Commons Sitting of 11 February 1873

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Printing, appointed and nominated; Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms (House of Commons), Mr. Arthur Guest added; Endowed Schools Act (1869), appointed.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—Landlord and Tenant*; Sale of Liquors on Sunday (Ireland)*.
Ordered—First Reading—Factory Acts Amendment* [47]; Roads and Bridges (Scotland)* [45]; Capital Punishment Abolition* [46]; Municipal Boroughs Extension* [48]; Innkeepers Liability* [49]; Household Suffrage Counties (Scotland)* [50]; Industrial and Provident Societies* [51].

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH.

  HER MAJESTY'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
  THE COMPTROLLER OF THE HOUSEHOLD (Lord OTHO FITZGERALD)reported Her Majesty's Answer to the Address, as follows:$
  I thank you for your loyal and dutiful Address. I rely with confidence on your careful consideration of the measures which will be laid before you, and on your earnest desire to promote the welfare of My People.

  EDUCATION OF BLIND AND DEAF MUTE CHILDREN.—QUESTION.
  MR. WHEELHOUSEasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether, in accordance with the principle of promoting the education of every child in the Kingdom, it be the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure during the present Session to afford increased facilities for the Education of Blind and Deaf Mute Children?
  MR. W. E. FORSTER: For the reasons which I stated once or twice in debate, I cannot hold out to the hon. Member any hope that such a measure will be brought forward.
  MR. WHEELHOUSE: Then, Sir, if I am in Order, I will give notice that I will ask leave to bring in a Bill for that purpose.

GALWAY ELECTION TRIALS, DUBLIN.

  QUESTION.
  MR. O'CONORasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether leave of absence to attend the Galway election trials in Dublin had been refused to Captain Nolan, late M.P. for that County; if so, whether he would not consider the advisability of allowing Captain Nolan to be present, the Attorney General for Ireland having declared him responsible for the acts of those now being prosecuted, and his own trial depending on the result of the present trials?
  MR. CARDWELL,in reply, said, he was informed that leave would be given to Captain Nolan for the period neces-
  282
  sary for attending the trial now proceeding in Dublin. At the same time the leave would be limited to the time necessary for attendance in the case, as Captain Nolan had been much absent from his battery, and His Royal Highness the Commander in Chief deemed his presence there necessary.

  THE LANDED ESTATES COURT—THE VACANT JUDGESHIP.—QUESTION.
  MR. OSBORNEasked, What course the Government intended to pursue in regard to filling up the vacancy of Judge of the Landed Estates Court in Ireland?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON,in reply, said, that from inquiries made by the Irish Government as to the business of the Court, it appeared unnecessary to fill up the office of second Judge, and the Attorney General was now considering a Bill which would authorize the Lord Lieutenant to abstain from filling it up, and would provide for the discharge of the duties of the Court in ease of the absence or illness of the Judge.
  SIR HERVEY BRUCEgave notice that he would repeat the Question put by the hon. Member for Waterford on Thursday. He had had painful experience of the necessity of a second Judge of the Court, and knew that there was universal complaint in Ireland on the subject.

UNION OF BENEFICES BILL.

  QUESTION.
  MR. CRAWFORDasked the right hon. Member for Cambridge University, Whether he would defer the second reading of this Bill, which stood for Friday, so as to enable persons in the City of London to consider its provisions. He had also to ask him whether the Rules of the House did not necessitate its introduction as a private Bill?
  MR. SPENCER WALPOLEsaid, the Bill was one which had come down from the House of Lords at the end of last Session, after having been carefully considered. His object in putting down the Bill for Friday was not to prevent its consideration by the parties interested, but in order that it might have a better chance of passing than it had last Session. He thought he ought not to defer that stage, but was willing to fix the Committee for a date which would give

  283
  ample opportunity for opposition or Notice of Amendments. The Act which it proposed to amend was entirely a public Act, and he believed this was properly a public Bill; but if the Speaker, after considering the question, was of a different opinion, he should, of course, defer to his ruling.
  MR. CRAWFORDstated that, subject to any advice he might receive in the meantime, he wished the right hon. Gentleman to understand that a Motion might be made to refer the Bill to the Examiners, to ascertain whether there were any Orders applicable to the measure as a private Bill.

