Commons Sitting of 28 February 1901

Preamble
One other Member took and subscribed the Oath.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILL PETITIONS [Lords] (STANDING ORDERS NOT COMPLIED WITH).
  MR. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of

  19
  Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the Petitions for the following Bills, originating in the Lords, the Standing Orders have not been complied with, viz.:—

  Chester Corporation Tramways.

  South Lancashire Tramways.

  Watford and District Tramways.

  Wigan Corporation Tramways.

  Ordered, That the Report be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

PRIVATE BILL PETITIONS (STANDING ORDERS NOT COMPLIED WITH).
Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the Petition for the following Bill, the Standing Orders have not been complied with, viz.:—
London County Council (Tramways and Street Widenings).
Ordered, That the Report be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (NO STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE).
Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—
Thames and Severn Provisional Order Bill.
Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time To-morrow.

LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS AND STREET WIDENINGS).
Petition for Bill; referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER.
Bill to confirm a Provisional Order made by one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State under the Metropolitan Police Act, 1886, and the Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1897, relating to lands in the parishes of Erith; Banstead; St. John, Horselydown; St. Leonard, Shoreditch; Clapham; and
20
Greenwich, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Jesse Collings and Mr. Secretary Ritchie.

METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
"To confirm a Provisional Order made by one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State under the Metropolitan Police Act, 1886, and the Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1897, relating to lands in the parishes of Erith; Banstead; St. John, Horselydown; St. Leonard, Shoreditch; Clapham; and Greenwich," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 73.]
PETITIONS.
  BEER BILL.
  Petition from Sandhurst, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (HIGHER GRADE AND EVENING CONTINUATION SCHOOLS).
Petitions for alteration of Law, from Cardiff; Colne; Queensbury; Birmingham; Widnes; Gateshead; and Drigh-lington; to lie upon the Table.
FRANCHISE AND REMOVAL OF WOMEN'S DISABILITIES BILL.
Petition from London, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
POOR LAW OFFICERS' SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1896.
Petitions for alteration of Law, from Barnet; Wimborne and Cranborne; Aberavon; and Martley; to lie upon the Table.
SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS TO CHILDREN BILL.
Petitions in favour, from Partick; and Colchester; to lie upon the Table.
SUNDAY CLOSING (MONMOUTH SHIRE).
Petition from Colchester, for alteration of law; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  COUNTY COURTS, ENGLAND (FEES).
  Copy presented, of Treasury Order, dated 22nd February, 1901, regulating Court Fees in County Courts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
MILITARY WORKS ACTS, 1897 and 1899.
Account presented, for the period ended 31st March, 1900, together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 66.]
BOARD OF TRADE (LABOUR DEPARTMENT).
Copy presented, of Seventh Annual Abstract of Labour Statistics of the United Kingdom, 1899–1900 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
PIERS AND HARBOURS (PROVISIONAL ORDERS).
Copy presented, of Report by the Board of Trade of their Proceedings under the General Pier and Harbour Act, 1861, and the General Pier and Harbour Act (1861) Amendment Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 67.]
FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 9th February, 1901, entitled the Persia (Regulations) Order in Council, 1901 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION ACT, 1889.
Copies presented, of Minutes sanctioning the subjects to be taught under Clause 8 of the Technical Instruction Act, 1889, for the following counties and borough:—

County of the Isle of Wight (Fourth Minute), dated 7th December, 1900;

County of the Soke of Peterborough (Eighth Minute), dated 18th January, 1901;

County Borough of Oldham (Eighth Minute), dated 25th January, 1901

[by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

ARMY (ORDNANCE FACTORIES) SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1900–1901).
Copy presented, of Estimate of the Further Amount required during the
22
year ending 31st March, 1901, to defray the expense of the Ordnance Factories [by Command]; referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 65.]

ARMY (MEMORANDUM ON ESTIMATES).
Copy presented, of Memorandum of the Secretary of State relating to the Army Estimates of 1901–2[by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
EAST INDIA (NORTH-WEST FRONTIER).
Copy presented, of Papers regarding British relations with the neighbouring Tribes on the North-West Frontier of India and Punjab Frontier Administration [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
PRISONS (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented, of Rule made by the Secretary for Scotland appointing the Police Cells at Haddington to he a legal Prison for the detention of untried prisoners for a period not exceeding fourteen days before or during trial, and of convicted prisoners for a period not exceeding seven days from the date of conviction [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
PRISONS (SCOTLAND) DIETARIES.
Copy presented, of Rules made by the Secretary for Scotland under the Prisons (Scotland) Act, 1877, establishing new rates of Dietaries for the several classes of prisoners [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
LOCAL REGISTRATION OF TITLE (IRELAND) ACT, 1891. AND SMALL, DWELLINGS ACQUISITION ACT, 1899 (RULES).
Copy presented, of Rules made by the Judge nominated as an additional Land Judge for the purposes of the Local Registration of Title (Ireland) Act, 1891, with the approval of the Lord Chancellor [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1901–1902 (VOTE ON ACCOUNT).
Estimate presented, showing the several Services for which a Vote on Account is required for the year ending 31st March, 1902 [by Command];

23
Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 68.]

ALLOTMENTS (SCOTLAND).
Return ordered, "of all Lands acquired in Scotland for Allotments under the Allotments (Scotland) Act, 1892, and the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894, showing in how many cases requisitions by the Parish Council to the County Council for the compulsory acquisition of Land for Allotments have been made, and with what result.

Parish and county.

Number of Allotments granted, giving particulars of acreage and rental.

Number of cases where Allotments refused.

—(Mr. Eugene Wason.)

PAUPERISM (ENGLAND AND WALES) (MONTHLY STATEMENTS).
Return ordered, "of Statements for each month of the year 1901 of the number of paupers (except lunatics in county and borough asylums, registered hospitals and licensed houses, and vagrants) in receipt of relief in England and Wales (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 135, of Session 1900)."— (Mr. Grant Lawson.)
QUESTIONS.

  SOUTH AFRICA—INQUIRY INTO THE CONDUCT OF THE WAR.
  *MR. LOYD: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in the event of a general public inquiry into the whole course and conduct of the war in South Africa being granted, the Government will place any limit to the cost or duration of such an inquiry; and would such a general public inquiry be in lieu of, or in addition to, the expert military inquiry necessary to ascertain and clearly define the lessons of the war.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): As the hon. Member is aware, we have promised a general inquiry, and the cost of the inquiry and its duration must depend on the discretion and competence
  24
  of the body to whom inquiry is entrusted. The Government can lay down no limitation as to matter of time. As to the last paragraph in the question, of course the lessons of the war are constantly studied by the military authorities of the War Office.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: May I ask whether, and if so when, the House will be informed of the circumstances attending the surrender at Nicholson's Nek and other places, and of the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief thereon?
  *MR. SPEAKER: That hardly arises out of the question on the Paper.

GOVERNMENT'S KNOWLEDGE BEFORE THE WAR OF ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE TWO REPUBLICS.
MR. C. P. SCOTT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, before the month of September, 1899, the Government were in possession of information that, in the event of war breaking out with the Transvaal, the Orange Free State would take the side of the sister Republic, and that this country would have to face the combined forces of the two States; and, if not, at what period this information reached them.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not quite know what the hon. Gentleman means by this question. There was no treaty that I am aware of between the Orange Free State and the Transvaal Republic of an offensive character.
MR. C. P. SCOTT: I referred to the Report, a copy of which has within the last few days been placed on the Library, issued by the Intelligence Department of the War Office about four months before the war began, in which it is stated that—
*MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! Notice had better be given of the question.

JAMESON RAID INDEMNITY—COUNTER-CLAIM OF THE CHARTERED COMPANY.
MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will lay upon the Table of

25
the House evidence showing that the Chartered Company had a claim of £5 to every £1 claimed by the late Transvaal Government for the Jameson raid.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. Chamberlain,): No, Sir; I have not received any such claim from the Chartered Company.
MR. ALFRED DAVIES: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider this question further, as the statement was made in the House on his behalf by the Chancellor of the Exchequer?
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. I do not think that my right hon. friend used the words which are repeated in the question. In any case I can only deal with the claim if made by the company in question. No such claim has been made.
MR. ALFRED DAVIES: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what are the words he refers to?
*MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

CAPE TOWN DOCK POLICE —GEORGE KERR'S ESTATE.
MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been directed to the case of the late George Kerr, a member of the dock police of Cape Town, who died early last year, and is believed to have left property undisposed of in Cape Town; whether he is aware that the police authorities at Cape Town realised the property referred to and sent to his relatives in Ireland as the result a sum of about £19; and can he state by what right the police authorities so acted, and whether there is now any means of ascertaining if the sum mentioned represented the whole value of the estate.
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I have no information on the matter, which appears to be one entirely for the consideration and decision, of the Cape Government.

SOUTH AFRICAN COMMISSIONS.
MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the Secretary
26
of State for the Colonies what portions of the Vote of £7,800, under Subhead O 1 of Vote for Colonial Services, in Supplementary Estimates is due to the Transvaal Concessions, the Land Settlement, and the Transvaal Financial Commissions respectively, and when the House may expect to be in possession of the Reports of these three Commissions or missions of inquiry.
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: (1) The figures are as follows: Transvaal Concessions, £3,500; Land Settlement Commission, £2,650; Transvaal Financial Commission, £1,650—total £7,800. (2) I cannot say until I have received and considered them.
MR. JOHN ELLIS: Is the Land Settlement Commission proceeding?
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes; it is considering its Report. As I stated the other day, the evidence has not yet reached me.

THE PAARDEBERG ARMISTICE.
MR. YERBURGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can inform the House what general granted the armistice of twenty-four hours to General Cronje, which Lord Roberts on his arrival at Paardeberg, as he states in his despatch of the 28th February, 1900, immediately revoked on the ground that the request for an armistice was obviously only an expedient to gain time for reinforcements to arrive.
THE SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,): The paragraph referred to is a little misleading. The facts are as follows: On the morning of the 19th February a message arrived from General Cronje asking for an armistice for twenty-four hours to enable him to bury his dead and send out his wounded. Lord Kitchener, as chief of the staff, replied to the message in the name of the senior officer at Paardeberg— Lieutenant-General French — who was with the cavalry some little distance off, to the effect that the message was being sent to the Field Marshal commanding, and that, pending his reply, Cronje's laager would not be attacked. Lord

27
Roberts received the message about 10 a.m. the same day, on his arrival at Paardeberg, and gave orders that the armistice could not be granted for the reason given in the despatch.
MR. DILLON: May I ask the right lion. Gentleman whether when Lord Kitchener replied he was actually in command of the British army on that day at Paardeberg?
MR. BRODRICK: No, Sir; the actual control was in the hands of the senior general officer, who, at that moment, by local rank, was not Lord Kitchener. Lord Kitchener was empowered by Lord Roberts to offer advice if he thought it necessary, and, if he offered such advice, no doubt it was taken by the senior officer on the spot.
MR. FLAVIN: What was the strength of Cronje's force as compared with the British?
[No answer was given.]

MILITARY COURTS OF INQUIRY.
MR. YERBURGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether an officer whose conduct forms the subject of a court of inquiry has the right or is afforded the opportunity of appearing in person before such court, and of calling witnesses in his defence; and whether officers of all ranks, against whom steps have been taken by the War Office in consequence of the finding of a court of inquiry before which they have not had the opportunity of appearing, have the right, whether on full or on half-pay, to demand a court-martial; and, if not, whether they have any, and, if so, what right of appeal.
MR. BRODRICK: The officer on whom a court of inquiry is held has the right and is afforded the opportunity of appearing before the court. The court of inquiry may report circumstances directly or indirectly affecting other officers, but in such cases the fact that they have not been called is considered in dealing with the finding of the court. No officer has a right of appeal to a court-martial, but to the Commander-in-Chief and the Sovereign, in accordance with Section 42 of the Army Act.
MR. COURTENAY WARNER: May I ask if steps are being taken by the War Office to alter these rules in accordance with the promise given by the right lion. Gentleman and the First Lord of the Treasury the other day.
MR. BRODRICK: No promise was given as to the alteration of rules, but certain pledges were given as to the way in which officers were to be treated in certain cases, and these pledges will be adhered to.
MR. YERBURGH: What I would like to ask the right lion. Gentleman is, are all officers whose conduct may be the subject of a court of inquiry given the opportunity of appearing before the court?
MR. BRODRICK: It is impossible to assure the procedure to such a degree that, when the conduct of one officer is under consideration by a court of inquiry, no evidence may be by any chance brought forward which may affect some other officer who may not be present. But should any action be taken on such evidence, or on the report made on it, of course the fact of such officer not being present is taken into account.
MR. YERBURGH: I desire to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether where punishment is passed upon an officer in accordance with the result of a court of inquiry that officer is given as a matter of right the opportunity of having his case heard before sentence is passed upon him?
MR. BRODRICK: I think the hon. Member had better put his question down. I am quite aware of the case to which he refers, and I am prepared, at the proper time, to answer it, but I am not prepared to enter into a debate on this question in the form of a question and answer across the floor of the House. But I may state that the officer to whom the hon. Member refers had had an opportunity of making an explanation, and the substance of his explanation was well known to the officer who made the recommendation in regard to it.

COLONIAL TROOPS IN SOUTH AFRICA.
*SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the

29
Secretary of State for War whether it is possible to state the number of men sent to South Africa by the Dominion of Canada, the Colony of New Zealand, and each of the six Australian Colonies respectively, and the number in each case who have completed their service and returned to the Colonies; also the number in the case of each of these Colonies now serving in South Africa.
MR. BRODRICK: I fear I must ask the hon. Gentleman to postpone this question for a fortnight, in order to obtain the information.

REPORTED SURRENDER OF GENERAL BOTHA.
MR. DALZIEL: Have the Government any official information as to the reported surrender of General Botha?
MR. BRODRICK: No official information has been received.

LORD ROBERTS AND GENERAL BOTHA—FARM BURNING.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the correspondence between Lord Roberts and General Louis Botha in reference to the burning of farms in the vicinity of railways damaged by the Boers.
*MR. BRODRICK: Yes, Sir.

PAY OF VOLUNTEER INFANTRYMEN IN SOUTH AFRICA.
MR. RENWICK: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, having regard to the fact that the pay of the Imperial Yeomanry is now 5s. per day both for the newly enrolled members of that corps and for those who are already serving in South Africa, whether he will take into his favourable consideration an increase of pay to the artillery, engineer, and rifle Volunteers who are now serving in South Africa, and to the members of the Volunteer service companies which have recently been enrolled for active service, so as to place the members of these corps on an equal footing with those of the Imperial Yeomanry.
*MR. BRODRICK: It would be impossible to place members of the Volunteer service companies on a different footing as regards pay from the Regular infantry with whom they are serving. We are endeavouring to relieve as many as possible of the Volunteers who went out to South Africa last year.

PENSIONS FOR SOLDIERS' WIDOWS.
MR. SOARES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, if a soldier on active service in South Africa dies of disease contracted during and incidental to such service, his widow is entitled to either a gratuity or a pension; and can he say when the Government propose to initiate a pension scheme for the widows of such men; and whether they will undertake to do so before making any grants to victorious generals.
*MR BRODRICK: Under existing regulations the widow of a soldier dying under the circumstances stated does not receive pension or gratuity from public funds. Under a scheme, which will shortly be issued, pensions will be given in such cases.

VOLUNTEERS AND THE IMPERIAL YEOMANRY.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if ho can state approximately what was the contribution in men of the Volunteer Force to the first levy of the body styled Imperial Yeomanry, and what to the new levy, and how many came respectively from the Yeomanry Cavalry of Great Britain.
*MR. BRODRICK: The number contributed to the first levy of the Imperial Yeomanry by the Yeomanry Cavalry was 1,898, and by the Volunteers 1,145. Corresponding figures for the second levy are not at present available.

WOODSTOCK HOSPITAL, CAPE TOWN.
MR ARTHUR STANLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Woodstock Hospital, Cape Town, is still being used for enteric patients; and whether, in view of the smells which are acknowledged to exist at Woodstock, any

31
steps have been taken to find another and more suitable site in the neighbourhood of Cape Town.
*THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY,): The hospital is still being used for enteric patients. Many improvements have recently been made in the hospital, and the senior medical officer in charge now describes everything as satisfactory. The only change contemplated is the removal of the drainage outfall.

MILITIA OFFICERS' GRATUITIES.
DR. FARQUHARSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, considering the inconvenience and expense incurred by Militia officers now actually embodied and serving, he will grant them, on completion of a year's service, the gratuity of £100 now paid to officers whose regiment has been disembodied.
*LORD STANLEY: This question has been thoroughly considered. I am not prepared to alter the decision already arrived at.

VOLUNTEER CAMP REGULATIONS.
MR. GRAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the conditions which will apply to Volunteer camps this year; and, in particular, whether fourteen days service in camp will be required, and whether the same rate of pay as last year will be allowed; and can he remove the doubts which arose last year as to the first and last day of the period in camp by stating what the War Office regards as a day.
*LORD STANLEY: An announcement with regard to this subject will be made very shortly.

SUB-LETTING OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can now state the results of his investigations into the charges made against Messrs. Musgrave and Company, ironfounders, and Messrs. Wilson and Sons, tent and sail makers,
32
both of Belfast, of having violated the conditions under which they held their contracts from the Government.
*LORD STANLEY: With regard to Messrs. Musgrave, the Department was; misled by the firm in the reply given to the House on the 13th December, 1900, as regards sub-letting, † It has: since been ascertained from personal inquiries made by the Director of Contracts that this firm did to a certain, extent infringe the terms of their contract in respect of sub-letting, and they have-been warned that this must not be repeated. With regard to Messrs. Wilson, the case has been further considered, but I can see no reason for altering the answer given to the hon. Member on the-13th December by my predecessor.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: Will a Commissioner be sent to Belfast to investigate the case against Messrs. Wilson, as was done in the case of Messrs. Musgrave?
*LORD STANLEY: The matter has been fully considered. I am afraid I cannot give any further answer.

IMPERIAL YEOMANRY—ACCOMMODATION FOR RECRUITS AT ALDERSHOT
MR. JEFFREYS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the recruits for the Imperial Yeomanry who are sent to Aldershot find no proper barrack accommodation ready for them; whether rifles in some cases have not been issued to them for a fortnight; and whether, as under these circumstances it is difficult to drill the men, he will take steps to have proper arrangements made.
*MR. BRODRICK: The General Officer Commanding at Aldershot reports that there has naturally been considerable difficulty in accommodating, almost at a moment's notice, over 6,000 recruits who came there immediately on enrolment without any military organisation. This difficulty has been rendered greater by many of the men arriving unexpectedly after the authorised hours. As the barracks are temporarily occupied by more than the normal number, it has been necessary to provide trestle camp
† See The parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxxviii., p.678.

33
beds, but every man has been provided with a bed and plenty of bedding. As regards clothing, there has been no unnecessary delay, as every man has to be carefully fitted, more especially with boots. It is not true that men have been drilled in the snow un-provided with proper clothing or boots. Every man is provided with a warm jersey to wear under his khaki serge frock. As regards the rifles, all demands of the Commandant, Imperial Yeomanry, have been met without any hitch or delay. The Commander-in-Chief has sent General Mackinnon to Aldershot to take command, under Sir Redvers Buller, of the large body of Yeomanry now there. Arrangements have been made to cope with the difficulties, and drafts are being rapidly despatched to South Africa.
MR. JEFFREYS: Why send the men to Aldershot at all?
*MR. BRODRICK: Because it is the most convenient station at which to deal with them.

LANCASHIRE HUSSARS —ACCOMMODATION FOR RECRUITS AT ALDERSHOT.
MR. ARTHUR STANLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that forty-three men of the Lancashire Hussars, who had volunteered for service in South Africa, were ordered to join at Aldershot on the 4th of February last; that on their arrival there they found that no provision whatever had been made for them; that thirty-seven of them were at last put into a room which had only accommodation for twenty-three men; and that as no food was given to them they were dependent upon what they could buy for themselves; and whether any steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of such mismanagement.
LORD STANLEY: The men arrived two hours after the hour laid down as the latest for receiving recruits. Thirty-five were put into a barrack room, a number not in excess of the winter occupation authorised for the room. There was no necessity for them to buy food.

PRICE OF IRISH HORSES.
COLONEL NOLAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if there is any objection to state for the year 1899 or the year 1898 the average price paid to dealers for Irish horses, and also the average price paid to farmers or non-dealers.
*LORD STANLEY: It would not be in the public interest to make these prices known.

ARMY CONTRACTS—SECRECY AS TO DETAILS.
COLONEL NOLAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether contracts for the conveyance of troops are kept secret; whether contracts for or the prices of arms, ammunition, clothing, medical comforts, tents, saddlery, food, and forage are kept secret; whether the prices given for Argentine horses is a secret; and can he say, where prices or contracts are secret, what machinery is used to prevent fraud, corruption, and waste.
LORD STANLEY: The prices paid under the contracts are not disclosed. The prices paid for Argentine horses have likewise, in the interest of the public, not been made known; but full particulars of all purchases, whether by contract or otherwise, are given to all officers concerned for the purpose of audit.
COLONEL NOLAN: The Financial Secretary has not answered the last part of the question, which is its main point.
LORD STANLEY: I think we can trust our officers to see that there is no fraud, corruption, or waste.
COLONEL NOLAN: Does the Secretary for War accept the responsibility for all this secrecy, seeing that millions of money are involved in these contracts?
[No answer was returned.]

FOURTH BATTALION BORDER REGIMENT —OFFICERS' PAY.
MAJOR BALFOUR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the officers' pay of the 4th Battalion Border Regiment, quartered at Youghal, which was due on 1st November, and which, by Article

35
276, Pay Warrant 1900, is ordered to be paid monthly in advance, was not issued by the paymaster till 10th December; and will he take steps to prevent the repetition of this breach of the Regulations.
LORD STANLEY: It appears that, owing to a misapprehension on the part of the officer commanding the battalion, the pay in question was issued in arrear instead of in advance. The Regulation on the subject is generally well known, and it does not appear necessary to issue further orders to meet what appears to be an isolated case.

GERMAN GUNS FOR THE BRITISH ARMY.
MR. WALFORD GREEN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the quick-firing field guns, purchased in Germany and issued to the 16th and 17th Brigade Divisions of the Royal Field Artillery stationed at Aldershot, have proved unsatisfactory; whether half of the guns issued have been returned disabled to Woolwich Arsenal; whether defects in the breech mechanism have been discovered; and whether the recoil has proved destructive to the gun carriages.
MR. BRODRICK: The guns in question have not proved unsatisfactory; they have been found, on the contrary, to shoot with remarkable accuracy. No defects have been discovered in the breech mechanism, nor has the recoil proved destructive to the carriages. The threads of some of the breech screws have become burred owing to the guns being used for drill purposes without drill carriages—a slight damage which can be repaired locally. Some of the axles of the gun carriages having cracked in travelling, the firm which supplied the batteries is replacing all the axles by axles of an improved pattern at its own expense. Fourteen guns have been returned to Woolwich for this purpose.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Have any of the guns been used in South Africa; and, if so, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability, with the view of finishing the war, of sending out a few competent German officers with them?

