CLASS II. (Hansard, 9 June 1892)

§ (7.40.) MR. MORTON
So far as any real work is concerned the money spent upon the House of Lords is absolutely wasted. Since the introduction of Free Education the people are beginning to take an intelligent interest in how the money of the country is spent, or rather in how it is wasted, and they are especially asking for information as to the expenses with regard to the House of Lords. If the officers of the House of Lords are only properly paid, I think we very much underpay the officers of the House of Commons, especially you, Sir. The time will come when we shall honestly appropriate the expenses connected with these matters; and then we shall bear in mind that we ought to reduce the amount paid to the officers of the House of Lords by at least £30,000. I confess I should under other circumstances have great pleasure in moving a reduction of the Vote to that extent, and taking a division upon it, just to show the country what I think, at any rate, of the expenses with regard to the House of Lords, but I wish on this occasion simply to protest against the waste of money in connection with the management of the House of Lords.

§ (7.41.) MR. MORTON
The other day I called attention on the Vote on Account to the salaries and expenses paid to what I may call the Lower Division of officers, and I was told by the First Commissioner of Works and Public Buildings that he had nothing to do with it. I presume the Financial Secretary to the Treasury has something to do with it, and I should like to know whether he will take that matter into his consideration. I do not say that anything is required to be done; but it occurs to me that in comparison with other officers the officers of the Lower Division are very much underpaid.

*SIR JOHN GORST
I cannot promise to take this matter into consideration, because by law the control of the salaries paid to the officers of the House is vested in a Commission by statute, consisting of the Speaker of the House of Commons, a Secretary of State, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Master of the Rolls, and the Attorney General and Solicitor General for the time being. I am not a Member of the Commission. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Speaker of the House of Commons are generally the acting members of the Commission, by whom the salaries of the House of Commons are regulated. I do not know that there is any complaint at the present time as regards the payment awarded to the officers of the House for their services; but if there is, and if it is represented in the proper quarter, it will receive attention, and, if the circumstances justify it, there will be an amelioration of the condition of the Lower Division of officers to whom the hon. Member refers.

§ (7.42.) MR. MORTON
It appears to me that there is not one of the Commissioners present who have the management and control of the expenditure in connection with the House of Commons to give us any information on the subject. I hope that on another occasion one at least of these Commissioners will be present when these matters are discussed.

§ (7.43.) DR. TANNER
There is another small matter which I have deemed it my duty on two or three occasions to bring under consideration—that is, the item of £1,000 allowed for service in the refreshment room. As a member of the Kitchen Refreshment Room Committee, I find that in that Committee it is nearly absolutely impossible to satisfy the members of this House, who make use of this particular department, and at the same time to make both ends meet. The consequence is that some members complain of the charges, which they consider excessive. They also complain of the method in which they are supplied; and a great number of members complain that the Kitchen Refreshment Room Committee make large sums of money yearly by the sale of intoxicating liquor. 635 What is more, I have heard the question raised just now by a friend, and during the last few years, that we are not licensed to sell intoxicating liquor, and that the time might come when the Chancellor of the Exchequer might summon us before a Court of Justice for a breach of the law of the land, for selling intoxicating liquor without a licence. The present Kitchen Refreshment Room Committee have found it nearly impossible to do everything to carry out the wishes and desires of Members, and to do everything as it should be done, with the £1,000 a year which is granted for that Department. I bring this matter forward in order that in due process of time it may be dealt with successfully, not by Members sitting on one side of the House or the other, but by all the Members of the House. There is one other matter to which I wish to call attention on this Vote, and that is the sum of £429 charged for the police in attendance on both Houses. Why should not the House of Lords pay their own share? It would only be a matter of a couple of hundred pounds. I find that on every possible occasion everything that can be done is done to put the share upon the democratic and more popular representative House by the noblemen who live above. I think that item is improperly placed upon this Estimate.

*SIR JOHN GORST
As regards the criticism of the hon. Member I shall take care before the Estimates are prepared next year to see that this matter is attended to, and to see that the cost is fairly shared between the two Houses.

§ (7.45.) MR. HOWELL (Bethnal Green, N.E.)
I should like to ask the representative of the Government in the absence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been done with regard to the constitution of the Board that is to deal with the Trustees of Savings Banks—the appointments that have been made, by whom these appointments have been made, and 636 the salaries that are being paid for all these appointments. I endeavoured at an earlier period of the Session to extract some information on the subject, and so far as I can learn—and I should be glad if the Secretary to the Treasury can give us any information on the point—these nominations are more or less on the responsibility of the Members of that Board, and none of these appointments will come under review by the House of Commons. After all is said and done, the Savings Banks Department forms a very important Board under the Crown. Money is voted by this House annually which goes to that Department; and I think especially after the exposures which have been made in this House with regard to how some of these Savings Banks are managed every care should be taken that the Act passed for the constitution of that Board should be properly carried out, and that the House of Commons should have an opportunity of calling attention to the work done by that Board when money is voted for it.

*SIR JOHN GORST
My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced to the House some time ago the constitution of the Board. I am afraid I have not got the names of the Board with me now, and with regard to the particulars of the salaries—

§ MR. HOWELL
I think the right hon. gentleman misunderstands me. I do not mean the Board, I mean the appointments made by the Board.

*SIR JOHN GORST
Does the hon. Member mean the appointments made by the Statutory Board?

§ MR. HOWELL
Yes.

