Commons Sitting of 18 September 1893

QUESTIONS.

  RIFLE RANGE AT OMAGH.
  MR. MACARTNEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a rifle range reported by a Military Board as suitable for the magazine rifle exists within a short distance of the barracks recently erected at Omagh, and that a drill and encamping ground of large extent and excellent quality lies under the barrack walls, which can both be acquired at reasonable rates, and that their acquisition has been recommended by successive officers commanding the brigade depôt and the district but refused by the War Office; and whether it is in contemplation by the War Office to acquire land on the west coast of Donegal for a rifle range, and permanently to train the Militia battalions of Fermanagh and Tyrone out of their own counties at a further large annual charge to the public; and, if so, whether the whole subject will be reconsidered and further inquiry made before any permanent course is finally decided upon?
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. WOODALL,): The recommendations of local officers to establish a range and camping ground at Omagh have not been approved by the General Officer Commanding in Ireland, because he does not consider it desirable to continue the practice of hiring local rifle ranges and camping grounds for the Militia, but prefers that battalions should be brought together at some central place for training and musketry where they would have the advantage of association with Regular troops. Nothing is known of any proposal to acquire land for a range on the Donegal coast.

  WAR DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS.
  MR. O'KEEFFE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will direct inquiries into the complaints
  1470
  regarding the working of two contracts under his Department in the City of Limerick, recently brought forward by the Trades Council of that city—namely, that, in the contract for works and repairs of the several barracks in the stated military district, no local carpenters, masons, or painters have ever been employed by the Government local contractor; that the contractor refused the Trade Society standard wages, although himself drawing a large margin of profit from the declared contract price; and that, as regards the contract for bread to the Army in Limerick, no regular trade bakers are employed or standard wages paid by the contractor for such supplies; and whether, having regard to the Resolution of this House of February, 1891, arrangement will be made to secure payment of the proper standard wages to competent workmen by the War Department in the contracts mentioned?
  MR. WOODALL: No complaint has been received as regards the non-employment of local men. I may, however, point out that the War Office has no power to insist upon the employment of workmen from any particular locality. All contractors are bound to pay the current rates of the district; and no complaint of their having failed to do so has reached the War Office.

  POSTAL PROMOTIONS.
  MR. MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether a sorting clerk at Bristol has been promoted over 10 men his qualified seniors; and, if so, on what grounds?
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. A. MORLEY,): The facts are as stated. I am informed that the men passed over, or the most promising of them, on being tried on higher duties, were found not to possess the necessary qualifications. I am, however, making some further inquiries, and will communicate with my hon. Friend.

  THE CONGESTED DISTRICTS BOARD.
  SIR T. ESMONDE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can explain why the occupiers at Slea Head, County Kerry, who agreed to give up a portion of their land for the use of the Congested Districts Board, and were

  1471
  promised the sum of £38 10s. for so doing, have received £8 less than the amount agreed upon; if, in view of the poverty of the occupiers, the Congested Districts Board will he instructed to pay them the full sum originally agreed to; and if he will give the terms of the original agreement?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. J. MORLEY,): I am informed by the Congested Districts Board that the tenant occupiers of land required for this road were not promised the lump sum of £38 10s. as stated, and that the payments to them were, individually, in strict accordance with the terms of the agreement entered into between them and the Board's engineer, the total amount so paid being £29 15s. The original estimate of the engineer was made for the confidential information of the Board, and it would be contrary to practice to disclose its contents.
  SIR T. ESMONDEasked if the sum of £38 was left in the hands of the parish priest?
  MR. J. MORLEY: I was not aware that any sum was left in the hands of the parish priest, but I will inquire.

  THE NEWSPAPER POST.
  MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether New Zealand weekly journals weighing over ten ounces, such as The Canterbury Times and The Auckland Weekly News, were delivered in London on 14th September at the 1d. postage rate, whereas newspapers of the same weight and character published in the neighbouring Australian Colonies cannot be posted to London without a fee of 2½d.; and whether any means are available for the rectification of this difference of charges?
  MR. A. MORLEY: At the Postal Conference hold at Brisbane in March last, at which New Zealand was represented, it was decided to adopt for newspapers addressed to the United Kingdom a rate in accordance with the Postal Union Regulations—namely, 1d. for the first four ounces and ½d. for every additional two ounces. But the New Zealand Post Office does not appear to have yet brought the new rate into operation, as newspapers from that Colony are still prepaid at the old rate of 1d. per paper.
  1472
  As soon as the New Zealand Post Office adopts the new rate, the difference of charges referred to in the second paragraph of the question will disappear. As the hon. Member probably knows, I have in practice no power to alter the rates of postage from the Colonies to other places.

  ANTHRAX.
  DR. FARQUHARSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, considering the persistent vitality of, the bacilli of anthrax, and more especially of their spores, as proved by the researches of Rastem and others, he will impress on Local Authorities the importance of burning the bodies of animals infected with this disease?
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. H. GARDNER,): The objection to burning the bodies of animals affected with anthrax is that without costly and elaborate appliances the operation entails the cutting up of the carcase and its movement to a convenient place, both of which acts are obviously undesirable. On this account we have advised Local Authorities that burial is the least dangerous method of disposing of bodies in such cases. As my hon. Friend is probably aware, the microbe in anthrax is aerobic, and cannot therefore live without air, and I am informed that it has been demonstrated that it does not retain its vitality in a carcase which has been burned without having been cut.

  THE LAND REGISTRY OFFICE.
  MR. GREENE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether Her Majesty's Government are aware that a highly contentious leaflet [L. R. 8370–300. 9,93. G. 35. D. &S.], bearing the Royal Arms, has just been issued officially from the Land Registry Office, professing to reply to a publication circulated privately by the Incorporated Law Society, criticising the Land Transfer Bill, 1893; whether the printing and circulation of this leaflet has been sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government; and, if not, whether its cost will be provided for out of public funds, and be included in the Estimates; and whether it is in accordance with the rules or usages of the Public Service

  1473
  for Departments, or the Heads of Departments, to engage in controversy at public expense, either in support of such Departments or their management, or as to the merits of Bills before Parliament; and, if not, whether any, and what, steps will be taken in respect of the leaflet referred to?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir J. T. HIBBERT,): I have not seen the leaflet referred to, but I understand that it was prepared by the Land Registry in reply to a pamphlet circulated to all Members of the House of Lords and containing statements about the work of the office which the Department considered itself bound to answer. If the leaflet in question is demanded by the public interest, I see no reason why it should not be paid for out of public funds.

  H.M.S. "LATONA."
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, with respect to H.M.S. Latona, if it is a fact that 43 of the complement are practically obliged to sleep on the upper deck for want of more adequate accommodation; whether this was originally laid down in the design; and if this is the case generally as regards the second class cruisers?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH,): No report has been received of any necessity for 43 men to sleep on the upper deck of the Latona. The Latona and the 20 other vessels of the Apollo class, which are similar in accommodation, were not designed with any intention that part of the complement were to sleep on the upper deck.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: Can the right hon. Gentleman state as a fact that there is sufficient accommodation for the men, without requiring them to sleep on the upper deck?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: The complement of the ship has been somewhat increased, and no doubt she may be somewhat crowded, but considering that all the men have not to sleep at the same time, probably there will be found to be sufficient accommodation.
  MR. TOMLINSON: Is this a temporary increase, or will the ship be always crowded?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: As to that I shall require notice.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: Certainly, Sir.

  INDIAN MEDICAL OFFICERS.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Indian Government will arrange to have the principal medical officers' inspections made twice a year in India as in this country?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. G. RUSSELL,): The War Office Regulations provide for half-yearly medical inspections at home, and yearly ones at foreign stations. The Secretary of State sees no reason for proposing any alteration of the system, so far as India is concerned.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Indian Government, in allotting bearer company and field hospital equipment for training the Medical Service of the Indian Army, would see that Netley was included in the distribution, so that the medical officers for the Indian Army could benefit by instruction there?
  MR. G. RUSSELL: Yes, Sir. The existing system provides for the instruction of the Indian medical officers at Netley in bearer company and stretcher drill.

  STOCKTON-ON-TEES SCHOOL BOARD.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the requisite facilities have been withheld from the School Board of Stockton-on-Tees, in respect to the building of a school of a superior grade unless the superior fees are remitted or not charged?
  THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Mr. ACLAND,): This is a case of a new school. No existing facilities have been withheld, and it is not a case of remission of fees. The Department hold that under Section 4 (1) of the Act of 1891 it would not be for the educational benefit

  1475
  of the district that fees should be charged in the proposed school, and so interposed at a period in a child's life when such a charge may be a barrier to his or her further advancement.

  WOODS AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether it is the intention on the occurrence of a vacancy to place at the head of the Woods and Forests Department an officer practically versed in forestry?
  SIR J. T. HIBBERT: No doubt the First Lord of the Treasury will, before making a new appointment, give every consideration to the requirements of the Department.

  ARMY EXAMINATIONS.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that widespread anxiety prevails as to the future educational course for entrance into the Army, and that no information on the subject can be obtained from the War Office; can he tell when the subjects of examination for next April and June will be published; can he also say if Latin is to be obligatory, and, if such be the case, what is the minimum standard of marks to be in this subject; and if he is aware that a high standard in Latin must result in the rejection of numbers of very promising candidates?
  MR. WOODALL: With regard to the first question of the hon. Member, I may say that every inquiry on this subject has been answered by the War Office. The Regulations for the examinations in April and June are in the printers' hands, and will be issued shortly. Latin remains an obligatory subject, and candidates who have not already passed the preliminary examination will be required to obtain such an aggregate of marks therein as may satisfy the Civil Service Commissioners.

  SOLDIERS AND SAILORS' GRAVES IN NEW ZEALAND.
  SIR J. GORST: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is true that the graves of the British seamen and soldiers who fell at Rangiriri in 1863, in the Maori War, are now in a ruinous and neglected state; and whe-
  1476
  ther he will make a representation to the New Zealand Government on the subject?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON,): No complaint has reached the Colonial Office of the state of the cemetery at Rangiriri, but if the right hon. Gentleman possesses any recent and authentic information an inquiry will he addressed to the Governor of the Colony. This was done on the occasion of a previous question in this House as to the graves at Tanranga, which it was alleged were in a discreditable condition, and the inquiry elicited the fact that they were kept in good order.

  EDINBURGH MUSEUM.
  MR. PAUL: I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he can now state what steps have been taken to improve the position of the attendants at the Edinburgh Museum, and to place them more nearly on a level with the attendants at South Kensington?
  MR. ACLAND: The Department of Science and Art have for some time been in correspondence with Her Majesty's Treasury and with the Director of the Edinburgh Museum, with a view to modifying the present arrangements in respect to the service of attendants at the Edinburgh Museum, and it is hoped that a satisfactory solution of the matter will be shortly arrived at.

  HEREMAKONO.
  MR. TOMLINSON: On behalf of Mr. Lawrence (Liverpool, Abercromby), I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is a fact that Heremakono, which is about 200 miles from Sierra Leone and well within the sphere of British influence (being south of the tenth degree of N. latitude) as defined by the Treaty between Great Britain and France of 1889, is now occupied by French troops; if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will call upon the French Government to withdraw from that post; and what was the result of the expedition to Falaba and Heremakono which left Sierra Leone early last year under the then Administrator of the Government, Sir William Quayle Jones, and whether

  1477
  Papers relating to that Expedition can be laid upon the Table?
  MR. S. BUXTON: Heremakono is at present occupied by French troops. Her Majesty's Government have for some time past been in correspondence with that of France on the subject. The fact of Heremakono being south of the tenth parallel of latitude, and, therefore, within the British boundary under the agreement of 1889, is disputed by the French Government. Further information on the point is now being awaited, upon the receipt of which the discussion of the question will be resumed. Sir W. Quayle Jones succeeded in the principal objects of his Mission, which were to open the roads, which had been closed by quarrels between various Native Chiefs, and to make some arrangement with the Sofas at Heremakono for the protection from their attacks of the people within the sphere of British influence. It is not considered desirable, in the public interests, to lay the Papers on the Table at present.

  THE QUEEN'S MESSENGER TRAIN.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the Duke of Fife made use, on the 7th instant, of the Queen's Messenger special train in Scotland, which is paid for by the Treasury; and whether other persons may use this train?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir W. HARCOURT,): No, Sir; I know nothing about this.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will inquire about it?
  SIR W. HARCOURT: No, Sir; I shall not.

  WESTFIELD SCHOOL, WOKING.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the Report of the inquiry into the Westfield School, at Woking, was adverse to the erection of a new school; whether he will authorise the managers to renew the lease to the School Board, with the provision that the hours and conditions of the religious instruction shall remain the same as heretofore; and whether, as an alternative, he will allow
  1478
  the managers to provide from their own resources any additional accommodation that may be required, or whether, failing that, he will permit the matter to stand over till after the next School Board election?
  MR. ACLAND: The Report was adverse to the erection of the new school proposed by the School Board, but suggested the erection of an infant school by the Board. The Education Department has communicated with the School Board (enclosing a copy of the Report) in reference to the renewal of the lease, and now await a reply from the School Board. The action of the Department will depend upon the nature of that reply. The Department understand from the School Board that they are in communication with the managers of the school. I cannot, therefore, at present answer paragraphs 2 and 3 of the question.

  ARMENIAN PRISONERS.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will consider the possibility of interceding with the Sultan's Government on behalf of a young Armenian student, Dikran Gulbankian, who has been sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment on a political charge?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir E. GREY,): This case is already occupying the attention of Her Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Constantinople, who will do what he can to bring it under the favourable consideration of the Porte.

  IRISH MAGISTRATES.
  MR. BUTCHER: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland how many licensed victuallers have been appointed to the Commission of the Peace in Ireland for (a) counties and (b) boroughs since the present Government came into Office; what was the total number of licensed victuallers holding the Commission of the Peace in Ireland at the time when the present Government came into Office; and whether there is any case in England in which a licensed victualler holds the Commission of the Peace?
  MR. J. MORLEY: The Lord Chancellor informs me that it would take

  1479
  several days to give a definite and complete answer to the second paragraph of the question. So far as his inquiries have proceeded, he is able to confirm what I stated to the House the other day, that since the present Government acceded to Office there is only one case in which a gentleman has been placed in the County Commission who retains a publican's licence in his own name. This gentleman, however, is a farmer, and holds the licence more as trustee for others than for his own benefit, and the licensed premises are situated in a different district from that in which he resides and acts as a Magistrate. Moreover, this Magistrate is disqualified by law from adjudicating in cases under the Licensing Acts. Several other gentlemen appointed to the County Magistracy by the present Government held spirit licences prior to their appointment, but they were required on their appointment to transfer their licences, and have done so. There are several instances of County Magistrates appointed by former Governments who, for reasons at the time deemed sufficient, were allowed to retain their spirit licences in their own names, but these persons are also debarred by law from taking part as Magistrates in licensing cases.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman two questions arising out of his answer—namely, first, whether the Magistrates referred to are debarred from sitting at Petty Sessions as they are at Quarter Sessions in licensing business; and, secondly, in the case of the publicans who have transferred their licences, to whom have they transferred them, and was it a mere power of transfer?
  MR. J. MORLEY: I cannot answer the last question. Of course that is a point I should be glad to have information upon, but it has not been supplied to me. As to the first question, whether they can decide cases at Petty Sessions, my information from my legal adviser is that they are disqualified by law from adjudicating in any case under the Licensing Act. That is all I can Bay.
  MR. SEXTON: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether any of the brewers and distillers appointed by former Governments to the Commission of the Peace in England and
  1480
  Ireland are allowed to administer the Licensing Laws in districts where the liquor they manufacture is sold and consumed?
  MR. J. MORLEY: That is a question of which I must beg notice of my hon. Friend. I will make inquiry. I cannot answer offhand.
  MR. BUTCHER: Can the right hon. Gentleman say approximately how many of these licensed victuallers hold the Commission of the Peace in boroughs?
  MR. J. MORLEY: I will inquire, and inform the hon. Member. The total number of County Magistrates in Ireland is 4,697, of whom 331 have been appointed by the present Government. There are 530 Borough Magistrates, of whom 79 have been so appointed.

  WORKING MEN MAGISTRATES.
  MR. MANDEVILLE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that a number of working men have been appointed Magistrates in England; and is it the intention of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to appoint any working men to be Magistrates in Ireland?
  MR. J. MORLEY: I understand it is the case that a number of working men have been appointed to the Commission for boroughs in this country. As regards Ireland, I believe no appointment of working men has yet been made, but the question will certainly be carefully considered.

  THE WINDSOR BARRACKS.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Army Sanitary Committee is an inspecting body, and have they visited Windsor or other barracks; whether the weekly Sick Returns of the Army and the Sanitary Returns of Garrisons are submitted to the Army Sanitary Committee for examination and report; whether their Reports for Great Britain and abroad are published; and can they be obtained by the public?
  MR. WOODALL: As a general rule, the Army Sanitary Committee is not an inspecting body; but, in very exceptional cases, they inspect particular barracks. They have not visited Windsor, but when the drainage system at Windsor is revised the subject will be referred to the Committee The weekly Sick Returns

  1481
  and the Sanitary Returns are not referred to the Sanitary Committee. Their duties are confined to Reports on sites and buildings. Their Reports are not published.
  MR. HANBURY: I should like to ask when the drainage arrangements of Windsor Barracks are going to be revised, because they are in a most dangerous state at this moment?
  MR. WOODALL: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War has on several occasions made specific statements with regard to the Windsor Barracks, and I have nothing to add to what he has said.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: The hon. Gentleman has not answered the last part of my question.
  MR. HANBURY: I really must press the hon. Gentleman to get information to give to the House as to the date on which the drainage of these barracks will come under consideration, because I must repeat they are in a most dangerous state.
  MR. WOODALL: The condition of the drainage of Windsor Barracks has been under consideration, and very full particulars have been given to the House; but if the hon. Gentleman chooses to put a question down for tomorrow, I will be prepared with further information upon it. I have already informed the hon. Member for Peterborough that none of these Reports are published. They are confidential.

  MR. HURLBERT.
  MR. PAUL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to two recent letters in The Standard, purporting to have been written at Genoa by one William Henry Hurlbert, otherwise known as Wilfrid Murray; whether a warrant has been issued against the said Hurlbert for wilful and corrupt perjury committed in this country; whether he is believed to be now in Italy; and whether any steps have been or will be taken for bringing this person to justice by extradition or otherwise?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH,): My attention has
  1482
  been called to the letter in question. A warrant for perjury was issued for the arrest of this person in November, 1891. It might tend to frustrate the ends of justice if I were to say where he is now believed to be; though I may observe (without any special reference to the particular case) that a letter to the newspapers by a fugitive from justice, purporting to be written from a named place, is, as a rule, primâ facie evidence that the writer is somewhere else. All possible steps have been, and are being, taken to bring this man to justice.

  RIO DE JANEIRO.
  MR. CLOUGH: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a question of which I have given him private, notice—namely, what steps, if any, have been taken for the protection of British life and property at Rio de Janeiro?
  SIR E. GREY: Her Majesty's ships. Sirius and Beagle are now in Rio harbour, and the Racer is under orders to proceed there. Ships of war belonging to France, Germany, Italy, Portugal,: and the United States are also on the; spot or on the road to Rio, for the protection of neutral shipping. Communications with Her Majesty's Minister have; necessarily been brief; he has reported, that trade is paralysed, and that it is impossible for vessels to unload cargo for want of labour and lighters. He has requested Her Majesty's Representatives at Buenos Ayres and Montevideo to warn British merchants and others interested of the risks attending shipments to Rio. In a telegram received on Saturday night he reports that the commanders of the neutral ships of war were endeavouring to prevent the bombardment of the town by the insurgent, vessel.

  THE LOSS OF THE "VICTORIA."
  COMMANDER BETHELL: May I ask the Secretary to the Admiralty a question of which I have given him private notice. Perhaps he will be good enough to state whether the Admiralty have come to any decision as to the nature of the inquiry into the causes which led to the loss of the Victoria?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: No, Sir; the matter is under consideration, and it is expected a decision will be arrived at within a few days.

  MASHONALAND.
  SIR G. BADEN-POWELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any further news has been received from Mashonaland?
  MR. S. BUXTON: Since the Papers which were circulated on Saturday we have received the following telegram, dated the 11th, from Sir H. Loch:—
  "In answer to your telegram of September 9, Administrator of Mashonaland was instructed August 17 not to communicate with Lo Bengula without my approval. Rhodes leaving on or about September 11 for Beira, en route for Salisbury. Jameson will keep me informed by telegram, and will not make any aggressive movement without my authority. It is rumoured that Barotsi impi had been put in quarantine for two months on account of smallpox by Lo Bengula. Peaceful sign, if true."

  THE NEW HEBRIDES.
  MR. HOGAN(on behalf of Mr. T. Curran): I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any Reports that would enable him to state approximately the extent of territory in the New Hebrides that has been either claimed or actually acquired by French Trading Companies?
  SIR E. GREY: The claims on the part both of French and British subjects to have acquired land by purchase appear to be remarkably extensive and vague. As a matter of fact, it was stated in 1891 that the area of land being cultivated by French subjects was about 100 acres, and that by British subjects somewhat less.

