Education who is going to make this comparison. The real makers of this comparison are conveniently absent whenever it suits. It is not what the right hon. Gentleman thinks ought to be done, but what someone else thinks must be done, and to save the pockets of the people who are better able to afford these sacrifices than the people called upon to make them. We ask for fair treatment, and we do not get it. All that we get from the Noble Lord is his sympathy. Sympathy does not butter any parsnips. We want some practical illustration of what he means by these Clauses. There is not a word of explanation from those opposite who go down to constituencies such as West Ham, and with tears in their voices tell them what interest they take in them, but say nothing about the interest they are taking out of them Those gentlemen all sit like dumb cattle without discussing these propositions. Not a word has been said in defence of the policy of the Government. Why cannot we get an explanation of the meaning of this? They know, but they shun the light because their deeds are evil. They can beat us by votes, we know, but they cannot beat us with brains. If they could, they would have tried it on. Evidently they are depending upon the big battalions.

We say that the most advanced education authorities in this country are all against the Government. Even the London County Council, with the majority of supporters of the Government, are suspicious, and ask for an explanation, but you refuse even them an answer. Here you are handing over to people, over whom we have no control, who have no authority in matters of finance, to decide what the financial result will be to the local authorities responsible for the education of this country. All the progressive education authorities will want to know what this means, and, after all, gentlemen who have been to the Universities ought to be able to explain the meaning of their own language, and not speak to us in dog Latin. I have heard the right hon. Gentleman talking two days, and I do not know yet what he is talking about.

As an old Member of the London County Council and a London Member, I should like to ask my Noble Friend a question. My hon. Friend the Member for West Fulham (Sir C. Cobb) put down this Amendment. Is it a question of difficulty with regard to the present stage, or is my Noble Friend prepared to say he will, in another place, introduce words in order that this difficulty may be overcome? Because there is a question as to what is meant by the present phraseology, and if my Noble Friend can give some promise that he will consider the matter further, with a view, if possible, of making the necessary alteration in another place, as far as I am concerned, that will meet the case; but, if not, I am afraid, much as I regret it, I shall he compelled in this matter to vote against the Government I should be glad if my Noble Friend would give an explanation.

I really am quite at a loss to know why the Noble Lord will not accept this Amendment, unless he fears that by doing so it will be necessary to have a Debate on the Report stage. The Clause itself says that its purpose is to remove doubts as to what people are to do. The Clause says that the Board may not recognise expenditure which is greater than the general standard of expenditure in other areas. What is "the general standard of expenditure in other areas?" I should have thought that, vague as those words are, they are made more precise by saying "similar," which narrows the ground somewhat, and "where conditions are comparable," narrows it more. Therefore, if the purpose of the Clause be to remove doubts as to what is the standard, undoubtedly, the Amendment leaves less room for doubt than does the original Clause.

I should not like this Clause to go through without expressing what I know is the educational point of view of the authority in the constituency I represent. I would not like it to be thought it was merely a view so far as London is concerned. There are other educational authorities besides London which have borne the banner of advanced education. The education authorities or Merthyr Tydvil claim the honour of having advanced secondary education further than any other authority in the country. Here are boroughs pressed with rating difficulties and compelled to economise, but which are to be punished still further because they do not come into line with educational authorities very much behind themselves.

I agree with what has been said with regard to the necessity of advancing, and not retarding education. We are going to hear a great deal before very long about the necessity of this country doing something to maintain its standard and place in the competitive markets of the world. The States on the Continent, even those which are passing through bankruptcy—States like Austria and Germany—face to face with tremendous difficulties, instead of decreasing their educational facilities, increase them by all means in their power. They are adding to their facilities for technical education, secondary

Division No. 178.]	AYES.	[7.34 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Bromley, J.	Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ammon, Charles George	Buchanan, G.	Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Connolly, M.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Cape, Thomas	Cove, W. G.
Barr, J.	Charleton, H. C.	Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Batey, Joseph	Clowes, S.	Crawfurd, H. E.
Broad, F. A..	Cluse, W. S.	Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)

education and university education. We are all the time having demands put forward that efforts shall be made to meet the increasing keenness of international competition, and yet here we are cutting down the one thing which would put our workmen on a level with the workmen of other countries, It is a retrograde step, and it is not economy. I protest, not only in the name of the people whom I represent, but in the name of working men and children in the whole of the country. We are demanding more education and not less. We are demanding that, if economy be necessary, it shall be made on what are more obviously objects for economy, and not on education. We object to advanced authorities, which have spent money for years past, having the whole of their work retarded, because they are to be compared, to their disadvantage, with education authorities of less attainments.

I have been asked a specific question, and I will answer it. I oppose this Amendment on the ground that I cannot agree that London has any right to be placed in a position where it would say,"Our circumstances are so peculiar in all respects that no comparison can be made between us and any other area in the country."That I want to avoid, and, therefore, I cannot accept the Amendment.

This does not apply to London only.

If, on the other hand, it is urged that in no case should an area be compared with other areas without at the same time a consideration of the circumstances of the particular area itself, I shall be very glad to consider whether I cannot put something in the Clause in another place to meet that point.

Question put, "That the word 'similar' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 145; Noes, 262.

Dennison, R.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Smillie, Robert
Duckworth, John	Kenyon, Barnet	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Duncan, C.	Kirkwood, D.	Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)
England, Colonel A.	Lee, F.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Fenby, T. D.	Lindley, F. W.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Forrest, W.	Livingstone, A. M.	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Lowth, T,	Stamford, T. W.
Gee, Captain R.	Lunn, William	Stephen, Campbell
Gillett, George M.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Gosling, Harry	Mackinder, W.	Sullivan, Joseph
Graham, D, M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	March, S.	Sutton, J. E.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coins)	Montague, Frederick	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Morris, R. H.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Groves, T.	Murnin, H.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Grundy, T. W.	Naylor, T. E.	Thurtle, E.
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Oliver, George Harold	Tinker, John Joseph
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Owen, Major G.	Townend, A. E.
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Palin, John Henry	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Paling, W.	Varley, Frank B.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Viant, S. P.
Harney, E. A.	Pethick-Lawrence, F W.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Harris, Percy A.	Ponsonby, Arthur	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Potts, John S.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Hayday, Arthur	Bees, Sir Beddoe	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Hayes, John Henry	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Westwood, J.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)	Riley, Ben	Whiteley, W.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Ritson, J.	Wiggins, William Martin
Hirst, G. H.	Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Rose, Frank H.	Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Sakiatvala, Shapurji	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Salter, Dr. Alfred	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Scrymgeour, E.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Sexton, James	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Shiels, Dr. Drummond	Windsor, Walter
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Wright, W.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham. Silvertown)	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Kelly, W. T.	Sitch, Charles H.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Kennedy, T.	Slesser, Sir Henry H.	Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Warne.

NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Fielden, E. B.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Ford, Sir P. J.
Albery, Irving James	Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)	Foster, Sir Harry S.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Chapman, Sir S.	Frece, Sir Walter de
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Christie, J. A.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Galbraith, J. F. W.
Astor, Viscountess	Clarry, Reginald George	Ganzoni, Sir John
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Clayton, G. C.	Gates, Percy
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Conway, Sir W. Martin	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Balniel, Lord	Couper, J. B.	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Courtauld, Major J. S.	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Goff, Sir Park
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Greene, W. p. Crawford
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Gretton, Colonel John
Bethel, A.	Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Grotrian, H. Brent
Betterton, Henry B.	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Gunston, Captain D. W.
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Dalkeith, Earl of	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.	Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Brass, Captain W.	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Hammersley, S. S.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Briggs, J. Harold	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Harland, A.
Briscoe, Richard George	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Harrison, G. J. C.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Hartington, Marquess of
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Dixey, A. C.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Drewe, C.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Buckingham, Sir H.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Haslam, Henry C.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Hawke, John Anthony
Burman, J. B.	Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Elveden, Viscount	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd. Henley)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Campbell, E. T.	Everard, W. Lindsay	Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)	Falle, Sir Bertram G.	Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Fermoy, Lord	Hills, Major John Waller

Hilton, Cecil	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Skelton, A. N.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Holland, Sir Arthur	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Hopkins, J. W. W.	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Murchison, C. K.	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Hurd, Percy A.	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn.W.G. (Ptrsf'ld.)	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Oakley, T.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Jacob, A. E.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Templeton, W. P.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Perring, Sir William George	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Jephcott, A. R.	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Pielou, D. P.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Preston, William	Tinne, J. A.
King, Captain Henry Douglas	Price, Major C W. M.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Kinloch-Cooke, sir Clement	Radford, E. A.	Waddington, R.
Knox, Sir Alfred	Raine, W.	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Lamb, J. Q.	Ramsden, E.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)	Remer, J. R.	Watts, Dr. T.
Loder, J. de V.	Remnant, Sir James	Wells, S. R.
Looker, Herbert William	Rentoul, G. S.	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Lord, Walter Greaves-	Rice, Sir Frederick	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Lynn, Sir Robert J.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Rye, F. G.	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Salmon, Major I.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Withers, John James
Macintyre, Ian	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Womersley, W. J.
McLean, Major A.	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Macmillan, Captain H.	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Macquisten, F A	Savery, S. S.	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
MacRobert, Alexander M.	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverpl, Exchange)	Wragg, Herbert
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Mason, Lieut. Col. Glyn K.	Shepperson, E. W.	Major Cope and Captain Margesson.

I beg to move, in page 10, line 6, after the word "areas," to insert the words "where conditions are comparable."

I move this Amendment on behalf of the London County Council. I appreciate the diffidence of the Minister in regard to the acceptance of the word "similar." In this Amendment the words are quite clear, so clear that "he who runs may read." Any intelligent person, including the President of the Board of Education, must clearly understand what is meant by "comparable" authorities. They should be limited to those places where the conditions are comparable. Speaking on behalf of the London County Council, I would very much like the Minister to take this opportunity of satisfying that great

Division No. 179.]	AYES.	[7.45 p.m.
Adamson, Ht. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Briant, Frank
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Barnes, A.	Broad, F. A.
Ammon, Charles George	Barr, J.	Bromley, J.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Batey, Joseph	Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)

authority, which has loyally tried to cooperate with him in his work for economy. It is the greatest education authority in the country. It is not enough for them, and it does not satisfy me, for the Noble Lord to talk gaily of moving Amendments in another place. In another place there are very few people who understand education. The members of this Committee do understand it. We are entitled to claim that these words should be accepted as the minimum concession to the right and proper demand of the London County Council.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 138; Noes, 261.

Buchanan, G.	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Sitch, Charles H.
Buxton, Fit. Hon. Noel	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Cape, Thomas	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Smillie, Robert
Charleton, H. C.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Smith Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Clowes, S.	Kelly, W. T.	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Cluse, W. S.	Kennedy, T.	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Clynes, Ht. Hon. John R.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Kenyon, Barnet	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Connolly, M.	Kirkwood, D.	Stamford, T. W.
Cove, W. G.	Lee, F.	Stephen, Campbell
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Lindley, F. W.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Livingstone, A. M.	Sullivan, Joseph
Dennison, R.	Lowth, T.	Sutton, J. E.
Duckworth, John	Lunn, William	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Duncan, C.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
England, Colonel A.	Mackinder, W.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Fenby, T. D.	March, S.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Forrest, W.	Montague, Frederick	Thurtle, E.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Morris, R. H.	Tinker, John Joseph
Gillett, George M.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, North)	Townend, A. E.
Gosling, Harry	Murnin, H.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Naylor, T. E.	Varley, Frank B.
Graham, RI. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Oliver, George Harold	Viant, S. P.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Owen, Major G.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Palin, John Henry	Warne, G. H.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Paling, W.	Watson, W. M. (Duntermilne)
Groves, T.	Parkinson. John Allen (Wigan)	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Grundy, T. W.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Ponsonby, Arthur	Westwood, J.
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark. N.)	Potts, John S.	Whiteley, W.
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Rees, Sir Beddoe	Wiggins, William Martin
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Riley, Ben	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Harney, E. A.	Ritson, J.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Robinson. Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Hayday, Arthur	Rose, Frank H.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Hayes, John Henry	Sakiatvala, Shapurji	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Scrymgeour, E.	Windsor, Walter
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Sexton, James	Wright, W.
Hirst, G. H.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)	Mr. Percy Harris and Mr. Trevelyan Thomson.

NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Everard, W. Lindsay
Albery, Irving James	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Faile, Sir Bertram G.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool,W. Derby)	Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.Sir J.A. (Birm.,W.)	Fermoy, Lord
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Fielden, E. B.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Chapman, Sir S.	Ford, Sir P. J.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Christie, J. A.	Foster, Sir Harry S.
Astor, Viscountess	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Frece, Sir Walter de
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Clarry, Reginald George	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Balniel, Lord	Clayton, G. C.	Gadie, Lieut.-Colonel Anthony
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Conway. Sir W. Martin	Galbraith, J. F. W.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Cope, Major William	Ganzoni, Sir John
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Couper, J. B.	Gates, Percy
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Courtauld, Major J. S.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Bennett, A. J.	Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.	Gee, Captain R.
Bethel, A.	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Betterton, Henry B.	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Goff, Sir Park
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Greene, W. P. Crawford
Brass, Captain W.	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Grotrian, H. Brent
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Dalkeith, Earl of	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N)
Briggs, J. Harold	Davidson,J, (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Briscoe, Richard George	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Gunston, Captain D. W.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Davies, Maj. Geo.F. (Somerset,Yeovil)	Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hammersley, S. S.
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Buckingham, Sir H.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Harland, A.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Dixey, A. C.	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Burman, J. B.	Drewe, C.	Harrison, G. J. C.
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Hartington, Marquess of
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Elliot, Captain Walter E.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Campbell, E. T.	Elveden, viscount	Haslam, Henry C.