*SIR JOHN GORST
I do not know whether they have yet made any appointments, but if the hon. Member puts a question on the subject on the Paper I shall be happy to give him an answer; or, if he writes me a question privately, I shall give him all the information in my power.

§ MR. HOWELL
I do not wish to prolong the discussion. All I ask is that care should be taken with regard to the men appointed under that Board, and that this House shall have an opportunity of reviewing those appointments and the salaries from time to time.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR
This Vote illustrates very accurately the patchwork system which is adopted by the Government. We are supposed to be discussing the Treasury Vote, and we find introduced in connection with the Irish Teachers' Pension Office an item for the salary of a gentleman named Robinson, who is a clerk in the War Office. Last year there was a Vote of £50 for assistance in preparing the quinquennial valuation for the Pensions Fund. This year the Clerk in the War Office and his assistants got into a terrible mess, and instead of having £160,000 surplus they found themselves deficient to the extent of an equal sum, and with no money at all. That accounts for the re-valuation, which we know perfectly well is now going on. We have asked over and over again for the Papers relating to the pensions, and we have not yet received them. We have not had any Report from the Board of Actuaries, which is now supposed to be sitting and hard at work on the accounts in connection with this Pension Fund. I presume there will be a Supplementary Vote taken for the purpose of defraying the cost of this re-valuation, as no money is asked for it in this Vote. I wish to know what is to be the expense of this re-valuation and how the actuaries are to be paid, when their Report will be presented, or, if they have reported, whether their Report is before the House?

*SIR JOHN GORST
It is not a revaluation which is taking place; it is an examination by a Committee of Actuaries of two valuations, one of which was made last year and the other five years before. The cost of that investigation will not be charged on the Pension Office for Ireland, as it would be very unfair that that should be done. The Committee have not yet concluded their work. Whether their Report will be presented to the House this Session or not will depend upon the length of the present Session.

§ MR. MORTON
As regards this matter of the Teachers' Pension Fund, it appears to me that if this gentleman does this work and goes to Ireland for the purpose he cannot discharge his duty in the War Office. I want to know why he should receive this money at all?

*SIR JOHN GORST
His duty consists of superintendence in the Teachers' Pension Fund Office, and he can perform that duty in London without going over to Ireland—at least, without being constantly in Ireland. I believe he has paid one or two visits to Ireland; but his presence there is not so necessary as in any way to interfere-with his duties in the War Office.

§ MR. MORTON
Why does he get the money?

*SIR JOHN GORST
He gets it for doing the work of the Teachers' Pension Office in London.

§ MR. MORTON
When we come to the War Office Vote I shall inquire further into this matter. A sum of £50 was allowed for assistance last year. I want to know why this money has been wasted.

*SIR JOHN GORST
The £50 was paid out of the Vote for services rendered.

§ DR. TANNER
I wish to ask whether the Treasury have withdrawn their block with regard to the acceleration of mails to America by Queenstown. A short time since the hon. Member for the City of Cork raised this question, and we were then told by the Postmaster General that the whole blame lay with the Treasury.

THE CHAIRMAN
That subject could properly be discussed on the Vote for the Postmaster General's salary.

§ DR. TANNER
The Postmaster General himself threw the whole weight of this matter on the Treasury, and I am only trying to get some explanation, notably as I have heard recently that there is some chance of the matter being settled.

THE CHAIRMAN
It is not in order to discuss it on this Vote, although the Treasury does exercise a superintending authority over the Postmaster General.

§ MR. MORTON
I want some information with regard to the Receiver of Hereditary Revenue: Who is the Receiver of this revenue, and where is the office? I understood that this was one of the offices that was to be abolished.

*SIR JOHN GORST
The officer is an officer who collects small branches of hereditary revenue. The receipts amount to about £4,000 a year. The 639 salary was formerly paid by deduction from the receipts, but in 1869–70 it was provided for in the Estimates, and the total receipts were paid into the Exchequer. On the death of the late Receiver the recommendation in favour of the abolition of the office was not for various reasons carried out. The present Receiver has a salary of £300 and an allowance of £145 per annum for office expenses.

§ MR. MORTON
I have asked two questions and neither has been answered. Surely we are entitled to have the name of anybody receiving public money and to know where the office is?

*SIR JOHN GORST
The gentleman is Mr. Kebbel, and the office is at Abingdon Street.

§ DR. TANNER
I cannot help being struck with the extraordinary appearance of three items in this Vote, namely, those in reference to the British Directors of the Suez Canal. The Resident Director in Paris receives £500 a year. The late Resident Director was allowed to retain his fees, in lieu of salary, but the change was made in order to save expense. I should like the Committee to look at the position of the two non-Resident Directors, who do very little of the work. One, in addition to receiving retired pay from the Army, gets £450, and the other, in addition to his salary as Controller General of the National Debt, gets £500. That is a very foolish state of affairs, and I would like to have some explanation of it.

SIR JOHN GORST
When the hon. Member says the non-Resident Directors do nothing he is not accurate. The duties of the three Directors are very much alike; they have all to attend the meetings of the Directors. Possibly the Resident Director in Paris may attend more committees than the others, but their duties in looking after this enormous national property are very much alike. I think that with a gigantic affair like the Suez Canal and the interests involved in it, it cannot be said that these salaries are too large.

§ (8.11.) MR. MORTON
Does the Resident Director at Paris, who is also a clerk in the Foreign Office, receive a full salary from the Foreign Office 640 although absent from that office all the time?