FACTORY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

  LEAVE. FIRST READING.
  MR. MUNDELLA,in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Factory Acts, stated that its objects were to reduce the hours of labour for children, young persons, and women; to raise the age of children employed at half-time from eight years to 10; to continue the half-time system from 13 to 14 years of age; and lastly, to abolish the exemption in favour of silk factories, by which children of 12 years of age were now permitted to work 60 hours a week. Anticipating the Report of a Royal Commission on this subject soon after Easter, he should defer the second reading till the first Wednesday after Whitsuntide; and, to prevent misapprehension, he wished to state that he had never contemplated interference with male adults employed in factories.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill to amend the Factory Acts, ordered to be brought in by Mr. MUNDELLA, Mr. MORLEY, Mr. SHAW, Mr. PHILIPS, Mr. COBBETT, and Mr. ANDERSON.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 47.]

PARLIAMENT—BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (TUESDAY SITTINGS).

  RESOLUTION.
  LORD JOHN MANNERSrose to move, "That the House do meet on Tuesdays at 2 p.m., and rise at 7 p.m." The noble Lord said, he had given Notice last year that he would take an early opportunity of calling attention to that subject. He proposed that alteration in the interest of two classes of persons—first, the private Members;
  284
  and next, the Officers of the House. In respect to private Members, the present system of Evening Sittings on Tuesdays was found to operate in the following way:—About Whitsuntide, or at whatever time of the Session the Government fixed for holding Morning Sittings on Tuesdays in addition to the Evening Sittings, either the House continued to sit to a late hour of the night, with comparatively few Members present, and great exhaustion was naturally felt towards the end of the Session by those servants and officials of the House who had to attend throughout all these long Sittings; or else, as not unfrequently happened, there was no House made in the evening, or the House was counted out soon after 9 o'clock, whereby private Members were prevented from proceeding with their Motions. The inevitable result was that angry recriminations occurred, the private Members accusing the Government, who had taken all the fresh hours of the House for their own business, of not fulfilling their implied pledge to make and keep a House in the evening; and the Government, perhaps not unfairly, retorting that more official Members than private were in attendance when the House was counted. Last Session the House was counted out no fewer than seven times on Tuesdays, though on two of those occasions the House had sat some hours, and a considerable number of private Members were deprived of the opportunity of bringing forward and discussing the Motions in which they were interested. Three of those "counts-out" occurred after Whitsuntide, immediately on the re-assembling of the House at 9 o'clock after a Morning Sitting. Now, his present Motion would provide an effectual remedy for that grievance. Under it the House would regularly meet at 2 o'clock on Tuesdays and sit till 7. The sitting would be devoted to the Motions of private Members, and if the Government thought the state of business was such as to require an Evening Sitting, that Evening Sitting being then at their disposal they would be responsible for the making of a House, and there would be fewer of those counts-out which had been seen of late years. With regard to the Officers of the House, he was sure every hon. Member felt that the more they could do to shorten the hours of these gentlemen's labours the better it

