756. Under our terms of reference we have to have due regard to the operation of the laws of foreign countries?-Yes. I only meant that I do not think that the question of the married woman's nationality should be influenced by what another nation chooses to do outside Great Britain. 757. But it has to be considered?Yes. 758. Now going back to the woman, the wife of the British subject retaining her foreign nationality, she goes abroad; she has minor children with her who will be of the nationality of their father?By our law, yes. 759. A foreign woman with children not of her own nationality but of British nationality. Now supposing there is any trouble? I thought you spoke of British woman. a 760. I am talking of the wife of a British subject who retains her alien nationality. She is abroad with her minor children. Now supposing they get into trouble, is not there some inconvenience as to the double nationality? That, of course, is a matter for her, I think. I do not say that this is going to do invariable good to the woman; I do not know that it will. 761. I am looking at it from the point of view of the children. The children are out there with their natural guardian, who does not happen to be of the same nationality as the mother. The children are British through their father? -Yes. 762. The mother has never assumed British nationality; she still retains her alien nationality and she gets into trouble. It is a little inconvenient, is it not, from the point of view of administration to have mother and children of different nationalities?-I do not think so. Supposing she is a Frenchwoman with English children, she has got the same recourse to French protection; in fact it is better for her almost. Sir John Butcher. 763. Would not the true position be this, that the woman as the natural guardian of British children would be entitled on their behalf to claim the protection of the British Consul and Diplomatic Authorities?-I should say so, certainly. Sir John Butcher.] She could say: "Here are my children for whom I am acting; you protect them." Chairman. 764. At all events she has to resort to two?-A British woman who had married a Turk, as for instance the lady who wrote to me 765. Do not take Oriental cases ?Taking the British women who marry Frenchmen, most of them would say: "I would rather have the protection of my British Government." Earl of Desart.] The woman is only entitled to claim protection from a representative of her own country, whereas the British children have to go to another person for protection. She first goes to the British Embassy and they say: We can look after the children, but we cannot look after you." Sir John Butcher.] She would have a double protection-the protection of her own Government and the protection of the British Government for her children. Earl of Desart.] She would have rather an agitating time. Witness.] That is one of the disadvantages of mixed marriages. Chairman. 766. But you do not have the same difficulty where the woman and children are both of the same nationality?-That is because we think it is better to be British than to be anybody else. Chairman.] That is the whole argument in your case, but in this particular instance it would operate, not by altering the law, but by retaining it. Colonel Alexander.] Would not the converse be true in this country of a British woman marrying a foreigner and coming to live in England. What would happen then? There you have the great 7 June, 1923.] The Right Honourable Sir WILLOUGHBY fact pointed out that a woman born in this country, who may get into difficulty through no fault of her own, is not afforded any protection by her own country and she would have to go to a foreign country in her own land for protection. Sir John Butcher.] And you have also the element of her British-born children being British, so that there again you have the alien wife in this country with the British-born children in this country, and it exactly meets the case which Lord Desart puts; the alien wife would have to go to one authority and the children to another. [Continued. the British-born wives and children of All 771. Do you agree that what we have to do is to consider peace necessities and not war emergencies?—Yes. 772. We have had it in evidence already. I do not think you can get rid of the feeling with regard to English wives who marry enemy aliens by merely allowing them to retain their nationality? -I think you would to a certain extent. 770. Will you proceed now ?—I will, to the position during the war. The whole position of these British women who had married aliens was most painful in the war. Numbers of them had been married for twenty or thirty years to Germans who had settled in this country; but who had never taken out naturalisation papers. The wives did not even know they had ceased to be English, and they suddenly discovered that they were to be treated as enemy aliens. Many suffered acute distress and fell into destitution. Special steps had to be taken to relieve them. Precisely similar experiences occurred in Germany where help had to be organised for the German wives of interned Englishmen. It has been largely these facts which have given strength to the movement for an alter ation in the law on this subject. I knew great deal about the work of the Committee formed at the beginning of the war called the Emergency Committee for the assistance of alien . enemy been They worked all through the War, especially in assisting a 773. We had it strongly put to us that while it was most pitiable, the condition in which these English women found themselves, yet at the same time the opinion of the witness was very strong that the fact that they were married to enemy aliens would always operate against them? Oh, yes. That is quite true. 774. I mean we must not put it too high. No, but I think it would have made a difference if the woman had not an alien, because she was in no sense or form an alien. 