CLASS II.—SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS.

HC Deb 27 May 1880 vol 252 cc555-93

(1.) £32,666, to complete the sum for House of Lords Offices.

(2.) £37,706, to complete the sum for House of Commons Offices.

(3.) £42,835, to complete the sum for the Treasury.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, that year after year objections had been made to the large amount paid as fees to counsel assisting the Parliamentary Counsel. A very large sum-namely, £5,689, was already paid in respect of the regular Parliamentary Counsel and Office, and it was most objectionable that extra legal assistance should have to be obtained at a cost of £1,700 for outside parties to assist the regular paid Counsel as draughtsmen. This charge had now become annual, and therefore should become a regular fixed sum as salaries to the parties employed. There could be no difficulty in framing an exact statement of the work required to be done by the Parliamentary Counsel, and of the work done by the outside assistants and draughtsmen, and by this publicity they would avoid the large excess annually for fees; or else put on the regular establishment the parties whose services were permanently needed. He hoped that in future the Treasury would endeavour to frame a more exact Estimate, and also that the details of this expenditure should be given, and that the House should know how the money was laid out, for what work and to what persons.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, it was desirable that the Government measures should be, as far as possible, prepared by the regular officer appointed for the purpose. But from time to time, when pressure arose, it became impossible. The Government would endeavour, so far as possible, to save expenditure in this direction.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, he hoped that the Government would in future give more details with regard to the expenditure than had hitherto been the case. An Estimate was necessarily vague. But the spending of the money entailed the taking of vouchers, and the work done for the public money, as also the parties receiving that money, could be so clearly stated as to allow of the several details being clearly set forth.

Vote agreed to.

(4.) £67,576, to complete the sum for the Home Office.

(5.) £54,041, to complete the sum for the Foreign Office.

(6.) £27,812, to complete the sum for the Colonial Office.

(7.) £23,179, to complete the sum for the Privy Council.

MR. J. W. BARCLAY

said, that before this Vote was passed he wished to call attention to the expenses incurred in the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council. The Estimates contained, a considerable charge in respect of travelling Inspectors. They had a right to expect that those persons should be practically acquainted with the duties which they had to fulfil. During the last Parliament he had to call attention to some of the appointments to these offices. The persons appointed by the late Government were officers on half-pay who knew nothing about the duties; and he must protest against such appointments as these being reserved for gentlemen who had no practical knowledge of the work. He should also like to see more information obtained by the Privy Council regarding the state of cattle disease in other countries, and more particularly in Canada and various parts of the United States. Under the present Act the whole of the United States was treated as one country; but it would be very desirable to obtain store cattle from the Western States of America, where they were very cheap, if this could be done with safety. He did recommend, in the present state of their information, that cattle should be admitted into this country from the United States; but he considered that the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council ought to procure full information as to the state of health of cattle in the Western States of America, and, if the reports were satisfactory, to ascertain whether it would be practicable to bring them across to this country without risk of contamination. This was a matter of great importance to the country, and more especially to farmers, who had to submit to a very keen competition with the fat cattle from America which were slaughtered at the ports of debarkation. He thought that the Veterinary Department would do great service to the country by taking the necessary steps to obtain information as to the herds of American cattle in the Western States, and, if no disease were found to exist, to take further steps to provide, if practicable, for their being brought, as might be done, to this country without passing through any of the States in which disease existed. That information they could obtain either by means of special Inspectors or from the Consuls at towns in the Western States of America.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, he regretted that his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mundella) was not present; but he would take care to inform him of the observations which had been made. He agreed that it would be of importance to be able to receive store cattle from America, if it could be done without injury to the herds of this country. It was necessary to have very accurate knowledge, however, as to whether they could be brought here without having to pass through infected States.

MR. J. W. BARCLAY

said, that he hoped the Government would take into consideration the desirability of appointing gentlemen to the offices of travelling Inspectors who had a practical acquaintance with the subject. There were very strong reasons why gentlemen appointed as Inspectors should possess some general knowledge of the diseases of cattle.

MR. DUCKHAM

said, that the hon. Member for Forfarshire (Mr. J. W. Barclay) advocated the admission of store cattle into this country from the Western States of America. In his opinion, it would be an unwise step to adopt, and it would be much bettor to continue the stringent regulations now in force.

MR. WHITWELL

said, he found that the quarantine expenses at Portsmouth amounted to about £1,200, whereas the expenses for all other ports, including London, only came to £700.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, that the Government had every desire to appoint those gentlemen as Inspectors who were best qualified to perform the duties. With respect to the quarantine expenses at Portsmouth being so much in excess of those at other ports, it was owing to the fact that nearly all the quarantine work, was performed at that port.

MR. DILLWYN

said, that it was to be regretted that the Ministers in charge of the Departments were not present in the House while the Votes for which they were responsible were being discussed. He did not wish to complain of the matter; but it was unfair to throw so much extra work upon the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury, and it also led to the postponement of many questions which might be disposed of if Ministers were in their places.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, that he quite agreed, with his hon. Friend the Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) that it much facilitated the discussion of the Votes if Ministers were in their places. It was unusual for these matters to be discussed during the absence of the heads of the Departments. He would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council should be sent for. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) had the honour of sitting in that House when the late Lord Palmerston was Prime Minister. The noble Lord was nearly always in his place in the House and very seldom left it. He thought that that was an example which would be well followed in these days.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, that the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury had met with unusual luck in getting so many Votes passed in so short a time. It did not seem to him (Mr. O'Connor Power) that the spirited economy advocated by the Government, while out of Office, had as yet manifested itself now that they were in power. If they could not have the benefit of the explanations of Ministers, he should suggest that they reported Progress. It was utterly impossible that they should go on with these Estimates until they were satisfied that the expenditure was really required. With respect to the particular Vote under discussion he had no objection to raise; but there might be others, more especially with regard, to Ireland, upon which explanation would be necessary.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, that he much regretted the absence of his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Privy Council. He saw him a few minutes ago, when he promised to be in his place shortly. His right hon. Friend probably did not expect that his presence would be so soon required.

MR. DILLWYN

said, that he was quite satisfied with the explanation of the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury.

Vote agreed to.

(8.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £2,090, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Lord Privy Seal.

MR. MONK

said, that he was glad that the Government was not responsible for the preparation of these Estimates. Had they been so, he should have felt it his duty to protest against this Vote. When the late Government was in Office, and also when the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister was in Office previously, he had taken exception to the Vote for the Office of the Lord Privy Seal. He hoped that the time had now come for its prospective, if not its immediate, abolition. He hoped to hear either from the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury, or from the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, that the Office of Lord Privy Seal was to be put an end to. As a great many new Members had taken their seats in the House, he thought it would be right that they should have an opportunity of expressing their opinions with regard to this Office. He had never heard any good reason offered for the retention of the post of Lord Privy Seal, except that it was useful in "another place," and that the noble Lord who held it was of use in the representation of some Department of State in "another place." He should not move a reduction of the Vote, if any promise were given as to the future abolition of the Office; but in default of such promise he should divide the Committee upon the whole Vote.