  285
  would be for them and for everybody connected with that Assembly. In the Wednesday Sittings they had now a limit exactly analagous to that which he proposed for the Tuesday Sittings; and the result, according to the testimony of all who remembered the former system of Wednesday Evening Sittings, had been greatly to improve the tone and character of their debates as well as of their legislation. He believed that a similar effect would be produced by the change which he now suggested. Moreover, as the House by its Rules could not be counted before 4 o'clock, and as everybody would look to 7 o'clock as the natural termination of the Tuesday Sittings, by the adoption of that Motion a moral and almost absolute security would be given to private Members that the hours nominally assigned to them would be actually at their disposal.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the House do meet on Tuesdays at 2 p.m., and rise at 7 p.m."—(Lord John Manners.)
  MR. CRAWFORDsaid, he hoped, in the interest of private Members, that the House would not accede to the proposal of the noble Lord. He belonged to a class of private Members who had occupations to pursue in the day. Many hon. Gentlemen were similarly situated, not to mention the professional Members of the House; and they found it very difficult to attend the Day Sittings on Wednesdays. They would be put to great additional inconvenience if the House sat at 2 o'clock on Tuesdays. Again, Tuesday happened to be one of those days on which Committees almost invariably sat; and he need not say it would be most undesirable that hon. Members acting on Committees should be called down suddenly to vote in divisions on questions of the merits of which they had no knowledge. For these reasons he must oppose the Motion of the noble Lord.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that the proposal of the noble Lord, instead of increasing the privileges of private Members, would really curtail them. It was true the noble Lord would give private Members the hours between 2 and 7 o'clock on Tuesdays to discuss their Notices of Motion, but he forgot that he deprived them of the unlimited time on Tuesdays when they met
  286
  at 4 o'clock and sat on until their business was all disposed of. The proposal only showed how necessary it was to have the whole question of the conduct of business properly considered instead of being dealt with fragmentarily. He was of opinion, he might add, that the question of Morning Sittings and the "counts-out" sometimes consequentupon them, to which the noble Lord had alluded, was one of those questions which might very properly be dealt with by a Committee, who could pronounce an opinion on the expediency of having those sittings on the days of which the nights were at the disposal of the Government, who would have no difficulty in keeping a House for their own purposes. In that way the Government might practically, he believed, secure more time than they had at present; while the business of private Members would not be interfered with. All those points, however, might, he thought, be referred to a Committee, who would deal with the subject not by scraps, but as a whole.
  COLONEL BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister, whether Public Business might not be fixed to commence at a quarter instead of half-past 4 for the future?
  MR. GLADSTONEsaid, it might be left with the Government to determine at what time Public Business should commence. It was sometimes suggested by them that it should begin at a certain time; but he should not like to make any suggestion on the subject at present without making full inquiries at the Table of the House, and he doubted whether, taking into account the immense mass of Private Business, the time now set apart for its transaction could at this period of the Session be curtailed. Whenever it could be done he should be ready to act on an intimation to that effect. As to the question raised by the noble Lord (Lord John Manners), the view of the Government was that they should observe the feeling of the House with respect to it and hold themselves prepared to recommend, if it was deemed desirable, a course of action in accordance with that feeling. Very few hon. Members, however, had risen to speak on the question; but he was glad to see how the hon. Baronet the Member for West Essex (Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson) and others were turning their attention to the best mode of utilizing the