Hawke, John Anthony	MacRobert, Alexander M.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)	Makins, Brigadier-General E	Shepperson, E. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Skelton, A. N.
Hann, Sir Sydney H.	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R-.Scar. & Wh'by)	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Hills, Major John Waller	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)
Hilton, Cecil	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Holland, Sir Arthur	Morrison, H. (Witts, Salisbury)	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Murchison, C. K.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.	Neville, R. J.	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M (Hackney, N).	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)	Oakley, T.	Templeton, W. P.
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Hurd, Percy A.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Thompson, Luke (Sutherland)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)
Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.	Perring, Sir William George	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Tinne, J. A.
Jacob, A. E.	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Pielou, D. P.	Waddington, R.
Jephcott, A. R.	Preston, William	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston on-Hull)
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William	Price, Major C. W. M.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Radford, E. A.	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Raine, W.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
King, Captain Henry Douglas	Ramsden, E.	Watts, Dr. T.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Wells, S. R.
Knox, Sir Alfred	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Lane, J. Q.	Remer, J. R.	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Remnant, Sir James	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Rentoul, G. S.	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Loder, J. de V.	Rice, Sir Frederick	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Looker. Herbert William	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Lord, Walter Greaves-	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Withers, John James
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Rye, F. G.	Womersley, W. J.
Lynn, Sir R. J.	Salmon, Major I.	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
MacIntyre, Ian	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Wragg, Herbert
McLean, Major A.	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Macmillan. Captain H.	Savery, S. S.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Macquisten, F. A.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Sir Harry Barnston and Captain Margesson.

I beg to move, in page 10. line 8, at the end, to insert the words

"Provided that the Board shall cause to be laid before Parliament a report indicating in each case the expenditure of any authority, proposed or incurred, which the Board have refused to recognise for the purpose of Parliamentary grants under this sub-section."

I move this Amendment formally.

I have no desire to prolong the business more than we can help, but I must say I think this Amendment is one of importance, and, though it is quite natural that my hon. Friend should have moved it formally, it really is an Amendment which requires a brief explanation. As I understand it, even though the President of the Board of Education exercises the power referred to in the Clause, and to that extent refuses to make payments to local education authorities, there is no provision by which there will be any public statement of what has been done, and there will be no means, therefore, given to other local education authorities to know what are the sort of cases in which the authorities are likely to incur the veto of the right hon. Gentleman. If the President of the Board of Education is going to exercise the powers given in this Clause and is going to say to a given education authority, "I know you may have expected that I would pay up to 50 per cent. of your expenditure, but I have cut down the payments and altered them, and those are my reasons," surely we ought to have in the Bill some provision which makes sure that what he is doing is, at any rate, available for the information of other local authorities.

There is a second reason why that should be so. I apologise to the Committee for referring them to other Acts of Parliament, but this is a, very complicated Measure, and I can summarise it quite clearly. Section 118 of the Education Act, 1921, which is referred to here, does itself make a corresponding provision where the Board of Education makes a grant from public funds to local education authorities. In the first instance, it makes a payment that is called a "substantive grant," and that is the result of a rather elaborate calculation. It is 36s. per child; it is 60 per cent. of the amount paid in salaries to teachers, and so forth. The President of the Board of Education is able in that way to arrive at a composite grant as distinguished from a "block grant," if you use the words in their proper sense. It is a complete mis-use of words to talk about a block grant as though it was something which is contrasted with a percentage grant. Properly speaking, a block grant is not to be contrasted with a percentage grant. This new-fangled use of the word, as though a block grant was the opposite of a percentage grant, is very confusing and unfortunate. When you have built up the substantive grant, it remains to be seen whether there remains something more to pay, because you have not yet paid 50 per cent. of the net authorised expenditure, and that addition is usually called the "deficiency grant."

But under the present law, if there is a local authority which has for some reason or other rendered itself liable to the loss of some portion of this substantive grant—supposing it has failed to obey the regulations of the central authority, supposing it happens, as happened some years ago, that a particular authority is fined£10,000 because it did not reduce the size of its classes—then Section 118 provides that you must put upon the Table of the House a Report which shows any case in which there has been a loss of grants by so much as£500. On those two grounds, think this Amendment really ought to be made. It ought to be made, first of all, because otherwise, if the President of the Board of Education is going to exercise this power in the case of one particular authority, the other authorities will not know what it is that the Minister approves of and what it is that he disapproves of, and will not be able to avoid falling into a similar difficulty. Secondly, the Amendment ought to be made, because it is exactly in line with what the law at present provides, and that is that the President of the Board of Education has to lay on the Table of the House a Report which shows every authority which has lost its grant by so much as£500. If a proposal of this sort— not a party proposal, but a proposal which is directed to efficient educational administration—is simply to be given the go-by and is simply to be rolled over by a majority, then we shall have reduced the proceedings of this Committee to a farce.

I must ask the Committee to reject this Amendment. At present, when a local authority is fined for failure to comply with the Regulations, a report has to be laid before Parliament. Under this proposal, the Board of Education would have to lay a report before Parliament — whenever a local authority came up and said, "We want to provide for doubling the size of our playgrounds," and the Board said, "No, we do not think we can sanction that."

8. 0 P.M.

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will forgive me, but with great respect, if I understand this rightly, it has nothing in the world to do with asking the Board whether it will or will not authorise a particular expenditure. It has to do with a perfectly different case, where the local authority asks for its 50 per cent. in respect of expenditure which is recognised, and is told that it cannot have it.

I think the right hon. Gentleman is wrong. In the matter of educational administration there is no distinction between the two things. The procedure in the two cases is the same, and the effect of this Amendment would really be that any Board of Education or any President of the Board would have to be constantly laying before Parliament week by week a large series of disallowances to local authorities. Local authorities know that this is not really a practicable proposition.

With great respect, it only applies to the new powers which the right hon. Gentleman is seeking under the Clause. The old powers go on just as before just as before, uninterfered with. We want to have these cases laid before the House so that the authorities can have a chance of having their grievances ven-

Division No. 180.]	AYES.	[8.4 p.m.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ammon, Charles George	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hirst, G. H.	Sitch, Charles H.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Barr, J.	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Smillie, Robert
Batey, Joseph	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Briant, Frank	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Broad, F. A.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Bromley, J.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Stamford, T. W.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Stephen, Campbell
Buchanan, G.	Kelly, W. T.	Sullivan, Joseph
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Kennedy, T.	Sutton, J. E.
Cape, Thomas	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Charleton, H. C.	Kenyon, Barnet	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Clowes, S.	Kirkwood, D.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Cluse, W. S.	Lee, F.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Lindley, F. W.	Thorne, w. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Livingstone, A. M.	Thurtle, E.
Connolly, M.	Lowth, T.	Tinker, John Joseph
Cove, W. G.	Lunn, William	Townend, A. E.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Ab'ravon)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C, P.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Mackinder, W.	Varley, Frank B.
Dennison, R.	March, S.	Viant, S. P.
Duckworth, John	Montague, Frederick	Wallhead, Richard C.
Duncan, C.	Morris, R. H.	Warne, G. H.
Fenby, T. D.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Forrest, W.	Murnin, H.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Oliver, George Harold	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Gillett, George M.	Owen, Major G.	Westwood, J.
Gosling, Harry	Palin, John Henry	Whiteley, W.
Graham. D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Paling, W.	Wiggins, William Martin
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Ponsonby, Arthur	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Groves. T.	Potts, John S.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Grundy, T. W.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Riley, Ben	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Ritson, J.	Windsor, Walter
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)	Wright, W.
Hail, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Rose, Frank H.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Saklatvala, Shapurji
Harris, Percy A.	Scrymgeour, E.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Sexton, James	Mr. Hayes and Mr. Barnes.
Hayday, Arthur	Shiels, Dr. Drummond

NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Blades, Sir George Rowland	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.	Chapman, Sir S.
Albery, Irving James	Brass, Captain W.	Christie, J. A.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, w. Derby)	Briggs, J. Harold	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Briscoe, Richard George	Clarry, Reginald George
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Clayton, G. C.
Apsley, Lord	Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Couper, J. B.
Astor, Viscountess	Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.I Berks, Newb'y)	Courtauld, Major J. S.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Buckingham, Sir H.	Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Balniel, Lord	Bull, Rt. Hot Sir William James	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Barclay-Harvey, C. M,	Burman, J. B.	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Burton, Colonel H. W.	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Crookshank, Col. C. de w. (Berwick)
Beamish. Captain T. P. H.	Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey. Ga'nsbro)
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Campbell, E, T.	Curzon, Captain Viscount
Bennett, A. I.	Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Dalkeith, Earl of
Bethel, A.	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt, R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Betterton, Henry B.	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Davies, Dr. Vernon
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Chadwick, sir Robert Burton	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)

tilated in the proper place that is, before the House of Commons.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 134; Noes, 256.

Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hume, Sir G. H.	Rice, Sir Frederick
Davison, Sir W H. (Kensington, S.)	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y. Ch'ts'y)
Dawson, Sir Philip	Hurd, Percy A.	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Dixey, A. C.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Drewe, C.	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Rye, F. G.
Eden, Captain Anthony	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Salmon, Major I.
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Jacob, A. E.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Elliot, Captain Walter E.	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Ellis, Ft. G.	Jephcott, A. R.	Sandeman, A. Stewart
Elveden, viscount	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Sanders, Sir Robert A.
England, Colonel A.	Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	King, Captain Henry Douglas	Savery, S. S.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Lamb, J. Q.	Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)
Everard, W. Lindsay	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Faile, Sir Bertram G.	Loder, J. de V.	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Fermoy, Lord	Looker, Herbert William	Shepperson, E. W.
Fielden, E. B.	Lord, Walter Greaves-	Skelton, A. N.
Ford, Sir P. J.	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Foster, Sir Harry S.	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Lynn, Sir R. J.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Frece, Sir Walter de	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Galbraith, J. F. W.	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)
Ganzoni, Sir John	MacIntyre, Ian	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Gates, Percy	McLean, Major A.	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Macmillan, Captain H.	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Gee, Captain R.	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Macquisten, F. A,	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Mac Robert, Alexander M.	Sueter. Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Goff, Sir Park	Maitland, Sir Arthur D. steel-	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Greene, W. P. Crawford	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Templeton, W. P.
Grotrian, H. Brent	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Gunston, Captain D. W.	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Tinne, J. A.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Hammersley, S. S.	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Waddington, R.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Harrison, G. J. C.	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Hartington, Marquess of	Murchison, C. K.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Neville, R. J.	Watts, Dr. T.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Wells, S. R.
Haslam, Henry C.	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Hawke, John Anthony	Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W.G. (Ptrsfld.)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Henderson, Capt. R.R.(Oxf'd, Henley)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.	Perring, sir William George	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Wise, Sir Fredric
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Withers, John James
Hills, Major John Waller	Pielou, D. P.	Wolmer, Viscount
Hilton, Cecil	Preston, William	Womersley, W. J.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)	Price, Major C. W. M.	Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Radford. E. A.	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Holland, Sir Arthur	Raine, W.	Wragg Herbert
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nut.)	Ramsden, E.	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper
Hopkins, J. W. W.	Rees, Sir Beddoe,	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Major Cope and Captain Margesson.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Renter, J. R.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney. N).	Remnant, Sir James

The next Amendment in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) is covered, and I understand he does not wish to move his second Amendment. Does he wish to move his third Amendment?

I beg to move, in page 10, line 9, to leave out Sub-section (2).

I have made inquiry about this Amendment to leave out Sub-section (2). I do not propose to put the House to the trouble of a Division, but. I wish to move it because it must not be supposed that there is not a great deal of feeling against Sub-section (2) in some quarters of the country. At any rate some of my friends feel that there are arguments against it, and though I do not propose to put the House to the trouble of a Division I wish to move it.

I wish to put a point of order with regard to the last Division. At first, you, Sir, declared that the "Ayes" had it, and then you reversed your decision, and said that the "Noes" had it. I should like to ask, on a point of Order, whether it is competent for the Chair to reverse its decision, and whether, having declarer? that the "Ayes" had it, it is competent to say that the "Noes" had it?

That has frequently happened, and it has always been the practice of the House to allow a lapsus linguæ

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause," put, and agreed to.

I beg to move, in page 10, line 28, at the end, to insert the words

"This Part of this Act may be cited as The Education Act, 1926, and shall be considered as one with the Education Acts, 1870 to 1918, and the Education Acts, 1921 and 1923, and those Acts and this Part of this Act may be cited together as the Education Acts, 1870 to 1926."

I am sure the Committee will be glad to know that this is the last Amendment I have to move. I sympathise with them very much, and 1 am just as pleased about it as they are. At the same time, it is a matter which, I submit, should be considered hi the Committee. If hon. Members will be good enough to look at Part 1 of the Bill, headed "National Health Insurance," they will see that Part 1 contains, as it ought to contain, a provision, in Clause 7, to the effect that that Part of the Act may be cited as the National Health Insurance Act, 1926. Whether by accident or by design, the Education Part of this Bill contains no similar label. That is, in fact, inconvenient, because, if you are going to make a collection of the education law of the country, it is the proper way to draft this or any other Act of Parliament to say that the Education Part, of the Act goes into Education Statutory Code, and it should be described as such.

That would be a good reason for putting in this Clause if it has been omitted by accident, but if, on the other hand, this label has been omitted by design, I desire to point out what the reason for that is. The reason is that this Part of this Economy Bill is the Conservative contribution to the cause of education. There is an Education Act of 1870, which will always go down in history as the work of Mr. Forster, and there is an Education Act of 1918, which will go down as the work of Mr. Fisher, but I venture to think that, if it is not an accident that this label has been left out, and if it has been left out by design and on purpose, it is because the Noble Lord in his heart is utterly ashamed that this is the contribution which he, as the head of the Board of Education in the Conservative Government, is able to make to the statute law of this country.

The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) did not give quite a full account of the treatment of this subject in this Bill. It is true that in Part I there is a Clause to this effect, as he said. It is also true that Part II, which deals with Unemployment Insurance, has no such Clause. Part III again has got such a Clause, but the rest of the Bill has not. I think that is a sufficient answer to the insinuations in regard to a deep and dark design to omit such a Clause in Part IV. I refrain from asking whether there was a deep and dark design in the drafting of the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment. He has referred proudly to the Acts of 1870 and 1918, but I am informed by my legal advisers that those Acts are entirely superseded and have no relation whatever to this Bill. I think a. citation Clause is put in a Bill which makes a solid and substantial change in the existing law, and the reason why it is not inserted here is that this is intended to be honestly declaratory and is not a change in the law. I cannot accept the Amendment, and I hope we may now come to a decision on the subject.