*(8.12.) THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. J. W. LOWTHER,) Cumberland, Penrith
Yes. The gentleman referred to is, strictly speaking, a clerk in the Foreign Office, but he is temporarily employed in the Diplomatic Service. Under an arrangement, which has gone on for a considerable time, exchanges occur between gentlemen serving in the Diplomatic Service and those in the Foreign Office. These exchanges have been approved recently by a Commission. Consequently, it happens occasionally that gentlemen in the Diplomatic Service come home and serve for a time in the Foreign Office and gentlemen in the Foreign Office take their places abroad.

§ (8.14.) DR. TANNER
Are we to understand that one gentleman is paid by the Foreign Office for doing Diplomatic work, and another gentleman is paid by another office for doing Foreign Office work?

MR. J. W. LOWTHER
No, it is the same office.

§ MR. EDWARD HOLDEN
Then, is that the reason why our Treaties are so badly drawn at the present time? I have been in the Foreign Office, and I think there has been a great deal of neglect there. It seems to me pretty clear that the cause of Treaties being made which no one can understand is that the Foreign Office clerks are doing other work.

§ MR. MORTON
I understand that the Home Secretary has charge of the 'buses and tramways of the Metropolis, and I want to know whether it is legal or right that the fares should be doubled on holidays, as was done last Monday?

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! The Home Secretary has no control over that.

§ (8.17.) DR. TANNER
As the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary receives the large salary of £5,000 a year, I desire to press upon him a matter upon which he has so far given 641 me most unsatisfactory replies. One province over which the right hon. Gentleman exercises control is most important, because it has to do with human life and the prevention of suffering. I have on several occasions raised the question as to the means which should be taken in connection with fires for the provision of reasonable means of escape in the case of high buildings, notably in this Metropolis and in other great cities. I pointed out reports of recent cases where lamentable loss of life had occurred owing to the fact that the right hon. Gentleman was not paying attention to this matter.

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! I am not aware that this is a function which has been put under the control of the Home Secretary. The argument of the hon. Gentleman appears to be that it should be under the control of the right hon. Gentleman, but that is not a question which can be raised in Supply.

§ (8.19.) DR. TANNER
At any rate, the right hon. Gentleman himself accepted the situation. I took every advice, and was advised by the officials to put the question to the Home Secretary. I thought at first I should address my questions on the subject to the Local Government Board or to the Board of Trade, but I was told I should address them to the Home Secretary, and he has answered several questions on this matter. Only the other evening a house at the top of the Haymarket was burned down and a number of young men lost their lives; and am I to be told that in a matter of this kind, where human life can be saved if proper attention were paid, I am to be shunted from one right hon. Member to another? If more lives are lost, the responsibility must rest with Her Majesty's Government; if the Government wish to shunt the duty from one person to another, let the blood be upon their own heads.

§ (8.20.) MR. WALLACE (Edinburgh, E.)
I just desire to refer to the question of these fares. I understand that the Home Office licenses these carriages, and they must have power surely to make some sort of conditions 642 with respect to the terms on which the licence should be granted, so that they shall not be allowed arbitrarily to overcharge the public when it suits their convenience. I think this is a very important and serious matter, for they may be doubly charged at the very time when they ought to be, if possible, convenienced in the way of regulations of that sort.

§ *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS,) Birmingham, E.
No Department of the State at present has power to lay down the fares stage carriages shall charge. The Commissioner of Police, who acts generally under the direction of the Home Office, licenses these carriages and sees that they are fit for the accommodation of passengers and the service of the public. The Commissioner of Police also has the power to prescribe the route for such carriages. I am not quite sure whether there is a maximum fare prescribed by the Statute. We have left these matters to be settled roughly by competition, and by the supply and demand of passengers and carriages, but I have no power to regulate the fares. I am not aware—certainly it has not been brought to my notice—that there is a maximum fare prescribed by the Statute, but if there is, I am sure the present fare is very much below it. With regard to the matters raised by the hon. Member opposite, I would point out to him that I have absolutely no power, under any Statute, in any way to regulate the precautions to be taken against fires.

§ DR. TANNER
To whom am I to address myself then?

§ *MR. MATTHEWS
There is no Department of the State charged with any authority in matters of this kind.

§ DR. TANNER
Am I to understand that these fires are to occur day after day, and that the Government will not accept any responsibility when life can be readily saved? You have got provision made for this matter in the United States of America, in Germany, and in Japan, and why can you not do something in England in this respect?

§ *MR. MATTHEWS
It will have to be done by legislation. No Department of the State, not even a County Council, is invested with the power to impose regulations on the owners of private buildings, requiring them to adopt certain precautions against fire. Possibly some regulations upon that subject may be very desirable; but in this country, at any rate, the Legislature has never thought fit to prescribe regulations of that kind. I would just point out to the hon. Member that last year I introduced a clause into the Factory and Workshops Act, providing that there should be certain precautions taken against fire. Considering the vast number of private buildings in such large towns as London, Manchester, and Liverpool, I am afraid we shall have to deal with great caution in imposing regulations of the kind suggested by the hon. Member.