  THE COURSE OF BUSINESS.
  SIR J. GORST: Will the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer inform the House what will be done with the Government Bills after No. 5 (the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill)? Will they be withdrawn?
  SIR W. HARCOURT: Yes, Sir; I think that is so. All after No. 5 will be withdrawn.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY—COMMITTEE.
  SUPPLY,—considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)

  SUPPLY—COMMITTEE.
    CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1893–4.

      CLASS V.
      1. £213,101, to complete the sum for Diplomatic and Consular Services.
      SIR C. W. DILKEwould like to ask one or two questions on this Vote. He held in his hand the Report of the Ridley Commission upon Civil Establishments. That Commission made several recommendations in regard to the Foreign Office, and he should like to know how far those recommendations had been carried out. There had been some who had advised—and it was the case in some Foreign Services—that there should be an amalgamation of the Consular and Diplomatic Services, and also the Foreign Office into a single Foreign Service. The Ridley Commission did not recommend the adoption of that course; but, at the same time, they did recommend a partial amalgamation. He should like to ask his hon. Friend whether it was the intention of the Government to act any further than they had done in the past in the direction of the amalgamation of these Services? With regard to the cost of the Diplomatic Service, the Ridley Commission did not seem to see the way to any considerable economies. They did, however, suggest that with regard to some of the Embassies—especially that in France—there was probably too large a staff. If we were to compare our Diplomatic Service with that of other countries they were very similar, except in the point of the amalgamation of the Services, and he was bound to say there was no more expenditure on our part than prevailed on the part of many foreign countries, although their Diplomatic and Consular duties were less heavy than ours. Although that was so, there was some reason to think there was often kept on foot in Embassies an unnecessarily large staff. He was not one of those who would desire in any degree to cut down the expenditure of the Diplomatic or Consular Services of this country. He

      1485
      fancied that money properly spent would be well spent, and would be beneficial to the trading interests of this country. But that was not the same point as over-expenditure on particular points; still less was it the same as being over-staffed in certain points. Our present system was to have Ambassadors at high rates of salary. He did not at all object to that, and in posts of great trust there should be large salaries, in order to give men of fitness for the place an equal chance. But whilst these Ambassadors were paid large salaries in large Embassies, there were placed by the aide of them many juniors who had not sufficient work to do to keep them fully employed. In many cases they were paid very small salaries; in some cases none at all. They had a large number of men doing work that could be done better by a smaller but better paid and more efficient staff; and as a result of paying small or no salaries they did not get the very best work. If a man was not willing to work, practically he was not worked at all, and the effect of this system was naturally to cause great stagnation. A great number of the lower ranks were doing extremely uninteresting copying work, or drudgery, with the result that by the time they had reached an age at which they might reasonably expect promotion to important posts, very often they had become inefficient—from doing mere drudgery or no work at all—for doing work of a higher kind. He therefore asked whether any attempt had been made to carry out the suggestions in this direction of the Ridley Commission, and especially on the point of the partial amalgamation of the Services? The next point he should like to allude to concerned the care which was taken as regarded secrecy in the Embassies. Recently there had been a case where a very important disregard of secrecy in a great Embassy occurred through the action of a person who was a subject of the country in which the Embassy was situated. We paid a great deal of money for the Queen's Messenger Service, and we also paid a large staff in Embassies. There seemed to be a hiatus between the two. There were boxes sent to these Embassies by Messengers, which ultimately reached the Ambassador or Secretary himself. But sometimes these boxes had to pass
      1486
      through the hands of persons who were subjects of the country in which the Embassy was situated, and in these cases there was an evident risk of Despatches being opened and read, or copied, or even, in some cases—as in the case of documents which were not or the highest importance—of not reaching their destination at all. Both these things had undoubtedly occurred; and although, no doubt, in the particular case to which he alluded the man had been employed for so many years and was looked upon as trustworthy that there was a great excuse for what occurred, yet, notwithstanding, there was this serious fact—that when this man was dismissed he was found in possession of more than one of the most secret keys which existed in any of our Foreign Embassies. Although it would be out of Order on this Vote to discuss the affairs of the Niger Company, he thought it would be competent for him to ask a question as to the boundaries of the territory administered by that company, and of that which came within the sphere of the Foreign Office. The Charter of the Company had never been laid on the Table of the House, but he found from a published version that the company's territory was supposed to extend to the whole of the basin of the Niger. The view of foreign countries, however, was that the Niger Company administered the country for only 48 miles on each side of the Niger. He would be glad to hear what were the working arrangements between the Company and the Foreign Office. He also found that the expenses of the Mission of Sir Gerald Portal to Uganda were charged on this Vote. No information had been received from the Government as to their views upon the subject of the future of Uganda. Less authorised sources of information would lead to the supposition that there was some idea of extending the Zanzibar Protectorate so as to include Uganda and the whole of the territories now or recently under the control of the British East Africa Company. The Protectorates of the Oil River, or west coast, of the Zanzibar coast, and also in South Africa raised a very serious question—namely, whether these Protectorates ought to be under the control of the Foreign Office or of the Colonial Office? To his mind, the Foreign Office could not properly be

      1487
      charged with details of government. On that ground Lord Granville, when at the Foreign Office in 1880, got rid of the administration of Cyprus. It was very likely true that the Foreign Office could do the work more cheaply, but he thought it would be found in the long run that the system was not a cheap one. There was another point which he wished to press upon the Government, and that was that if any sums of money had to be paid as compensation to foreign subjects on account of the action of the agents of the British East Africa Company, they ought to come out of the pockets of the company and not of the British taxpayer. Captain Lugard was not a servant of the Government, but of the company; and if, in consequence of his proceedings in Uganda, expenditure was necessitated, the money ought to come out of the coffers of the company, if it had any funds, and not out of the pockets of the British taxpayer. If the administration of the country by the company was really very weak and insufficient, surely the time had arrived when the Charter should be forfeited. If this country was to be called upon to pay money as compensation to Roman Catholics on account of acts done by the company's agents, there certainly would be a strong demand for the forfeiture of the Charter. There was the case of Nyassaland, or the Central African Protectorate. It was an anomaly that, although all the territory was administered by one man—namely, Consul Johnston—yet on the north of the Zambesi he acted under the Foreign Office, and south under the Colonial Office, the result being that when Lo Bengula sent his forces north of the Zambesi their Representative had to communicate with the Foreign Office, and that when he sent them south their Representative had to communicate with the Colonial Office. The two Departments were in consequence involved in constant correspondence, and there was a certain amount of friction. In his opinion, the duties to he discharged in connection with the Protectorates should be undertaken by one Department, and not two. He should like, further, to ask whether anything was being done by the Secretary of State in the direction of limiting his own discretion in the patronage of the Consular Department? Even within the last
      1488 s
      15 or 20 years Consular administration had been one of jobbery—he had almost said of corruption. Money-lenders had been placed in the Consular Service in discreditable circumstances within the last 15 or 20 years, and still remained in it. He would suggest that the Secretary of State should lay down rules respecting the exercise of patronage in connection with this Service. Among the Consuls was a gentleman who had been removed from Madagascar in order to please the French. He had been removed for no other reason than because he had done his duty and had become distasteful to the French in consequence. The Consuls remaining in Madagascar had become useless in consequence of the recognition of the French Protectorate and the results that had followed it.
      SIR J. FERGUSSONsaid, there was one point upon which many Members of the Committee desired further information, and upon which they should have an assurance from the Government—he meant the serious responsibilities incurred in the Uganda district. He did not agree with the right hon. Baronet (Sir C. Dilke) in his general views upon this question. He did not wish to press the Government to make any statement that might be considered premature; but he thought, before the House separated, they ought to have some fresh assurances from the Government that they were thoroughly alive to the responsibilities which undoubtedly had been incurred in the region to which he alluded, and of which they could not now divest themselves. It was probable that the Government were in possession of more recent information than that contained in the Papers which had been presented to Parliament. He should like to know, for instance, the grounds upon which Sir Gerald Portal withdrew a considerable distance from Uganda and those upon which here traced his steps? The position of affairs in Uganda could not be regarded as unsatisfactory. The latest intelligence showed that their officers had been able, with the very scanty means at their disposal, to maintain British interests in the best way—namely, with the least possible sacrifice of life. Everything depended upon their policy being firm and consistent. It must not be marked by that vacillation which in former years

      1489
      characterised a Government composed largely of the Members of the present Administration—a policy which led to such grave disaster in Africa. If the notion should get abroad that their stay in Uganda was to be temporary, no confidence would be placed in the assurances given by their officers, and natives who were now inclined to act as their friends would hesitate long before they declared themselves to be on their side. At the beginning of the Session the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs (Sir E. Grey) himself declared that withdrawal from Uganda would undoubtedly be followed by local misery and disaster.
      THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir E. GREY,)said, what he did say at the beginning of the Session was that statements had been made to the Government to the effect that disastrous consequences would follow the withdrawal of the company, and that the Government, in the circumstances, felt bound to make inquiries with a view to ascertain whether those statements were well founded. He gave no individual opinion on the subject on the occasion referred to by the right hon. Baronet.
      SIR J. FERGUSSONsaid, the Prime Minister (Mr. W. E. Gladstone) referred to the statement as the opinion of the right hon. Baronet.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, this statement was that made by the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere); it was an opinion given after reading the Lugard Report as to the real origin of the civil war in Uganda. The statement had nothing to do with regard to future action.
      SIR J. FERGUSSONsaid, at all events, earlier in the Session the right hon. Baronet (Sir E. Grey) recognised the responsibilities of the Government and the country, and he felt confident that the right hon. Baronet would not minimise them now. The right hon. Baronet (Sir C. Dilke) had expressed a strong opinion as to which of the Departments ought to take charge of and administer these Protectorates; but it must be remembered that in cases like Uganda, whose boundaries were little settled, and which touched on the territories of Foreign Powers, it was more difficult for them to be dealt with by the Colonial Office, as was the case with settled territories which touched only on
      1490
      other British territory, or that over which Her Majesty was suzerain. It would be premature if he were to express an opinion on the subject in connection with a region such as Uganda, where the position was as yet inchoate; but, speaking generally, he thought that the Foreign Office should take charge of territories so situated that International questions were likely to arise respecting them between England and Foreign Powers. Then with regard to the Establishment, and the opinion expressed as to the staff, he would point to the recent experience in Siam as proof of the necessity of keeping up the staff so as to be able to deal with sudden emergencies. The Committee would understand that a crisis might arise suddenly and unexpectedly, and they should always be prepared to meet a crisis if it did arise. What he had said with regard to Uganda applied to Niassa. They had only just begun to exercise their influence there; and it would be premature to declare it a Colony; but with regard to Uganda, it would be highly desirable that they should have the latest information in the possession of the Government, and an assurance that no vital change would be made until the House and the country were in possession of Sir Gerald Portal's Report.
      MR. R. WALLACEsaid, he would not have intruded on the Committee but for the tone of the speech delivered by the right hon. Baronet who had just sat down. He wished to emphasise the remarks of the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean with regard to Uganda. He quite appreciated the position of the Government. The Government was at present in a state in which their judgment was suspended. He did not suppose the Report from the Commissioner was in a state to be presented to the House. At all events, it was not in a state of preparedness for discussion in the House. He would call attention to Enclosure 7, page 24. So far as the Papers were before them, they had a right to information; he presumed, when the Report was laid on the Table, the Government would be able to tell them what they intended doing. Well, the point on which, meanwhile, information was required was this—the Paper before them seemed to him to approve that there were to be Permanent Residents. This seemed to him to be going

      1491
      beyond the understanding arrived at. He should be glad to find that he was wrong in his suspicions, and he hoped they would soon know that there was to be no Permanent Resident or arrangement of the kind. Another point that occurred to him was that if they were to maintain any permanent connection with that place they would have a second Ireland—a large Catholic community and a considerable Protestant community, and they would have contest for mastery by both Parties. He was not going to enter upon the Irish Home Rule question on this occasion; but he wished to say that, as he was not frightened in the case of Ireland when there were two Parties of this character, he would not be frightened by the application of the same principle in Africa. He went upon broad principles, and he said that as the Government had not been afraid in relation to this matter in Ireland, they need not be alarmed in reference to this district in Africa. He was sorry to be obliged to complain of one feature in Sir Gerald Portal's action. Generally, he thought he was very favourable to that office; but he noticed that at the end of his Dispatch he went out of his way to pay compliments to Bishop Tucker, ignoring the Catholic Bishop. The absence of the Catholic Bishop's name was conspicuous. This seemed to reflect upon him, and to show a tendency or leaning towards the Protestant side, and he did not think they could approve of the idea that they were going to take up that side as a matter of course. He wished to say one word upon another point—the conduct of the British East Africa Company. This company seemed to him to have been acting in direct opposition to the terms of their Charter. He had no hesitation in saying that the evils and mischiefs that had arisen in Uganda were due to a lawless disregard of the conditions of the Charter on the part of the company, who ought to be called upon to bear the charge. The Charter required that before any Treaty could be acted upon it should have the approval of the Secretary of State; but they had acted in the most high-handed manner, disregarding the Secretary of State. In one case he believed the Treaty did not even reach the Secretary of State, much less receive his approbation. Such conduct as this was a source of the greatest trouble. He
      1492
      was of opinion that the Charter should be withdrawn, because as long as it remained in force the Government of this country would be in danger of being involved in the responsibility arising out of the imprudence and weakness of the company.
      THE CHAIRMAN: It appears to me that the hon. Member is wandering from the question. The question of policy does not arise on this Vote, and it is impossible to discuss the conduct of the company and the administration of the Charter. The hon. Member must confine himself to the Vote.
      MR. R. WALLACEsaid, he rose mainly to deal with the Mission of Sir Gerald Portal, and he understood, as that officer was to report on the state of matters in Uganda, the question of the company and its Charter would be relevant to the point of discussion; but he really had exhausted the topic, and, therefore, there was no occasion—still less was there any desire on his part—to prolong the discussion. He hoped they would have from the Government a statement of their attitude on the whole question.
      MR. HANBURYsaid, he had been a Member of the Commission which inquired into these Services, and he should be glad to get from the Representative of the Foreign Office some information as to how far the recommendations of the Commission had been carried out. The Commission had recommended that the distinction which at present existed between appointments in the Diplomatic Service and in the Foreign Office should be abolished, and that the property qualification of £400 a year in the case of the former Service should be done away with. He desired to know whether any steps had been taken to give effect to those recommendations? What he wanted to. speak about principally, however, was some information which had been given by Mr. Law, one of our two commercial attachés, to the effect that our commercial interests were not being looked after by our Ambassadors as they should be. The only attachés of this kind we at present possessed were Sir Joseph Crowe at Paris, who represented the whole of Europe with the exception of Russia, and Mr. Law at St. Petersburg; and the latter had stated before the Commis-

      1493
      sion it was practically impossible for him to do all the work that was thrown upon him at St. Petersburg, in the Levant, and in Persia, and he laid great stress on the necessity of there being at each of the higher Embassies some official directly responsible for commercial matters. He said that when be was away from the Embassy—which was generally the case, his duty being to travel through the different countries in his area—he had found that commercial work was not assigned to any particular individual, and he never knew whom to correspond with. This work being everybody's work, was really nobody's. The work did not receive the attention it would receive if all the commercial business were thrown into the hands of one official. We had not at our Embassies men who had commercial training or knowledge, and Mr. Law instanced the Reports that were sent home by the Secretaries of Legations as showing that in our Embassies we had no men of that kind. Some of the Reports were of such little value that the Foreign Office did not take the trouble to publish more than about half of them. That was a state of things that ought to be remedied; but as these commercial attachés had only recently been appointed, it would be well, he thought, to wait a little longer to see what use they were before we largely increased their numbers. With regard to the Consular Reports, there was not, he believed, at the Foreign Office any person who had any practical experience of Consular life. At one port in Russia—according to Mr. Law—where 300 British vessels entered in the course of the year, the Consul was only paid £10 a year. According to the same authority, our trade at Moscow was much neglected owing to the fact that we had no fitting Representative there, our Consul receiving a miserable salary, whilst the German Representative drew over £600 a year. The same state of things prevailed at Helsingfors, Revel, and Odessa. He quite agreed with what had been said to-night, and with the recommendations of the Commission, that in view of the small amount we paid our Consuls we should cut down the salaries of some of our Ambassadors. The salary which should be cut down was that of the Ambassador to Paris. The Embassy in Paris cost the country £16,000 a year,
      1494
      while the Russian cost £10,000, and the German £9,000. The salary of our Ambassador there was equal to the whole cost of the German Embassy. It was said that it was necessary for him to entertain a good deal; but Paris was, by reason of the way in which French society was split up into parties, just now, perhaps, the last place in the world where any Ambassador would do much good by entertaining. As had been pointed out, the men at the top of the Service were highly paid, but the lower officials were badly paid—certainly not on the same scale as the corresponding German officials. This was a matter which required some alteration. He thought it was the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster who had alluded to the fact that neither in ability nor in general qualities was the standard in the case of these officials up to that of other countries, nor to the standard which this country had a right to expect. That was largely due to the drudgery they had to go through in their early years in the Diplomatic Service, which disgusted them with it, and to the absence of any training which fitted them for the work they had to do in the future. The drudgery they had to do absolutely disgusted them with the profession they had taken up. With regard to Consular pensions, while there was no distinction between the Consular and Civil Service scale of pensions there was great difference between the Diplomatic and Civil Service scales. To begin with, anyone in the Diplomatic Service who was ill could draw a pension after five years, whereas in the Civil Service no one could draw it unless he had served 10 years, and the scale of pensions in the Diplomatic Service was ridiculously high. In the Civil Service a man got for every year of service l–60th of his salary, and in the Diplomatic Service it was fully double that amount. The pension of an Ambassador was based on the salary received during the past three years, and the result was that the pensions we paid to our Ambassadors were extremely high, indeed out of all proportion to Ambassadors in any Foreign Service. As to minor details, he should like to know what account was kept of the valuable plate at the British Embassies abroad? He should also like to know how the

      1495
      amounts for Ambassadorial expenses and "outfits" were regulated, and why the expenditure in Paris was the fixed sum of £4,000, whilst in connection with other Ambassadors it was one-third of the salary on appointment and one-sixth on transfer? The sum paid under this head in connection with the Embassy in Paris was out of all proportion to the amount paid in respect of outfit in connection with all other Embassies. He did not see why they should go out of their way to add to an item of this kind having regard to the heavy charge already imposed on the British taxpayer in connection with the Ambassador to France. He had to complain that the regulation of the Foreign Office requiring heads of Legations to send home confidential Reports as to the officials serving under them was never observed, and he wished to urge on the Government that there should be some limit to the authority of the Foreign Secretary in the selection of Consuls. The only condition at present was that a Consul on appointment should not be more than 50 years of age, but the most incompetent man might be jobbed into the most important position. It was all very well to say that a Foreign Secretary would not do this, but such things had happened in the past and might happen again. There ought to be some rule which would prevent such a thing happening. A great deal of injury was done to English trade from the fact that Consuls often knew nothing of the language of the country in which they resided. It seemed ridiculous to send men into foreign countries to discharge duties so important to England, and expect them to do so efficiently, when they were unacquainted with the very language of the countries to which they were sent. With regard to the Soudan, he was told that as the winter came on Osman Digna would be "raiding" again. A great deal of the Lancashire trade had been lost through this "raiding." We lost our customers through trade being stopped because crops were raided, and the people had nothing to buy Manchester goods with, and because in some eases the people who would have traded were killed. He thought the idea of starving out the Soudan was a ridiculous one, the sole result being that trade for England, which ought to go through Suakim went through Massowah, the only gainers
      1496
      being the Italians. He put aside the question of our pledges to the Soudanese. There people were told we would protect them, and they were disarmed, and then we left them to the attacks of Osman Digna and retired to S akim without giving them any protection at all. We had broken our pledges to the natives of the Soudan. And both from the point of view of honour and of trade, the present policy of starving out the Soudan ought to be abandoned. With regard to the present position of Nyassaland, he wished to know whether the country was under the authority of the Imperial Government, or under that of the British South Africa Company? There were very grave doubts on the point. To begin with, the Public Accounts Committee had had complaints brought before them of the way in which judicial fees were being expended in building a Court House at Blantyre. The British Government could get no account of the taxation, and revenue, and expenditure of that country, and there was nothing to show whether this money was being properly expended or not. Then Proclamations were issued, but it was impossible to ascertain the effect of them at the Foreign Office. This was unfair to the traders, who had a right to know the general laws of the country, so far as they were embodied in Proclamations. Mr. Albert Grey, in a letter he had addressed to The Spectator, had stated that Nyassaland was practically the property of the company, which subsidised Her Majesty's Government at the rate of £17,000 per annum; and that the expenses of the Commissioner of Nyassaland were paid by the company and not by the Imperial Government. They knew that Mr. Johnston acted as Commissioner of Her Majesty's Government in the Protectorate, and also as agent of the British South Africa Company in their sphere of influence. That was an anomalous dual position which he did not think tended to good government. He asked for a definite statement as to who was responsible for the government of this important district of Nyassaland. Was it Her Majesty's Government, or was it, as this Director of the Company said, that the British South Africa Company were subsidising the Imperial Government, finding them £17,500 a year, and paying the expenses