I cannot profess to be satisfied, though I accept the correction about the Act of 1870. It is true that, like the Act of 1902, it has all been scrapped and is represented now by, I think, the Act of 1921. I do not propose to put the Committee to a Division, although I must be allowed respectfully to say that, while I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his invariable good temper, I wish the excellence of his explanations was as good.

I am sorry the right hon. Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) is not going to press his, Amendment to a Division, and I am also sorry that the Noble Lord the. Minister of Education has not been prepared to accept this Amendment. I only want to point out what a great opportunity the Noble Lord is missing. Here is this tremendously beneficial change in the educational system of the country owing to the efforts of the Noble Lord in this Economy Bill, and there is here an opportunity for himself to be associated with those changes, but he is letting this opportunity slip. I would suggest to him that he might still consider that in another place this Amendment should be accepted. I do not think there is any suggestion that we are anxious to put it in now in order that we might have an

Division No. 181.]	AYES.	[8.25 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Albery, Irving James	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Hopkins, J. W. W.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Howard, Captain Hon, Donald
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M, (Hckney, N).
Applin, Colonel R. V. K,	Dixey, A. C.	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Apsley, Lord	Drewe. C.	Hume, Sir G. H.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Astor, Viscountess	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Hurd, Percy A.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Ellis, R. G.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Balniel, Lord	Elveden, Viscount	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M)	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Jacob, A. E.
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Everard, W. Lindsay	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Jephcott, A. R.
Bennett, A. J.	Fermoy, Lord	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Bethel, A.	Finburgh, S.	Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Betterton, Henry B.	Ford, Sir P. J.	King, Captain Henry Douglas
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Foster, Sir Harry S.	Knox, Sir Alfred
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Lamb, J. Q.
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.	Frece, Sir Walter de	Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Brass, Captain W.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Loder, J. de V.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Gadie, Lieut,-Col. Anthony	Looker. Herbert William
Briggs, J. Harold	Galbraith, J. F. W.	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Briscoe, Richard George	Ganzoni, Sir John.	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Brocklebank. C. E. R.	Gates, Percy	Lynn, Sir B. J.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Macdonald, Capt. p. D. (I of W.)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart.
Buckingham, Sir H.	Goff, Sir Park	MacIntyre, Ian
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	McLean, Major A.
Burman, J. B.	Greene, W. p. Crawford	Macmillan, Captain H.
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Grotrian, H. Brent	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)	MacRobert, Alexander M.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Campbell, E. T.	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Margesson, Captain D.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester. City)	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Hammersley, S. S.	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)	Harmsworth. Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Chapman, Sir S.	Harrison, G. J. C.	Moore, Sir Newton J.
Christie, J. A.	Hartington, Marquess of	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T, C.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Clarry, Reginald George	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Clayton. G. C.	Haslam, Henry C.	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hawke, John Anthony	Murchison, C. K.
Cope, Major William	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Neville, R. J.
Couper, J. B.	Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Heneage. Lieut. -Col. Arthur P.	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.	Hennessy, Major J. R. G.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Herbert, S. (York, N. Scar. & Wh'by)	Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Hills, Major John Waller	Perring, Sir William George
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Hilton, Cecil	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Dalkeith, Earl of	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Pielou, D. P.

opportunity of discussing the Bill on Report. It is only our desire that the fair fame of the Noble Lord should be connected with this Bill that is responsible for our disappointment that he has not eagerly seized upon the great opportunity that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Specs Valley presented to him.

Amendment negatived.

Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 241; Noes, 132.

Preston, William	Skelton, A. N.	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Price, Major C. W. M.	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Radford, E. A.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Raine, W.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.	Watts, Dr. T.
Ramsden, E.	Sprot, Sir Alexander	Wells, S. R.
Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)	White Lieut. Colonel G. Dairymple
Remnant, Sir James	Stanley, Hon. U. F. G. (Westm'eland)	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Rice, Sir Frederick	Steel, Major Samuel Strang	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Stott, Lieut-Colonel W. H.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford. Lichfield)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Strickland, Sir Gerald	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Stuart, Crichten-, Lord C.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Rye, F. G.	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)	Withers, John James
Salmon, Major I.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser	Wolmer, Viscount
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid	Womersley, W. J.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Tasker, Major R. Inigo	Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)
Sandeman, A. Stewart	Templeton, W. P.	Wood, Sir S. Hill (High Peak)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)	Wragg, Herbert
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Savory, S. S.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Tinne, J. A.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of	Major Sir Harry Barnston and Captain Viscount Curzon.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	Waddington, R.
Shepperson, E. W.	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbor')	Hayday, Arthur	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Ammon, Charles George	Hayes, John Henry	Sitch, Charles H.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Smillie, Robert
Barr, J.	Hirst, G. H.	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Batey, Joseph	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hore-Belisha, Lesile	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Briant, Frank	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Broad, F. A.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Stamford, T. W.
Bromley, J.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Stephen, Campbell
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Sullivan, Joseph
Buchanan, G.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Sutton, J. E.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Kelly, W. T.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Cape, Thomas	Kennedy, T.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Charleton, H. C.	Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.	Thomson, Trevelvan (Middlesbro. W.)
Clowes, S.	Lee, F.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Cluse, W. S.	Lindley, F. W.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Livingstone, A. M.	Thurtle, E.
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Lowth, T.	Tinker, John Joseph
Connolly, M.	Lunn, William	Townend, A. E.
Cove, W. G	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)	Varley, Frank B.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Mackinder, W.	Viant, S. P.
Dennison, R.	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Duckworth, John	March, S.	Warne, G. H.
Duncan, C.	Montague, Frederick	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
England, Colonel A.	Morris, R. H.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Fenny, T. D.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Forrest, W.	Murnin, H,	Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Oliver, George Harold	Westwood, J.
Gillett, George M.	Owen, Major G.	Whiteley, W.
Gosling, Harry	Palin, John Henry	Wiggins, William Martin
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Paling, W.	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Grenfell. D. R. (Glamorgan)	Potts, John S.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Rees, Sir Beddoe	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Groves, T.	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Grundy, T. W.	Riley, Ben	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Ritson, J.	Windsor, Walter
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Rose, Frank H.	Wright, W.
Hall, F, (York, W. R., Normanton)	Saklatvala, Shapurji	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Scrymgeour, E.
Hamilton, sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Sexton, James	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Harris, Percy A.	Shiels, Dr. Drummond	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. A. Barnes.

Clause 15 — (Establishment Of Bank Ruptcy And Companies Winding-Up Fees Account And Application Thereof)

I beg to move, in page 11, line 12, to leave out the word "may," and to insert instead thereof the word "shall."

As the Committee will be aware, this Clause deals with the establishment of a. Bankruptcy and Companies Winding-up (Fees) Account, and power is given to defray expenses out of these fees, and all the remainder is to be paid into the Exchequer. In Sub-section (3) the word used is "may," and I propose to insert instead the word "shall." I do not want to argue this point at any length, but it is quite possible, and very probable, that hon. Members sitting on this side of the Committee will return to office. Therefore we are now thinking about the future, and we do not want to have any unnecessary Debates in regard to appropriations-in-aid. It is vital to the interests of the Board of Trade that, instead of leaving this optional power to the Treasury, it should he compulsory for the Treasury to reimburse the Board of 'Made for that amount, and not to leave it in the air so that the Treasury may, if it comes under the jurisdiction of a predatory Chancellor of the Exchequer such as we have at present, refuse to honour his obligations, scoop the whole pool and place the onus on the Board of Trade of coming to this House for the salaries and expenses in connection with this Fund.

The hon. Member for Hillsborough (Mr. A. V. Alexander) is not the first Member of Parliament who has wrestled with the respective merits of "may" and "shall," and I imagine he has often heard the answer, that sometimes "may" is the more appropriate word to use, and, sometimes "shall," because in that case the direction is intended to be mandatory. If he will look at Sub-section (2) of Clause 15, he will see that the word "shall" is there used:

"shall be paid."

That is because the direction is mandatory and absolute, and all sums are to be paid into the new account which is created. When we come to Sub-section (3), it is intended that the Treasury shall have the power to pay these sums, and there "may" is the appropriate word. Any sums which are not provided for in Sub-section (3) of this Clause are provided for in Sub-section (4), to be dealt with as the Treasury shall direct. In that case the intention is carried out by the use of the word "may." The intention is that the Treasury shall pay such sums, but it does not follow that there will be any sum, for instance, under paragraph (b) of Sub-section (3). [Interruption.] I do not know whether the hon. Members who are so anxious to cheer the observations I am making fully understand the Clause or not, but, if so. I gather from their applause that they are in agreement with the observations I am offering, and, as the hon. Gentleman desired to be brief, I will be brief also, and will say no more on the matter.

Amendment negatived.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 16 ( Provision as to fixing of fees) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 17—(Annual Account Of Bank Ruptcy And Winding-Up Proceedings)

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Before we part from this Clause, I wish to congratulate the Government upon their bankruptcy proposals, which I think are very appropriate, as I am sure that bankruptcies are increasing in number, and will go on increasing as long as the Government remain in office.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 18 ( Application of Part V to fees, etc., under heeds of Arrangement Act, 1914) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 19—(Provision As To Marks To Be Used For Cancelling Postage Stamps)

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

take it that this Clause, if I read it aright, legalises the stamping by the Government on letters of the words "Buy British Goods," and similar words. The President of the Board of Trade well knows that every letter that passes through His Majesty's mails is stamped "Buy British Goods" with a machine bought in America—

No; it is "British Goods are Best."

It was "Buy British Goods at one time. I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman; "British Goods arc Best" is, I think, very much better than the other slogan. I would prefer "Sell British Goods," but that is neither here nor there. The fact is that the stamping machine—this ought to be known, and that is why I am taking the opportunity of bringing it to the notice of the Postmaster-General, because the President of the Board of Trade already knows it—is bought in America. I also wish to protest in a very few words against the Government finding it necessary to scrape a few pounds together by putting advertisements on His Majesty's matter and stationery. I think that that is altogether undignified and unworthy of the Government of a great Empire, and when they allow advertisements of strong liquor to appear—[Interruption] —I am not advocating temperance or Prohibition or anything of that sort—when they allow advertisements of strong liquor to appear on the little 2s. books of stamps that you buy at the post office, I feel I cannot allow this Clause to pass without at any rate one voice protesting, and, accordingly, I do protest.

I want to add my testimonial to the protest of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Ken-worthy) with regard to the Government turning itself into an advertising agency. I object, not to the Government turning itself into an advertising agency, but to its having such bad goods to advertise. My hon. and gallant Friend has said that the drink is strong, but I venture to suggest that, so far as the great mass of the people who drink in this country are concerned, our protest is that it is too weak. We would not mind if they advertised the real goods, but they advertise the worst goods. So far as stamping is concerned, I do not care what they stamp, but there is one thing that they are doing now—they are stamping as impossible people for the future consideration of this country. They do not say what they mean by this Bill; we have had no explanation of it as yet. The chief villain of the piece has generally been absent when we have been considering the various Clauses for which, in the main, he is responsible. He has walked through the Lobbies like Hamlet looking for his father's ghost.

The hon. Member would have been perfectly in order, had he been in -time, in suggesting, in regard to advertisements of goods, the desirability of making sure that the quality should be guaranteed, but I am afraid that the opportunity is now past. On the Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," the Chancellor of the Exchequer cannot come in.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer will not come in, Sir. I want to say that, so far as I am concerned, I join with my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Central Hull in protesting against this very skimping Measure. Why cannot I advertise myself on the back of the Government's publications? I may be worth more than some of the stuff they advertise. I want to join in the protest against this economy stunt, which really means no economy at all. If the Government began at the right end, we would support them.

I appreciate what has been said by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy). I would only point out that this Clause is simply for the purpose of removing doubts as to whether the use of these commercial postmarks is legal. In the opinion of those who advise me, there is some doubt as to whether such advertisements, and still more as to whether advertisements of a more commercial character, such as are suggested in future, are legal or not. This Clause takes the opportunity of removing those doubts, and I suggest that the Committee would do well to pass it.

This is the only opportunity that. Parliament has ever had, so far as I know, of expressing an opinion upon administrative action taken without the consent of the House of Commons.

Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Clause 20 ( Fees under Merchant Shipping Acts) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 21—(Short Title And Repeal)

The Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. J. Hudson), at the end to insert the words

"and Section 14 may he cited as The Education Act, 1926"

is covered by the decision of the Committee on Clause 14.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

The new Clause (Amendment of Section. 4 of Representation of the People Act, 1918), which stands on the Paper in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Tiverton (Lieut.-Colonel Acland-Troyte) and other hon. Members, is out of order as being outside the scope of the Bill.

First Schedule—(Consequential Amendments Of Enactments Relating To National Health Insurance)

With regard to this Schedule, which provides for repeals of existing Acts following upon the decisions already taken by the Committee, the first Amendment on the Paper, in the name of the hon. Member for Ormskirk (Mr. Blundell) and others, in page 14, to leave out lines 7 to 31 inclusive, is undoubtedly out of order, as the decision of the Committee on the point is quite clear. With regard to the second Amendment, in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas), in page 16, to leave out lines 16 to 20 inclusive, it is not clear whether this follows necessarily from the decisions which the Committee has already taken on Part I of the Bill. Therefore the discussion must not in the first place turn on the merits. It should be conducted first of all to show that the repeal is not necessary. On that assumption the question of merits may then come in.

I beg to move, in page 16, to leave out lines 16 to 20 inclusive.

I think I can show that the point involved in this Amendment has not been discussed and also that it is a point of substance. When the National Health Insurance Bill was first introduced it was an obligation, even prior to the consideration of any medical benefit for the ordinary industrial workers ashore, the shipowners by Statute Law being compelled to provide medical attendance for seamen on foreign-going ships. That shortly was the situation when the Measure was introduced, so that the House was faced with this fact. Here is an obligation already accepted and recognised by one section of employers with regard to a particular section of workmen. In order to get over that difficulty, provision was made in the Bill that so far as foreign-going members employed by any shipowner were concerned, a reduction of a penny a week should be allowed to the employer because of the special circumstances I have already described.

