CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.

HC Deb 05 September 1887 vol 320 cc1224-70

(2.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £424,051, 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 1888, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland.

MR. CONWAY (Leitrim, N.)

Mr. Courtney, I approach this Vote with some misgiving, because our experience has been that promises have been made yearly that the grievances that exist in regard to public education in Ireland shall be attended to. I approach it also in some misgiving because I fear that the reply to the various points which I shall raise will be of a somewhat perfunctory character. This Vote invites attention from many points of view. From a National point of view, it contrasts with education in England and Scotland; and it invites criticism as compared with the English and Scotch Vote on account of the total absence of anything like public control of education in Ireland. We have also the cost of the administration to take into consideration, and its relative smallness as contrasted with the educational grant made in Eng- land and Scotland is worthy of notice. For the purpose of my argument it would be just as well that I should point out that in England, according to the Blue Book issued only last week, a sum of over £3,000,000 was voted for the education of 4,500,000 children. Four and a-half million children on the Looks. In the Blue Book issued on Saturday morning with reference to Scotch education, we find that over £500,000 was voted for the education of 615,000 children. In Ireland the Vote is practically stationary, and we have only £750,000. That is to say, that if we eliminate the grants for the encouragement of agricultural and other technical instruction, we have £750,000 voted for the education of 1,071,000 children. If we contrast the sums, we find that Ireland gets not nearly so much as Scotland per head, and very much less than the amount of money voted in respect of each child in England. We must take into account that in Ireland the children are largely educated under the national system. We have self-sacrificing people at home, we have the Christian Brothers who take charge of a considerable percentage of children, but practically speaking the education of Ireland is in the hands of the National Commissioners. Now, in England the children in elementary schools are the children of the poor. There is a large middle-class population in England, and a considerable population attending high-class schools, so that if we put the children of Ireland on a par with England, we arrive at once at the conclusion that, as compared with England, Ireland is very badly treated in the matter of education. In Scotland, too, there is generosity. The State is very generous to the people of Scotland so far as the education of their children is concerned. But, Sir, there is many a comparison which may be instituted with a view of driving home the fact that the help given towards the education of the children of Ireland is most miserable. Last week a discussion took place with regard to the cost of police. We find that in the counties and boroughs of England the police are assisted to the tune of £800,000 a-year, and that education is assisted to the extent of £3,500,000 a-year. In Scotland the police grants only amount to £149,000, and the grants for educa- tion to over £500,000; but in Ireland, in the country in which the people are taunted with not being well educated, hon. Members opposite frequently get up and talk about the illiteracy of Ireland—£1,500,000 is voted for the police, and only £750,000 for public education. I think that when this condition of things is realized, it ought to bring a blush to the cheeks of the Gentlemen who sit on the Treasury Bench. Both political Parties have sinned with regard to public education in Ireland. Now, since the National Commissioners undertook the control of Irish education there has been no public control, none whatever. The Commissioners employ the whole machinery for the education of over 1,000,000 children, and under their system there is no less than 10,996 teachers. These teachers are employed in educating over 1,000,000 of children. You would think that the Commissioners would be somewhat generous to these teachers; you would think they would treat them fairly if not generously. Especially when it is laid down in one of their rules that the national teachers shall be persons of character and sentiment, of calm temperament and discretion; that they shall be imbued with the spirit of peace and obedience to law, and be loyal to their Sovereign: that they shall not only possess the art of communicating knowledge, but be capable of moulding the mind of youth, and of giving to the power which education confers useful direction. These are the qualities which the local managers of schools have to look for in teachers when making a choice, and these are the qualities which the Commissioners are anxious to encourage and reward. This is the effect of one of the rules extracted from the list of rules set forth for the benefit of the teachers of Ireland. There are no less than nine different admirable qualities found requisite under this particular rule, and if the teachers possess these qualities they are told by the Commissioners that they will receive encouragement and reward. Now, I say that education in Ireland is practically under the control of the Commissioners of Education; the teachers are directly under the thumb of the Commissioners, they are not allowed to take part in any political meetings, they are not allowed to use their judgment as to when they shall go in for examinations to raise their certificates—all promotion is given through the Inspectors. If teachers want to change their situations they have to give a month's notice to the Inspector, so that the course of the teachers from the time they are classed to the time when their services are finished is persued by the National Commissioners of Ireland. This brings us to the consideration of the character of the work these men do. The character of the work the Irish teachers do compares favourably with, that produced in England and in Scotland. To enable us to estimate the character of this work we have the Reports I mentioned just now before us. According to a recent Return the percentage of children in Ireland passing in reading is 93.6, in writing 96, and in arithmetic 83.3. These are good results, and, if put side by side with the results attained in England and Scotland, one would think the National Commissioners would be warranted in giving to Irish teachers similar salaries to those given to English and Scotch teachers. The results, according to the Blue Book, of the voluntary schools in Ireland, are, in reading 91.4, writing 83.41, arithmetic 79.58. In particular schools the results are a trifle better, reading 93.31, writing 86.49, arithmetic 83.69, but still in particular schools, the success attained is not greater than the success attained by our National teachers in Ireland. In England, the results are, reading 94.05, writing 91.07, arithmetic 86.78, so that there can be no complaints made as to the character of the work done by the Irish teachers. The results certainly bear favourable comparison with those attained in England and Scotland. Now, just let us compare the salaries paid to teachers in Ireland with those paid to teachers in England and Scotland. The average salary of a master in England is £120 17s. 6d., and the average salary of a mistress in England is £74 4s. 11d. In Scotland, the average salary of a master is £135 8s. 3d., and of a mistress £64 18s. 7d. So that we have compared with the results of 1874, four years after the now Code came into operation, a marked improvement in the condition and prospects of English and Scotch teachers. In England there are 251 masters who receive over £300 a-year, and there are no less than 1,433 who receive over £200 a-year. In England there are 329 mis- tresses who receive over £200 a-year.; In Scotland there are 170 masters receiving over £300 a-year, and five mistresses who receive over £200 a-year, and also 552 masters who receive over £200 a-year. Now, the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Mr. A. J. Balfour) was recently Chief Secretary for Scotland, and, no doubt, his attention has been called to the Blue Book relating to Scotch education. From that Blue Book, the right hon. Gentleman will see that there are a certain number of masters who receive £400, £500, £600, and £700 a-year, and I believe that one master of an elementary school receives £800 a-year. So that, when I come to talk about the masters in Ireland, who are classed according to their certificates, and who receive certificate money plus result fees, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not begin by pointing out that certain masters in Ireland are receiving £130 to £140 a-year. The average salary of a master in Ireland, as far as we can make out from the Returns, is £57 9s.; £57 9s. against £123 on the English side, and £135 on the Scotch side. The average salary of a head master in Ireland is £51 14s. 7s., and of an assistant mistress £38 8s. 8d. These salaries are from all sources. When we take into consideration that the results produced by the Irish teachers are equal to the results produced by teachers in England and Scotland, I think the time has come when similar rewards ought to be given to the Irish teachers. Now, one great grievance the Irish teachers has is, that the result fees are made contingent upon certain circumstances. I think that the Government should do away with anything like contingencies. There are managers of schools in this House, men who take a great interest in their schools, and I appeal to them whether it is not the rule in England to engage masters, quite irrespective of any results they may obtain. A manager says to a master, "I will give you so much a-year. I expect you to attend to your duties, and I expect certain results. Whatever the results are, I shall pay you such a sum a-year." A master in England expects a salary down, and we think that such a rule ought to apply to Ireland. The Irish teachers do uncommonly good work, and they ought to receive a definite salary, and not to be bothered or disturbed in mind as to whether they will receive full salary or not. The Irish teachers' position is affected by the uncertainty of pay, and they ask that some amelioration of their condition shall be effected. I believe that, in regard to salaries, the third-class teachers of Ireland would be satisfied if they received £1 per week on their certificates. As it is, they only receive £35 a-year. I believe the second-class teachers would be satisfied with 30s. a-week, and that the first-class teachers would be satisfied with £2 per week, or with something approaching that sum. Something certainly ought to be done in order to relieve the minds of these men from the anxiety attending on the uncertainty of their remuneration which exists throughout the year. They ask, in the first place, that something more definite shall be given to them, and I believe they would be satisfied with certain result fees after these sums were given. This, of course, is not too much to ask from the Government. We ought to remember that before the Pension Fund was started the Government generously gave £10,000 per annum for gratuities to old teachers; but, when the Pension Fund was started, this sum was no longer demanded from the Treasury. The Government might fairly fall back on some temporary grant until a definite scheme of payment was fixed upon. Over and over again the Government have promised to look into the question of the position of the teachers in Ireland. I am perfectly well aware that the Session is drawing to a close; but I think that the Government might acknowledge the justice of the teachers' claims by making a temporary grant. This brings me to a Question I put on the Paper some time ago. In that Question I pointed out that the teachers had suffered great loss owing to the non-contributory Unions failing in their subscriptions, and I asked for a grant of £10,000, out of which the salaries of the teachers might be increased. I was told I was a simpleton for asking so much; but I do not think it is too much to ask the Treasury to make some grant towards the salaries of the teachers even at this late period of the Session. If the Government would give us a promise that the whole system of payment in Ireland shall be reviewed and placed on a basis similar to that in England and Scotland and Wales, we should hail such a promise with satisfaction. Now, Sir, there is another point which I wish to raise in this House, and it is that of residences. The Board have striven to get managers and patrons of schools to take up the question of residences; but it is not a question for the managers and patrons, but it is a question for the Commissioners themselves. The Commissioners have the security of the houses, they have the security of the schools as it were, and they ought to be satisfied with one security, and give grants for building school houses without so much red-tape-ism. At present the improvement and repair of the residences which are at the command of masters are all done at the cost of the masters; these certainly ought to be done at the cost of the Commissioners. The houses themselves ought to be roomy; they ought to be very attractive and well-ventilated. I hold that the basis of the well-being of a nation lies with the school teachers of the country. So that when I advocate their cause I advocate a cause which is likely to produce beneficial results to the great Empire of which we are so proud. I hope the question of residences will be dealt with in a more liberal and large-hearted manner than it has hitherto been dealt with. The Commissioners are always complaining that the managers and patrons of schools do not take up this question of residences; but I maintain that it is the fault of the Commissioners themselves. In many cases in which residences are provided, masters are put to the trouble of walking three or four miles to and from school every day. The question of salaries and that of residences are two of the great points that trouble our teachers; then they also complain about the system of pension. They are disturbed because they must be 65 years old before they can receive a pension. When you understand that a lad goes into school at 18 years of age, and works until he is 65 years of age, it will give you an idea of the length of service he is required to put in. The teachers of Ireland would like to see, instead of an Age Clause, a Service Clause; they would like to see 35 years' service put in on the part of men, and 30 years' service on the part of women. There is precedent for this. It is not definitely laid down, but it is understood that a master in England may get a pension, subject to the approval of the Education Department, after 30 years' service. There are certain pensions given every year, and 30 years' service is the basis on which these pensions are given. In asking for 35 years' service on the part of a man and 30 years' service on the part of a woman, I do not think we are asking too much for our teachers, who do good work. These are the chief points I wish to raise. I have shown that the work of the Irish teachers is good in quality, and that it bears comparison with the work done in England. I have shown how well the English masters are paid, how well the Scotch masters are paid, and how miserably the Irish masters are paid. I ask some relief in the matter of salaries; and inasmuch as the masters at home are practically civil servants, I ask that the question of residences should be taken up, and that some relief should be given in the matter of pensions. There has been a threat that the services of the third-class masters will be dispensed with unless they obtain head masters' certificates. The men have given great services to the nation, and I appeal to the Treasury not to dismiss them without good and sufficient reason. Then, again, the first-class assistants complain of their scale of pay. They receive pay just at the same rate as third-class masters—namely, £31 per annum. I think that if the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary will take these points into consideration, and do something for the amelioration of the condition of the Irish teachers generally, he will receive the gratitude of this deserving body of people.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