  287
  time at the disposal of the House. One thing must, however, be borne in mind, and that was that practically the aggregate of time available for the transaction of Public Business was a fixed quantity, and not an elastic quantity which could be diminished or extended at pleasure. The necessities of the country kept it up to a certain point, while it was kept down to a certain level by the physical and moral necessities of human nature. Questions such as that raised by the noble Lord required, therefore, to be very carefully examined, and he concurred with the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson) that unless the proposal was one which immediately commended itself to the general approval of the House the best mode of proceeding would be to deal with the subject as a whole. But while he gave full credit to the noble Lord for the motives by which he was actuated, he did not think his proposal seemed to recommend itself to the general feeling of hon. Members; and under those circumstances he would suggest to him, whether it would not be well to avoid taking any opinion of the House on it that evening, reserving to himself the liberty of bringing it forward, if he thought proper, on a future occasion.
  MR. OSBORNEsuggested that an opportunity was now open to the Government of referring the whole question to a Select Committee. There was evidently a feeling against dealing with it by scraps, and he was very much fortified in the vote which he had given on the previous evening by what had just occurred. If, he might add, it was competent for him to do so, he should move, by way of Amendment to the Resolution of the noble Lord, that the whole subject of Parliamentary procedure be referred to a Select Committee.
  MR. SPEAKER: The House last night, on the Amendment of the hon. Baronet the Member for West Essex (Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson), refused to entertain the proposal that the mode of conducting the Business of this House should be referred to a Select Committee, and it is therefore out of order to propose now, by another Amendment, that such a course should be taken.
  LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, his object in bringing the question forward was to elicit the opinion with regard to it of the mass of private Members, and
  288
  that he gathered from what occurred that there was a general impression that it would be unwise to proceed piecemeal, and that the rules and regulations relating to Public Business had better be dealt with en masse. After what had fallen from the Chair, however, he supposed that the opinion of the House could not now be taken on the Amendment suggested by his hon. Friend the Member for Waterford. Under these circumstances, he felt some embarrassment as to the course which he ought to pursue. He should like to test more accurately the feeling of the independent Members of the House with respect to his Resolution.
  SIR ROBERT ANSTRUTHERwished, without any feeling of disrespect to the Chair, to doubt whether it was not competent for the hon. Member for Waterford to move his Amendment. On the previous evening the Amendment of the hon. Baronet the Member for West Essex put in opposition to the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was lost; but he did not understand that those who voted against it thereby declared themselves to be opposed to the appointment of a Committee. So far as he was concerned, he should have been glad to vote for the Amendment as well as for the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it were possible; and if the hon. Member for Waterford were now allowed to move his Amendment the discussion and settlement of the question would, in his opinion, be greatly facilitated.
  MR. SPENCER WALPOLEsaid, that if the noble Lord pressed his Resolution, he had no alternative but to vote against it. The effect of it would be that, throughout the whole Session, the heads of Departments would be taken away from the discharge of their duties in the public offices on Tuesdays, while hon. Members, who had private business to attend to, would find their time considerably interfered with. The Resolution would, therefore, he thought, work very inconveniently in the case of official, as well as of many unofficial Members.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT (1869).

  MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.
  MR. W. E. FORSTER,in moving that a Select Committee be appointed "to inquire into the operation of the Endowed Schools Act, 1869," said, he should detain the House but a very few minutes in making this Motion, inasmuch as his proposal followed naturally from the last clause in the Endowed Schools Act of 1869. That Act gave very considerable powers to certain Commissioners and to the Education Department to frame schemes for the management of Endowed Schools; but the last clause of that Act directed that those powers should cease and determine at the end of 1872, unless they were prolonged by the Privy Council for one year; and that in any case they should finally expire at the end of 1873. In the exercise of their discretion the Government had had no hesitation in using the authority thus given to them, and they had extended these powers until the end of 1873. The House, however, before regranting those considerable powers, would naturally expect an account of the manner in which they had been exercised, and it was also desirable that the amendments which experience had shown it to be desirable to introduce into the Act should be laid before them. Under these circumstances, he begged to move for the appointment of a Select Committee who could take evidence as to the past working of the measure, receive the suggestions which the Commissioners were prepared to offer, and make a Report thereon. He should also be glad that there should be an opportunity of explaining before the Committee how much work had been done, and how much remained to be done under the measure. In moving for this Committee he wished to offer two further remarks. In the first place, although the Government wished to avail themselves of the assistance of this Committee, they by no means desired to divest themselves of their present responsibility as to the way in which the work was to be carried out. They would gladly avail themselves of the information that might be elicited by the Committee; their Report would receive their greatest attention and consideration, and they should look upon it as a guide in the course they might adopt; but, at the same time,
  290
  they should act under a full sense of their own responsibility in the matter. There might be a difference of opinion with reference to the work already performed, and which was about to be performed under the provisions of the Act; but the general opinion was that the reform of the Endowed Schools should proceed, and it would be the duty of the Government, acting under a full sense of their responsibility, to direct how that reform should be conducted. In the second place, he was anxious that the Committee should be in a position to make their Report as speedily as possible in order that the Government might decide this year how the work was to be carried on. He also wished it to be clearly understood that the Government and the Commissioners were anxious that the work they had done should be thoroughly investigated by the Committee. As he should have ample opportunity of expressing his opinions on the subject both before the Committee and on presenting their Report to the House, he should not detain hon. Members further at the present moment. When the Bill was first brought before the House, it contained not only a provision of the necessary machinery for the reform of the Endowed Schools—which were, as he had stated, of a temporary character—but also permanent provisions for the examination of schools and scholars, and for certificates in the case of schools endowed or otherwise; but, owing to the pressure of time and other circumstances, this part of the Bill had been dropped in 1869. Circumstances, however, had now altered, and the Commissioners thought it necessary that the Endowed Schools should attain and be kept up to a right standard, and that those interested in the teaching of private schools should have some means of testing their efficiency. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the appointment of a Select Committee.
  MR. LOCKEsaid, he was anxious to know what proceedings were to be taken with respect to these Commissioners and the schools that they were already dealing with. People were very much dissatisfied with the body of the Commissioners; in fact, they had no confidence in them at all; and therefore, seeing the Government were of opinion that an improvement should be made in regard to their power, and that directions should