The result was that when the original Act was introduced this penny was deducted from the employers' contribution, and the ordinary rates for shore workers were: Employer, 3d.; workman, 4d, total, 7d.; and for foreign-going seamen, employer, 2d.; workman, 4d.; total, 6d. The effect of that was to relieve the shipowners to the extent of one penny per week on every National Health Insurance contribution for foreign-going seamen. Then in 1920 it was found that the amount paid for medical benefit was inadequate, and, again by agreement, the contribution was raised from 6s. to 9s. 6d. This resulted in the previous reduction of one penny being raised to threepence in respect of foreign-going seamen, the whole of which, again, was taken from the employers' contribution, so that up to this stage all the benefit that accrued from National Health Insurance, as far as medical benefit was concerned, although it was an obligation prior to the Insurance Act for which the employer himself was responsible, went to the employer and not to the workman.

Under this Bill the charge to societies for medical benefit is further increased, not of course as the direct result of the Bill, from 9s. 6d. to 12s. 6d. This necessitates a further reduction with regard to the seamen's contribution, and there is now a further reduction in the contribution of the shipowner of one halfpenny a week. I understand from the people who know the numbers employed that, taking a very conservative figure, there are at least 120,000 foreign-going seamen insurable for 32 weeks of the year. So that the ordinary reduction of one penny relieves the shipowner to the extent of£16,000. I understand—it appears to me to be a very good arrangement—that the money derived from this share of the employers' contribution is paid to the Seamen's Pension Fund, formerly known as the Lascar Pension Fund, the object of which is to provide some kind of a pension —it is not very much, but it is very much appreciated—to seamen after long years of service when they are unable to continue to go to sea, and men between 65 and 70 years of age obtain a pension of approximately 10s. a week. This is an agreement between both sides, and it is generally accepted by the employers and the men's representatives as a very satisfactory arrangement. They assure me that if this Clause is carried, the net effect will be to reduce the contributions to that fund by at least,£4,000 per annum, which will affect the pensions of at least 150 sailors who would in the ordinary way get them.

I think I have fairly summarised the facts of the case, and I would ask the Minister this very pertinent question. It would be a waste of the Committee's time to argue the tremendous service rendered by seamen. There would be common agreement that there is no class of the community that is more deserving, when they have reached the age of 65, of a pension. This statement and this protest is sent to me by the Seamen and Firemen's Union, and whatever view hon. Members may have with regard to trade unionism in general or any particular union, it will not be argued that this is a revolutionary organisation. They say they desire to enter their strongest protest against this fact, that prior to this Bill being introduced they never heard a solitary word about it. They were not consulted, and the first they heard of it was when the Bill was thrown at them. Having regard to this extraordinary situation, first that title medical benefit was the direct responsibility of the employer and naturally was taken into consideration in the relationship of wages, having regard to the fact that they are deprived of the extension of the general benefits of the medical provision, having regard to their particular calling, having regard to the fact that it is used for the wonderful and beneficent purpose of providing pensions for a very deserving class, and that it means a reduction to them of£4,000, they ask me to urge upon the Minister responsible that, at least, the matter should be deferred until the three parties—the Minister of Health representing the Government, the shipowners and the Seamen's Unions—should have an opportunity of discussing the whole question. Upon those grounds I move the Amendment.

The right hon. Gentleman has so fully and persuasively surveyed the history of the question that very few words are needed to reinforce what he has said. The National Sailors and Firemen's Union of Great Britain and Ireland have asked me to put down the Amendment which stands in my name, which is substantially the same as that of the right hon. Gentleman, and they have furnished me with, roughly, the same arguments that he has employed so skilfully on their behalf. It is an extraordinary thing that this is the only part of the Economy Bill which puts money into the pockets of anybody outside the Exchequer. There is no other Clause or provision in this Bill for benefiting any section of the community except the Exchequer. This Schedule is an exception; it puts one halfpenny per week, or£12,000, into the pockets of the shipowners. I am informed that they have not asked for this reduction, that there is reason to believe that they would be perfectly willing to allow this money to be used for the benefit of seamen as a whole, and that£4,000 of the£12,000 would be devoted to a pensions fund to be expended in 150 pensions of 10s. per week to those seamen who are entitled to a pension under the scheme.

If that be so, and if it be true that the shipowners have not been consulted and that the representatives of the men have not been consulted, would the Minister of Health be so good as to reconsider the attitude that he has taken up in this Bill. I do not ask him to accept my Amendment or the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment, because we know that the Government wish to avoid a Report stage of the Bill, but would they in the meantime, before the Bill becomes an Act of Parliament, consider whether they cannot in another place introduce an Amendment which would have the effect of benefiting the Seamen's Pension Fund, and providing a very deserving class of the community with benefits which they might rightfully expect to enjoy, seeing that the owners have not asked for this reduction. There are so many good services which might be performed by this money on behalf of seamen who suffer from so many disabilities in different parts of the world, that it would be easy, in conference with the seamen's representatives and the employers, to find some means of using these contributions of one halfpenny per week, which will not benefit the employers, but which might be used with much advantage to the seamen. Realising that the right hon. Gentleman will not accept the Amendment, I ask him whether he cannot in another place accept the spirit of it and make some provision that the money shall be used on behalf of the seamen.

9.0 P.M

I only want to add a few words to what has been said. I heartily agree with what has been said by my right hon. Friend, the Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) and my hon. Friend the Member for Devonport (Mr. Hore-Belisha). Not only the Seamen and Firemen's Union, but the Marine Workers Union are closely interested. If it is necessary to treat the foreign-going merchant seamen in the same manner as the soldiers and sailors have been treated, may I plead that this money, the shipowners' part of it—the shipowners are being relieved of a substantial sum a year—should be put to a special fund, and that in the meantime a round table conference should take place to decide what could he done with it? One suggestion I make is that it might be used for the relief of the men who lose their ships abroad or who are thrown out of employment in foreign ports and have to he returned as distressed British subjects by the Consuls, under very nauseating conditions. A fund of that sort would be very useful if held at the disposal of the Consuls abroad to assist British seamen down on their luck. I think something of that sort might he done. I hope the Government will lend a sympathetic ear and consider whether something could not be done in another place to remove the grievance.

I am sorry that I had not beforehand some knowledge of the particular point which the right hon. Gentleman wished to bring out in connection with his Amendment. I did not apprehend what his purpose was in the Amendment. Before I deal with that, may I say that there is some misapprehension, not on his part, but on the part of the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut. - Commander Kenworthy). He does not seem to understand why the shipowners should be relieved of the payment of this money. The thing is perfectly clear. The shipowners were compelled, before there was a National Insurance Act, to provide medical and surgical benefits for their seamen while they were on foreign service. When the National Health Insurance Act was introduced, which provided similar benefits for people serving on shore which could not, obviously, be made applicable to those people who were not on shore but were on ships on foreign service, the foreign-going seamen had to continue receiving medical and surgical benefit provided for them by the owners. As the owners were already, at their own expense, providing this service, it was not considered fair and right that they should be asked also to pay contributions in respect of services which they were not getting. Therefore, the owners were relieved of such part of the ordinary contributions towards national health insurance as represented the cost of this medical and surgical benefit.

The right hon. Member for Derby has related to the Committee the fact that the cost of medical benefit has been found to change from time to time. On the previous occasion when the cost of medical benefit changed, similarly a redution was made in the owners' contribution, to correspond with the change in the cost of the benefit. Once again, there is a change in this respect that the whole cost of medical benefit is now being borne by the societies. That being so, it is assumed that the cost of medical benefit provided by the owners has changed, just as the cost of ordinary medical benefit at borne has changed. If that assumption be a fair one, it is only logical that once more there should be a change in respect of the owners contributions, and that relief should be given to the owners in respect of the service which they are providing in another way. I hope I have made it quite clear why this change has been made.

That is quite correct as regards the case of a man who is treated in a foreign-going ship. But in the case of a man who is sick at home and who may be discharged from his ship some penalty is placed upon him by this Schedule, and the man who leaves his calling as a seaman and wants to be accepted as a member by an approved society will not be regarded as a good member.

This only applies while a man is serving abroad. It does not apply if he is at home on shore, be- cause he gets the ordinary medical benefits under the Act whilst he is at home. I seems only logical that the alteration should be made, mud that is the reason shy it has been made. The right hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) says that this money has been used for the purpose of providing a pension fund not for all British seamen but a pension fund for Lascars—

That is not quite correct. The. Lascar Fund was provided by shipowners because they employed Lascars. They said that they would provide a pension fund for the British seamen who were displaced. That is shortly the origin of that fund.

I am informed that the contribution is to the Lascar Find. I have not had time to go into this matter and I am not blaming the right hon. Gentleman opposite—

This fund was previously known as the Lascar Fund. All these contributions are paid to the Seamen's Pension Fund, formerly known as the Lascar Pension Fund, which provides pensions of 10s. per week for British sea-men who have a long record of service at sea, and the pensions are payable from the age of 65 to 70 years. It is not a pension fund for Lascars. That is the came by which the fund was originally known.

I am much obliged for the further information. I understand that the 2d. per week of which the owners have been relieved has been paid to this Fund. Now they are being relieved of 2½d. and I should have thought that was a. reason why they should pay one halfpenny more—

I understand that hitherto this has been the procedure between the parties prior to a change being made. When on the previous occasions the shipowner was relieved, the three parties were called together, under the guidance of the Ministry of Health, and an agreed arrangement made for the allocation of this fund. Now the Sea- men and Firemen's 'Union tell me that they have not been consulted, that they know nothing about it. The shipowners say the same, and the automatic effect of passing this Clause is what I have already stated.

The right hon. Gentleman has made the point perfectly clear that when the alterations in the Act were previously made an agreed arrangement was come to between the parties interested and the allocation of these monies decided upon. Obviously, the correct thing to do is to borrow that procedure again. I have had no representations from the Seamen and Firemen's Union or the owners on this matter, or I should have perhaps said something more about it. But it is not too late. It is clear that the Amendment ought not to be accepted and the alteration should be made in order to make the proper consequential alterations that have been brought about by Clause 2 of this Bill. I do not desire to prevent the existing arrangements being made as on previous occasions, and if I can facilitate arrangements of that kind I shall be only too glad to receive representations from the various parties and do anything I can to assist it.

The difference in the procedure appears to have been that prior to the introduction of a Bill these discussions took place and an agreed arrangement was made. In any case there is a desire—I am only concerned to do the right thing and to help these very deserving people to continue the arrangement that appears to them to be satisfactory, If, as I gather, the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to take flue necessary steps to call the representatives of the parties together, and that is what they desire, so that some scheme may be arranged between them I have no desire to force the matter to a Division, and I accept the undertaking of the Minister of Health that he will take the necessary steps to bring the parties together.

I shall be happy to give an undertaking to that effect.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Motion made, and Question proposed: "That this be the First Schedule to the Bill."

I desire to say just a few words because I represent a constituency which is very acutely affected by this Bill, and I also want to impress upon the Minister the equity that lies against the change that is suggested. The change is that the employers should in future contribute not 2½d. but 2d. to the insurance fund. The right hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) has said that the reason for that was that in 1911 a contribution of 7d. only was taken from the shipowner because men on foreign going ships were under the Merchant Shipping Act and were supplied with medical and surgical benefit. The Minister of Health argues that it is only logical on that ground that employers, who already provide under the Merchant Shipping Act some of the benefits created by the National Health Insurance Act, should not be asked to contribute towards benefits which they already provide.

There is another side to the picture. In every one of these Acts from 1911 to the present time, the contribution of the seagoing man has been identical with that of the shore man. Reductions, whenever made, were made in the contribution of the employer. It may be quite logical to ask why should the employer be called upon to contribute a full share of contribution for a benefit which he was already partly providing himself; but, equally, we must ask if it is fair that the seagoing man—who already by statutory obligation was entitled to a proportion of these benefits, and who, therefore, under the Insurance Act could only receive a fraction of the provided benefit—should he called upon to contribute exactly the same amount as the shore man? I ask the right hon. Gentleman to ponder on that point. My own humble view is, that under the Merchant Shipping Act it was an obligation Do shipping owners to look after the surgical and medical treatment of these men—an obligation of the same sort as the obligation to provide lifebuoys on their ships, an established obligation which ran into increased rates and increased passenger fares. That was the position, quite apart from any insurance scheme. The insurance scheme then laid it down, on an actuarial basis, that for the purpose of giving certain benefits certain contributions had to be charged. The insurance scheme, certainly, involved this consideration—that in regard to seagoing men lesser benefits had to be provided, just as lesser benefits have to be provided for a healthy race compared with an unhealthy race. There- fore, it was only necessary to contribute a lesser sum in respect of them.

I can understand that view but was there any logical justification for saying that the ratio of the contributions of employers and employés should be varied? Should not the proportions remain exactly the same? The effect undoubtedly has been that while on the one hand the employers claim to be exempt from paying more in respect of the seamen, because the seamen require less benefits than the shoremen, the employé says, "Look at me. I am getting less than the shoreman is getting under the insurance scheme, but I am paying exactly the same." The only way out of this position is to say clearly to the shoreman, "You will have to provide for certain benefits incidental to your shore occupation." and to the seaman, "You have to provide for certain benefits that are required in connection with your occupation and the contribution in your case is to be lower." Once that was done, and the relevant proportions were fixed, the proportionate contributions of employers and employés should be applicable in respect of seamen as well as shoremen. I desire to make the position clear because I know the right hon. Gentleman loves to be logical, and I think this point is worthy of his consideration. I need say no more on this head.

The move which was started—I believe in the wrong direction—in 1911 has been carried through all these Acts up to the present. Without exception, where a change has been made, it has been a reduction in the employer's contribution. To-day the employé on a foreign-going ship pays the same as the man staying at home. This Bill simply says to the employers that their liability, without any request from them, is to be reduced by another halfpenny, whilst that of the employé is to remain exactly the same. That results in a gross injustice which the right hon. Gentleman has passed over very lightly. There has been some confusion in the mind of both the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas) and the Minister as to the Lascar Fund. The real genesis of the Lascar Fund was this. When the Act was brought in which provided that the owner of the foreign-going ship had to insure his employés, he pointed out that those employés included Norwegians, Orientals, Africans, Lascars and others who were not British subjects and were not insurable. If nothing had been done in the Act as regards that position, the effect might have been to make the employer ask himself, "Will I take a Britisher for whom I have to pay 2½d., or one of these aliens for whom I pay nothing?" Had the matter been left there, human greed would have resulted in the filling of ships for foreign voyages with aliens to the exclusion of British seamen.