      1497
      of the Imperial Commissioner? He did not say how this ought to be, but he maintained that they ought not to play fast and loose with the matter. If Nyassaland was to be governed by the British South Africa Company, let them say so, but if it was not, it ought to be governed as an Imperial Protectorate, and we ought not to accept a subsidy.
      SIR A. ROLLITsaid, that the right hon. Baronet had rendered a public service by drawing attention to the Ridley Commission, and to the necessity of a closer relation between the Diplomatic and Consular Services. He was afraid it would be some time before that reform could be effected, but in the meantime he desired to point out the great importance of rendering to our Diplomatists every possible commercial assistance, in order that they might be able properly to fulfil the duties they owed to their country in connection with the commercial affairs of this country. He was bound to admit that he thought there was improvement in diplomatic circles with regard to their commercial duties; but it was capable of extension. If their position was not strengthened he had no doubt that the commercial interests of this country would greatly suffer. The number of our commercial attachés was less than it ought to be, while the areas over which their duties extended were too large and ought to be reduced. In the Diplomatic Service it was necessary for our Ambassadors in large and important negotiations to have ready at hand the assistance of some one familiar with all the commercial interests of the country. Take the case, which occurred to him at the moment, of the negotiations connected with the Commercial Treaty with Spain. That was a matter of immense moment to the trade and industries of this country. At present we were under a modusvivendi; but when the Cortes met, there might be some ratification of the proposed arrangements. He wanted to know who had been rendering, more or less permanently, assistance to our Ambassador in Madrid, and whether during the ultimate portion of the negotiations he would have that or what assistance at his command? On behalf of the Chambers of Commerce he had seen Sir Henry Drummond Wolff before he left for Spain, and he was bound to admit that that, gentle-
      1498
      man had entered fully into these questions; but there were many matters with which it was not possible that he should be so fully conversant as to be able to represent the wants and desires of this country adequately. He hoped the Under Secretary would be able to give an assurance to the Committee that when the Treaty was in course of revision commercial assistance would be given to Sir Henry Drummond Wolff in the matter. He agreed with the hon. Member for Preston that the list of Consular remuneration required revision. A good deal more expedition, moreover, might be used in the publication of Consular Reports. These were not the days in which they could wait for commercial intelligence for a whole year with regard to foreign trading competitors, and yet he noticed that a Consular Report from Bavaria, dated "August 20th," was brought up to the end of last year. That Report was full of most important and suggestive matters—matters that had a distinct bearing on all our commercial interests. It was only a small document, covering not more than 15 pages, and yet nearly a whole year elapsed before it was made known to the country. Such a state of things should not be allowed to exist. He would suggest that the Congested Districts Board in Ireland should give most careful perusal to the Commercial Reports which had been sent by the Consul in Denmark. These Reports dealt with matters of the greatest importance to the people of this country, and they were suggestive in every possible way of that collectivism in agriculture which was all-important. He referred to creameries and the making of butter. From what he had himself seen, the collection of milk and the packing of butter at Copenhagen were admirable. If the Danish methods were observed in Ireland they would be suggestive of improvements there which would be of the greatest value. One of the chief exporters of produce from Denmark had told him that the one country which he and others feared, as a rival, in the future, if it possessed better processes of preparation, manufacture, and packing, was Ireland. As to Newfoundland, he urged, with reference to the claims of the French for compensation in the matter of the lobster factories, that equal consideration should be given to the

      1499
      owners of British vessels and other subjects as were given to the French, for their ships had been seized and confiscated under the forms of law, and they had been most inequitably dealt with.
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, he desired to support the observations of the hon. Member who had just sat down as to Consular Reports. Two years ago he had suggested to the Government that some means should be taken to circulate the Reports and other Papers for the benefit of the public by sending them to the Public Libraries and other institutions. He believed that if these were so circulated they would be found of great value. The Vote comprised very nearly half-a-million of money, and he was afraid that there was a great deal of waste in connection with it. It struck him as extraordinary that whilst our Ambassador in the United States received only £6,000 a year our Ambassador in France received £9,000, and those in Austria and Turkey obtained £8,000 each. He should like to have some explanation of the differences in the amounts. He also desired to know why it was we had Secretaries of Legation at Coburg and Darmstadt, and a Minister in Saxony? He wanted, further, to know why certain Members of the House who happened to be lawyers had been paid for their services in reference to the Behring Sea Arbitration, whilst laymen who had attended that Arbitration had not received anything at all? If he had his way, if there was anybody who was not paid it would be the lawyers, because they already got enough of the public money. At the same time, he congratulated the Attorney General (Sir C. Russell) and the ex-Attorney General (Sir R. Webster) on the services they had rendered to the country in connection with the Arbitration. As to Uganda, he thought that money was being spent there with a view probably to annexation. He was told that the majority of the Cabinet were infected with the Jingo sentiment. Everybody knew that the Tories took an extraordinary interest in foreign affairs, the reason being that they wished to divert attention from home affairs, and to prevent necessary reforms being carried out. He noticed very often that when the Liberal Party was in power those who had seats on the Treasury Bench did not think it at
      1500
      all necessary that they should carry out Radical principles. That was not good enough for the Radical Party, and he should certainly like to know what was now the position of the East Africa Company with regard to Uganda? He was afraid that there was some danger of Her Majesty's Government being led into doing a great deal more than their supporters anticipated, and he trusted they would give a further assurance that they intended to keep the undertaking already given not to pledge the House or the country in any way until after Sir Gerald Portal had reported.
      SIR R. TEMPLEdesired to assure the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down that the reason why Conservative Members took a keen interest in all Consular and Diplomatic matters were not those which the hon. Member supposed. Their real reasons were that they desired to secure the promotion of British interests abroad, the security of British capital, and the extension of British commerce. If the hon. Gentleman and his friends did not sympathise with those objects, he thought they would have sooner or later to reckon with the industrial classes of this country.
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, Radical Members entirely sympathised with the objects which the hon. Baronet had stated, but it was the Radical and Liberal Party that had really made the trade of this country what it was.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he would not discuss with the hon. Gentleman which Party had shown the greatest interest in the extension of foreign commerce in semi-civilised regions beyond the ocean. He wished to make some remarks on the Consular Service, with which he necessarily had a special acquaintance. He quite agreed with all that had been said regarding the extreme importance of that Service, and the importance also of its being properly organised. The Service was adorned with many officers and gentlemen who did credit to their country; and as they were not present to speak for themselves, he desired to say on their behalf, as one who knew their worth, that England was greatly indebted to her Consuls and Vice Consuls in many parts of the world. At the same time, he admitted that the Service ought to be better organised, although

      1501
      he was afraid the subject of organisation was more difficult than it at first sight appeared. There was already an organised group of Consuls in the China Seas for China and Japan, and he fancied that no other nation trading in those regions had a better staff of Consuls than we had. He thought it would be desirable to have one group of Consuls for the Mediterranean. He was very well acquainted with the shores of the Mediterranean, and he believed that one or two languages would carry a man pretty well all around the Mediterranean—certainly, Arabic and Italian would be sufficient for that purpose. There might also be a group for the West Indies. He had often heard complaints made of Consuls being transferred from somewhere in Asia Minor or Turkey to the West Indies. In carrying on the work of organisation a difficulty always arose with reference to the arranging a proper size for each group, and for giving the officers proper chances of promotion in their own group. With reference to Uganda, he had listened with regret—he might say with pain—to the expressions used by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir C. Dilke), and afterwards by the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. R. Wallace), regarding the conduct of Captain Lugard. He thought that great reserve ought to be exercised by hon. Members in criticising our officers, who had certainly done their best for us.
      MR. A. C. MORTON: He is not our officer.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, Captain Lugard was an officer of the British Army, and was employed by a great British Chartered Company. In that sense he was a British officer, and he had certainly done his best for his country.
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, it had been distinctly stated over and over again that Captain Lugard was lent to the Company, and that we were in no way responsible for him.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he had not stated that we were responsible. What he had said was that Captain Lugard virtually was our officer. At all events, whether he was our officer or not, he was our countryman and a member of our Army, who had done yeoman service abroad. He thought hon. Members should maintain a careful reserve until the whole particulars were forthcoming. He was
      1502
      sure that Captain Lugard would come out of the ordeal of an investigation of his conduct as gold came out of the furnace. Two gentlemen opposite had spoken of compensation having possibly to be paid to some of the Roman Catholics in Uganda. He hoped that the Government would not consent to pay any compensation unless and until a proper judicial investigation had taken place. As regarded Sir Gerald Portal's Mission, it would be very interesting if the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs would explain what was the exact position of our Representatives in Uganda at this moment. Was it not the case that Sir Gerald Portal left Uganda, proceeded a certain distance towards his headquarters at Zanzibar, and then retraced his steps? Whilst he quite understood that no conclusion could be arrived at by the Committee until the result of the Mission was understood, and there had been an opportunity of discussing the question, he might be allowed to express a hope that the Mission would result in the establishment of the British Protectorate in Uganda. He said this partly on behalf of British commerce and of British interests generally in East Africa, and partly in the interests of the religious world, over and above all the arguments relating to the Slave Trade. The day had passed when the House of Commons could afford to ignore the wishes of the great number of our countrymen who were interested in Protestant Missions. He could assure the House that the keenest anxiety was taken in the subject, and that all those who were interested in Protestant Missions breathed a prayer that the House might be led to a wise conclusion in the matter, and that the Protectorate so long wanted might be established.
      COLONEL LOCKWOOD COLONEL LOCKWOOD (Essex, Epping), said, that whilst appointments had, he believed, been made from the Foreign Office to the Diplomatic Service, he was not aware that anybody had been transferred from the Diplomatic Service to the Foreign Office, although he knew that such transfers were frequently desired by members of the Diplomatic Service. He noticed that the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. A. C. Morton), who was always ready to abolish everything, wished to abolish the Missions at Coburg and Darmstadt. There was no doubt that we received

      1503
      valuable information from Germany on commercial matters; and in view of our relations to the present Duke of Coburg, it was necessary that we should keep up our Mission in that Duchy. He believed the hon. Member for Preston (Mr. Hanbury) overstated the matter when he said that attachés of 10 years' standing were kept at copying work, but he believed that attachés of seven or eight years' standing, had to do that work. This rather pointed to the necessity of creating a sufficient staff of permanent officials at the Embassies for the purpose of doing clerical work of this kind. He was aware that many of our Representatives abroad were against the establishment of such a staff, but he thought the suggestion was well worth the attention of the Secretary of State.
      MAJOR JONESthought we were paying too much at one end and too little at the other of our Diplomatic and Consular Services. For a great many years we had paid more to our Representative at Washington than the President of the United States received, whilst we were not giving a penny to Her Majesty's Consular Representative at Saint Paul, which was a very important commercial centre. A short time ago, having written to one of Her Majesty's Vice Consuls for information respecting towage dues, pilotage, &c., he received a reply in which the Vice Consul said that as no allowance was made to him for postage he was compelled to post unstamped the replies to those letters in which postage had not been enclosed. He (Major Jones) contended that it was somewhat undignified to place our Representative in such a position that he had to write humiliating notes of this kind. Some little allowance ought, he submitted, to be made to our Consuls for postage, stationery, and office expenses.
      MR. R. G. WEBSTERthought that everybody in the House must have agreed with what the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir C. Dilke) said with regard to our Chartered Companies. Our diplomatic relations might be strained not only with regard to the British East Africa Company, but with regard to other Chartered Companies.
      THE CHAIRMAN: That subject comes under another Vote.
      MR. R. G. WEBSTERsaid, he wished to refer to the Mozambique Company, with regard to which there was a
      1504
      Consular Vote, and with whose Suzerain State—Portugal—we had Consular relations. The Mozambique Company was established in 1889, and various Charters and rights were given to individuals in the country. Within a very short time afterwards the British South Africa Company was formed. That Company obtained from some individual, who they declared was a King, a Charter, or deed, and they then bundled all the settlers, many of whom were British subjects, out of that part of the country. These people attempted to appeal to the High Court of this country, but were told there was no jurisdiction. There was a jurisdiction at the time of Warren Hastings; and though he (Mr. Webster) was a Member of what had been described as the Jingo Party, he was ready to stand up for those who were wronged, whether they were British or Portuguese subjects. He did not wish to blame anybody for the arbitrary action of the British South Africa Company; he simply blamed the system under which we had given over our rights to a Company.
      THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must not go into the operations of the British South Africa Company. They do not come under the Vote.
      MR. R. G. WEBSTERsaid, that in that case he would bring the question before the Foreign Office.
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid, that in view of the fact that the Diplomatic and Consular Vote had increased this year by nearly £27,000, he did not wonder that that undaunted patriot, the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. A. C. Morton), had attacked it with his usual vehemence and success. The right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir C. Dilke) had expressed an opinion that our Ambassadors were not too well paid. Witness after witness before the Ridley Commission avowed that they were more highly-paid than those of other countries. The standard that ought to be adopted was not what we paid here, but what other countries paid, for that was regulated by the cost of living in the particular place. One of the arguments put forward in favour of the present high salaries was that our Ambassadors had to entertain very largely. In his opinion, that was absurd. He thought it a very vulgar idea of an Ambassador that he should go abroad to dispense chicken and champagne, and he did not believe

      1505
      an Ambassador ever obtained any State secret or other secret by that method of procedure. With reference to the plate, he knew that the plate in the Paris Embassy alone cost this country £8,500 15s. 11d. This would indicate that we had knocking about the rest of the world something like £100,000 worth of plate. He would draw the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to this fact, so that when occasion arose the right hon. Gentleman, instead of putting his hand into the Treasury Chest, might put it into the Ambassadorial Plate Chest. He (Mr. Gibson Bowles) would like to see the Consuls increased, and the Ambassadors decreased, in number, and he would also like to see the Consuls better paid. He objected to the monstrous system of private letters indulged in by our Ambassadors. It had been stated that Ambassadors put their most important information into private letters, which were the property of the Secretary of State for the time being. No record whatever was kept of these letters; those received from Ambassadors were taken away from the office by the Secretary of State, and the result was that the records of the Foreign Office were absolutely falsified by them. The system was reckless, bad, and improvident, and he should have thought that a high-minded Government like the present Government, with a particularly high-minded Secretary for Foreign Affairs, would at once have taken steps to put an end to it. He complained that the methods by which correspondence was conveyed to and from the Ambassadors was such as to enable Foreign Governments to get hold of our most secret affairs. There were several foreigners employed as messengers in our Ambassadorial Service. There was one who had been in the Permanent Service, most improperly, he thought, and perhaps it was that official who had divulged the secrets referred to by the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean. He considered that our Ambassadorial Service was altogether too dear. In Denmark our establishment cost £4,132, while France, whose interest in the country was much greater, spent only £3,080 there. In the Netherlands we spent £4,478, and France £3,600. In Sweden the figures were—England, £4,150, and France, £2,960. Switzerland was the only country in which the cost of the
      1506
      French Ambassadorial Service was greater than the cost of ours, the figures being—England £1,900, and France £2,860; but, as was well-known, Switzerland was of the most terrible moment to France. He thought the cost of our Establishments might be reduced in Denmark by £1,500; in the Netherlands by £1,600; in Sweden by £1,000; and in Switzerland by £500; and we should still have our Diplomatic Service carried on excellently well in those countries. Then there were a number of small German States in which we maintained Diplomatic Establishments without the slightest necessity. Our Establishment at Bavaria cost £2,150; at Coburg, £700; at Darmstadt, £702; and at Saxony, £1,150; and yet at all those places there was absolutely no diplomatic work to be done. All those States, formed part of the German Empire; and as their foreign affairs were conducted at. Berlin, our Diplomatic Establishments were altogether unnecessary. He was surprised that the present Radical Government, which was pledged to economy, did not abolish every one of these unnecessary posts, by which they would save the country £2,550 a year. The time had arrived when our system of Embassies should be overhauled. England had given a pledge to the world that she would never fight again; and as no one now believed that there was any danger of war with England under any circumstances whatever, the action and influence of our Ambassadors was very much circumscribed. Since 1882 there had been no Report from the British Commissioner who had been sent out to secure the free navigation of the mouth of the Danube. It was time that something was done in the matter. It seemed to him that we did not want a Commissioner there at all, for he was simply set aside or bullied by Russia. What we should do was to secure the separate and independent rights of Roumania to the free navigation of the mouth of the Danube. He noticed that at Shanghai there was a Consulate General and Judge, as well as a Consul and Assistant Judge. The business had been done there for years by one Consul, and he thought one Consul was still sufficient. But, in any case, we had there an officer who discharged duties which were inconsistent with each other, for it was impossible for a man properly to be a Judge and a Consul at the same

      1507
      time. As Consul he was the advocate of British interests, but as Judge he ought to be entirely independent. He thought this officer should be deprived of his Consular duties and remain Judge only.
      MR. BURDETT-COUTTSsaid, that he recognised the inconvenience of attempting a debate on East African affairs at such a time in the Session. But an attack had been made on the Company and on one of its officers which called for a brief reply. He did not have the advantage of hearing the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir C. Dilke), but he did listen to the hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. R. Wallace) indulging in a ferocious attack—unsupported by a single atom of fact—on Captain Lugard, the brave officer who had done such valuable work in Uganda, almost single-handed, and under tremendous difficulties.
      MR. E. WALLACE: I refrained from mentioning Captain Lugard's name. Anything I said was about the British South Africa Company.
      MR. BURDETT-COUTTSsaid, he was sorry to say he had clear in his recollection the fact that the hon. Member had referred to the Administrator of the company. The Administrator of the company was Captain Lugard, who was responsible for everything that had occurred in Uganda at the time. The hon. Member had been ruled out of Order; but he (Mr. Burdett-Coutts) found this connection between the work of Captain Lugard and the subject under discussion, that the former had paved a way for the future work which he hoped Sir Gerald Portal would do in that country in the future. The attack on Captain Lugard was based on the fact that he had not waited for the approval of the Foreign Office before taking action. He commended to everyone who was acquainted with the history of British enterprise in all parts of the world the ridiculous suggestion it was that a man engaged in carrying out an enterprise in a wild, savage country like South Africa should wait for 12 months until he got a reply from the Foreign Office, before taking action on the critical problems that hourly presented themselves. He would not, at the present time, go into the general attacks which had been made on the com-
      1508
      pany. He would only say that it was a matter of special regret to him to hear those attacks of unreasoning violence made by a Representative of the capital of a country which had always taken a foremost part in every enterprise for the amelioration of the savage tribes in Africa, and a country especially which had originated and had given the greatest and most valuable support to the British East Africa Company. The company claimed, and believed they could prove to the hilt, that they had expended the greater portion of their capital in doing a national work, and he was sure that that same public opinion which had thrust them forward in Uganda would, when all the circumstances were under review, declare that in pursuing their way amidst the greatest difficulties the Company had always kept clear before them the honour of British enterprise in that country.
      SIR G. BADEN-POWELLsaid, he desired to say a few words on one important matter, upon which he had had recent personal experience. This was the question of the amalgamation of their Diplomatic and Consular Services. He emphasised the fact that their Diplomatic Service in nearly all the capitals was overworked at the present moment; but there was an improvement desired with the view of getting better commercial information for the traders of this country. In appointing commercial agents, however, they must be very careful not to fall into the error of other countries, and appoint those who were, to say the least, financially interested in the concerns of the locality. They ought also to have some means instituted for a redistribution or reclassification of salaries in accordance with the growing wants or the decreasing wants of a particular post. If there were some general scheme for the redistribution of salaries at stated periods, he believed they would got more work done with greater economy. Here, as elsewhere, they were very much too apt to judge of the importance of the work done by the statement of the exports and imports of the country, whereas those who had been behind the scenes knew that equally important British interests were those of the employment of British subjects in the country, and of the investment of British capital in any particular country. He was convinced that their Diplomatic

      1509
      and their Consular Services were both underpaid; but, at the same time, he must acknowledge that they obtained far better work from both those Services than any other nation did.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, the most important point raised was that of the appointment of commercial attachés for different districts, whose business it would be to travel over those districts, ascertain their needs, and give advice as to the organisation of the commercial trade of those districts. That was an important suggestion, but he was not able to announce any decision in the matter, because the power of the Foreign Office in procuring assistance of this kind was, undoubtedly, limited by the funds placed at its disposal. The commercial work was some of the most important work to be discharged at the Foreign Office, and he was glad to say that it was receiving more and more attention. During the time he had been at the Foreign Office he had seen a growth of Commercial Reports, and the tendency was for them to grow more and more. Preliminary steps had been taken to carry out the recommendations of the Royal Commission towards the amalgamation of the Foreign Office and Diplomatic Services, and successful candidates in the examinations recently held had received certificates qualifying them for both Services. Other recommendations of the Commission, which there was no intention to evade, were going to be discussed with the Treasury, and since the date of the Report of the Commission something had been done towards the reduction of small German Legations. As to the alleged over-working of Embassies, he did not think that there was any general overwork, though, undoubtedly, the work was irregular—sometimes very heavy and sometimes light. So far as the present Government was concerned, no charge could be made against the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of having imported into the Consular Service people from outside who had no special training. The doctrine had been strictly adhered to that when a good post fell vacant it should be given to someone who had already proved his fitness by work done in the Service. With regard to trading and unpaid Consuls, he admitted that wherever there was any British shipping or trade, they should have a paid Consul, but naturally they
      1510
      had to make the best use of what they had, and where they found an unpaid Consul it was because it was necessary to place some limit on the expenditure devoted to the Consular Service abroad. They endeavoured to devote the expenditure to the most important places, and filled up the less important positions by unpaid men who were engaged in trade, but who were well recommended and trustworthy people. He would only say with regard to the dates of the Commercial Reports, it was sometimes true that the dates were considerably in advance of the time to which the Report referred, but that was in consequence of it frequently happening that the statistics necessary were not published sooner in foreign countries. He passed over the plate provided for the various Ambassadors, though he rather thought the hon. Member for Lynn Regis (Mr. Gibson Bowles) did recommend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to have it seized and melted down for purposes of the Mint. As to the question of private letters, that was not a matter the Committee would really expect him to deal with, as there had been no change made in the system. With regard to the larger political questions raised, he would take first the question of the Soudan. He could only repeat on that what he had stated the other day, that no doubt it was very desirable that the Soudan should be opened up to trade, but the difficulty was that past history had not made it easy to approach the people in the Soudan itself. Any means that were taken would have to depend on political considerations, and, of course, the policy of the Egyptian Government would enter into the question. As to the present state of hostilities, he hoped they would soon pass away, but he was afraid it would be a question of time. Then he took the question of Nyassaland. It was true that Her Majesty's Representative there occupied more than one position. He would answer at once what the hon. Member for Preston (Mr. Hanbury) had said, that it was the Imperial Authority that was responsible for affairs in Nyassaland, and to the Foreign Office complaints must be addressed in regard to any matter in that district. The Chartered South Africa Company had subsidised Nyassaland to the extent of £10,000, but at the same time it did not carry with it any reversionary rights.