MR. RAMSAY

said, that he had on more than one occasion voted in the minority against the retention of the Office of Lord Privy Seal. No one could have sat in the last Parliament, but had heard the explanation given by the late Ministry to justify the retention of that Office that the Lord Privy Seal was if use—when any head of a Department, through ill health or otherwise, was unable to attend to his duties. What had occurred to him was that the Office need not be abolished if its duties were conjoined with those of a Secretary of State for Scotland. If the present Government would entertain that proposal, they would avoid the constant recurrence of divisions upon the question which he had invariably felt bound to support, simply because he did not believe it was requisite or desirable to have any Office retained for which a sum was voted with- out any corresponding duties. No one could doubt but that the great talent of the distinguished Nobleman who now filled the Office (the Duke of Argyll) could be of great service to the country, and he was certain that that was the desire of that Nobleman. He (Mr. Ramsay) thought it would be an advantage to his country if the duties of the Lord Privy Seal were conjoined with taking charge of the public affairs of Scotland in Parliament. He thought, therefore, it would be well if the present Government considered whether it might not be a desirable thing to have this brought about. He was aware that there were those who sought to describe the Lord Advocate as being the Scotch Minister; but the late Home Secretary bad told them again and again that he (Mr. Cross) was the Minister of State for Scotland, and everyone who had come into contact with the right hon. Gentleman had met with the greatest courtesy and attention in reference to the affairs of Scotland. But that was not a satisfactory state of matters, because in going to the Home Secretary they bad to encounter a person who was not personally acquainted with the sentiments or wants and wishes of the people of Scotland. The suggestion, therefore, he had made in the last Parliament would, he thought, obviate the difficulty the Government had felt regarding this Vote, and it would be carried without dissent if Her Majesty's Ministers were to adopt his view. He hoped they would hear from the First Lord of the Treasury some explanation in regard to his views; because he felt that, if they must come to a division, he must, in the absence of satisfactory explanation, vote with the minority as on former occasions.

MR. GLADSTONE

said, that it was very difficult indeed for him, desirous as he was of retaining the support of both his hon. Friends, to win it on that occasion by promising to combine the Office of Lord Privy Seal with new functions, and to bring into existence a Secretary of State for Scotland. The question of the retention of the Office of Lord Privy Seal was one which lay within a comparatively narrow compass, while that of the creation of a Secretary of State for Scotland was a very serious and complicated one, and one which involved a multitude of considerations, many of which did not appear upon the surface. It was one also which did not stand alone. If such an Office were created, a number of persons would be ready to claim a Secretary of State for Ireland; others would claim a Secretary of State for Education; others a Secretary of State for Agriculture and Commerce. The multiplying of Secretaries of State was too serious a matter to be disposed of on such occasions as the present. If the retention of the Office of Lord Privy Seal stood alone it would be hard to defend it; but it did not. The holder of the Office was a Member of the Cabinet. If the House thought that the Cabinet might do more work than it did, then that was a proper subject for consideration. But if it were of opinion that there was quite enough for the Cabinet to do, the wisest course would be to leave the Cabinet to make the internal distribution of its duties for itself. In that point of view he could say that in the Cabinets in which he had sat the Lord Privy Seal was a very useful Minister. Most of the Ministers were so full of the duties of their Departments that it was not possible to put upon them the whole burden of legislation. Therefore, a Minister less charged with, or wholly free from, departmental duties was often of the greatest use to his Colleagues by taking care of Bills which it was really impossible for them to undertake, and in other ways. There were six Cabinet Ministers in the House of Lords, among them being the Lord Chancellor; the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who was also charged with the duties of Leader of the House; the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and the First Lord of the Admiralty; and those Ministers were all men whose hands were completely filled with the duties of their Offices. It was of the greatest value to the Government to have a Member of the Cabinet to whom they could assign with perfect propriety the charge of Business that could not well be undertaken by other Members of the Government who were more closely occupied in the duties of the Departments. It was, indeed, of great service to the Government, in 1868, to have a Cabinet Minister able to conduct the negotiations with America. The then holder of the Office of Lord Privy Seal (Lord Kipon) was enabled to undertake that duty, which could only have been performed by a Cabinet Minister. In stag- nant times, no doubt, the case would be weak for the retention of the Office; but at a time like the present, when legislation had fallen into arrear, when the Government were hard pressed in handling the subjects which were forced upon their attention, he did not hesitate to say that the presence in the Cabinet of the holder of the Office of Lord Privy Seal was of the greatest importance. That which constituted the perfection of a Cabinet was the facility it possessed for discussing all the measures it proposed to introduce from every possible point of view, so that every objection that could be made might be anticipated and considered. It was most useful to have a man in the Cabinet whose mind was free from the duties of his Department, and who was able to devote himself to the consideration of the proposals of others. He did not hesitate to say that it was of very great advantage to have some Member of the Cabinet at liberty to consider proposed legislation, for he was better able to make suggestions with reference to proposals than those whose minds were occupied with their departmental duties. He did not wish to overstate the case, and he was not one who admired a sinecure Office; but he could assure the House that the Office of Lord Privy Seal in this Cabinet was not a sinecure; and in the present state of public affairs, the demand—the legitimate demand—upon them being far beyond their power to meet, his belief was that the public got full value for the not very extravagant charge to which they were put by maintaining the Office.

MR. DILLWYN

said, that he had always voted against the retention of this Office. It had been opposed for a number of years, and he did not think that the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister exactly appreciated the principle upon which they opposed it. It was not that they objected to the Nobleman who now filled the Office; it was that the Office was ostensibly a sinecure. They objected to Offices of which there did not appear to be any duties. He was prepared to admit that the Office was one which might be made useful, and if it wore given another name it might be well to continue it. But he did not think that an obsolete Office should be allowed to remain which had no duties attached to it. There might be some duties to the Office; but there were certainly no real duties. It was well known, both to the House and to the public, that this was a sinecure Office. He did not object to there being an extra Cabinet Minister, for he was in favour of the Cabinet being more fully represented. In his opinion, those Ministers who had no special duties to perform should be called Ministers without portfolios. It was right that the country should know the way in which public money was spent. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister had, no doubt, given excellent reasons for the appointment of a Minister without portfolio. They desired the abolition of this Office without any personal feeling; and he trusted that his hon. Friend the Member for Palkirk (Mr. Ramsay) would divide the Committee upon the point. Where a question of principle was involved it was desirable that they should record their opinions by a division.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, that if his hon. Friends went to a division he should follow them into the Lobby, as he had done in previous years. It was not that he objected to the £2,790 for the services of a great Officer of State as now voted for this Office; but, as had been stated, a question of principle was involved. It was fully admitted that no Office ought to be retained to which no ostensible duties were attached; at the same time, there was great need for the appointment of a Secretary of State for Scotland.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, that the hon. and gallant Member would not be in Order in referring to the duties of a Secretary of State for Scotland on a question regarding a Vote for the Lord Privy Seal.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, that he had the same object in view as his hon. Friend (Mr. Ramsay), who desired to unite this Office with that of Secretary of State for Scotland. He was in favour also of a Secretary of State for Ireland, and for the abolition of the Office of Lord Lieutenant.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, that the subject of the Lord Lieutenant would come before the Committee in a separate Vote, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman would then be in Order in his reference to a Secretary of State for Ireland.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, that the object which they had in view was to make the money which, was voted for this Office available for the performance of the duties of a Secretary of State for Scotland. At present, Scotch Business was almost wholly neglected.