  291
  be given to them by a Committee of this House as to the course which in future they are to pursue, it seemed extremely hard that certain schools should now be submitted to a body which had not the confidence of the House of Commons. He wished to know what would be done between the present time and the Report of the Committee now moved for—because a great deal of injustice might be committed in the interval. It was very hard that those who were in their clutches should be left to their tender mercies.
  MR. GOLDNEYsaid, that the manner in which the Endowed Schools Act was carried through the House reflected the greatest credit on right hon. Gentlemen opposite, and he did not know of any measure which had gone forth with greater promise, and which had proved more abortive than this Act. The Act was passed in 1869, and out of 3,000 endowments, for which schemes had to be prepared, the Commissioners had only dealt with 24; so that, according to that rate, it would require 200 years to get through the work. If the object of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Forster) was not only to continue the present powers of the Commissioners, but also to give them more extended powers, then he (Mr. Goldney) thought the right hon. Gentleman had taken a very unfortunate course; because the Commissioners, instead of attending to those rules which were laid down in the Act, and with regard to which the right hon. Gentleman was so much complimented for his firmness in allowing them to continue in the Bill, had ignored the whole of them, and stated that they were only bound by three sections of the Act which related to religious disability, and that the whole of the machinery of the schemes, the appointment of the governing bodies, and the principles regulating the education and maintenance or not connected with it was entirely in their discretion. He doubted whether it would not be better for Government to bring in a Bill, and leave the House to deal with it. The great principle on which the contest had arisen between existing bodies and the Commissioners was that the Commissioners declined to recognize anything like gratuitous education, which they considered to be on a level with indiscriminate almsgiving. The object of the Act was to free governing bodies of schools from those
  292
  trusts which hampered them in the carrying on of education, and it provided for the framing of a scheme within six or twelve months, according to the size of the school. The Commissioners could not be said to have gone at all into this matter. In the case of Christ's Hospital the Governors had appointed a committee, consisting of very able gentlemen, and a great deal of trouble had been bestowed upon the preparation of a scheme, which was sent to the Commissioners two and a half years ago. Now the Commissioners had never dealt with it in the slightest degree; the scheme remained unattended to, and it was considered that during these two and a half years the Hospital had been injured to the extent of £25,000. Was this a thing to go on? If the Committee was appointed it should inquire into the operation of the Act, and make its provisions more obligatory upon the Commissioners, so that the intentions of Parliament, and not the mere personal views of the Commissioners, should have effect.
  MR. MELLYthought the speech of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Forster) contained conclusive reasons for inquiry. Without that a debate would take place without any adequate power of explanation on the part of the Commissioners, and the House would have nothing but one-sided statements, which might be correct or not, to proceed on. He thought the Government had adopted a wise course in proposing the appointment of this Committee, and he trusted that a Bill would be brought in as soon as possible.
  MR. MIALLsaid, that no Act of Parliament could have been passed with better intentions or for more patriotic and liberal reasons than the Endowed Schools Act. He had anticipated great things from it in the equalizing of the general machinery of education in this country, but the Act had been spoilt in its administration. The egg was fresh enough and perfectly sound, and had in it the germ of life; but it had been addled, by whose influence it was impossible for that House to determine. It was therefore most wise on the part of the Government to refer the operation of the Act to a Select Committee. He heartily supported the reference, and earnestly hoped that the inquiry would be unrestricted, so far as reason might