Perhaps it would be convenient to the Committee that I should rise at once and reply to the remarks of the hon. Gentleman the Member for North Leitrim (Mr. Conway). I will take the various points he has touched upon in the order in which he has mentioned them. The first accusation is that the control of teaching in Ireland is vested not in the localities, but in what he describes as an irresponsible Board. Well, the Board may not be responsible to the different localities, but the Board is responsible to Parliament, and that seems not to be an irrational plan when you are dealing with a system of education in which the cost is borne not by the different localities, but by Parliament. In England, undoubtedly, those responsible are the localities in the first instance; but in England the localities bear the cost, or a very large proportion of the cost, of education. In Ireland there is not the same ground for placing responsibility upon the localities, because in Ireland a very email proportion of the cost of education is borne by the localities. My re collection of the figures is that in England about 23s. per child per year, counting attendances, is paid by the localities. In Ireland only about 5s. per child per year is paid, and yet in Ireland, though a very small and insignificant fraction of the cost of education is borne by the localities, with the localities practically rests the responsibility of appointing and dismissing the teachers. Under these circumstances, I think the first accusation of the hon. Gentleman falls to the ground. He then went on to complain that whereas the Education Vote is, as he says, stationary as regards Ireland, it is progressive as regards England and Scotland. But, Sir, I do not think he can have had in his mind when he made that statement the figures regarding the payments of teachers which have obtained during the last 20 or 30 years,

MR. CONWAY

The salaries were reviewed in 1875.

Ma. A. J. BALFOUR

I think the hon. Gentleman will see that I am meeting his arguments quite fairly. I will take the amount paid by the State towards the salaries of the teachers of the first class from the year 1854 to the year 1887.

COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)

How many teachers are there in the first class?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I do not care what class I take, I will take the lowest class if the hon. and gallant Gentleman desires me to do so. I will take the years 1854, 1864, 1874, and 1885. Now, I find that the average pay of Irish teachers of the first class has been in 1854, £36; in 1864, £54; in 1874, £87; and in 1885, £101. Sothatin the 30years which intervened between 1854 and 1885 the salaries of the Irish teachers of the first class, paid from Imperial sources, have risen from £36 to £101.

COLONEL NOLAN

How many teachers are there in the first class?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

And this is a Vote which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Conway) describes as a non-progressive Vote.

COLONEL NOLAN

How many teachers are there in the first class?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I have not got the statistics with me, but I do not think the point is material.

MR. CONWAY

In averaging I took head masters and assistants.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I fail to see how that affects the matter. I will now take the lowest class if that will satisfy the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Nolan).

COLONEL NOLAN

No; I want the number of teachers of the first class.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think I have met the case perfectly fairly. I am dealing with the argument of the hon. Member for North Leitrim that this Vote is a stationary Vote. I think I have shown that so far as the salaries of the first-class teachers, which are paid from Imperial funds, are concerned, this Vote is certainly progressive. Now, what have been the salaries of the lowest class of teachers? In 1854 the salaries of these teachers amounted to £15, in the year 1864 to £19, in 1874 to £36, and in 1885 to £51. So that, taking the figures of the lowest class, the progression or the actual development of the supply from Imperial sources to the salaries of these teachers of the lowest class in Ireland has been from £15 in 1854 to £51 in 1885. I think that I need not go into any further figures. After this, the hon. Gentleman, I am sure, will hardly maintain that this Vote, be far as Imperial contributions to the teachers' salaries are concerned, has been a stationary Vote. Then the hon. Gentleman went on to say that the Irish teachers were much worse off than the English and Scotch teachers. Well, Sir, I am not prepared to deny that the salaries of the Irish teachers are lower than the salaries of English and Scotch teachers. I do not deny it; but the question is whether that is a thing which can or ought to be remedied by the action of the Imperial Parliament, and I apprehend that in considering that question more than one argument is to be taken into account. First of all, we have to consider the point on which I have already dwelt— namely, what is the comparative contribution in the three countries from local sources to teachers' salaries? I allow that in Ireland the teachers' salaries are lower than in England, but, as I have already stated to the Committee, in England and in Scotland the contribution from local sources is about 23s. or 24s. per child per year, while in Ireland it is only about 5s. per head per year. No; 7s. 4½d. is the exact amount. Now, to ask this House to contribute an increased sum over the large sum that is already contributed to Irish education, considering how little is contributed from local sources, is rather hard on the English taxpayer. But that is not the only point we have to take into consideration. We have to consider what is the comparative amount of work which is being done respectively by Irish teachers on the one hand, and by English and Scotch teachers on the other hand. Now, I find that there is one English teacher, on the average, to about 83 pupils. In Ireland there is a teacher, on the average, to about 41 pupils. So that the amount of work, estimated by the number of pupils taught, is rather more than double in England what it is in Ireland; and that alone—leaving out the arguments I have already adduced—is a ground for making some distinction between the amount of the salaries paid in England and the amount of the salaries paid in Ireland. Sir, there is a further argument—are the Irish teachers as good as the English teachers? I apprehend that it is perfectly certain they are not.

MR. W. A. MACDONALD (Queen's Co., Ossory)

You will not get them for the money.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Gentleman the Member for the Ossory Division of Queen's County appears to think that we should pay teachers more than their market value, and that their value as teachers will increase according to the salaries you choose to pay them. That is not the ordinary method in which business is conducted on this side of the Channel, and I do not think it is on the other. But, as a matter of fact, take as a test—I admit it is a rough one, but it is a test up to a certain point—the number of teachers you have got from Training Colleges in Ireland. I think it will not be denied by those who have interested themselves in the subject of Irish education that the number of Irish teachers who have gone through Training Colleges is incomparably smaller than the corresponding number in England and Scotland. Though I admit that is a test you cannot apply absolutely, it is an indication which is supported by all other indications we have on the subject, that Irish teachers have not yet reached the standard attained by their English and Scotch confrères. There is a decided progress visible on the part of Irish teachers. They are increasingly able to pass examinations which do give them a larger salary. Now, Sir, the hon. Member for North Leitrim has complained of the practice of paying Irish teachers to a certain extent by result fees, and he has actually compared in this respect the Irish system with the English system. But he seems to forget that while in Ireland the largest proportion of a teacher's salary is a fixed salary irrespective of result fees, in England the whole contribution from the State—call it by what name you will — is entirely and solely paid by results; so that if the Irish teacher has ground for complaint in the fact that part of his salary depends upon the results of his educational efforts, how much greater reason has his English brother to complain that the whole contribution of the State is determined by the results he produces, and by no other consideration whatever? Then the hon. Gentleman went on to say that the teachers of Ireland had a grievance in regard to residences. Sir, I am bound to say that if there be any failure in the provision of teachers' residences in Ireland, it does not depend upon the Board of Education in Ireland, or upon the efforts that this House has made towards providing these residences. Under the law as it at present stands money can be lent by this House at 5 per cent, for purposes of teachers' residences. This 5 per cent includes not only the interest upon the capital sum expended, but practically pays it back in 35 years, so that the actual interest does not amount to more than 3½ per cent, and of that 5 per cent, half is paid by the the Board of Education if the buildings are bonâ fide used as teachers' residences. Now, I ask the Committee whether it is possible to make more liberal arrange- ments than those which have been provided by the State for these purposes?