MR. THOROLD ROGERS

said, that he came into the House with the intention of voting against the salary paid to the Lord Privy Seal. But having heard the argument of the right hon. Gentle-man the Prime Minister, he had come to the conclusion to support the Vote. It seemed to him conclusively proved that in the present state of public affairs it was necessary to have a Minister in the Cabinet without departmental duties. As the Government had succeeded to a muddle, he thought they were entitled to the services of the distinguished Nobleman who now held this Office to assist them in the Cabinet. Next year, he should reserve to himself a liberty of exercising his judgment upon the retention of this post; but it seemed to him right for the due conduct of public affairs at the present time that they should retain the services of the singularly distinguished Nobleman who now held the Office of Lord Privy Seal.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, that he should not have addressed the Committee had it not been for the observations of the hon. Member who had just sat down (Mr. Thorold Rogers). It was true that there had been a muddle in this matter, and that muddle enabled any hon. Member who had sat in the House for some Sessions to offer his condolences to the hon. Members who objected to this Vote. The hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) was entitled to their condolences, because he had lost the support of the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke). The hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea for some years past had taken part in the attempt to abolish this Office. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister was also entitled to their condolences, because others of his Colleagues had also supported the abolition of the Office. No less personages than the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Law Officers of the Crown, the Attorney General, and the Solicitor General, had also voted against the retention of the Office of Lord Privy Seal. The right hon. and learned Lord Advocate also had done the same, and he was sure that if that right hon. and learned Gentleman had had any business to transact in the House that evening, he would, as on previous occasions, have voted for the abolition of the Office. Last year the noble Lord the Comptroller of the Household (Lord Kensington) was also found amongst its opponents. In the divisions of the last Parliament, however, the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister would not be found as voting on this question. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) was glad to be able to support the right hon. Gentleman on this, as on former occasions, as he thought that his arguments were perfectly sound. In one of his speeches in Scotland the right hon. Gentleman spoke about an appeal from Philip sober to Philip drunk. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck), however, would appeal from Philip drunk to Philip sober. Now that the Government was becoming sober, and was doing sober things, they would always have his support, as they had on that occasion. He hoped, now that the Government was becoming sober in small things, it would become sober in great things also, so that Gentlemen on the Opposition side of the House might give them their support.

MR. SHERIDAN

hoped the Motion would not be pressed.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, that it was well worth raising a debate upon the Vote for the sake of the intellectual treat which they had had. He begged to thank the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister very much for the information which he had afforded them as to the internal economy of the Cabinet. The principle on which he should give his vote was this. Although it was true that the Lord Privy Seal had plenty to do by assisting his Colleagues, yet so long as they retained an Office of this kind, which was professedly a sinecure, they would always be open to criticism. Another victory had been scored by the champions of economy in the admission of the Prime Minister of the general principle of the matter at stake, when he stated that he was opposed to sinecure Offices. As the Prime Minister had seen his way to concede the principle of their contention, perhaps at a future time, when the opposition to that Vote had become more extended, he would be able to suggest some distribution of Cabinet Offices that would save them discussions of that nature, which, during the six Sessions of the last Parliament, had always come up with perfect regularity, but had been carried on hitherto, he was sorry to say, in vain. Under these circumstances, he did not know whether the hon. Gentleman who had introduced the discussion (Mr. Monk) would consider it his duty to divide the Committee. The Prime Minister, he was sure, would not ignore the force of their protest, even if they did not divide, but would fully take into consideration the plea which had been urged against the grant for the Office of Lord Privy Seal.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 89; Noes 57: Majority 32.—(Div. List, No. 7.)

(9.) £126,443, to complete the sum for the Board of Trade.

MR. WHITWELL

said, he was not going to make any remarks this year as to the large amount of these Estimates, although there had been some increase in them, because he knew, of course, that the Government were not responsible for the figures; but he did complain that there was no regular rule, apparently, as to the services which the officials should perform, and there was no getting to know what was the work which they had to do. For instance, it appeared, by a foot-note to page 93, that the Assistant Secretary of the Board of Trade was allowed to occupy an appointment as Auditor, under the Metropolitan Water Act of 1871, for which he received £550, paid, of course, by the Companies. While this gentleman was thus holding this office, he was also employed as one of the Secretaries of the Board of Trade. There was a similar employment, which to him was equally objectionable, where a gentleman received fees as a member of the Thames Conservancy Board, while being also a Government official. Of course, it was quite reasonable that the Board of Trade should have some control over these Boards, and, for his part, he wished they had a far greater control over the Water Companies; but, at the same time, it was very undesirable that the officials should be mixed up in this way. He thought the appointments to them should be clear and distinct. He hoped, therefore, that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain) would institute a patient inquiry, and that, as the result of his presence at the Board of Trade, they would see a complete change in this respect. In the hope that there would be a very close inquiry into the matter, he did not propose to move any Amendment.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

wished to call attention to the large amount of the law charges to the extent of £16,000, being only £800 less than the amount for the previous year, and he really should like to have some information as to how that money was laid out. The whole of this large sum was set forth under general heads, not susceptible of check. As for other payments, however small, paid to individuals, besides these large amounts, they found the items of law charges spread over every Vote in the Estimates, and, for his part, he thought nothing could be more beneficial than to draw those Votes into one statement, so that they might see exactly what was spent in this way. From a rough calculation, he believed that £100,000 would not cover the different amounts thus scattered over the accounts for law charges, all set forth without any specification as to detailed expenditure. He hoped, also, that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain) would show the divisions of the Departments of the Board of Trade more clearly. They already had Legal and Standard Departments; but he should particularly like to know something about the Harbour Department. [Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The Harbour Department comes under Class I.] His right hon. Friend would find, upon inquiry, that under the Act of 1861, certain general duties, there recorded, over all harbours of the United Kingdom, were taken from the Admiralty and handed over to the Board of Trade, one Assistant Secretary of the Board now receiving £1,500 a-year for looking after the harbours, with a large and costly establishment to aid them in performing duties much more economically and efficiently than by the Harbour Department of the Admiralty. He did urge these matters upon the attention of his right hon. Friend, because they were spending thousands and thousands every year, and had spent millions in the past, upon harbours, without anyone knowing in the least How wasteful a mode of dealing with the public money as well as the private money was now followed by reason of their ignorance as to how to design and construct harbours. No one was more anxious than himself to see good harbours round the coast. He believed incredible good might be done to the country, if they only understood how to construct them; but he did deprecate making those harbours without any sort of control as to whether the plans and improvements were sound. He urged the Predecessors of his right hon. Friend to give them an annual Report upon all the harbours of the Kingdom. The efficient head of the Harbour Department of the Board of Admiralty, 30 years ago, prepared a Report on the harbours which, if now revised and the information made complete, would be most useful; and he hoped now, in the public interest, that would be done.

MR. MACDONALD

also objected to the system of allowing paid officials of the State to accept salaries from other persons or from the State. Every lover of economy, and every friend of his country, ought to set his face against such a system. For instance, there was this case of £550 a-year paid for the audit of the Water Company Accounts. That official also enjoyed a salary of £1,000 a-year from the Government, and, for his part, he (Mr. Macdonald) could not understand how one person could properly fill two situations valued at those amounts. The work in one place must be neglected. Therefore, that gentleman should confine his attention to one Department, and make room in the other for some other person. Again, he found that one of the items included a special allowance of £100 a-year to the present holder. It was not explained what that sum was for, and, for his part, he was of opinion that every shilling on the Votes should be accounted for, otherwise they might arrive at the conclusion that this money was generally given from personal favouritism. ["Oh, oh!"] They thought fit to cry "Oh, oh!" There could be no doubt of this, that they thought, like many others, that abuses and scandals of this kind had only to be supported by the Gentlemen occupying the Treasury Benches for the time being, and the "Outs" who were doing all they could to get in. Such a state of things could not last. He ventured to say that 19 out of 20 persons out of the House seeing the Vote there would put that construction upon it. He did not wish in any way to embarrass the Government; but if this system of double situations were continued, he would do his very best in the future to put a stop to it.