In order to overcome that temptation a provision was put into the Act that the employer should contribute as much for the alien as for the Britisher, but as the contributions in respect of the alien could never result in benefits to the alien, they were allowed to accumulate in a fund, to be expended upon British subjected. It was made into a seamen's fund which at that time was called the Lascar Fund. Therefore, the less the employer is called upon to pay in respect of alien seamen, the smaller becomes the Lascar Fund, and out of the Lascar Fund is paid pensions for British seamen of 65 or 70 years of age. Thus the direct result of this Bill is to take one halfpenny off the

Division No. 182.]	AYES.	[9.27 p.m.
Acland-Troyte. Lieut.-Colonel	Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Mon. Sir James T.	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Faile, Sir Bertram G.
Albery, Irving James	Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Fermoy, Lord
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Fielden, E. B.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W.Derby)	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Finburgh, S.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Chapman, Sir S.	Ford, Sir P. J.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Christle, J. A.	Foster, Sir Harry S.
Apsley, Lord	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Ashlay, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Clarry, Reginald George	Frece, Sir Walter de
Astor, Viscountess	Clayton, G. C.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Atkinson, C.	Cobb, Sir Cyril	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Cope, Major William	Galbraith, J. F. W.
Balniel, Lord	Couper, J. B.	Ganzoni, Sir John
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Courtauld, Major J. S.	Gates, Percy
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.	Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Grant, J. A.
Bennett, A. J.	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Grattan-Doyle. Sir N.
Bethel, A.	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Greene, W. P. Crawford
Betterton, Henry B.	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Grotrian, H. Brent
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Brass, Captain W.	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Gunston, Captain D. W.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Davies. Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovll)	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Briggs, J. Harold	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hall. Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Briscoe, Richard George	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Hammersley, S. S.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Dixey, A C.	Harland, A.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Drewe, C.	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)	Eden, Captain Anthony	Harrison, G. J. C.
Buckingham, Sir H.	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Ellis, R. G.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Burman, J. B.	Elveden, Viscount	Haslam, Henry C.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Hawke, John Anthony
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Campbell, E. T.	Evans. Captain A. (Cardiff, South)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Everard, W. Lindsay	Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.

contribution of the employer, which is met by the denial of pensions to poor British seamen. That is how it is meant. To the exact extent that by this Bill you relieve the owner of the British-going ship, to precisely the same extent you deny pensions to British seamen. I hope the Committee will pardon me for having occupied their time so long. I know the right hon. Gentleman, whatever may be his manner, is really most sympathetic; and whatever else his faults it cannot be denied by his greatest enemy that he has to a high degree the gift of logic and precision. I want to bring home to him both on the moral and the intellectual side that he is now being given a very fine opportunity, since he is denied the chance of making an Amendment in this House which would involve a Report stage. Therefore, all that can be expected of him is that he will absorb the thoughts and views thrown forth, and in his -own study do what he considers to be the right thing.

Question put, "That this be the First Schedule to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 260: Noes, 137.

Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Shepperson, E. W.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.	Margesson, Captain D.	Skelton, A. N.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Herbert, S. (York, N.R.,Scar. & Wh'by)	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Hills, Major John Waller	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Hilton, Cecil	Mitchell. W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St.Marylebone)	Monsell, Eyres Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Holland, Sir Arthur	Morden, Col. W. Grant	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Hope, Sir Harry (Fortar)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Hopkins, J. W. W.	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Murchison, C. K.	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Neville, R. J.	Sueter. Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Hume, Sir G. H.	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Tasker. Major R. Inigo
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer	Nuttall, Ellis	Templeton, W. P.
Hurd, Percy A.	Oman, Sir Charles William C	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'I)	Perring, Sir William George	Tinne, J. A.
Jacob, A. E.	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Jephcott, A. R	Philipson, Mabel	Waddington, R.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Pielou, D, P.	Ward. Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.	Preston, William	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
King, Captain Henry Douglas	Price, Major C. W. M.	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Radford, E. A.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Knox, Sir Alfred	Raine, W.	Watts, Dr. T.
Lamb, J. Q.	Ramsden, E.	Wells, S. R.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Remer, J. R.	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)	Rice, Sir Frederick	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Loder, J. de V.	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Looker, Herbert William	Ropner, Major L.	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Withers, John James
Lynn, Sir Robert J.	Rye, F. G.	Wolmer, Viscount
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Salmon, Major I.	womersley, W. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Wood, E. (Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow. Cathcart)	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
MacIntyre, Ian	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
McLean, Major A.	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Wragg, Herbert
Macmillan, Captain H.	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Savery, S. S.
Macquisten, F. A.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
MacRobert, Alexander M.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)	Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain Bowyer.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Fenby, T. D.	Kelly, W. T.
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Forrest, W.	Kennedy, T.
Ammon, Charles George	Gillett, George M.	Kirkwood, D.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Gosling, Harry	Lee. F.
Barnes, A.	Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Lindley, F. W.
Barr, J.	Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Livingstone. A. M.
Batey, Joseph	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Lowth, T.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Lunn, William
Briant, Frank	Groves, T.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Broad, F. A.	Grundy, T. W.	Mackinder, W.
Bromley, J.	Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	MacNeill-Weir, L.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	March, S.
Buchanan, G.	Hall, F. (York, W. R. Normanton)	Montague, Frederick
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Morris, R. H.
Cape, Thomas	Hamilton. Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Charleton, H. C.	Harney, E. A.	Murnin, H.
Clowes, S.	Harris, Percy A.	Naylor, T. E.
Cluse, W. S.	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Oliver, George Harold
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Hayday, Arthur	Owen, Major G.
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Hayes, John Henry	Palin, John Henry
Connolly, M.	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Paling, W.
Cove, W. G-	Hirst, G. H.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Ponsonby, Arthur
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)	Hore-Belisha. Leslie	Potts, John S.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoghton)	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Rees. Sir Beddoe
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Dennison, R.	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Riley, Ben
Duckworth, John	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Ritson, J.
Duncan, C.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Rose, Frank H.
England, Colonel A.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Saklatvala, Shapurji

Scrymgeour, E.	Sullivan, Joseph	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Sexton, James	Sutton, J. E.	Westwood, J.
Shiels, Dr. Dmmmond	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)	Whiteley, W.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)	Wiggins, William Martin
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)	Williams, David (Swansea. E.)
Sitch, Charles H.	Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Slesser, Sir Henry H,	Thurtle, E.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Smillie, Robert	Tinker, John Joseph	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)	Townend, A. E.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.	Windsor, Walter
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)	Varley, Frank B.	Wright, W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip	Viant, S. P.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles	Wallhead, Richard C.
Stamford, T. W.	Warne, G. H.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Stephen, Campbell	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. T. Henderson.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)

Second Schedule—(Rates Of Contribution On Which The Amount Of The Contribution Payable Under The Enactments Relating To Unemployment Insurance Out Of Moneys Provided By Parliament Is To Be Calculated)

One series of Amendments on the Second Schedule is, I understand, to keep the rates of the contributions as they are at present, and another is to increase them which, of course, would be out of Order as it would increase the charge. As regards the first Amendment, if the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Kelly) agrees to move to insert 7d. instead of 7½d., he can do so. I think that as this is part of a series, the, whole series of Amendments could be discussed on the first Amendment.

I beg to move, in page 16, line 29, to leave out "6d." and insert "7d"

I move this because it is difficult to understand the mind of the Government which, at this time of day, attempt to draw out of the bargain they made with the people who are insured in this country. When the Insurance Acts were before us there was an understanding that the State would subscribe a portion to the Fund for the purpose of paying unemployment benefit, and now, when unemployment is severe and many of the industries are struggling against the conditions around them, we find one of the parties, and that party the strongest, drawing away from its bargain, endeavouring to run away from the contribution it had to pay to the Fund. Seeing that the Government ask those who are unduly low-paid in many of the industries, to continue to pay their portion to the Insurance Fund, the Government should have the decency, at least, to stand to their share of the bargain. Instead of running away from their responsibility, one would expect them to pay a larger amount into this Fund. In the White Paper, the Government say that if they can assure themselves of this reduced payment they will save something between£3.000,000 and£5,000,000 a year.

I do not know whether they feel justified in using the word "saving" in connection with it. I look upon it as robbery of the unemployed, for the Government to attempt to keep this£3,000,000 at a time when the Fund is needed. Of course, we shall be told that provision is made for the deficiency period, but all this is holding up the time when this deficiency will be paid off, and it looks as though the Government have little or no regard for those people who are out of work, through no fault of their own, and that the Government are not prepared to spend their share to help the unemployed through this serious time. Only the other week the Chancellor was fighting for the handing over of a grant of£5,000,000 to Northern Ireland for the purpose of unemployment insurance; yet now he comes to us to-day and suggests that in this Economy Bill 6d. should be paid in instead of the 8d. which is allowed for under the Unemployment Insurance Act. These proposals are unjust and unfair to the unemployed. I ask the Committee to vote for this Amendment in fairness to the people of the country, and not to look upon the Unemployment Fund as one which can be raided without regard to the injustice which is done to these people.

I cannot quite bring my mind to the alteration of the Amendment from 7½ to 7d., because the 1925 Act, providing as it does for the State contribution of 8d., would have brought the 7½d. well within the limits under that Act, and could in no way represent an increased charge. I take it, it might still have been in order.

I think not, because Part 2 of the Second Schedule of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1925, as I read it, continues the contribution at the rate of 7d during such time as the extended period continues after the 1st January, 1928.

I accept the correction in that sense, but in my own mind I have some doubt, because I understood it was to be 8d. up to the termination of the deficiency period. But be that as it may, I now support the Amendment that 7d. should take the place of 6d. One ought to offer this final word of protest at the inability of the Government to make any concession, and particularly in relation to this Fund. Had the State continued to pay its fair proportion the deficiency period would very soon have elapsed, and then you could have taken in hand a general review of the contributions from the State and the insured persons. This matter is of such grave concern to many who are suffering to-day that a protest ought to be made before we pass this Bill. I want the country to realise that, in addition to the many millions in excess that employer and workman have contributed in proportion to the State's contribution, the trade union movement of this country has spent more than£9,000,000 of its funds in unemployment donation to its distressed members since. 1920. Yet the State comes along at the time of their distress and says, "We are going now to withhold a proportion of our grant to this Fund."

I urge hon. Members opposite in particular not to sacrifice the principle of rendering adequate assistance to the unemployed, but to vote with us for arriving at a stage when the State's contribution shall be something more than the proposals of this Bill. As a final and emphatic protest, I want, as strongly as I can, to say that this is an attack upon the most helpless of our citizens who have gone through five years of real hardship, whose physical and mental powers have been undermined, and yet the Government come along and say: "Notwithstanding your request for aid, we must satisfy the demands of our Chancellor of the Exchequer." I am sure that the Minister of Labour and the Parliamentary Secretary are not throwing themselves into this proposal with any light heart. I feel sure that the proposal is against the grain, inasmuch as they know the circumstances.

I wish to join in the protest against this raid on the Unemployment Fund. Of all the deplorable raids made by the Government, this is the most deplorable. When there are over a million unemployed, to make this reduction in the State contribution is really adding insult to injury. The Parliamentary Secretary may tell us that this does not reduce the amount of unemployment benefit paid under the Act. That may be true, but it is also true that it defers the ending of the deficiency period. When the deficiency period comes to an end there is to be a re-adjustment of the rates paid by employer and employed. Therefore, the Government are extending the period during which industry is burdened by these heavy charges. At a time like the present, when the recovery of trade gives some hope of ending unemployment, we want to do all that we can to reduce the charges which are crippling industry. The taking of this£5,000,000 is a very serious blow to the Unemployment Fund, and I hope that if the Minister cannot accept the Amendment now, he will see that it is inserted in another place.

I do not want to take up the time of the Committee, because the arguments which have been addressed to us are the arguments which were used when we were discussing Clause 8, and they really go to the root of the proposals made it, the Bill. The Amendment would have been out of order, for the reasons Which the Chairman stated, had it been moved as it appeared on the Paper, to insert 7½d., because under the Act of 1925 the amount payable in respect of a man after January, 1928, is 7d., and not 7½d.

Then how do you explain the White Paper which says that under the Act of 1925 it would during 1926 and 1927 have been£15,900,000, taking the interim rate?

Really that has nothing to do with the point which I was trying to make. I was showing that, had the Amendment been moved as printed on the Paper, it would have been out of order because, during part of the extended period, it would have exceeded the amount laid down in the Act of 1925, that amount for the second part of the period being 7d.

But during the first part of 1925 is it not to be at the rate of 8d.?