§ DR. TANNER
I will introduce the subject early in the next Parliament, and I hope I shall have the assistance of the right hon. Gentleman. Now, with regard to the Factory and Workshops Act, may I ask whether steps have been taken to provide female Inspectors for the inspection of places, of factories and workshops, where women are employed. This is a matter which has commended itself to the judgment of a very considerable portion of the public, and in that I am sure I am speaking in the name of the ladies of England, Ireland, and Scotland. I think women ought to be inspected by women. In the present day you have got lady doctors; you have got ladies in every department of the State except the House of Commons, and I understand that certain Members are pressing to have them admitted here. But I certainly think some steps ought to be taken to provide female Inspectors for the inspection of their sex in connection with factories and workshops. I have the pleasure of knowing many gentlemen who hold high office and responsible positions as Inspectors of Factories, and they do their duty in a wholehearted and ungrudging way. I read their reports conscientiously, because I always find that in reading those reports which are furnished us by the Factory Inspectors you are reading 644 matter which shows up a great deal of suffering, and of cruelty, and of injustice existing in these countries. It is only by reading these matters that we find out where the shoe pinches, and it is only by putting questions upon these points in the House of Commons that substantial justice has occasionally been done. But some of these gentlemen have complained to me that it is very hard and very difficult for them satisfactorily to carry out the proper inspection of premises where females are mainly employed. There is greater difficulty for men to do this than there would be if women were employed. I do not wish to deprive men of the chance of earning their daily bread, but, at the same time, where women can possibly be engaged as Inspectors of their own sex, with the view of redressing the grievances under which they as women suffer, I think they should be so occupied. As this matter has been broached before, I simply content myself with asking the right hon. Gentleman whether any steps have been taken in this matter, or whether it has been thought advisable to defer action at the present time?

§ *(8.37.) MR. MATTHEWS
I cannot myself say that I am strongly in favour of female Inspectors. I think it is an experiment that might well be tried if the Departmental arrangements can be satisfactorily made. I was surprised to hear the hon. Member say that complaint has been made to him by some of the Factory Inspectors, and I should be glad if he would privately communicate to me the names of those Inspectors who had expressed themselves in favour of female Inspectors. The reports which have been made by them to the Department are quite to the contrary, and they point out the difficulty there would be in the appointment of women. Certainly, you would have to raise the age of Inspectors, for no young woman could go about the streets and slums where the Inspectors have to go in order to see that the provisions of the Factory and Workshops Act are carried out. It is not fit work except for a woman of mature age. I believe there is a very large public feel- 645 ing on the subject, and I am anxious to meet the view as far as I can. I would rather not take any decided action in the matter until the Commission on Labour has reported; but I may inform the hon. Member and the Committee that I have directed the Chief Inspector of Factories to prepare a statement as to the districts where there is a sufficient number of factories and workshops where women are mainly employed, and to see whether they can be arranged in geographical districts, so that I am getting the ground ready for the appointment of female Inspectors if there is shown to be any necessity for them.

§ MR. MORTON
I desire to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the exact position of the Newfoundland matter at the present time, and whether the Government can give an assurance that the question is likely to be settled before long?

*THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. J. W. LOWTHER,) Cumberland, Penrith
I think the hon. Member will not expect me to make a very lengthy statement upon this subject; and I am afraid all I can tell him is that the matter is at the present time receiving the most anxious consideration of Her Majesty's Government. As the hon. Member is aware, the Newfoundland Government did not recently see its way to pass the Bill which Her Majesty's Government hoped would have received the assent of the Newfoundland Legislature. Her Majesty's Government now have under consideration the reasons which induced the Newfoundland Legislature to take that view; and of course it will be the duty of Her Majesty's Government to carefully consider these reasons and to see what further steps, if any, must be taken. Meanwhile the French Government have not ratified the Arbitration Convention.

§ MR. MORTON
I should like to know whether the modus vivendi arranged last year cannot be extended so as to give the Newfoundland and the Home Government time for consideration?

*MR. LOWTHER
Yes, Sir. It is in operation at the present time. I am afraid I do not carry in my mind at the present moment the exact date when it will cease. The modus vivendi is, however, at present in operation, and what is being done on the west coast of Newfoundland is being done under that arrangement.

§ MR. MORTON
The modus vivendi extends until 1893, and the question is whether it cannot be extended for another year or two so as to get the matter settled. I should like to know, too, whether the right hon. Gentleman cannot allow us to have a copy of the Bill rejected by the Newfoundland Legislature in order that we may consider the reasons for the rejection, and whether their complaints are correct?

*MR. LOWTHER
I do not see any reason why the Bill should not be in the hands of Members. The question, however, more closely concerns the Colonial Office, and perhaps the hon. Member will put a question to my right hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies.

§ MR. EDWARD HOLDEN
As one representing a trading community, I have great complaint to make of the conduct of the Government in connection with the French Treaty. I have always understood that there are two to a bargain, but it seems to me in this case that the Government have quietly stood aside to the disadvantage of our country. In consequence of the neglect of the Government, the town which I represent is very severely suffering. It seems to me that the Government is perfectly indifferent as to our trade with France, and I am certain that a person of less importance and less ability than anyone sitting on the Treasury Bench could have done better for this country than Her Majesty's Government have done. I believe that Her Majesty's Government know nothing about the Treaties we have made with that country, and the effect those Treaties have on the commerce of our 647 country. I have endeavoured to get information from them, but they seemed to neither know nor care how matters stood. I make my protest against this action in allowing France to put on something like double the duty of the old tariff. I believe that France does not intend these high duties to be applied against this country. They were intended to affect Germany; but Her Majesty's Government have, by its thorough indifference to the trade of this country, allowed these mistakes to occur.

*MR. LOWTHER
I am afraid the hon. Member is under a misapprehension.

§ MR. HOLDEN
I know what I am talking about.