MR. NORWOOD

observed, that he saw from the public prints that there was an intention to reduce the salary of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board from £1,500 to £1,200. He ventured on behalf of the mercantile community to say that that gentleman had to perform very important functions, for by his judgment and his intelligence the trade of this country might be very greatly benefited, or the reverse. Every other Parliamentary Secretary was allowed £1,500 a-year; and why the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade was to be made inferior in status to the others he could not understand. He hoped to have an assurance from his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain) that the late arrangement would remain intact, and that this gentleman's position would not be affected.

MAJOR NOLAN

said, there was an item about which he should wish some further explanation. There was a product called kelp. [An hon. MEMBER: What?] Kelp was petrified ashes of seaweed, and a number of chemicals, such as the iodides and the bromides, were produced from it. It was produced in very large quantities on the West Coast of Ireland, and sold from thence to the Glasgow merchants, who resolved it into its chemical products. The trade was in the hands of a very few manufacturers; while the producers were the very rudest peasants, very ignorant of the value of the commodity in which they dealt. Some Government Department ought to give information as to the price of kelp from year to year, and the value of the products from it, so that the producers might be able to know the value of the article they sold. The Committee would see how important the question was, when he told them that the great fall in the price of kelp was the main cause of the distress on the Coast of Ireland. If his right hon. Friend at the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) could not give him any information on the subject, he hoped he would do his best to see that it was given.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he would certainly take the first opportunity of making the inquiry, the importance of which he fully recognized. He hoped it might he in the power of his own Department to furnish the information, and if his hon. and gallant Friend (Major Nolan) would communicate with him in a few days, he could let him know what information he had, or where he could obtain it. He could assure him he should be very glad to give him any assistance. With regard to the salary of the Secretary, of course that matter did not rest with him, but was a question which concerned the Treasury. He had, however, been informed that the subject had been under the consideration of the Treasury, and having regard to the importance of the duties of the Office, and especially to, as he might say, the growing importance of the Office in connection with commerce and agriculture, it had been decided that it was undesirable to make any change. His attention had been called to the question of harbours; but the hon. and gallant Gentleman (General Sir George Balfour) would scarcely expect him to give a detailed answer upon so very complicated a subject only a few days after he had entered upon the duties of his Office. He trusted he would be quite satisfied with an assurance that before the next Estimates were prepared he hoped to give full information on any of the points with reference to which inquiry was made. He must, therefore, simply appeal to his hon. Friend the Member for Kendal (Mr. Whitwell), and must remind him that these Estimates were not prepared by him, but by his Predecessors. As a matter of fact, he only saw them that morning, a few minutes before he came down to the House. He was, therefore, in some little difficulty, because he was not absolutely certain as to the accuracy of the information he might give. The complaint was that some of their officers had salaries from two Services, as was shown by foot-notes to the Estimates. He must remind the Committee, however, that this was a great improvement on the old practice, because originally it was complained that officers in receipt of considerable salaries appearing in the Estimates were also in receipt of large salaries of which the House knew nothing whatever. It was, in consequence of that, decided to put in a footnote any addition to the salaries of these officers from whatever source, in order that the House might, as far as possible, be in possession of the fullest information. In the present case, objection was taken to the amount payable to the gentleman who acted as auditor of the Water Companies. It must, however, be understood that this officer was appointed distinctly in the interests of the public. As the Committee was aware, on the amount of the profits of the Water Companies depended, to a considerable extent, the price of water, as they were compelled to reduce the price of water if their profits exceeded a certain amount. It was necessary, therefore, that someone in the interest of the public should examine these accounts, and, consequently, this gentleman had been appointed, who, it must be remembered, was not paid by the public, but by the fees taken from the Water Companies. Next year he hoped he should be prepared more fully to explain these Estimates.

MR. RYLANDS

said, they would all be inclined to grant to his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain) the indulgence he reasonably claimed; and it would certainly be asking too much from him to expect that he should be in a position to defend all the items of the Estimates. At the same time, he (Mr. Rylands) wished to point out that the complaint he made against this system was not that as a result of it any charge was made against the Revenue, because quite clearly, in the case at any rate of this auditor, the payment justly came out of the pockets of the Water Companies. Also, the services performed were in the interests of the public. He had, however, often urged that their Public Offices were over-manned, and that a larger number of clerks were employed than were absolutely necessary for the fulfilment of the public work. That suspicion was very strongly confirmed when they found that in so very many of the Votes gentlemen occupying positions in Public Departments were able also to undertake other duties of a different character, for which they were paid in some instances large salaries, the duties of which they were sometimes able to perform in the time for which the country was voting them salaries. This point was not at all met by the answer of his right hon. Friend that much of this work was done out of office hours, because if hon. Gentlemen would look at the Estimates, they would see that it was not always the case. He thought this point might very justly be recommended to the attention of the Government, and he hoped there would be a very careful inquiry, not merely in this, but in all Departments, to find out whether the number of clerks was not so great that in many instances their time was not fully employed. The Committee was certainly in a far better position to judge of this matter than it was in former years, for they had now much fuller information given them than previously. This extra duty was really regarded as a sort of patronage given to certain favoured clerks. Some of these gentlemen were paid £300, £400, and even sometimes £1,000 a-year for extra services required of them, and, of course, these posts were positions which those gentlemen were very anxious to obtain. While he was quite ready to pay all clerks fairly and fully for their services, he thought it was very objectionable that more should be employed than were necessary for the Public Service, or that any of them should employ the time for which the money of the country was paid in other work.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

begged to call attention to the item "Surveyors." They would find that the gentlemen employed by the Department were nearly always naval officers, as was seen by the footnote which showed that most of them were in receipt of a Navy pension. He found that friends of his who had done every kind of work in the Mercantile Marine, and men who had been all over the world, were ignored in the competition for posts of this kind, and they were constantly given to naval men. He hoped that this would not always be the case, and that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain) would do something to throw this office open to other men who had also served their country well, and who had, it might be remembered, no pension at all. He hoped also that his right hon. Friend would turn his attention to the question of the Corn Returns, about which there was great complaint that they were not properly made. Country people were, of course, not so clever and wise as others; but still they had their little complaints, and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would attend to them also, and not be under the impression that all the wisdom in the country was concentrated in Birmingham and the large towns.

MR. SHAW

felt very strongly that the item for law expenses required further explanation. They seemed to spend something like £16,000 a-year, although they had a large legal staff permanently employed in giving advice. He knew, of course, that a great part of it was in connection with merchant shipping; but he should have thought a great part at any rate of the money so expended should have been re-paid by the merchant shippers, and he did not see why the country should pay for it. They always had these discussions on these Estimates; but he did not remember ever since he had been in the House that a single £1,000 had been struck off in consequence, and he looked upon the discussions as a great wate of energy; yet he was also of opinion that any men of business, looking over those Estimates and having a fair opportunity to cheek them, would be able to knock off at least 35 per cent. He would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, who was capable of initiating very great improvement in many ways, that he would do an immense benefit to the country if he would extend his labours into other Departments, go through all these Estimates, and endeavour to save something on what were, perhaps, individually small things, but which, nevertheless, told up to a considerable amount in the affairs of the country. He would suggest that, at the beginning of next year, a Committee of business men should be appointed to go through these Accounts, and he believed they would thus be able to effect very great savings. On the other hand, they might go on year after year, as they had been going on for the last 50 years, criticizing the matters that were annually laid before them without making the least saving. The item of "Collecting Statistics," might, he thought, be removed. In Ireland all that work was done by the police officers; and he did not see why in this country the work should be thrown on the Excise, and additional expense be so incurred.