Yes, 8d. up to January, 1928. The White Paper states that it is estimated that the income to the Fund, with the Exchequer contribution as proposed in the Bill, will be sufficient to meet expenditure with a live register of 1,030,000. The Amendment as originally drawn would have meant an

Division No. 183.]	AYES.	[9.55 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Crookshank. Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Albery, Irving James	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Dalkeith, Earl of	Hennessy, Major J. R G.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.	Herbert. S. (York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Apsley, Lord	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Hills, Major John Waller
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Hilton. Cecil
Astor, Viscountess	Davies. Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Atkinson, C.	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Dawson, Sir Philip	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Dixey, A. C.	Holland, Sir Arthur
Balniel, Lord	Drewe, C.	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Hopkins, J. W. W.
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Ellis, R. G.	Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Elveden, Viscount	Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Bennett, A. J.	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Bethel, A.	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Betterton, Henry B.	Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)	Hume, Sir G. H.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Everard, W. Lindsay	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Fairfax, Captain J. G.	Hurd, Percy A.
Brass, Captain W.	Faile, Sir Bertram G.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Fermoy, Lord	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S.
Briggs, J. Harold	Fielden, E. B.	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Briscoe, Richard George	Finburgh, S.	Jacob, A. E.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Ford, Sir P. J	James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Foster, Sir Harry S	Jephcott, A. R
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Frece, Sir Walter de	Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Buckingham, Sir H.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	King, Captain Henry Douglas
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Burman, J. B.	Galbraith. J. F. W.	Knox, Sir Alfred
Burton, Colonel H. W.	Ganzoni, Sir John	Lamb, J Q.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Gates, Percy	Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)
Campbell, E. T.	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John	Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Grant, J. A.	Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Loder, J. de V.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Looker, Herbert William
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Grotrian, H. Brent	Lord, Walter Greaves-
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Chapman, Sir S.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Luce. Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Christie, J. A.	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Lynn, Sir R. J.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Clarry, Reginald George	Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)	Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Clayton, G. C.	Hammersley, S. S.	Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Macintyre, Ian
Conway Sir W. Martin	Harland, A.	McLean, Major A.
Cope, Major William	Harmsworth. Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Macmillan, Captain H.
Couper, J. B.	Harrison, G. J. C.	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Hartington, Marquess of	MacRobert, Alexander M.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.	Harvey, G (Lambeth, Kennington)	Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Haslam, Henry C.	Margesson, Captain D.
Crocke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Hawke, John Anthony	Mason, Lieut.-Colonel Glyn K.

increase in the State contribution of£2,040,000. The Amendment as moved would represent a total of£1,136,000. At this stage, after the discussion that we have already had, I am sure that the Committee will not expect me to accept an Amendment which would have the result of reducing the£3,740,000 the amount which would be saved in the State contribution, by a sum of no less than£1,136,000.

Question put, "That '6d.' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 266; Noes, 137.

Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Tinne, J. A.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Rye, F. G.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Salmon, Major I.	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Moore, Sir Newton J.	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Waddington, R.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Murchison, C. K.	Savery, S. S.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Neville, R. J.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Watts, Dr. T.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)	Wells, S. R.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Nuttall, Ellis	Shepperson, E. W.	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Skelton, A. N.	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)	Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)
Perring, Sir William George	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Sprot, Sir Alexander	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)	Wise, Sir Fredric
Pielou, D. P.	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)	Withers, John James
Plicher, G.	Steel, Major Samuel Strang	Wolmer. Viscount
Preston, William	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.	Womersley, W. J.
Price, Major C. W. M.	Strickland, Sir Gerald	Wood, E. (Chest', Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Radford, E. A.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.	Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)
Raine, W.	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)	Wood, Sir S. Hill (High Peak)
Ramsden, E.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser	Wragg, Herbert
Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Rice, Sir Frederick	Templeton, W. P.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)	Mr. F C. Thomson and Captain Bowyer.
Ropner, Major L.	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Harris, Percy A.	Sexton, James
Alexander. A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro)	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Ammon, Charles George	Hayday, Arthur	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hayes, John Henry	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Barnes, A.	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Sitch, Charles H.
Barr, J.	Henderson. T. (Glasgow)	Slesser. Sir Henry H.
Batey, Joseph	Hirst, G. H.	Smillie, Robert
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Briant, Frank	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Broad, F. A.	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Bromley, J.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Spoor, Rt. Hon Benjamin Charles
Buchanan, G.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Stamford, T. W.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Stephen, Campbell
Cape, Thomas	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)	Stewart. J. (St. Rollox)
Charleton, H. C.	Kelly, W. T.	Sullivan. Joseph
Clowes, S.	Kennedy, T.	Sutton, J. E.
Cluse, W. S.	Kirkwood, D	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Lee, F.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Lindley, F. W.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro., W.)
Connolly, M.	Livingstone, A. M.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Cove, W. G.	Lowth, T.	Thurtle, E.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Lunn, William	Tinker, John Joseph
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Townend. A. E.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)	Trevelyan. Rt. Hon. C. P.
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)	Mackinder, W.	Varley, Frank B.
Dennison, R.	MacNeill-Weir, L,	Viant, S. P.
Duckworth, John	March, S.	Wallhead, Richard C.
Duncan, C.	Montague, Frederick	Watson. W. W. (Dunfermilne)
England, Colonel A.	Morris, R. H.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Fenby, T. D.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham. N.)	Webb. Rt. Hon. Sidney
Forrest, W.	Murnin, H.	Westwood. J
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Naylor, T. E.	Whiteley. W.
Gillett, George M.	Oliver, George Harold	Wiggins. William Martin
Gosling, Harry	Owen, Major G.	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh. Wrexham)
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Palin, John Henry	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Paling, W.	Williams, Dr. H. (Llanelly)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams. T. (York, Don Valley)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Ponsonby, Arthur	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Groves, T.	Potts, John S.	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Grundy, T. W.	Rees, Sir Beddoe	Windsor. Walter
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wright, W.
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Riley, Ben	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Ritson, J.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Rose, Frank H.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Saklatvala, Shapurji	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.
Harney, E. A.	Scrymgeour, E.

Question proposed, "That this he the Second Schedule to the Bill."

When the Financial Resolution was under consideration I raised a point when Mr. Hope was in the Chair that this. Resolution, if incorporated in the Bill, would be outside the Title of the Bill, Mr. Hope was unable to give a ruling at that time, but he suggested that I might raise it when this Schedule came before the Committee, and I therefore do so now. May I call your attention, Captain FitzRoy, to the Title of the Bill. It is

"A Bill to make provision for reducing in respect of certain services the charges on public funds and for increasing by means of the payment into the Exchequer of certain sums and otherwise, the funds available for meeting such charges, etc."

There is nothing at all in the Title of the Bill which permits any increase of Exchequer contributions. The Financial Resolution which was reported to the House to-day says,

"That…it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of a contribution under the Acts.…"

In submitting this Financial Resolution to the House, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour said:

"The point is a very short one but it is rather a technical one. It deals, as far as, the amount is concerned, with no more than£28,000 a year after January, 1928."

He then goes on:

"The Resolution is necessary because the Bill, as it is drafted, may involve a charge on the Exchequer in respect of exempted persons should it prove to he the case that the extended period does not come to an end by the 1st January, 1928.''

Later on he said:

"It is necessary to get this Financial Resolution in order to provide for a possible further charge on the Exchequer after January, 1928, for the whole of the extended period to cover the difference between the higher and the lower rates."—[Official Report, 19th April, 1925; Vol. 194. cols. 869–70.]

Therefore, I submit that under the Title of this Bill it is not competent to include in the Bill any proposal which involves an increased charge on the Exchequer, and that certainly would be the case if the Clause and the Second Schedule stand in the Bill.

In answer to the very ingenious point of the right hon. Gentleman may I submit to you, Captain FitzRoy, that there are two or three reasons which are quite conclusive. The right hon. Gentleman said the other night., and he said to-day, that there is nothing whatever in the Title of the Bill which would permit a proposal to be included for Increasing the contribution from the Exchequer. The first answer to that is this, that, taken, as you are bound to take these contributions, in the aggregate, that is, in the bulk, there is not an increase, hut a very large reduction in the amount, and it has always been, not merely contemplated by this legislation, but it was laid down in the Act of 1925, that the Government contribution is a single amount arid not several separate amounts. If the right hon. Gentleman will look at Section 4 of the Act of 1925, which describes and prescribes the method by which this is to be arrived at, he will see that it is clear that the amount is an aggregate amount and not a succession or collection of successive small amounts. That is the first answer, which I think is conclusive. The second answer is this, that exactly the same thing occurred, and, indeed, it is entirely on all fours, in a former Clause of the Bill with which I was not personally concerned, namely, Clause 5. That involves an additional charge on the public funds, and could only be justified on the one ground I have just stated, if the contention of the right hon. Gentleman is right. The third reason is this, that if the right hon. Gentleman desired to raise the point that the part of this Schedule relating to exempt persons is outside the long title of the Bill he should have taken it up before and, according to the Rules of the House, on Second Reading of the Bill. If he will look at the Manual of Procedure he will find on page 144 the following statement:

"The contents of a Bill must not go beyond the description given of the Bill in its title at the time of its introduction, wit any objection on this ground should be Taken before the Bill is read a Second time."

Now, for these reasons, each one of which, I submit, is conclusive by itself, which in the aggregate are quite overwhelming, I submit that the right hon. Gentleman's point is without substance. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"]

I am quite sure there must be judging by the cheers from hon. Members opposite at the statement we have just heard, considerable satisfaction among them at the way in which the hon. Gentleman has answered this point, but for the benefit of those who were not here when this matter was raised yesterday I first desire to draw their attention to this fact, that the difficulty created is due to the decision of the Government not to have a Report stage. Hon. Members will know that there was on the Order Paper two days ago a number of Amendments in the name of the Government's own supporters including the Home Secretary. In order to get over a Report stage it was arranged by the Government that those Amendments should be inserted in another place. This Amendment which necessitates a financial resolution could not be inserted there because of its financial bearing. That is why my right hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Snowden) would have been met—and I am now dealing with the last point raised—if he had raised this matter on the Second Reading, by the argument right away that this was a matter that would have been corrected on the Report stage. That would have been the answer he would obviously have got and that is

Division No. 184.]	AYES.	[10.15 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Fairfax, Captain J, G.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Cecil. Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Faile, Sir Bertram G.
Albery, Irving James	Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Fermoy, Lord
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N, (Ladywood)	Fielden, E. B.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool.W. Derby)	Chapman, Sir S.	Finburgh, S.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Christie, J. A.	Ford, Sir P. J.
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Foster, Sir Hairy S.
Apsley, Lord	Clarry, Reginald George	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Clayton, G. C.	Fremantle, Lieut-Colonel Francis E.
Astor, Viscountess	Cobb, Sir Cyril	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Atkinson, C.	Conway, Sir W. Martin	Galbraith, J. F. W.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley	Cope, Major William	Ganzoni, Sir John.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Couper, J. B.	Gates, Percy
Balniel, Lord	Courtauld, Major J. S.	Gault, Lieut.-Cal. Andrew Hamilton
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Courthope, Lieut-Col. Sir George L.	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Crott, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Grant, J. A.
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Bennett, A. J.	Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Greene, W. P. Crawford
Bethel, A.	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Grotrian, H. Brent
Betterton, Henry B.	Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Curzon, Captain Viscount	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Dalkeith, Earl of	Gunston, Captain D. W.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.	Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Hacking. Captain Douglas H.
Brass, Captain W.	Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Hall, Lieut. Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Hammersley, S. S.
Briggs, J. Harold	Davies, Maj. Geo, F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Briscoe, Richard George	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Harland, A.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Harrison, G. J. C.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Dixey, A. C.	Hartington, Marquess of
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)	Drewe, C.	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Buckingham, Sir H.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Haslam, Henry C.
Burman, J. B.	Ellis, R. G.	Hawke, John Anthony
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Elveden, Viscount	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Henderson. Cap R. R, (Oxf'd, Henley)
Campbell, E. T.	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)	Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Everard, W. Lindsay	Hennessy, Major J. R. G.

why he could not possibly raise it. I do submit that the point he has raised is certainly a legitimate and strong one and, as indeed the Financial Resolution introduced by the right hon. Gentleman opposite all goes to show this difficulty was created absolutely and definitely by the Government itself because of its determination not to give the House an opportunity of a Report stage.

With regard to this rather technical point which has been raised, I would point out that a similar occasion arose on Clause 5, and this question, if it was going to be raised, ought to have been raised at that particular time. With regard to this being outside the Title of the Bill, it appears to me quite conclusive that, although this is a Bill for reducing in respect of certain services the charges on public funds, this particular expense is entirely within the Title of the Bill, because it is incidental to those purposes.

Question put, "That this be the Second Schedule to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 266; Noes, 138.

Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)	Makins, Brigadier-General E.	Slaney, Major P, Kenyon
Herbert, S. (York, N. R, Scar. & Wh'by)	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Hills, Major John Waller	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Hilton, Cecil	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon B. M.	Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Holland, Sir Arthur	Moore, Sir Newton J.	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Morden, Col. w. Grant	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Hopkins, J. W W	Moreing, Captain A. H.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)	Murchison. C. K.	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)	Neville, R. J.	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Hume, Sir G. H.	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Templeton, W. P.
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Ayfmer	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)	Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Hurd, Percy A.	Nuttall, Ellis	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Tinne, J. A.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Jacob, A. E.	Perring, Sir William George	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon Cuthbert	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Waddington, R.
Jephcott, A. R.	Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Ward, Lt.-Col.A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Pielou, D. P,	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Kindersley, Major G. M.	Preston, William	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
King, Captain Henry Douglas	Price, Major C. W. M.	Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Radford, E. A.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Knox, Sir Alfred	Raine, W.	Watts, Dr. T.
Lamb, J. Q.	Ramsden, E.	Wells, S. R.
Lane Fox, Col Rt. Hon, George R.	Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Rice, Sir Frederick	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)	Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)	Ropner, Major L.	Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)
Loder, J. de V.	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Looker, Herbert William	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Lord, Walter Greaves-	Rye, F. G.	Wise, Sir Fredric
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Salmon, Major I.	Withers, John James
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Wolmer, Viscount
Lynn, Sir R, J.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Womersley, W. J.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Wood. E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
MacIntyre, Ian	Savery, S. S.	Wragg, Herbert
McLean, Major A.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Macmillan, Captain H.	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
MacRobert, Alexander M.	Shepperson, E. W.	Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain Margesson.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-	Skelton, A. N.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)	Forrest, W.	Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Garre-Jones, Captain G. M.	Kelly, W. T.
Amnion, Charles George	Gillett, George M.	Kennedy, T.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Gosling, Harry	Kirkwood, D.
Barnes, A.	Graham, D, M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Lee, F.
Barr, J.	Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Lindley, F. W.
Batey, Joseph	Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Livingstone, A. M.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Lowth, T.
Briant, Frank	Griffiths, T. (Monmouth. Pontypool)	Lunn. William
Broad, F. A.	Groves, T.	MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Bromley, J.	Grundy, T. W.	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Mackinder, w.
Buchanan, G.	Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	MacNeill-Weir, L.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Hall, F. (York, W. R.. Normanton)	March, S.
Cape, Thomas	Hall. G. H. (Merihyr Tydvil)	Montague, Frederick
Charleton, H. C.	Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Morris, R. H.
Clowes, S.	Harney, E. A.	Morrison, R, C. (Tottenham, N.)
Cluse, W. S.	Karris, Percy A.	Murnin, H.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.	Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Naylor, T. E.
Collins, sir Godfrey (Greenock)	Hayday, Arthur	Oliver, George Harold
Connolly, M.	Hayes, John Henry	Owen, Major G.
Cove, W. G.	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Palin, John Henry
Cowan, D. M, (Scottish Universities)	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Paling, W.
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)	Hirst, G. H.	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Ponsonby, Arthur
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Potts, John S.
Dennison, R,	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Rees, Sir Beddoe
Duckworth, John	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Duncan, C.	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Riley, Ben
England, Colonel A.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Ritson, J.
Fenby, T, D.	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Rose, Frank H.