ARMAMENTS OF VOLUNTEER ARTILLERY.
MR. DUNCAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that some battalions of Volunteer Artillery have only guns of a pattern nearly forty years old, and if he can give any promise to issue to them, at an early date, guns of more modern design.
LORD STANLEY: It is intended, as was explained to the House last year, to re-arm the Volunteer Artillery. The heavy guns required for the batteries of position are now being manufactured. I cannot give the exact date on which new guns can be issued.

SECTION D RESERVE MEN.
*MR. M'CRAE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state if the rule which exacts an extra year's service from Reservists who have completed twelve years service in the First Class Reserve also applies to those men who have enlisted under Section D Class to complete sixteen years; and whether Reservists at present serving in South Africa are being detained beyond the period of their engagement to serve for sixteen years.
LORD STANLEY: The answer to the first of the hon. Member's questions is in the affirmative. No man by reason of his serving abroad may be retained beyond one additional year.
*MR. M'CRAE: Is the noble Lord aware that complaints are coming from South Africa of men being detained beyond their agreed period of service?
LORD STANLEY: I am not aware. If they are complaining I think there must be a misunderstanding. They are liable to serve an extra year.
*MR. M'CRAE: Under what Army Order is that extra year made applicable to a man who has already done sixteen years service?
LORD STANLEY: I must ask for notice of that.

MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL FLEET RESERVE IN GOVERNMENT EMPLOY. MENT.
Lieut.-COL.LEE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admi-

37
ralty whether retired non-commissioned officers of the Royal Marines, or retired petty officers, Royal Navy, who are now in Government employment in any of the Naval establishments and who may join the Royal Fleet Reserve, will be granted the necessary leave to attend the annual trainings without loss of or prejudice to their positions in such Government employment.
THE SECEETABY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. Arnold-Forster, Belfast, W.): Yes, Sir. This point is specially provided for in the Royal Fleet Reserve Regulations.

HIRE OF TRANSPORTS FOR THE CAPE.
*MR. ALFEED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can explain why the Government did not exercise the powers in the subsidy contract with the steamship companies when war was imminent with the late Transvaal Government, and when the ultimatum had been issued and British territory invaded, by taking their fastest steamers for transports which were available, some of which have an average speed of twenty-one to twenty-two knots, and would have done the passage to Cape Town in twelve to fourteen days (the length of passage by ordinary steamers being sixteen days), instead of chartering at that time steamers many of which had an average speed of ten to twelve knots, and took twenty to twenty-eight days for the passage to Cape Town; and whether, Shaving regard to the importance of the arrival of troops eight or twelve days earlier at that critical time, he can state why the following steamers were employed for carrying troops — namely, the "Jelunga," which took thirty-six days from Southampton to Durban; the "Harlech Castle," which took twenty-six days from Southampton to Cape Town; the "Manila," which took twenty-six days from Southampton to Cape Town; and the "Zibengla," which took twenty-eight days from Birkenhead to Cape Town.
MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: It is doubtful whether the Admiralty had power to take up subsidised ships for the purpose of transport, and in any case the Admiralty does not consider it desirable
38
to make a demand upon the steamship companies which would clearly be at variance with the intention of both parties when entering into the contract. The intention of the Admiralty was to obtain the use of these vessels as armed cruisers, and not as transports in a non-maritime war. Many of the steamers on the Admiralty List, especially the Atlantic vessels of very high speed, are not suited for the purpose of Army transport, and would require extensive alterations and refitting to make them available for the purpose. When two of the Atlantic vessels were subsequently engaged (not under the Subsidy Agreements) they took eighteen and nineteen days respectively to reach Cape Town. They are quite unsuited for the conveyance of artillery (for which the first requisition was received) and for cavalry. The "Jelunga" was all ready fitted when requisition for the despatch of troops was received. It was necessary to send her via the Mediterranean and Suez Canal, as the Rifle Brigade, which was one of the regiments selected for South Africa, was stationed at Crete. With regard to the other vessels—looking to the necessity in every case of erecting special fittings, it was obviously necessary to take the most suitable ships actually in British ports, a necessity which, of course, limits choice. The "Harlech Castle" and "Manila" each lost four days on their passage through heavy weather. As there were only three weeks in which to prepare transport for 20,000 men, the ships that could be got at once had to be taken to enable it to be done, as it was.
*MR. ALFRED DAVIES: Were not some of the ships only fit to be broken up for old iron at the time they were hired?
[No answer was given.]

ROYAL MARINE ARTILLERY—DUTY FREE TOBACCO.
*MR. REGINALD LUCAS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether permission may be given to Royal Marine Artillery serving ashore to purchase their ship's tobacco duty free, as in the case of sailors and Marine Light Infantry.
*THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): The power of issuing tobacco free of duty is granted by the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, sections 123 to 125, and applies to ships on service only. The regulations as to men being allowed to purchase tobacco free of duty apply equally to all belonging to H.M. ships (except coastguard when on shore), whether seamen, Royal Marine Artillery or Royal Marine Light Infantry. Neither men of the Royal Marine Artillery or Royal Marine Light Infantry are allowed the privilege when at their divisions in barracks.

FOREIGN WARSHIPS IN BRITISH DOCKS.
MR. BARTLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether Japanese or other foreign war ships are now occupying and have recently occupied docks at Chatham and elsewhere, though at the same time His Majesty's ships are waiting to enter these docks for repairs; and whether, if this is correct, he can state by what authority foreign authorities use His Majesty's dockyards when these docks are urgently needed for the Navy, and whether the practice will be at once put an end to.
*MR. PRETYMAN: No Japanese or other foreign warship is now occupying any of the docks at the present time, but the Japanese cruiser "Iwate" was recently docked at Chatham. This is a courtesy that has been occasionally granted to Japanese and other foreign ships by the Admiralty. It is always arranged so as not to interfere with the docking of any of His Majesty's ships. I may mention that the Japanese recently extended the same courtesy to us by allowing the "Victorious" to be docked in Japan.

ROYAL VISIT TO THE COLONIES -PRESS ARRANGEMENTS.
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is intended to exclude, with one exception, the correspondents of all the newspapers desiring to be represented on the occasion from the ships of war accompanying the Royal
40
Mission to Australia; whether Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace has been deputed to accompany the Duke of Cornwall and York as official reporter; and whether that gentleman will also represent The Times, which will thus, enjoy privileges denied to the London press generally.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: At the same time, may I ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, seeing that newspaper correspondents have been refused permission to sail in His Majesty's cruisers accompanying H.R.H. the Duke of York to Australia, and that the effect of this will be to prevent special correspondents reaching places at which His Royal Highness will call in time to send home descriptive reports, he will state if Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, a special representative of The Times newspaper, has been selected historian for the trip., and whether he will be prohibited from sending reports of the voyage to The Times, so that it may not have an advantage over other daily newspapers.
*MR. PRETYMAN: Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace will accompany His Royal Highness the Duke of Cornwall and York on his projected tour. The First Lord of the Admiralty is in communication with representatives of the press for the purpose of ascertaining whether it is possible to arrange for other representatives to accompany His Royal Highness. I may say, however, that the accommodation available is exceedingly limited, and the question is one of some difficulty. If the hon. Member will put down a further question at a future date I shall be happy to give him the information he requires as soons as the First Lord of the Admiralty has come to a decision.
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I shall put a question down for Monday.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: Arising out or that question, is the hon. Gentleman aware that on the occasion of the funeral of the late Queen Victoria the representative of the Times was admitted to Frogmore Chapel on condition—
*MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: I was coming to a supplementary question, Sir. My question is whether in the event of The Times correspondent alone being allowed to accompany their Royal Highnesses he would be under an obligation to supply his reports to some central news agency, so that all the newspapers may be placed on an equal footing.
MR. PRETYMAN: I understand that Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace is not representing The Times.

ROYAL MARINES—DISCHARGE PAYMENT.
MR. REGINALD LUCAS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, seeing that an ex-soldier upon joining the Royal Reserves has refunded to him two-thirds of the money with which he has previously purchased his discharge, and that this re-payment is denied to ex-non-commissioned officers and men of the Marines, His Majesty's Government will in future recognise the claim of the latter to similar treatment under similar circumstances.
MN. PRETYMAN: The conditions of service in the Royal Marines are more analogous to those prevailing in the Royal Navy than to those in the Army, and it has not been found possible to extend the Army rules on this point to the Marines without considering the Royal Navy. The formation of the Royal Fleet Reserve, however, may make some modification in the existing rules for the Royal Navy and Royal Marines desirable, and the question is now under consideration.

AMERICAN EXPORTS.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the exports from America of iron, steel, and agricultural implements amounted last year to 145,000,000 dollars, or treble the value in 1897; and that the greater proportion of these surplus goods, not required by the American people, were sent to England, Scotland, and Ireland to compete with British productions, taxed by Imperial imposts and local rates; and whether, in the interests of British and Irish workers, he will take steps to secure such fiscal treatment of these and other
42
competing foreign manufactured imports, amounting to £100,000,000, as shall establish the equality of foreign goods with British goods in the British markets, and place upon the foreigner some portion of the pecuniary burden of the Boer War.
*THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (SIR M. HICKS BEACH,): The exports from America of iron, steel, and agricultural implements amounted last year, as stated by my hon, Friend, to 145 million dollars, which is not treble, but just over double the value of 1897. But I must demur altogether to his statement as to the proportion taken by the United Kingdom. For the year ended 30th June, 1899, the proportion of these exports taken by the United Kingdom was, according to figures furnished to me by the Board of Trade, under 20 million dollars, out of a total of over 106 million dollars. The figures for 1900 are not yet fully made up, but they are not expected to differ greatly in this respect from those of the year before. If I rightly understand the second paragraph of the question, it suggests a fiscal policy to which I am not disposed.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I shall take an early opportunity of raising this question.

BEER ADULTERATION.
COLONEL BROOKFIELD: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is prepared to give effect to the suggestion made in the Majority Report and endorsed in the Minority Report of the Beer Materials Committee, that columns for hops and hop substitutes should be inserted in the brewers' entry books.
*SIR M. HICKS BEACH: Yes. I have given directions that the change is to be made. I find there would be practical difficulties, which my hon. friend will no doubt appreciate, in the way of altering the books in the middle of the brewer's year. So I propose to introduce the change on 1st October next.

COLONIAL LOANS ACT, 1899.
MR. STUART SAMUEL: I beg to ask Mr.

43
Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state to what colonies up to the present time sums have been advanced by the Treasury under the Colonial Loans Act, 1899, and for what purposes, to what amounts, and at what rates of interest; also the date on which each such loan was granted and the date fixed for its repayment.
*SIR M. HICKS BEACH: The information asked for cannot be satisfactorily given within the limits of an answer to a question. I will lay a Return on the Table.

COOPER'S HILL COLLEGE.
Colonel MILWARD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state when the Cooper's Hill Papers, which were laid upon the Table in dummy upon the 21st February, will be ready for distribution.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HANILTON, Middlesex, Ealing): The Papers I understand will be delivered to-morrow.

NEWSPAPER LICENCES IN GIBRALTAR.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to an application made, on 17th December last, by Arturo Sacramenti to the Governor of Gibraltar for a licence to publish a newspaper devoted to the interests of the working classes, under the Press Ordinance, Gibraltar, 1869; and can he explain why the application was refused.
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The issue of newspaper licences in Gibraltar is entirely at the Governor's discretion. Sir George White reported to me last month that he had decided to refuse Sacramenti's application for a licence, in the interests of the peace and good order of the fortress, for the maintenance of which he is responsible.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: Is it proposed to lay on the Table any Papers on this subject?
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir.

BRITISH AFRICAN PROTECTORATES— GRANTS-IN-AID.
MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what have been the total sums voted or to be voted up to the 31st Mareh, 1901, in respect of the British Central African, East African, and Uganda Protectorates (including the purchase of the interests of any Chartered Companies), and what is the total sum advanced, or proposed to be advanced, up to 31st Mareh, 1901, in respect of any railways or other public works in the above Protectorates.
*THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS Viscount CRANBORNE,): The grants in aid of the revenues of the several Protectorates, including Somaliland, and of the Uganda Railway are as follows:— British Central Africa, £239,700; East Africa Protectorate, £793,675 (including £50,000 paid to the Imperial British East Africa Company for surrender of its charter, etc., and also including the Supplementary Vote before. Parliament for £149,000); Somaliland Protectorate (Supplementary Vote, before Parliament), £60,000; Uganda Protectorate, £1,222,400; Uganda Railway, £3,999,000 — total, £6,314,775.
MR. LABOUCHERE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can state what has been spent of public money during the last ten years on British East Africa, Uganda, Somaliland, and the minor Protectorates in the neighbourhood of these countries.
*VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The terms of this question are covered by the answer already given to the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division of Nottingham. The figures given include all grants made in respect of the Protectorates and railway. These grants go back to 1894 only, covering therefore a period not of ten but of seven years.

CHINA—ITALY AND BRITISH PROPERTY AT PEKING.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's

45
Minister at Peking has received a protest from Sir Robert Hart against the proposed appropriation of the Imperial Customs buildings by the Foreign Legations, and particularly the Italian Legation, which proposes also to take possession of land which is the property of Sir Robert Hart himself.
*VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: We understand that in connection with the scheme of defence for the Legation quarter a plan is under consideration which would require an open zone 150 yards wide all round, and that to obtain this it would be necessary to take a great part of the site of the Customs Administration. On the 20th instant Sir Robert Hart addressed a letter to His Majesty's Minister and also to the Doyen of the Diplomatic Body expressing his surprise at this appropriation, but stating that if military necessities required the cession of the sites for the defence of the Legation quarter he would not protest or oppose it. But we are in communication with His Majesty's Minister on the subject.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Can the noble Lord say what compensation is to be paid?
*VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: We have not got to that point.

THE YANG-TSZE VICEROYS.
SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will take steps to ensure the maintenance in their office of the Yang-tsze Viceroys who have rendered such services in the interests of Great Britain and of civilisation in their provinces, and to enable them to carry out essential reforms of which they are in favour.
*VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The matter referred to was carefully considered some time ago, but His Majesty's Minister at Peking reported that he was satisfied that there was no danger of the, Viceroys' removal. His Majesty's Government fully appreciate the services which they have rendered.

NEWFOUNDLAND—FRENCH CLAIMS.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the
46
Colonies whether His Majesty's Government are at present in negotiation with the French Government in reference to French claims in Newfoundland; and, if not, whether the advisability of commencing negotiations will be taken into consideration at once.
*VISOCUNT CRANBORNE: It would not be correct to say that negotiations are proceeding with the French Government in reference to Newfoundland; but His Majesty's Government have repeatedly shown themselves willing to take any favourable opportunity for adjusting this long-standing difficulty, and are now in consultation with delegates from the Government of the colony upon the subject.

WALFISCH BAY.
SIR BRAMPTON GURDON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information which he can communicate to the House respecting the alleged cession of Walfisch Bay to Germany, and whether Walfisch Bay is a portion of the territory primarily under the control of the Government of Cape Colony.
*VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: There is no question of a cession of Walfisch Bay to Germany. Walfisch Bay is administered as part of Cape Colony.

LEAD POISONING IN THE POTTERIES —NEW RULES.
MR. COGHILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware, of the dissatisfaction that is felt amongst all classes of the Staffordshire Potteries with the suggested new rules; will he state who drew them up and who is responsible for their production; and will he, in view of the condemnation they are receiving at the hands of every practical person engaged in the manufacture of china and earthenware, take an early opportunity of withdrawing them.
*THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. RITCHIE, Croydon): I am not aware of any such general dissatisfaction as my hon. friend suggests, though objections

47
have been taken to the new rules. The rules were drawn up by the officials of my Department, and I am responsible for their production. I see no reason for withdrawing the rules. The objections must now, in accordance with the statutory provisions on the subject, be settled by arbitration.
MR. COGHILL: Why was no notice of the new rules given to the operatives in the district?
*MR. RITCHIE: They are as fully aware of the rules as the manufacturers.
MR. COGHILL: They got no notice.

CORONERS AND THE PUBLIC EXECUTIONER.
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can give any instances of a public executioner having been required by a coroner's request, summons, or warrant, to give evidence to satisfy the law and the public that an execution was properly carried out within a prison in Great Britain; and whether he can state any instances in which the executioner attended and gave evidence, and any instance in which he refused to attend on the coroner's summons or warrant.
*MR. RITCHIE: So far as I have been able to investigate the matter, I am not aware of any instances of the nature referred to in the question.

DANGERS OF TOY PISTOLS.
MR. HELME: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the accidents frequently resulting from the use of so-called toy pistols, and to the recommendation of the jury at the inquest held on Norman S. Allen, of Lancaster, who was shot on the 19th instant by a playfellow, and died immediately after; and if the Government would be willing to adopt measures to restrict the sale of weapons capable of inflicting such injury. In putting the question, I should like further to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he has seen a telegram announcing the death of a lady aged twenty-two, at Ashton-under-Lyne, in consequence of
48
being shot with a toy pistol; and has he received a memorial from the Mayor and Corporation of Lancaster urging that legislation should be initiated.
*MR. RITCHIE: I have received several memorials of the nature referred to, but I have not heard of the death at Ashton-under-Lyne. I have this morning received the recommendation of the jury referred to. I am fully sensible that the question of pistol accidents is a serious one, but as I said two days ago, I cannot promise legislation on the matter this session.

LADY INSPECTORS OF FACTORIES.
MR. BIGNOLD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, seeing that Miss Paterson, who resides in Glasgow, is the only lady inspector in Scotland under the Factory and Workshops Act, and that an increase in the number of lady inspectors was recommended by the Chief Lady Inspector in London, then Miss Abraham, and that this course has been successfully adopted in England and Ireland, he will take into consideration the appointment of additional lady inspectors, or lady inspectors' assistants for Scotland.
*MR. RITCHIE: The lady inspectors are not assigned to England, Scotland, and Ireland separately, or to particular divisions thereof. The lady inspector who resides in Scotland may be and often is employed in England and Ireland, and, conversely, the inspectors residing in England may be employed in Scotland. The increase in the staff of the Lady Inspectors' Department, to which my hon. friend refers, has therefore benefited all parts of the United Kingdom. I am sorry that I do not see my way at present to propose any further increase.

JUSTICES AND THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE.
SIR JOHN DOR1NGTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the letters patent of 15th February, 1901, relating to the Commission of the Peace and announced in the Gazette of the same date, constitute a new commission superseding and determining the existing commission within

49
the meaning of the statute of Anne 1, stat. 1, c. 8; or. if not, what is the effect of such letters patent; and if such letters patent constitute a new commission, must two justices at least from each county take the judicial oath and the oath of allegiance before the Lord Chancellor or one of His Majesty's judges in order to enable a court of quarter sessions to be formed before which the other justices can take the necessary oaths as required by the Promissory Oaths Act, 1871, or will some person be appointed by His Majesty in accordance with Section 2 of that Act.
*MR. RITCHIE: I have been in communication with the Lord Chancellor, from whose office the letters patent referred to were issued. The answer to the first and second questions is that the letters patent do not constitute a new commission, and that their effect is not to determine but to continue existing commissions. Consequently the third question does not really arise, but seeing that justices may think it desirable (in accordance with the advice which I stated a few days ago had been given to me) to take the oaths afresh, I am considering whether I shall recommend His Majesty, for the sake of general convenience, to make an appointment under the Promissory Oaths Act. 1871.

RAILWAY SERVANTS AND THE WORK MEN'S COMPENSATION ACT.
*MR. THOMAS SHAW: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention, has been called to the case of Brodie against the North British Railway Company, in which the Second Division of the Court of Session in Scotland recently decided that a railway servant who had been injured while engaged in the company's work as a goods guard was not entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, because the place at which the accident occurred was upon a private siding connected with the main line of rails; whether he is aware that the existing state of the law as declared by this decision has been the subject of much discussion and dissatisfaction among the railway servants of the United Kingdom; and whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to bring in
50
any measure to amend the Workmen's Compensation Act so as to include within its scope accidents of the kind before mentioned, to which such a large class of the working men of this country are subject in the regular course of their duties.
*MR. RITCHIE: I have seen a report of the case referred to, but I have not received any representations on the subject from railway servants. No doubt the point will have to be considered when an amending Bill is taken in hand, but I am not at present in a position to promise legislation on the subject.
AN HON. MEMBER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that half the railway servants of the United Kingdom are deprived of the beneficent provisions of this Act?
[No answer was returned.]

CHEAP TRAINS ACT.
DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the time has now come when steps should be taken for an extension of the Cheap Trains Act of 1883, in order that greater facilities for cheap locomotion for working men and women may be secured.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): No, Sir. I am of opinion that the Act of 1883 is at present adequate. I would refer the hon. Member to the voluminous Return published last year showing the facilities that now exist in the matter of workmen's trains and fares.

UNITED STATES STEEL TRUST.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if be is aware that eight of the largest iron and steel firms in the United States have combined their forces with a capital of £229.000.000, with the main object of destroying the iron and steel industries of the United Kingdom, the only market throughout the world open to them without a toll; and what steps His Majesty s Government propose to take to safeguard the interests of the principal staple trades in Great Britain and the workers dependent upon it.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I have no official information on the subject, but I believe from statements which have been publicly made that a combination of iron and steel firms in the United States is now in course of formation. I am not prepared to accept my hon. and gallant friend's statement of the main object of the combination, and I do not think that any action on the part of His Majesty's Government could usefully be taken.

DESERTIONS FROM THE MERCANTILE MARINE.
*MR. HAIN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the number of desertions of seamen and others from the mercantile marine during the past three years; and if he will lay upon the Table of the House a Return giving full particulars similar to the Return presented to Parliament by the Registrar General of Seamen some three years ago.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I am quite willing to give this Return; its preparation will take a little time.

REGISTERED TONNAGE OF SHIPS.
MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that in some instances the registered tonnage of vessels is only about one tenth of the gross tonnage or cargo carried; whether he has had complaints from Irish Harbour Boards upon this subject; and whether he can state if the Board of Trade propose to remedy this inequality between the registered and gross tonnage of vessels.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, Sir; I am aware of the circumstances to which the hon. Member refers, and the Board of Trade have under consideration an instruction to their officers which it is hoped will mitigate the inequality complained of. Meanwhile, as I have already stated to the House, it is open to harbour authorities to endeavour to obtain powers to levy dues based on the gross instead of on the net tonnage of vessels by means of local Acts.

LONDON WATER COMPANIES—WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS.
MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, considering the character of the regulations which the eight water companies of the Metropolis have prepared, the expense that would be thrown upon consumers if any sanction were given to them, and the alarm that has been created amongst the local authorities and inhabitants of London by these proposals, he will undertake that no sanction shall be given to them by his Department without further Parliamentary consideration.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,): I understand that the proposed regulations have been withdrawn.
MR. LOUGH: Can the right hon. Gentleman suggest any means by which local authorities and the inhabitants of London may be saved from the great expense and trouble they have been put to by such regulations being brought forward?
MR. WALTER LONG: The regulations were brought forward by the companies in consequence of the direct recommendation of the Royal Commission. They were submitted to the Local Government Board in proper form, and if the Commissioners thought it was desirable that the regulations should be put forward, I have no suggestion to make as to the way in which the expense may be avoided.