7 June, 1923.] The Right Honourable Sir WILLOUGHBY DICKINSON, K.,B.E. Colonel Alexander. 775. She would have had facilities, for instance, for obtaining employment. She might not have got it in her own district, but she might have got it elsewhere?Yes. I was told of a case where they were not allowed to send an invalid child to hospital because the mother was an alien. The circumstances of the war are only an illustration of what it comes to. Earl of Desart. 776. We shall all agree that there were cases of hardship. We were told also in evidence that, in fact, the difference was less than it appears, because under Regulation 14 B it was very often the case that the German-born wife of a Britisher was more British than the British-born wife of a German; in fact, there was more evidence that, perhaps, in the majority of cases the wife was more attached to her husband than to her nationality ?-Yes, very often, I quite agree, but at the same time it is a feature which I think we are bound to bear in view. Why is the law such that it should compel a woman to be put in that position if she does not want to? should like to put another illustration. This is not war, but it is out of the war. I do not know whether you have seen the report of Mr. Justice Younger on this question about the sequestration of property? Chairman. I 777. We had his evidence before the House of Commons Committee. Lord Justice Younger gave evidence there.May I just read a very short paragraph? Colonel Alexander. 778. What is the reference to the Report? It is Cmd. 1687 "Interim Report of the Committee appointed by the Board of Trade to advise upon applications for the release of property of ex-enemy aliens in necessitous circumstances." This does touch upon the question of women very much indeed. This Committee pointed out the intense hardship that has fallen upon the alien owners of property in England, of whom many have been British-born wives of aliens. Earl of Desart. 779. That is under the Treaty?—Yes. Referring to that it says "If the individual answers to that description, the embargo upon his or her property is thereupon completely effectual, whether [Continued. such nationality be constituted by birth or only by marriage and whatever may be his domicile or the place of his residence at the time. The property here of a German woman married to an Englishman on the 9th February, 1920, is exempt, although she may only have been permitted to land in this country a few lays before. The property here of an English woman married to a German on the same day is retained, although she may never in her life have been out of this country. So far as this Clause of the Treaty goes it matters not whether the former enemy national concerned has resided in this country all his conscious life and is still resident here; or whether he has never been out of his own country and is still resident there; or whether again he, or his sons, or both him and his cons have fought for us in the war or whether they have fought against us." There are, I believe, a very great number of cases in which a British-born woman has had all her property taken away and there is no chance of her getting it back, because the only means by which she can do it is by recourse to the German Government, and there is no means of getting anythting out of the German Government at present. They make certain recommendations; they point out that it has operated with great harshness in the case of small sums геpresented by the Post Office Savings Bank Deposits which have been the source of great anxiety to the Committee. They say this "The present situation is that there is no compensation forthcoming at all for any ex-enemy national other than a German; not readily for any German other than one resident in Germany and possibly not for her, if she be female, if she was of British or Allied birth." Then they make suggestions in which they say that the power which the Government have of releasing property ought to be exercised in certain steps, and the class of person to whom they would recommend the release of property, first of all, is the "British-born ex-enemy nationals-such nationality having been acquired only upon and by reason of marriage." I thought I might quote that, because they say, "The first class comprises Britishborn married women whose property here almost always consists of property settled upon their marriage, and is usually held by British trustees for their benefit. Appeals from this class have been especially numerous, many of them very painful." 7 June, 1923.] The Right Honourable Sir WILLOUGHBY 780. What is the date of that?-That is the 5th May, 1922. It is the recent one. 781. Am I right in saying that that has been to some extent acted upon already? -I do not think it has. I think it has been pointed out that they cannot act upon it under the Treaty. The money goes into the clearing-house. I have quoted it, because it is another example of the way in which the law has placed the British woman in a grave disadvantage in this respect. I believe that a British woman whose father died before [Continued. 1920 could inherit nothing from her German. father if she had married a That all comes from this principle, which, of course, I contend is wrong, and I contend ought never to be enforced by the law of the country upon any woman, merely on the ground of convenience. Chairman. 782. Would it be convenient to you to come back on Tuesday morning?