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the landlords will not give land for the purpose of building teachers' residences?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I have never yet hoard that any Irish landlords have shown any unwillingness to dispose of their land on fair tenure. Therefore, if you take into account these facts, first, that the payment of one-half the money which is made by the Government is supplemented by the Boards of Guardians in Ireland, and, secondly, that England and Ireland are on au equality with regard to the taking of land for teachers' residences by compulsion, you will, I think, admit that if there is a grievance in this respect in Ireland, it exists in tenfold force on this side of the Channel. When the hon. Member for North Leitrim compared the position of the National School teachers in Ireland with the position of the National School teachers in England, I think he might have stated to the Committee the fact that in England there is no State pension fund whatever, while in Ireland there is a sum of £1,000,000 and more set apart for this purpose. There is no corresponding fund in England.

MR. CONWAY

The principle of pensions is accepted in England. [Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: No, no!] I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon. If he will refer to the Returns issued to Parliament he will see that a certain amount of money is allowed for the purpose of pensions to National School teachers. There is a difference in form, but the principle is the same.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Member for North Leitrim has, I think, not made himself acquainted with the history of the English system. Under the old system, which is dying out, there was some provision made for teachers' pensions; at present there is no such provision made.

MR. CONWAY

I wish to state that a statement has been issued from the Education Office, to the effect that a friend of mine, on his retiring from the service, will receive a pension. Of course, the principle is that those who were teachers before 1862 would be entitled to pensions; but you will, in the course of a few years, extend the principle to the years 1865 and 1870.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Gentleman has founded his whole case on the experience of one of his friends, and that friend was a teacher before the year 1862. The hon. Gentleman is in error in saying that the past state of things would exist in the future. That, will not be the case. In England we no longer recognize that the State is responsible in any way whatever for providing pensions for teachers; but in Ireland the teachers are so much better off that £1.300,000 has been allocated from the Irish Church Fund for the purpose of providing pensions for all time, and therefore I repeat that if there is an Irish grievance here, there is, with respect to teachers' pensions, a tenfold English grievance. The hon. Gentleman thought that the pensions ought to be larger than they are; but I would point out that although it might be possible to distribute the interest on the pension fund in a different way, the amount cannot be increased, in other words, if an alteration in the mode of distribution were to be made you would, by giving more to some, be taking away from others. And if you decline to recognise this necessity and insist on increasing the total amount given in pensions, this would only result in making the fund bankrupt, because you would disturb the actuarial calculation on which it is based. If you change the allocation you will simply be giving to A in the future what you are now giving to B; and I am not aware that there is any possible redistribution that can be suggested that will place the teachers in a better position than they are in at the present time. I think I have met the case of the hon. Gentleman fairly, and shown that although the Irish teacher is, in some respects, in a less advantageous position than his English brother, it is no fault of the Imperial Parliament. The Imperial Parliament does more for education in Ireland than in any other part of the United Kingdom, and if the Irish teacher is worse off than the English or Scotch teacher, it is because the Irish people contribute less to the cost of education.

MR. NOLAN (Louth, N.)

I do not desire to prevent the Allotments Bill being reached at a reasonable hour, which I believe is desired by the Com- mittee, and I shall therefore be as brief as possible in the observations I have to make on this Vote. In my opinion, not only is there ground for complaint that there is no pension fund established for the National School teachers in Ireland; but the whole education system as regards Ireland is at fault. The hon. Member for North Leitrim (Mr. Conway) has drawn attention to the fact that the education system in Ireland is not under local control. I point out that it is one which has been forced on the people by the Government, and they ought to accept the responsibility for it. The people of Ireland have no voice whatever in the appointment of the Commissioners, and although the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland has stated that the Commissioners are a responsible body, inasmuch as they are appointed by the Executive, which holds its authority from this Government, yet, in my opinion, the Irish Representatives in this House have no voice in their appointment. Now, I was not prepared, even after the experience of this Session, to find that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland would take up such an attitude of uncompromising hostility to the wishes of the Irish Members with regard to this question of the position of Irish National School teachers. The Predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman —the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach)— when this Vote was under consideration last year, said that there should be some modification of the entire system of national education in Ireland; and although, in the matter of the position of the National School teachers, no definite promise was made, yet he gave us distinctly to understand that amongst other matters the salaries of the National School teachers should be considered, and the right hon. Baronet even held out the promise that he would ask the Representatives of Ireland to co-operate with him in reforming the Irish educational system. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman the present Chief Secretary for Ireland is so over-taxed that he cannot enter upon this very important work; but, however that may be, I sincerely trust the right hon. Gentleman will take some steps in the matter before long. I do not want to approach the question of national education in Ireland entirely from the point of view of the Irish National School teachers, although I believe their views are well worthy of consideration. But the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland has made an attack upon the National School teachers—[Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: No, no!]—I speak of them as a class, not as individuals; and I want to draw attention to the status of the National School teachers in Ireland. When the right hon. Gentleman compared the working of the system in Ireland with the working of the system in England, he said that the teachers in England were very much better than those in Ireland; but I wish to point out that if that is so it is because their salaries are higher, and higher salaries attract a better class of men to the profession of teaching. The right hon. Gentleman made merry over the fact that my hon. Friend proposed to increase the salaries of the lower class teachers with the hope that they would become better; but cannot the right hon. Gentleman see that if higher salaries were offered that men of a higher class would be attracted to the profession, while the better class of men would remain in it instead of leaving it and going into the Civil Service, or to America; or even into the Constabulary, as some have done, rather than work on the present rate of pay? The scheme of education in Ireland may be described as a grand one. It has its Commissioners paid and unpaid; it has splendid offices, with a large staff of clerks, who are appointed from the favoured class, and a large number of Inspectors; but the people on whom the successful working of the system depends are underpaid. The system has always reminded me of the spectacle which would be presented by some fine carriage drawn by a set of starving horses. If it is a fact that the teachers are inadequate to the work of education that is required, I am prepared to maintain that the explanation is to be found in the words—"The teachers are underpaid." My hon. Friend has already pointed out the fact that in London teachers are paid on an average £135 per annum. My figures are £140, and I have taken them from very good authorities. The teachers in England receive on an average £120 a-year, while those in Ireland certainly do not receive more than £59 on an average. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland says that the whole of the salaries of the teachers in England depends upon results; but I wish to point out that it is not the teachers, but the managers of the schools who receive the result fees. The teachers have nothing to do with them; the manager pays the teacher a fixed salary, and. the complaint in Ireland is that the teacher does not receive a fixed salary, but that a portion of his salary depends on results. Of course, you cannot institute a comparison between the two systems. In England you have a system belonging to the people; in Ireland you have a system belonging to the Government, and there can be no kind of comparison instituted between them. You have taken the matter of education in Ireland into your own hands. Now, with regard to the salaries which the National School teachers receive, Mr. Rowntree, the Inspector of National Schools in Sligo, writing in 1883, says that of 164 teachers in his district, there was only one who received £100 a-year; and of 123 principal teachers, 33 had between £70 and £100, and the remaining 90 between £30 and £70 a-year; 23 received £60, 39 £50, 30 £40, five £30, and three under £30. Notwithstanding this, the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland stated just now that the lowest class of teachers in Ireland received £50 a-year. Then we have the fact that 80 per cent of the teachers in Ireland are without houses. The right hon. Gentleman, upon this subject, was reminded by my hon. Friend the Member for West Belfast (Mr. Sexton) that there was a difficulty in obtaining sites for both school rooms and for houses for schoolmasters in Ireland; but that is a fact that would be in the knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman if he knew much about the condition of the country. It is a matter of complaint all over the country that landlords will not grant sites for such purposes as schools and teachers' residences, and the complaint has more than once reached me from clergymen who are anxious to build school houses or houses for themselves that they cannot get the land necessary for that purpose from the landlords. Then, again, there is an- other matter which the right hon. Gentleman did not take into account, and that is that in England large numbers of resident gentry and manufacturing firms who contribute largely to the local schools—

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

When I spoke of the amount of contribution, I took every source of contribution within the State.