      1511
      Undoubtedly, when the late Government were dealing with this question of Nyassaland, when they determined to have a Protectorate, they were bound to ask the House for a sum of money or take advantage of the South Africa Company. Up to the present moment it remained the same. They had to choose on such questions as this either payment of a sum annually for the administration of the country, place it under a Chartered Company, or they might receive from the Chartered Company an annual sum in payment of expenses, because, somehow, the expenses had to be met. That was the plan of the late Government, and was the plan of the present Government. As to the suggestion that Nyassaland ought to be transferred to the Colonial Office, that was a question that might arise, but not just yet. The hon. Member for St. Pancras (Mr. Webster) believed it belonged so much to the Foreign Office that he had endeavoured to-night to discuss the whole question.
      SIR C. W. DILKE: That was on the difficulty in Matabeleland.
      SIR E. GREY: Yes; but his contention was that something which was now under the Colonial Office ought rather to be discussed on a Foreign Office Vote.
      MR. R. G. WEBSTER: I simply stated that wrongs had been committed against Portuguese subjects in Mozambique territory.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, with regard to the former points, reference was made to the arrangements that were closed before the present Government came into power. In the early stages of these African territories a great deal of the correspondence, chiefly in reference to boundaries, had to be carried on by the Foreign Office, and it was therefore convenient that for a time they should be administered by that Department.
      MR. HANBURYasked why there was no Return of the expenditure and taxation, and why it was impossible for anyone interested in Nyassaland to get information as to the proclamations?
      SIR E. GREYshould have thought the information could have been obtained from the Foreign Office. He believed some new arrangement had been come to; through its being a new territory, a good deal remained to be done in the way of organisation, and this was being done by the Commissioner as fast as possible, and he informed the Foreign
      1512
      Office fully in the matter. Then the question of Uganda had obtained considerable attention, and the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. A. C. Morton) seemed to think that the present Government were using Uganda as a means of diverting attention from home matters.
      MR. A. C. MORTON: I referred not to the present Government, but to the Tory Government generally.
      SIR E. GREYunderstood the hon. Member to say that the present Government were inclined to carry out a Jingo policy, one of the features of which was to divert attention from home affairs. He did not know that the present Government had done anything of the sort; he thought it had been very much the other way, and that the Government had not directed the attention of the House chiefly to Uganda, or any other foreign question. The hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. R. Wallace) objected to the word "Resident." It might well have had "temporary" before it, but, as a matter of fact, Sir Gerald Portal was the Resident at the time in Uganda, and the hon. Member ought not to infer from that that any step was taken to appoint a permanent Resident. If the hon. Member road the correspondence he would see that the arrangement come to was not dictated by Sir Gerald Portal, but was an arrangement that the two heads of the Mission came to; Sir Gerald Portal signed it because it was drawn up in his presence. When the right hon. Baronet the Member for North-East Lancashire was speaking on this question he (Sir E. Grey) stated he thought individual opinions had been attributed to him that he had not expressed. What he really did say was that the Government had been told by the only people who had been in Uganda or near it that the withdrawal of the company would cause serious disaster. The Government decided to send an expedition to the spot in order that those disasters might be prevented, and that a Report might be made on the best method of dealing with the country, or, if it was decided to withdraw, the best means of that withdrawal. He had never gone further than that. In the circumstances, the Government were bound to send Sir Gerald Portal's Mission; and so long as that Mission remained in the country they had a right to expect that the Government would

      1513
      make such arrangements that none of the disasters which were apprehended should occur. For instance, the other day four officers were sent to Uganda, but they were not sent there to take new measures, but simply in order to take over the control of the Soudanese troops, so as to guarantee the security of the country until it was decided whether it should be occupied permanently or not. That was his answer to the right hon. Baronet the Member for North-East Lancashire. In reply to his hon. Friends behind him, who were anxious that they should not be committed against their wills to the permanent occupation of Uganda, all he could say was that Sir Gerald Portal had stated that in taking over the Soudanese troops in that country he had carefully prevented anything being done that would lead to the permanent occupation of the territory. All that the Government had done was—without prejudice to the question whether the occupation was to be permanent or temporary—to guarantee the peace of the territory until they had arrived at a final decision in the matter. Sir Gerald Portal was now on his way home, and the Government had received recently from him only a short telegram which corresponded with the information that appeared in the newspapers, and until they had obtained further information from him they could arrive at no final determination in reference to the matter. But undoubtedly he could say that there was no intention in the minds of the Government to come to a hasty decision with regard to it, and until the House had had an opportunity of considering the subject. He had now travelled over all the points raised.
      SIR C. W. DILKE: There is the question of the French Catholic claims.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, the Government had not come to any decision on that, as they required further consideration.
      MR. J. CHAMBERLAINsaid, the hon. Baronet had made a very important statement. Did he pledge the Government that they would take no steps with regard to the retention of Uganda or the future government of that country without first submitting the matter to the consideration of the House?
      SIR E. GREYsaid, he was not in a position to pledge the Government to that extent; all he could say was that
      1514
      the Government had taken no decision at present, and did not anticipate taking any decision, certainly, before the Autumn Session. Sir Gerald Portal had not reached the coast; and, before any final decision was taken, they must communicate with him. Emergencies might arise, but undoubtedly it was not their present intention to come to any specific decision on this question before other Papers were laid before Parliament.
      SIR R. TEMPLEasked where Sir Gerald Portal was now?
      SIR E. GREYreplied that Sir Gerald Portal was somewhere between Uganda and the coast, but he could not state exactly where; he expected to be at the coast at the end of the month.
      SIR G. BADEN-POWELLasked if he was to understand that on the question of principle no decision would be come to with regard to Uganda before the matter was discussed by Parliament?
      MR. A. C. MORTONasked whether the hon. Baronet was going to run away from the pledge which the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister had given, that nothing should be done with regard to the retention of Uganda until the House had had an opportunity of discussing the matter?
      SIR E. GREYsaid, that, of course, any pledge that had been given by the Prime Minister would have far greater force than anything that he could say. He had already said that no decision would be come to in the matter by the Government before the Autumn Sittings. Of the questions that remained there was the question of the Danube. They had had a Representative on the Danube Commission for many years, and there was no reason to alter the arrangement just now. It was most important they should have a Representative on that Commission; and, as to the publication of the Reports, they dealt usually with details, which were not of sufficient general interest to be published. Larger questions might arise involving careful consideration, and that was one reason why they kept their Representative on the Danube Commission. With reference to the last question raised, the consolidation of the two offices of Consul General and of Judge at Shanghai, the result of the amalgamation was a saving of £2,000 a year in salary and £416 a year in rent. The step was not taken without full

      1515
      consideration, because the saving ought not to be made if it was to result to the detriment of the work to be done. The appeal cases were few in number, and it was felt the work might be done by one man, and accordingly the authorities were well advised to make this considerable reduction.
      SIR C. W. DILKE: There is the further question of the Niger Company's lands.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, that in time the coterminous boundaries of the Niger Company with those of foreign States in Africa would be delimitated by agreement with other countries. The question of boundaries was one of the most troublesome at the Foreign Office. So far as they could they were confirming the paper boundaries that now existed by lines traced on the spot.
      MR. A. C. MORTONasked whether the Trade Reports from our Consuls abroad could not be presented to the Public Libraries throughout the country?
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESwished to ask a question arising under the China Vote—namely, whether the hon. Gentleman could not now give them Papers with regard to the Pamirs matter, and also Papers with regard to Siam? There might be some difficulty with regard to the Pamirs; but with regard to Siam, he thought the time had now arrived when they might be allowed to know—which was the most important thing to know—what the Government did when the question first arose?
      COMMANDER BETHELLasked the Government whether Metu was to be now regarded as a Protectorate or not?
      SIR E. GREY: It is regarded as a Protectorate.
      COMMANDER BETHELL: Is Mr. Reed Consul there?
      SIR E. GREYsaid, the country was a British Protectorate when the present Government came into Office, and it remained so still. It was not annexed to Zanzibar, but it was being administered from Zanzibar.
      COMMANDER BETHELLasked if it was to be administered by the Zanzibar Consul General?
      SIR E. GREY: Yes; and the hon. Member would see the exact terms of the Proclamation in the last Paper that had been laid. With regard to Siam, he was afraid the incidents were not closed; and until they were closed it would be
      1516
      impossible to lay Papers on this subject without running the risk of producing further complications to those that had already existed. With regard to the Trade Reports, he might say they had continual applications at the Foreign Office for a supply of these Trade Reports. The practice was to present them to the House first, and to inform other applicants where they could be freely purchased.
      MR. A. C. MORTONobserved that the hon. Baronet had not answered his question with respect to the hon. Gentleman opposite and the Behring Sea Arbitration.
      SIR E. GREYsaid, that he had no wish to under-rate the work done by the hon. Member opposite on the Behring Sea Arbitration, but he would point out that the arrangements for that Commission were concluded by the late Government.
      MR. A. C. MORTONwanted to know upon what principle a Member of the House who was not a lawyer was remunerated for his services upon one scale, while Members of the House who were lawyers were paid upon quite another scale?
      SIR E. GREYsaid, it was not a question of principle at all.
      Vote agreed to.
      2. £638, to complete the sum for Slave Trade Services.
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESobserved that, whilst the efforts of the Government had been devoted with a considerable amount of success to the suppression of the Slave Trade on the East Coast of Africa, there had arisen a very considerable Slave Trade on the North Coast. The centre of the Slave Trade had been changed. It was now no longer at or near Zanzibar, but was still being carried on, though in a less degree, on the North Coast. He should, therefore, like to know whether there was any intention of extending the operations for the suppression of the Slave Trade in the direction of the Gulf of Sidra, where, he was informed, a large number of caravans arrived each year, and where the trade in slaves was still going on?
      SIR W. HARCOURTsaid, that he was not aware of any intention at the present time to extend the operations in the direction which the hon. Member indicated.
      MR. JESSE COLLINGSsaid, that while the Government were asking for this Vote to put down slavery on the seaboard, he was afraid, from the statement of the hon. Baronet, that they had an intention of giving up the control over the sources of this traffic. If that was to be their policy, then he thought the country should know, and should be released from wasting this money for putting down the Slave Trade, after having abandoned the country—if it was their intention to abandon it—in which the sources of that trade existed.
      SIR E. GREY: I expressly said they had come to no decision.
      MR. JESSE COLLINGSsaid, it was true the hon. Baronet had said no decision had been come to; but the reply left grave doubts as to what was the intention of the Government. The British people would regard this Vote for the suppression of the Slave Trade on the seaboard as insufficient if the Government gave up all control over the country inland where that Slave Trade mainly originated.
      Vote agreed to.
      3. Motion made, and Question proposed,
      "That a sum, not exceeding £84,066, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in coarse of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for sundry Colonial Services, including Expenses incurred under 'The Pacific Islanders' Protection Act, 1875,' and certain Charges connected with South Africa."
      COMMANDER BETHELLobserved that they had had no Papers whatever upon the progress of British Bechuanaland during the last two or three years. For a year or two in the ordinary commercial intelligence furnished to this House they had small leaflets about Bechuanaland, giving them the revenue and expenditure. No balance-sheet had been presented to them, and it would be very convenient if they could have such a statement, especially now, when there was a railway proposed to be made through Bechuanaland to the North, by which the revenues of Bechuanaland were to be used in order to guarantee the interest of the expenditure upon that line. He was not going to criticise the construction of the line by the British South Africa
      1518
      Company—he believed there was a gentleman present who would have something to say on that subject. He was not adverse, but, on the contrary, was favourable to a line being made to develop the country; and, although he was not favourable to a Chartered Company, he thought the promotion of a transaction like that might be usefully performed by the British South Africa Company, nor did he object to the funds of the Protectorate being used for that purpose. He desired to know whether the revenues of the Protectorate were sufficient to provide the £20,000 a year which had to be found for the interest on the outlay incurred by the construction of the railway? Of course, if he had an assurance that the revenues of the Protectorate were sufficient for the purpose, and would not inconvenience the expenditure in the Protectorate, his objection, at any rate, would be removed. He might say, upon the general policy of constructing the railway, he thought it would be a benefit to Bechuanaland by tending to open up good land, which might be usefully used towards increasing the prosperity of the country. He should also like to have some information about the action of the Government in Bechuanaland in relation to the social progress of the people, education, and so on. The only other subject on which he desired to say a word or two was Swaziland. His opinion was that the interest had gone out of this question a great deal. There was no doubt that in the Transvaal the influx of English people had been so great as to have a considerable effect on the Legislature there, and it would become much greater in process of time. The anxiety which was so largely felt by a great many people on the question of Swaziland two or three years ago had largely vanished on that account, and so far as he was concerned, if the people of Swaziland were agreeable to be incorporated in the Transvaal Government, and by the terms of the Treaty they had to give their consent, he should have no objection to a new Convention being made upon that basis. Still, if the Transvaal took over Swaziland, he thought a quid pro quo should be given to Natal, which would obviously before long incorporate Zululand, and would then find itself with an inconvenient boundary.

      1519
      He, therefore, suggested that the tongue of land which had been shown as "Schedule B," and which cut into Zululand, should be given up to us by the Transvaal in order to be incorporated with Natal.
      MR. KNOXsaid, there was one transaction in this Vote which, as a supporter of the Government, he regarded with the very gravest regret. He referred to the guarantee which the Government proposed to give for the railway which was to be built through Bechuanaland. The guarantee was to be £20,000 a year for 10 years, and the railway was to be built, not by the British South Africa Company—indeed, the object of the guarantee was to relieve the Company from the undertaking they had already given to build the railway. They had got concession for it for nearly the whole way. ["No!"] The railway was not to be built by the British South Africa Company, but by some independent company afterwards to be formed, and the capital of which was to be raised chiefly by debentures. The first objection to this enormous guarantee of £200,000 out of the money of the taxpayers of Great Britain and Ireland was that it was given without any formal Parliamentary sanction. That was totally different to the policy adopted in the case of the Irish Light Railways, for instance. An Act of Parliament had to be passed to enable the Irish Light Hail-ways to be made, and yet this sum of money, which was one-fifth of the total amount spent on those railways by the Leader of the Opposition when he was Chief Secretary, was guaranteed without any application to Parliament. This guarantee had been given without any Parliamentary sanction. It was said it was not a Government guarantee, but a guarantee out of the revenues of Bechuanaland. What were the revenues of Bechuanaland? The revenues of Bechuanaland did not pay more than about one-third of the expenses of administering the country; all the rest was paid out of Imperial funds, and so when it was said this was not a guarantee out of Imperial funds, it was a mere trifling with the House. It was really, in fact, a guarantee out of Imperial funds; it was so regarded by capitalists who had asked for that guarantee, and it was only because it was regarded as an Imperial guarantee that they
      1520
      would be able to get the necessary capital subscribed. A further objection he had was that the guarantee would not come into force until the railway was half completed, which might not be for five or six years, and therefore the Government by their promise had bound not only this House but a future Parliament. It was, he contended, a most dangerous precedent that the Government, by its executive action, should enter into an agreement which could not be broken by this House, but which would bind their successors. In the meantime, the money would be asked for on the market on the security of this guarantee, and when the matter subsequently came before the House it would be impossible to go behind what had been done by the Government; therefore, he said that by their mere executive action this Government would bind future Parliaments and Administrations. He found he was not without considerable and weighty support in urging this objection, because the late Government in its closing days deliberately refused to give this guarantee, stating in the telegram they sent out to South Africa that such a guarantee could not be given without consulting Parliament, and there was not then time to consult it. He thought the House would require from the Government a very strong reason for departing from the precedent set by their predecessors and giving this vast guarantee without any sort of Parliamentary sanction. His further objection was that no Papers had been presented to the House since January last until a few days ago. It was said this railway would effect a large saving in the cost of administering Bechuanaland, but that point could not be dealt with in detail at this period of the Session. He would only say that a very large saving could be made at once in the cost of the administration of Bechuanaland. There was nothing like this charge—£100,000 a year—in any of the British Colonies. What was it spent on? On a force of cavalry of a most peculiar character, composed chiefly of young men who had failed in their examinations for the Army, who had gone out to South Africa, and who were paid at a very extravagant rate, far higher, in fact, than was paid to any troops in the ordinary British service. These gentlemen were kept there, not in

      1521
      order to keep the peace in Bechuanaland, but in order to protect the northern part of the Protectorate against the Matabele and other enemies of the Chartered Company, and the company had disbanded their police because they knew this force, which was paid out of Imperial funds, was near at hand. The force in Bechuanaland would have been reduced long ago by one-half if it had not been for the proceedings of the Chartered Company. He protested against this procedure of voting £100,000 a year every year for what was really the purposes of the Chartered Company. As he had said, the Chartered Company had disbanded their own police because they knew this force was at hand to help them. He believed if they wanted to reduce the expenses of the Bechuanaland administration the Government could do it without in any way going to this enormous expense of building this railway, they could do it by ordinary administrative means. He found they had already reduced the expenses of administration by £20,000 from last year. He protested against this concession on general financial grounds, because he did not think there ought to be any possibility of British Guaranteed Stock being hawked about on the Stock Exchange for a mere song, which would be the case, for the object of the Company in getting the Government promise was to float this new Stock in debentures on the London market rather than to complete the railway. Whenever they got the money they could do practically as they liked, their Memorandum of Association being so vaguely worded, and they would practically retain control of the Company. He did not think this was at all an undertaking suitable for a Government guarantee. He did not think the Government ought to enter into any financial partnership with an Association like the British South Africa Company. They knew from the Papers presented that day, and the Secretary for the Colonies had solemnly placed it on record, that the Chartered Company obtained their Charter by representing they had concessions, which it turned out afterwards they did not possess, and upon these representations they obtained their capital. They had, according to the Blue Book just published, been
      1522
      guilty of most atrocious crimes—crimes which were a disgrace to British officers who ought to have been gentlemen, and who had massacred unfortunate natives for no adequate cause. The character of the British South Africa Company in its inception and administration of its territory was not such that the Government ought to enter into any financial relations which made them guarantors for the Company, and he thought it extremely unlikely the British South Africa Company would ever pay its £10,000 a year to this Company. He hoped they would have some explanation from the Government. Having said so much, he would, in order to confine the discussion to this one subject, move to reduce the High Commissioner's salary by £200.
      Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item P., Salaries, be reduced by £200."—(Mr. Knox.)
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, he might be allowed to say one or two words about this. He was astonished to find, with reference to the extension of the railway, that there was a guarantee of £20,000 per annum to this railway for 10 years without the previous consent of the House of Commons being obtained. It was all very well to say that the question would be brought up some years hence. That was absurd. The question to be decided was not one of confidence in this particular Government, and it was not possible for it to get fair discussion coming up years hence. He would say to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir W. Harcourt) that they simply wanted to get an opportunity of considering the matter previous to the country being pledged. He remembered that the Radical Party in that House objected to the late Government spending money on the survey of the Mombasa Railway, and it astonished him that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was their leader in that opposition—
      THE CHAIRMAN: This question of Mombasa is out of Order.
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, he found that the late Government had in a telegraphic message of June 11, 1892, declared that it was impossible to give any pledge without getting the authority of Parliament; and, again, on June 14, 1892, they refused to pledge themselves