  293
  dictate. His hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield had given Notice of a Motion as to the propriety of having one of the Commissioners to represent a large body of middle-class people who were now utterly excluded from representation by the constitution of the Endowed Schools Commission. He agreed with his hon. Friend that English Nonconformists, by their numbers and social position, were fairly entitled to such a representation.
  MR. WHEELHOUSEsaid, he hoped that if the Committee were appointed, one thing would not be lost sight of, and that was the necessity of giving the House a better opportunity than had ever been accorded to it of challenging any scheme which the Commission might think of handing over to the Government for the purpose of laying it on the Table of the House. One of their schemes had been laid on the Table at a time when there were only six or seven clays during which it could be discussed, and practically nothing could be done upon it. All schemes should be laid on the Table fully 40 days during the sitting of Parliament. He would only add that he did not think it well to take away from the poor of this country the privilege of free education which had hitherto been granted to them in connection with some of these endowments.
  MR. HINDE PALMERthought it would be a cause for great regret if the Commission were not renewed in some form or other. He urged that in any future settlement of schemes for charities religious belief should not be any ground for excluding a man from the governing body of the school. It had been a matter of discussion whether a Dissenter could not be placed on the governing body of a school. In the Ilminster Case the Master of the Rolls decided that a Nonconformist was qualified to act on the governing body of the school; but the Lords Justices overruled the decision. It was carried to the House of Lords, and two Law Lords held one way and two the other, and the consequence was that the disqualification of the Nonconformist was confirmed. That question should not be left open to litigation. If the Commission was allowed to expire, the question to which he was adverting would recur to its former position, and could only be settled by litigation. He hoped, therefore, the result
  294
  of the Committee would be that in some form or other the Commission would be renewed. It had been said that the Commissioners had only disposed of 24 cases up to the time of their Report. Whilst this was true, it was also true they had under consideration, in various stages of progress, between 500 and 600 cases; and it should be borne in mind that these 24 cases, if it had not been for the Commission, would have been 24 Chancery suits before any schemes could have been settled for the schools. Now, one of the great advantages of the Endowed Schools Commission was that it found a Court to supersede the necessity of going to the Court of Chancery, and so far from its being a reproach that they had disposed of no more than 24 cases in four years, it was a matter of praise that they had disposed of so many in a time so much shorter than would have been taken in Lincoln's Inn. The proposed Committee would, to his mind, be a great calamity if it should result in this Act being discontinued. Great objection had been made to the manner in which the Commissioners had worked the Act of Parliament, and he was not at all surprised at this, considering the sphere they had to work in and the nature of their duties. They had to investigate the concerns of various charities which, for a long series of years, had been conducted in a manner which did not give to the public the full advantage that might have been derived from the endowment, and were unaccustomed to any real investigation of their affairs. It was natural enough that there should be remonstrance and dissatisfaction with any Commission that inquired into such matters. The hon. Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney) had spoken very strongly against the objection of the Commissioners to purely gratuitous education. But their object was to apply the funds to education, which was a stage above mere elemental education. Gratuitous education to a certain extent pauperized those who received it; whereas the plan of the Commissioners would keep alive a spirit of self-help and desire to rise on the part of the children of this country. The more he looked into the Reports of the Commissioners the more he became convinced that they were actuated by an earnest desire to do what the Act directed them to do, and to make the endowments available in the best