TUBERCULOSIS SEIZURES.
MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, following up the Circular dated 11th March, 1899, respecting tuberculosis seizures, he has received any communications from local authorities pointing out their inability to comply with the suggestions of the Board; whether he is aware, as the result of non-compliance, that actions at law have risen and are now arising in which the recommendations contained in the said Circular are ineffectively cited although based upon the Report of the Royal Com-

53
mission; and whether the Local Government Board will again draw the attention of local authorities to the aforesaid Circular.
MR. WALTER LONG: The answer to the first and second paragraphs of the question is in the negative. I am not aware of any sufficient reason at the present time for complying with the suggestion in the last paragraph of the question.

THE HOUSING QUESTION.
DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether lie is prepared to accede to the request of the London County Council that in its scheme of repayment of loans contracted in connection with its housing schemes it may he permitted to take the value of the land wholly or in part out of the Kinking Fund, thus treating the value so excluded as an asset against debt.
The following question also appeared on the Paper:—
DR. MACNAMARA: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is prepared to accede to the request of the London County Council that it may be permitted to spread the repayment of the loans contracted in connection with its housing schemes over a period of 100 years.
MR. WALTER LONG: Perhaps in replying to this question. I may be allowed also to answer that to my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury, which stands in the name of the hon. Member. Proposals of the kind referred to in these questions were more than once discussed in this House last year in connection with the Bill for the Housing of the Working Classes. It clearly appeared that the sense of the House was adverse to them, and I am not now prepared to propose the legislation which would be necessary for carrying them into effect. In connection, however, with the very pressing question of the provision of housing accommodation for the working classes, I welcome any suggestions which may be made to me and will give them my most careful consideration.
MR. GRAY: Is it not the fact that the discussion on this question arose in the last and not in the present Parliament?
MR. WALTER LONG: Yes, but it was only last June.
DR. MACNAMARA: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of appointing a Committee to see whether proposals might be made to deal with this pressing question.
MR. WALTER LONG: If that course seems desirable I shall not hesitate to recommend it to the House. I have issued circulars to the various local authorities in the country asking them to inform me what are the precise difficulties which stand in the way of carrying; out the Acts, and I would rather wait to receive their replies before I decide to appoint a Committee.
MR. LOUGH: Might not the period allowed for the repayment of the loan on the value of the land be extended?
MR. WALTER LONG: I am not quite sure whether the hon. Member is entitled to press the question. I have to consider whether we ought to treat the land as holding a permanent value when there is one section in the House which would be willing, by legislation, to depreciate its value.
MR. LOUGH: What ground has the right hon. Gentleman for saying that I entertain an opinion which would depreciate the value of the land, or of anything else, for that matter?
MR. WALTER LONG: I did not intend to cast any imputation on the hon. Member, but I understand the hon. Gentleman is one of those who favour the imposition of a special taxation on land, which certainly would not increase its value.
DR. MACNAMARA: When you get the replies from the local authorities will you state the effect to the House?
MR. WALTER LONG: I do not think I can make any promise to offer a statement. I am doing my best to bring about a solution of this very difficult question.

DEFAULTING POSTMASTERS.
MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, in the case of defaulting postmasters, the Post Office Authorities proceed against the sureties before they have failed to realise from the principal in default; and, if so, whether the practice will be altered, so as to leave the sureties free till all the usual steps have been taken to make the property of the principal liable for the debt.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): No, Sir. The practice is to proceed against the defaulter in the first instance, before calling on the sureties to make good the deficiency.

SOUTH AFRICAN MAIL DELAYS.
MR. BARTLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the South African mail arrives frequently, as it did this week, on Monday, thus taking nineteen days from Cape Town; whether he is aware that the new mail boats do the voyage in fifteen or sixteen days, thus securing delivery of the letters three and four days earlier; whether, under a recent arrangement, the voyage of the mails was to be done in sixteen days; and whether he will take steps to secure that the mails shall not in future be carried by the old slow boats of the Union Castle Line.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: On three occasions during this year the South African correspondence has only been delivered in London on Monday, the packet having reached Southampton on two of those occasions on Sunday morning, and on the third, late on Saturday night. On the two occasions of a Sunday arrival the packet exceeded, in adverse circumstances, the time allowed for the voyage under the contract, namely sixteen days twenty hours. A contract time of sixteen days fifteen hours comes into force on the 1st of October, 1903. It is a fact that the voyage has been completed by some of the packets in sixteen and even in fifteen days; but the Postmaster General cannot prevent the
56
use of any particular packet of the Union Castle Line which is not up to that speed, especially if the ships can in normal circumstances do the contract speed. If a vessel incapable of performing the contract were habitually employed, the Postmaster General would, of course, represent the matter to the Colonial Government. The contract is not with the Postmaster General, but with the Government of the Cape Colony. Penalties are prescribed for cases in which the contract time is exceeded.
MR. BARTLEY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this week again the mail arrives on a Sunday. Can he not do something to facilitate the carrying of them?
[The answer was inaudible.]

PRIVATE POSTAL COLLECTIONS —SHEFFIELD CASE.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that Mr. J. G. Graves, a leading merchant of Sheffield, carrying on a large business through the Post Office, has petitioned the Post Office authorities to have parcels of a less postal value than 5d. either collected at his place of business or accepted at the nearest branch office; and whether the Postmaster General will accede to this request.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The person referred to by the hon Member already enjoys exceptional facilities in regard to the collection of his parcels, both ordinary and registered, by the Post Office, and be desires the further privilege of having registered letters collected from his premises. No provision exists for this purpose, but the Postmaster General is considering whether a scheme can be devised which under prescribed conditions would apply to the public generally. A decision will, it is hoped, be shortly arrived at.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Has not the gentleman referred to a right to a private collecting box on payment of a fee of a guinea a year?
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I have no personal knowledge as to that.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he is aware that inconvenience has been caused to the Sheffield public having business at the General Post Office by the crowding and work entailed there by the representatives of a postal customer to the extent of about £18,000 a year, owing to the refusal of the authorties to collect the registered packets of his firm, as they did prior to the reduction in the postage rate by the last Postmaster General; and whether the Postmaster General will give directions for the ordinary business practice of all carriers to be at once resumed so that mutual annoyance and loss of time may be avoided.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Postmaster General is aware that a good deal of inconvenience has been caused by the proceedings of the person referred to, who has been warned that if he persists in obstructing public business at the Sheffield Post Office it will be necessary to take proceedings against him. The Department has not in the past made special provision for collecting registered letters from his business premises. The latter part of the question is not understood.

REGISTERED LETTERS—COMPENSATION REGULATIONS.
*MR. THORNTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to the statement and table of figures printed on the back of the envelopes made to inclose registered packets, that, subject to the conditions published in the Post Office Guide as to registration, compensation for loss or damage is given in respect of inland registered packets of all kinds according to a table which includes a, fee of 2d. to secure compensation limited to £5; and seeing that this statement may lead the public to believe that by paying the 2d. registration fee they are ensuring repayment in full up to £5, of money which has been registered but which is lost in course of post, instead of the £2 limited by the above-mentioned conditions: whether he will give instructions that on all future issues of such envelopes a clearer statement shall be
58
printed of the amount of specie recoverable through registration in the post.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am in communication with the Postmaster General on this subject. I should be glad if the hon. Member would postpone his question for a week.

ELECTION PETITIONS CLERK—SALARY AND DUTIES.
*MR. MANSFIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Election Petitions Clerk receives a salary of £450 per year, although the work of his office can be done in about a week per year; whether he has just retired on a pension of £300 per year; and whether he will consider the advisability of adding the office to some other department with a lower rate of payment.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The gentleman to whom I understand the hon. Member to refer is a first-class clerk in the central office of the Supreme Court, receiving a fixed salary of £700 a year, plus a fee of two guineas for each petition lodged and registered. He has: not retired on a pension. He already performs the ordinary duties of a clerk in the Taxing Department, besides the work connected with petitions.

LONDON CUSTOM HOUSE—ACCOUNTS OFFICES.
MR. O'MALLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether any reorganisation of the tea and dry goods accounts offices in the London Custom House is in contemplation by the substitution of clerks for officers of the outdoor department; and, if so, what steps are proposed to be taken to safeguard the interests of the staff at present employed in those offices.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: In any scheme for the re-organisation of the tea office, the legitimate interests of existing officers will not be overlooked. The exact measures which will be adopted cannot be stated in advance.

GLASGOW SMALL-POX EPIDEMIC.
MR. THOMAS BAYLEY: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will institute an inquiry

59
into the outbreak of small-pox in Glasgow in a manner similar to that in which the Local Government Board have granted inquiries on the occasions of recent outbreaks in England; and if he will extend such inquiry into the sanitary conditions of the city and its water supply.
*THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM Murray,): I am informed by the Local Government Board for Scotland that there does not seem to them to be any reason at present for instituting an inquiry into the sanitary condition of Glasgow and its water supply. The reference to the practice of the English Local Government Board is, I am informed by that Board, rather misleading. That Board usually send one of their medical inspectors to a district where small-pox is epidemic, in order that he may assist the local authorities with his advice and experience, but the Board have not on any recent occasion held an inquiry into an outbreak of small-pox.

ST. SEPULCHRE. HOLBORN—BELLTOLLING AFTER EXECUTIONS.
MR. H. C. RICHARDS: I beg to ask the Parliamentary Charity Commissioner if the attention of the Charity Commissioners has been directed to the new rules of the Home Office with regard to the tolling of the bell of the parish church for fifteen minutes after each execution; and if the Commissioners will restore to the parish of St. Sepulchre, Holborn, the income of the benefaction bequeathed for such purpose, and which has been withheld or diverted from the I parish by the Commissioners for some years past.
THE PARLIAMENTARY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. GRIFFITH BOSCAWEN,): With reference to the question in the first paragraph, the Commissioners have no knowledge of the new regulation mentioned in the question beyond what has appeared in the newspapers. The benefaction in question was a gift by Robert Dowe, in the year 1705, to the end that the vicar and churchwardens of St. Sepulchre, London, should for ever, previous to every execution at Newgate, cause a bell to be tolled, and certain words to be delivered to the prisoners ordered for execution. Under the provisions of the
60
City of London Parochial Charities Act, 1883, the sum representing Dowe's gift, which amounts to £1 6s. 8d. a year, was scheduled as an ecclesiastical charity, and freed from all previously existing trusts, and by a scheme established under this Act it became part of the City Church Fund, the balance of which, after providing for various City church purposes, is paid to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. An amendment to that scheme could only be made on the initiation of the trustees of the London Parochial Charities.

ST. CROSS (WINCHESTER) CHARITY SCHEME.
SIR WALTER FOSTER: I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Tunbridge Division, as representing the Charity Commissioners, whether in the new scheme for St. Cross there is a provision giving to the town council of Winchester the nomination of one of the trustees; whether there is a restriction in the choice of the person nominated that he must be a member of the Church of England; whether in recent years there is any precedent for making the election of a representative trustee appointed by a town council on another public body subject to such restriction; and whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the correspondence on the subject, and any protests made against the new scheme.
MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWEN: There is in the recently established scheme for St. Cross a provision giving to the town council of Winchester the nomination of one of the trustees. But the scheme in question is not a new scheme in the sense that it reorganises the charity. It is in the main a scheme consolidating the provisions of previous orders of the Court of Chancery and of the Charity Commissioners. There is such a restriction in the scheme as that mentioned in the second part of the hon. Member's question. The restriction is in accordance with the provision made by the Court of Chancery in 1857, that the mayor of Winchester should be a trustee if a member of the Church of England. In answer to the third part of the question, there are many recent precedents for requiring in schemes that representative

61
trustees of Church of England trusts shall be members of that Church. I shall be glad to lay the correspondence on the Table if the hon. Member desires it.

IRISH SCHOOL TEACHERS' PENSIONS.
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish national teachers in the service on the 31st March, 1900. and who will be graded according to the new system higher than their present classes, receive the pension of the class or grade to which they will be promoted by paying an increased premium, in the same way that teachers appointed after the 31st March, 1900, and who will be similarly graded, will get pension rights.
MR. THOMAS O'DOXNELL: At the same time may I ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether teachers in Irish national schools will in future get pensions according to their new grades or according to the classification which has been abolished; and, if the latter, can he state what arrangements have been made for promoting deserving teacher's to a higher class on the list of prospective pensions.
THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): At present teachers pay for the pensions of the classes which they have obtained by examination. Under the new scheme they will rise from grade to grade, as distinguished from classes, by seniority and efficient service. The commissioners have resolved that teachers in the service prior to the 1st April, 1900, are to retain their classifications. How far this decision will affect the pension rules and the pension fund I am not at present prepared to say. The matter is one requiring careful consideration.
MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Will the teacher who was formerly classed as first class, but who may now be in the second class, get the first or second class pension?
MR. WYNDHAM: I have communicated with the Board of Education on this matter, and have given the hon. Member their decision, so far as it has
62
been arrived at. I have also explained that the way in which that decision will affect the pension scheme will have to be carefully considered.

SCHOOL ATTENDANCE IN IRELAND.
MR. THOMAS O'DOXNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the decreasing population of Ireland, and the sub-division of labour required under the new programme in national schools, he will urge upon the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland the necessity of reducing the average attendance required for the first assistant from sixty to fifty.
MR. WYNDHAM: The answer to this question is in the negative.

EVICTION AT NEWTOWN-CUNNING HAM.
MR. M'FADDEX: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been drawn to the eviction of a tenant named Allison, in the petty sessions district of Newtown cunning ham, county Donegal, when the sheriffs' officer had to remove the tenant from a sick bed; whether a doctor's certificate that it was dangerous to remove the tenant was produced; is he aware that the tenant, at the hearing of proceedings at the Newtowncunningham Petty Sessions, stated that he had paid in rent to the landlord over £2,000 down to the value of the fee simple of the farm; and whether the forces of the Crown will in future be sent to assist the sheriffs in Ireland in carrying out such evictions.
MR. WYNDHAM: The eviction of Allison was carried out on the 6th instant in pursuance of a magistrate's warrant for possession. At the hearing of the case a statement was made on behalf of the tenant to the effect mentioned in the third paragraph; the statement, however, was not proved. After eviction, a sum of £50 was offered to Allison by the agent, but was rejected. I am informed that Allison was carried out of the house in his bed. No medical certificate, however, was produced such as is alleged, nor was a doctor present. Upon the information before me, it appears that the man was in his usual health before, during,

63
and after the eviction. In reply to the last paragraph, it is the imperative duty of the Crown to afford protection to sheriffs or their officers in the execution of writs or decrees issued by a competent Court.
MR. M'FADDEN: Was the evicting landlord in this case one of the Government candidates at the last General Election?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

HORSE BREEDING IN IRELAND.
MR. DALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can say why it is that the Royal Dublin Society, in awarding premiums for stallions on the register of the Agricultural and Technical Department, give twenty-five prizes of £100 for thoroughbred stallions, while agricultural stallions get only three premiums of £50 each; whether he will request the Royal Dublin Society to give a larger number of premiums in the case of agricultural stallions, considering that Ireland is an agricultural country.
MR. WYNDHAM: The twenty-five premiums of £100 each offered at the recent Stallion Show at Balls Bridge will be paid out of the fund payable annually to the Royal Dublin Society under the Probate Duties Act of 1888. They absorb one-half of the fund; the other half is alloted to bull premiums. The three premiums of £50 each for Agricultural Stallions are not paid out of public money; they will be paid out of the private funds of the Royal Dublin Society.
MR. DALY: But cannot the number be increased, seeing that Ireland is so suitable a country for horse-breeding?
MR. WYNDHAM.: That question raises the policy of the Agricultural Department, which I am not prepared to discuss now. As the hon. Member is aware, horse-breeding is a very important business in Ireland.
MR. DALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, under the new horse-breeding scheme in con-
64
nection with the Department of Agriculture, no sire has been allotted to County Monaghan, while two sires are given to County Cavan; and if he will direct that one sire at least be placed at the disposal of the farmers of County Monaghan.
MR. WYNDHAM: This question refers, I am informed, not to the horse-breeding scheme of the Department of Agriculture, but to that of the Royal Dublin Society. I understand that only one stallion was entered from the County Monaghan, but that it was withdrawn by the exhibitor. One stallion is allotted to County Cavan, which will be available for Monaghan, as will also a stallion at Oldcastle, in Meath.
MR. DALY: Cannot you give us a stallion for County Monaghan? You place two in County Cavan?
MR. WYNDHAM: That rests with the Royal Dublin Society.

HAND AND EYE TRAINING IN IRISH SCHOOLS.
MR. WILLIAM MOORE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that classes have been formed to instruct teachers in the new system of hand and eye training at Ballymena and at Coleraine; that most of the teachers in the Ballymoney district are by reason of the rule as to distance ineligible for either of these classes; and can he state what provision will be made for the Ballymoney and Ballycastle teachers by the Commissioners of National Education for instructing them in this subject, and will equal facilities be afforded to those now given by the Commissioners in Coleraine and Ballymena.
MR. WYNDHAM: A class for the instruction of teachers in hand and eye training is in operation at Coleraine, and a similar class is in course of formation at Ballymena. These places have been selected because each is favourable for the attendance of a large number of teachers. The claims of Ballymoney and Ballycastle will be considered as soon as possible, and classes will be formed when teachers can be assembled in sufficient numbers.

LAND PURCHASE IN IRELAND— SECURITY FOR ADVANCES.
MR. WILLIAM MOORE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to the pledges of certain Ulster Members, he will consider the propriety of recommending in the proper quarters the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the question of the financial security for advances to be made from Imperial sources for the purposes of land purchase in Ireland over and beyond the balance of the £33,000,000 secured by the Guarantee Fund (Probate Duty grant, local taxation and grants, etc) under Section 5 of the Purchase Act, 1891, and to report on the means by which such advances may be best secured.
MR. T. W. RUSSELL:Can the right hon. Gentleman say who are the Members referred to in the question and what was the nature of the pledges said to have been given by them?
MR. WYNDIIAM: No, Sir; I have no information which will enable me to answer the supplementary question. The matter referred to in the question is now under consideration by the Government. I am not at present in a position to make any statement on the subject.

INTEREST ON ACCUMULATED EXCHEQUER CONTRIBUTIONS.
MR. CLANCY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what becomes of the interest payable on the sum of £200,000, the amount of the accumulated Exchequer contributions which are levelled up to meet possible deficiencies in the payment of instalments of purchase money under the Land Purchase Act of 1891; and if the interest is not paid, together with the annual contribution of £40.000, to the local authorities for the purpose of building labourers' cottages, can he explain why not.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: It is presumed that the hon. Member refers to the Reserve Fund created under Section 5 (2) (b) of the Act. On this understanding, the answer to his question is
66
that, pursuant to Section 15 (7) of the Act, the interest on the investments representing the Reserve Fund is accumulated, reinvested, and added to the Fund. The investments on account of the Fund now amount to £241,000 Consols.

LAND PURCHASE AND LABOURERS' COTTAGES.
COLONEL M'CALMONT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state how many farms have been sold in Ireland under the Land Commission since the Act of 1890 became law; also how many labourers' houses have been erected or improved in connection with such farms in pursuance of the order of the Land Commission under Section 26.
MR. WYNDHAM: The Act of 1891 is presumably intended to be referred to. Between the passing of that Act and the 31st ultimo, advances have been made in 27,924 cases to enable tenants to purchase their holdings under the Acts of 1891–1896. The number of Orders made under the 26th Section of the Act of 1891 has been three.

LABOURERS' COTTAGES AT LETTER KENNY.
MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the month of May, 1899, representations were forwarded to the Letterkenny District Council on behalf of fifteen labourers residing in that district; that the district council decided not to formulate a scheme, and that an appeal from that decision, as provided by Section 4 of the 1891 Act, was forwarded to the Local Government Board; that nothing was done in the matter by the said Board; that subsequently other representations were forwarded to said district council, and acted upon by them; that at an inquiry held with reference to the latter representations, evidence was produced before Mr. Kelly, Local Government inspector, to the effect that the district council had shelved the representations lodged with them in May, 1899; that Mr. Kelly stated that the scheme then before him was inadequate; and that he

67
reported accordingly to the Local Government Board; and whether the Local Government Board will order an inquiry by their inspector into the representations lodged in May, 1899, and order the district council to promulgate a scheme which will include cottages for those labourers whose representations are so long pending.
MR. WYNDHAM: The facts are generally as stated. It appears that the district council received representations for the erection of twenty-four labourers' cottages, but they decided to make a scheme for eleven only, as that was the number of applicants' dwellings which the medical officer of health actually condemned as unfit for human habitation. The scheme so made is being confirmed by Provisional Order, and it appears from recent minutes of the district council that they are considering further representations with the view of making a supplemental scheme. The effect of an inquiry such as that asked for would be to coerce the council to act on particular applications, but as that body seems to be exercising a reasonable discretion in the matter, the Board do not think there is any cause for interference on their part.
MR. O'DOHERTY: What was the reason for the rejection of the scheme?
MR. WYNDHAM: The district council put forward a scheme affecting a number of houses which had been condemned by the medical officer. They are now considering a further scheme, and under those circumstances I see no reason for interference on the part of the Local Government Board.

RENT FIXTURES.
COLONEL M'CALMONT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he state what is the number of cases in which rents have been fixed by the Land Commission or by agreement in Ireland; and how many cases in which orders have been made under Section 19, Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, directing cottages to be built or improved; in how many of these cases have the orders been complied with; and in how many cases have the penalties for non-compliance with orders been enforced.
MR. WYNDHAM: The number of fair rents fixed by the Land Commission has been, for a first statutory term, 174,849; for a second term, 34,367. The number fixed by agreements and declarations lodged with the Commission has been, for a first statutory term, 132,051; for a second term, 27,777. Fair rents have also been fixed in the civil bill courts for a first statutory term in 18,477 cases, and for a second term in 2,492 cases; and by agreements in the same courts, for a first term in 7,329, and for a second term in 146 cases. The number of orders made by the Land Commission under the enactment referred to in the second paragraph is 853. I am unable to say, without further inquiry, in how many cases these orders have been complied with. The duty of enforcing compliance with the order devolves primarily upon the sanitary authority, and it is only in cases where complaint is made to the Local Government Board by householders in the district that the Board act in lieu of the sanitary authority. Only one such case has so far occurred, and in that the Board took proceedings and enforced the penalty.
MR. FLAVIN: How many future tenancies have been created?
MR. WYNDHAM: I will give the hon Member the information privately if he will allow me.
MR. FLAVIN: I will put a question down.

IRISH LAND PURCHASE.
MR. FFRENCH: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, having regard to the fact that the Land Judge as seller of an estate under the 40th section of the Land Act of 1896 frequently asks a higher price than that fixed by the Land Commission, and that the possession of such power by the Land Judge prevents sales to the tenants and deprives them of the benefits of the 40th section, whether the Government intend to amend the law so that the Land Judge cannot ask a higher price than that fixed by Land Commission.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): The answer to this question is in the negative.
MR. FFRENCH: Would it not greatly facilitate the sale of estates if the Land Judge had power to increase the loan or no power to increase the price?
MR. T. W. RUSSELL: Is it not the practice of the Laud Judges in these cases to demand payment of arrears?
MR. ATKINSON: I must ask for notice.
MR. FFRENCH: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether the Land Judge must give the first chance of purchasing their holdings to the tenants when there is an absolute order for the sale of an estate under the 40th section of the Land Act of 1896; and whether, seeing that owing to insufficient notice the tenants are often not in court when the 40th section is applied, steps will be taken to have notice served directly on the parties interested.
MR. ATKINSON: The tenants must, and as a matter of fact always do, get an opportunity of exercising the right of preemption. The rules and orders provide that the tenants must get notice of the day fixed for the consideration by the Land Judge of the report of the Land Commission. No alteration in the procedure is necessary. If the tenants do not attend the fault is their own.
MR. FFRENCH: Is any notice given except in the law lists in the daily paper, and can anyone who is not a lawyer understand them?
MR. ATKINSON: I think anyone who can read can understand the law lists. I understand, however, that the tenants have a special notice.

