[BILL 145.] SECOND READING. (Hansard, 3 May 1875)

MR. DALRYMBLE
said, he must object to the Bill, which, though a small one, was a selfish one also. It was introduced by the landed proprietors of the two counties referred to, and its purpose was to extend certain privileges in the Act of 1872 which were accorded to the counties of Boss, Argyll, and Inverness, to Sutherland and Caithness. It might be right or wrong to extend these privileges; but the extension meant adding taxation to the rest of the country, and the people of Scotland were already suffering very severely from the taxation imposed upon them by the Scotch Education Act. Such a Bill as that ought to be introduced at least on the authority of the Government. He (Mr. Dalrymple) did not say that the principle of the privilege was wrong, but it wanted inquiring into. There were many who thought that the application of the privilege should be to parishes where the rate was high, and not to counties where there was great inequality in the rates. It was well known that in the counties which now enjoyed the privilege the rate was by no means equally high; and even in the counties which the Bill referred to, Caithness did not, in respect to all cases, stand on the same footing with Sutherlandshire. But, more than that, this Bill proposed to meddle with the incidence of the rate in a piecemeal fashion, 2002 and he (Mr. Dalrymple) was specially anxious that the point should not be prejudged, before he ascertained whether the whole question was to be considered during the present Session. He had no special love for the Education Act, but it was an Act which had been very skilfully drawn—as no one could doubt—and it would not be easy to amend it in a nibbling way. If Amendment were needed, it should be done on the authority of Her Majesty's Government. The time would, no doubt, come when the Education Act would be more thoroughly understood than it was at present, and then he was quite sure there would be an outcry against the taxation incident to it. In the meantime, he objected to a Bill like that being introduced, until the time had come for dealing with it in a comprehensive way.

§ MR. WHITBREAD
said, he did not think the hon. Gentleman had a right to characterize the Bill as a selfish one, because it simply proposed to relieve two Highland counties from exceptional taxation. The counties of Sutherland and Caithness had been omitted from the Education Act by accident, and they had a right to be placed on the same footing as Boss, Argyll, and Inverness.

SIR TOLLEMACHE SINCLAIR
also bore testimony to the fact that the Education Act operated very severely on the ratepayers of Caithness and Sunderland, and that this Bill would simply do an act of justice.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE-QUER
said, that during the passage through the House of the Scotch Education Act in 1872, the then Lord Advocate introduced a special clause to meet the case of the counties of Inverness, Cromarty, Boss, and Argyll. More recently the noble Lord who introduced this measure (the Marquess of Stafford) represented to the noble Duke the President of the Council (the Duke of Richmond) the advantage of extending that clause to Sutherlandshire; but the Government thought it would not be advisable for them to bring forward a Bill on the subject. The Government, however, informed the noble Lord that they would not offer any opposition to a measure which would simply give to Sutherland and Caithness the same advantages in respect to education as had been granted to the counties of Inverness 2003 and Ross. The Bill, he believed, would do nothing further than that; and, therefore, on the part of the Government, he would support the second reading. At the same time, they reserved to themselves a discretion as to the course they would pursue in case of the introduction of a measure on larger principles.

§ MR. DALRYMPLE
said, he had never doubted that the case of Sutherlandshire was a very hard one; but he contended there were other counties in as bad a condition in particular localities. It now appeared that an arrangement had been made between the noble Marquess and the noble Duke the President of the Council, and therefore he would not press his objection to the Bill at that stage, though he might say that the arrangement had been made unknown to Scotch Members, whose ignorance was the more pardonable as he did not think all the Members of the Government were aware of the arrangement which had been entered into that the Bill should not be opposed.

§ MR. HUNT
said, as one of those Members, he was perfectly aware of the arrangement.

§ SIR JOHN LUBBOCK
thought that the House should have some explanations concerning the Bill, which seemed to throw a portion of the charge for education in Scotland on the English taxpayer.

§ MR. RAMSAY
said, the sole object of the Bill was to provide that in parishes in these two counties in which there was a rate of 9d. in the pound, the Education Department should have power to make grants towards the erection of schools' buildings.

§ SIR GRAHAM MONTGOMERY
was of opinion a Bill like that ought to have been in the charge of the Government, and not in the hands of a private Member.

§ MR. DALRYMPLE
gave Notice that on the Motion for going into Committee, he should move that the House go into Committee on the Bill that day month.