MR. NOLAN

But in Ireland we have not this resident gentry. The landlords, who draw large revenues out the country, prefer to leave their duties behind them, and dwell elsewhere; and who have not got those large manufacturing firms who in England contribute so largely to the local schools of the country. Now, as to the causes of low classification in Ireland. I do not intend to enter into that question. The teachers themselves have very clearly stated their case in a pamphlet, to which I would recommend the right hon. Gentleman to give his attention. I remember that during the course of his speech this evening he spoke of the small number of children to be educated in Ireland as compared with the number in England. Now, I think, if the right hon. Gentleman would look into this question, he would find that the averages are different; and in England it is possible—particularly under the present system of compulsory attendance—to secure a better average. The case is very different in Ireland where, during a certain part of the year the schools are almost deserted, because the children have to go from long distances, and in bad weather they cannot attend so regularly, and, again, in harvest and seed time they are engaged in the fields. The teachers in Ireland are therefore at this disadvantage, that while at certain times of the year they have a large number of children at the schools, at others the attendance is cut down and the average does not represent the number of children for whom they are responsible. The right hon. Gentleman has thrown the blame on the Local Authorities in Ireland, and, certainly it would appear that the Poor Law Authorities have not done their duty in this respect; but I point out that the Irish people are powerless in the matter of education. This is a Government system of education cut and dried. The Commissioners make the rules, draw up the programme, and select the books. Books cannot be used in the schools in Ireland as they can be used in this country at the will of the managers. Some time ago you might take up a whole set of books used in the Irish National Schools, read them right through, and not find the name of Ireland mentioned in them; and even now Irish history is not taught; and why? The Commissioners say it is because there is too much contentious matter in it, and I may draw attention to the fact, that the portion of history about which Irishmen have the best right to be heard, has nothing contentious about it at all. I am speaking of the period before the Danish Invasion. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman does not know that Ireland had a history so far back, but I beg to assure him that she had, and that standing monuments remain of the schools and institutions founded in the time of Charlemagne. The right hon. Gentleman has made a comparison of the state aid as between England and Ireland, but he never said one word about the immense sum given out of the Treasury for the police in Ireland, where both the educational and police systems are grossly mismanaged. My hon. Friend the Member for North Leitrim has drawn attention to the amount of money expended on the rent extracting machine—the police force. You spend upon this machine £ 1,000,000, while you seem to think it too much to spend £100,000 on the work of education—in other words force ad libitum. is used to squeeze an impossible rent out of the Irish tenant, even if it is necessary to pull down his house or burn the roof over his head, while you begrudge the money for educating his children. Now, both constables and teachers are at your disposal in Ireland, but you limit the sphere of action of the latter in every way. I should like hon. Members opposite to consider for a moment the relative position of the members of the Constabulary Force to that of the National School teachers. A constable in Ireland receives from £60 to £70 a-year; teachers of the same grade receive from £30 to £40. Sergeants of police receive £70 to £80 a-year, while the teacher of the corresponding grade gets from £40 to £70. A head constable receives £90 to £140, while the head teachers in the National Schools receive from £70 to £100. Then the members of the police force stand in a better position than the National School teacher, inasmuch as the police have barrack accommodation. The police pay a trifling amount for barracks, but it does not amount to as much as the teachers pay for houses. The police are provided with medical attendance: but whent the National School teacher is away through illness, he has to pay for a substitute as well as bear his own medical expenses. Let us look at the salaries from the point of view of the National School teachers, who have had hopes held out to them of improvement from year to year, even so far back as 1854, and in 1875 an Act of Parliament was passed which was intended to have an effect in the direction of improving the teachers' salaries, but which was found in operation to be a total failure. The object of the Act was to increase the salaries, but a portion of the amount was to be dependent on the Local Poor Law Unions, and it was found that out of 163 Unions only 21 contributed to the teachers' salaries, and as I have remarked, the Act became a failure. Then, again, in 1878 a Resolution was passed in this House, to the effect, that with reference to the position of the Irish National School teachers in Ireland, and the fact that the various means taken by Government had failed to satisfy the just demands of the Irish National School teachers, the House was of opinion that their present position called for immediate attention at the hands of Her Majesty's Government, with a view to the satisfactory adjustment of their claims. In 1879 there was an increase of £4 per head, but this concession was accompanied by a falling off of the contributions of the Guardians, so that, notwithstanding the increase in question, the National School teachers were reduced to the same position as they occupied in 1875. Then in 1883 a deputation waited on the then Chief Secretary for Ireland, consisting of Irish National School teachers, and to this deputation the Chief Secretary for Ireland said that he was so strongly impressed with the statements made by the deputation that he considered action ought to be taken by the Government in the matter, and, if possible, that it ought to be taken at once. He said, further, that he recognized the pledge which had been given by Parliament in 1875, and also recognized the fact that the measures taken by Government in redemption of that pledge have been only of a temporary character, and that he would be glad to introduce a measure on the subject at once. In 1884 a Bill was introduced by the Chief Secretary for Ireland to deal with this matter, but it was unfortunately dropped. We hoar in foreign politics a great deal about continuity of policy, and I do not see why we should not hear more about it in connection with the Irish teachers. As to the few thousand pounds it would cost to put the system of education in Ireland on a satisfactory footing, I must say that I cannot see why Her Majesty's Government should shrink from it. If people are educated, they will be more easily dealt with. I know the progress of education within my own memory has had a wonderful effect upon the habits of the people. There may be some pauperism in the country, but I think that every right-minded man, whether Tory or Liberal, will agree, if he has any knowledge of the subject at all, that the people of Ireland are in a much more satisfactory condition now than they were in 25 years ago, and this is owing, in a great measure, to the work which has been done amongst them by the schools. Although the action of the schools is very important, much better results could have been obtained by putting them in a better state. Nothing, I believe, would contribute to helping the work on more than raising the status of the teachers. My hon. Friend the Member for North Leitrim (Mr. Conway) spoke of an intention on the part of the Government to dismiss the third-class teachers who have been for a long time at work in the schools. I hold that there should be no third-class teachers in the service, except for very elementary purposes, but at the same time it would scarcely be fair to throw overboard men who have been induced to enter the service, and who have discharged their duties to the best of their abilities for a number of years. But something must be done by the Government in the matter of refusing to sanction in the future the appointment of third-class teachers or men who are not likely to be suitable men for the work of education, and I hope that notwithstanding what the right hon. Gentleman has said on the subject, that he will reconsider his decision, and see if he cannot do something to improve the condition of affairs.

CAPTAIN COLOMB (Tower Hamlets, Bow, & c.)

I do not mean to trouble the Committee with many remarks, but I should be sorry to allow the debate to close without saying something on the matter. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North Leitrim (Mr. Conway), who introduced the subject, did it very temperately, and many of the points upon which he has touched have been fairly treated by the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary. So far as money goes, comparing England with Ireland, the Imperial Parliament gives really more in the case of Ireland than in that of England; but the real point in this question, to my mind, is this, the position of the National Schoolmasters as a means to an end, as a means of bringing up the youth of Ireland in a proper way, with right ideas, and with a due education. Now, Sir, I speak — putting aside the statistics— from personal knowledge. The view that I form is this—that the wisest thing any Government could possibly do is to look at this matter from the point of view that the National Schoolmasters constitute this means to an end. I think the Government should regard it in the light that in order to discharge our duty to the Irish people, it is a matter worthy of their most serious attention to deal with their position in such a way as to elevate and improve the masses. I think myself, Sir, that, under all the circumstances, putting aside the question whether we pay more or lees to Irish schoolmasters than to English, I cannot help feeling that if I were an Irish schoolmaster I should be a discontented man. I do not think that it is a good thing for the State to have the schoolmasters, as a body, discontented men. The question must be looked at, not as one to be determined by statistics, but as one for statesmanlike inquiry and for grappling with the facts. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, when he has a little more time to give to considerations of the future, will find that there is a great deal in the way of improving the population which can and ought to be done. I quite agree that though the State does give money for residences, still I know many districts where the money is valueless, because there is no possibility of obtaining sites. The real difficulty is not so much a landlords' difficulty. The fact is that landlords let their lands to tenants, and, as a general rule, I believe, that by giving up part of their land—or, rather, taking it from tenants for the purpose of offering a school site—brings about consequences which it is desirable to avoid. I think, therefore, that when this question is fairly approached, it will be seen that there is room for improvement in the law by which the landlord shall be relieved from his difficulties, and may be able to give sites for school residences where they are wanted. And there is another thing to be considered, even if there were no objection on the part of the landlords, and that is one of the difficulties before us in facilitating education. It largely proceeds from the fact that it is found that the nature of the education given does not tend to advance the agricultural interests of the country. It is found that the present system of education turns out a large number of inferior clerks, who are utterly unfit to obtain their living by agriculture. I would ask the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to this point—the character of the education given. There is a point which is hardly ever alluded to on these Benches, or by the National Leaders in Ireland, and it is with regard to the National Schoolmasters. I touched upon it last year, and I promised the House that I will touch upon it on every possible occasion, in the hope of getting the evil of which I complain remedied. It has been pointed out by the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary that the schoolmaster in this country is a local servant, but that in Ireland he is a State servant. The State pays the schoolmaster, but they are the only servants of the State in the whole length and breadth of the Empire whose tenure of office depends upon the will of private individuals. Though nominally the servant of the State—the manager—that is, a landlord's agent—the parsons and the priests may discharge the schoolmaster at three months' notice on the merest caprice; and these State-paidservants may not only lose their position under the State and their present means of living, but also the prospective advantages of pen- sions which the State offers. Well, now, to rectify this state of things would not require any addition to the Estimates. It is a grievance capable of being remedied—a grievance which is working a great deal more ill in Ireland than those who have not a clear knowledge of it suppose. I do entreat the right hon. Gentleman, when he gets time at his disposal, which I hope he soon may —because I trust that we shall soon see the peace and settlement of Ireland— that he will look into this question of the grievances of the schoolmasters, and I trust that, above all, remembering that they are State servants, he will secure them from capricious dismissal by private individuals.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. and gallant Gentleman speaks upon this subject with great knowledge; but his speech indicates what I am sure he himself is alive to—namely, the great difficulty that is inherent in the question, do what the Government may, and do what Parliament may. He has stated very fairly that the Irish school teachers are, to a certain extent, a discontented body, owing to the smallness of their salaries; and I think the hon. and gallant Member will feel just as much as I feel that for the State on that account to step in and add to their salaries without asking them to do anything for the increase made, may be, to a certain extent, good for the teachers, but it certainly would not be good for the cause of education, which I think does require effort on the part of localities corresponding with the effort of the State, for its healthy development. The second point my hon. and gallant Friend started was this—he said that while the State pays the teacher, somebody else appoints him, and somebody else dismisses him. My hon. and gallant Friend has not exaggerated the peculiarity of the Irish educational system. He has exactly described the system, which is a most extraordinary one; but he knows, as well as I do, that to attempt to take out of the control of the priests of the country—for that is what it comes to practically — the management of the education of the country, would be to throw the whole Catholic hierarchy into direct and violent antagonism to the whole system. I do not hesitate to say that I have always been anxious, in those parts of Ireland where the Roman Catholic religion predominates, to act, as far as I can, in the direction of favouring an educational system in accordance with the prevailing feeling and sentiment of the locality, and any alteration, such as that my hon. and gallant Friend proposes, which would bring into antagonism with the system of education the whole Catholic hierarchy, would alone be enough to blast the most perfect system which could exist on paper. I only make these few remarks in order to show my hon. and gallant Friend that I am alive to the evils he points out, and that I recognize with him that there are evils, and that I am also alive to the difficulties which beset not only this Government, but I am afraid any Government for a long time which attempts to deal in a comprehensive and liberal spirit with the Irish educational system.