  295
  possible way for the instruction of the children of the poor.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYobserved, that the subject was about to be referred to a Select Committee, and this should be done in the most unrestricted manner, with the view to inquiries as to what had been done, and recommendations as to the future being fairly entered upon. It seemed to him, therefore, to be most unwise that they should discuss the acts of the present Commissioners, or what the Commissioners of the future were likely to do, on the present occasion. If they did so, they would be sure to have the matter over again, for the most careful Committee could not produce such recommendations as would be acquiesced in by the various Gentlemen who entertained different views in that House; and therefore he hoped that upon a fair and free Committee being given they would be content to wait until that Committee should have reported before they entered upon a discussion on this matter.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that it was his intention to leave the Committee entirely unrestricted as to what had been done or should be done for the future. It was the object of the Government in asking for the Committee that no question relating to the conduct of the Commissioners or of the Education Department should be kept from being fairly brought before the Committee. The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Leatham) had given Notice of a Motion; but no doubt in his discretion he would think that, as the whole matter would be fully before the Committee, it would be better that he should not bring his Motion on until the Report of the Committee was before the House. He was quite aware that there would be charges made by other persons. There were some Nonconformists who thought that the Commissioners had been too partial to the Church, and some Churchmen who thought that they had been too partial to the Nonconformists; and he believed that there was an influential Committee in London, connected with the Church, appointed to bring forward the decisions which had been given in favour of Nonconformists. He did not, however, think that the present was the proper time to enter into a discussion of the conduct of the Commissioners; though, as he felt that he must to some
  296
  extent defend them, he would first ask the House to wait until the Report of the Committee was before them before they made up their minds as to the conduct of the Commissioners. He was sure that the House would act unjustly if they withdrew their confidence from the Commissioners before they had seen the Report of the Committee. They would see that it was one thing to bring forward a general measure of reform, and quite another matter to carry out that measure in detail. Even those who had supported a general measure would oppose the application of it in detail in particular cases; and he believed that the Commissioners would be able to show that it was owing to the opposition they had experienced that they had not made greater progress than they had hitherto done. The hon. Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney) said that the Commissioners had done but little work; but still the fact was that they had framed 89 schemes which had received the Royal Assent, and there were 55 more now in the Department. They also entered into negotiations with the governors of schools throughout almost the whole country. One of the problems would be how they could obtain greater expedition. Christ's Hospital had been alluded to, and it was supposed to be a matter of wonder that the future management of that institution had not yet been settled; but he thought, on the other hand, that it was rather unfair to complain of the Commissioners, or to express surprise that so very difficult a work had not yet been completed. The opposition that had been made had not increased the power of the Commissioners; however, negotiations were now in progress between the Governors of Christ's Hospital and the Commissioners that might lead to an agreement. The hon. and learned Member for Southwark (Mr. Locke) asked whether the labours of the Commissioners would be suspended during the sitting of the Committee: he (Mr. W. E. Forster) must say that he did not think that it would be right that such should be the case. The Commissioners and the Education Department would of course bear in mind that the Select Committee were sitting; but the hon. Member himself would not wish that a work should be stopped where it was proceeding satisfactorily. [Mr. LOCKE: Satisfactorily to both

  297
  sides.] If the Commissioners were to suspend all operations except those which were satisfactory to everybody, that would mean that they must suspend all operations whatever, because every scheme affected some individual interest or other, and if an individual knew that his opposition would stop any further proceedings he would be sure to interpose.
  MR. RAIKEShoped that amended schemes to which opposition was raised would not be laid on the Table of Parliament while the Committee were sitting. It would be unfair to ask the Commissioners to suspend work altogether; but it would not be unfair to ask them to take no further steps in regard to schemes which in their amended form were still disapproved by the parties concerned. There was, for example, the great foundation of Dulwich. It was probable that an amended scheme would shortly be laid before Parliament which had excited the greatest possible opposition. Would it be desirable that the Commissioners should go on with this scheme when a Committee was sitting whose principal object was to condemn in the main the proceedings of the Commission?
  Motion agreed to.
  Select Committee appointed, "to inquire into the operation of 'The Endowed Schools Act, 1869.'"—(Mr. William Edward Forster.)
  And, on February 14, Committee nominated as follows:—Mr. WILLIAM EDWARD FORSTER, Mr. HARDY, Dr. LYON PLAYFAIR, Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, Mr. LEATHAM, Mr. WELBY, Mr. ILLINGWORTH, Mr. KENNAWAY, Mr. TREVELYAN, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. ANDREW JOHNSTON, Mr. HEYGATE, Mr. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH, Mr. POWELL, Sir THOMAS ACLAND, Mr. JOHN TALBOT, and Mr. HARDCASTLE:—Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.
  And, on February 17, Sir JOHN PAKINGTON and Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE added.
  And, on February 25, Mr. KENNAWAY discharged, Mr. NEVILLE-GRENVILLE added.