Saklatvala, Shapurji	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Scrymgeour, E.	Sutton, J. E.	Westwood, J.
Sexton, James	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)	Whiteley, W.
Shiels Dr. Drummond	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)	Wiggins, William Martin
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Sitch, Charles H.	Thurtle, E.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.	Tinker, John Joseph	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Smillie, Robert	Townend, A. E.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.	Wilson, R. J. (Jartow)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)	Varley, Frank B.	Windsor, Walter
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)	Viant, S. P.	Wright, W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip	Wallhead, Richard C.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Spoor, Rt. Hon, Benjamin Charles	Walsh, Rt. Hon, Stephen
Stamford, T. W,	Watson, W M (Dunfermline)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Stephen, Campbell	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne

Third Schedule

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this be the Third Schedule to the Bill".

Division No. 185.]	AYES.	[10.25 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel	Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon, Sir James T.	Curtis-Bennett, sir Henry	Henderson, Capt. ft. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Albery, Irving James	Curzon. Captain Viscount	Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Dalkeith, Earl of	Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Davidson. J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Hennessy, Major J, R. G.
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Davidson, Major-General Sir John H	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Davies, Dr. Vernon	Herberts. (York, N.R.,Scar. & Wh'by)
Apsley, Lord	Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Hills, Major John Waller
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W	Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Hilton, Cecil
Astor, Viscountess	Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Atkinson, C.	Dawson, Sir Philip	Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Dixey, A. C.	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Batnlel, Lord	Drewe, C.	Holland, Sir Arthur
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Eden, Captain Anthony	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Barnett, Major Sir Richard	Edmondson, Major A. J.	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Ellis, R. G.	Hopkins, J. W. W.
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Elveden, Viscount	Howard, Captain hon. Donald
Bennett, A. J.	Erskine, Lord (Somerset Weston-s.-M.)	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Bethel, A.	Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Betterton, Henry B.	Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff South}	Hume, Sir G. H.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Everard, W. Lindsay	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Fairfax, Captain J. G	Hurd, Percy A.
Brass, Captain W.	Faile, Sir Bertram G.	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Fermoy Lord	Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. F. S
Briggs, J. Harold	Fielden E. B.	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth. Cen'l)
Briscoe, Richard George	Finburgh, S.	Jacob, A. E.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Ford, Sir P. J.	Jephcott, A. R.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Forrest, W.	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Brown, Maj. D. C.(N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Foster, Sir Harry S.	Kindersley, Major G. M.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	King, Captain Henry Douglas
Buckingham, Sir H.	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Gadie, Lieut.-Colonel Anthony	Knox, Sir Alfred
Burman J. B,	Galbraith, J. F. W.	Lamb, J. Q.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Ganzoni, Sir John	Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Gates, Percy	Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Campbell, E. T.	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)	Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John	Loder, J. de V.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Grant, J. A.	Looker, Herbert William
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Grattan-Doyle. Sir N.	Lord, Walter Greaves-
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Grotrian, H. Brent	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harmarn
Chapman, Sir S.	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)	Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Christie, J. A.	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Clarry, Reginald George	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Macdonald, Capt, P. D, (I. of W.)
Clayton, G. C.	Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)	MacDonald, R- (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hammersley, S. S.	MacIntyre, Ian
Conway, Sir W. Martin	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	McLean, Major A.
Cope, Major William	Harland, A.	Macmillan, Captain H.
Couper, J. B.	Harmsworfh, Hon. E. C. (Kent)	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Harrison, G. J, C.	MacRobert, Alexander M.
Courthope, Lt.-Col. Sir G. L.	Hartington, Marquess of	Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Marriott, Sir J. A R.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Haslam, Henry C.	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Crookshank, Col. C. de W, (Berwick)	Hawke, John Anthony	Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)

Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.	Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)	Tinne, J. A.
Moore, Sir Newton J.	Rye, F. G.	Tichfield, Major the Marquess of
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.	Salmon, Major I.	Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant	Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)	Waddington, R.
Moreing, Captain A. H.	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)	Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Morrison, H. {Wilts, Salisbury)	Sandeman, A. Stewart	Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive	Sanders, Sir Robert A.	Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Murchison, C. K.	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.	Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Neville, R. J.	Savery, S. S.	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)	Watts, Dr. T.
Newton, Sir D, G. C. (Cambridge)	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westby)	Wells, S R.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster	Sheffield, Sir Berkeley	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Nuttall, Ellis	Shepperson, E. W.	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple
Oman, Sir Charles William C.	Skelton, A. N.	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)	Slaney, Major P. Kenyon	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)	Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)
Perring, Sir William George	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)	Spret, Sir Alexander	Winterton. Rt. Hon. Earl
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)	Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E)	Wise, Sir Fredric
Philipson, Mabel	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)	Withers, John James
Pielou, D. P.	Steel, Major Samuel Strang	Wolmer, Viscount
Preston, William	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.	Womersley, W. J.
Price, Major C. W. M.	Strickland, Sir Gerald	Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Radford, E. A.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.	Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Raine, W.	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Ramsden, E.	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser	Wragg, Herbert
Rawson, Sir Alfred Cooper	Sugden, Sir Wilfrid	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)	Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Remer, J. R.	Tempreton, W. P.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Rice, Sir Frederick	Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)	Captain Margesson and Captain Bowyer.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)	Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Ropner, Major L.	Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen. South)

NOES.
Adamson, Bt. Hon. W. (File, West)	Hayes, John Henry	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Ammon, Charles George	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Sitch, Charles H.
Attlee, Clement Richard	Hirst, G. H.	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Barnes, A.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Smillie, Robert
Barr, J.	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Batey, Joseph	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Broad, F. A.	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Stamford, T. W.
Bromley, J.	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Stephen, Campbell
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Buchanan, G.	Kelly, W. T.	Sullivan, Joseph
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel	Kennedy, T.	Sutton, J. E.
Cape, Thomas	Kirkwood, D	Thomas, Bt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Charleton, H. C.	Lee, F.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Cluse, W. S.	Lindley, F. W.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro., W.)
Connolly, M.	Livingstone, A. M.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton), E.)
Cove, W. C.	Lowth, T.	Thurtle, E.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Lunn, William	Tinker, John Joseph
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)	MacDonald, Bt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)	Townend, A. E.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	Mackinder, W.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)	MacNeill-Weir, L.	Varley, Frank B.
Dennison, R.	March, S.	Viant, S. P.
Duckworth, John	Montague, Frederick	Wallhead, Richard C.
Duncan, C.	Morris, R. H.	Warne, G. H.
England, Colonel A.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Fenby, T. D.	Murnin, H.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Gillett, George M.	Naylor, T. E.	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Gosling, Harry	Oliver, George Harold	Westwood, J.
Graham, D. M, (Lanark, Hamilton)	Owen, Major G.	Whiteley, W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Palin, John Henry	Wiggins, William Martin
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Pating, W.	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Ponsonby, Arthur	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Groves, T.	Potts, John S.	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Grundy, T. W.	Bees, Sir Beddoe	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Riley, Ben	Windsor, Walter
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)	Ritson, J.	Wright, W.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Rose, Frank H.	Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Hamilton, Sir fl. (Orkney & Shetland)	Saklatvala, Shapurji
Harney, E. A.	Scrymgeour, E.	TELLERS FOB THE NOES.—
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Sexton, James	Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. B. Smith.
Hayday, Arthur	Shiels, Dr. Drummond

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report the Bill. Without Amendment, to the House."

Division No. 186.]	AYES	[10.35 p.m.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel	Evans, Captain A. (Cardff, South)	Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.	Everard W. Lindsay	Lynn, Sir R. J.
Albery, Irving James	Fairfax, Captain J. G.	MacAndrew. Major Charles Glen
Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)	Faile, Sir Bertram G.	Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)	Fermoy, Lord	Macdonald, Capt, P. D. (l. of W.)
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.	Fielden, E. B.	MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K.	Finburgh, S.	MacIntyre, Ian
Apsley, Lord	Ford, Sir P. J.	McLean, Major A.
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.	Forrest, W.	Macmillan. Captain H.
Astor, Viscountess	Foster, Sir Harry S.	McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Atkinson, C.	Foxcroft, Captain C. T.	MacRobert, Alexander M.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)	Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.	Maitland. Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Balniel, Lord	Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony	Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.	Galbraith, J. F. W.	Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Barnett, Major Richard	Ganzoni, Sir John	Mason, Lieut.-Colonel Glyn. K.
Barnston, Major Sir Harry	Gates, Percy	Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)	Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton	Mitchell. 5. (Lanark, Lanark)
Bennett, A. J.	Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham	Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Bethel, A.	Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John	Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Betterton, Henry B.	Grant, J. A.	Moore, Sir Newton J.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)	Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.	Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Blades, Sir George Rowland	Greene, W. P. Crawford	Moreing, Captain A. H.
Brass, Captain W.	Grotrian, H. Brent.	Morrison H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive	Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)	Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Briggs, J. Harold	Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.	Murchison. C. K.
Briscoe, Richard George	Gunston, Captain D. W.	Neville, R. J.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.	Hacking, Captain Douglas H.	Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.	Hammersley, S. S.	Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)	Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry	Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Brown, Brig.-Gen- H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)	Harland, A.	Nuttall, Ellis
Buckingham, Sir H.	Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)	Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James	Harrison, G. J. C.	Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Burman, J. B.	Hartington, Marquess of	Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey	Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)	Perring, Sir William George
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward	Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)	Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Campbell, E. T.	Haslam, Henry C.	Peto, G. (Somerset. Frome)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)	Hawke, John Anthony	Philipson, Mahel
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)	Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.	Pielou, D. P.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.	Henderson, Capt. R, R.(Oxf'd, Henley)	Preston, William
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)	Heneage. Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.	Price, Major C. W. M.
Chadwick, sir Robert Burton	Henn, Sir Sydney H.	Radford. E. A.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)	Hennessy, Major J. R. G.	Raine, W.
Chapman, Sir S.	Herbert, Dennis (Hertford. Watford)	Ramsden, E.
Christie, J. A.	Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar, & Wh'by)	Rawson. Sir Alfred Cooper
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.	Hills, Major John Waller	Rees, Sir Beddoe
Clarry, Reginald George	Hilton, Cecil	Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Clayton, G. C.	Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)	Remer, J. R.
Cobb, Sir Cyril	Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy	Rice. Sir Frederick
Conway, Sir W. Martin	Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard	Richardson, Sir p. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Cope, Major William	Holland, Sir Arthur	Ropner, Major L.
Couper, J. B.	Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)	Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Courtauld, Major J. S.	Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)	Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.	Hopkins, J. W. W.	Rye, F. G.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)	Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)	Salmon, Major I.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.	Howard, Captain Hon. Donald	Samuel, A. H. (Surrey, Farnham)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)	Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N).	Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)	Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whitch'n)	Sandeman, A. Stewart
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey. Gainsbro)	Hume. Sir G. H.	Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry	Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aytmer	Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Curzon, Captain Viscount	Hurd, Percy A.	Savery. S. S.
Dalkeith, Earl of	Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.	Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Davidson, J.(Hortf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)	Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)	Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.	Jacob, A. E.	Shepperson, E. W.
Davies, Dr. Vernon	Jephcott, A. R.	Skelton, A. N.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)	Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)	Slaney, Major P, Kenyon
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)	Kindersley, Major G. M.	Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)	King, Captain Henry Douglas	Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Dawson, Sir Philip	Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement	Sprot, Sir Alexander
Dixey, A. C.	Knox, Sir Alfred	Stanley. Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Drewe, C.	Lamb, J. Q.	Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Duckworth, John	Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip	Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Eden, Captain Anthony	Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)	Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Edmondson, Major A. J.	Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)	Strickland, Sir Gerald
Elveden, viscount	Loder, J. de v.	Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
England, Colonel A.	Looker, Herbert William	Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)	Lord, Walter Greaves-	Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere	Sugden. Sir Wilfrid

The Committee divided: Ayes, 264; Noes. 124.

Tasker, Major R. Inigo	Waterhouse, Captain Charles	Wise, Sir Fredric
Templeton, W. P.	Watson, sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)	Withers, John James
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)	Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)	Wolmer, Viscount
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland}	Watts, Dr. T.	Womersley, W. J.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)	Wells, S. R.	Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-	Wheler, Major Sir Granville C, H	Wood, Sir H. K, (Woolwich, West)
Tinne, J. A.	White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple	Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of	Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)	Wragg, Herbert
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement	Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)	Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Waddington, R.	Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)
Ward. Lt.-Col. A. Lt.-(Kingston-on-Hull)	Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.	Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl	Captain Margesson and Captain Bowyer.