EXPENDITURE ON THE INSANE IN IRELAND.
MR. CLANCY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the increase in the numbers admitted to lunatic asylums in Ireland and in the consequent expenditure, for buildings and maintenance, in those institutions; whether he has come to any conclusions as regards the suggestions made to him by the deputation of medical men which recently waited upon him in reference to that subject; and if he has considered the question whether the
70
cost of the maintenance and treatment of the maintenance and treatment of the insane ought to be made a State charge.
MR. WYNDHAM: The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The object of the deputation referred to in the second paragraph was the establishment of a central pathological laboratory. In reply to the last paragraph, I would prefer to wait for the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation before expressing a final opinion on the subject.

GOVERNMENT GRANT TO IRISH LUNACY AUTHORITIES.
SIR JAMES HASLETT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state when the portion of capitation grant for lunatic asylums not paid by Government in 1899 will be paid over to the local authorities: and what is the reason for withholding it so long.
MR. WYNDHAM: The position in reference to the payment of the grant in aid of the maintenance of pauper lunatics for the period mentioned has repeatedly been explained, both in answer to questions in this House and in communications addressed by Government to the local authorities. It is erroneous to assume that these authorities have been deprived of any portion of the grant by reason of the change in the year of account. It is true that the expenditure during the quarter ended 31st March, 1899, does not form an element in the calculation of the grant for 1900–1, but in lieu of it the somewhat greater expenditure for the corresponding quarter of 1900 has been taken, and the local authorities have thus received for this year, as heretofore, a full year's grant.
An HON. MEMEBER: Is it not the case that the grant is sometimes kept back three months? Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire into an instance of that laid before him?
MR. WYNDHAM: I have inquired into it very fully. It is a very complicated matter.

DEPORTATION OF PAUPERS TO IRELAND.
MR. GILHOOLY: On behalf of the hon. Member for North Tipperary, I beg to ask

71
the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the deportation of a woman named M'Cabe from Glasgow to Nenagh (Ireland); whether he is aware that it appears from the depositions of Mrs. M'Cabe, that she left Ireland when eight years old and went to England where she resided fifty-two years, then went to Scotland when, after a residence of four weeks in a workhouse in Glasgow, she was sent to Nenagh; and whether the authorities connected with the Glasgow Workhouse are empowered to take such action; and, if so, whether he will cause the law to be amended to prevent a repetition of similar action.
MR. WYNDHAM: I am informed that the facts are correctly stated in the question. The Local Government Board for Scotland have informed the Guardians that the Parish Council of Glasgow were acting within their legal rights in removing this poor person, and that she did not reside in Glasgow sufficiently long to confer upon the Irish Board of Guardians a right of appeal against her removal. The case is doubtless one of hardship, but I am afraid I can hold out no hope of an amendment of the law, as suggested.
MR. DALY: Why was this woman, who lived fifty-two years in England, not sent there instead of to Ireland?
MR. WYNDHAM: I understand the law is that a person who has resided for five or six years in a place has to be maintained there, but if the term of residence is shorter, then the birth-place is the place of settlement. Hence this poor woman was not sent to England.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the extreme hardships of cases like these, he will consider the advisability of altering the law, so that a person who has lived fifty-two years in England shall not become a burden on the Irish ratepayers?
[The answer was inaudible.]

SOLICITORS AS MAGISTRATES.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether solicitors
72
who become magistrates by election as chairman of public bodies in Ireland under the Local Government Act are disqualified by becoming magistrates from practising their profession; and if so, whether the Government will take steps to remove such disqualifications.
MR. WYNDHAM: Solicitors who become justices of the peace by virtue of being elected to the post of chairman of a county or district council are not thereby disqualified from practising their profession. But it would obviously be most improper for them to practise as solicitors in the petty sessions courts in which they are in the habit of sitting, or are entitled to sit as justices.

TYPHUS FEVER IN THE ARRAN ISLANDS.
MR. DUFFY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that typhus fever has broken out in one of the Arran Islands, Galway; that no steps were taken by the medical inspector to prevent this outbreak; and that the unsanitary condition of the burial grounds was brought under the notice of the late Chief Secretary by questions asked in the House on, 6th July and 2nd August, 1900; whether the medical inspector has visited the island since complaint was made in July; whether he is aware that one death from typhus has already occurred; and whether he will inquire if the person placed in charge of the patients is a man duly fitted to discharge the duties entrusted to him.
MR. WYNDHAM: There are four cases of typhus under treatment in the Arran Islands. One other case has proved fatal. The condition of the graveyard has been repeatedly brought under the notice of the local, council, and questions were addressed to my predecessor on the subject. The duty of taking steps to prevent outbreaks of fever devolves upon the local authority, and not upon the medical inspector of the Local Government Board. That gentleman visited the islands last week. The medical officer of health considers the person referred to in the last paragraph com-

73
petent to discharge his duties. The medical inspector proposes to visit the islands again to-day, and he will consult with the medical officer as to further steps, if any, that may be required.
*MR. DUFFY: Is it a fact that the Local Government Board inspector never visited this island from July last until this question appeared on the Paper a day or two since?
MR. WYNDHAM: My reply shows that the duty of taking the necessary preventive measures rests in these cases with the local authorities.

CONGESTED DISTRICTS IN COUNTY MAYO —MARQUESS OF SLIGO'S ESTATES.
DR. AMBROSE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a resolution of the Westport Rural District Council urging upon the Congested Districts Board for Ireland the great importance of the purchase by the board of the Louisburgh and Aughagower estates of the Marquess of Sligo; and would he, as President of the Board, use his influence in bringing about the speedy purchase of those estates, and thereby contribute to putting a stop to the tide of emigration from those districts.
MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: At the same time I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that the Congested Districts Board many months ago entered into negotiations for the purchase of the estates of the Marquess of Sligo, in the parishes of Louisburgh and Aughagower, he can say what is the cause of the delay in completing the purchase.
MR. WYNDHAM: Owing to the purchase by the Congested Districts Board of so large an estate as that of Lord Dillon, the limit of advances of guaranteed land stock fixed by the Land Law Act, 1896, has been reached in the case of the County Mayo, and until a considerable portion of that estate has been resold to the tenants the Board will not be able to resume negotiations for the
74
purchase of other estates. There ought to be no long delay.
MR. DILLON: Can the right hon. Gentleman not see his way to remove the difficulty?
MR. WYNDHAM: I should prefer not now to discuss a question of policy or legislation.

FEES UNDER THE LABOURERS (IRELAND) ACTS.
MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether solicitors in Ireland, who appear to oppose representations at inquiries held under the Labourers Acts, are entitled to fees to be paid, on the order of the Local Government Board, by the rural district council, whether the opposition is successful or not; and if so, to what fee are such solicitors entitled.
MR. ATKINSON: The Local Government Board have, in the exercise of the powers conferred upon them by the seventh section of the Labourers Act of 1883, made an Order fixing the costs and expenses which may he allowed to owners of land proposed to be taken opposing a scheme. These costs include, of course, the solicitor's fee, and are payable by the rural district council, The practice is to allow costs only when the opposition is successful, in which case the solicitor's fee is fixed at 10s. 6d.

ROYAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND.
MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Government is prepared to adopt the resolution recently passed by the Senate of the Royal University of Ireland, and to issue a Royal Commission to inquire into the working of the Royal University, and to report as to the means by which University Education in Ireland may receive a greater extension and be more efficiently conducted than it is at present.
MR. WYNDHAM: The resolution to which reference is made has not yet been officially received. I understand my noble friend will be approached in a day or two on the subject, and I should not

75
like to anticipate his reply to the request of the Senate.

IRISH POOR LAW OFFICERS' ASSISTANTS.
MR. M'FADDEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a sealed order, dated 4th February last, addressed by the Local Government Board of Ireland to the boards of guardians in Ireland, making it mandatory for them to appoint assistants to the several poor law officers set forth in said order in all cases in which the Local Government Board consider such appointments necessary; and whether it is intended by such order to further increase the number of officials in Ireland without first consulting the elected representatives of the ratepayers as to the necessity for such increase.
MR. WYNDHAM: The reply to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The occasion for the making of the Order was a default in some cases by guardians to appoint nurses when their own medical officers were of opinion that such nurses were absolutely necessary for the proper care of the sick poor. The Order does not confer any new power on the Local Government Board, but was made in pursuance of Section 31 of the Poor Belief Act, 1838.
MR. M'FADDEN: Then am I to understand that the Order is not final?
MR. WYNDHAM: Any representation that may be made by local authorities against the Order will, of course, be carefully considered by the Board.

IRISH RURAL DISTRICT COUNCILLORS AND CONTRACTS.
MR. POWER: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any decision of the High Court in Ireland has yet been obtained as to the effect which an interest in a contract of tenancy by a person otherwise qualified has on the right of such person to act as a member of a rural district council with which he has such contract.
MR. WYNDHAM: In the case which the Local Government brought to test
76
this question, in pursuance of their undertaking, the King's Bench Division have, in a judgment which I have not as yet seen, overruled the decision of the justices, and held that the occupant of the labourers' cottage was not disqualified.

LETTERKENNY TOWN COURT.
MR. M'FADDEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the town of Letterkenny there has been established and is held a town court, under the Towns Improvement (Ireland) Act, 1854, for the hearing and determining of offences against said Act, and offences against Section 12 of the Licensing Act of 1872, committed within the boundary of said town; will he explain why the constabulary authorities have refused to prosecute before said town court for offences committed within the town boundary in cases where the offenders reside outside the township, particularly in cases coming within the 12th section of the Licensing Act of 1872,. although the urban council of Letterkenny and magistrates of the district petitioned the authorities to have all such offences committed within the town boundary prosecuted before the said town court, which petition has been refused; whether he is aware that by this action of the constabulary the urban council of Letterkenny are deprived of a considerable source of revenue owing to such prosecutions being conducted at petty sessions in the name of the constabulary as complainants; and whether His Majesty's Government will cause directions to be issued to the constabulary authorities that such offences be prosecuted in the several town courts in Ireland, so that the fines resulting there from may be available for the reduction of the heavy taxation with which all urban districts have to contend.
MR. WYNDHAM: I am aware of the fact mentioned in the first paragraph. The rule is that in cases where the offender lives outside the town, or his address is unknown, the police prosecute in their own name before the justices in petty sessions, and not in the town court, one half of the penalties in such cases being paid to the town commissioners. All

77
other cases are prosecuted in the town court in the name of the commissioners, who receive, in these cases, the whole of the penalties. The rule has operated generally throughout Ireland for many years, and I am advised it should not be altered.

PRESS PROSECUTIONS IN IRELAND.
MR. DUFFY: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. John M'Philpin, editor and proprietor of the Tuam News, Tuam, county Gal way, has been summoned by the Crown to give evidence in respect to resolutions and newspaper reports published in his paper, and alleged to have been furnished to him by persons awaiting their trial at Athenry on 14th March next; and whether, in view of the announcement made recently in respect to similar summonses issued in the city of Waterford, he will direct the immediate withdrawal of the summons against this newspaper editor.
MR. ATKINSON: I have called for a report from the Crown Solicitor in reference to the matter referred to, and would ask the hon. Member to postpone his question until Monday. The case has been adjourned until the 8th of March, so there is ample time to make inquiry.
MR. DUFFY: Is it not the fact that within the past week an explicit statement was made in reference to a similar case at Waterford, and will like treatment be meted out to Mr. M'Philpin?
*MR. SPEAKER: Order. order!

IRISH KELP INDUSTRY.
MR. O'MALLEY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the importance of the kelp industry to the people along the coasts of the congested districts of Connemara, and in view of the conditions under which that industry has been and continues to be carried on, he will take steps to urge on the Congested Districts Board the advisability of establishing a depot in some central locality, where the industry could be carried on on a more scientific basis, to the advantage of the people engaged in it.
MR. WYNDHAM: Owing to the possibility of the importation of iodine from South America being at any time largely increased, the market for kelp, in the opinion of the Board, is an uncertain and, to some extent, an artificial one which should not be disturbed by any precipitate action of the kind suggested. The Board are, however, making inquiry as to the possibility of teaching better methods of preparing kelp.

MAYDEW GRAVEYARD.
MR. J. P. FARBELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state on what date the order of the Local Government Board closing Maydew graveyard takes effect; whether it is within the Board's knowledge that no arrangements have been made to provide any further burial accommodation there: and whether, under these circumstances, the Board will suspend the enforcing of the order until some arrangement to provide for future interments can be made.
MR. WYNDHAM: The order closing this burial ground will take effect from the 1st April next. The Local Government Board are not aware whether the rural district council have taken steps to provide future burial accommodation. If, however, the council make an effort in this direction, the Board, on the application of the council, will be prepared to extend the time for closing the graveyard, should such a step be necessary to enable the council to complete their arrangements.

POSTPONEMENT OF FAIR RENT APPLICATIONS.
MR. CULLINAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the practice of the Land Commission of postponing indefinitely the hearing of fair rent applications in cases where negotiations for sale are pending: and whether he will take steps to secure a more speedy hearing of such cases in future.
MR. WYNDHAM: Perhaps the hon. Member will repeat this question on Monday next, as communication is neces-

79
sary with the Commissioners, some of whom are out of Dublin.

HANGING GALES.
MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the fact that what is commonly known in Ireland as a hanging gale, comprising a half-year's rent, is claimed by the landlords as being due to them out of all agricultural holdings; but demanded only when the tenants are entering court to have fair rents fixed; and whether, in any future legislation affecting the relations of landlord and tenant in Ireland, the advisability of having this hanging gale abolished will be considered.
MR. WYNDHAM: A hanging gale is a debt due to the landlord by the tenant which the latter gets six months or more to pay after it has become due. This indulgence is given to tenants on many estates in Ireland, but I have no means of ascertaining whether it is demanded when the tenant enters the courts as suggested. I am unable to promise any legislation to deprive a creditor of his debt because he has given time in this way to the debtor.
MR. FLAVIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many cases the landlord issues the writs within fourteen days of the current gale becoming due?
[No answer was returned.]

THE RECENT "DAY OF GENERAL MOURNING"—POLICE AND WICK-LOW SHOPKEEPERS.
MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the police ordered the publicans of Roundwood and Lara, county Wicklow, to keep their shops closed on Saturday, 2nd February, and whether they acted on their own initiative, or upon instructions received from a superior officer, and under what statute are the Irish constabulary entitled to order the closing of public-houses on an ordinary weekday.
MR. WYNDHAM: The fact, I understand, is as stated in the first part of the question. The police acted on the in-
80
structions of the district inspector, who was of opinion, erroneously, that the public-houses should be closed as on a day of public fast under the 35 and 36 Vict. cap. 94, Section 78.
MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: Will the attention of the Inspector General of the Irish Constabulary be drawn to this case?
MR. WYNDHAM: Yes, his attention has been drawn to the error.

EVICTIONS IN ULSTER.
MR. O'MARA: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that during the quarter ending 31st December, 1900, the number of eviction notices filed in the county courts of Ulster was 46 per cent, of the number of all Ireland, he will consider the expediency of repealing Section 7 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887.
MR. WYNDHAM: The number of eviction notices filed in the county courts in Ulster in the last December quarter was 145, out of a total of 310 throughout Ireland, or a percentage on the latter of 46. I cannot hold out any hope of legislation in the direction suggested.
MR. O'MARA: Is this percentage so large because of the sympathy that exists between the Government and the Ulster Members?
[No answer was given.

ALLOTMENTS ACT—EXTENSION TO IRELAND.
MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will introduce a Bill to extend the Allotments Act to Ireland this session.
MR. WYNDHAM: I cannot undertake to introduce legislation on this subject.

IRISH PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE FACTORY ACTS — KEADY LINEN COMPANY.
MR. DONAL SULLIVAN: On behalf of the hon. Member for North Louth, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department

81
whether he is aware that when complaint was made to the factory inspector, Belfast, that children in the Ready Linen Company wore fined for not coming to work-on a factory holiday (15th August), the inspector returned the fine, and did not prosecute the company; and that when the father of the children wrote to the Home Office for an explanation, he was referred by letter of 18th February to the inspector complained of; and can he state the number of prosecutions under the Factory Acts for the last two years in county Armagh and county Donegal respectively.
*MR. RITCHIE: I have made inquiry and find that the facts are as stated in the first paragraph of the question. The inspector seems to have taken much trouble to see that the fines wrongly imposed on the two children by their employers were returned. It was a matter for his discretion whether or not to report the case for prosecution. The number of prosecutions during the last two years has been as follows; In Armagh eighteen firms were prosecuted for a total of eighty-four offences, and in Donegal seven firms were prosecuted for sixteen offences.

DUBLIN POSTAL TELEGRAPHIC STAFF—STAGNATION OF PROMOTION.
MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Postmaster General is aware that in the telegraph branch of the post office, Dublin, of a staff of 212 sorting clerks and telegraphists employed, there are over forty at present at the maximum of their scale of pay; whether, having regard to the slowness in promotion in the telegraph branch of the post office as compared with the sorting branch, any steps are being taken in the revision of the Dublin establishment, at present under consideration, to remedy this state of affairs; whether it is being taken into account in this revision that the four London and Dublin news wire repeaters, which should be manned by officers of the rank of clerk, have been staffed by sorting clerks and telegraphists almost continuously for the past five years; and also whether it is contemplated to allocate clerkships for the Intelligence, Examining, Circulation,
82
and Correspondence sections, as has been done in Liverpool and other large centres.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: A revision of the telegraph staff of the Dublin Post Office is now under consideration. It will include such additional provision, if any, as may be found necessary for the duties referred to by the hon. Member. The number of superior appointments, however, must of course be strictly regulated by the requirements of the service, and no increase in them could be sanctioned merely in order to afford promotion to telegraphists who are at the maximum of their scale.

ENNISKILLEN POST OFFICE.
MR. JORDAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he is aware that though under the terms of Mr. Raikes's scheme of revision, announced in 1890, the commencing wages of sorting clerks and telegraphists were; first year 12s. per week, second year 11s. per week, and third year 18s. per week, this scale was refused to the staff at Enniskillen, and instead, one of 12s. per week, rising by annual increments of 2s. per week, insisted on; that this matter was submitted to the surveyor, who replied that Mr. Raikes's scheme did not apply to that office, and is he aware that the form used by the postmaster of Enniskillen when recommending the starting pay had the initial scales of pay given by Mr. Raikes printed on the margin; and whether inquiry can be made with a view to restitution to those sorting clerks and telegraphists on the establishment at Enniskillen, appointed subsequent to July, 1890, and prior to February, 1896, who have been affected.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: There appears to be some misapprehension in this case. The scale of pay for sorting clerks and telegraphists on appointment at Enniskillen, sanctioned by the Treasury in 1890, was the same as at all other offices of a similar class— namely, 12s. the first year. 14s. the second year, and 18s. the third year, and then rising by 2s. per week annually to the maximum. It appears, however, that two officers, who are probably those referred to, did not enter the scale at 12s.

83
per week, but, in pursuance of further authority obtained in 1891, granting a concession to officers who had rendered unestablished service of not less than a year and had attained certain qualifications, wore allowed to enter the scale at 14s. a week; and in their case the pay was, as laid down in the authority, 16s. a week for the second year, and 18s. a week for the third year; so that instead of receiving 12s. a week for the first year, 14s. a week for the second year, and 18s. a week the for third year, they received 14s. a week for the first year, l6s.a week for the second year, and 18s. a week for the third year. Another officer, appointed in 1892, with longer unestablished service, was, in accordance with the same authority, allowed to enter the scale at 10s. a week, receiving 18s. a week for the second year, then rising by 2s. per week annually.

SUNDAY DELIVERY AT COOLARTY (CO. LONGFORD).
MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether lie is aware that three complaints and a petition, signed by the residents of thirteen townlands, were sent to the Dublin office of the Department, asking for a Sunday delivery of letters at Coolarty, county Longford, and a wall box to be put at Springpark gate; and will the prayer of the petition be now attended to.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The complaints and petitions referred to by the hon. Member, which it now appears were, addressed to the Dublin Post Office, have not yet reached the Postmaster General; but in consequence of the hon. Member's previous question of the 18th instant, instructions were at once sent to the Dublin Post Office to make inquiry as to the practicability of affording a Sunday delivery of letters at Coolarty, county Longford, and erecting a letter box at Springpark. A Report shall be obtained as soon as possible and the result made known to the hon. Member.

LIGHTS ON THE IRISH COAST— MIZEN HEAD.
MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether repeated representations have been made
84
by the shipowners and the nautical community generally, as well as the Harbour Commissioners of Cork, as to the necessity for the erection of a lighthouse and fog signal on or near Mizen Head; and whether, seeing that a number of casualties have occurred there within recent years, he will take steps to compel the Irish Lights Commissioners to remedy this defect.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The question of the erection of a lighthouse and fog signal on or near Mizen Head was discussed at a conference which was held last month at the offices of the Board of Trade, and at which representatives of the General Lighthouse Authorities and of a committee of shipowners and others interested in shipping attended. The latter were asked to state their views on the subject in writing, and these will be considered by the Commissioners of Irish Lights. I may add that the Board of Trade have no power to compel a General Lighthouse Authority to undertake any work.

BULL ROCK AND MEW ISLAND FOG SIGNALS.
MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether it has been decided to replace the fifteen-minute fog guns on the Bull Rock by an automatic fog signal, and whether it has been decided to fit a siren there; whether he is aware that a siren has been found by experience to be a less efficient and more costly form of fog signal than a reed horn such as is in use by the Belfast Harbour Commissioners; and whether he will ascertain and inform the House of the cost of the fog-signal machinery at Mew Island, and also at Belfast Loch No. 1.
*MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The Board of Trade sanctioned in 1897, and a tender has been accepted for, the erection of a siren on Bull Rock. On the general question as to the relative efficiency and cost of sirens and reed horns I am not prepared to express an opinion, but I may mention that the Trinity House propose to make some experiments on the subject in the course of the present year. The fog siren at Mew Island has, I understand, cost about £3,400, but I have no information as to the cost of the

85
fog-signal machinery at Belfast Lough, which was not provided by the General Lighthouse Authority.

LUCIFER SHOAL RED LIGHT.
MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether representations have been received from the nautical community as to the character of Lucifer Shoal fixed red light; and whether, seeing that representations have been made that this is liable to be mistaken for the port side light of a sailing ship, the Irish Lights Board will take steps to remove this danger.
*MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Such representations have been made, and I am informed that the Commissioners of Irish Lights are considering the question of improving the character of the light at the Lucifer Shoal.

INISTRAHUL FOG SIGNAL.
MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether representations as to the necessity for a log signal at Inistrahul have reached the Irish Lights Board; and, if so, can he explain why no notice has been taken of them.
*MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I understand that the question of providing a fog signal at Inistrahul has been considered by the Commissioners of the Irish Lights, but that they are of opinion that it would be a most unsuitable place for that purpose.

