THE COMPULSION BILL

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2679, 27 January 1916, Page 5

THE COMPULSION BILL

UNEVENTFUL PASSAGE IN THE . COMMONS GOVERNMENT DELIGHTED DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OP LORDS By Telegraph—Press Association—Oopyrijht London, January 25. , The Military Service Bill was carried by the House of Commons without any demonstration, and lias been read a first time in the House of Lords. Sir John Simon, speaking on the third reading debate, said lie justified the Voluntaryists' opposition to the measure to the end. Otherwise the Government would not realise that any opposition existed in the country. Mr. J. H. Thomas, Secretary of the Amalgamated Society of -Railway Sen. vantsj similarly insisted that large eeotions of trade unionists were opposed to compulsion. Mr. Bonar Law, in closing the debate, commented on tho changed tone in the debate since the Bill was introduced. The suspicion that the Bill had been used to secure industrial compulsion had been removed. TJieGovernment was delighted at th# restraint shown by all sections in the Rouse, and hoped that every member, would do his best to prevent industrial trouble if it was threatened. ' THE BILL IN THE LORDS SPEECH BY LORD DERBY. (Rec. January 26, 8.15 p.m.) London, January 25. The Compulsion Bill has been read a second time in the House of Lords. Lord Lansdowne, in moving the second reading of the Bill, said that fclio measure was based on expediency rather than ou principle, and was recommended by a unanimous Cabinet and an almost unanimous House of Commons. There was no need to apologise for a homeopathic dose of compulsion. There was no doubt that a weakening of our industrial army would moan a weakening of our financial position, and a consequent diminution of power. "Wo will give our Allies that assistance upon which they have naturally relied on us."

Lord Lansdowne said that as matters stood wo wero not wholly _ masters of the situation. It was distinctly of interest to industry that wo should emerge victorious, but also that victory should,not be too long delayed. The Government had endeavoured to hold the balance as fairly as possible between the Army and the Commons. He regretted that Ireland had not claimed the right of inclusion. Lord Derby (Director of the Reoruiting Campaign) said that 650,000 single men had not been accounted for in his report. That was the minimum numbor, and until they had been accounted for it would have been perfectly impossible to have fulfilledi Mr. Asquith's pledge. Married men were coming in in large numbers. The singlo men were in larger proportion to the married men, but- not to the extent to justify anyone thinking the number, left was still a negligible quantity. He was more frightened of the Government than of tile tribunals in reduoing the number of men available. Since his report was issued, four lists of reserved occupations had been issued. He could not help feeling apprehensive when lie knew of the hundred thousand badges which they had issued in the four days. AVhen tlio Bill was introduced he feared ftat many fish would escape the' net. He now "thought that there was less danger of their escape. . It would have been of no avail, he added, to introduce industrial compulsion in the guise of a Military Service Bill. He believed that the Bill would meet the emergency, and would not make a great industrial disturbance. It would be worked so as to bring men to the army as they were required, and "as industry-could spare them. He believed that it would be impossible for the Government to frame a Bill more simple for the carrying out or its pledges and more fully meeting tna requirements of the military authorities. Lord Haldane added,that he thought that the Government might have to go further, and inaka appeals to the married men and to Ireland. He doubted whetheryt would he possiblo to introduce compulsion permanently, hut whilo ■ India and the Dominions were unable to provide for thoir own ■ defence, it would be necessary to raise a. professional army for that, purpose. •. . . Lord Haldane did not think that the Bill trenched on any large principles. The Government, wisely, had restricted it' as far as possible. Lord Russell opposed the Billi <n J'C ground that compulsion would dimuusli 'the country's glory. . . The Archbishop of Canterbury said that he whole-heartedly supported.-the Bill. He believed it would be plain, straightforward, and vigorous, and that it would meet an extraordinarily dithcult situation. ~ Lord Curzon said that no one would like to see a permanent measure more than himself, but it was obviously out of the question to revolutionise our whole system in the. middle of a great war, or forco upon the country a general system of compulsion. Lord Midleton regretted that the Government had not shown more courage and spread the net a little wider. He asked whethor the course of the war had not been marred the Governmojit's progress oil tho line of least resistance. associated with him had great difficulty in considering the course they should adopt, and had eventually decided not to attempt to amend the Bill, but to leave the responsibility on the Government.

MINERS WILL NOT HAMPER THE GOVERNMENT (Rec. January 26, 10.30 p.m.) London, January 26. The Miners' Federation Congress at Bristol has resolved not to do anything to hamper tho Government during the war..