MR. TUITE (Westmeath, N.)

The speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary, in reply to the hon. Member for North Leitrim (Mr. Conway), will be received with great disappointment by the school teachers of Ireland, as, during the early part of the Session, the late Attorney General for Ireland (Mr. Holmes), in reply to a Question of mine, held out every hope that the case of the teachers would receive attention. Early in the Session I called attention to the position of the teachers, and the right hon. and learned Gentleman, in reply, stated that the right hon. Gentleman the late Chief Secretary (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) was engaged at the time he was stricken down with illness—-an illness which we all very much regret — in dealing with this question. He said— I can assure hon. Members that my right hon. Friend has been working assiduously for some time on several matters in fulfillment of his promise to attend to this subject. And he went on to say—and this is the point to which I would more particularly direct attention— He has left the result of his work for his successor, and I am certain there will be no default in this matter on the part of my right hon. Friend (Mr. A. J. Balfour.)"—(3 Hansard, [311] 1443.) I want to know how far the right hon. Baronet the Member for West Bristol had proceeded with the scheme which he intended for the benefit of the National teachers? From the speech of the then Attorney General for Ireland, the right hon. Baronet was evidently at work upon it, and in view of that I must say that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to-night will be received with great disappointment by those persons who have been so long promised relief. In 1879 a Resolution was passed declaring that the salaries of the teachers in Ireland was altogether inadequate, and that the teachers required relief. That relief has never come, though, from that time to this, successive Governments have promised relief, particularly the Tory Government, and particularly the right hon. Baronet the Member for West Bristol. I very much regret that right hon. Gentleman's absence from this House, because I believe that if he had been in Office since last March the case of the National teachers would not have remained undealt with.

MR. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.)

The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary, in the course of his speech, led the Committee to believe that the money to be voted towards the increase of the salaries of the National teachers in recent years was all derived from Imperial funds. I think, if I may be permitted to say so, and if the phrase is not un-Parliamentary, that that is altogether disingenuous. The right hon. Gentleman must know that all the recent increases in salaries, whether to National teachers or anyone else in Ireland, have come out of the Irish Church Surplus Fund—a purely Irish fund. This has been the case with regard to all the grants from this Parliament made for the promotion of intermediate or higher education, or for the relief of distress or for advances to the landlords. I deny that the Government are entitled to take credit for having been generous to the Irish people in the matter of any of these grants during the past 15 years. All these grants, I repeat, have been taken out of the Irish Church Fund, which has been a sort of much cow for Ministers, on whichever side of the House they sat, whether on that side or on this. The right hon. Gentleman says that the demand made to-night for increased salaries to the Irish National School teachers would, if granted, be hard upon the English taxpayers. Undoubtedly, it is hard upon the English taxpayer; but that is the fault of your system of government. Every branch of Irish Administration, under the present system, is supported in an extravagant manner, because you are upholding a system of government in Ireland which is incapable of reasonable maintenance. You are supporting a system of government which is entirely corrupt and corrupting, and the consequence is that you are obliged to spend an amount of money which no purely Irish Administration would dream of spending. When England objects to spend more money on Irish education, our answer is—"Will you give up the control of Irish education, if we, the Irish people, pay the money?" Will the right hon. Gentleman consent to give us the appointment of the Commissioners in Dublin, and to hand over to us the framing of the rules and the management of our whole system of education? If he will do that, we shall be perfectly content to pay the cost. If he will not do that, what right has he to complain of the demands made by us? The ratepayers in Ireland have refused to avail themselves of the power to become contributory to the support of the National teachers. They have done so deliberately, and, for my own part, I think they have done right, because they were refused all share in the management of the schools; and so long as the British Parliament refuses to the people of Ireland the control of their own education —a thing which every people ought to possess—I hope the people of Ireland will persit in this attitude. The right hon. Gentleman founded an argument for not giving an increase of salary to the teachers in Ireland on the fact that very few of them, or a comparatively small proportion of them, are trained. Now, this is really too bad altogether. After having for years resisted the demands of the Representatives of the Irish people, in and out of this House, for denominational training schools — the only training schools which the Irish people would be content to accept—and having by that refusal denied an opportunity for the training of teachers in Ireland, the right hon. Gentleman now comes for ward and bases upon the result an argument against us. I must say I never heard in the form of argument anything so preposterous or anything more audacious, if I may be allowed to say so. In the first place, he denies us that system of education which the Irish people would accept, and then, discovering the bad result of the denial, he charges it upon us and makes it an argument against us. Everything like that, it seems to mo, comes with a very bad grace from any supporter—I do not care who he is, whether Liberal or Conservative—of the present system of education in Ireland. The hon. and gallant Gentleman who has just left the House (Captain Colomb) complimented my hon. Friend the Member for North Leitrim on the manner in which he had introduced this question to the House. The House will admit, I think, that my hon. Friend introduced the subject in a very temperate fashion; but what thanks has he got for so doing? Why, he has been treated just the same as if he were one of the most reckless talkers in this House. The fact of the matter is, that the result is precisely the same whether you advocate the demands of Ireland in a temperate fashion or in an intemperate fashion. Let the National teachers hear and note to-morrow that never has there been a man who occupied the post of Chief Secretary for Ireland who returned a more emphatic negative to every one of their demands than the right hon. Gentleman who now occupies that position. The right hon. Gentleman will probably, before he leaves Office, discover the fatal results of outraging the feelings of the National teachers of Ireland, for those National School teachers will now be informed that they have nothing to hope for from the present Government, a discovery which will be particularly disappointing to them, when they recollect that within the last six months the Government has made to this House the pledges it has now violated; and I sincerely hope that the National teachers will exercise the power they have of marking in an emphatic mariner the resentment they must feel at such treatment. Sir, I rose for a very different purpose than to dwell on these matters, and it was to draw the attention of the House to a point to which I attracted attention last year, with regard to the Training Colleges. On that occasion I pointed out several advantages which the State Colleges in Ireland possessed over the denominational Training Colleges which have recently been permitted to be erected. I will not trouble the Com- mittee with stating the case over again; but on that occasion, after I had made my statement, the then Chief Secretary for Ireland said that he could promise hon. Members that the subject would receive his consideration. At the time I knew the value of a promise like that; of course, I knew that it meant simply nothing at all. Vague promises of that description in the mouth of a Chief Secretary for Ireland never do mean anything at all. However, we should like to know from the present Chief Secretary whether anything has been done, or whether any consideration has been given to the question? We should like to know whether anything has been done to level up or to level down in respect of these denominational Training Colleges, and the State Training College in Marlborough Street? At present some most irritating and objectionable differences exist; and, so far as I have been able to make out, nothing has been done during the past 12 months to remove those differences. I should like to know whether anything has been done, and, if not, whether it is intended to do anything, to put the denominational Training Colleges on the same footing as the State Training College in Marlborough Street?

COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)

I had hoped that when the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland left the hot field of political discussion and turned his attention away from such questions as Resident Magistrates, that he would have met us in a different manner to that in which he has met us. I had thought that when we got to the question of these teachers, to whom, he admits, in past years our Governments have shown the cold shoulder, and whom he admits to have been very badly treated, that he would deal with the question in a conciliatory and sympathetic spirit. Instead of that, I think we have got from him less satisfaction on this matter than we have received from any of his Predecessors. The right hon. Gentleman has been a constant attendant in this House for years, and he, no doubt, has watched the course of former Administrations with regard to Irish affairs. I think he will admit that the right hon. Baronet the Member for West Bristol (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) always spoke sympathetically of the Irish teachers, and always expressed a desire to do something for them. The right hon. Baronet the Member for the Bridgeton Division of Glasgow (Sir George Trevelyan), when Chief Secretary, also spoke sympathetically of this class, and, on the question of sites for school residences, promised to do something. Well, there is no question as to the obtaining of these sites now before the Committee; but the right hon. Gentleman has admitted that the case of the teachers deserves investigation, though he has treated them with extreme coldness, and held out no hope of ameliorating their condition. He has given us a number of arguments which, when examined, become of extremely small value. The hon. Member for North Dublin (Mr. Clancy) has pointed out that the complaint of the right hon. Gentleman that the schoolmasters have not got training is entirely unfounded. What did the right hon. Gentleman say to the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for the Bow Division of the Tower Hamlets (Captain Colomb)? Why, he said as to doing away with the power of the school managers to dismiss the teachers, that to take this power away would be to set the whole Catholic hierarchy of Ireland against the system of education. I agree with him in that; but he does not say the same with regard to the Training Colleges—that is to say, he does not attach the same importance to the opinion of the Catholic hierarchy on that subject. He knows very well that they set their face against these undenominational Training Colleges, and that in consequence of that the Colleges have been modified within the last few years. Up to the last few years teachers could not go to the Training Colleges without fighting with their ministers and the whole hierarchy of Ireland. I think the hierarchy were right, because they would never have been able to protect denominational education if they had not set their faces against these training schools. Whatever happened was not the fault of the teachers; but the responsibility, such as it was, rested with the Government, who would not allow the model schools to have denominational teaching. The statistics are drawn up in different forms. I think the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary will admit that in England the average amount paid to school teachers, including assistants, is £120 a-year, and that in many cases there are residences provided. But in Ireland the school teacher gets on the average, if we throw in the assistants, about £65 a-year. That is an enormous discrepancy, because there is no difference in the cost of living. Perhaps eggs and butter are a little cheaper in Ireland than in England, but everything else is quite as dear; clothes, and perhaps tea, are a little dearer in Ireland. The statistics on which the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary chiefly dwelt were somewhat fallacious. He pointed out that the first-class teachers got £101 a-year. I am not sure he included the whole of the first class, because there are two divisions; but if even he included the whole class they form only 13 per cent of the whole of the teachers of Ireland, and out of this number there are many female teachers. There are only 7 or 8 per cent male teachers who belong to the first class. The average salary of a male teacher in England is £120 a-year; there are many who only get £40, £50, £60, or £70—in fact, the great bulk get under £60. Hon. Gentlemen must see that it is the worst possible policy that they can adopt to have 10,000 teachers throughout Ireland who are thoroughly discontented. These teachers are entrusted with the education of the future generation, and yet you do not pay them sufficient to keep them contented. They would be content, I think, if their remuneration were a little lower than that of the teachers of England. The present discrepancy is much too great, and when they see this enormous discrepancy in their position they are, of course, naturally discontented, and I, personally, wonder they are not more so. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary rather denied that the Estimate for England has increased much faster than that for Ireland. As a matter of fact, the English Education Estimate has increased very rapidly indeed. In 1874 the sum voted for education in England was £1,500,000, and now it is upwards of £3,000,000; although there has been an increase in the grant to Ireland, there has been no such increase as that. You have been rapidly increasing the Estimate for England, but you have made no corresponding increase to that for Ireland. I do not wish to go at length into the question of administration, though the cost of your administration is much more expensive in Ireland than it is in England in proportion to the population. Our case is that we want a considerable share of the money we subscribe to the Imperial Revenue for education; instead of which you say—"Oh, no; the first mortgage must be for the Army and the Constabulary." The money spent on the Military Forces in Ireland is about £4,200,000; there is no country in Europe—no military country — which pays the same percentage for an armed force as Ireland. I say, spend a little less on the armed force and a little more on education; £100,000 to the National School teachers would be an enormous boon, and would go far indeed to lessen the necessity for a gigantic armed force in the country—gigantic in proportion to the Revenue of the country. What we say is, redistribute the Revenue, and let the first object of your redistribution be an increase of the Irish teachers' salaries, so that they may live decently. I think there is one reason why Ireland, if she were allowed to manage these things for herself, would expect to pay more to the teachers per head of the population, and it is this—England is only twice as big in area as Ireland, but it has got five times its population; secondly, the population of England is more concentrated, and it is easier to collect the children in the schools. I think that if you wish to give equal education in the two countries, you cannot do it as cheaply in. Ireland, where the population is scattered, as you can in England, where the population is concentrated, and where there are greater facilities for the teaching of children. Now, upon the question of sites for residences, I must say the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary has not inquired into that subject sufficiently. A great many landlords will not give sites for teachers' residences, or they will raise such difficulties as are tantamount to a refusal. They will not sell the land— that is out of the question, and I do not altogether blame them for that; but some of them will refuse to lease land— at any rate, land in a proper situation. I know that in my own neighbourhood certainly one or two landlords either refuse to lease land for such purposes, or, while not actually refusing, they throw almost insuperable difficulties in the way. I will not bring the charge against Irish landlords that as a general rule they refuse sites—they do not; but still the question is humiliating. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary ought to look to this point and see that more residences are built. There are now 71 per cent of the teachers in Ireland without residences, while the proportion in England without residences is very much smaller indeed. I have not seen the figures this year, but I have seen the figures for several years in which the number of free residences in England was enormously greater than that in Ireland. There is only one other point I have to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to. The hon. and gallant Member for the Bow Division of the Tower Hamlets (Captain Colomb) suggested to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary that he should take over the teachers as State servants, and take out of the hands of managers the power of dismissing teachers; but the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary saw what a political flood he would bring upon himself if he attempted to grapple with such a question. The whole educational history of Ireland for the last 40 years has been a constant struggle between proselytizing on the one hand and the denominational system on the other. At the present time the system is partly denominational, protected by a Conscience Clause. If you once interfere with the power of managers you open the whole question, and must settle at once whether you are to have Protestant schools for Catholics, or whether you are to have mixed schools, or schools without any religion at all, which the people will never stand in Ireland. At present there is a fairly satisfactory working compromise arrived at in that respect. I do not think the hon. and gallant Gentleman is very correct when he says that the school teachers are practically discharged by priests. Now, as to the question of the taking over of local schools by Poor Law Unions, I must say, being personally acquainted as I am with the working of the Poor Law system in Ireland at present, that the Unions do not particularly want to take over the schools. There is no other properly constituted Body in Ireland except the Poor Law Beards; but I do not consider they are very well suited for managing schools. It is perfectly clear that if the Poor Law Guardians do not want to take over the schools, they are not very likely to grant the teachers any increase of salary. In the whole of Connaught there is not one contributory Union. You have already put enormous burdens on the Unions for the registration of voters and half-a-dozen other things, and to ask them to assume a new burden in addition would be very unfair, and would be, in my opinion, the height of folly. I do not see myself that the teachers are very likely at pro-sent to get any great increase of salary unless it comes through the Government, and I think we have a strong claim on the Government simply because we pay such a large revenue to the Imperial Exchequer, and that very little is spent in Ireland that is of any good to the country. Either the State will have to pay more towards the salaries of the National School teachers of Ireland, or they must be left in their present wretched and discontented position. I think that if you want to make the country contented the very first thing you should do is to put the teachers of the young in a decent position. You have always been told this by your own Irish supporters, and I think it is one of the most beneficial uses to which you could put the Irish Revenue.

MR. CLANCY

Will the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary take up the question I put to him some time ago, and to which he has paid no attention—namely, the question of the Training Colleges?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

With regard to the speech of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Gal-way (Colonel Nolan), I have to say that his observations about sites I am perfectly ready to meet. But I hope that he, on his part, will feel that a great portion of the difficulties which actually exist in Ireland with reference to the provision of sites for residences of school teachers rests with the slackness of the school managers. If he, on his part, will recognize that difficulty I will see what I can do.

COLONEL NOLAN

No, no!

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am afraid that is so. The terms given by the Treasury are undoubtedly very good, and it is impossible to admit that the non-provision arises from the fact that the landlords will not give land for sites.

COLONEL NOLAN

Very largely.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

If landlords there be who are unwilling to give sites, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman will do all he can to stir up the school managers to take advantage of the enormous pecuniary privileges granted by Parliament, we will do all we can to obtain sites for residences. I do not think the hon. and gallant Gentleman will himself deny that the terms offered by the Treasury are generous.

COLONEL NOLAN

They are not very bad.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Now, I have been very unfortunate in the remarks I have made to the Committee if I have led any hon. Gentleman to suppose that I regard the present state of education in Ireland as perfectly satisfactory, or that it is at the present moment so stereotyped a system and so perfect in itself that I am not prepared to do anything I can to improve it. That is not my belief. All I attempted to show in my previous speech was that at all events if there be grievances as regards the payment of salaries a still greater difficulty exists in England with regard to the payment by the Exchequer of contributions to the salaries of English teachers. I admit that the system of education in Ireland is not one which. meets with universal acceptance. I think that fact can never be absent from the minds of the Executive, and I shall certainly continue to give my best attention to the subject and do what I can to improve the system, especially with regard to the subject of Training Colleges. I am quite aware that the existing system of Training Colleges does not give perfect satisfaction, because it is alleged—and alleged with perfect truth—that the undenominational Colleges have special advantages over the denominational Colleges. It is true, and I admit that it is a subject which do-serves consideration. But it is also true that the denominational Colleges in Ireland, if they have less favourable terms as regards contributions from the Exchequer than undenominational Colleges, they have as favourable terms as denominational Training Colleges in England and Scotland. The denomina- tional Training Colleges in Dublin have 75 per cent of the cost paid by the Imperial Exchequer, and that is all that is paid towards denominational Colleges in England. Therefore, as compared with the Colleges in England the Irish denominational Colleges have nothing to complain of. I perfectly admit that the inequality at present existing between denominational Training Colleges and undenominational Training Colleges in Dublin is a question which has engaged the attention of my Predecessor in Office, and which shall engage my attention; but it is a part of the larger question of Irish education—a very large question if you include in it not merely primary education, but also University education. The subject is one which shall receive my most careful attention. 1 have no scheme to propose to the House, but I promise hon. Members that I will not fail during the Recess to consider the question in all its bearings.