—Yes. The Witness is directed to withdraw. Ordered: That this Committee be adjourned to Tuesday next at 11 o'clock. THE VISCOUNT CHELMSFORD, G.C.S.I., G.C.M.G., G.C.I.E., G.B.E., IN THE CHAIR. SIR WILLOUGHBY DICKINSON, K.B.E., is again called in; and further examined as follows: Witness.] There are two points which I would like to clear up. The first is with regard to the French position. I stated that there was a Bill for carrying out this change in the law which passed the Senate and was awaiting to be discussed in the Commons. You said the Foreign Office had no knowledge of this. I have ascertained this from France in a letter which has been received upon this matter. It is in French. I will hand it in. The translation is: "No change has been made in the Bill which has been voted by the Senate on Articles 12 and 19. The Bill has been sent for discussion and to be voted upon in the Chamber of Deputies, where a Rapporteur, Mr. Lionville, has been nominated. He has declared himself as favourable to our claim." Chairman. 783. Is that from the Embassy?—No. It is from the Headquarters' Secretary of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance. It must have come from the French members of this International I communiWoman Suffrage Alliance. cated with them and they got this reply from France. I have no doubt it has been sent by the lady in France who represents this movement there. 784. I think all you can do is to hand it in? Yes. (The letter is handed in and is as follows.) "9th June, 1923. To Sir Willoughby Dickinson, K.B.E., 41, Parliament Street, S.W.1. Dear Sir,- -In reply to my inquiry as to the Bill before the Senate in France, I have received the following information :— "Il n'a été apporté aucun changement au projet de loi voté au Sénat sur les articles 12/19. Le projet a été envoyé pour discussion en voté a la Chambre où un rapporteur, M. Lionville, a été désigné; il s'est déclaré favorable à nos revendications.' "I trust that this information will be of use to you. Yours truly, Katherine Bombas, Headquarters Secretary." Ꭰ 787. I am only taking the practice in the League of Nations which I think follows very largely the French practice. The Committee find more or less in favour of a certain course; then you get hold of a Rapporteur who represents one of the majority, and he makes the Report?— I think they appoint the Rapporteur before the Commission report. I do not wish to say that this has the force of a Second Reading behind it. I should not think so. It is probably an initial stage for consideration. Then with regard to the Act in Canada I have the whole of the Act before me. It is called Bill No. 3. I think it is easy to ascertain whether Bill No. 3 of 1918 is an Act. I take it it must be; I assume it is. The wording with reference to this particular point is this. It is Section 1 Sub-section (2) (d). The first Clause says that every female person shall be entitled to vote at a Dominion Election who has certain qualifications. Then it says: "For the purposes of this Act a female person shall be deemed to be a British subject; (d) if, notwithstanding she is married to an alien, she was at the time of such marriage a British subject by birth and has not herself allegiance to any foreign power: Provided, however, that this paragraph shall not apply to the wife of an alien enemy." That was passed ou June 1st, 1918, while the War was still on. Earl of Desart. sworn 788. That was not quite the point we raised here. The point was whether, even supposing such a provision had existed here, she would be able to vote under our Franchise Law because her franchise was derived from the status of her husband in this country. I mean that was the immediate point before us? I think even in this Act a somewhat similar provision arises that where married couples are concerned the wife does vote in respect of her husband's qualification.-Yes, it is 60. [Continued. 789. All I meant was that that might be in a great many cases inoperative because she could not derive the vote though, being a British subject, she would be entitled to vote if she could?-I quite see your point. It would knock the bottom out of it if she depends upon her husband's qualifications and her husband is an alien. It is giving her nothing. But I can hardly think that that was the effect in Canada. Chairman. 790. It does not follow that the law in Canada is the same as here?-No, it does not. Sir John Butcher. 791. I suppose in Canada, as here, an unmarried woman can acquire the franchise on her own behalf?-Yes. If she is 21 years of age and “possesses the qualifications which would entitle a female person to vote at a Dominion election in the Province in which said female person seeks to vote: Provided that a married woman or an unmarried daughter living with her father or mother shall be deemed to have any necessary qualification as to property or income if the husband or either of the parents is so qualified." Mrs. Wintringham.] Since the last meeting I have obtained the resolutions which were passed by the International Woman Suffrage Association to which Sir Willoughby referred. I do not know whether they would be of any use to the Committee. I see in the evidence he says he does not know what resolutions have been passed. Witness.] I have had them since. Of course I have only had them from the source of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance. Chairman.] I think we may take it for what it is worth. Mrs. Wintringham. 792. (To the Witness.) Have you had the report from the International Woman Suffrage Alliance?—Yes. I have the resolutions which were passed. 793. Can you tell me whom that International Woman Suffrage Alliance represents? It represents Associations from the Argentine, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czecho Slovakia, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Newfoundland, Norway, Palestine, Rumania, Serbia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, |