THE HOP INDUSTRY 283 



their Committee, and adopted the report with three dis- 

 sentients. 



" (1) Your Committee are of opinion that the majority, in 

 failing to recommend in their report that a duty should be placed 

 upon imported foreign hops, acted against the weight of evidence 

 placed before them, and thereby failed to deal with the only 

 proposals which, in the opinion of your Committee, offer any 

 prospect of substantial recovery from the prevailing depression 

 in the hop industry. 



" (2) They note with satisfaction the recommendations made 

 by the Select Committee that the use of hop substitutes should 

 be prohibited, and are strongly of opinion that the word " sub- 

 stitutes " should be so defined as to include all chemical pre- 

 servatives. 



" (3) Your Committee further approve of the proposal that 

 the provisions of the Hop (Prevention of Fraud) Act, 1866, 

 should be extended to foreign hops." 



In December the Government introduced a Bill to give 

 effect to some of the proposals of their Committee, but almost 

 immediately withdrew it under the pretext that there was no 

 time to deal with an opposed Bill. Such opposition as there 

 was came wholly from some twelve followers of the Govern- 

 ment. A few Members representing hop-growing con- 

 stituencies had amendments on the paper, but they withdrew 

 these in the hope that the Government would thereby be 

 encouraged to proceed with their Bill. 



1909. 



Viscount Hardiiige introduced a Bill in the House of Lords, 

 which met with the unanimous approval of the Hop-Growers' 

 Association. It passed through Committee, but was not 

 allowed to proceed further owing to the Government having 

 introduced another Bill Hops (No. 2) in the Lords drawn 

 up on almost the same lines. Amendments to this latter Bill 

 were carried which made them practically identical, but when 

 the Bill passed through Committee the Government withdrew 

 it, in spite of every protest that was made against their doing 

 so. The Council on 21st September passed a resolution 

 regretting this action of the Government and asking them to 

 re-introduce it at the earliest opportunity. 