Vote agreed to.

(10.) £24,305, to complete the sum for the Charity Commission.

MR. W. H. JAMES

said, he should like to call the attention of the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury to one or two matters in connection with this Vote, as he had long been of opinion that this was an improper charge on the Public Revenue. At two different times, Resolutions had been passed in that House to carry into effect that the cost of this Commission should no longer be borne by the Consolidated Fund, but the suggestion had never been carried out. It had been suggested that the endowed schools and other eleemosynary charities might pay something equivalent to the Succession Duty or Income Tax, and the late Government brought forward a Bill on the subject; but it met with such powerful opposition that they had to abandon it. He hoped, however, that another year this proposal would receive the careful consideration of the Government.

MR. GREGORY

observed, that recently very large amounts had been transferred from private charity trustees to the Charity Commissioners, in order to free those gentlemen from the position in which they stood. The Commissioners, therefore, now had a very large amount of money under their control; and it did seem to him very unfair that these funds should contribute nothing to the expense of the Commission and that the country should have to bear the whole amount. Individually, the amount they would have to pay would be but a very small one, and it would be a perfectly just tax upon the charities in return for the security which they obtained from the Commissioners.

MR. RAMSAY

also agreed that endowed schools, or other charitable foundations, ought to pay something of the expenses of their management, in order to provide a sufficient sum to meet this expenditure. It certainly was not desirable that a charge of this kind should be placed upon the Imperial Treasury, when they had full information to show that the charge would not affect the charities to any appreciable extent. He therefore hoped the Government would consider the expediency of having this charge transferred from the Imperial Treasury.

MR. GLADSTONE

It will be sufficient to say, with great brevity, that I do not think it is expected of us that we should now go into any detailed answers in respect to these subjects; but I certainly most confidently hope, before 12 months have elapsed, that when we approach this Estimate we shall approach it in a very different way.

MR. COURTNEY

remembered that one of the first acts of the late Administration was to abolish the then Endowed Schools Commission, and to attach the remaining work to the Charity Commission, and since that time the rate of progress of this Department of the Charity Commission had certainly been inconceivably slow. He had made a calculation to show that, at the present rate, at least 100 years must elapse before the schools would be thoroughly re-organized, As a proof of the capacity of the Commission, he might mention that one great foundation in the immediate vicinity of London—Dulwich College—for which a scheme had been elaborated by the late Commission before the Dissolution in 1873; but, although that was so, that scheme had never up to the present day been perfected. He did not know whether his noble Friend (Lord Frederick Cavendish) would be able to promise in the near future any better progress in this matter; but he did hope that the Vice President of the Council, or whoever had the superintendence of this Department, would set the officials to work, as the present rate of progress was most discreditable. He hoped there would be some pressure put upon the Department to insure that these gentlemen did some work in return for the salaries which were paid them.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

was also strongly of opinion that the charities should bear the expense of their management in some form or another.

MR. BRAND

asked whether any information could be given in respect to Christ's Hospital?

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Council (Mr. Mundella) had that moment come in; and he was, perhaps, the more proper person to answer these questions. But as he was nearly as incapable of answering them as he (Lord Frederick Cavendish) himself was, from the short time in which they had both been in Office, it would hardly be fair, perhaps, to ask him to undertake the task. To some extent he certainly sympathized with his hon. Friend the Member for Liskeard (Mr. Courtney) in his disappointment at the slowness with which the great work of re-organizing the endowed schools had been proceeded with. The noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Viscount Sandon), when introducing his Endowed Schools Act at the commencement of the last Parliament, made some very severe remarks with regard to the Endowed Schools Commissioners, and complained that they had not made such progress as they might have done. At any rate, he (Lord Frederick Cavendish) thought that the work of those Gentlemen would compare not unfavourably with the work of their successors. At the same time, he did not wish to be too severe on those Gentlemen, for anybody who had ever had anything to do as governor or trustee of any charity knew the difficulty of such work as this. He hoped, however, that these remarks would have some effect, and that something might be done which would produce a little more satisfactory results.

SIR THOMAS ACLAND

wished to warn the Committee against taking any hasty or sudden action in regard to the Commission. At present, a great many trustees came to them from the country, because they knew they would be met with consideration and justice, and not put to expense; but if a sudden change were made which would increase the difficulties the work of the Commission would be retarded.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

said, he only asked that these institutions should pay the expenses incurred by the Government in their management.

Vote agreed to.

(11.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £21,065, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Civil Service Commission.

MR. ANDERSON

said, that for several years they had been accustomed to have a division on this Vote; but this year he was happy to know it would not be necessary, as they had received an assurance from the Government, in reply to a Question from himself, that for the future the salary that had been voted to the late Lord Hampton would not be required. He, therefore, would move that the Vote should be reduced by £1,800, as he understood a small part of the salary had already been paid.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £19,265, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Civil Service Commission."—(Mr. Anderson.)

MR. RYLANDS

expressed his great gratification at the reduction. He wished, however, to call attention to another amount at page 101—namely, that paid to the assistant examiners who were already paid for their official work. Before that Vote was allowed next year, more details would have to be given of that expenditure. It might, of course, be open to explanation; but on the face of it, it was not satisfactory that for the fulfilment of duties which were extremely important they should be called upon to pay large sums distributed among clerks already receiving heavy salaries.

MR. BYRNE

complained that fees were taken from persons presenting themselves for examination in the form of stamps; and as the sole object of these examinations, he understood, was to obtain the best men for the Public Service, he was of opinion that the Government should put a stop to such fees being imposed, and that the Order in Council of the 22nd March, 1879, ought to be rescinded.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, he had very great pleasure in accepting the Amendment of his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson). The payments made to the assistant examiners were for services rendered out of official hours. At times there was a great deal of work to be done in connection with these examinations, and at others next to nothing. It would, therefore, be impossible to employ gentlemen specially for the work. He believed the work was economically done; but he would take an opportunity of inquiring and explaining more fully next year. With regard to the fees for examination, he entirely agreed it was very objectionable that heavy fees should be charged which would have the effect of limiting the number of persons entering into competition; but, at the same time, a small fee was not objectionable, and was, in fact, desirable, in order to prevent persons entering themselves who had no sort of competence or capability for the work. If there were no charge made for the examination, the Commissioners might be put to very great inconvenience by the enormous number of persons who would present themselves for examination without having any qualification for the work.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

pointed out that a considerable amount was paid for work done out of hours, and suggested that when a part of a man's work was performed within fixed hours, and another part during overtime, the former was likely to suffer in favour of the latter. He did not say that that was so in this particular ease, and he was confident that the Government would look to the matter before another year.

MR. GORST

said, no doubt the matter would be carefully looked into by the Government, and no doubt, also, it would be found that the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell) had discovered a mare's nest. The fact was that there was a frequent necessity for examinations on technical matters. For instance, owing to the wise arrangement of the Public Service, any Dockyard labourer or skilled workman who wished to pass into a higher grade had to pass an examination, not only in reading, writing, and arithmetic, but also in some technical subject connected with his Department. Of course, there could not be maintained a number of technical examiners to examine two or three workmen at a time; and, therefore, the natural and cheap way was to get some of the officers of the Dockyard to conduct those examinations. No doubt, it was the payment of these officers which had excited the jealousy of the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy; but he (Mr. Gorst) was quite sure it would be found there was no abuse, and that the charge was a reasonable and proper one.