MR. M'LAREN (Cheshire, Crewe)

I wish to call the attention of the Committee to the Vote for Irish Agricultural and Dairy Schools, because I think the farmers of England should know what is being done by the State for agricultural education in Ireland. I gave notice some time ago to move to reduce the Vote of £3,968 by £200, under the impression that I could thereby endeavour to secure that the £200, if deducted, should be given to the Cheshire Dairy Institute; but I found that that was irregular, and therefore I can merely say that I feel strongly that if grants are given by Parliament to Irish dairy schools they should also be given to English ones. The policy which has been pursued towards these schools in Ireland is remarkable, and a great deal of money has been spent on them, more, perhaps, than is justifiable, and I doubt whether at the present time the country get full value for the money, and whether the schools are fully appreciated. The most important and the earliest is the Grlasnevin Training School and Farm, which was started in 1838, and which is described as follows by Sir Patrick Keenan in 1883 in a letter to the Lord Lieutenant— The Glasnevin Farm was not designed merely to bring up a race of skilled stewards and practical farmers. Its original and primary purpose, on the contrary, was simply to qualify the ordinary elementary schoolmasters to instruct their pupils in the theory of agricul- tural science; and, where practicable in school gardens and small farms attached to the national schools, to illustrate their teaching by reference to the operations on gardens and farms. There are also farmers trained at it; but the main object is thus seen to be a Training College to give ordinary school teachers some knowledge of agriculture. About 1850 to 1856 there was a further development of these schools. Parliament spent no less than £115,000 in starting 20 school farms and erecting farm buildings and residences; in the years 1853–4 the Vote for such purposes being £15,500. This policy was not continued, and nearly all these farms, with their costly buildings, were handed back to the landlords owing to the hostility of succeeding Irish Governments. One branch of the education still remains, however, in full operation, for every rural National School is obliged to teach the fundamental principles of agricultural science to the children in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Standards. I find that last year 74,000 children have thus been taught and examined, and of these 45,700 have passed. Now, what is called a result fee is, I understand, given for each child who passes; and, so far as I can learn, this result fee or grant is about 4s. If so, then a grant of about £9,000 is paid for agricultural teaching, in addition to the sum of nearly £4,000 we are now asked to vote. I think the British farmer should know of this, and should know how the money is spent, especially when no such money is voted for England. There is, however, another class of school of which I very much approve, and I should like to see them copied in England. A certain number of ordinary rural National Schools have attached to them small farms or gardens in which the children are taught how to work; and "result fees" or grants are paid for passes in them according, first, to the degree of merit which the cultivation of the little farm or garden evince; and, second, according to the practical powers of the pupils as agents in the working of the farms. Now, good as these are, I fear they are not thriving in Ireland, because in 1881 there were 93 of them, and this year we are only asked to vote money for 70. I regret this diminution, but this, along with other signs, makes me fear either that the money is not properly spent, or that the schools are not appreciated. There are four heads for this Vote. Superintendence takes £650, all of which goes to one man, and I think it is too much. The Glasnevin School gets £3,061, merely, or at any rate chiefly, as a Training College, and I want to know whether the Government really think that money well spent. The Albert Model Farm is the most satisfactory, for, though its expenses are £2,840, it makes an income of £3,333. The Minister Dairy School and the 70 small farm schools get£2,500; but there are receipts from fees in the various schools of £500, and the Munster School makes £1,250. Thus the total grant required is £3,968. When I come to examine the Appropriation Accounts, however, I find that none of these schools have had as many pupils as were expected, and therefore have not spent the whole of the grant. Glasnevin has saved £576, owing to vacancies in several classes, and consequent saving in provisions; for the same reason the Munster School has saved £209 and the other schools £284, whilst at the Albert Farms £168 less was received in fees than was estimated. I consider these facts unsatisfactory, and they justify mo in asking whether the country is getting value for its money. I am strongly in favour of grants for technical schools where it is proved they are well used, and I urge the Government to make some declaration that they will treat England in the same way as Ireland in the matter. In the meantime, I think public attention should be called to these grants, because I am sure that very few persons in England—and even very few hon. Members of this House—know that they exist, and I want some explanation from the Government as to the results that are obtained in Ireland.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)

I am perfectly satisfied that only a very few words of explanation will be necessary to satisfy the English people with the Vote as it stands upon the Paper. I am sure that the English public wish to give every facility to Irish industries, and especially to the agricultural industry. The hon. Gentleman opposite the Member for the Ore we Division of Cheshire (Mr. M'Laren), to my intense surprise, has, for the first time in this House, practically made a Motion to reduce the wretched pittance given for the improvement of Irish agriculture. I do think that, for once in my life, I shall receive the support of the Irish Members below the Gangway in resisting that proposal. [Cheers.] The hon. Gentleman has given us figures, but figures are not of much use when in ignorance of the facts. The hon. Gentleman really knows nothing of the subject. These schools have done a great deal of good in Ireland, and have turned out a very useful class of men with a fair knowledge of agriculture, and very great service has thus been done, not only in. Munster, but elsewhere. I can speak of people who have been trained in the Munster schools who, from their thorough, knowledge and tenderness of habit making their butter—

DR. TANNER

Dairy-maids?

COLONEL KING-HARMAN

Yes; dairy-maids. They have acquired a thorough knowledge themselves, and they have been able to impart it to the wives and daughters of the small farmers all round. I do not think I shall be asked at this hour of the night to go into particulars on this point. It would take a very long time to do that, but I am quite sure the House will believe me when I say that in this one particular I do not think the House will grudge to help the Irish farmers to the knowledge and use of those things which alone can bring them to prosperity. I cannot believe that any English Member, and I am sure the hon. Member himself (Mr. M'Laren), when he thinks over it, will be the last to press the idea that a very small sum paid for teaching ought to be got rid of because he may not find the system of teaching pursued quite what he expected to find it. I cannot allow this occasion to pass without expressing my deep regret for the lamented death of Professor Baldwin, who has done so much good in the school at Glasaevin.

MR. F. S. POWELL (Wigan)

I wish to say only one word, for, as an English Member and a friend of education, desiring to see the advancement and progress of technical education, I cannot avoid expressing my extreme regret at the language which has been used by the hon. Member for the Crewe Division of Cheshire (Mr. M'Laren). He seems to have an objection to the extent of this Vote, and he says the English people ought to know the manner in which the money is being spent. I wish, Sir, that the English people did know more of the manner in which the money is spent, because they would then see that a fair attempt, at any rate, has been made to do justice to Ireland in one respect. I myself have devoted attention to this matter for many years, and it has been to me a matter of great regret that the attempt to improve technical education in Ireland, as regards agriculture, has not been more successful. But although I do feel that regret, I congratulate successive Governments on the efforts they have made; and although the success has not been complete, still the desire to attain success has been the characteristic of successive Governments. As regards the comparison between the advantages given to English agriculture and the advantages given to Irish agriculture, at any rate in this particular the Irish have a preference over the English. I desire to see technical education extending in Ireland, for I feel that technical education in Ireland is far more important than political agitation in that country; and, holding that view most firmly, I rejoice to see that in this one branch of education—technical education for the greatest industry of the Irish people — namely, agriculture—some small beginning has been made. I extremely regret that any word should have fallen from any Member of this House expressing any sort of grudging spirit against this Vote. I hope the Vote will largely increase, and that these schools will become increasingly useful; and I believe, instead of technical education being confined to agriculture in Ireland, it should be extended over various other fields. In that case the genius of the Irish people will find new spheres of development, and as their industries increase there will be an enlargement of Irish wealth — there will be more labour, more toil, and a corresponding growth of wealth and happiness.

MR. M. J. KENNY (Tyrone, Mid)