      1523
      even to submit the matter to the House of Commons. That was the attitude of the late Government with reference to the House of Commons and this matter. He merely mentioned this to show that the House ought to be consulted. He understood there had been no survey or estimates of cost with reference to this railway before the Government pledged themselves and, to a certain extent, the people of the country. There was a running survey, but that was all. He complained that the Papers had only been very recently circulated, although some of them were dated in January last. He thought they might have been circulated before now.
      THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir W. HARCOURT,): Hear, hear!
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, he was glad to hear that expression of approval of his criticism. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would convey his censure to the Department which was responsible for the delay. They should have further information regarding the guarantees and the £200,000. It was not clear what was to be done with the money, nor was it clear whether, if any profit arose, it was to come to them. They were asked to give up 6,000 square miles of land for the benefit of this speculative company. This was British land now. He thought it was not at all right that they should give money and land for ventures of this kind. It was a very unfortunate policy. He trusted it was not too late to stop it; but he thought the Government could have assisted them by an earlier distribution of the Papers, so that a matter of such importance would be discussed before the last days of the Session, when the majority of Members had left town. He wished to suggest, in conclusion, that as the Government were going to be partners in the concern a list of the shareholders should be made public.
      SIR W. HARCOURT: We have no power.
      MR. A. C. MORTONhoped the Government would endeavour to have the list published.
      THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON,)said, the hon. Member had laid great stress on
      1524
      the fact that Parliament had not been asked for its sanction before any arrangement was come to. The matter had been considered by the Treasury and the Colonial Office; and it was thought that, taking all the circumstances into account, the House would have a proper opportunity of considering the matter in the form in which it was brought before them, and that there was no need in this case for an Act of Parliament. The Bechuanaland Government were allowed to enter into an agreement with the Railway Company for the formation of the company, and a subsidy had been promised. But that agreement would not come into force until, in ordinary course, the agreement was made and the Treasury Minute laid before the House, and accepted by the absence of an adverse vote. He regretted it was considered there had been any delay, because, as a matter of fact, the Government had given the House information on this question at an earlier period than they would in the ordinary course have received it, though, under ordinary circumstances, they would have waited until the Correspondence was complete. He could only say again that he regretted very much that the Correspondence, incomplete as it was, was delayed so long; but there would be every opportunity for the House to give its opinion on the subject. If they had desired concealment nothing would have been easier than to have kept the Correspondence back 10 days, and so allowed the House to rise without seeing it. So far from desiring that, they were anxious that the House should have the Correspondence before them. They had no desire to go behind the back of Parliament, for if the House chose it could reject the proposal. He hoped, however, the House would not do anything of the kind. They asked the House to consider the position. When the Government came into Office they found that the cost of the Protectorate of Bechuanaland was very heavy, especially in connection with the transport of police and of mails. After consultation with the High Commissioner, they came to the conclusion that the only way to reduce the expenditure was to improve the means of communication. They found that negotiations had gone on under the late Government, and that that Government was to this extent in favour of the scheme—that they

      1525
      had already agreed to the running survey to which his hon. Friend had referred. When Sir H. Loch was in London he presented a more complete scheme than that which was before the late Government. The arrangement was that 600 miles were to be built before any subsidy could be given at all, and that there should be savings equal to that subsidy.
      COMMANDER BETHELL: The Revenue?
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, the present Grant in Aid was set down at £100,000, and the Estimate was the same this year. He was sorry there was any confusion with regard to the figures.
      COMMANDER BETHELL: What is the local revenue?
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, he could not give that. They found a scheme placed before them which would be a great benefit to the people of this district, and they thought they were entitled to do what they could to promote it. It had been suggested that they should have nothing to do with the unclean thing—that they should not be connected in any way with schemes promoted by the British South Africa Company; but he was bound to say this, after all the abuse heaped on the company, that they ought to recollect that but for the company they would probably have lost Mashonaland, and that even if they had kept that country they should have had to make a large grant in aid of administration, whereas the company was doing that work for nothing. But, apart from that, it was no use their saying that they would have nothing to do with the company. The company was there, and they were bound to deal with them and to recognise their right to British protection. It was impossible to ignore their existence. The hon. Member for West Cavan (Mr. Knox) said they had entered into a partnership with the company. He denied that. He said there was no partnership, but simply that the company got a guarantee of a subsidy when the line was completed to the satisfaction of the Bechuanaland Government. No burden would be imposed on the British taxpayer, Sir Henry Loch having guaranteed that the £20,000 a year in subsidy would be saved in the reduced cost of transport.
      MR. A. C. MORTON: What about the £200,000?
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, the real point in connection with the matter was, what security they would have that these savings would be had. The hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Knox) did not think they would have any security; but they had these lines of defence—the pledge of the High Commissioner, the watch-dog of the Treasury, and then the reduction of the grant in aid. With regard to the question of the share deposit, if the hon. Gentleman would look at the proposal made he would find that if there was a profit the Government would take their portion. He believed that not only would they have savings equal to the subsidy, but through the development of the country they would have a considerably increased revenue from Customs and direct taxation, and the British taxpayer, in whom alone they were interested, would benefit largely through the extension of the railway system. He believed that even before the end of 10 years they would be in a much better position than at present in regard to the Bechuanaland Protectorate, and that they would see this portion of our South African Possessions bearing its own charges and liabilities, and, like most of our Colonies, meeting its own costs of administration. There was no possibility of this benefit accruing if the railway was not made. Whatever might be anyone's opinion of the Chartered Company, and of the British South Africa Company in particular, they would have to deal directly with them, or indirectly, if they were going to extend and develop the railways throughout the British Protectorate. In no sense, however, could they enter into a financial partnership. They were free from any liability in regard to the railway, except that when it was completed and capital had been expended, and the line was open, the Bechuanaland Government were prepared to pay a subsidy, and in the end there would be no greater charge on the British taxpayer.
      MR. A. C. MORTONasked if the hon. Member would give an answer as to the 6,000 square miles of land?
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, that if the hon. Member would peruse the Correspondence he would find that that was given for the extension of a railway in

      1527
      another district, and not in connection with the 400 miles under discussion. What had occurred in that respect showed that they had already entered into relations with the Company as to these railways.
      MR. KNOXsaid, the question had arisen out of a statement by the Secretary for the Colonies. He had said that a Treasury Minute would be made, and would be laid before the House. If he were sure that there would be a full discussion on that Minute, and that the question could be raised on its merits, it would to some extent modify his action. He recognised the futility of taking a Division at this period of the Session, but he asked for a promise that the House would have an opportunity of discussing the Treasury Minute. The views of many hon. Members would be modified if they had an assurance that the Government would be represented on the directorate of the railway in proportion to the amount of its contributions.
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, that the Government were not entering into a partnership in regard to this railway. When the line was constructed to a certain point a subsidy would be given. He had not been distinguishing between the Chartered Company and the Railway Company.
      MR. KNOXsaid, that would extinguish a large part of his objection. If there was to be a guarantee given it should be understood that Her Majesty's Government or the Bechuanaland Government should have control over the railway. That matter had not been decided. He did not know any case of a congested district railway in Ireland where some control was not given to the ratepayers. A great many people distrusted Mr. Rhodes, and believed that the Chartered Company was the head and centre of a circle of swindling companies. If two thirds of the Directors were nominated by the Bechuanaland Government and Her Majesty's Government the whole situation, as far as this Company was concerned, would be materially modified.
      SIR W. HARCOURT: I regard it as of paramount importance that the control of Parliament should be complete in questions of this kind. I regret that through some omission the Papers on this subject have not been presented sooner, but I assure the Committee that
      1528
      there is no disposition to withdraw this matter from the control of Parliament or withhold information. If this had been a direct Imperial subsidy an Act of Parliament would have been necessary, but it is not an Imperial subsidy. It is a charge on the revenues of the Bechuanaland Authorities. It is said, and said truly, that indirectly the grant in aid is under the control of Parliament, and that Parliament can say how great or how small it shall be. I myself am not an admirer of Protectorates or of Chartered Companies, but the position in which we found ourselves was this, that there was a Chartered Company that had established a Protectorate, and there was an expenditure of £100,000 a year going on. I satisfied myself that if the railway were made the expenditure would be less and the revenue more than it was before. We arranged that under no circumstances should the expenditure exceed the present sum of £100,000 a year. Therefore, we shall have a railway which will very much increase the revenue of the district, and the expenditure coming upon the Estimates will be decreased to the amount of £20,000 a year for police, mails, and other things. As goon as the railway is made we shall have effected a good bargain. Under the circumstances, and the guarantees being many, it did not become necessary to have an Act of Parliament. The Company was only formed in August, and the agreement has not yet been settled. The Treasury Minute has not been drawn up, and, therefore, Parliament, in my opinion, has still complete control over it. I hope the Committee will be satisfied with the discussion that has now taken place on this subject, and will be satisfied with the assurance that the Government have no desire that transactions of this kind should be carried into effect without the full knowledge and consent of Parliament.
      MR. KNOXasked for an assurance that the Government would afford an opportunity for the discussion of the agreement before anything was finally settled in regard to it.
      MR. A. C. MORTONthought an assurance should be given that the House should have an opportunity of discussing the Treasury Minute. He wished to know whether the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies could

      1529
      give the Committee a list of the shareholders of the Company.
      MR. S. BUXTON: I do not know what our powers are in the matter, but I should be very glad indeed if such a list could be prepared, as it seems to me that there ought not to be any concealment on the subject. If there is anything concealed it certainly ought to be made public. It is rather difficult to give a pledge at the present moment that the House shall have an opportunity of a full-dress Debate, but at any rate I think I can assure my hon. Friend that the House will have plenty of opportunity of discussing the subject. The Treasury Minute will be placed before the House, and there will be no attempt either to rush it through or to conceal it from the House. As far as we understand at present, the Railway Company are not in a position to take up the agreement, and therefore there is no immediate prospect of the question of subsidy arising.
      MR. KNOXsaid, he did not want a full-dress Debate, but some little time for discussion. If the Government would give him an undertaking that the Treasury Minute would not be laid on the Table during the Autumn Sitting he should be glad to withdraw his Amendment.
      MR. S. BUXTON: I cannot give that undertaking, because if the Railway Company choose to go on with the agreement we shall be bound to lay the Treasury Minute before the House, but I think the probabilities are very greatly against that happening during the Autumn Session. It is almost certain to be carried over till next year.
      MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, there ought to be no difficulty in giving an opportunity for discussion on the Treasury Minute.
      SIR W. HARCOURT: It is entirely our desire that the subject shall be discussed, and we will do what we can to give the House an opportunity of pronouncing an opinion upon it. As the House knows, we are in some difficulty as to what we can or cannot bring in during the Autumn Session. It is the intention and desire of the Government to act in good faith and to give the House an opportunity of pronouncing upon the matter.
      MR. HANBURYdesired to know whether there were any understandings
      1530
      with the British South Africa Company, because he had come across a very remarkable letter from Mr. Rhodes to Sir Henry Loch in which reference was made to some understanding which, as far he (Mr. Hanbury) could interpret Mr. Rhodes' letter, meant that the railway was to be made up to the north of Bechuanaland, and that all the land was to be practically the property of the Company. He should like to know how far such an understanding existed between the Colonial Office and Mr. Rhodes. He wanted it to be made clear what were the real facts with regard to the territory and lands which the British South Africa Company were handing over to this railroad. He was told that the lands which they were going to hand over to the new railway were not, after all, a free gift on the part of the British South Africa Company, but were actually lands which the British Government handed over to the British South Africa Company on condition that they should make another line, which other line was never made by them, but which Mr. Rhodes got the Cape Government to construct. He was in favour of opening up countries by means of railways; but, looking to the attitude of the British South Africa Company, he was a little distrustful in this case, and did not desire to play into the hands of a speculator.
      MR. KNOXsaid that, after the promise given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that nothing final should be done in this matter without the House of Commons having a full opportunity of discussing the question, he begged leave to withdraw the Amendment.
      Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
      Original Question again proposed.
      MR. R. G. WEBSTERdesired to call attention to two or three matters in this Vote. The first was with regard to the action of the British South Africa Company in regard to the Mozambique territory and their concessions in that country. In 1888 this territory now in dispute as between the Mozambique Company and the South Africa Company was occupied by British subjects in the main, who were under the jurisdiction of the Queen and Government of this country. But when the British South Africa Company was

      1531
      formed, about 1890 or 1891, these British subjects, owing allegiance to the Queen, were dispossessed from their possession, which they held under favourable terms from the Mozambique Company, by force majeure. Again, from the Blue Book which had been placed on the Table that day it appeared that the relations of the South Africa Company in regard to the Matabele territory were in a somewhat critical condition, and he was well aware of the fact that an important Despatch had been sent by the Minister of State to Sir Henry Loch, stating that no forward action was to be taken; therefore, it was clear that the territory owned by the British South Africa Company was not altogether in a quiescent condition. If, as he contended was the case, the British South Africa Company had wronged British subjects and driven them from territories which these subjects had acquired from a friendly foreign State, the Colonial Office ought gravely and carefully to consider the question with the view to seeing that the rights of such subjects were not taken from them. In Article VIII. of the Draft Charter of the British South Africa Company, it was stated that if at any time our Secretary of State saw fit to object to the exercise by the Company of any authority or power, in any of the territory comprised in any of the concessions, agreements, grants, or Treaties, on the ground of there being an adverse claim to that part, the Company should defer to that objection, until such time as any such claim had been withdrawn or finally dealt with or settled by the Secretary of State. It was apparent from that provision that when the Government decided to grant these important concessions to the British South Africa Company, they also determined that the rights of British subjects in these or neighbouring districts should be absolutely and completely maintained. He urged the Under Secretary to carefully consider the aspect of affairs at the present moment. The hon. Gentleman had stated that there was a safe route from the Cape through the Matabele territory to Fort Salisbury and Victoria, but he found it, stated in The Pall Mall Gazette that 100 waggons had to turn back the other day, so that he felt bound to believe that that part of the country was in an unsettled and disorganised state. If that were so,
      1532
      and they were to use the alternative route to the Beira Railway, it was important we should do everything in our power to keep on friendly terms with the Mozambique Company and the Portuguese in the event of our having to send troops to the front. He should like to ask a question about Swaziland. The Swazis were a brave people, and were our allies. They had rendered us useful service, and we guaranteed a Protectorate to them. He was told we could not give up these Swazis to any other State without asking their consent. But how could the Swazis give this consent? It was no use to ask them to go to the ballot, because they could neither read nor write. He urged that before any step was taken which would result in handing the Protectorate over to Swazis to another Power an opportunity should be given to the House of Commons to carefully consider the question.
      SIR R. TEMPLEobserved, that they had not yet succeeded in getting the Papers with regard to Swaziland; but even without the Papers he was anxious to challenge briefly, but very positively, the policy of the British Government in respect to the natives of Swaziland, without presuming to specify how far Her Majesty's present Government might be responsible for that or not. What was Swaziland? It was the territory stretching eastwards from the shore of the great bay to the base of the mountain range that formed the eastern flank of the Transvaal uplands. In this important tract inhabited by the Swazis there were two interests; first, the construction of a railway, and, secondly, the protection, direct or indirect, of the natives who dwelt there. In regard to the railway, it was obvious that this line must be vital to the interests of the Transvaal. Of course, he should desire that this important work of constructing the railway should be done by our country and countrymen; but if we could not and would not undertake the work it must be done by somebody, and if the Boers would undertake it, the Boers must have their way, and he should be very sorry to say more in opposition to that. Apart from the question of the railway, there remained this matter of the future welfare of the natives. The two questions were absolutely distinct. It would

      1533
      be perfectly possible for the Boer Republic to make this line, and have full control over it, and yet for the rights of the natives who lived on the South and the North of that line to be properly safeguarded; and his allegation was, they were not going to be safeguarded. On the other hand, these natives, who really needed our protection, were about to be abandoned to their fate by the British Government—the fate of being in entire subjection to a Republic eminently unsuited to control or manage native tribes—a Republic which was tolerably certain to trample into the dust the rights of the natives. He contended that England, in conjunction with the Boers, had placed itself under the moral obligation to protect the Swazis; and if the effect of the Convention was to relieve us of that obligation, he pronounced it as unjust to the people of Swaziland. We had placed ourselves under certain moral obligations to take care of these poor Swazis, and give them the benefit of that British protection which had proved a blessing to hundreds of millions of people in different parts of the world. This protection had been undoubtedly shared between us and the Boers of the Transvaal Republic, and the question was, were we going to retain our share in the management of Swaziland or not? not for any selfish aggrandisement of ours, but for the fulfilment of the rights and equitable obligations which we had incurred towards a population that could not help themselves. He assumed the Convention was going to be ratified and placed on the Table of the House; but it would be more satisfactory if the Convention was placed on the Table first and ratified afterwards, so that the House of Commons might have a little to say on the subject. The hon. and gallant Member for the Holderness Division (Commander Bethell) had alluded to the introduction of the English element into the Transvaal; but, notwithstanding that, the British duties in regard to the protection of the natives remained intact and unimpaired. The Boers were a very enterprising class of colonists, but it would be flattering them too much to say they had ever shown themselves able to manage native tribes. He was afraid the very opposite was to be said for them. There were many cir-
      1534
      cumstances connected with the Boers which told most unfavourably in their conduct towards the natives of Africa. He repeated, that the Boers were the very last people to whom the care of native tribes ought to be made over. As regarded the English element, he was bound to say that, with all the splendid qualities of his countrymen in this semi-civilised country, some control over them in their dealings with the natives was absolutely necessary, and if they were to be allowed to have uncontrolled power over the native tribes to whom we were under obligations then he said we should not be doing our duty. We were bound to take care that the Swazis were protected as much against our countrymen in the Transvaal as they were against the Boers. It was said that the Swazis were to be masters of their own destinies, inasmuch as they were to settle for themselves whether they should go over to the Transvaal. But he contended that was absolutely worth nothing. The Swazis undoubtedly had a tribal organisation with a certain sort of administration of their own, which could hardly be called a Government. They had their chiefs and a King of their own. But if they were made over to the Boers—that was to say, the Transvaal Government—by a Convention under the authority of Her Majesty's Government, they would have to consent absolutely without the slightest objection or demur to any conditions which the Transvaal Government might be pleased to impose. Of course, they would consent. What else could they do? The idea of our escaping our Imperial obligations and shirking our Imperial duty upon the ground that these Swazis would consent was the merest excuse, and one which he was sanguine the House of Commons would never accept. Upon these various grounds he contended we were bound to maintain our protecting position in Swaziland; that we must continue to hold our sheltering ægis over these poor natives, to take care they were not trodden under foot and oppressed by the Transvaal Republic, and if the existing arrangements did not admit of our having the entire control we should maintain our joint control of the means of doing justice to the Swazis. Although we might not have technically and legally a Protectorate in Swaziland,

      1535
      we had virtually undertaken obligations there, and the good faith of the British Government was as solemnly pledged as if it were set forth in a written document. He trusted that the House would preserve that British good faith which had never yet failed in any part of the world.
      MR. HANBURYsaid, he did not think that there were the political objections to the cession of Swaziland to the Boers that might have existed some years ago before the growth of British influence. British interests were growing so rapidly in the Transvaal that even if Swaziland were handed over to that Government it would not be very long before it again came under the control of this country. But he attached great importance to our obligations of honour. He wanted some clear information as to how far any written or verbal engagements had been entered into with the Boers. The obligations that we were under towards the Swazis were undoubtedly strong, because the promise that they should never fall into the hands of the Boers was given at a time when they rendered us valuable assistance against the Boers; and it would be fatal if the natives of South Africa were taught that England was not true to her word. Did the Government intend to abide by the latter engagement or not? What did the Boers want with Swaziland? It was clear that their object was to acquire the laud for themselves. The Boers' idea of the treatment of natives greatly differed from our own; and if we did hand the territory of Swaziland over to the Boers we ought to have the fullest guarantees that the rights of the natives would be protected. The argument that the consent of the Swaziland Government would have to be given to any arrangement was a mere farce and piece of hypocrisy, because the Swazi Government was in effect the King, a boy 17 or 18 years old, and they all knew how the consent of the Sovereign of a savage country was obtained. It did not follow that, because the Boers had treated the Swazis well, so long as we were there to control them, they would continue to do so when they were unchecked by British influence. They were being elbowed out of the Transvaal, and Swaziland was about the only piece of open country adjoining into which they could trek, and undoubtedly their idea of
      1536
      the way in which natives should be treated was entirely different from ours. That must not be allowed to happen unless the fullest guarantees were obtained for the protection of the natives, to which we were fully pledged. He did not say a word with regard to the rights of the English concessionaires in Swaziland, for they were perfectly able to protect themselves. So far as he was able to understand the question, a complete change of opinion had taken place in the Cape Government as to the concession of Swaziland. Some time ago Mr. Rhodes was strong against any concession of Swaziland to the Transvaal. Now, this proposal for the concession of Swaziland was made by Mr. Rhodes and the Cape Government. This was a part of a large policy of the Cape Government to establish a great Customs Union throughout South Africa, which he was afraid would have the effect of placing a heavy burden on the import of English goods. It was clear that the Cape Government desired that Swaziland should be handed over to the Transvaal, because they hoped that the Transvaal would thereby be induced to enter into the Customs Union by which the importance of Cape Town would be maintained, as the great port for South Africa. But the result of such a Customs Union would be that the Import Duties upon British manufactures would be raised from the 5 per cent. at which they now stood to 12 per cent. His only hope was the strong objection which the Boers entertained against entering the Customs Union. However, before the Government agreed to the concession of Swaziland, they should see that the interests of the natives were safeguarded, and make sure that they were not placing a heavy burden on our exported goods to South Africa.
      COMMANDER BETHELLexplained that when he spoke about getting the assent of the people of Swaziland he meant that we were quite capable, through our officers, of getting the consent of every tribe if we chose.
      SIR G. BADEN-POWELLappealed to the Government, before ratifying any Convention for the cession of the country, to consider the statesmanlike course of renewing the old Convention, continuing the present provisional state of things