MR. SEXTON

remarked that £4,000 was put down for expenses of military examinations, and desired to know whether any fee was charged to those candidates, such as was charged in the case of civilians; and, if so, what was the amount of the fee?

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, he was not able to answer the question at that moment; but if the hon. Member would repeat it on the Re-port he would be happy to answer it.

Question put, and agreed to.

Original Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.

(12.) £12,668, to complete the sum for the Copyhold, Inclosure, and Tithe Commission.

MR. WHITWELL

said, he thought the Commission should be so conducted as to be no longer a charge on the State. He found that £8,000 was contributed by persons who derived the benefit of the Commission, and £8,000 had to be levied out of the taxation of the country. He should be glad to find that this Commission was treated in the same way as the Charity Commission.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, the circumstances of the two Commissions were not exactly similar. They were all desirous to make this Commission self-supporting; but there was a difficulty in the way, because the probability was that if they raised the charges they would diminish the business of the Commission.

Vote agreed to.

(13.) £6,190, to complete the sum for the Inclosure and Drainage Acts, Imprest Expenses.

(14.) £42,017, to complete the sum for the Exchequer and Audit Department.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, he did not rise to object to the Vote; on the contrary, he thought no Department did better work than the Exchequer and Audit Department; but he wished to urge that the accounts of the several Departments of the Civil Service should be put before the Committee in a more complete manner. No doubt, the present form was one prescribed by the Treasury under the powers given to that Board under the Exchequer and Audit Act, and so far the Audit Department was bound by that Order; but it was in the highest degree objectionable to interfere in this way with the independent action of the Auditor General of the Kingdom. The accounts of the Army and Navy were given in a more detailed form; and in consequence, in some degree, of that detail, the expenditure of the Army and Navy had increased in a much smaller proportion than that of the Civil Service, which during the last 20 years had nearly doubled. But even in respect to the accounts of the Army, there were most objectionable accounts of large sums lumped together for classes of Service, instead of for each Service. He was glad to bear testimony to the efficient manner in which the Auditor General performed his duties. That officer had been 14 years at the head of the Department, and had carried on his duties with a great deal of tact and independence.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

thoroughly agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir George Balfour) as to the value of the services of the Auditor General and the Department generally. The system of accounts for the Civil Service Estimates was laid down some years ago, after a most careful inquiry, and had been revised from time to time. Whilst the matter was considered every year by the Public Accounts Committee, great improvements had been made in the system; and the amount of service done by the Exchequer and Audit Department was worthy of all praise. At the same time, care must be taken not to overload a Department which had every year additional work thrown upon it. He would, however, bear in mind the suggestion which had been thrown out.

Vote agreed to.

(15.) £4,638, to complete the sum for the Friendly Societies Registry.

(16.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £318,417 be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board, including various Grants in aid of Local Taxation.

MR. J. W. BARCLAY

moved the reduction of the Vote by £100,000, for the purpose of giving the Government an opportunity of stating their intentions with regard to Scotch medical officers. For his own part, he would prefer that the English grants were diminished rather than the Scotch grants increased; for he believed that those grants in aid did not tend so much to economizing the relief to local taxation as was generally supposed. He was informed that a case had occurred in the West of England, where the local authority found a medical officer who was quite willing to discharge the duties for a salary of £30, and the Local Government Board were quite satisfied of his ability. But the Local Government Board could not entertain the idea of a medical officer taking such a small salary; and they intimated that unless the salary were raised to at least £50 they could not grant any part of the amount. Accordingly, the local authority had to raise the salary to £50, and they got from the Local Government Board a return of £25, making a saving to the local authority of £5, at an expense of £25 to the Public Exchequer. Therefore, he wished to point out that those grants in aid did not always bring a benefit equal to the increasing charge upon the country, and ought to be very strictly watched. The subject of the grant in aid of medical officers in Scotland had been under the consideration of the House for several years past. The Scotch Members had urged it over and over again, and very definite promises were made upon it by the late Government. He hoped the present Government would be able to make a definite statement.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £218,417, he granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board, including various Grants in aid of Local Taxation."—(Mr. Barclay.)

MR. RAMSAY

said, it was extremely desirable that this subject should be fairly considered at the present time. The Scotch Members had appealed in vain to the late Government during the last six years to redress what they considered an injustice to the people of Scotland. The ratepayers of that country were made to pay, not only the amount paid for medical officers from the rates, which was relieved simply by the sum of £10,000 allocated amongst them, but they had, in addition, the whole burden of the maintenance and education of pauper children. In England, £35,200 were voted to enable the pauper children in the various Unions of that country to be educated at the expense of the Imperial Treasury. But the relief of the English ratepayers was not restricted to that, and the further sum of £135,000, for there were £32,000 given for the Medical Department, whilst there was no corresponding grant in relief of the Scotch ratepayers. He conceived that there could not be the slightest justification for inflicting on the poorer of the two countries the additional burden, when the ratepayers in the richer country were to that extent relieved. Besides, in his opinion, the present system of workhouse schools, and the £35,000 that was paid for the education of pauper children, was a radical injustice to the children themselves. It was simply doing what they could to perpetuate the pauper class as a separate class in society, and to imbue them from their childhood with the feeling that they were to depend on the State for their future subsistence. Nothing could be more detrimental than that system; and he would suggest that an early opportunity should be taken of calling the attention of the Guardians throughout the country to the propriety of placing the pauper children in schools where they would be educated with other children, and a chance given them to emerge from the state of pauperism. It was not the fault of the children that they were born of pauper parents; and surely it could not be right to stamp their fate indelibly upon them by educating them in workhouse schools. It was not a service to the ratepayers, but a positive injustice, to permit and encourage such a system. As to the claims of Scotland, they were promised consideration by the late Government, and had they remained in Office they would have got some concession at this time. But up to the present the proposal had always been coupled with a condition that the Scotch Members should accept certain modifications in the Poor Law of Scotland, which the Scotch people had always objected to, and rather than accept the increase on conditions which they regarded as an injustice the Scotch ratepayers preferred to go without the additional grant. It was on those grounds that it had been hitherto refused; but he should be glad to know whether any ground could be stated by the present Ministry for perpetuating that injustice? He hoped the same policy would not now be attempted, and he could not conceive why the Scotch people should be so unfairly treated, unless, indeed, it was that they were the friends of the present Ministry, and he did not think that was a very tangible ground for treating them badly. The total amount of grants in aid in England for the objects he had enumerated was £280,273, as against £10,000 in Scotland. The population of the latter country was about one-seventh of the population of the former, and was entitled to at least a seventh of the same amount of grants. If there was any difference, a somewhat greater proportion of relief should be given to the poorer country. This subject had been a matter of complaint for years, and he hoped it would not need to be renewed in future.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

said, he was rather surprised at the statement of the hon. Member for Falkirk (Mr. Ramsay), who argued that this money ought not to be paid in England, whilst he pleaded that it should be paid in Scotland. That was a curious way of putting the matter; however, he agreed very much with what the hon. Member said as to the conditions of workhouse schools. The children got an inferior education in those schools, and were bred up to pauperism; and he contended now, as he had done over and over again, that they ought to be educated in the ordinary schools, in the parish in which the workhouse was situated, with the other children.