I must protest as strongly as I can against the speech which my hon. Friend the Member for the Crewe Division of Cheshire (Mr. M'Laren) recently made with regard to this Vote. The hon. Gentleman has got it into his head that under this Vote there is something like a scandal concealed, and he has assumed the extraordinary attitude that because Englishmen do not see fit to vote away a sum of money every year for technical education in agriculture in their own country, therefore Irishmen should be deprived of this very small sum that is annually voted. There is not a sum in the whole of the Irish Estimates which is turned to better account than this. There is not a sum of money which, for its amount; does so much good as this very small sum, and all I regret is that this sum, instead of being £4,000 a-year, is not nearer £400,000 a-year for the general support of agriculture. I may seem to exaggerate; but it would cost the people of Ireland fully that sum each year to teach agriculture properly and insure agricultural improvement and development. It is all very well to say that agricultural education in England is totally independent of the State. That is because the people engaged in it are able to afford to take the money from their own pockets, and to instruct each other fairly well. If you turn to Continental countries you will find that, in proportion to the Revenue, the amount of money spent in this way in such countries as Switzerland and France is much more than the sum of £400,000 would be in Ireland. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. M'Laren) has made some reference to what happened before the Select Committee on Butter Substitutes which sat upstairs, and he suggested that the evidence did not intend to show that the Cork School—the Munster Dairy Farm —was giving value for the money spent upon it. I think there is no evidence directly from that body on the point. Still, the evidence that did come before the Committee tended to show that the amount of value given by that institution was fully in proportion to the amount of money spent on it. I will not go into the evidence; but it showed, to my mind, that the people educated in the school were able to show people in Cheshire, who are supposed to have great skill in dairy pursuits, their business in some respects. Under these circumstances, the people of the Munster Dairy Schools cannot be said to have failed altogether. Reference has been made to the Glasnevin School, and I am sure that every Irishman who takes an interest in the material progress of the people of Ireland will thank the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Ireland (Colonel King-Harman) for expressing regret at the somewhat premature death of Professor Baldwin, who has been of enormous service to the general body of persons interested in agricultural education. The success achieved by the Glasnevin Farm is entirely due to the efforts and to the enthusiasm of Professor Baldwin, extending over a long-series of years, as head of the school. Sir, I regret very much that this sum, instead of being so small, is not very much larger, and I trust that the Government of which the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is a Member will, during their term of Office, try to take steps not in the direction indicated by the hon. Member for the Crewe Division but quite the contrary, and see if they cannot increase the number of these schools on the model of the Albert Farm. The hon. Gentleman has pointed out that some of these schools were built at considerable cost, and have fallen into disuse and become the property of the landlords. I lament that that should be the case; but I believe that if the Government made the attempt they would carry these model schools through in spite of all opposition, and the people would be glad to take advantage of them. They are sorry that advantage was not taken of them before, and I am sure they would not let them fall into disuse again.

CAPTAIN COTTON (Cheshire, Wirral)

I quite agree with the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Tyrone (Mr. M. J. Kenny). At the present moment, the teacher who teaches us butter-making in the Cheshire Dairy School is a pupil of the Munster Dairy School, and we owe our gratitude to that institution for sending us such a teacher. I am quite sure the hon. Member for the Crewe Division of Cheshire (Mr. M'Laren) did not entirely intend what he said. I am sure that all he meant or intended to convey was that as the Munster Dairy School, and agricultural education in Ireland generally, was encouraged by the State, so similar institutions should be encouraged in England — that there should be State aid given to similar schools and dairy institutions in this country. I know that is what the hon. Gentleman meant, and I am sure that is what he intended to convey.

DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)

We have had again a blast and counter-blast regarding all the advantages extending to the country to which I have the honour to belong which it is said are not granted to England. That is all very well. Why not grant them to England, then? At the same time we have had the counter-blast of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Ireland (Colonel King-Harman), which was just merely an expression of that cheap sympathy which we can relish and judge properly in Ireland over the Munster Model Farm. It is very easy to pump up any of these cheap expressions of sympathy which are given to the people of Ireland. What is the total amount of this grant? Why, the total amount of the grant for agricultural establishments this year is £9,051, as against last year's Vote of £9,436. But these people lose sight of the fact that these agricultural schools are made to be self-supporting to a great extent, and there is a set-off of £5,083 this year as against £5,485 last year. So that the total amount of this Vote which we have this wonderful amount of talk about is only £3,968 this year as against £3,951 last year. It is simply absurd that so much valuable time should be wasted over such a question.

COLONEL KING-HARMAN

Hear, hear!

DR. TANNER

"Hear, hear!" says the right hon. and gallant Gentleman. He got up to fire a shot on behalf of his beloved Munster Dairy Farm—his dairy of dairy-maids—because it does not produce anything else. Now, the right hon. and gallant Gentleman and his friend Colonel Shoulden—

COLONEL KING-HARMAN

I beg pardon. I never heard of him in my life.

DR, TANNER

Well, he belongs, at all events, to two of the same Clubs as the right hon. and gallant Gentleman. They have been praising up this Munster Model Farm.

Several Irish MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. TANNER

Some of my hon. Friends may say "Hear, hear!" but what I maintain is that this Munster Model Farm is not doing the good it really ought to do; and when I ask myself why it is not doing so much good, I can tell you the reason—it is because it does not command the confidence of the people. It is in the hands of a lot of "shoneens" in the South of Ireland, whom the people have no confidence in. They send us out invitations to take luncheon, prepared by the pupils; they send out these invitations twice a-year to go and inspect their dairymaids. [Cries of "Oh, oh!"] Quite so. It is to go and inspect the school; but the school produces nothing but dairy-maids. I maintain that, and I say that this school does not command the confidence of the people in the South of Ireland; and if you want to make it a really good school you should have people placed on the management who are known to the people and to the friends of the people; and you should take away those who are now connected with the management of this Munster Model Farm, for I can assure you that none of them are at all popular in the South of Ireland. If you want to make this a good and going concern in the South of Ireland, where you have a large district to deal with, let it command the confidence of the people; and to do that you must put proper people on the management, instead of having it, as it is necessarily at present, under "shoneen" people. Put people who are more popular upon the management, and then you may do something with it.

MR. CONWAY

I should like to say a few words on the main Vote. In consequence of the reply of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland, I would venture to propose the reduction of the Vote by a certain sum, but that I am restrained by my hon. Friends. I am alone in this House in withstanding the attitude, and manner, and eloquence of the right hon. Gentleman. I regret that my fears were realized in the answer he gave on behalf of the teachers. He attempted a rhetorical diversion, and put forward a certain percentage of teachers who received £ 101 a-year on the average, and bolstered up his case by leaving out in the cold those below. He held out no hopes to those teachers when he was shown the distinction exhibited in the character of the pay of the English and Scotch masters—he held out no helping hand to these men; but he threw ridicule upon them. With regard to the sites, he ought to make the sites for residence compulsory. I do not think there has been any answer to this.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I distinctly said that I would consider the question.

MR. CONWAY

Well, our hopes are not realized, and I am afraid that they will not be realized. The Irish masters say that when they do get residences they have to pay these installments for 35 years. They begin their labours at 18 years of age, and have to work up to 65, and at 65 they leave the premises. The payments should be extended over a longer period than 35 years, so that one individual should not pay the cost of the whole tenement. The right hon. Gentleman did not go into the question of the pensions which the services of the masters ought to get, so that I should be warranted in moving the reduction of the Vote, because these masters produce results that ought to be paid for. He held out no hope to the masters at all. But I simply enter a protest on this occasion, though next year I shall move certain reductions in the Vote.

Question put, and agreed to.

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

My hon. Friends are not unwilling that the Government should take the remaining Votes in this Class, on condition that the postponed Resolution may be further postponed till to-morrow, in order that we may now proceed with the Allotments Bill.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

Does the hon. Gentleman mean that we should take all but the Supplementaries?

MR. SEXTON

No; all the Irish Votes.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

All the Irish Votes should be taken; but the consideration of the postponed Resolution shall not be taken to-night.

MR. SEXTON

I referred to Class IV.

MR. W. H. SMITH

There is nothing else of any importance. We must get all the Irish Votes this evening.

MR. M. J. KENNY (Tyrone, Mid)

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean the Supplementary Irish. Votes?

MR. W. H. SMITH

The understanding is that all the regular Irish Estimates will be taken this evening; but that consideration of the Report of Supply is to be postponed.

(3.) £1,115, to complete the sum for the Teachers' Pension Office, Ireland.

(4.) £420, to complete the sum for the Endowed Schools Commissioners, Ireland.

MR. BLANE (Armagh, S.)

Will the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland say when the Report of the Endowed Schools Commission will be received?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

I think the hon. Gentleman rather makes a mistake There is a considerable difference between the temporary Endowed Schools Commission and the permanent body to which this Vote alone applies, and which carries on the work which is being criticized by the temporary Commission.

Vote agreed to.

(5.) £1,201, to complete the sum for the National Gallery of Ireland.

(6.) £8,028, to complete the sum for the Queen's Colleges, Ireland.

DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)

I want to say only two words in connection with this Vote. There are two or three points in the Report of these Colleges to which I wish to direct attention. The first is about electric lamps. We find in the Report that the Chairman or Vice Chancellor of the University calls attention to this fact—that the deficiency really calls for remark, and he hopes that it will be remedied.

THE CHAIRMAN

Order, order ! That subject would come under the Buildings Vote, Class I. This is a Vote for Salaries.

DR. TANNER

There is a point in connection with Queen's College, Cork — about technical education — about which we have heard this evening. There is a small technical school there. [Laughter.] Some hon. Gentlemen opposite laugh; but I understood hon. Gentlemen on the other side are in favour of technical education. The Professor at the College at Cork has lately taken steps in this direction, and he has made rather a successful commencement; but, unfortunately, he has not the funds at his command in order to bring the matter to a thoroughly successful issue. Accordingly he hopes, and we in the City of Cork hope—for my own part, having been a student at that College, I certainly wish to enforce on the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary the great good that it has done latterly, and the fact that it has been beautified to a degree that I hardly ever thought the site would have allowed of, owing altogether to private endowment—I repeat we sincerely hope the right hon. Gentleman will see his way to advance a certain sum of money to promote technical education in connection with that College. I should like to hear what the right hon. Gentleman has to say upon this matter that I have raised.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUB) (Manchester, E.)

I am afraid it would not be right that public funds designed for these Colleges should be devoted to technical education purposes. If private funds were forthcoming they might be so applied; but I am afraid it cannot be done under a Parliamentary grant.

DR. TANNER

Is there no fund which can be applied to such a purpose?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am afraid not.

DR. TANNER

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into this matter?

Vote agreed to.

(7.) £959, to complete the sum for the Royal Irish Academy.