*MR. LOWTHER
The only Treaty we have with France is a Treaty made in 1882. Under that Treaty the arrangement is that France and this country shall make their own customs tariff. We have no Commercial Treaty with France beyond that; and under that Treaty, made in the year 1882, the French Government, on 1st February this year, brought into operation a tariff which, I quite admit, affects the hon. Member's constituents very severely. But I think that if the hon. Member would really give a little close attention to this matter he would see that obviously the tariff settled by the French Government is not in the interests of the hon. Member's constituents, or in the interests of English trade, but is arranged in the interests of the French trade. Her Majesty's Government were not consulted as to the tariff, and I venture to say that if Her Majesty's Government had made any suggestion that the leather merchants of England would be injuriously affected by the tariff the probable result would have been that the tariff, instead of being lowered, would have been increased.

§ MR. HOLDEN
I consider the reply of the right hon. Gentleman has been most unsatisfactory. All I can say is that for the last four months we have been under a different tariff. If four months ago Her Majesty's Ministers knew that a tariff was being instituted against English traders, I think they ought to have endeavoured to do something 648 on the other side. They have not done so. By a little exertion on their part there might have been a different result; but I rather think they rejoice at the present state of things, as an aid to return to Protection.

§ DR. TANNER
My hon. Friend is under some misapprehension. He ought to know that if it suited the political exigencies of Her Majesty's Government, they would so deal with the matter as to catch votes. The Government do not care about the commerce with France of that good Liberal centre my hon. Friend represents; but if a Tory centre had been concerned, he would have found Her Majesty's Government busy preserving its interests. I rise, however, to complain of the way in which French fishermen have been allowed to carry on depredations on the coast of Ireland. This question has been frequently raised, but the Government have not taken one step in the direction of protecting Irish interests. Last year I raised the question of these fishing smacks coming from the north-west of the northern coast of France, and making use of a net of small mesh. If this is permitted to continue, a great and productive source of benefit for our fishery folk in Ireland will be destroyed. Were an Irish boat to be driven into a French port there would be no reciprocity—a tax would be levied upon every fish on board. You ought to make all foreign boats observe the seven miles limit; and if you were to send a remonstrance to the French Government calling attention to the fact that French boats are destroying a valuable fishery, I think the result would be to safeguard Irish fishing interests.

*MR. LOWTHER
I can assure the hon. Member that any cases brought to our notice will at once be considered, and the attention of the French Government, if French boats are concerned, drawn to them. We have from time to time similar cases occurring on the east coast of England, and the cases are at once investigated by the foreign Governments I think I can say with 649 most satisfactory results. I can only assure the hon. Member that if any cases are brought to the notice of the Foreign Office, they will at once be dealt with. During the short time I have been there I do not recall any Irish case; but if the hon. Member will call my attention to any specific instance of what he complains of, I will see that it is dealt with.

§ DR. TANNER
The right hon. Gentleman must be aware that as the trouble I have alluded to, such as the destruction of nets usually takes place during the night, it is difficult to provide these specific cases. As a matter of fact, all we know is that the injury is done by French boats. If a remonstrance calling attention to what transpires were sent to the French Government I am sure the whole matter would be at once settled.

§ MR. MORTON
There are many points in connection with this Vote I should have liked to consider, and especially with regard to the £5,000 for the Secretary of State. He has been making what I may call revolutionary speeches, speeches no Secretary of State ought to have delivered. Had he been an Irish Nationalist Member he would have found himself in prison long ago. His reward, however, I gather, is to be a dukedom. I consider it the duty of a Prime Minister of this country to induce the people to respect the law, and especially is this to be expected from the head of a Government which has boasted so much about "law and order." While not intending to move a reduction, I do enter my protest against the delivery of such a speech as that I have referred to.

§ DR. TANNER
Am I to understand that the Foreign Department will look into the question I have raised.

*MR. LOWTHER
If the hon. Member reflects about the matter he will see how difficult it would be for the Government to make a general remonstrance to the French Government, because the latter would at once say, "On what grounds do you base your general remonstrance?" And naturally they would ask for specific cases. You 650 cannot found a general remonstrance upon anything except special knowledge of the particulars, and to allege generally that French fishermen have been guilty of the destruction of nets would simply meet with the rejoinder I have just indicated. I can only say that if any specific case is brought to the notice of the Foreign Office steps will at once be taken to ensure that the proper proceedings follow.

§ MR. MORTON
I desire to get a little information with regard to the position of affairs in Newfoundland. I understand that the French Shore Bill was rejected by twenty-two votes to nine in the Colonial Legislature, and that the Governor-General, in his speech at the prorogation of the House, said he hoped no bad result would follow, and made other remarks reflecting upon the action of the Legislature. The Colonists complain very much of the Governor-General having presumed to lecture the Legislature—a thing that the Queen never does in this country. They have heard over there that Lord Knutsford has said, with regard to Queensland, that it is dangerous to interfere with an independent Colony; and they want to know why the same treatment should not be shown towards them as is shown towards this Australian Colony when dealing with the aristocratic sugar-planter. I want also to inquire if a copy of this French Shore Bill will be placed in the library of the House? It is stated that clauses were introduced into the Bill when the majority of the delegates had left this country last year, and I think that it is only right we should be able to see for ourselves whether these statements are correct. Another thing I should like to ask is whether it is not possible to extend the modus vivendi another year or two. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will give us what information he can on these points, because it is only right and proper we should feel a certain amount of interest in this, our oldest colony.