RATHLIN ISLAND LIGHT AND SIGNAL.
MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether representations have been received from the shipping community that a light and fog signal should be erected on the west side of Rathlin Island, and whether he will take steps to compel the Irish Lights Board to remedy the defect; and whether, seeing that other works are being undertaken during the coming financial year, the Board of Trade will exercise their veto upon such an expenditure pending the carrying out of the above-mentioned works.
*MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, sir, representations have reached me in
86
regard to Rathlin Island. I understand, however, that the Commissioners of Irish Lights consider that the present lighthouse is in the best position for both outward and homeward bound ships, and that they do not consider it necessary to have an additional light on the western end of the island.

PROTECTION OK TOWN TENANTS' IMPROVEMENTS.
MR. NANNETTT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed at a meeting of the guardians of the South Dublin Union, requesting the Government to take urgent steps to have a Bill passed through Parliament for the protection of town tenants, whereby the occupier would in case of disturbance or expiration of lease be entitled to compensation for his own improvements: and whether he will be able to see his way to give effect to the desire expressed in this resolution.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The resolution referred to in the first paragraph of the question has been received. I am not able to hold out any hope of legislation as suggested in the second.
MR. FLYNN: Can the right hon. Gentleman give Irish Members any assistance in passing a Bill?
[No answer was returned.]

ILLEGAL PRACTICES IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
MR. CHARLES MARTHUR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been directed to the continued resort by a section of the clergy of the Established Church to practices not prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer or ordered by lawful authority, such as. masses, celebration of Holy Communion without the requisite number of communicants, children's Eucharists, ceremonial use of incense, and the inculcation of habitual confession; whether he is aware that the bishops continue to veto legal proceedings intended to check such irregularities; whether the laity in large numbers are thus deprived of their constitutional right to the ministrations of religion in their parish churches in

87
accordance with the rites of the Church of England, and that disturbances in Divine worship have been occasioned in connection with these irregularities; and whether he will consider the desirability of carrying into effect the Resolution of the House of Commons on 10th May, 1899, that if the efforts now being made by the archbishops and bishops to secure the due obedience of the clergy are not speedily effectual, further legislation will be required to maintain the observance of the existing laws of Church and Realm.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: As my hon. friend is aware, I have no official cognisance of the matters referred to in the first three paragraphs of the question. He must therefore take my answer as conveying my own personal views for what they are worth. I hope, and believe, that the efforts of the bishops have had, and are having, a great effect in diminishing practices in the Church of England which are unlawful or inexpedient. I have heard of no employment of the veto by any bishop except in the case of Colonel Porcelli, who was not a parishioner of any of the churches of which he complained, nor did he represent any responsible body or association in the country. I ought to add that my hon friends enumeration of the unlawful practices he desires to see dealt with is somewhat misleading. He enumerates five practices which he implies are contrary to the law. The first of these is Masses. If he means to describe the Communion Service of the Church of England by the word "Mass," it seems to me to be a misleading and foolish expression. But it is not illegal. As to the second point, the celebration of the Holy Communion without the requisite number of communicants is undoubtedly illegal; but I have no ground for thinking it is otherwise than of rare occurrence, and when it happens it is often by accident. The third point is children's Eucharists. If this means, as I suppose it does, the presence of children during the Communion Service, it seems to me to be a very undesirable practice, but it cannot be described as unlawful. I may add that it has been frequently objected to by the bishops. The ceremonial use of incense is undoubt-
88
edly illegal, but I believe the practice has greatly diminished, and is diminishing, through the action of the bishops. As to the fifth point, the inculcation of habitual confession is, wherever it takes place, a most unfortunate practice.
MR. DILLON: This is a speech, and a very offensive one. On a point of order I desire to ask whether the First Lord of the Treasury is in order in delivering a long speech giving his opinion on controversial matters to which hon. Members are not at liberty to reply.
*MR. SPEAKER: I must say I think the fault, if any, is rather of the questioner than the answerer. The question enters into matters of opinion which, if I had seen it, I should not have allowed to appear on the Paper. The first part of the question does refer to these practices as illegal, and I cannot say the right hon. Gentleman is out of order in offering his opinion whether they are illegal or otherwise. He is speaking, not of the merits of the practices, but strictly to the question whether they are in accordance with the law of the Church of England.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If the hon. Gentleman supposes I was making any reflection on observances in the Church of which he is a member he is mistaken. I was referring only to the Church of England, and to practices as they are regarded by the Protestant community. To make confession a condition of receiving Communion is not only repugnant to the whole spirit of the Church of England, but is wholly illegal. I do not think the imposition of such a condition has been attempted, and if it were it would not receive a moment's toleration from any member of the episcopal bench.
MR, CHARLES MARTHUR: I will take the first opportunity of drawing the attention of the House to this subject.
MR. SAMUEL SMITH: Will the Government give facilities for discussion of the subject during the present session?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I believe there are two Bills on the subject actually on the Orders of the House.
MR. SAMUEL SMITH: With no chance of debating them.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman give facilities for discussing the question whether Catholics are or are not idolators?
[No answer was returned.]

ANCIENT IRISH GOLD ORNAMENTS.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when he intends to carry out the promise made last year that the Government would test in a Court of Law the right of the British Museum authorities to retain in their possession certain gold ornaments found in Ireland.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The kaleidoscopic changes on this question seem to be endless. In August last the then Chief Secretary said it had recently been ascertained that the right to possession was governed by a grant of James I., confirmed by charter of Charles II., and since then doubts have arisen whether the Crown have any right to press a claim against the British Museum.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: But do the Government intend to fulfil their pledge to ascertain if the British Museum has a right to retain these ornaments?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The present Chief Secretary for Ireland has been going carefully into the matter, giving it his personal attention, and has received a deputation on the subject. If the hon. Member will communicate with my right lion, friend, all the information at the disposal of the Government would be placed before him. I may point out, however, that the doubts to which I have referred have arisen since the pledge was given.
LORD BALCARRES: Will the information be laid before the House? Many Members are interested in the subject.
MR. WYNDHAM: The position of the Crown in such a matter introduces complications which make it impossible at the moment to carry out the pledge given last year.

THE BUDGET.
MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can approximately fix the date for the introduction of the Budget.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I can fix no approximate date for the introduction of the Budget. It will not be in the immediate future.

NAVAL WORKS AT GIBRALTAR.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the-Treasury if he is now in a position to-state the constitution of the proposed Committee or Commission on the Naval Works at Gibraltar, the terms of reference, and the date on which the members are to proceed to Gibraltar for the purpose of the inquiry.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It will not be a Committee or Commission in the formal sense of the word; it will be an inquiry by experts into certain points and put before the First Lord of the Admiralty and the Secretary for War. It will be a full inquiry, but not with terms of reference, as the hon. Gentleman appears to suppose.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Will there be a Report?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not know whether there will be a connected Report: probably separate points will be laid before different officers. It will be an informal inquiry.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. JOHN REDMOND: Can the First Lord give the House any information as to the course of business?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I propose to-morrow (Friday) to proceed with the Civil Service Supplementary Estimates and follow with the Navy Supplementary Estimates. On Monday I propose to move the Order for Ways and Means, and. ask the House to give the Government Tuesdays for financial business up to Easter. On Tuesday I shall probably ask the House to take a Vote on Account.
MR. JOHN REDMOND: Can you give us any idea when you will move the Speaker out of the chair on going into-

91
Committee of Supply on the Army and Navy Estimates?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It will not probably be necessary to move the Speaker out of the chair for the Army Estimates before the end of next week.

NEW MEMBER SWORN.
Charles Alfred Cripps, esquire, K.C., for South East Lancashire (Stretford Division).

SUPPLY.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
(MR. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

CIVIL SERVICE (SUPPLEMENTARY) ESTIMATES, 1900–1901.

  Class I.
  1. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £5,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1901, for the Houses of Parliament Buildings."
  MR. DILLON: I have long been waiting for this opportunity, and I hope the question I am about to raise will not be debated upon party lines. I allude to the necessity of providing for the Members of this House a new and a more airy smoking place. Those of us who make a practice of attending steadily and regularly to our duties in this House have been long groaning under an intolerable grievance in the shape of the present smoking-room accommodation.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: How does the hon. Member propose to raise such a discussion upon this Vote?
  MR. DILLON: IT is for the cost of certain alterations in the House of Commons
  *THE CHAIRMAN: But these alterations do not relate to the smoke-room.
  MR. DILLON: My point is that they ought to relate to the smoke-room.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The discussion must be confined to the matters dealt with in this Supplementary Estimate.
  MR. DILLON: How are we to know what is included? The items are not set forth.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Member will look on page 4 he will see them.
  MR. LOUGH: This Vote relates to the new rooms which have been placed at the disposal of the House, and I ask therefore is it not in order to discuss to what use they should be put?
  *THE CHAIRMAN: It is obvious that there is no relation between the late clerk's residence and the provision of a smoking-room.
  MR. LOUGH: Would those rooms not enable us to have another smoking room?
  MR. FLYNN: The present smoke-room was changed not long ago, and I believe the alteration is a portion of the expense in connection with this Vote. It will be remembered that the smoke-room has quite recently been removed to the other side of the corridor, and the present room is a very great inconvenience to the majority of the Members of this House
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member, to bring himself in order, must show that the late residence of the Chief Clerk ought to have been converted, or might have been converted, into a smoking-room. If he can show that, then he will be in order in discussing that, but if he is suggesting that other rooms should be devoted to a smoke-room, or that the accommodation of the present smoke-room ought to be improved, then he is not in order.
  MR. DILLON: I confess that I did not think you would draw the rule so close as to say that it should be a room in the residence of the late Chief Clerk. Of course, I can argue my point upon that as well as if it

  93
  were any other room in the House. This Vote provides some fresh accommodation for the members of the press, and for the warming and ventilating of a portion of the House. My contention is that the present smoking-room is not sufficient accommodation for the Members of the House who frequent it, and I do think that it is a monstrous thing that in the House of Commons we cannot have decent accommodation in the smoke-room and the dining-room. I would prefer to take the new smoke-room from the House of Lords, but I can see that I cannot argue in favour of that proposal under your present riding. My primary object is to get this accommodation wherever we can, and I am quite ready to accept an additional room if the First Commissioner of Works can offer one of those which belonged to the residence of the late Chief Clerk. What are the conditions to which we are subjected? In the first place the room is not large enough, and I myself and other hon. Members have gone and found it impossible to get in, the room being so crowded, and the atmosphere absolutely unhealthy, and calculated to make one weary and ill, instead of making Members refreshed to return to business in the House. Not only is that the case, but the present smoking-room is situated over the kitchen or some other subterranean place where fires are kept up in the summer time. It looks into a closed yard in which there is no free circulation of fresh air, the consequence of which is that when summer comes it is absolutely intolerable, and I have seen the thermometer there standing at 90 degrees day after day, so that it was, practically speaking, uninhabitable. I think that that is a condition of things which the Members of the House of Commons ought not to be subjected to. At all events, if we are to have no other smoking-room accommodation except the present room, then I would ask that some attempt should be made, by a system of ventilation, to relieve the vitiated atmosphere of the room.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is not confining himself to the subject. The house of the late clerk is the point to which the hon. Member must confine himself.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (MR. AKERS DOUGLAS,): Perhaps it will shorten the debate upon this subject if I state now what the Government propose to do, and it may save a good deal of time. I fully admit the inadequacy of the present smoking-room accommodation, and it has been my earnest endeavour to improve the ventilation of that spot. Owing to the vacation of the late clerk's residence we have been able to make a different allocation of the rooms, and at the present moment there are some four or five rooms which have not been allocated on the Terrace front. I had intended to ask the House at the commencement of this session to reappoint the House of Commons Accommodation Committee, so that they might make some recommendations upon this point. Besides further smoking-room accommodation, some hon. Members opposite require further accommodation for their private secretaries and for typewriting, and it has always been the practice of this House, that whenever structural alterations of the building take place, this should only be done upon the Report of a Committee of this House. I did not see fit last autumn to make these alterations, because I intended to move for the re-appointment of this Committee for that purpose. It is quite possible to make a decent smoking-room on the site to which I have alluded. I am not certain that it would be adequate for the large number of hon. Members who use the smoking-room, but, at all events, it would be a great improvement on the existing room, and not being over the kitchen, would he free from the smells of which the hon. Member complains, as it would be possible to ventilate it thoroughly. I will do my best to: provide this extra accommodation. In regard to the other small requirements of the House, I think these had better be left to the Committee, and if the hon. Member is satisfied with my explanation I will put down a notice for the appointment of the Committee.
  MR. DILLON: I rise simply to convey my grateful thanks to the right hon. Gentleman. Nothing could have been more satisfactory than his statement.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDasked if an additional smoking could not be provided.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: That is a point to which the attention of the Committee will be directed. Of course Ave shall be guided by the recommendations of the Committee, and we had better wait until it reports.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: When will you appoint the Committee?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I will put it down on the Paper as soon as I can.
  COLONEL WELBYsaid they all knew the condition of many parts of the House on a hot July day, and he would make a suggestion as to the ventilation of the lobbies—
  *THE CHAIRMAN: No question arises on the lobbies,
  MR. LOUGHthought that the statement of the right hon. Gentleman in regard to the appointment of a Committee was quite satisfactory, and it would be more convenient for hon. Members to bring any suggestions they had to make before the Committee rather than discuss them there. A reference was made in the Estimates to ventilation. Members had suffered greatly from the thoroughly bad ventilation of the big Committee rooms upstairs. He understood that experiments were promised a long time ago with the object of determining whether the ventilation of these rooms could be improved. He did not know whether this would come within the scope of the reference to the Committee, but he would ask whether the right hon. Gentleman could not adopt some of the simple expedients now common in other places—such as electric fans— so as to make the ventilation quite right. There was also a reference in the Vote to the increased cost of fuel. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could give some information on the point which might be interesting to the House, for other people had suffered from the increased price of coal. Would the right hon. Gentleman say what the Government were doing in the pur-
  96
  chase of fuel, and whether the price was going down, so that this difficulty might soon disappear.
  MR. FLYNNsaid he wanted some-information in regard to the item under the heading D,—"Cost of furniture I etc., in connection with the opening of Parliament by the King in person." He objected to this Vote in toto, not because the King had opened Parliament in person, but because the whole of the arrangements had been most unsatisfactory and most undignified. He would like to know what that additional furniture was and where it was-placed. He had never seen any of it. The sum—£800—was not very great, but the principle involved in this Vote was important. The House had to find the money for these ceremonies, but hon. Members were deprived of any accommodation to witness them except that which they would not give a lackey. He himself had taken no part in the proceedings, because he had a distaste for ceremonials of that kind, but he had been assured by hon. Members who were there that the only accommodation they could get enabled them to gain a peep view over their neighbour's shoulders. In fact, they had no more opportunity of catching sight of the King and Queen than a man in a theatre had of securing a view of the stage if he sat behind a lady wearing a tall feathered hat. The result was that hon. Members had suffered considerable pain of mind and body. He had great sympathy with hon. Members on both sides of the House who had been engaged in the discreditable football rush towards the-bar of the other House, and who, when they got there, could not even see their Majesties.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDONsaid he had placed on the Notice Paper a motion to reduce this Vote by the sum of £1,300. He would not have done so if it had really been the opening of Parliament for which they were asked to pay the reasonable expenses. But it was not the opening of Parliament, but the opening of an assembly of ladies and friends of the Lord Great Chamberlain; and it was

  97
  too much to ask the British taxpayer to pay the expenses, at this time, of such a ceremony. He believed that the people who went to see this show and who had no constitutional right or necessity to be there, should pay the expenses, just as they would pay for seats at the opera or theatre. A great constitutional question was involved in this Vote, because if Parliament was to be opened by the Sovereign in person, and if the King was to deliver his gracious Speech from the Throne to the Lords and his faithful Commons, the Commons ought to be there, and it was for them that room ought to be supplied. He was not making any attack upon the right hon. Gentleman opposite. He knew it was not the right hon. Gentleman's fault, and that the matter was entirely in the hands of the Lord Great Chamberlain. He spoke not only for Members of that House, but also for Members of the other House, who had been worse treated even than the Commons were, and had been deprived of their usual seats. It was most important that the House should show that they meant to be as loyal and faithful to His Majesty the King as they were to the late Queen; but if they passed this Vote it was as much as saying that they did not value the privilege of access to His Majesty, and that they did not care to hear his gracious Speech from the Throne. He thought that, having been prevented from obeying the first command given to them by His Majesty after his accession, they should make this protest; and he hoped hon. Members would take that, the only opportunity they had, of testifying their loyalty to His Majesty by refusing to vote this sum. He moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £1,300.
  Motion made and Question proposed, "That a sum not exceeding £3,700 be granted for the said Service."— (Sir Brampton Gurdon.)
  *COLONEL NOLANsaid he might fairly support the Amendment for the reasons given by the hon. Member. He had not been in the crush, but everything had been done to put hon. Members in a position in which they were very
  98
  likely to be crushed. When he got to the House of Lords he had a view of several very handsome peeresses, very prettily dressed, but he saw very little else, and had only a peep at His Gracious Majesty. But he had a much more serious reason for moving the reduction of this Vote, as he had intended doing. He thought that it would have been far better if the King had not come to open Parliament on that occasion, and the £1,300 would have been saved. Her late Majesty, when she came to open Parliament, was fulfilling a very important part of the Constitution, and therefore she was to be encouraged in doing so; but on this special occasion the King ought not to have come, and his reason for saying so was that he wished His Majesty had put off making the Declaration calling him an idolater.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! That has nothing to do with the Vote before the Committee.
  *COLONEL NOLANsaid he might not be allowed to argue the question, but he could not be compelled to vote £1,300 to pay the expenses of His Majesty coming. as was alleged, to open Parliament. He did not blame the King. He knew that whatever His Majesty said, he was advised to say by his responsible Ministers. If he was not allowed to give the reasons for the vote he was going to record, everyone should know why he objected to the Supplementary Estimate asked for. Not only every Roman Catholic Member, but every enlightened Protestant ought to join in the endeavour to cut it down.
  MR. LABOUCHEREsaid that all this bother in the House of Commons was. as usual, due to an hereditary gentleman—the Hereditary Lord Great Chamberlain. He was perfectly convinced that if the matter had been left in the hands of the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works, the House of Commons would not have been treated in the fashion it had been, and that hon. Members would have had allocated to them a fair space in the House of Lords when His Majesty came to deliver his gracious Speech from the Throne. He would like some-

  99
  one to explain how far the functions of this hereditary gentleman—the Hereditary Lord Great Chamberlain—went. He had an objection to vote anything as long as that gentleman had the disposal, in any sort of way, direct or indirect, of the funds voted by the House of Commons. He believed that there was a time when this Hereditary Great Chamberlain exercised a jurisdiction over all the palaces in the country; but, by degrees, he had been disestablished in every palace except that of Westminster. He really thought it was full time that they should claim that the Palace of Westminster, being the seat of the Legislature of the country, should be in the hands of some responsible Minister, like the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works. He would point out that the Hereditary Great Chamberlain was a peer, and looked after his own friends — especially the peeresses. He (Mr. Labouchere) was as fond of a show as anyone else, but he had had no opportunity of seeing this one. Surely, if it became a question as to whether peeresses or the Members of the House had the privilege of witnessing the show, representatives of the Commons, who were a component part of the Legislature, had the first call in regard to space. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would take some steps to take the control of the Palace of Westminster out of the jurisdiction of the Lord High Chamberlain, and place it in the control of a responsible Minister.
  *MR. JOHN ELLISexpressed a hope that the right hon. Gentleman who asked for the Vote would take notice that what had been said was a faint echo of the widespread dissatisfaction that existed in regard to this matter. On the occasion of the opening of Parliament hon. Members endeavoured to squeeze themselves into a place which could not accommodate them, and the arrangements made were such as to mar the dignity and decorum which everyone desired should permeate such an occasion. He did not look at the matter from a spectacular but a constitutional point of view. The Sovereign, the Crown, the Lords, and the Commons were the component parts of Parliament, and it was the King's command which
  100
  took hon. Members to the other House; and, putting the spectacular aspect of the matter on one side, the only proper way in which the King's command could be obeyed was for proper accommodation to be made for the Commons to assemble in the House of Lords, as was desired-He had been shocked to see the way in which the House of Lords had been transformed. If the Lords cared to have. their benches put up and stacked away and narrow wooden benches erected for themselves and their peeresses, certainly he did not object. But outside the space of the actual technical House of Lords the Commons had the first claim. He would like to know why Members were deprived of the possibility of going into the galleries in the House of Lords which were reserved for them, especially when those galleries were not fully occupied. The-only remedy for preventing a recurrence of the unseemly spectacle which was: witnessed on this occasion was that steps should be taken—and they could be taken at the beginning of a new reign, for of course the Crown was above precedent as regards its own high officials —to put the Lord Great Chamberlain in his proper place in these matters.
  MAJOR JAMESONalso protested against the arrangements which were made for the reception of the House1 of Commons when they started to obey the King. Many reasons had been given: to show that the First Commissioner of Works was not to blame, but he considered that that Gentleman was entirely to blame. In the unseemly crush which took place when the House was summoned to hear the Speech from the-Throne, he had been content to put up with the loss of a hat, but one hon. Member had been so injured that he had never been out of bed since. Until the House received some kind of apology from the right hon. Gentleman for what had occurred, when he knew, under the circumstances, that all Members of the House would like to attend, he should consider he was to blame for not making arrangements with the Lord Great Chamberlain on the subject.
  *MR. STEVENSONwas glad that this opportunity had been, taken for adequately expressing the wide-

  101
  spread feeling of dissatisfaction which prevailed on this subject. A short time since he had put a question to the First Lord of the Treasury as to the advisability of appointing a Committee to consider the comparative merits of Westminster Hall as a place where Parliament might be convened. The proceedings on the opening day marked a complete divergence of the theory and the practice of Parliament, and they were, in so far as the House of Commons was concerned, a positive scandal. Until the reign of Henry VII., and possibly on some subsequent occasions, the opening of Parliament took place in the Painted Chamber, the Lords sitting on the one side and the Commons on the other; and at this date, when the Painted Chamber was no longer in existence, the chamber which most closely approximated was Westminster Hall. The cost of utilising what was acknowledged to be the grandest hall in England would not greatly exceed the cost at present involved in opening Parliament.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDEsaid it appeared to him that in this particular case the House of Commons was in the same position as an Irish county council in connection with the court-houses in Ireland. They built and maintained the court-houses, yet those court-houses were not in their control, but in the control of the High Sheriff. In this ease the House of Commons paid the money, and the control was in the Lord Great Chamberlain. He should certainly go into the lobby against the Vote asked for. He intended to vote against the proposal as an expression of his feeling in connection with the proceedings at the opening of Parliament.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I am not at all surprised at the dissatisfaction which has been expressed by the Committee with regard to the arrangements made at the opening of Parliament. As many hon. Members on the other side of the House were kind enough to say, those arrangements were not in my hands or in the hands of the Government. It has always been my wish on these occasions to represent in the proper quarter that accommodation of a suitable character should be found for the House
  102
  of Commons. But so far as I am concerned, I have no power in this matter to act for the House of Commons. With regard to the particular question and the jurisdiction of the Lord Great Chamberlain, I venture to offer the protest that this is hardly the opportunity when complaints in regard to that distinguished officer can be made. All we are asked on the present occasion to do is to vote a sum of money with regard to certain arrangements made for the opening of Parliament in the House of Lords, arrangements made not by the Great Chamberlain's office, but by the Department I represent. I hope I shall be able to justify that expenditure and show, if pressed, that the actual amount of money spent has been represented by the goods provided. But with regard to the general question of the convenience of Members on that occasion. I would point out that I recognise that the House of Commons is properly dissatisfied with the arrangements then made, but I think that that dissatisfaction is general not only to the House of Commons, but to the other House and to the public at large. I am quite sure that there is no one in this country more anxious to provide proper accommodation for his faithful Commons than His Majesty the King. With regard to Westminster Hall, the hon. Member who has just sat down has made an appeal to me, and although I agree with him as to the suitability of the building, I wish to put on record a protest with regard to the expenditure likely to be incurred. I should like to guard myself in that maattr, because undoubtedly the expenses would be considerable in providing accommodation.
  *MR. STEVENSON: My only point with regard to expenditure is that Westminster Hall would require little decoration.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: With regard to decoration, yes; but with regard to stands and other things I may tell the hon. Member that I have taken pains to go into the figures, and to get these things would involve considerable expenditure, but I do not think there need be a difficulty; if both Houses are agreed and if the King is pleased to agree in making the necessary alterations.