NOES.
Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)	Hayday, Arthur	Sexton, James
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')	Hayes, John Henry	Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Ammon, Charles George	Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)	Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Attlee, Clement Richard	Henderson, T. (Glasgow)	Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Barnes, A.	Hirst, G. H.	Sitch, Charles H.
Barr, J.	Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)	Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Batey, Joseph	Hore-Belisha, Leslie	Smillie, Robert
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.	Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)	Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Broad, F. A.	Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)	Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Bromley, J	Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)	Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)	Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)	Stamford, T. W.
Buchanan, C.	Jones, J. J (West Ham, Silvertown)	Stephen. Campbell
Cuxton, Rt. Hon Noel	Kelly, W. T.	Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Cape, Thomas	Kennedy, T.	Sullivan, Joseph
Charleton, H. C.	Kirkwood, D.	Sutton, J. E.
Cluse, W. S.	Lee, F.	Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Connolly, M.	Lindley, F. W.	Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)	Livingstone, A. M.	Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Crawfurd, H. E.	Lowth, T.	Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)	Lunn. William	Thurtle, E.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)	MacDonald, Rt. Hon J R. (Aberavon)	Tinker, John Joseph
Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)	Mackinder, W.	Townend, A. E.
Dennison, R.	MacNeill-Weir. L.	Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Duncan, C.	March, S.	Varley, Frank B.
Fenby, T. D.	Morris, R. H.	Viant, S. P.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.	Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)	Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Gillett, George M.	Murnin, H.	Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Gosling, Harry	Naylor, T. E.	Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)	Oliver, George Harold	Westwood, J.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)	Owen, Major G.	Whiteley, W.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)	Palin, John Henry	Wiggins, William Martin
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)	Paling, w.	Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)	Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)	Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Groves, T.	Pethick-Lawrence, F, W.	Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)
Grundy, T. W.	Ponsonby, Arthur	Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)	Potts, John S.	Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)	Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)	Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)	Riley, Ben	Windsor, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)	Ritson, J.	Wright, W.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)	Rose, Frank H.	Young, Robert (Lancaster. Newton)
Hsrney, E. A.	Saklatvala, Shapurji
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon	Scrymgeour, E.	TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
		Mr. B. Smith and Mr. Warne.

Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the Third time To-morrow.

Imperial War Graves Endowment Fund (Re-Committed) Bill

Considered in Committee.

[Captain FITZROY in the Chair.]

Clauses 1 (Incorporation Of Trustees Of Endowment Fund) And 2 (Accumulation And Investment And Audit Of Accounts Of Endowment Fund) Ordered To Stand Part Of The Bill

Clause 3—(Short Title)

Motion made, and. Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Are we to understand that provision for the proper maintenance of all the graves of our soldiers who died in the War is part and parcel of the Bill? If so, it is very suggestive that, while we are prepared to look after the graves of dead soldiers, yet in the previous Bill before the House we were robbing the homes of the living soldiers. [HON, MEMBERS "No !"] Oh, yes, you are taking from the men—

I hope the hon. Member will not pursue that line of argument. It is quite out of Order on this Bill.

Yes, but the point of Order is this—that so far as I am personally concerned, and I am not speaking for anybody else, party arrangements may be made but some of us have the right to express opinions. A sum of£1,100,000 has been taken from—

The hon. Member has a right to express his opinion at the proper time. This is not the time to express that opinion.

I only want to record it.

Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill" put and agreed to.

Preamble agreed to.

Bill reported, without Amendment; read the Third time and passed

Weights And Measures (Amendment) Bill Lords

Order for Second Reading read.

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

This Bill is one which I think will meet with general assent. It has been approved in principle by all parties. The object of it is to give the Board of Trade power to make Regulations about measuring instruments which are not at present within the scope of the law. Under the provisions of this Bill we shall be able to deal with measuring instruments in regard to the measurement of superficial area, and we shall also have full power to deal with types of petrol pumps, and to give local authorities the right to stamp petrol pumps of the approved type. This particular power is largely overdue. The only other provision of the Bill is to make proper arrangements in reference to fees for testing.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a Second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill Lords

Order for Second Reading read.

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

It is of a non-contentious nature. Hon. Members will remember that after the collapse of the post-War boom there was a large number of fraudulent bankruptcies, particularly in the wool and textile trades, which have brought about losses of between£3,000,000 and£4,000,000 to textile firms owing to shat I might call long firm swindles. The Association of British Chambers of Commerce approached, and J accompanied a deputation to the President of the Board of Trade. He was very sympathetic. In March, 1924, I introduced a private Bill to deal with the Bankruptcy Act of 1914 by Amendment. After some time, the right hon. Gentleman, who was then President of the Board of Trade, said, if I would withdraw my Bill then before the House, he would give a departmental inquiry, which would look into the whole working of the 1914 Bankruptcy Act with a view to stopping dishonest persons from robbing their neighbours by their long firm swindles. A Committee was appointed, and I had the pleasure of sitting on it. Mr. H. Spencer, of Bradford, who was then in the House, and the Chairman of the London Chamber of Commerce also served on the Committee as did the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Gillett). The Committee sent in a Report in January, 1925. It was unanimous, and this Bill has been drafted giving effect to all the recommendations of the Report, with the exception of that dealing with compulsory discharge, which has not been adopted. I will not trespass on the patience of the House by going through Clause by Clause of this technical Bill. It is meant to stop dishonest people robbing honest people: it will not touch the honest little man at all; but will merely check those persons who have ridden rough-shod over the law.

I only intervene in this Debate because there is one question raised in this Bill which is of such considerable importance that I think the hon. Member who has moved the Second Reading should know of the point and give it his careful consideration before it reaches the Committee stage. This Bill is, of course, in part a fruit of the Labour Government. The Committee which reported on this Bill was appointed by my right hon. Friend the Member for Seaham (Me. S. Webb). I am not criticising the Bill as a whole, but there is one very important change in the Bill which the House should fully understand, and that is the change in Clause 7 which enforces upon traders, subject to a certain qualification, the obligation of keeping very complete accounts. Those accounts are described in the Bill as being sufficient to exhibit or display transactions, the financial position of the trade or business, including a book or books containing entries from day to day in sufficient detail of all cash received and cash paid, and where the trade or business has involved dealings in goods, statements of annual stoektakings.

The hon. Member said this Bill did not in any way touch the small men. It will be quite evident to the House that, although this charge is not to come into operation for two years, even then to impoce, without a qualification—and there is a qualification with which I will deal in a moment—on every small trader, every small shopkeeper, every smallholder the obligation to keep full books and accounts with the resulting liability that if, unfortunately, he became bankrupt and those accounts were not sufficient he might be guilty of a criminal offence, it is a very serious matter indeed. I want to be perfectly frank with the House. There is a protection for the small man, but that protection, in my submission, is entirely unsatisfactory, because there is put upon every trader, however small, however humble, the obligation to produce full accounts, anal many of them are almost unable to write. When I was acting as a Civil Liability Commissioner. I had hundreds of shopkeepers before me who could scarcely write and never kept accounts, but bought their goods for so much and sold them for so much and kept the balance in an old cigar box. it is protection of an unsatisfactory kind, in my opinion. It is that if a person becomes bankrupt and the unsecured liabilities do not exceed£500, then the obligation to keep accounts is not applied. That means that when the man goes into business he does not know whether he has a duty to keep accounts or not. It is only after a failure, and the amount of the failure is ascertained, that his criminal liability is taken away. It is an elementary proposition of criminal law, as I understand, that no man shall be liable criminally unless the act is a criminal act at the time he performs it. It is most vicious legislation to have retrospective liability.

There is one more protection. If this trader proves in the circumstances in which he trades that the omission was honest or excusable, he is not liable. But what does that mean? Here is a small man who does not keep accounts, and who is required by the Bill to keep full and complete accounts, however small the business. A coffee-stall keeper or other small trader does not do it, and perhaps cannot do it. Then comes this liability. He fails, and then he commits a criminal act. It may be that he can say the omission was honest and excusable. But what a risk he runs! What I wish to ask the hon. Member is whether between now and the Committee stage, while, I think we all agree that the substantial traders should be compelled to keep proper books of accounts, this Clause cannot be reconsidered, and businesses of a certain type specifically exempted from the Clause, so as not, to be dependent on subsequent liabilities or upon whether somebody thinks, on a subsequent occasion, it was honest. I only mention this matter on Second Beading because it is really substantial. At present only the few thousand persons who actually become bankrupt are liable if they do not keep accounts. but this is going to impose an obligation upon a million people or so—in fact, every trader in the country. I ask the Minister, therefore, to consider this before the Committee stage, and see whether this Clause—although I agree that in its present form it is the recommendation of the Committee—is not misconceived, and whether specifically certain people could not be compelled to keep accounts, and certain humble people be exempted from that obligation.

As a member of the Committee appointed by the last Government to consider this subject, I naturally support the Bill now before the House, because it practically carries out the recommendations of the Committee. As a matter of fact, I believe only one recommendation of the Committee has not been introduced in this Bill, and that deals with the question of the discharge of bankrupts. I understand that the reason why this recommendation has not been carried out is simply because of the question whether the expense involved in seeing that every bankrupt is actually discharged would really be worth the money involved. That was a question before our Committee at the time, but we thought, in the circumstances, it would be worth the additional cost involved.

11.0 P.M.

I must say one word in connection with the remarks made upon Clause 7 by my hon. and learned Friend. I think that possibly he has exaggerated the difficulties to a small extent. The point that he raised was certainly before the Committee. What we wanted to guard against was the frauds committed deliberately by men in cases where, especially in Yorkshire, they deliberately defrauded the manufacturers. One of their ways of doing it was by leaving no books behind, so that it was impossible to ascertain the destination of goods which had been ordered and then sold again before they were paid for. The bankrupts took very good care to have no hooks that would give the information. The Clause is an attempt to compel people in that position to have books, so that. the destination of goods may be traced.

Then, of course, we had to guard against the hardship upon the small business man. We felt that it was quite impossible to take the turnover of a business as the standard, because we were dealing with cases where there were no books whatever. My hon. and learned Friend referred to the man who ran a small coffee shop. The Committee felt that the sum of£500 would have secured the position of these shops. The House must remember that as soon as a man gets anywhere near the Income Tax limit, he is compelled, in order to satisfy the Income Tax Commissioners, to produce books and accounts in order to show what his business is bringing in. Therefore, you have to deal only with the small shop that would in no way be thought by the Income Tax Commissioners to be liable to pay Income Tax. I agree in hoping that the Minister will consider whether£500 should be the limit. My own opinion is that it is only a question whether the£500 should be raised to£1,000 in order to be absolutely certain that the small shopkeeper will not have a hardship inflicted on him. But I do not think that the danger to the very small shopkeeper is such as my hon. and learned Friend suggested. It is difficult to know how we can get hold of the men who are abusing the present position and at the same time not inflict a hardship on the small shopkeeper. I think the Committee which considered the question were very fortunate in securing the services of so able a chairman as Mr. E. W. Hansell, who certainly led us with great ability. I entirely support the general principles of the Bill.

The speech to which we hare just listened shows how very carefully the Committee considered the questions with which they were confronted, and they tried to safeguard the real interests of the people who ought to be safeguarded. We have paid particular attention to the drafting of this Measure, and we feel that it will really provide a very considerable safeguard to the people who are ignorant of keeping accounts. The unsecured liability must be over£500, and in any case the prosecution can be made only on the order of the Court. I can assure the House that. the points raised will receive careful consideration. They seem to me to deal with exactly the kind of thing that ought to be thrashed out in Committee. and the Government will therefore give them the most careful consideration they can. I would like, in conclusion, to join with the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Gillett) in paying a tribate to the excellent work of the Chairman of the Committee. Mr. Hansell.

I do not wish to delay the passage of this Bill, and I understand that my party have come to an arrangement on the matter, but my first intention was to oppose the Second Reading and carry that opposition to a Division. I agree with the hon. Member for South-East Leeds (Sir H. Slesser), and I take a serious view in regard to this Clause. I cannot accept the view of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Gillett). It is quite common in my own constituency for people to accept Income Tax assessments, although they have kept no books at all, because the Income Tax authorities strike a figure by some means or another, and it is found that people who do business of a much greater value than merely£500 keep no books at all. My own view is that this Bill is open to serious criticisms from the smaller people, and I hope that in Committee the President of the Board of Trade will at least consider doubling the amount from£500 to£1,000.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a Second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Adjournment

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[ Commander Byres Monsell.]

Adjourned accordingly at Ten Minutes after Eleven o'Clock

Volume 194: debated on Saturday 20 March 1926

House Of Commons

Private Business

Oral Answers To Questions

Mercantile Marine

Deaths Of Seamen And Fishermen

Engineering Examinations (Scotland)

Government Departments

Board Of Trade (Welfare Attendant)

Civil Service (Bonus)

Safeguarding Of Industries

Worsted Textile Trade

Manufactured Woollen And Worstedyarns

Gloves

Gas Mantles

Imports

Trade And Commerce

Japanese Hair And Tooth Brushes

Artificial Silk Manufactures

Europe (Exports And Imports)

Customs Import Duties

Companies Acts (Committee)

British Army

Troops At Konigstein

Moss Litter

Aden Garrison

Australia (Naval Guns)

Secret Documents (Publication)

Scotland

Crops And Grass (Acreage)

Co-Operative Egg Marketing, Orkney Islands

Agricultural Workers (Statistics)

Land Raids, Harris

Small Holdings

Coal-Mining Companies (Profits)

Transport

Sea Wall Road, Sidmouth

Omnibuses (Alternative Routes)

Post Office

Parcels (Customs Examination)

Letters (Morning Delivery)

Trans-Atlantic Telephony

Imperial Penny Postage

Suspension Of Members (Allowances)

Disarmament

Enemy Action Claims

Antique Silk

Treasury Bills

Super-Tax

United States (British Debt)

France (Debt Negotiations)

Charges On State Funds

Trade Unions (Political Levy)

Sexual Offences (Custody Of Children)

Housing, Devonport

Local Authorities (Loans)

Employment Exchange, Finsbury

Film Industry (Blind Andblock Booking)

His Majesty's Cable Ship "Monarch" (R Allen)

Imported Pictures (Customsfine)

Bills Presented

Roadside Petrol Pumps Bill

Access To Mountains Bill

Business Of The House

Juvenile Courts (Scotland)

Juvenile Courts (Scotland) Bill

Local Authorities (Emergency Provisions) Bill

Selection (Standing Committees)

Standing Committee B

Standing Committee C

Chairmen's Panel

Orders Of The Day

Economy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Money (No 2)

Economy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

Clause 14—(Operation Of Section 118 Of Education Act, 1921)

Clause 15 — (Establishment Of Bank Ruptcy And Companies Winding-Up Fees Account And Application Thereof)

Clause 17—(Annual Account Of Bank Ruptcy And Winding-Up Proceedings)

Clause 19—(Provision As To Marks To Be Used For Cancelling Postage Stamps)

Clause 21—(Short Title And Repeal)