COLONEL COLTHURST

thought there could be no doubt that the children would be much better provided for if they were boarded out or sent to public schools. But that which was true of the majority of the workhouse children was, unfortunately, more true of the Catholic children, in whose case the evils of workhouse training were intensified. In spite of all efforts of the authorities, the Catholic children in workhouses in this country were in a position of inferiority, and subjected to a hostile system. He thought they should all be sent to industrial schools, where provision was made for them, or boarded out.

MR. ANDEESON

said, he was not surprised that the hon. and gallant Baronet opposite (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) wished to confine the discussion to his view of the question, as to the passing of this Vote. He must admit the form in which the hon. Member for Forfarshire (Mr. Barclay) raised the question was not very convenient; hut it should be remembered that it was impossible to raise the question involved in the Amendment of the hon. Member for Forfarshire when the Scotch Vote was reached, because it was not competent to a Member of the Committee to propose any addition thereto at that time. Scotland had received, for a good many years, an amount of £10,000 only for the medical relief of their poor, when, according to the English scale, they ought to have had £40,000 or £50,000 per annum. The Scotch Members had pressed this upon the late Government time after time, and had received the most distinct promises that the matter should be attended to. All that was necessary to this end was a Treasury Order; but they had insisted upon including it in a Bill, which contained so many questions of Poor Law reform that it was impossible for the Scotch Members to agree to the passing of the measure. Upon this pretence, the late Government had kept them out of that extra payment to which they were entitled for a number of years. He thought this was a favourable opportunity for the present Government to make known their intentions as to this subject.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

said, the people of Scotland were very tenacious of their rights in cases where they believed they had a real grievance; and he wished to point out that it had been admitted, year after year, by the late Government, that such grievance existed. The remedy, however, had been long deferred, and they had done no more than introduce a Bill dealing with large matters quite outside the financial question. The feeling with regard to this subject in Scotland being so strong, it was to be hoped that they would receive from the present Government an assurance that it should be fairly considered, and that justice should be done without delay.

MR. RAMSAY

said, he was obliged to protest against the remarks of the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) as to the allusion to nationalities in questions of this kind. The Scotch Members had no other mode of bring- ing to the notice of the Committee the injustice done to Scotland except by pointing out the different manner in which this question was dealt with as between the two countries, England and Scotland. They proposed a reduction of the grant, in order to elicit from the Government a declaration that they should not be continued in that invidious position; and when they proposed to do away with grants in aid he had no doubt that there would be a large majority of Scotch Members to support that Motion; but so long as they were made to pay more than a fair proportion of Imperial taxation, they had reason to expect from the Imperial Treasury, for local purposes, the same proportion for Scotland as was received by the people of England.

MR. DODSON

objected to the proposed Amendment—first, because they were discussing Scotch questions upon an English Vote, and, the Scotch Members desiring an increase in the Scotch grant, they proposed that the English Vote should be reduced. No doubt, it was open to Scotch Members to point out to the Committee, when it was arrived at, the insufficiency of the Scotch Vote, which, in their opinion, existed. Again, the Scotch Poor Law was not under his supervision; and he was, therefore, not in a position to speak with authority upon that subject. However, as regarded the Medical Grant, he believed there was this difference between Scotland and England—namely, that the appointment of medical officers was compulsory in England, but not so in Scotland. A Bill had been brought in by the late Government which proposed that the appointment of medical officers should be made compulsory by the Scotch Parochial Boards, with the intention that if that were done there should be a claim to a corresponding grant on the part of Scotland. Since, however, he had been appealed to, he would make it his business to bring the matter under the notice of Members of the Government who were conversant with, and had to administer the Scotch Poor Law, in order to ascertain the differences in the treatment of England and Scotland; and if it were found that the latter had a fair and just cause of complaint the Government would do their best to remove it in one way or another. As regarded what had been said of the children in workhouses, he agreed, to a great extent, to what had fallen from hon. Members; but he understood that there existed, at present, no opposition to the boarding-out of children, when there was a fitting opportunity. He hoped that the Committee would be satisfied with the observations he had made, and that the Motion for the reduction of the Vote would not be pressed.

MR. DUCKHAM

said, he wished to draw attention to three items, amounting in all to £844, which would be found on page 112, under the heading of "Highway Department," and which applied to the turnpike roads in South Wales. It appeared to him very inconsistent that while those who lived in contiguity to those counties should be obliged to pay tolls, the expenses of the Government inspection should also be paid out of the National Funds. He did not wish to be understood to disagree with this charge in the Estimates; but merely to point out the unfairness of placing a charge upon one portion of the Kingdom on the National Funds, and in another part of the Kingdom for the same purpose upon the rates.

MR. DODSON

said, he did not wonder at the objection made by the hon. Member for Herefordshire (Mr. Duckham), because it was clear that this portion of the Vote, as it stood, was an anomaly; but he would point out that the inspection of the highways in South Wales were under a temporary Act of Parliament, which would soon cease to be in force.

MR. DILLWYN

said, that although he did not consider that South Wales got the benefit of the custom referred to by the hon. Member for Herefordshire (Mr. Duckham), he should be glad to see any unfairness done away with, and South Wales assimilated in this respect to the rest of the Kingdom at large. With regard to the charge for the Medical Department of £1,900, he hoped that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Dodson) would see his way to its discontinuance in this Vote. He would rather see a grant of money given to some recognized medical authority than to a roving Commission from this Department. He was glad to see that the attention of his right hon. Friend had been directed to the subject, and that the amount had already been reduced to £1,900 from the original Estimate of £2,000. He hoped, however, that the Government would see their way to reduce the amount by a much larger sum.

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR

said, he held that the grants in aid had always done harm to the country which received them. He earnestly hoped that these grants, now amounting to upwards of £5,000,000, would be done away with, and taxes now collected for the Imperial Treasury handed over to localities. In a few days a Return would be in the hands of hon. Members, showing 47 taxes which might all be given to suitable areas, and the amounts used fox-local services.

MR. A. H. BROWN

said, he thought that the Medical Reports would be better made by the officers of the Local Government Board than by any other person. He desired to know whether any steps had been taken in the matter of the pollution of rivers?

MR. DAWSON

said, he believed the amount spent in vaccine lymph in Ireland was very much less than that spent in England and Scotland. Smallpox had been hanging over the Metropolis of Ireland for a long time, and from the statistics it was manifest that the number of cases of recovery of persons who had been vaccinated was very much greater than in the case of those persons who had not been vaccinated. In England there were Inspectors to see that vaccination had been effective; in Ireland there were no such officers, and hence the operation was badly done and the whole practice discredited.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

said, with regard to the Amendment before the House, which related to a matter of very great importance, he should move that Progress be reported, unless the Government would say that the subject should be considered when the Scotch Vote was before the House, and that justice should be done.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, it had been a practice for the last six years to make complaints in respect of certain sums and allowances under the Vote for the Local Government Board in England. The allowances had been, to some extent, increased of late, and it was desired to extend those allowances to Scotland. The Scotch local authorities, however, were not under the same restrictions with regard to the appointment or removal of officers, nor with regard to schools; they were, in fact, free from the obligations of the English Poor Law system; and until Scotland was willing to submit to those obligations, they had no right to expect that the benefits of the Poor Law subventions should be fully extended to them. There was no obligation to extend them to Scotland, unless the whole Poor Law system was placed on an entirely now footing, which, as far as he knew, Scotch Members had never been willing to agree to.