  103
  May I point out that not only did we recognise that the accommodation at present is unsatisfactory, but that we have at once met the appeals made to us from both sides of the House to find some remedy, and my right hon. friend the Leader of the House at once consented to the appointment of a committee to take into consideration not only the accommodation available in the House of Lords, but also the advisability of substituting Westminster Hall for use on similar occasions? That motion has been on the Paper two or three nights, and it is only owing to the action of hon. Members from Ireland who complain of the general arrangements on that occation that that motion has not received the approval of the House of Commons. I hope that the motion may be carried to-day, especially after the discussion we have had. Before that committee the whole of the subject can be raised in a much fuller way, with all the materials required before it, than can be the case on the present occasion. I trust, in view of the anxiety expressed by the (government to meet the views of Members on both sides, the Committee will not only agree to the expenditure which has been incurred for the opening of Parliament this year, but also allow us to proceed with the motion to-night for the committee to inquire into the providing of proper accommodation on a future occasion.
  MR. DALZIELthought the House would recognise the very sympathetic reply of the right hon. Gentleman. He was sure they were all agreed that if the arrangements had been in his hands the state of things that existed would not have occurred. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that this was not the occasion to raise this point. The hon. Member would like to know when the occasion would arise. This gentleman's salary did not come up on the Estimates, and they had practically no other occasion whatever for raising the question. It appeared to him that if they were dissatisfied at the insult offered to the House of Commons it was the duty of the House to refuse to vote this money, as a protest against the system. If the individual responsible for what had happened had brains he ought to have
  104
  foreseen the state of things. He himself did not attempt to get into that portion of the House of Lords which was allocated to Members of the House of Commons on that particular day. The individual responsible must have known that the House of Commons would be summoned to the House of Lords, and if he had only calculated the space required he would have come to the conclusion that it was impossible to have his own particular friends and the peeresses present on that occasion. There was another matter, and that was the ridiculous arrangements made for the press on that occasion. The accommodation for the press was materially limited, in fact only comparatively few selected newspapers were represented, and many important journals in the country were unable to have their representatives there. In fact, in his opinion, they were treated in the most contemptuous way by the individual responsible. That was a state of things which deserved severe condemnation, and showed utter incapacity on the part of the person responsible. There were persons in the House of Lords that day who had no more claim to be there than the man in the street. It seemed to him to be part of the general policy pursued in reference to recent processions and other things. If it were in order to discuss them now he should say something of the arrangements made on the occasion of her late Majesty's funeral, but it was impossible to enter upon that matter now. It showed to him that there was a feeling practically of contempt with regard to that House on the part of the individual responsible, for this treatment was continued. This official seemed to think that he might pursue that course, because the House of Commons did not vote his salary.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid everyone who experienced the inconvenience arising from the arrangements made for the opening of Parliament must feel that there was great neglect of the interests of that House, but he was not at all sure that they were fair in laying all responsibility, or indeed any very large share of it, on the Lord Great Chamberlain. No doubt these affairs were governed by precedent. He thought there was great want of a

  105
  sense of responsibility on the part of the Government to see that the House of Commons was properly looked after on the occasion. The right hon. Gentleman said he was not responsible. What he wanted to know was, which member of the Government —there were twenty of them—was responsible for seeing that the House of Commons was treated with ordinary decorum? The hon. Member for the Kirkcaldy Burghs had referred to the want of arrangement on the occasion of Her late Majesty's funeral. That want was most deplorable.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: That matter cannot be raised on this Vote.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: Quite so. He would say no more about it. He only referred to it, not to argue the matter, hut as an illustration of the necessity for some new arrangement being made in the interests of the House of Commons. He suggested that either some special official should be appointed to look after the interests of the House of Commons, or that the Government should distinctly depute his right hon. friend the First Commissioner of Works to deal with this question. Then no doubt they would have all the arrangements satisfactory. He was quite certain that there was no person in the realm who would regret the want of proper accommodation for Members of the House of Commons more than His Majesty himself. He thought if proper representations had been made to him by someone, the interests of the House of Commons would have been better looked after.
  MR. DALYsaid the interest of the Nationalist Members in this question had reference to the money involved. He had no sympathy at all with hon. Members who got jostled in the rush to the House of Lords. He thought those who were crushed deserved all they got on the occasion. He rose to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question with regard to the new smoke-room.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid it would not be in order to raise that matter on this Vote.
  MR. HEYWOOD JOHNSTONEsaid he was very
  106
  glad that, on the occasion referred to, the side galleries, usually available in the House of Lords for Members of the House of Commons, were not open to them. If they had been he was quite certain that a larger number would have shared in the discomforts of the occasion. He did not think that any of the Members who had spoken had grappled with the real difficulty of this question. It was not to be solved by making the office of Lord Great Chamberlain an elective one, or by any method of that sort. The real difficulty was to get the quart of the House of Commons into the pint of the House of Lords. The House of Commons could not attend His Majesty as a whole, and it would be well to consider whether some small number of Members should not be selected to represent the House.
  MR. BARLEYsaid he would vote for the reduction of this Vote. The Government had proposed a Committee to deal with this subject, but the Committee would have no legal right to go to the Lord Great Chamberlain and ask him to do anything on their behalf. If the House had the moral courage to protect its own dignity and constitutional rights in connection with the granting of money when they were treated as they had been, things would be managed differently on such occasions. He would support the Government and the Committee in the action they were taking.
  MR. DILLONsaid he should be sorry to allow it to be supposed that the Irish Members had any grievance in not getting into the House of Lords. They had not the slightest desire to enter the House of Lords, and they watched with amusement and surprise the degradation of others of the House. If the Members of the House had any proper sense of their own dignity they would let these high and mighty persons know that if they were going to treat them with contempt they must put their hands into their own breeches pockets. If the House of Commons refused to pay the bill, ample accommodation would be forthcoming on the next occasion. He heartily agreed with the sentiment expressed by one hon. Member who said that on the occasion referred to they had been treated as they deserved to be. He had never attended any of these

  107
  ceremonials, but during the time he had been in the House he had seen Members come there after great ceremonials weeping, lamenting, and bewailing the gross insults with which they had been treated. On one occasion they went in procession through Victoria Street to present congratulations to the Queen in connection with the Jubilee, and they were practically kicked downstairs, and he found the House of Commons literally boiling with indignation over the treatment to which they had been subjected. That had been repeated over and over again, and until the House of Commons did some specific act different from grumblings and growlings, and showed that they were not going to submit to that treatment, they would be treated in the same way. They had a simple way of stopping it if they chose, and that was by stopping the supplies. Let it be known that if they were going to carry on ceremonials at the public expense they must treat the House of Commons with civility, and that otherwise the House of Lords could raise a subscription for these entertainments. He thought they would then find that the Lord Great Chamberlain would become civil to the House of Commons. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had on these occasions done his best for the House of Commons. He trusted sincerely that if they passed the Vote they would get kicked out as before.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIENsaid he rose to call attention to the accommodation provided in the press gallery of the House of Commons. He was not sure that it was in order to do so under this Vote.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid the Amendment which had been moved related solely to the provision for the opening of Parliament, and the debate must be confined to that.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIENgave notice that on another occasion he would call attention to the fact that, in his opinion, there was not proper accommodation in the press gallery.
  MR. JORDANsaid there were no details given of the expenditure, and they were absolutely
  108
  in the dark as to what the money was asked for. They did not know whether they had got fair value for the money or not.
  MR. O'DOHERTYsaid the remark made by the hon. Member for South Fermanagh showed the Ulster keenness about pounds, shillings, and pence. As an Irish Member he had no fault to find with the accommodation provided at the opening of Parliament, but ho suggested that in connection with the Coronation ceremony a few hundred pounds should be spent in providing ambulances for Members of the House who at risk of life and limb attempted to attend. Moreover, it would be as well that Irish Catholic Members should not be asked to go to the House of Lords on such occasions to hear their religion insulted.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDONthought that to go to a division was the only means the House had of apologising to the King for not obeying his command. Furthermore, as the hon. Member for Rushcliffe Division had truly said, if the Lord Great Chamberlain had removed the benches from the House of Commons, that House would very soon have wanted to know the reason why. The Lords, however, have no constitutional privileges in this way, and so were obliged to suffer. The House of Commons, therefore, should have some feeling for the House of Lords, and help them where they could not help themselves.
  MR. FIELDwould not have intervened but for the remarks of a previous speaker. Being an Irish Member he had no desire to assist in the House of Lords at the opening of Parliament, especially when the King used an Oath which in the opinion of Catholics was blasphemous—
  *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! I have already pointed out more than once that the matter is not one to be discussed on this Vote.
  MR. FIELDdid not propose to discuss the matter further than to say that as an Irish Member—
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is not entitled to say anything further

  109
  after I have told him it would be disorderly to refer to the matter. He really must not go on with the subject.
  MR. FIELDsaid that while the Irish Members had no desire to go into the House of Lords, they insisted on sufficient accommodation being provided for Members of the House of Commons. He could not understand why an invitation should be given if no accommodation was provided. If the noble Lords, who occasionally came down for a few minutes to carry on or to obstruct the business of the country, occupied all the available room, there was no use in requiring the Members of the House of Commons to attend, and the Vote should be opposed by all hon. Gentlemen who had any respect for their own dignity.
  MR. TULLYasked for further details as to the expenditure under discussion. There was an item of £200 for the extension of electric lighting to the Royal Gallery; another £200 for additional supply of electric current; and £1,100 for additional cost of fuel, mainly in respect of steam coal used by the engineering branch. What was the steam coal required for? No justification had been given for the expenditure of such a large sum. The electric light was supplied from the electric mains; therefore, why should there be this additional expenditure in regard to steam coal?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: Those items are not in connection with the opening of Parliament at all. The £1,400 is mainly in respect of steam coal used by the engineering branch during the year, and, as everyone knows, the price of coal has enormously increased during that period. With regard to the £200 for supply of electric current, that is an additional sum owing entirely to the fact that Parliament met for an autumn session, and also for a short
  period in January of this year, over and above the period for which the estimate was made. As to the provision of the electric light in the Royal Gallery, that is not merely for the occasion of the opening of Parliament, but for all time; it is for the supply of standards and so on in a portion of the House which has not been used for forty years for similar purposes. The furniture consisted of curtains, etc., and seating accommodation in the House of Lords, the Royal Gallery, the Robing Room, and other apartments in that portion of the House.
  Colonel NOLAN: Are they the perquisites of the Lord Great Chamberlain after the ceremony is over?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: No.
  MR. TULLYthought the valuable information the right hon. Gentleman had volunteered proved that the criticism from the Irish benches had some foundation. As to this £800 for furniture, was that of a permanent character, or would a similar amount be required each time the King opened Parliament in person?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: This is not a sum which will appear again. The furniture was required in consequence of the fact that it is something like forty years since Parliament has been opened in state. This furniture will always be available in future.
  MR. JORDANasked whether the furniture in question was supplied under contract, or were tenders invited?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASwas understood to reply that all furniture was supplied under a contract extending over a period of years.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 167; Noes, 219. (Division List No. 20.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Burt, Thomas

  Allan, William (Gateshead)

  Blake, Edward

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Boland, John

  Caldwell, James

  Ambrose, Robert

  Boyle, James

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Brand, Hon. Arthur G.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

  Brigg, John

  Carew, James Laurence

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Cawley, Frederick

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Hobhouse, H. (Somerset, E.)

  O'Mara, James

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Holland, William Henry

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Colville, John

  Hope, John D. (Fife, West)

  Palmer, George Wm.(Reading)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Merley)

  Partington, Oswald

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Crean, Eugene

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Cremer, William Randal

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swans'a

  Price, Robert John

  Crombie, John William

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Rea, Russell

  Cullinan, J.

  Joyce, Michael

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Daly, James

  Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

  Reddy, M.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Labouchere, Henry

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Langley, Batty

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Reid, Sir R. T. (Dumfries)

  Delany, William

  Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Dewar, John A.(Inverness-sh.

  Leng, Sir John

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Dillon, John

  Levy, Maurice

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lloyd-George, David

  Roche, John

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lough, Thomas

  Russell, T. W.

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Lundon, W.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Duffy, William J.

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Scott, C. Prestwich (Leigh)

  Duncan, James H.

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Dunn, Sir William

  M'Crae, George

  Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Govern, T.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

  Sullivan, Donal

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mooney, John J.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Ffrench, Peter

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Field, William

  Morley, Rt Hn. John Montrose

  Thomson, F.W. (York, W.R.)

  Fison, Frederick William

  Moulton, John Flethher

  Tomkinson, James

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murphy, J.

  Tully, Jasper

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Nannetti, Joseph J.

  Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

  Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

  Nolan, Col. John P.(Galway, N.)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tippera'y Mid

  Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Haldane, Richard Burdon

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

  Hammond, John

  O'Doherty, William

  Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo. S.)

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale

  O'Dowd, John

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir A. D.

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon N.

  Sir Brampton Gurdon and

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  O'Malley, William

  Mr. Robert Wallace.

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F

  Bill, Charles

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Aird, Sir John

  Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Allhusen, Augustus Hy. Eden

  Brassey, Albert

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Allsopp, Hon. George

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Arrol, Sir William

  Bulliard, Sir Harry

  Dewar, T. R.(T'r H'mlets, S Geo.

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Cautley, Henry Strotber

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Austin, Sir John

  Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cocktield

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J (Birm.

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Balcarres, Lord

  Chamberlain, J. Austen(Worc'r

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Balfour, Rt, Hon. A. J. (Manch'r

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W(Leeds

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Barry, Sir Francis T.(Windsor)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Faber, George Denison

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Beach, Rt Hn. Sir M. R. (Bristol)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  112

  113

  Fergusson, Rt. Hn Sir J. (Manc'r

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Round, James

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Leigh-Bennet, Henry Currie

  Rutherford, John

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Firbank, Joseph Thomas

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Bristol, S)

  Samuel, Harry S.(Limehouse)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos Myles

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Sasson, Sir Edward Albert

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

  Fletcher, Sir Henry

  Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

  Shaw-Stewart, M. H.(Renfrew)

  Forster, Henry William

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Gore, Hon F. S. Ormsby

  M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

  Smith, H. C. (Nrthmb. Tyneside

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

  Goschen, Hon George Joachim

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D.(Strand)

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Spear, John Ward

  Green, Walford D. (Wednesb'ry

  Malcolm, Ian

  Spencer, Ernest (W. Bromwich

  Greene, Sir E W (B'ryS Edm'nds

  Maple, Sir John Blundell

  Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

  Groves James Grimble

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Ld. G. (Midx

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Stroyan, John

  Hamilton, Marq. of (Londndrry

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Hanbury,Rt. Hn. Robert Wm.

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G (Oxf'd Univ

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Harris, F. L. (Tynemouth)

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Tufnell, Colonel Edward

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Morgan, Hn. Fred (Monm'hsh.)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Heath, Arthur, H. (Hanley)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H. (Sh'ffld

  Heath, J. (Staffrds., N. W.)

  Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Henderson, Alexander

  Morton, Arthur H. A.(Deptford

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Hermon Hodge, R. Trotter

  Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Murray, Co). Wyndham (Bath)

  Welby, Lt-Col. A. C. E. (Tauntn

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffi'ld, Brightside

  Welby, Sir C. G. E. (Notts.)

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Newdigate, Francis Alexander

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Howard, Capt. J. (Faversham)

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord.

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Wilson, A. S. (York, E. R.)

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Plummer, Walter K.

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir J. H.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Wilson-Todd, Wm.H.(Yorks)

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Purvis, Robert

  Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R (Bath)

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Pym, C. Guy

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

  Knowles, Lees

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Wylie, Alexander

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Lawson, John Grant

  Renwick, George

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. Wm. Edw. H.

  Ritchie,Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Sir William Walrond and

  Lee, Capt. A. H. (Hants, Farehm

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Mr. Anstruther.

  Question put and agreed to.

  Original Question again proposed.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIENasked whether the Committee to be appointed would be empowered to inquire into the necessity of better accommodation for the press, and of a fairer distribution of the seats already provided?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASreplied that in answer to a similar question on the previous day the First Lord of the Treasury said the matter was barely within the reference.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: What I am dealing with is the Press Gallery in this House.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: Oh, I beg the hon. Member's pardon.
  THE CHAIRMAN: That will not arise on this Vote at all. I thought the hon. Member was referring to the accommodation in the House of Lords.
  2. Motion made and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March,

  115
  1901, for Expenditure in respect of Art and Science Buildings, Great Britain."
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDEasked whether a corresponding supplementary Vote would be submitted with, regard to similar buildings in Ireland?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I do not think that really arises here, but I am only too glad to answer any question. I understand the lion. Baronet to ask whether there is a corresponding Vote required for Ireland. I will endeavour to obtain that information, but I am not responsible for any buildings outside Great Britain.
  MR. DILLONsaid the Committee knew there would not be a corresponding Vote for Ireland, as the present represented the whole of the Civil Service Supplementary Estimate for the year. This Vote was claimed simply and solely on account of the increased price of coal. The point of the hon. Baronet was why, if this Supplementary Estimate was necessary in regard to public buildings in England and Scotland, was not a corresponding Vote required in connection with similar public buildings in Ireland? There should be some proof that this was a bonâ fide claim due to a real deficit caused by the increase in the price of coal. Were the Committee to understand that in Ireland when coal rose in price the unfortunate inhabitants were obliged to shiver and do without coal in order to keep within the Estimate, while in Great Britain a different principle was applied?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: As I pointed out to the Committee, I am quite prepared to justify the Vote which I am asking for in regard to the extra expenditure due to the higher price of coal, so far as it affects those buildings for which I am responsible. But it is not for me to say whether the Secretary to the Treasury, who administers the public buildings in Ireland, has been more fortunate in his contracts. I can only tell the House what has occurred in regard to the price of coal in the buildings for which I am responsible in England. I will take this opportunity of answering the question put to me by the hon. Member opposite, which applies to all these Votes. The reasons for the extra cost in the coal contracts for the year are
  116
  two. In the first place there was a very large increase in the cost of steam coal since the time that the original estimates were prepared. There has been a very great increase in this respect, and consequently we have had to ask for more money for the warming and the lighting of these buildings. The other reason is because we have a different system in vogue now to that which has hitherto been the practice. We are paying this year for fourteen months supply of coal in the place of twelve months, because we are now supplying ourselves directly from the pit's mouth, instead of supplying ourselves through the middlemen and contractors in London; and we are paying ready money for our coals instead of paying quarterly, so that we are asking for a larger sum than if we bought under the old system. This is an advantage, because we get a very much better class of coal, and we have the control of the supply in our hands. We also get the advantage of the overweight which is always given when dealing direct with the colliery. We have saved in efficiency at least 15 per cent., and at least 5 per cent, in the overweight, besides securing a better quality of coal.
  MR. JORDANthought that in view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman had been buying coal at cost price, and also getting the overweight, he would have been able to reduce and not increase the sum required for coal.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: We should have had to pay a great deal more, owing to the extra price of coal, had we not been able to make this economical arrangement under the new system of purchasing direct from the collieries.
  MR. JORDANsaid that possibly this explanation was satisfactory, but he did not understand how that explanation could apply to such articles as water and household furniture.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: If the hon. Member will look at the bottom of the page he will see that the extra cost is due to the increase in the price of steam coal.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 271; Noes, 71. (Division list, No. 21.)

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Lawson, John Grant

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. Wm. Edw. H.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Lee, Capt. A. H. (Hants, Farehm

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc, Stroud

  Duncan, James H.

  Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

  Allhusen, Augustus Hy. Eden

  Dunn, Sir William

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Allsopp, Hon. George

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Edwards, Frank

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Arrol, Sir William

  Elibank, Master of

  Levy, Maurice

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Emmott, Alfred

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Faber, George Denison

  Long, Rt Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.

  Asquith, Rt Hon Herbert Henry

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Lucas, Reginald J (Portsmouth

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

  Austin, Sir John

  Fenwick, Charles

  Macdona, John Gumming

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Firbank, Joseph Thomas

  M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Fisher, William Hayes

  M'Crae, George

  Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r

  Fison, Frederick William

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingah.)

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Fletcher, Sir Henry

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Forster, Henry William

  Malcolm, Ian

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Beach, Rt Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Max well, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

  Bill, Charles

  Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert J.

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Blundell, Col. Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fred k.

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Boseawen, Arthur Griffith

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Bowles, T. Gibson (King'sLynn

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Brassey, Albert

  Grant, Corrie

  Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

  Brigg, John

  Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nds

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Broadhurst, Henry,

  Groves, James Grimble

  Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Haldane, Richard Burdon

  Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Morton,ArthurH.A.(Deptford

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Hamilton,Rt.Hn.Ld.G.(Midx.

  Murray,Rt Hn A.Graham(Bute

  Burt, Thomas

  Hamilton, Marq. of (Londndrry

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon Rbt. Wm.

  Murray, Col. Wyndham(Bath)

  Caldwell, James

  Hardy,Laurence(Kent,Ashfrd.

  Newdigate, Francis Alexander

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)

  Harris,F Leverton(Tynem'th

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Cavendish, V.C.W(Derbyshire

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Cawley, Frederick

  Hayne, Rt.Hon.CharlesSeale-

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hayter, Rt. Hn.Sir Artliur D.

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Heath, A. Howard (Hanley)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn.J.(Birm.

  Heath, James (Staffords.N.W.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Chamberlayne,T. (S'thampton

  Henderson, Alexander

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Hermon-Hodge, R. Trotter

  Price, Robert John

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Purvis, Robert

  Cochrane, Hon.Thos. H. A. E.

  Hobhouse, H. (Somerset, E.)

  Pym, C. Guy

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Holland, William Henry

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H.Athole

  Hoult, Joseph

  Reid, Sir R. T. (Dumfries)

  Colville, John

  Howard,Capt. J. (Faversham)

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Corbett,A.Cameron (Glasgow)

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Renwick, George

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas.T.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Kennaway,Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Round, James

  Dewar.T.R. (T'rH'mlets,SGeo.

  Kenyon-Slaney,Col.W(Salop)

  Russell, T. W.

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Rutherford, John

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth

  Sackville, Col. S. G.Stopford-

  Dimsdale,SirJoseph Cockfield

  Knowles, Lees

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alex.