  PRINTING.
  Select Committee appointed, "to assist Mr. Speaker in all matters which relate to the Printing executed by Order of this House, and for the purpose of selecting and arranging for Printing, Returns and Papers presented in pursuance of Motions made by Members of this
  House:"—Mr. BONHAM-CARTER, Sir JOHN PAKINGTON, Mr. SPENCER WALPOLE, Mr. HENLEY, Mr. Secretary CARDWELL, Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE, The O'CONOR DON, Mr. HUNT, MT. STANSFELD, Mr. SCLATER-BOOTH, and Mr. DODSON:—Three to be the quorum.

  ROADS AND BRIDGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Sir ROBERT ANSTRUTHER, Bill for the abolition of Tolls and Pontages in Scotland, and to provide for the maintenance of Roads and Bridges in Scotland by assessment, ordered to be brought in by Sir ROBERT ANSTRUTHER, Mr. M'LAGAN, Mr. MILLER, and Mr. PARKER.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 43.]

  CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ABOLITION BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. CHARLES GILPIN, Bill to abolish Capital Punishment, ordered to be brought in by Mr. CHARLES GILPIN, Mr. ROBERT FOWLER, Mr. HADFIELD, and Mr. M'LAREN.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 46.]

  LANDLORD AND TENANT BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. JAMES HOWARD, Bill for the improvement of the relation between Landlord and Tenant in England, ordered to be brought in by Mr. JAMES HOWARD and Mr. CLARE READ.
  SALE OF LIQUORS ON SUNDAY (IRELAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Sir DOMINIC CORRIGAN, Bill to extend to the whole of Sunday the present restrictions on the Sale of Beer and other fermented and distilled Liquors in Ireland, ordered to be brought in by Sir DOMINIC CORRIGAN, Mr. PIM, Mr. O'NEILL, Viscount CRICHTON, Mr. M'CLURE, Mr. WILLIAM JOHNSTON, Lord CLAUD HAMILTON, and Mr. DEASE.

  MUNICIPAL BOROUGHS EXTENSION BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. HENRY SAMUELSON, Bill to facilitate the Extension of the Limits of Municipal Boroughs, and to make other provisions with reference thereto, ordered to be brought in by Mr. HENRY SAMUELSON, Mr. WYKEHAM MARTIN, and Mr. STAVELEY HILL.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 48.]

  INNKEEPERS LIABILITY BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. WHEELHOUSE, Bill to amend the Law respecting the liability of Innkeepers, and to prevent certain frauds upon them, ordered to be brought in by Mr. WHEELHOUSE and Mr. LOCKE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 49.]

  HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE COUNTIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. TREVELYAN, Bill to extend the Household Franchise to Counties, and otherwise to amend the Laws relating to the Representation of the People in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. TREVELYAN, Sir ROBERT ANSTRUTHER, and Sir DAVID WEDDERBURN.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 50.]

  INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. THOMAS HUGHES, Bill to amend the Law relating to Industrial and Provident Societies, ordered to be brought in by Mr. THOMAS HUGHES and Mr. MORRISON.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 51.]
  House adjourned at half after Six o'clock.