§ *THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Baron H. DE WORMS,) Liverpool, East Toxteth
I am sure the hon. Member will not think me discourteous when I repeat the answer I gave the other day to a similar question put by him on the same subject. I then said it was impossible to enter into any details relative to the negotiations now pending in which international questions are involved besides those directly concerning the Colony, and that under those circumstances I could not make any answer to the question of the hon. Member. I am obliged to repeat that answer now, and I am sure the hon. Member will see the force of it.

§ MR. MORTON
I cannot see what objection there can be to telling the House whether it is possible to extend the modus vivendi for another year. I must also press the right hon. Gentleman to say whether we cannot see a copy of the Bill, which is public property in Newfoundland?

§ BARON H. DE WORMS
We have not received a copy of the Bill yet, but when it arrives I shall be happy to show it to the hon. Gentleman.

§ DR. TANNER
I wish to ask if the Government have any further intelligence in connection with the Uganda business, and, if so, of what nature is it?

SIR JOHN GORST
In answer to the hon. Member I am obliged to say that no further intelligence has been received.

§ DR. TANNER
I want the right hon. Gentleman to give the Committee some explanation of the expenses under the Pharmacy Act. Some of the prosecutions which have taken place under this Act have resulted in scandalous injustice being done to people.

SIR JOHN GORST
These expenses are those of officers appointed by the Privy Council to be present at examinations under the Pharmacy Act.

§ DR. TANNER
Owing to the benevolent legislation of the present Government we have an increased number of emigrants leaving Ireland every year, and I want to see proper steps taken to provide for the comfort and health of these people whilst crossing the Atlantic to find a new home. Again and again I have shown the House that these emigrants am crowded into cattle ships, and that very little, if any, precaution is taken to ensure their health and comfort. It is monstrous that these men, women, and children should be battened down for days in the holds of large steamers without any proper water supply or sanitary appliances being provided. I complained of this matter in 1886, and now in 1892 very little improvement has been effected. The right hon. Gentleman (Sir Michael Hicks Beach) has only to go to his Inspectors in Liverpool to find that several cattle ships within a fortnight of landing their cargo at that port have embarked a human freight to carry across the Atlantic without providing any sanitary arrangements. I was told by the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor that it was absolutely impossible to deal with this matter unless I was able to produce medical authority for these complaints. But I, for one, am not going to give away the medical men who earn a livelihood on these boats, because I should in that way expose them to the arbitrary conduct of the great shipping companies. If the same attention were devoted to this traffic as is bestowed upon the emigration service to New Zealand and Australia, and other English colonies, a great number of the grievances of which I have complained would be swept away. I do not wish to weary the Committee about this matter, but in making this appeal on behalf of poor people, who have no power to protect themselves, I feel I am only doing my duty. Within the last two months there was a case of a steamer which put to sea with 1,200 steerage passengers, and had only one water tank out of which to supply these people with water for all purposes. 653 This is a state of things which ought not to be allowed to exist, and I hope by dint of hammering away on this matter to succeed in influencing the right hon. Gentleman or his successor to remedy it. I should like the right hon. Gentleman to say whether anything has been done.

§ *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Sir MICHAEL HICKS BEACH,) Bristol, W.
The hon. Member has made the same speech to-night as he has made for the last two or three years; but he has never given me any kind of clue by which it would be possible to examine into the charges he makes. I think the hon. Member, with one exception, is the only person who has made a similar complaint to me during the time I have held my present office. I sent an Inspector to Liverpool to inquire into the case of the particular ship complained of, and I satisfied myself that the charges were without foundation. If the hon. Member (Dr. Tanner) had during the past three years given me the faintest clue, it would have been followed, because I desire as much as he does to prevent the occurrence of anything of the sort referred to by him, and I instruct my officers on this side to be as careful as possible in these matters. But, as the hon. Member declines in any way to substantiate his charges, I am forced to conclude that he relies upon information which, so far as I can ascertain, is absolutely baseless. Until I have reason to conclude otherwise, it is impossible for me to take any further action.

§ DR. TANNER
I have placed before the Committee what I know to be facts. My information is derived from medical men on board these ships; but I dare not give their names, for the simple reason that if I did they would lose their positions to-morrow. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the American Government have taken steps to deal with this matter? All I ask is that some steps should be taken between the officers of the Board of Trade on this side and the American officers on the other side to satisfy themselves as to whether the state of 654 things of which I have complained does or does not exist.

§ MR. MORTON
I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman (Sir Michael Hicks Beach) a question with reference to Railway Companies. Early in the year it was announced at a meeting of the Caledonian or North British Railway that arrangements had been made against the possibility of competition by other railways, and therefore against the interests of the public.

§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH
I rise to order. This is a matter that does not come within my power.

§ MR. MORTON
Then I think some Government Department should have power to deal with the monopolies which the House of Commons grants, and which are supposed to be granted, not in the interest of capitalists and company-mongers, but in the interests of the people at large. Another question I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman is, Has he any power to deal with overcrowding?

§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH
No.

§ MR. MORTON
I am sorry to learn that, and I think his Department should have. In connection with this matter I allude especially to lines on the south side of London, where there are a lot of empty first and second class carriages, whilst the third class are continually in a crowded state. There is one other thing. Although we are grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has done with regard to the Patent Laws, yet we shall not be satisfied until he still further reduces them so as to give inventors in this country the same advantages as are enjoyed by those living in the United States of America. This country depends upon trade, and trade in these days depends upon inventions, and therefore nothing in the shape of fees should be put in the way of inventors. I trust the right hon. Gentleman, if he remains in office, will see his way to do something more than he has already done in this direction.