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  118

  119

  Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

  Talbot,Rt.Hn.J.G(OxfdUniv

  Welby, Sir C. G. E. (Notts)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Tennant, Harold John

  Whiteley,H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Shaw-Stewart,M. H. (Renfrew

  Thomson, F. W. (York, W.R.)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford,E.)

  Tomkinson, James

  Wilson, A.Stanley(York,E.R.

  Smith,H.C.(Nrthmb.Tyneside

  Tomlinson, Wm. Edw.Murray

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Smith, James Parker(Lanarks

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Valentia. Viscount

  Wilson-Todd, Wm. H.(Yorks.)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Vincent, Sir C. E.H.(Sheffield)

  Wodehouse,Rt. Hn. E. R.(Bath

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B.Stuart-

  Spear, John Ward

  Walker, Col. Wm. Hall

  Wylie, Alexander

  Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

  Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

  Wyndham, Rt.Hon. George

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M'Taggart

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Stroyan, John

  Wason, John C. (Orkney)

  Sir William Walrond and

  Strutt, Hon. Chas. Hedley

  Welby,Lt.Col.A.C.E.(Tauntn

  Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William(Cork,N.E.)

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Dowd, John

  Blake, Edward

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Roland, John

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon,N.)

  Boyle, James

  Leng, Sir John

  O'Mall'ey, William

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Lough, Thomas

  O'Mara, James

  Carew, James Laurence

  Lundon, W.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Cogan, Denis J.

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Reddy, M.

  Crean, Eugene

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Redmond,John E.(Waterford)

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Govern, T.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Crombie, John William

  M'Killop,W.(Sligo, North)

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Cullman, J.

  M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

  Roche, John

  Daly, James

  Mooney, John J.

  Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Sullivan, Donal

  Delany, William

  Murphy, J.

  Tully, Jasper

  Dillon, John

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  White, Patrick (Meath,North)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Nolan, Col.JohnP.(Galway,N.

  Whiteley,George(York,W.R.)

  Duffy, William J.

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Farrell, James Patrick

  O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

  Woodhouse, Sir JT(Huddersf'd

  Ffrench, Peter

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipper'y,Mid

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Field, William

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Hammond, John

  O'Doherty, William

  Sir Thomas Esmonde and

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Captain Donelan.

  3. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1901, for Expenditure in respect of Diplomatic and Consular Buildings."
  MR. DILLONsaid this Vote was a glaring example of a custom which had grown from year to year since the present Government came into office, and which threatened to be a great public nuisance. He alluded to the system of covering the Notice Paper with Supplementary Estimates in almost every department of the public service. When he first came to the House of Commons Supplementary
  120
  Estimates were very few, and it was considered to be a reproach to any Minister to be compelled to put down a Supplementary Estimate unless he could allege some unforeseen circumstances. When a Minister came down to the House of Commons in past years and asked for a Supplementary Estimate he was always on the defensive, and he was bound to make out some special cause for his action. Consequently Ministers bringing forward such Estimates always rose and made a statement in regard to the grounds upon which the money was asked for. Nowadays, Ministers seemed to be proud of Supplementary Estimates, and the number and the amount of them was growing year by year. The original Estimate for Diplo-

  121
  matic and Consular Buildings was £30,000, and they were now asked, without any details whatever, to add to that sum an additional £2,000 for the maintenance and alterations of those buildings. The reason given for this extra expenditure in the Estimate was as follows—
  "Sundry urgent works, some due to changes of occupation, not anticipated when the original Estimate was prepared, were required to be carried out at, among other places, Vienna Embassy House, Brussels and Lisbon Legation Houses, and Cairo Agency House."
  What was the meaning of "urgent works"? What were the urgent works necessary in the embassy and legation houses at Vienna and Lisbon? These urgent works were not anticipated at the beginning of the financial year, and why could they not have waited? He should like to know why the right hon. Gentleman had departed from the good and orthodox system of endeavouring to keep within the original Estimate unless something really urgent occurred.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASsaid that this increase of £2,000 was almost entirely due to changes in the personnel in the diplomatic and consular service which had rendered a change of occupants necessary. A certain amount of expense for the redecoration and repair of official residences upon a change of consul or ambassador was unavoidable. It was the custom, even in private life, when a man had been in possession of a house for a certain time to incur a certain amount of expense in order to prepare it for his successor.
  MR. J. P. FARRELLdid not think that the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman was satisfactory, for this large expense seemed to have been incurred without steps being taken to carry out the work in the most economical way. He thought hon. Members from Ireland were only exercising their ordinary rights in closely criticising the proposals of the Government in the smallest detail. As an Irish Member he strongly protested against the Government having a free hand in expenditure of this kind without taking contracts in the usual way. Unless some more satisfactory explanation was given he
  122
  would move a substantial reduction in the Vote. He thought they were entitled to demand a more explicit statement in regard to this increased expenditure than that which they had received from the right hon. Gentleman, and he begged to move the reduction of this Vote by £2,000.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: That is the total amount of the Vote.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: Then I will move to reduce it by £200.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,800, be granted for the said service."—(Mr. J. P. Farrell.)
  MR. DILLONsaid the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman was by no means satisfactory. The only ground given for the increased Estimate of £2,000 was that changes had occurred in our embassies. Changes were always occurring in our embassies or agencies. It was the average state of things, and it ought to have been in the power of the Government to produce a more reasonable Estimate than the one before the Committee. He was aware that it was not reasonable to press unduly for details in the Estimates, because the elaborate details were matters for the Committee of Accounts, but the persons responsible for preparing the Estimates were surely bound to go so far as to let the Committee know where the money had been spent. The Estimates showed that £2,000 had been spent in Vienna, Brussels, Lisbon, and Cairo, and the Committee was entitled to know how much had been spent on each house. The real reason for his protest against this particular Estimate was the extraordinary statement of the First Lord of the Treasury on a previous occasion, that it was the practice of the Committee of Supply never to examine the Estimates. Such a practice would open the floodgates to every kind of jobbery and loose expenditure, if a Minister wished to make any additions to his house, if such openings were afforded by such a statement being made beforehand that it was the settled practice not to examine the Estimate. He protested against such a statement being made. It was the duty

  123
  of the Committee to examine the Estimates with great care, and to endeavour to remove any abuses and ensure economy in the financial business of the nation.
  SIR WALTER FOSTERdesired to emphasise the views just put before the House, and appealed for a more definite explanation of that increase in the Estimate which, though small in itself, was a considerable amount when one considered the amount of the original Estimate. With a very little consideration, the Government ought to have been able to provide in the ordinary Estimates sufficient to cover these charges, but with the want of foresight which was so great a characteristic of the Government, they could not even look twelve months ahead.
  MR. LABOUGHEREsaid in his opinion the Vote ought to be reduced by at least £1,000, if at all, because although it might be necessary to keep up such establishments at Vienna and Brussels, it certainly was not at Lisbon and Cairo. At the time it was proposed to buy these houses he protested against it because it would lead to increased expenditure. It was unnecessary to bring into the present Estimates the residencies at Lisbon and Cairo, and therefore he should vote for the reduction.
  MR. POWERsaid that the Supplementary Estimate, although not large in itself, presented a large percentage of increase. He endorsed the remarks of the Member for East Mayo. When the First Lord introduced the Rule for the guillotining of the debate, it was pointed out that it would lead to a certain amount of looseness in preparing the Estimates, and when those who were in the House in the eighties recalled the trouble Ministers took to explain every Vote, they would recognise the change which had come over the practice of the House in the discussion of the financial business of the country, and that every year the amount of information given by the Ministers responsible was less.
  MR. TULLYsaid so far as the debate had gone it had shown that very little supervision was exercised over the financial business of the House. The
  124
  Supplementary Estimate was not large in itself, but at the same time the Committee was entitled to know how it had been expended and how much was spent on each house. The expense of an Agency in Cairo should not have been incurred, seeing that Egypt was a British dependency and, as he understood, was administered at a profit to this country. He supported the Amendment.
  MAJOR JAMESONdisclaimed any desire to detain the House, but felt compelled to say that what he objected to in this Estimate was its unbusinesslike character. He had some knowledge of how a Government contractor did his work; repairs were often made which were absolutely unnecessary, simply for the purpose of increasing the Expense, and whatever might be the position of England, Ireland at all events had not too much money to pay for these estimates. The four items dealt with should have been kept separate and not lumped together in one Estimate, because when it came to a question of voting Supplementary Estimates no one knew where it was going to end. So far as the Irish Members were concerned, they were determined to extract the greatest possible information from the Government in regard to them.
  MR. FIELDsaid the House of Commons took upon itself to criticise the work of some of the count councils in. Ireland, but, as a member of a county council, he would inform the Committee that no county council in Ireland could carry on its financial business in the way in which the fiscal business of the Empire was conducted. The fiscal business of the Empire was carried on in the loosest possible manner—the House being expected to vote millions of money on the mere word of a Minister, no financial committee making any examination into the Estimates until they came to be considered by a Committee of the House. Such a practice was not one to recommend itself to a business man. He thought the business of the Empire ought to be carried out on business principles, and therefore he supported the Amendment.
  MR. DALYdid not know who was responsible for the Estimate, but the

  125
  Estimate itself certainly showed that very loose management existed in the Department from which it emanated. It showed a great want of economy. He regretted also that as the amount was so small and we were so near the new financial year this Estimate could not have gone over with the ordinary Estimates, but no doubt the reason for bringing it in in this way was in order that the general Estimates should be made to look less. He was pleased the Amendment had been moved, and was of opinion that if a good fight were made by the Irish Members it would tend to make the Government more careful in the future.
  COLONEL NOLANthought that the Vote ought to be reduced by at least £1,500, as he saw no reason for maintaining any of these Embassies in Catholic countries.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member is not entitled to go into that question. All that is open to discussion is the amount in the Supplementary Estimates.
  COLONEL NOLANdrew attention to the fact that in the original Estimates a sum was allowed for this purpose, and he thought that amount ought never to be exceeded.
  MR. FLYNNexpressed the opinion that if a county or district council in Ireland prepared their accounts in such a fashion as the Estimates of the Empire were prepared there would soon be a strong complaint from the Local Government Board. Some explanation ought to be given by those responsible for the Estimates such as the Committee had the pleasure to listen to when the Treasury was represented by the present President of the Board of Agriculture. On the Front Opposition Bench there was at one time a party whose cry was Peace, Retrenchment, and Reform, but that party, judging from the state of the bench, had disappeared. It had come to this, that the iconoclastic, revolutionary, and semi-socialistic persons re presenting in that House the people of Ireland were the only persons who looked at the Estimates with a critical sense of economy.
  MR. FLAVINhoped some explanation would be forthcoming. All that the right hon. Gentleman said was that urgent work was necessary; he gave no details. He submitted that no business man would accept an account which only contained the lump sum in respect of several items, and in this case the House ought to be treated as a customer who, having to pay the money, was entitled to receive a detailed account.
  MR. DALZIELcomplained that the application by hon. Members for details had not been acceded to, but he thought, at all events, they were entitled to a courteous reply, if it only contained reasons why no details were to be given.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASsaid he had already explained that there had recently been many changes in the personnel of the diplomatic and consular service, and expense had unavoidably been incurred in redecoration and repairs of official residences on a change of Consul or Ambassador. It was the general thing to do. Hon. Members themselves did it when they took a house after the expiry of a lease.
  MR. JORDANhad no objection to putting these houses into repair, that was a thing that everybody did. His objection lay in the fact that no details; being before the Committee, the Committee was unable to form an opinion as; to whether the work had been economically carried out. In all these cases there was a lack of business detail. If the Committee had been in possession of the details of the £2,000 they might, having found the details correct, have agreed to the Estimate. As matters stood, he should vote against the lump sum.
  MR.CALDWELLsaid it appeared to him that what was gene rally complained of was a want of specification in the Estimate. The Committee would notice that in Section B there was a Vote for £500 for anything that might not be foreseen. There were a great many changes in our diplomatic service-every year, and the changes of one year balanced the changes of another, and

  127
  that sum of £500 was put in in order to meet anything extraordinary which might take place. The Estimate ought to have stated what the particular expenses were, and the amount required at each place. The whole complaint
  against the Government seemed to be a want of specification.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes. 101; Noes, 175. (Division List No.22.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N.E.)

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Doherty, William

  Allen, C. P. (Glouc, Stroud)

  Hammond, John

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Boland, John

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Dowd. John

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hayne, Rt.Hn. Charles Seale-

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Boyle, James

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N

  Bring, John

  Holland, William Henry

  O'Malley, William

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife,West)

  O'Mara, James

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Caldwell, James

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Cawley, Frederick

  Joyce, Michael

  Rea, Russell

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

  Reddy, M.

  Colville John

  Leese,SirJosephF.(Accrington

  Redmond, JohnE. (Waterford)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Crean, Eugene

  Leng, Sir John

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Cremer, William Randal

  Levy, Maurice

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Crombie, John William

  Lundon, W.

  Roche, John

  Cullinan, J.

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Daly, James

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Sinclair, Capt. John(Forfarsh.)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Delany, William

  M'Govern, T.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Duffy, William J.

  Mansfield, Horace Kendall

  White, Patrick(Meath, North)

  Duncan, James H.

  Mooney, John J.

  Whiteley, George(York, W. R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Murphy, J.

  Wilson, Henry J. (York.W.R.)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Woodhouse,SirJ.T.(Huddrsfld

  Ffrench, Peter

  Nolan, Col. JohnP.(Galway,N.

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Field, William

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Flynn, James Christopher

  O' Brien, Kendal(Tipper'ryMid

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Mr. Tully and Mr. J. P.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow,W.

  Farrell.

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.

  Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbysh.)

  Dyke, Rt. Hon, Sir Wm. H.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Faber, George Denison

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J.(Birm,)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

  Fergusson, Rt. HnSir J(Manc'r)

  Arrol, Sir William

  Chamberlayne,T.(S'thampton

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Finch, George H.

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Austin, Sir John

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A.E.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Fitzroy,Hn. Edward Algernon

  Baird, John Geo. Alexander

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Balcarres, Lord

  Colston, Chas. E. H. Athole

  Forster, Henry William

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Cook, Frederick Lucas

  Gladstone, Rt.Hon.Herbert J.

  Balfour, Bt.Hn.A.J.(Manch'r

  Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)

  Godson, Sir Aug. Frederick

  Balfour, Rt. Hn.G.W. (Leeds)

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Gordon,Hn.JE.(Elgin&Nairn)

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Beach,Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Goschen,Hon. George Joachim

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Greene, H. D.(Shrewsbury)

  Bowles, T. Gibson(King'sLynn

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Dimsdale,Sir Joseph Cockfield

  Gretton, John

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Groves, James Grimble

  Butcher, John George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Hambro, Charles Eric;

  Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)

  Dunn, Sir William

  Hamilton, RtHnLordG(Mid'x

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Spear, John Ward

  Hardy, Laurence(K'nt,Ashf'rd

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Stanley, Lord (Lanes.)

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  More, Rt. Jasper (Shropsh.

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Morgan, D. J.(Walthamstow)

  Stifling-Max well, Sir John M.

  Heath, James(Staffords. N. W.)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Henderson, Alexander

  Morris, Hon. Martin Henry E.

  Stroyan, John

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Morton, ArthurH. A.(Deptford

  Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Murray, Rt Hn AGraham(Bute

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Hoult, Joseph

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Thomson, F.W.(York, W. R.)

  Howard, Capt J(Kent,Faversh.

  Murray,Col.Wyndham (Bath)

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Newdigate, Francis Alex.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Tomlinson,Wm. Edw. Murray

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Pilkington, Richard

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  Kennaway,Rt. Hon. SirJohn H.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Valentia, Viscount

  Kenyon, James (Lanes.,Bury)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Keswick, William

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Knowles, Lees

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Purvis, Robert

  Wason, John C. (Orkney)

  Lawson, John Grant

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Welby, Sir C. G. E. (Notts.)

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Willoghby de Eresby, Lord

  Long, Rt. Hon.W. (Bristol, S.

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Lucas,Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Renwick, George

  Wilson, A. Stanley(York,E.R.)

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Ritchie,Rt. Hn.Chas.Thomson

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

  Round, James

  Wodehouse,Rt. Hn.E.R.(Bath

  M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim,E.

  Russell, T. W.

  Wylie. Alexander

  M'lver, SirLewis(Edinb'h,W.)

  Rutherford, John

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  M'Killop,James(Stirlingshire)

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alex.

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

  Malcolm, Ian

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Maxwell, W. J. H.(Dumfriessh.

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Sir William Walrond and

  Milner, Rt.Hn.SirFrederickG.

  Smith,H.C(North'mbTynesde

  Mr. Anstruther.

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Smith, JamesParker(Lanarks)

  Original Question put.

  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 176; Noes, 91. (Division List No. 23.)

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood,Capt.SirAlex.F.

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Forster, Henry William

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Godson,Sir Augustus Frederick

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Gordon,Hn.J.E.(Elgin&Nairn

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Goschen, Hon.George Joachim

  Arrol, Sir William

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Greene, SirE. W.(B'ySEdm'ds

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Colston, Chas. E. H. Athole

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cook, Frederick Lucas

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Austin, Sir John

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasg'w

  Gretton, John

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Groves, James Grimble

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Hamilton, Rt Hn LordG(Mid'x.

  Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J.(Manch'r

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Hardy,Laurence (Kent,Ashf'd

  Balfobr,RtHnGeraldW. (Leeds

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Dims dale, Sir J. Cockfield

  Heath, ArthurHoward(Hanl'y

  Beach, RtHn.SirM. H. (Bristol)

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Heath, James(Staffords. N. W.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Henderson, Alexander

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Bowles,T. Gibson(King'sLynn)

  Dyke, Rt Hon. SirWm. Hart

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Faber, George Denison

  Hoult, Joseph

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Howard,CaptJ(Kent,Faversh.

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Fellowes,Hon.AilwynEdward

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Butcher, John George

  Fenwick, Charles

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Fergusson, RtHnSirJ. (Manc'r

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex

  Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Kennaway, Rt.Hn. Sir John H.

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

  Finch, George H.

  Kenyon, James (Lanes., Bury)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Keswick, William

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Knowles, Lees

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hon.J.(Birm.

  Fitzroy,HonE ward Algernon

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Chamberlain, J. Austen(Worc'r

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lawson, John Grant

  130

  131

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Stroyan, John

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

  Long, Rt Hn Walter (Bristol,S.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Thomson, F. W. (York,W.'R.)

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsm'uth

  Purvis, Robert

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Tomlinson, W. Edw. Murray

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  M'Calmont, Col.J.(Antrim,E.)

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Valentia, Viscount

  M'Iver, Sir L.(Edinburgh, W.

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)

  Renwick, George

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Ridley Samuel F. (BethnalGr'n

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Malcolm, Ian

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

  Wason, Hn. Cathcart (Orkney

  Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriessh

  Roberts, JohnBryn (Eifion)

  Welby, Sir CharlesG.E(Notts'.)

  Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Fred. G.

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton-u.-Lyne)

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Round, James

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Russell, T. W.

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Montagu, G.(Huntingdon)

  Rutherford, John

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  More, Robert J. (Shropshire)

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alex.

  Wilson,A.Stanley (York, E.R.

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Sandys, Lt. -Col. Thos. Myles

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Wodehouse, RtHonE. R. (Bath)

  Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

  Smith, HC(Northmb.Tyneside

  Wylie, Alexander

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Buth)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Spear, John Ward

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Murray, Col. Wyndham(Bath)

  Stanley, Lord (Lanes.)

  Newdigate,Franeis Alexander

  Stewart,SirMark J.M 'Taggart

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Sir William Walrond and

  Pilkington, Richard

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham,William(Cork,N.E.)

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Ambrose. Robert

  Hammond, John

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow,W.

  Boland, John

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  O'Doherty, William

  Boyle, James

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Brigg, John

  Hayne, Rt.Hon.Charles Seale-

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Dowd, John

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Caldwell, James

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  O'Kelly.James(Roscommon,N

  Campbell. John (Armagh, S.)

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Malley, William

  Cawley, Frederick

  Jordon, Jeremiah

  O'Mara, James

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Colville, John

  Kinloch,Sir John George Smyth

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Leese,Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Reddy, M.

  Crean, Eugene

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Cramer, William Randal

  Leng, Sir John

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Crombie, John William

  Levy, Maurice

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Cullinan, J.

  Lundon, W.

  Roche, John

  Daly, James

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Delany, William

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Govern, T.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Duncan, James H.

  M'Laren, Charles-Benjamin

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Dunn, Sir William

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  White, Patrick (Meath, North

  Edwards, Frank

  Mooney, John J.