MR. J. W. BARCLAY

begged leave to withdraw his Amendment.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question again proposed.

DR. LYONS

said, that he hoped in future this Department would be more generally supported by the State. No doubt, it would be very desirable that the same facilities should be afforded to the Medical Profession in Ireland and Scotland that were enjoyed in England.

MR. MARK STEWART

said, that it had long been felt a great grievance that Scotland was treated differently to England with regard to this subject; a very much smaller grant was made to Scotland than to England. He hoped that the Government would see its way to making some arrangement on this question which would be satisfactory to Scotch Members. The question had been raised for many years, and it was time that the recommendations were carried out. He believed it was of the utmost consequence that something should be attempted to be done in the present Session.

MR. DODSON

said, that last year the District Auditors Act was passed, by which the District Auditors were paid out of the Imperial Funds. By means of stamps, however, about £22,000 would be received from the localities to meet the expense.

MR. DAWSON

said, that he could not raise the question of increasing the Vote then; but unless an assurance were given by the Government that they would deal with the question, he should move that the Vote should be reduced by the sum allowed to England in respect of this matter.

MR. DODSON

said, that he could not increase the Vote then, and he had no intention of proposing to do so on a sub -sequent occasion.

MR. DAWSON

said, he must, therefore, ask the Committee to diminish the English Vote, in order to show his appreciation of the way in which his countrymen were suffering. He did not wish to offer any factious opposition towards a Government which he held in the greatest respect; but unless he had an assurance that the Irish case would be properly treated he must make the Motion. If the Government gave him an assurance that the Irish would be fairly treated he should be satisfied. It was of the utmost importance, as every medical man must know, that every step should be taken to stay the disease.

MR. MAGNIAC

said, that he could not allow this Vote to pass without calling the attention of the Committee to a very serious subject. No part of local government was more unsatisfactory than the management of the highways. From every part of the country complaints with respect to the present system arose. The Act which was passed in 1878 he could truly say was practically unworkable. Some change ought to be made in this matter; and unless it were done, he proposed, on an early day, to bring the subject before the notice of the House. At the same time, he could not allow this Vote to pass without stating that, in his opinion, the subject required careful amendment, and he hoped that it would receive it at the hands of Her Majesty's Government.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, that the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Magniac) had taken upon himself to state that the Highways Act of 1878 was unworkable. He begged to assure him that it was only in the county of Bedford that such could be the case, for in other counties it had been found to work well. He could quote instances of numerous counties where the Act had been found extremely useful. No doubt there were difficulties surrounding the working of the Act; but they were very small parts of a very large system. The whole of the Highway Law required to be amended, and he trusted that it would be. The task, however, would be a difficult and a lengthy one, and would give rise to a serious amount of opposition. He had great pleasure in saying that the Act of 1878, so far as it went, worked ex- tremely well. He thought that that fact would be acknowledged by Her Majesty's Government if they looked into the matter.

MR. PELL

said, that he could not hear the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sclater-Booth) state that the Highway Act worked in a satisfactory manner without informing the Committee that, so far as his experience went, it worked in an extremely unsatisfactory manner. It caused a great amount of discontent and dissatisfaction, founded, he believed, upon reason, at any attempt to put the Act into force. In one county in England with which he was acquainted an attempt was made to work the Act; but he believed that the authorities had not yet found out a method to make it palatable to all. They might, perhaps, hope for better things from the present Government, and that a question which had been touched upon by the hon. Member for Herefordshire (Mr. Duckham) and the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Magniac) would receive that attention which he could not think that anything he might say would induce. He was sorry that there should be a necessity of raising the question upon the Estimates; but it was necessary to show their constituents that it was not lost sight of.

MR. JAMES HOWARD

said, that the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Magniac) seemed to think that the Highway Act of 1878 was unworkable. In his opinion it was both unworkable and unpopular, not only in Bedfordshire, but, he believed, in every county in England; and he hoped that the question would be dealt with in a trenchant fashion by Her Majesty's Government.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

said, that he desired to impress upon the Government the necessity of dealing with the matter. The Highway Law at present was in a far from satisfactory state, and it was time something should be done.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum not exceeding £310,617, to granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1881, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board, including various Grants in aid of Local Taxation."—(Mr. Dawson.)

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, that he understood the hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Dawson) to complain that there was a great deal of small-pox in Ireland. He must acknowledge that he had not yet heard that there was any fear of the outbreak of small-pox in Ireland. It might, however, be the case; and he might assure the hon. Member that the Government had every wish to examine into the matter thoroughly. They could not, however, make any proposal to increase the Vote until another year. If the hon. Member apprehended that there was any great danger of small-pox breaking out in Ireland, then he could represent the matter to the authorities.

MR. MITCHELL HENRY

said, that this subject had been raised by a distinct Motion on nearly all occasions recently that the Vote had been taken. Irish Members had been compelled to move to reduce the Vote in England, simply because they had no power to do anything else. It was almost impossible to get Irish grievances of this kind redressed, because during the time that the late Government, at any rate, was in Office, the Chief Secretary for Ireland promised to take the matter into consideration on each occasion, but never did so. It had been brought forward, over and over again, and the right hon. Gentleman had promised that attention should be paid to it; but the next year the matter was in the same state. How could they tell that before that time next year there might not be a fresh outbreak of smallpox in Ireland producing such frightful misery as occurred two years ago? There were indications that small-pox was likely to become epidemic; and, therefore, he asked the Government to consider the subject at once. If it were found, upon local evidence, that it was necessary that the grant in favour of vaccination in Ireland should be increased, he hoped that the Government would do it this year and not wait for next. The matter was a small one, but of excessive importance.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, that his hon. Friend the Member for Galway (Mr. Mitchell Henry) was peculiarly qualified to give information upon the subject, for he possessed considerable professional experience. If he could give him facts upon the subject, he should be happy to consider them and do his best in the matter.

MR. HOPWOOD

said, that he would like to point out to hon. Members from Ireland that last year the operation fee for vaccination paid to the Medical Profession was raised from 1s. to 1s. 6d. or 2s. 6d. With regard to vaccination, he could only say that a few years ago Ireland was represented to be one of the most healthy countries as regarded freedom from small-pox, and that it was vaccination which had secured its immunity from that disease. Since that date, although they were assured that the population in Dublin was vaccinated up to 98 per cent, yet they had had one of the most terrible epidemics of small-pox that had happened in recent years. His conclusion was, not that they wanted more vaccination, but an inquiry into the local causes that caused small-pox. He heard from various quarters that there were matters of health which ought to be attended to in Dublin. He heard that there were circumstances connected with health generally in. Dublin which, he ventured to suggest, were closely connected with this outbreak of small-pox. He trusted that his hon. Friend the Member for Carlow (Mr. Dawson) would not press his Amendment; but if he did, he should certainly vote with him, for he was disposed to think that this country was over-vaccinated.

MR. M. BROOKS

said, that there were many things connected with public health in Dublin which were to be complained of, and there was great need of sanitary improvement in that city. He hoped that the hon. Member for Garlow (Mr. Dawson) would not go to a division upon his Amendment, because, although the facts he had adduced could not be resisted in favour of raising the grant in Ireland, yet they did not go to prove that the grant for English purposes should be reduced. When they came to the Irish Votes he would have an opportunity of raising the question of increasing the grant for Ireland.

MR. DAWSON

said, that he was satisfied with the expressions of opinion from the Government, and begged leave to withdraw his Amendment.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;

Committee to sit again To-morrow.