      1537
      until the British inhabitants of the Transvaal had obtained the franchise and asserted themselves.
      MR. S. BUXTONregretted that, in consequence of the delays in negotiating the Convention, it was impossible to present Papers to the House. Had it been otherwise, they would have been spared some of the speeches of hon. Gentlemen who, speaking in the dark, had totally misrepresented the position of the Government and the results that they hoped would accrue if the Convention was ultimately signed. It was hardly right that the inhabitants of a friendly nation should be spoken of in the language that the hon. Member for Kingston (Sir R. Temple) had used. He dissented very strongly from the views which had been expressed by the hon. Member with reference to the Boers. Though it was possible that in the old days, before they became a civilised nation, the Boers might have practised considerable cruelty towards the natives, nevertheless he was certain that at the present time the Transvaal Boers were in a totally different position. The Transvaal was becoming year by year more English and less Dutch, and, therefore, he did not believe that there was now any foundation for any fears with regard to the natives. The Government were carrying out the pledges of the late Government when they authorised Sir Henry Loch to confer with President Krüger, with a view to carrying out, as far as might be, the wishes of the Transvaal Government in this matter. He denied altogether that we had any Protectorate over the territory, but admitted our moral obligations with regard to the natives; and, in any Convention that the Government might carry through, they would have very due regard indeed for those obligations. The independence of the Swazis had been recognised to this extent—that neither England nor the Transvaal could encroach upon it without the assent of the other party. The Convention proposed that we should withdraw the existing prohibition to the Transvaal entering into an organic agreement with the Swazi nation. As to the question of the assent of the Swazis being duly ascertained, the country was governed, not by a King, who was a minor, but by a Queen Regent and a Council of all the Chiefs, and, as far as was known,
      1538
      this Council was very representative indeed of the Swazi nation, and any resolution they came to would be confirmed by the natives themselves. The Government were not going to hand them over altogether to what was called the tender mercies of the Boers. The Government would take care that proper provision was made for the protection of the natives in the management of their own internal affairs, their own laws and customs, and especially the laws of inheritance and succession, where such laws were not inconsistent with those of civilised nations; and, further, they would be protected in the continued use and occupation of land now in their possession, and all grazing and agricultural rights to which they were at present entitled. So far as the Government were concerned, they would see that the Swazis were not worse off after their arrangement with the Transvaal than before. In regard to the European rights, care would be taken that Europeans had protection and freedom in all their personal and proprietary rights, so long as they were legitimate rights; and arrangements would be made that they should become burghers of the South African Republic for all voting purposes. While Swaziland was absolutely useless to ourselves, the Convention might bring about a friendly arrangement with the South African Republic, which would be doing something for the ultimate federation of the races and Powers throughout South Africa. It would remove what had been, in the past, a source of friction between the Dutch and English elements, and would be of benefit to the Transvaal and England, and not detrimental to the Swazis. In answer to the hon. Member for Preston, he might say that the Customs Union question did not arise in this connection. Care would be taken also that the prohibition in regard to the sale of liquor to the natives would be continued.
      SIR R. TEMPLEasked whether we would retain any control in Swaziland, so that, in the event of any invasion of the rights of the natives of their lands, they would have an appeal to England?
      MR. S. BUXTONsaid, he thought that when the Convention was presented to the House—and he hoped it would not be long before it was signed—the hon. Baronet would see that the Government

      1539
      had protected the rights of the Swazis, and that they had taken care that this protection should be no mere paper protection.
      Original Question put, and agreed to.
      4. £32,400, to complete the sum for Subsidies to Telegraph Companies.

  NAVY ESTIMATES, 1893–4.
  5. £80,500, Educational Services.
  ADMIRAL FIELDsaid, he had received a letter that day from a very distinguished officer in the Service, in which he complained that a certain midshipman was about to be allowed to pass his examination for sub-lieutenant before he was 19 years of age. Such a favour was without precedent, except in the case of Royal Princes, or unless a midshipman desired to pass when he was sailing for foreign service, and in that case his seniority would only date from his 19th year. He also referred to the case of a very smart Marine officer who had obtained leave at his own expense, and had gone to Russia and had mastered the language. With a view to encourage the study of that language, Lord Wolseley had got the War Office to make grants to certain officers. The Marine officer and an officer in the Yorkshire Regiment passed the same examination; but while the Line officer received a bonus of £150, the Marine officer got nothing. He thought it was most important that sub-lieutenants should be trained in the handling of torpedo boats, and he also considered that there should be some competent persons to teach swimming.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLEScalled attention to the system of examination at Greenwich, and said that the students who competed were not told in what respect their answers were wrong, which prevented them from learning anything from the examinations. He was opposed to the prominence given to higher mathematics and to the subject of fortification, contending, in respect of the last-named subject, that it was a mistake to divert the sailor's attention from sea fighting to land fighting. The subject of navigation and nautical astronomy were also referred to, it being shown that, while the navigation course was not obligatory on officers above the rank of sub-lieutenant, the course of mathematics
  1540
  was, whereas the reverse should be the case. There was also a course of special lectures given, especially by Mr. Lawrence, who preached the greatest nonsense on the subject of International Law, and who was the author of what was held to be an official text-book on the subject. For example, Mr. Lawrence said that no notice of hostilities was required, this doctrine being at variance with the teaching of other writers on International Law. If there was one nation more than another which required a text-book on the Law of Nations it was this country. Certainly a proper text-book to replace the book of Mr. Lawrence, and amplified as to the special necessities of seamen, would be a great advantage. It appeared that the horse marine had become an absolute reality, for he found there was a Vote for instruction in riding of officers of the Royal Marines. In order to complete the system of instruction it should be rendered less theoretical and more practical, and a practical school of tactics was absolutely needed, say, at Portsmouth.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHsaid, he would be glad to receive the details of the cases of the two officers mentioned by the hon. and gallant Member for Eastbourne. He would take care that the subject of the importance of training sub-lieutenants in the use of the torpedo was mentioned in the proper quarter. The subject of teaching stokers swimming had been prominently before the Admiralty since the unfortunate disaster to the Victoria. Active measures had been taken to promote the teaching of swimming among stokers, particularly at Sheerness and at some of the other dockyards. No doubt much had still to be done, but that subject was receiving the careful attention of the Admiralty. With regard to the remarks of the hon. Member for King's Lynn in respect to the Royal Naval College, the points raised would receive careful consideration. If an officer of Marines had to be called upon to act on shore—and they frequently had to act on shore—it was desirable that he should be able to ride. Therefore, a beginning had been made to teach the officers of Marines to ride.
  Vote agreed to,
  6. £59,300, Scientific Services.
  ADMIRAL FIELDcalled attention to the inadequate recognition given to the Survey Service, as shown by the Hydrographer's Report. He particularly referred to the men. There was no encouragement given to them. Most of their work was done in boats, and they went back to their ships in the evening. It was a severe service, and the men did not receive even extra pay for their work.
  MR. FORWOODthought that if the right hon. Baronet had given the House the same information as was given in previous years—namely, a Return setting forth the expenditure of the different services of the Navy, similar to the Return given by the War Office as an Appendix to their Estimates, probably the speech of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Admiral Field) would not have been made. In 1892–93 the expenditure in connection with the Hydrographer's Department amounted to £97,000. Practically £100,000 a year was spent on this work. At present many nations relied upon us to do surveying work which they ought to do themselves. He thought that some International agreement ought to be come to on the subject.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESconsidered that the men—he was not speaking of the officers—engaged in this particular service had some claim on the Admiralty, and some small extra allowance should be made to them in return for their extremely hard work. Our surveys were exceedingly good, and the charts issued by the Admiralty Board were deserving of every word said of them. The Admiralty charts were much superior to other charts issued by private publishers, and it was of the utmost importance that the ships of the Mercantile Marine should be encouraged to provide themselves with Admiralty charts instead of the inferior charts sold by ordinary salesmen. In order to bring about this result, he suggested that the price of the Admiralty charts should be reduced, as also that of The Nautical Almanac, which, he suggested, might be sold for 1s.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHremarked that, considering the excellence of the works and the expenses involved in their production, the charts and The Nautical Almanac were sold at a very
  1542
  cheap rate, so that he was afraid it would hardly be possible to make any further reduction. The right hon. Gentleman opposite did good service in drawing attention to the fact that £97,000 a year was spent on hydrographic work and surveying, and he mentioned that a Return was not presented this year. It was dropped by the Board of the Admiralty (of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member) last year, and was not presented to Parliament. It was prepared for the use of the Admiralty, but was never ordered by the Admiralty to be printed and presented as a Return, and the same course had been adopted this year. It was a useful document to refer to, but he was not quite sure whether it was worth the expense of printing it. He would consider the suggestion that extra pay should be given to men engaged in survey work. He could not forget, however, that if extra pay was granted in one quarter it was exceedingly difficult to refuse it in others, and therefore he could not undertake that the suggestion would be given effect to. Reference had been made to the discovery of rocks, and the more complete the surveys became the more rocks were discovered. He was afraid it would be impossible for any official survey to discover all these rocks in all parts of the world, but the Admiralty did their best in this direction, and it was satisfactory to find some rocks were discovered before disasters resulted. He would promise that all the matters mentioned should receive careful consideration.
  COMMANDER BETHELL COMMANDER BETHELL, who said he had had some years' experience in this particular branch of the Service, observed that the men engaged in surveying had the hardest work in the Naval Service, and that for many years it had been recognised that they ought to be given more pay. The same inducements as were formerly given, and which for some reason had been taken away, should be held out to officers to join this Department of the Service, which was a very important one, but which there had always been a difficulty in getting officers to join.
  Vote agreed to.
  7. £172,000, Royal Naval Reserves.
  LORD G. HAMILTONsaid, he believed there was some understanding that they should, if possible, dispose of all the Votes that night, therefore he should curtail his observations on this and other Votes to the smallest possible compass, because he hoped the House of Commons would be able to get through that necessary work and then adjourn at a respectable hour. He wished to ask whether anything had been done towards the experiment of placing the firemen on the same footing as the men of the Naval Reserve, and whether the system of training the Naval Reserve had been changed? The period of training which the Naval Reserve had hitherto undergone was 28 days, and he understood that some alteration had recently been made or was proposed to be made.
  SIR G. BADEN-POWELLbrought forward certain complaints made by the firemen, the seamen, and the officers of the Royal Naval Reserve. The seamen, he said, were very anxious to be assimilated more and more to the Royal Navy, and he was glad to think that the Admiralty were, at all events, meeting them on some of the points, such as that of clothing. He should like to hear something on the question of pensions. The men of the Royal Naval Reserve had made great efforts to secure what to some men seemed rather a small concession, but which was a great one to them—namely, that the age of receiving pensions in their case should be assimilated to that of the men of the Royal Navy. In the case of the Royal Naval Reserve the age was 60; in the case of the Navy it was 50. It had been stated that the Admiralty were in doubt whether the Royal Naval Reserve should have pensions at all. If they were not to have pensions let the Admiralty say so at once. The firemen had grievances with regard to drill and to certificates of discharge, and he believed they wished also to have some sort of authority in the larger ports to whom they could apply to be registered. If those grievances were met he had no doubt there would be a great improvement in stokers and firemen. The grievance of the officers was with reference to precedence, and he was told
  1544
  there had been several resignations in India in consequence of this grievance. It was a well-known grievance; and whereas the Royal Naval Reserve, by several Orders in Council, were given precedence after officers of the Royal Navy, suddenly, in 1891, the Indian Marine was brought to life again, and the officers were given seniority over the officers of the Royal Naval Reserve. It was perhaps a matter much of sentiment, but he hoped that the Admiralty would find some way out of the difficulty, perhaps by deciding that the officers of these two Services should be placed on a similar footing of seniority.
  ADMIRAL FIELDgreatly sympathised with the view put forward by the hon. Member who had last spoken. He himself considered that the Indian Marine had nothing to do with the old Indian Navy. They did not fly even a pennant in their ships. As to their qualifications, while the sub-lieutenants of the Royal Naval Reserve must have a master's certificate, the sub-lieutenants of the Indian Marine must have only a mate's certificate. Then there were only 170 officers in the Indian Marine, while there were 1,288 in the Royal Naval Reserve. The Indian Marine was not called on to serve out of India, but the Royal Naval Reserve had to serve anywhere and everywhere if wanted. He failed to see why the Indian Marines should be petted at the expense of the Naval Reserve. He supported the Naval Reserve officers in this matter. It was a grievance they felt strongly upon, and a grievance that ought to be settled to their satisfaction. They did not ask to be put before the Indian Marine, but they demanded that the Indian Marine should not be put before and made senior to them. The hon. and gallant Gentleman pointed to the fact that a great many of our seamen, after serving their term of 12 years in the Navy, left the Service altogether. He suggested some inducement should be offered to get them to join the Naval Reserve. If they were engaged to serve for 12 years, from the age of 18, they might, if they did not re-engage at the end of the 12 years, be required to serve five years in the Royal Naval Reserve.
  MR. GIBSONBOWLES*MR. GIBSONBOWLES, speaking as a Royal Naval Reserve officer himself, did not think this grievance of his brother officers with regard to precedence was well-founded. It was not well-founded for this simple reason: The Indian Marine was a permanent service of the first line. The Royal Naval Reserve was not a permanent service; it was ancillary to the other and in the second line, and, therefore, its officers ought to come after the officers of the other Service. As regarded pensions to the Reserve men, he did not think the men had any great grievance; but he thought it would be advantageous if they could obtain pensions on their attaining 50 years instead of 60 years of age.
  MR. E. ROBERTSONpromised that the various suggestions which had been made by hon. Members should receive full consideration. As to the grievance of the Royal Naval Reserve officers as regarded the precedence allowed to officers of the Indian Marine, he might almost leave hon. Members who had spoken to answer each other, for they had effectively done so. The real fact was, as had been pointed out by the hon. Member for King's Lynn, the Indian Marine was a permanent service of naval men in the service of the Crown. [Admiral FIELD: Not naval men.] They were, at any rate, in the service of the Crown, and they ceased to be civilians. The other men were in a totally different position, and that was why the Admiralty had not been able to listen to the complaint of the officers of the Royal Naval Reserve. The officers of the Royal Naval Reserve had no vested right. It was really only a sentimental grievance, and the difference of the footing on which the officers of the two Services stood justified the Admiralty in the rule they laid down as to precedence. He could hold out no hope that the present Board of Admiralty would alter the rule in this matter laid down by a previous Board. As to the question with regard to pensions being paid at an early age, the matter should receive consideration. As to the query of the noble Lord who asked if the experiment with regard to the firemen had been successful, too short a period had yet elapsed to be able to deter-
  1546
  mine. As to the training of the Royal Naval Reserves, the recommendations made by Sir George Tryon's Committee had been given effect to.
  Vote agreed to.
  8. £1,315,200, for Naval Armaments.
  MR. FORWOODsaid, the Committee were probably aware that up to two or three years ago the Vote for Naval Armaments was entirely administered by the War Office. That was a highly inconvenient, and in the case of war a very dangerous, system. In consequence of the appointment of an inter-Departmental Committee of the War Office and the Admiralty, a complete change had been made in the custody of, and responsibility for, naval armaments, so far as regarded account keeping. But there was one important change recommended by that Committee which had not yet been carried out, and that was as regarded the purchase of naval armaments. Although the Admiralty obtained the money from this House, and were entirely responsible for the administration of this Vote, yet for a large portion of the material and supplies required they had to go to the War Office. He would point out that it had been recommended before now that the purchase of these stores should be made by the Admiralty itself—by its officers. It was manifest to anyone who had had any experience that it was impossible—at least that it was highly inconvenient—for one Department to act on behalf of another Department, or to communicate with another on the subject, without having a great deal of unnecessary correspondence. In time of emergency the existing system would not be found workable. He felt it would lead to great confusion. A transfer had already been made on the recommendation of a Committee with respect to the keeping of accounts; but the Committee, of which he (Mr. Forwood) was a Member, also recommended that the whole responsibility in regard to contracts for stores should be borne by the Admiralty. He could only give it as his opinion the change was necessary to prevent the delays and difficulties that must otherwise arise in time of emergency, which, as he said, might lead to serious disaster. One other point. The sum