§ DR. TANNER
I have a word or two to say with regard to the electrical adviser to the Board of Trade, who I 655 find is drawing £658 a year in addition to his regimental pay of more than £200. It appears to me an extraordinary thing that an ex-army man should have been selected for a position of this sort. The same kind of thing goes on in Ireland. If you want a Resident Magistrate or a Removable Magistrate you get some pensioner. I should like the right hon. Gentleman to say how it is that a man is chosen from among retired officers for the position of electrical adviser to the Board of Trade when there are so many professional electricians who would be competent to fulfil the duties. Most of these things are "jobs," and it is for that reason I raise this question. I should like to know who this gentleman is, what his qualifications are, and how it comes to pass he has been chosen for the position in preference to a practical electrician?

§ *SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH
If the hon. Member for Cork (Dr. Tanner) knew anything about the matter, he would be aware that the name of the gentleman to whom he has referred carries confidence with all who are engaged in electrical affairs. He is an electrician of great ability and practical experience, and if the Board of Trade had searched the whole of Her Majesty's Possessions they could not have found an abler man. He was appointed before I went to the Board of Trade, but I am bound to say, from my experience of the matter, that his salary is below his merits.

§ MR. CHANNING (Northampton, E.)
I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question in respect to a matter that I have previously brought to his notice, and that is the appointment of boys to dangerous duties on the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company. The attention of the House was called to this matter in connection with the death of a boy who had not reached his 15th birthday. I had at that time specific information in my possession from railway servants that the employment of boys in duties of the kind referred to was frequent, and I should like to know if the right hon. Gentleman received any further information from the Railway Company or any 656 remonstrance was addressed by the Board of Trade.

§ *SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH
I cannot charge my memory entirely with the case, but to the best of my recollection the answer which the Railway Company sent about this particular matter in regard to which the hon. Member asked a question was entirely satisfactory. I am sorry I cannot say any more, but the hon. Member did not give me notice that he intended to bring the matter forward.

§ DR. TANNER
Have any steps been taken with respect to the provision of a remedy for sheep scab? I know the right hon. Gentleman has nothing to do with Ireland, but in Cork and Tyrone this disease has been very bad; and I should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman could tell us whether he has made any inquiry to find out what is the recipe which proved so successful in Australia and New Zealand.

§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. CHAPLIN,) Lincolnshire, Sleaford
The hon. Member approached me the other day on this subject, and I have since been in communication with the proper authorities. What I gather from them is that they are not aware what is the specific remedy in Australia, and we have not yet been able to ascertain. But it may be taken for granted that a careful application of the treatment, whatever it may be—and there are various recipes for this particular purpose—is more effective than the use of a specific recipe. We have a number of recipes at the Office, but I cannot charge my memory with them at this moment; but if the hon. Member desires further information I shall be glad to place all we have at his disposal.

§ MR. MORTON
Some time ago the right hon. Gentleman promised some particulars with regard to the fees charged for information in regard to 657 tithes and also with respect to the tithe plans. Has he got that information? Further, under Sub-head H., I see an item for rent of stalls for market places, &c, £420. The late Mr. Joseph Hume discovered that "et cætera" meant sherry and biscuits, and I think this is a loose way for the Government to present the Accounts.

§ MR. CHAPLIN
In reply to the first question, I have given instructions that the question of fees should be reconsidered, and, if possible, a new scale of fees drawn up and submitted to me for my consideration and decision. But we have had this misfortune at the Board of Agriculture, that a gentleman who has recently been appointed in that Department, and who would have done this work, has been taken ill, and it is only a very short time since he has been able to resume his duties. I have therefore not yet had an opportunity of considering that scale of fees which I desired should be submitted to me, but the preparation is not likely to occupy much time. With respect to the other item mentioned, I may say that the item has only just been transferred to my Department from the Board of Trade, and the only information I can give is that it is precisely in the same form as it has appeared for a number of years. However, I will inquire into the matter, and shall be able to make a statement on the report stage.

§ MR. MORTON
I hope the right hon. Gentleman will take care that the "et cætera" does not mean sherry and biscuits.

§ MR. MORTON
I should like to ask whether this is the last grant which is to be made to the City of London Charities. This is about £50,000 that has already gone for this purpose. I believe money is to be paid back out of the funds devoted to certain charities, and though I do not object to a better application of money than is possible under the old trusts, I must say that the remedy in this case is worse than the disease. It seems to me that by 658 far too large a proportion of this money is being spent on management and in payments to officials, and I can only hope that this is a final vote. Then with respect to local inquiries, I am told that the Charity Commission has not power to interfere. Would it not be well for the Government to give the power?

*SIR. JOHN GORST
The expenses of the London Charities are in the first place defrayed by moneys voted by Parliament, and in accordance with the City of London Parochial Charities Act of 1883 they are ultimately repaid to the Treasury out of the Charity Funds. That is the reason the Vote appears in the Estimates, but there is no charge on the taxpayers in consequence. The powers of the Commissioners under this Act will only run till the 30th September in the present year; therefore, there will be no further expenditure, and this sum will not again appear in the Estimates. With respect to the suggestion to give extended powers to the Commissioners, there is no chance that Her Majesty's Government will be able to propose any legislation in the present Session of Parliament.