  1547
  estimated this year was less than would be required, unless the Government had been able to obtain armaments at a less cost than they were originally put down at in the original Estimate. He hoped the Government would give some information showing the reason for the increase.
  COMMANDER BETHELLsaid, he had only one or two remarks to make. He wished to know whether the guns to be constructed during the present year were in anticipation of the vessels about to be laid down; and whether the experiments with wire guns were sufficiently satisfactory to indicate a chance of their being carried in the ships of the near future? He would also like to be informed whether experiments had lately been made with shells similar to the melanite shells in use in the French Navy?
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, he would like to draw attention to the inconvenience to men in the Naval Ordnance Department of having the pay-day changed from Fridays to Saturdays. He hoped the old custom would be agreed to by the Government. There were certain privileges which the men used to enjoy, and which should be granted to them in the ordinary way.
  MR. E. ROBERTSONsaid, the question of the inconvenience of the pay-day was being considered. The hon. Gentleman was understood to say that as to the privileges referred to full compensation was always made to the men who had lost them.
  ADMIRAL FIELDsaid, he wished to know how it came that certain guns of the Colossus had been found unserviceable? He also wished to inquire as to the reserve guns at Malta, and to express his disapproval of the 12-pounder gun being fired from the top of the conning tower in the new torpedo-boat destroyers. He was opposed to the practice of discharging torpedoes from the bow, because of the danger of the vessel overtaking the torpedo. He would point out particularly that, if it had been resolved that the 12-pounder in the new torpedo catchers was to be fired from the top of the conning tower, it would be practically impossible for the officer in the tower to
  1548
  perform his duties. Upon this question he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to give them some information.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether the reserve guns were in a reliable condition? With regard to the Colossus, three or four of the guns were found to be unserviceable. They had had other similar experiences, and he would like to know what were the patterns of the guns, and the condition in which they now were?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHsaid, what had occurred in reference to the guns of the Colossus was simply ordinary wear and tear. With respect to the guns generally, the assurance he could give was that, instead of the ships waiting for guns, the guns would be waiting for the ships. They were well in advance with the supply of guns for new ships, and, although the battleships under the Naval Defence Act were being pushed forward, and would, he hoped, be finished this year, not one of these vessels would have to wait for her guns. With regard to the system of purchasing naval armaments by an officer of the War Department, there were two sides to the question. Care should be taken to guard against competition between one Public Department and another, and there should be no want of uniformity between the guns of one Department and those of another. Both guns and ammunition should be interchangeable between land and sea service. It was an administrative question of great importance, and would receive the attention of the Admiralty. The present system secured these objects, but he was not quite certain that a system could not be devised which would sufficiently secure them, and yet not be open to the objection urged to the present system.
  MR. TOMLINSONsaid, there were two or three questions remaining unanswered. He would like to hear whether any change had been made in the guns at Malta.
  ADMIRAL FIELDsaid, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would answer his question regarding torpedoes.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHwas understood to say that these matters would have attention. The defective guns at Malta were coming home.
  Vote agreed to.
  9. Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £380,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Expense of Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad, including the cost of Superintendence, Purchase of Sites, Grants in Aid, and other Charges connected therewith, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894."
  SIR E. TEMPLEsaid, he desired to say a few words upon Gibraltar, which next after the Cape of Good Hope was the most important strategic position they had in the world. He had endeavoured to bring this question on before, but was told that it could not be done until this Vote was reached. He regretted the unavoidable absence—the absence through sudden illness—of the hon. Member for West Belfast (Mr. Arnold-Forster), who desired him to express his regret to the House on this account. In the absence of the hon. Gentleman, who was particularly well acquainted with this subject, he would endeavour to deal with it as well as he could. He would ask the Committee to consider for a moment what were the objects for which they retained Gibraltar, which was one of the most vital positions on earth for our Navy. They retained it, first, as a fortress commanding the Mediterranean; secondly, as a place from which a squadron could issue forth—on the pounce, as it were; thirdly, as a coaling station. These three purposes were answered. There was yet a fourth, which was not answered.
  THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. ROBY): The Vote is for new works and improvements, and I do not think the hon. Baronet is entitled to raise this question upon it. This is a question of policy, and it is out of Order.
  SIR C. DILKEsaid, on a point of Order, he would remind the Chairman very respectfully that when the hon. Member for West Belfast spoke on this important subject of Gibraltar on a former occasion he was told by the Chairman of Committees (Mr. Mellor) that he would
  1550
  be in Order in raising the question on this Vote.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHsaid, the statement was that on the Vote for the New Mole some points in connection with Gibraltar could be brought forward, but it was not said that the hon. Member would be at liberty to go into the whole question of the Rock of Gibraltar and its strategical position.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid, it seemed to him clear that they should be able to raise this question on the present Vote, which was for new works. The question he understood the hon. Baronet wished to raise was that of a repairing dock, which would come under the head of "new work." They had been debarred from discussing the question on a previous occasion. Surely they would not be debarred now? They had a right, if he might venture to say so with every respect to the Chair, to discuss this matter.
  MR. FORWOOD: Is not the New Mole part and parcel of the new dock, and made from its excavations?
  MR. E. ROBERTSON: That is not so.
  THE CHAIRMAN: If Mr. Mellor ruled that this discussion would be in Order on the present Vote I give way.
  MR. E. ROBERTSON: What he ruled, Sir, was that the question of Works should come up on the Works Vote, and nothing else. He did not say that a general discussion concerning Gibraltar could come up on this Vote.
  SIR C. W. DILKE; My recollection is distinctly as I stated; but if there is any doubt on the matter, would not the hon. Member be in Order in raising the matter as a question of high policy on the salary of the First Lord of the Admiralty?
  MR. JESSE COLLINGS: Whether it is the Mole or any other part of the works that is in question, can it be discussed other than on Gibraltar as a whole?
  THE CHAIRMAN: It is clear that nothing can be discussed on this Vote that does not distinctly relate to the works that are to be effected under it—certainly not the question of the retention or the non-retention of Gibraltar.
  SIR E. TEMPLE: I was mentioning this point as a proof—
  THE CHAIRMAN (interrupting): The hon. Baronet will be good enough to confine himself strictly to the Vote.
  SIR C. W. DILKE: Cannot the question of policy be raised on Vote 12?
  THE CHAIRMAN: I will deal with that matter when it arises.
  LORD G. HAMILTONrose—
  THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! Sir Richard Temple.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: We are shut out from dealing with a most material point. The Government knew perfectly well that Mr. Mellor gave his ruling in favour of the raising of this question on the present Vote. [Cries of "Order!"] I desire to state the ruling. It was given whilst a speech was being made by the hon. Member for West Belfast regarding the provision of a dock at Gibraltar, to which we understood that this Mole was ancillary. I hold that I am entitled to urge on the Government the importance of providing a repairing dock as part of the works at Gibraltar. You say, Sir, that it is not competent on this Vote to urge that a repairing dock ought to be part of the new works; then I obey your ruling.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Baronet must confine himself strictly to the Mole.
  SIR R. TEMPLE: Then I must take some other opportunity of raising the more important question. As to the Mole, which certainly is in the Vote, I want to know—and I am speaking in the presence of naval authorities—what is the use of it unless it is followed by a dock? [Cries of "Order!"] The Government are to blame for shortening our privileges. This Mole is a distinct part of the dock, and I beg to point out to the House, and through the House to the country and to all persons who are interested in the well-being and security of our Navy, that the work upon this Mole, which is an essential preliminary and a subsidiary undertaking to the provision of a dock, is being carried out at a snail's pace. Look at the figures presented to us. This year £5,000 is put down, although in another column there is the figure of £54,000 as already spent,
  1552
  and the total amount, we are informed, yet to be spent is £80,000. At this rate we shall be 10, 15, or 20 years before we complete the Mole. Yet this is an essential undertaking, for in the event of war with France, and a naval action being fought at Toulon, what would become of our wounded ships if they could not put into Gibraltar for repairs? What could they do? They would either have to go to Malta and run the gauntlet of Tunis, or go to Gibraltar and stop there without the possibility of being repaired. They could not be brought to England in the face of Brest and Cherbourg. Therefore, a repairing dock at Gibraltar is vital. I apologise to the Committee for having been obliged to treat this matter in such a fragmentary, cursory, and imperfect a manner, but the fault lies with the Rules of the House, which now and then prevent the proper discussion of matters of the highest importance to our naval supremacy. But we shall take other opportunities of urging this on the Government.
  MR. KEARLEYwas understood to ask whether the probationary period for labourers in the dockyards was to be abolished. In the case of carpenters and other mechanics at the Works Department, the rates of pay were altogether disproportionate to those which prevailed in the Trades Unions outside. The Union rate of pay for carpenters was 7½d. an hour, which worked out at 31s. 6d. per week, but in the Works Department the wages paid were as low as 25s. The Department frequently undertook work for other Departments, and though the scale of wages paid was only 25s. or 26s. a week the charge made to those other Departments was 7¾d. an hour. The Works Department charged the dockyard when it did work for it a scale equal to the Trades Union rate of wages. If, therefore, the full rate of wage was charged it was only fair that the men should be paid an amount approximating to that. There was a great grievance felt in 1891 under the late Secretary to the Admiralty, and he need not say that since the new scheme had been in force and the mechanics had been left out of consideration altogether the feeling of discontent had become intensified. The

  1553
  hon. Member (Mr. E. Robertson) in replying would perhaps say that the mechanical capacity of these men was inferior to that of the men employed in the dockyard. He had two arguments to meet that. He had to point out that many of the men had been employed at the dockyards, and when discharges had taken place had joined the Works Department, their characters being good and their capabilities satisfactory. His second argument was the character of the work these men were called upon to do. When the late Commander-in-Chief came to Devonport great alterations were made at his official residence—Mount Wise. Amongst other things, the ball-room was redecorated and the stables were altered in honour of the Duke of Edinburgh taking the command. It was evident that the workmanship must be of the highest quality. The men employed were from the Works Department—and he mentioned this to show that these mechanics were of equal ability to any employed in any other Government Department. He hoped that before the 1st of April, when the new scheme would come into force, the case of the mechanics would be considered, and that they would be put on a proper footing.
  THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. MELLOR): This Vote is for works, and not wages.
  LORD G. HAMILTONsaid, he proposed to point out that the money taken in this Vote was inadequate, and he submitted that he would be in Order in taking that course. It would be impossible to discuss the question of adequacy or inadequacy without noticing the works which were deemed necessary. There was a reduction this year of £68,000 in the amounts allocated to these two most important stations. Less money was taken this year than last, when, in his opinion, there should have been an increase, and the Vote was really quite £100,000 less than it ought to be. He had analysed the figures, and found that there was this year a reduction of 20 per cent. in the case of all large works compared with the amount voted last year, and in respect of Malta and Gibraltar the amounts taken were 40 per cent. less than last year. Lately increased importance had been attached to Malta, and larger expense had been incurred
  1554
  there, but it had been thought necessary also to extend the works at Gibraltar, and the construction of a mole had been decided on. The question of the mole and a now repairing dock being together, the dock would practically be cut out of the rock as an extension of the mole. Last year £5,000 only was taken for the extension of the mole, but the money was unfortunately not spent, and all that it was proposed to do this year was to re-vote that sum. Gibraltar was maintained simply as a naval station, but the whole of the defences there were under the control of the Army; and so long as that system continued, he did not believe there would ever be satisfactory results. The opinion prevailed in many important quarters that Gibraltar was the most strategical position we possessed, and that it was, therefore, essential to render it as perfect as possible for naval purposes. He admitted that there were difficulties in the way which had prevented the Government pushing on with the dock. Still, he thought that a more vigorous attempt should be made to extend the mole. But the War Office and the Colonial Office were of opinion that the population of Gibraltar should not be larger than it was; therefore, it was difficult to carry on the work. Notwithstanding that difficulty, the position of Gibraltar was so important that he thought the difficulty ought to be faced. He would, therefore, impress upon the Admiralty that the question of dockyard accommodation was a pressing one, and he hoped they would take it into their serious consideration. Attempts had been made to get this accommodation supplied through civilian intervention, but he doubted if that would be possible. Steps should be taken to bring the three Departments—the War Office, Admiralty, and Colonial Office—into agreement upon the matter. This question was even more important now than before, because the Admiralty were about to construct two gigantic cruisers, each costing £1,500,000, and the dock at Malta was the only one large enough to receive them. Was it worth while to construct ships if there was no dock at Gibraltar to accommodate them? To his mind, it was a matter of national policy to provide adequate accommodation for these vessels.

  1555
  He hoped both sides of the House would join in pressing upon the Government the importance of getting on with the work at Gibraltar.
  SIR C. W. DILKEagreed with the noble Lord as to the importance of this question. At the moment when Russia was establishing naval stations in the Mediterranean, the importance of Gibraltar was increasing every day. There were two naval policies in the event of war—one was to hold the Mediterranean and the other was to retire to Gibraltar, but in either case we should require ample coaling and dockyard accommodation there.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid, that the value of our trade which passed within reach of Gibraltar, either through the Mediterranean or down the West Coast of Africa, annually was £250,000,000. That was the value of our trade in that part of the world, and it was equally necessary that we should take measures at Gibraltar to protect it whichever of the two policies referred to by the right hon. Baronet we adopted—either that of holding the Mediterranean or retiring to Gibraltar. It was well-known to every great Power in Europe that if war were to break out between us and our great rival in the Mediterranean, our Fleet would, owing to its comparative weakness, have to fall back upon Gibraltar for reinforcements. That was a fact which it was no use attempting to conceal. In all probability the great naval action of the war would take place at or near that place. No doubt some of our ships would be seriously injured, and so long as we had no repairing dock at Gibraltar we should run the risk of having one or more of our ironclads, which cost £1,000,000 each, rendered useless or of losing them, for we should have to send them either to Malta or up the coast of Spain and through the Bay of Biscay to Portsmouth or Devonport, and either route would be beset by an active and powerful enemy. Such a state of things would be absurd. If the late Government had not been compelled to repair the deficiencies and weakness of the Fleet as they found it there was not the slightest doubt they would have undertaken that important work at Gibraltar. With regard to the
  1556
  mole at Gibraltar, in the opinion of naval authorities that was intimately connected with the question of the proposed dock. According to the evidence given before the Committee over which he had presided, if the dock were constructed it would give facilities, through the excavation of stone, for the construction of 360 additional feet of the mole. He had seen it reported in the papers that the Secretary to the Admiralty and the Financial Secretary were about to proceed to Gibraltar. If that was so, he hoped they would give the closest attention to the question of the site for a dock. He trusted that the Representatives of the Military Service would not allow sentimental objections to prevail against the adoption of this most valuable site. The Mole Parade was not absolutely necessary for the military, and by using that for a dock they would get an admirable site. No position at Gibraltar could be free from land fire, and there would always be a certain risk of that in the event of a war with Spain; but the position in the new Mole Parade was practically invulnerable to sea fire. He hoped, also, that the practicability of a secure mole would be considered for the sake of the comfort of our sailors—who, when lying at Gibraltar, would like to feel secure from torpedo attack—and for the sake of coaling. Coaling was at present carried on at Gibraltar by means of 40 or 50 hulks, which were all in private hands. In the event of war a couple of torpedo-boats could slip in in the dark and destroy all the coal hulks. If a mole were made available for coaling, a royalty of 6d. or 1s. a ton might be charged for coaling, and in this way £20,000 or £30,000 a year might be raised. That would be sufficient to pay the interest on a loan, by means of which the whole of the necessary works could be effected. That might be a too sanguine view of the matter; but, at any rate, it would go a long way towards it, the estimated cost of the mole and dock being £600,000. For this sum an invaluable dock could be obtained at Gibraltar and the port made practically free from torpedo attack—for about two-thirds the cost of one of our line of battleships. When these facts were taken into consideration the Committee, he thought, would agree that the

  1557
  Government should lose no time in dealing with the matter. In 1890 some 560,000 tons of coal were transferred from the hulks or travelling colliers at Gibraltar to merchant vessels in addition to that supplied to Her Majesty's ships. This was the most pressing question of all in connection with the Navy at the present time, and he hoped the Government would give it immediate and thorough attention.
  SIR J. GOLDSMIDsaid, that anyone who had been on board a ship in Gibraltar Harbour when she was endeavouring to coal in rough weather, as he had had the misfortune to be, would know how difficult an operation it was, and would be able to form an idea of the risk that one of Her Majesty's ships would have to face, when coaling, with an enemy outside. He was able, therefore, to speak as to the importance of the construction of the mole, and also as to the necessity of dock accommodation. The one thing depended upon the other, and the sooner the mole was completed the sooner would it be possible to provide dock accommodation. He would join in the appeal to the Government to be a little more liberal in their supplies for expenditure in these works. Works quickly executed always in the end cost less than those which dragged their slow length along.
  MR. E. ROBERTSONsaid, that with regard to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Devonport, who asked whether the probationary period for unskilled labour would be abolished, there were difficulties in the way of his making a statement just now. The hon. Member, however, would be able to form an idea of the nature of his reply from what he had said on a previous occasion. As to the workmen on the Works Department, he proposed to take the course which had been taken in the case of the dockyard men. Nothing had been further from the intention of the Government than to prevent the discussion of a question so important as that of the Gibraltar dockyards; but, of course, the Regulation of Order in the Committee was the work of the Chair. He was not concerned to deny anything that had been said about the desirability—and he might go so far as to say the necessity—of building dock-
  1558
  yards at Gibraltar. The First Lord of the Admiralty (Earl Spencer) had expressed the views of the Government on this question in another place, and by those views the Admiralty were, of course, bound. One reason why nothing appeared in the Estimates with reference to the dock at Gibraltar was that there were a great many other things which had to be done. A great dock had just been finished at Malta, and two other docks were in progress at Portsmouth, whilst there were pending at Devonport questions of dock-building policy which had to be taken into consideration. The supposition that the mole and the dock were necessarily bound up together in the way suggested by some hon. Members was refuted by the history of the mole itself. The mole had been there 10 years, while the dock was not there yet. The Admiralty had found that they had to strike the balance of advantages this year, and the balance they struck excluded from the Estimates the Gibraltar docks. Some of the hon. Members who had spoken had had the great advantage of having seen Gibraltar, and he hoped to have that pleasure before very long if the Debate was not unduly prolonged.
  ADMIRAL FIELDsaid, he thought some of his friends on both sides of the House would some day have a rude awakening on the subject of the dock at Gibraltar.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  10. £160,100, Miscellaneous Effective Services, agreed to.
  11. Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £231,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Expenses of the Admiralty Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894."
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid, that there had lately been cruising round the Eastern Mediterranean a French Squadron which was as large and as strong as the whole of our Mediterranean Fleet, and there was, in addition, a large squadron of reserves at Toulon. At the same time, the whole of Europe was interested by the fact that the Russian Fleet was about to visit the French at Toulon. It was also stated that arrangements were being made to

  1559
  establish a Russian Squadron permanently in the Mediterranean with a permanent port or naval harbour. In spite of these important facts, the present Board of Admiralty had allowed our Navy to be depleted by the loss of a first-class battleship without taking any steps to make up for that loss. He regarded this as a failure of policy which was deplorable. He made a strong protest against the Admiralty allowing our Fleet to be weakened by the loss of a great battleship at a time when our naval strength was, in the opinion of many high authorities, below what it should be, when other Powers were slowly increasing their naval strength, and when France, Russia, Italy, and Germany were spending more in proportion to their previous strength in construction than we were spending this year.
  SIR C. W. DILKEwished to know whether the Government had put on record in any form the reasons which had induced them to refuse to adopt the Report of the Commission on Civil Establishments with regard to the abolition of the position of the Civil Lord of the Admiralty? Of course, nobody would wish to abolish the present occupant of the office; but the view the Commission took was that the administrative work done by the Civil Lord might be performed by permanent officials, and that more Parliamentary work might be discharged by the Secretary to the Admiralty. He wished, further, to know whether fresh instructions were given each year to the naval officers employed on the coast of Newfoundland, or whether copies of the same Instructions were sent out year by year?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: I am not aware that any new Orders have been issued to the officers on the Newfoundland station differing from those it has been customary to issue, nor am I aware that the Admiralty have put on record any new opinion with regard to the retention of the office of Civil Lord; if so, it was done during the time of the late Board of Admiralty.
  SIR C. W. DILKE: The Commission on Civil Establishments condemned the retention of the office, and the reasons for the adoption by the Government of the contrary opinion ought, I think, to be put on record.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: I will look into the matter, and if my right hon. Friend likes to question me further on the subject, I shall be pleased to answer him. As to what my right hon. Friend says about the possibility of having much of the work done by my hon. Friend the Civil Lord (Mr. E. Robertson) and myself transferred to permanent officials, I heartily agree. An amount of administrative work falls upon us which is quite exceptional in the Public Service. I have really entered so fully on previous occasions into the questions raised by the hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir E. Ash-mead-Bartlett) that I must ask to be excused from repeating what I have said. I have told the House that the fact that the strength of the Navy has been reduced by the loss of the Victoria has been taken into account, and will be considered with the programme for future shipbuilding. We have not thought it our duty to come at once to the House of Commons to ask for a Supplementary Estimate. Of course, we bear the responsibility of not having done so, but I can assure the House and the country that we are not blind to the facts of the case.
  ADMIRAL FIELDinquired whether the defects that must have been brought to light by the experiments tried in the Summer Manœuvres would be remedied, and particularly whether anything would be done to get rid of the deficiency in the signalling staffs of torpedo-catchers and smaller ships?
  THE CHAIRMAN: That hardly comes under this Vote.
  ADMIRAL FIELDinquired whether the Admiralty would consider the desirability of appointing a Departmental Committee to consider the grievances of the coastguards, warrant officers, and chief boatmen, and the chief officers of the coastguard and the stokers?
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, he wished to move a reduction in the salary of the Secretary to the Admiralty (Sir U. Kay-Shuttleworth).
  THE CHAIRMAN: It is out of Order to move to reduce the salary of the Financial Secretary or the Secretary to the Admiralty for the purpose of bringing forward any questions.
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, in that case he would be pleased to transfer the reduction to the salary of the First Lord of the Admiralty.
  THE CHAIRMAN: Will the hon. Gentleman state what his ground is?
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, his ground was the evasive answers given to questions put by him in the House about the absence of the Commander-in-Chief of Devonport, His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh. The question he put was whether the Secretary to the Admiralty could state the total number of days on which His Royal Highness was absent from his duties on leave or otherwise during each of the three years he was at Devonport. The question was met with a point-blank refusal by the right hon. Gentleman (Sir U. Kay-Shuttleworth), who, however, made some interesting statements which were deserving of consideration. The right hon. Gentleman said the movements of the Commander-in-Chief were governed by the exigencies of the services and by the reasonable requirements of officers; that the Admiralty were responsible for the leave granted to the Duke of Edinburgh, and that the amount of leave granted did not interfere with the efficient performance of his duties by the Commander-in-Chief. He was justified in refusing to accept such a reply as had been given him. He asked for specific information, and he thought he ought to receive it. In the absence of the information which the Government could supply, he had private information of his own—not drawn from official sources, but drawn in the ordinary way from public journals, where the absences of His Royal Highness were noted as they occurred as matters of passing interest. The facts were reliable. His Royal Highness had been appointed for three years, and he held the appointment for two years and 10 months. In 1890 he was absent for 59 days, in 1891 for 116 days, in 1892 for 145 days, and during the time he held the command in 1893 he was absent 49 days, making a total of 369 days. No account was taken in this enumeration of local absences, such as visits to various seats in the neighbourhood, which were described as being within the boundaries of the port.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I did not quite catch the last date.
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, the last absences were in June, 1893. He was well aware that there were certain ways in which these absences could be explained. He must, however, press for information as to the number of days of the Duke's absence—the official record. He thought he was entitled to a better answer than he had yet succeeded in obtaining. There must be some reason for withholding the information. In his opinion, the precedent was dangerous and hurtful, and he would express his sense of disapproval by moving the reduction of the Secretary's salary by £100.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member cannot do that.
  MR. KEARLEY: The Secretary to the Admiralty's salary, Sir? Then I move to reduce the First Lord's salary by £100.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That Item A. Salaries, be reduced by the sum of it 100, in respect of the Salary of the-First Lord of the Admiralty."—(Mr. Kearley,)
  LORD G. HAMILTONsaid, he was responsible for the appointment of the Duke of Edinburgh to the command to which the hon. Member had referred. The hon. Member had a right, of course, to pass criticism, but any Member of the Government had a right in the exercise of his discretion to decline to answer him. [Cries of "Oh, oh!"] The hon. Member seemed to have obtained his information as to His Royal Highness's leave from a certain Plymouth paper.
  MR. KEARLEY: That is not my only source of information. It is a matter of public notoriety.
  LORD G. HAMILTONsaid, all he could say was that if the paper was not more accurate on this question than it was in its remarks about the late Board of Admiralty no truthful man would attach any importance to it. The Duke of Edinburgh was appointed to the Devonport command by him (Lord G. Hamilton), and everyone knew he was a singularly able officer; and no one

  1563
  could deny that during the time he was Commander-in-Chief his command was in a most efficient condition. The Duke of Edinburgh was an able administrator, and every time that he himself, as First Lord of the Admiralty, visited Devonport he found the Fleet in the most admirable order. He could not state how many days the Duke of Edinburgh had been absent from Devonport, but he could say that when he accepted the appointment His Royal Highness informed him that he had duties to discharge as personal Aide-de-Camp to the Queen, which might necessitate his absence at certain times from the port. The Admiralty thought that a legitimate cause of absence. During the time the Duke of Edinburgh held the command at Devonport several visits were paid by Royal and Imperial personages to this country, and on these occasions it was natural that the highest personage in the realm should be anxious to have associated with those exalted personages so distinguished an officer as her son had proved himself to be, and who could take part in the many State ceremonies. It was quite new to him that the Duke of Edinburgh was unduly absent during the time he held the command, and his (Lord G. Hamilton's) strong impression was that, if the facts were accurately known, it would be found that these occasional absences were due to the Duke's position as personal Aide-de-Comp to the Queen, and the ordinary two months' leave, which an Admiral was entitled to, formed the greater portion, if not the entire time His Royal Highness was absent. It did appear to him to be an abuse of the Forms of the House to move the reduction of salary of the First Lord of the Admiralty, because an hon. Member thought he had not been adequately informed as to the number of days on which a certain Admiral was absent from his command.
  MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, Ministers were paid to answer questions—they might refuse to answer questions, but it would be at their peril—and hon. Members were entitled to the information they asked for. The noble Lord opposite had given the Committee information which the Secretary to the Admiralty might have given in answer to his hon. Friend's question.
  LORD G. HAMILTON: I was personally responsible for the appointment.
  MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, there was no justification for refusing the information. He wondered what position the Navy would be in if every Admiral were absent from his command for 369 days in two years and 10 months. It was a very serious thing when members of the Royal Family were shown favouritism; and he held that when a member of the Royal Family accepted an appointment, the country had a right to claim that he should do the work attached to it. No complaint was made against the Duke for want of efficiency. The complaint was that he, was not at his post when there was work to do. He was elsewhere instead of discharging the duties of his office. There was a very strong feeling outside with regard to the favouritism shown in such cases as this. The noble Lord had a right to say what he liked, but he was not now in Office; and it was the duty of the Government to give answers to questions put, and not to defy the House and refuse information. He hoped the necessary information would now be forthcoming.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHsaid, he was sorry the hon. Member for Devonport should think that on any occasion he had given an evasive answer. He was always ready to give any information that it lay in his power to give, and he believed his answers were always straightforward. There were certain Rules in the Naval Service as to these matters, and he understood, from his close relations with those at the head of the Service, that it would be a grave departure from what had always been considered the practice to give details of the amount of leave granted to officers holding such positions as that of Commander-in-Chief. Comparisons between one efficient officer and another would be invidious, and it would be improper for the Board of Admiralty to give such information as had been asked for. In his question his hon. Friend had suggested

  1565
  that there was some want of attention on the part of the Duke of Edinburgh to his duties.
  MR. KEARLEY: I made no suggestion of that kind.
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWOKTHsaid, his hon. Friend said that His Royal Highness was away more than he ought to have been; but this was a question that did not arise for the House of Commons unless there was a departure from the usual Regulations or the public interest suffered. It was his duty, as representing the Admiralty in the House of Commons, to protect any efficient officer from the suggestion that he had done something or left something undone to the detriment of the Public Service. He could assure the hon. Member that he had endeavoured to treat the case of His Royal Highness exactly as he would treat the case of any other Commander-in-Chief. He came now to the Amendment, and he would point out that the leave granted to His Royal Highness since Lord Spencer took Office as First Lord was a small amount. His hon. Friend would see that the First Lord was only responsible for that small amount. He hoped the Amendment would not, in these circumstances, be pressed.
  MR. KEARLEYsaid, he regretted that he could not withdraw. He could not see why a different attitude should be taken upon these questions when the right hon. Gentleman was in Office from that taken when in Opposition. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that he did him some wrong. If he submitted the question to a Committee of a few Members of the House he would guarantee to prove every word he had said—and more.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 19; Noes 95.—(Division List, No. 308.)
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  The following Votes were agreed to:—
  12. £768,700, Half-Pay, Reserved, and Retired Pay.
  13. £956,400, Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances.
  14. £312,200, Civil Pensions and Gratuities.
  15. £60,300, Additional Naval Force for Service in Australasian Waters.

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.
  16. £535,022, to complete the sum for Post Office Packet Service.
  17. £1,724,010, to complete the sum. for Post Office Telegraphs.
  18. £5,140,575, to complete the SUN for Post Office.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

  SUPPLY.—REPORT.
  Resolutions 16th September reported and agreed to.—[See page 1409.]
EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL. (No. 451.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  MR. T. W. RUSSELLsaid, he objected to the renewal of the Peace Preservation Act, a measure of coercion which was unnecessary to the Government in carrying out their policy, especially as they had dispensed with the Criminal Law Procedure Act.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. J. MORLEY,): My only answer to the hon. Gentleman is that the Peace Preservation Act has been in force for many years. I do not regard the Act as a measure of coercion, but essentially as a measure of police regulation, and it is from that point of view that I desire to see it renewed.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNEproposed to amend the first Schedule by omitting the re-enactment of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act. So long as no difficulty arose in the administration of an Act, and the intentions of the Parliament which passed it were carried out, there could be no objection to its re-enactment in the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill. But in regard to the

  1567
  Welsh Intermediate Education Act, the Government had adopted a principle which was utterly at variance with the intentions of Parliament when the Act was passed, for it was being administered practically for the endowment of the Nonconformists of Wales, and therefore the Committee had a right to say to the Government that they would not grant the re-enactment of this Act unless guarantees were given that in the future it would be administered in accordance with the intentions of those who passed it. He could understand objection being raised to any religious teaching being permitted in schools supported by State aid. But that was not the policy of the Act. It allowed what was called undenominational religious teaching in the schools. But the most rigid denominational religious teaching was carried on in these State-aided schools; and, therefore, as he had said, the Act was an endowment of the Nonconformists of Wales. Again, if the Act were passed in its present form it would prevent the Local Authorities from having a free band in regard to the regulation of endowed schools which had been set up by the Charity Commissioners, and which gave parents of day scholars or board scholars the right to demand instruction for their children in denominational education. When the Welsh Education Act was passed, it was agreed that the Cowper-Temple Scheme should always be applied; but now this was set aside by a clause it was proposed to insert in the present Bill. No doubt hon. Members opposite would attempt to rest their defence of the clause on the Endowed Schools Act. [Cries of "Divide!"] No doubt hon. Members wished to get home to bed. So did he; but he wished to point out that if the Bill were passed as proposed a great injustice would be done to the people belonging to the Church of England in Wales; but no doubt that would be in accordance with the policy of the present Government. But the clause went on in a most remarkable manner—
  "Provided that the person in charge of a boarding-house, if the County Governing Body so allow, and subject to any regulations they may make on the subject, may separately from such general religious teaching, if any, give, either by himself or by deputy, religious instruction of a denominational character."
  1568
  That was subject to the control of the County Governing Bodies. He did not think a more extraordinary provision was ever put into a scheme. The Governing Body, as everyone knew, belonged, in a large majority, to the Nonconformist side, and, consequently, children, whose parents desired they should have Church of England teaching, were compelled to have it subject to the majority of the Nonconformist Body in the Church of England School. ["Hear, hear!"] An hon. Member approved that, and imagined the County Governing Body would, with impartiality, have the teaching the parent required. He (Lord Cranborne) was not of that opinion, and those with whom he acted and who had taken an interest in Welsh local politics were not of that opinion either. He thought the religious teaching of children who desired Church of England teaching ought not to be subject to the control of County Governing Bodies, consisting of the strong partisan Nonconformists, which the Principality produced. [Cries of "Divide!"] He apologised most humbly to the Committee for detaining them, but he had not had an opportunity of bringing this matter forward before. The history of the religious clauses in the English Education Act were very peculiar. As the Bill was originally introduced into Parliament, it had a clause such as met the views of the Nonconformist Members for Wales, which was imposed on boarding and day scholars alike. That was the same policy that revealed itself in the schemes for Wales. He only quoted the Merioneth scheme, but the policy revealed in that was the same as was found in the Intermediate Education Bill as originally drawn. That Bill went through various modifications, and he held in his hand the Debate in which the Amendment he was going to deal with was introduced. The Member for Dartford, the late Vice President (Sir W. Hart Dyke), introduced a number of Amendments, and his right hon. Friend authorised him to say that the change in the Bill by the adoption of the Cowper-Temple Clause as to boarders was done with the full concurrence of, and after conference with, the Welsh Nonconformist Members. He himself took part in that Debate, and did his best to

  1569
  support the then Vice President, and the attitude taken up. For that he was severely denounced by gentlemen who thought he had done his best to spoil the Bill. Now they were asked to re-enact the Intermediate Education Act, and they believed that the present Government, like their predecessors, were bound to administer the Act in the same spirit in which the late Government administered it, and because hon. Gentlemen opposite were in power they had no right to alter what was the plain intention of Parliament, as shown in Debate at that time, and introduce by a side-wind, by a scheme introduced into Parliament, general words giving power to the Governing Body to make schemes which might be for the advantage of the children, or some general words of that kind. By so doing a breach had been made in the practice of the former Government, and action had been taken directly contrary to the spirit and intention of Parliament. He claimed that he had made out a case for moving an Amendment on the Expiring Laws Continnance Bill. [Cries of "Divide!"] Really he thought this was most unseemly, because if the Government were once more to set this machinery in motion they were bound to give a pledge they would administer it in the spirit in which it was passed.
  Schedule 1.
  Amendment proposed, in page 6, line 6, to leave out "No. 35 (Welsh Intermediate Education)."—(Viscount Cranborne)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."
  THE PARLIAMENTAEY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. T. E. ELLIS,)said, the noble Lord had brought forward a charge against the present Government of having made some great change in policy in dealing with these schemes, and the noble Lord, he thought, based most of his argument on that assumption. He would like to point out to the Committee that every one of the schemes that contained this alleged objectionable religions
  1570
  clause was finished, so far as the Charity Commissioners were concerned, before the present Government came into Office; not a single scheme had passed from the Charity Commissioners with any change whatsoever since the present Government came into Office. The Conscience Clause was in every one of them. Among these were schemes for the Counties of Carnarvon, Merioneth, Pembroke, Flint, Denbigh, and Montgomery. There had been no change whatever either in the policy of the Commissioners or the Government.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNEasked if the hon. Gentleman asserted these clauses received the assent of Her Majesty's late advisers, because his right hon. Friend assured them to the contrary.
  MR. T. E. ELLISsaid, that so far as Carnarvon was concerned, he thought the Education Department sanctioned the scheme. At the instance of Lord Knutsford, strongly supported by the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council in the late Government, the Address to that scheme was adopted unanimously in another place, and no one ventured to bring forward an Address in that House to reject that scheme. With regard to the Merioneth scheme, the clause as it stood was a compromise that was effected by the Education Department, as between the clause adopted by the Charity Commission and the Joint Education Committee of Merioneth. The scheme of the Charity Commissioners was adopted with a minor alteration. The noble Lord said most of the schemes touched schools belonging to a particular denomination. In all the 16 schemes ever drawn up in Wales and Monmouth shire there was not a single school belonging to any denomination touched or affected by this scheme. In the case of Carnarvon a complaint was made that one school, Fryer's, was a Church of England School. Lord Knutsford, speaking on behalf of the late Government, took objection to that, and said the inclusion of Fryer's was quite in conformity with the Act of 1889. How did the Nonconformist majority propose to deal with the

  1571
  religious instruction in boarding schools? So far as the day schools were concerned, the noble Lord admitted it was included in the Welsh Act of 1889, but how did it deal with the religious education? He should like to read to the Committee the provision made for religious instruction in boarding schools. The first provision was this—
  "In the hostel, or boarding house, or school, scholars shall be allowed to attend such places of worship, and have reasonable facilities for religious instruction from such religious teachers, as their parents may choose for them."
  He ventured to think no more liberal provision could be adopted than the provision introduced in that scheme. The second provision, as to family worship, was—
  "Christian family worship shall be held daily in the hostel or boarding house, but in the family worship so held the formularies of any particular denomination shall not be used."
  The noble Lord made objection to that provision, but that was the very provision which was passed unanimously in the House of Lords.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I have nothing to do with the House of Lords.
  MR. T. E. ELLISsaid, if the able Lord had so little interest in the doings of the House of Lords, why did he not himself move an Address to Her Majesty to reject this clause, and take the opinion of the House of Commons upon it? Neither he nor his hon. Friend took any step whatsoever to challenge the opinion of that House. The last provision ran thus—
  "In the course of any general Christian religious teaching given in the hostel or boarding-house, the formularies of any particular denomination shall not be used, nor shall the distinctive tenets of any particular denomination be taught, provided that the person in charge of a boarding-house, if the County Governing Body so allow, and subject to any regulations they may make on the subject, may separately from such general religious teaching (if any), give, either by himself or deputy, religious instruction of a denominational character, but only to those scholars whose parents have in writing expressed a wish for such instruction."
  That gave a free hand to the Local Authority—the very provision which the noble Lord wanted. He ventured to submit that in these counties, where the Nonconformists were in an enormous
  1572
  majority, this provision was as liberal a provision as could be devised. If the clause were not re-enacted the result would be that many schemes which were now in progress could not be proceeded with. He trusted the Committee would not accept the Amendment of the noble Lord.
  MR. J. G. TALBOTwho spoke amid cries of "Divide!" supported the Amendment of the noble Lord. They objected, and challenged the continuance of this Welsh Intermediate Act, because they said it had been worked in a manner in which it was never intended to be worked. He would remind the hon. Gentleman who had last spoken, of the Debate on the Welsh Intermediate Act which took place in July 1889, when the very power which was now sought to be introduced into this scheme was sought for by the hon. Gentleman and his friends, and was deliberately refused in this House. The Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Stuart Rendel), on the occasion of the Debate of 1889, moved to omit the word "day" before scholars, and he said—
  "The question of boarders is one about which the feeling is very strong in Wales."
  Mr. Osborne Morgan supported the Amendment, and then the following discussion ensued:—
  "Sir W. HART DYKE: I appreciate the point which has been raised, but I cannot accept any Amendment virtually tending to widen the clause, which already extends the Cowper-Temple Clause to day-schools.
  Mr. T. E. ELLIS: May I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman? I think it would be rather hard if a Nonconformist child were a boarder in a school in Wales, and were compelled to attend lessons on any religious subject in connection with some other religious denomination.
  Viscount CRANBORNE hoped the change would not be made.
  Mr. MUNDELLA: I think this clause should be allowed to extend to board scholars as well as day scholars."
  Why had he quoted all this? Because he wanted to show that this point was distinctly raised in 1889, and was distinctly refused; therefore, when the hon. Gentleman sought now to apply to boarders the provision which the Act only applied to day scholars, he was

  1573
  doing that which the Act of Parliament did not allow him to do. In the Report of the Endowed Schools Inquiry Commission, 1867, on which the Endowed Schools Act was founded, it was stated—
  "Parents of day scholars ought to be allowed to withdraw their children from the religious instruction if they think fit, and also to appeal against any unfair inculcation of religious doctrines in the course of the secular instruction."
  Then the Report went on to say—
  "Boarders must stand on a different footing. A master who has boarders in his house is not merely a teacher; he has for the time the full responsibility of a parent."
  He would not trouble the Committee with the whole extract. He merely quoted this to show that the matter had been very deliberately regulated by Parliament, and that a distinction had been always drawn between day scholars and boarders. Whilst, on the one hand, day scholars had been given that provision for undenominational teaching under these schemes of the Endowed School Acts, enlarged by the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, the matter with regard to boarders had been distinctly put on a different footing, and what they said was that the present Government had materially altered the foundations on which that was done. The words of the Merionethshire scheme—
  "If the County Governing Body so allow, and subject to any regulations they may make on the subject"—
  were deliberately put in against the scheme which the Charity Commissioners had framed. The scheme, as submitted by the Charity Commissioners, had left discretion in the hands of the master, and the Education Department, acting on the advice of the Charity Commissioners, put in these words, taking away the option of the master to demand liberty of religious teaching and giving it to a Governing Body. His noble Friend was not saying too much when he said that the County Governing Body in a Welsh county was a hostile body which might make and force hostile regulations upon the people. What they asked was that this Act should be administered in the spirit in which it was passed, and they maintained it was not so administered. They did not stand alone on the Merionethshire Scheme, because they had the Cardiganshire Scheme, which actually
  1574
  went to this extent in illiberality—that they excluded from the benefits of Cardiganshire Scholarships boys attending a certain school, notoriously one of the best in the county, because it happened to be a denominational school. [Mr. ACLAND: It is under private management.] That was a perversion of language: the school was, to all intents and purposes, a public school, and it had the public confidence to a remarkable degree. The Carnarvonshire scheme, though sufficiently undenominational to please most people, had not been challenged in either House of Parliament; but there was another scheme for Denbighshire, which dealt with the ancient school of Ruthin, long connected with the Church.
  MR. T. E. ELLISsaid, there had been no change in the Denbighshire scheme during the last 18 months.
  MR. TALBOTsaid, he knew the scheme had created great alarm, and he hoped it would not be pressed aggressively. He regretted once more that these matters could not be brought before the House on a more suitable occasion. It was the fault of the system under which they laboured; they had not had the ordinary opportunities of bringing forward their grievances. All they asked was that the "denominational conscience," as it was called, should be respected [Laughter]. He supposed there was no harm in doing that? Their demand was, he thought, a very simple one. If the Church in Wales was in a minority, he thought they should have the privilege of a minority, and be protected in all these matters.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Other Schedules agreed to.
  Bill reported, without Amendment; read the third time, and passed.

WAYS AND MEANS.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Resolved, That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty for the Service of the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, the sum of £26,449,207 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.—(Sir J. T. Hibbert.)
Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

SAVINGS BANKS BILL.—(No. 292.)
As amended, considered.
A Clause (Proof that bank is a post office savings bank,)—(Mr. A. Morley,)—brought up, and read the first and second time, and added.
An Amendment made.
Bill read the third time, and passed.

LABOUR DISPUTES (ARBITRATION) BILL.—(No. 308.)
Order for Second Reading read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

CONSPIRACY AND BREACH OF THE PEACE BILL.—(No. 208.)
Order for Second Reading read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

VACCINATION BILL.—(No. 356.)
Order for Second Reading read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 215.)
Order for Committee read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (SCOTLAND) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 216.)
Order for resuming Adjourned Debate on Second Reading [26th April] read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

ESTABLISHED CHURCH (WALES) BILL. (No. 225.)
Order for Second Reading read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

LIQUOR TRAFFIC (LOCAL CONTROL) BILL.—(No. 233.)
Order for Second Reading read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

POLLING DISTRICTS (LANCASHIRE).
Copy presented,—of Order made by the County Council for the County Palatine of Lancaster re-dividing the Heywood Parliamentary Division into Polling Districts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
PRISONS (IRELAND).
Copy presented,—of Fifteenth Report of the General Prisons Board (Ireland), 1892–3 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ARMY (ROYAL MILITARY ACADEMY, WOOLWICH).
Copy presented,—of Report of the Board of Visitors for 1893 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ARMY (ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE, SANDHURST).
Copy presented,—of Report of the Board of Visitors for 1893 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ARMY MEDICAL STAFF (EFFECTIVE AND NON-EFFECTIVE VOTES)
Return presented,—relative thereto [Address 5th September; Mr. Bartley]; to lie upon the Table.
NAVY (LOSS OF H.M.S. "VICTORIA").
Copy presented,—of Minutes of Proceedings at a Court-Martial, held on board H.M.S. Hibernia, at Malta, between the 17th and 27th July 1893, relative to the loss of H.M.S. Victoria [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
TRANSMISSION OF SEAMEN'S WAGES.
Copy presented,—of Report of the Committee appointed to consider the question of the extension, to Ports Abroad within Home Trade limits, of the arrangements now in force in the United Kingdom for the transmission of Seamen's Wages; together with Minutes of Evidence, Appendices, and Index [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

ADJOURNMENT.
Motion made, and Question, "That this House do now adjourn,"—(Mr. Marjoribanks,)—put, and agreed to.
House adjourned at ten minutes after Two o'clock.