§ MR. MORTON
I complain that this money is being taken from the charities. This money was left by pious people for a specific purpose, and they certainly did not intend that it should be wasted in paying officials. There is another matter that I might mention. Many of the endowed school trusts have been terribly hit by that piece of business of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reducing Consols from 3 per cent. to 2¾ per cent., and when they have wished to get better interest for their money than 2¾ per cent., they have been met by the Charity Commissioners with a refusal to sanction the investment. I think the Commissioners might be more liberal in this way.

§ MR. MORTON
I do not see where the Comptroller and Auditor-General gets his salary from.

THE CHAIRMAN
Order, order! It is charged to the Consolidated Fund.

§ MR. MORTON
I do not wish to say one word about the accounts; they are admirably prepared, and are most useful to Members of Parliament.

§ MR. MORTON
I should like to call attention to the length of time it takes to get a reply from this Department in respect to applications for Free Libraries and other matters. I have not the letters with me now, but a complaint was made that in one matter it took between two and three months to get an answer from the Board to get their consent to take a building for a short time for the purpose of a Free Library. I know the right hon. Gentleman has nothing to do with ordering an inquiry, and I think many of those inquiries are unnecessary; but I think we might get a reply in less than three months. I do not know whether the Department is under-staffed.

§ *THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RITCHIE,) Tower Hamlets, St. George's
No doubt there is a time of the year when the pressure upon the Local Government Board with regard to these matters, especially matters of inquiry, is much greater than at other times, and unquestionably there are delays at particular times which are to me a matter of regret, but which are at the same time inevitable. It would be impossible so to over-staff the Local Government Board with Inspectors as to be able during the busiest part of the year to take up these matters with the rapidity that Town Councils and Local Authorities desire, and I can quite understand that sometimes there has been undue delay in replying to their inquiries and applications. But I assure the hon. Gentleman and the Committee that these matters are taken up with as great rapidity as possible. 660 If we had a greater number of inspectors; no doubt we should be able to deal more rapidly with these applications than we do now, but that would very largely increase the cost of the Department, and lead to complaints on the part of the taxpayers. The hon. Member seems to think that some of these inquiries could be dispensed with. That may be so, but these inquiries are held in the interests of the ratepayers. If I had been aware that the hon. Member intended to bring forward the particular matter to which he has referred, I would have prepared myself; but, according to my recollection, it was in the month of March, 1891, that the Town Council of Peterborough resolved that they would hire a building, and it was not until September in the same year that application was made for sanction to the Local Government Board. Even then we had to make further inquiries, because the particulars supplied were not sufficient to enable us to give the definite sanction, and it was not until the end of the year, December, that we obtained the particulars that it was necessary for us to have before we could direct the inquiry. Therefore, I think the Committee will see that the fault of the delay did not rest altogether with the Local Government Board.

§ MR. EDWARD HOLDEN
We should like to know something about the new coinage.

SIR JOHN GORST
That question should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Questions have been addressed to him very recently, and he has given very full answers. I have nothing to add to what he has said.

§ MR. MORTON
I see that a sum of £100 is included for supplying Parliamentary papers to Free Libraries. I should like to know what papers are sent and how the papers are distributed, and whether it would be possible to let the Libraries have copies of the Statutes passed every year.

*SIR JOHN GORST
I think every encouragement should be given by Parliament to the people to study the papers which are issued, and the suggestion of the hon. Member shall receive every attention. At the same time, I question whether the public would find much to interest them in the Statutes to which the hon Gentleman has referred, and I think the £100 is spent in sending to the Libraries a more interesting kind of document than the Statutes.

§ MR. MORTON
How is the money expended?

*SIR JOHN GORST
If the hon. Member will put down a question I will tell him exactly what papers are sent out.

§ MR. MORTON
I wished to ask the First Commissioner, if he had been in his place, one or two questions. One was with regard to Holyrood Palace.

THE CHAIRMAN
That comes under Class I. The occasion for raising that has passed. This Vote only refers to the organisation of the Office.

§ MR. MORTON
I wished to ask a question with regard to a statement of the right hon. Gentleman which was 662 not quite in accordance with my information. I also wished to ask a question with regard to a reply he gave me as to the water in Trafalgar Square. I will defer my question till Report or some other occasion.

§ MR. MORTON
I wish to ask a question with regard to a vaccination case which came, before the magistrates, at Ayr on Jan. 12. A man was only fined one shilling, but the expenses were £1 19s. The hon. and learned Gentleman said the expenses were legal charges. I have a copy of the bill of costs, and perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman had not this paper before him when he answered the question I put to him. There are seven items, and I want some information about the second and third—copy of plaint, 3s.; copy of service, 3s. I am informed that these are overcharges. If the hon. and learned Gentleman cannot say now whether that is so or not I will defer the question. The matter is one which requires the consideration of the law officers of Scotland.

§ *THE LORD ADVOCATE (Sir C. J. PEARSON,) Edinburgh and St. Andrew's Universities
This is not the first time this question has been raised. I do not carry all the particulars in my mind, but my recollection is that I had the bill before me when I answered the question, and that I went through the items and was satisfied that the charges were correctly made under Schedule A of the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Act. The item which appeared to me doubtful was a charge by the Inspector; but I understand that this item was wrongly put down as fees, and that it was really out-of-pocket expenses. However, if the hon. Member will put down a question I will give him the information he desires.

§ MR. MORTON
I shall take an opportunity of putting a question down.