  Whiteley, Geo. (York, W.R.)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Ffrench, Peter

  Murphy, J.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Field, William

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Nolan, Col.John P.(Galway,N.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES— Mr. J. P. Farrell and Mr. Tully.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Gilhooly, James

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMd

  4. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a supplementary sum, not exceeding £7,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during
  132
  the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1901, for the expenses of the Post Office and Post Office Telegraph buildings in Great Britain, including furniture, fuel, and sundry miscellaneous services."
  MR. J. P. FARRELLthought it would be admitted that the criticism of these Votes had been very useful. The total original Estimate in this instance was £316,000, and without any explanation an additional £7,000 was asked for. It was said to be in consequence of the additional cost of steam coal in the engineering branches. He did not know much about the arrangements for the postal service in London, and perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would explain what was meant by the "engineering branches." Everybody knew that coal had increased in price, but he understood that the Post Office were now paying more for coal at the pit mouth than they were formerly paying to the contractors.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: Less, not more.
  MR. J. P. FARRELLaccepted the correction of the right hon. Gentleman, but he was speaking on the authority of Members who knew something of the subject when he made the statement. There was another reason why the Irish representatives should discuss this Vote. London was one of the largest and richest cities in the world, and served by a very big Department. But the Irish people gained no benefit whatever from the large expenditure involved, and it was not fair that they should be expected to contribute something like £30,000 for the accommodation of the people of London in this matter. It was an extraordinary thing that in each case where the Department came for a Vote it was increasing an original Estimate which it had been thought would be sufficient for the year. If satisfactory explanations were not forthcoming it would be the duty of the Irish Members to take the opinion of the House as to whether these constant increases were justified. There was an utter absence of detail in regard to the expenditure. For all the House knew, there might be a large amount of jobbery concealed in these items. It certainly would not be much trouble to print, in addition to the bald information now supplied, a schedule giving particulars which would explain these matters.
  MR. TULLYthought this Vote was another instance of the slovenly manner in which the Estimates were presented. It was not fair to ask for an additional sum of £7,000 on an original Estimate of £15,009 without giving any information. If officials got a free hand in these matters, knowing there would be no inquiry, they would pile up extras at an enormous rate. No confidence could be placed in any estimate coming from the Post Office Department, as Committees sitting upstairs knew how the leading officials of the Department juggled with the finances of the country. As an illustration he might instance the case of the telegraphs—they were to have been bought for £3,000,000, but when the Post Office had done taking the public money £17,000,000 had been paid. The Committee had been told that instead of buying the coal from contractors the Post Office officials were to do a stroke of economy by buying at the pit mouth, and thus avoid the I middleman's profits. What was the result as soon as they had this free hand? There was this increased demand for £7,000. That ought to appeal to the Liberal Members to support the Irish I representatives more than they had done in criticising these Votes. If these small sums were not looked into with care and discrimination they would soon mount to very large totals.
  MR. DALYpointed out that in the footnote to this Estimate it was stated that this £7,000 was due partly for steam coal. What did "partly" mean? With regard to purchasing coal at the pit mouth, was the contract put out to tender, or had the Government given it to some particular firm? As one who knew a little about the coal business, he was surprised to hear that by buying the coal direct from the collieries the right hon. Gentleman obtained extra weight. If he had been so fortunate he had been more lucky than most people. What foundation had the right hon. Gentleman for that statement? Had he personally seen the coal weighed? Another point was, how much per ton had the Government paid for the coal I That there should be a Supplementary Estimate of £7,000 on an original Esti-

  135
  mate of only £15,000 seemed to point to great incapacity on the part of the department that made such a wrong calculation, and it was nothing short of an insult to the Committee that they should be asked to pass such Supplementary Estimates without any particulars or explanation whatever.
  MR. CALDWELL,in reference to the appeal to the Liberal benches by the hon. Member for South Leitrim, said he had not seen any necessity for the Liberals to interfere in the Votes so far as they had gone. The Local Government Act in Ireland had evidently been most beneficial, one of its fruits being that Irish Members, being now accustomed to local government and to the manner in which accounts should be kept, were able with that experience to come and give a lesson in the matter of accounts to the House of Commons. He never thought that the Government would have put forward the price of coal as a reason for the present Estimate, because there had not been a rise in the price since the Estimates were prepared. The Government evidently thought that they were going to make a good bargain by taking the coal supply into their own hands, and they made a contract for fourteen months supply of coal just before the price went down.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASsaid he could only repeat the explanation which he had given on the previous Vote as to the causes of the increase. A very great increase had taken place in the price of the coal. The Estimates were prepared in November and December of the year before the last, and that Estimate had been exceeded. Hon. Members opposite must be aware that the extra cost of coal had been felt very severely not only by individuals, but also by large undertakings. Under the new arrangement which the Government had made they were paying for a fourteen months supply, whereas the original estimate was made only for twelve months. They had been told that as the Government were very large consumers of coal, and consumed in their public departments something like 24,000 tons
  136
  of steam coal annually, they ought to make arrangements whereby they could supply themselves from the pit's mouth. Such an arrangement was entered into, and it came into effect on the 3rd of July last. They were now getting steam coal direct from the collieries, and it was being paid for monthly, whereas it was paid for quarterly before. They were distributing it themselves, and were actually placing it in the cellars of the public departments. By this means they could guarantee that the coal was of the description which it professed to be, and they could ensure greater punctuality in the delivery. By this new system they got not only a very much better class of coal but they had a much smaller amount of what were known as "sweepings." On the whole, the experiment they had made in this direction had worked extremely well. They had now got their own wharf in London, and they had a practical man resident there who inspected the coal and saw it weighed before it was delivered to the Government departments. They had now under the present system an assurance that the coal they were receiving was of the quality ordered. They were also getting the advantage of the overweight by dealing directly with the collieries, and they would not get that additional weight if they bought from the middleman or the contractor. With regard to-the price, they were paying for steam coal 18s. 3d. per ton at the pit's mouth. They were consuming some 24,000 tons-of coal annually, and they were practically saving about 1s. per ton upon the prices which they would have to pay in London
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONagreed that the Department were doing well in dealing directly with the collieries, instead of allowing the middleman to get a profit. That course was certainly putting the matter on a more businesslike footing. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had given the Committee a full explanation, but he agreed with his hon. friend behind him that some such explanation ought to have been put on the Estimate itself If the terms of this new arrangement had been set forth on the Estimate this

  137
  discussion would have been unnecessary, and the right hon. Gentleman would have been saved a good deal of trouble. One point he wished for an explanation upon was how the right hon. Gentleman made out that he had effected a real saving by taking this contract for fourteen months instead of twelve months, in view of the high price of coal?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: We did not make such a contract. What I said was that by the present system we are paying ready money, whereas formerly we paid only quarterly. It is only for this particular year that we are paying for this extra two months supply. By this system of paying ready money instead of paying quarterly we have got two more months supply in the year.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that when the new contract was arranged last July the price of coal was about the highest, and it had come down in price since that time.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: But we did not enter into a contract for a year at all. We simply made this new arrangement, and the extra two months, as I have-already explained, is entirely owing to the different method of payment. We are now paying for our coal in advance, and consequently we have to put two more months in the Estimate. We did not enter into a year's contract last July.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONaccepted this explanation, and said there was one other point upon which he should like an explanation. He wished to know whether a considerable number of respectable producers were asked to contract for the supply, and was the lowest tender accepted.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: Yes, a considerable number of producers were asked to tender, and the lowest tender was accepted.
  MR. DALYsaid that the right hon. Gentleman's explanation was not satisfactory He moved a reduction of the Vote by £1,000.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £6,000, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Daly.)
  MR. NANNETTIsaid he desired to enter his protest against this increase in the expenditure, because it showed very bad management on the part of the parties responsible. He happened to be connected with a corporation which had to buy coal, and when the difficulty complained of by the right hon. Gentleman occurred they made their arrangements for purchasing coal accordingly. The parties responsible for this contract had very much mistaken their position, and they had made a mistake in giving out a contract which was far in excess of the requirements of the case. He was very much surprised indeed that hon. Gentlemen opposite were satisfied with this state of things, and were leaving all the criticism to Members on the Opposition side of the House.
  MR. O'MARAsaid the right hon. Gentleman opposite had pointed out that the Government had been purchasing coal in a cheaper way, and under those circumstances he could not understand why there had been an increase of £4,000 in twelve months. Last winter was not very cold, and how was it that in public offices some attempt was not made to economise in the quantity of coal used and so reduce the expenditure of the country? To his mind 18s. 3d. per ton was a very excessive price to pay for steam coal.
  MR. FLAVINregarded the right hon. Gentleman's statement as very unsatisfactory, and he wished to know why a fourteen months contract was entered into last July.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I did not state that such a contract was entered into last July. What I said was that the new arrangement came into force in that month. We certainly did not make such a contract in July.
  MR. FLAVINsaid he understood that the new system came into opera-

  139
  tion in July. He wished to know when the Government commenced paying the price which had been quoted, and had that price been continued up to the present moment. The right hon. Gentleman had not explained that I point. If the information he had received was correct, steam coal was now worth between 3s. to 5s. a ton less I than it was in July, when this arrangement was entered into. Taking the 24,000 tons consumed during the fourteen months at 18s. 3d. per ton, according to the present price of steam coal they were paying an overcharge of 5s. per ton. [Ministerial laughter.] He thought he was perfectly entitled to say that, because the First Commissioner of Works had given them no explanation of it. Hon. Gentlemen opposite sat there and absolutely refused to ask a single question upon this subject. This was not the first occasion upon which Irish Members had considered it their duty to examine the details of a Supplementary Estimate, and they were quite prepared to accept the laughter of hon. Gentlemen opposite. The fact remained that they laughed and did nothing else. What they wanted to know was when the contract was entered into, and whether the price of 18s. 3d. per ton was given last July, August, or September.
  MR. CLEANsaid that what struck him in connection with this Vote was not so much the amount of money in excess of the original estimate, but the system of contracting. If the humblest county or parish council in Ireland were to prepare its estimates in this fashion, and then add 50 per cent, to them, the Local Government Board would come down on it, surcharge the amount, and make the members pay the excess. If that system were introduced in the Government departments they would have none of these Supplementary Estimates. At present the work was evidently done in a very slipshod way. Ho was perfectly well aware that so long as the Government had such a big majority behind them, their supporters would swallow anything, even if it were as big as a whale, or so long as it was for the consumption
  140
  of Government money. He supposed the same thing would happen if the Liberals were in power, and ho maintained that it was the Irish Nationalists who could alone, with clean hands, criticise the Government departments in their dealings with the country. If the war contracts were conducted on the same principle as the right hon. Gentleman had conducted the contracts for his office, no wonder they were spending hundreds of millions in South Africa. The Irish people had to pay the piper more in proportion to their means than the English, and they could not afford to allow this extravagant expenditure over estimates to go on. [Laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite-might laugh, hut they would laugh with the wrong side of their mouth if they did that sort of thing in Ireland. Hon. Gentlemen opposite were very good when they went to their constituents and said they would carefully look into these things; hut the moment they were elected they did not care how the taxpayer's money was spent. They in Ireland did care, and hence their protest against this extravagance. He did not want to waste the time of the Committee, but if more time was spent in discussing the Estimates there would be less waste of public money.
  *MR. MANSFIELDsaid he did not question the principle of these contracts, but the true secret was to choose the light time for entering into them. The right hon. Gentleman had explained that the contract was for fourteen months and not for twelve months, but he had given no-idea when it was entered into. If that had been done in July it was what no business firm would have done.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLASsaid he would point out again that although the contract, for a certain fixed amount of coal, dated from the 1st of July, it did not necessarily follow that they made it on that date. There was no desire whatever on the part of the Department to keep back anything from the House, but to give the actual facts as to the date of the contract.
  *MR. MANSFIELDthought that under the circumstances it would be better to postpone the Vote. What he was seeking to know was, whether the contract was entered into on the 1st of July at July prices, or whether it was entered into prior to July at lower prices. At what price per ton did the contract allow the coal proprietor? He would like to be clear as to whether the Government had given a price at high-water mark, and so secured for the contractors a rate which in a year's time the contractors could not have hoped to have obtained. He noticed that the fuel for the Post Office had risen 50 per cent., while that for the Science and Art Department had only increased 6 per cent., and for Public Buildings Department 8 per cent. Would the right hon. Gentleman tell the Committee the reason for this enormous difference? Was there one contract, or different contracts entered into at separate times? It would not be amiss if someone went down from the Public Buildings Department, or, better still, from the Science and Art Department to the Post Office, and made some inquiries as to the cause of these enormous differences. It would be a pity if they were asked to vote for this huge increase, and to be kept absolutely in the dark as to the reason for it.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDEsaid that if the right hon. Gentleman could not give the information, he supposed it was not owing to his fault, but to that of the person who drew up the statement. He thought the right hon. Gentleman should postpone the Vote to enable him to obtain full and accurate information.
  MR. CALDWELLsaid he too would appeal that the Vote should be postponed. The right hon. Gentleman had, after he had drawn attention to it, himself to admit that the Vote was not correct in this respect, that whilst they had put £7,000 under item M, item Rought to have been included, which would have brought the sum up to £20,000. That one point showed that the Government came before the Committee with defective Estimates. But more than that, if the right hon. Gentleman would refer to the
  142
  explanation given in the foot-note, he would find that it had nothing to do with; the explanation now given from the Front Bench. The explanation in the, foot-note was—"Additional cost of fuel, partly steam coal, required for the engineering branches." But the explanation given from the Front Bench was that the increase was due to the contract being for fourteen months instead of twelve. But the difference would only amount to £4,000 for the two months, supposing the whole quantity of coal had been taken, and that left £3,000 or £4,000 entirely unexplained. The increase in the price of coal had nothing whatever to do with the increase of expenditure, because, if they took this same Vote under item J, for coal fuel for the port of London and the outports in England, Wales, and Scotland, amounting to £9,000, no increase was asked for. How did they make out that in a particular Department in London there was an enormous increase in the price of coal, while there was no increase whatever in the price throughout England, Wales, and Scotland? There must be some explanation, but obviously that given both on the Estimates and from the Front Bench was insufficient and incomplete. For their own credit he beseeched the Government to withdraw this Vote—the Estimates would not all be pushed through that night— and bring it forward on Monday with full information, and then the Committee would be able to deal with it in a spirit which would be intelligent at least. His experience of the House was that when person the Government would not get on with their other Estimates if they insisted on going on with the disputed one without explanation.
  MR. JORDANsaid his excuse for the right hon. Gentleman was that he was new to his office, and had not been able to give the attention desirable to his permanent officials, who desired, of course, to "boss" the whole thing. These permanent officials had evidently furnished the right hon. Gentleman with Estimates without any details, and they had thought that hon. Members were fools enough to pass them without discussion. But the Committee had been indued with a

  143
  spirit of investigation, and intended to exercise it. He appealed to the right hon. the First Commissioner of Works to postpone the Vote, at any rate until Monday; and between now and then he could see his permanent officials and consult with them as to how a detailed Estimate could be brought in. The right hon. the First Commissioner could come on Monday fresh and primed for his work, as they also would be.
  MR. O'MARAsaid he had just been doing a little sum on paper, and found that there had been an increase of 26 per cent, on the original Estimate. If the First Commissioner had been chairman of a railway company, and had come before his shareholders and told them that there had been an increase of 26 per cent, in the cost of running the locomotive department, the shareholders would have immediately appointed a committee of investigation to inquire where the money had gone. An hon. Member had drawn attention to the fact that this increase was only for London. The figures were very interesting. Over the whole country £316,000 was spent for fuel, and in London £22,000. That was only 7 per cent, of the total amount spent in the whole of England. Now, it was a very curious thing that there should have been an increase of 50 per cent, in the cost of coal in London, and no increase at all in the money spent in all the provincial towns. He could not understand how the price of coal had risen 50 per cent, in London, and had remained the same in every town in the country. He joined in the appeal made to the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw this Vote until he had a full explanation to offer to the Committee. [Laughter.] Although there was a good deal of laughter on the Government benches, the country would not be satisfied with the explanation given by the First Commissioner.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid it was an extraordinary thing that no British representative, except a few on the Opposition side of the House, had offered any opposition whatever to
  144
  these accounts. Was it to go out to the public that supporters of His Majesty's Government were prepared to sit perfectly silent when they found such a large increase in the Votes without one of them asking the Minister responsible why the increase had come about? Outside the House he had heard representatives of the British public saying that they opposed Home Rule because they were always glad in Committee of Supply to have the Irish Members standing up and objecting to extravagance on the part of the Government, which the supporters of the Government were either unwilling or afraid to put out. The hon. Member who spoke from Scotland had appealed to the First Commissioner of Works to postpone this Vote, and he would repeat that appeal. He would ask whether any Gentleman representing the Government on the Front Bench could point to a single precedent where a responsible Minister in Committee of Supply had got up and frankly admitted that he had not got the particulars asked for, and at the same time refused to postpone the, Vote in question until he had obtained the particulars which would enable him to answer inquiries made? If they were not to receive detailed explanation from the Minister in charge of these Votes, and if inquiries addressed to him in a reasonable way were not to be listened to the sooner a fresh arrangement was made the better, whereby Ministers could allocate the public money in any way they pleased without coming to the House and asking for it. He had heard it said that the reason for this large increase of £7,000 in one year was due to the increased price of coal. That might be the reason for all he knew, but it ought to be the duty of the responsible Minister to take steps to guard the public against such an exorbitant increase, in the price of a necessary of life like coal, which came from time to time on the public. They had heard that fuel ought to be laid in stock by municipalities, so that the public could have a supply at a reasonable rate. Whether that were so or not, he submitted that the Government ought to take steps to lay in a sufficient supply of fuel, in order to protect the taxpayers, when they had reason to believe that the price was to be raised to an exorbitant rate. If this extraordinary increase

  145
  was the result of the increased price of coal, then that increased price had been purely fictitious, and had enormously and extravagantly enriched the coal merchants, and to a great extent the coal-owners, from which the public ought to have been protected. For the Government to come down and, without a word of explanation, calmly to ask the representatives of the taxpayers to pay £22,700, instead of £15,700, owing to an increase in the price of coal, was an extravagant and outrageous thing. He quite agreed with what fell from the hon. Member for North Wexford, that the lack of details and the absence of explanations asked for might not be in any single way the fault of the First Commissioner of Works. So far as he had had experience of the right hon. Gentleman in the office he held, they had always found him quite ready to give any explanation in his power; but on this occasion he told them frankly that he had not got at his disposal the facts that would throw some light on this extravagant increase. He certainly thought that some hon. Gentlemen supporting His Majesty's Government should lend assistance to the appeal they were making to the right hon. Gentleman; because, after all, the constituents of hon. Gentlemen opposite were as much interested in this matter as Irish constituents. He believed there was not one of them who,
  at a meeting of his constituents, would be able to deny that, in the demand they were now making, the Irish Members were doing a service to the taxpayers of the United Kingdom. It seemed to him that if the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works desired, as they did, to facilitate the business of the House—[Laughter.] It appeared to be perfectly impossible to convince hon. Gentlemen opposite that they on the Irish benches were just as anxious as those hon. Gentlemen were to get through Supply as soon as possible; and if they did not understand that, then they characteristically and pre-eminently misrepresented the feeling of the Irish people. If the object of the First Commissioner of Works was to get through Supply in reasonable time, he would be well advised if he conceded the demand made to postpone the Vote until he had furnished himself with the information desired.
  MR. AKEBS DOUGLASrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question be now put."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 222; Noes, 135. (Division List No. 24.)

  Fitzroy,Hon. Edward Algernon

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Renwick, George

  Fletcher, Sir Henry

  Leighton, Stanley

  Ridley,S. Forde(BethnalGreen

  Flower, Ernest

  Long,Rt Hn.Wal'tertBristol,S)

  Ritchie, Rt.Hn.Chas. Thomson

  Forster, Henry William

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Foster,SiiMichael(LondUniv.

  Lucas,Col. Francis(Lowestoft)

  Round, James

  Garfit, William

  Lucas,Reginald J(Portsmouth)

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Godson, Sir Augustus F.

  Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. E.

  Russell, T. W.

  Gordon,Hn.J.E.(Elgin&Nairn

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Rutherford, John

  Gore, Hon. P. S. Ormsby-

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Gorst,Rt. Hon. Sir JohnEldon

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Gosehen, Hon. George Joachim

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Samuel, Harry S.(Limehouse)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  M'Calmont,Col. J. (Antrim,E.)

  Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  M'Iver, Sir L.(Edinburgh,W.)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Green.WalfordD(Wednesbury

  M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)

  Smith,Abel H. (Hertford,East)

  Greene,SirEW (B'rySEdni'nds

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Smith,H.C.(NorthumbTynesd

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Malcolm, Ian

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D.(Strand)

  Gretton, John

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Spear, John Ward

  Groves, James Grimble

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Maxwell. WJ H (Dumfriesshire

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir Jn. M.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Milner,Rt. Hn. SirFrederickG.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Milton, Visconut

  Stroyan, John

  Hamilton, RtHnLordG.(Mid'x

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

  Hamilton,Marq.of (L'nd'derry

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Hardy,Laurance(K'nt,Ashford

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

  Heath, A. Howard (Hanley)

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  Heath, James(Stanfford,N.W.)

  Morgan, Hn. F.(Monmouthsh.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Helder, Augustus

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Henderson, Alexander

  Morris, Hn. Martin Henry F.

  Walker, Col. William Hal).

  Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

  Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

  Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E.

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Hobhouse,Henry(Somerset,E.

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Wason, John C. (Orkney)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Murray, Col. Wyndham(Bath)

  Welby, Lt. -ColA C E(Taunton)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Newdigate, FrancisAlexander

  Welby,SirCharlesG. E. (Notts.

  Howard,CaptJ(Kent,Faversh.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Pilkington, Richard

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York,E. R.)

  Kennaway,Rt. Hn. SirJohnH.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Kenyon, Jamas (Lanes., Bury)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Kenyon-Slaney,Col.W (Salop)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

  Keswick, William

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Wodehouse,Rt Hn E.R.(Bath)

  Knowles, Lees

  Purvis, Robert

  Wylie, Alexander

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Wyndham, George

  Lawrence, William F.

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Lawson, John Grant

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Lee,CaptA.H.(Hants, Fareh'm

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Sir William Walrond and

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William(Cork,N.E.)

  Colville, John

  Ffrench, Peter

  Allen, C. P. (Glouc, Stroud)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Field, William

  Ambrose, Robert

  Crean, Eugene

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Crombie, John William

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Cullinan, J.

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Boland, John

  Daly, James

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Boyle, James

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Gilhooly, James

  Brigg, John

  Delany, William

  Gladstone,Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Burt, Thomas

  Doogan, P. C.

  Hammond, John

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Hardie,J. Keir(MerthyrTydvi)

  Caldwell, James

  Duffy, William J.

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Duncan, James H.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Carew, James Laurence

  Dunn, Sir William

  Hayne, Rt. Hon.Charles Seale-

  Carvill, Patrick G. Hamilton

  Edwards, Frank

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Cawley, Frederick

  Elibank, Master of

  Holland, William Henry

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Hope, John Deans (Fife,West)

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Fewick, Charles

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  148

  149

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Nolan, Col. JohnP. (Galway,N.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

  Jones,DavidBrynmor,Swansea

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  O'Brien,Kendal(Tipper'ryMid

  Shipman, Dr John

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.

  Kinloch,SirJohnGeorgeSmyth

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow,W.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Labouchere, Henry

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  O'Doherty, William

  Sullivan, Donal

  Leese,SirJosephF(Accrington)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Levy, Maurice

  O'Dowd, John

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Lloyd-George, David

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Thomson, F. W. (York, W.R.

  Lough, Thomas

  O' Kelly, James(Roscommon, N

  Tomkinson, James

  Lundon, W.

  O'Malley, William

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  O'Mara, James

  Tully, Jasper

  M'Crae, George

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Wason,Eugene (Clackmannan'

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Rea, Russell

  White, George (Norfolk)

  M'Govern, T.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  White,Patrick (Meath, North

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Reddy, M.

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Whiteley, J. H. (Halifax)

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Williams, Osmond(Merioneth)

  Mansfield, Horace Kendall

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Woodhouse,SirJ.T(Hudd'rsf'di

  Mooney, John J.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East).

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Murphy, J.

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Sir Thomas Esmonde and

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Roche, John

  Captain Donelan.

  Question put accordingly, "That a sun, not exceeding £6,000, be granted for the said Service."

  AYES.

  Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N.E.)

  Dunn, Sir William

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Allen, Chas.P.(Gloue,Stroud)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Ambrose, Robert

  Farrell, James Patrick

  M'Govern, T.

  Asquith, RtHn.Herbert Henry

  Fenwick, Charles

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Ffrench, Peter

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Field, William

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Boland, John

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Mooney, John J.

  Boyle, James

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Brigg, John

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Murphy, J.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Naunetti, Joseph P.

  Burt, Thomas

  Gilhooly, James

  Nolan, Col. JohnP. (Galway, N.

  Buxton, Sidney Charles

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Caldwell, James

  Hammond, John

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipper'y,Mid

  Carew, James Laurence

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Carvill,Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Hayden. John Patrick

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow,W)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Hayne.Rt.Hon.Charles Seale-

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Doherty, William

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Holland, William Henry

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Colville, John

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry', W.)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  O'Dowd, John

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Crean, Eugene

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Kelly, J. (Roscommon, N.)

  Crombie, John William

  Jones, D. Brymnor (Swansea)

  O'Malley, William

  Cullinan, J.

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  O'Mara, James

  Daly, James

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Rea, Russell

  Delany, William

  Leese,Sir JosephF. (Accrington

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Dewar, JohnA.(Inverness-sh.)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Reddy, M.

  Dillon, John

  Levy, Maurice

  Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lough, Thomas

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Lundon, W.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Duffy, William J.

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion),

  Duncan, James H.

  M'Crae, George

  Robson, William Snowdon

  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 132; Noes, 222. (Division List No. 25.)

  Roche, John

  Tennant, Harold John

  White, Patrick (Meath.North)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Whiteley, G. (York, W. R.)

  Scott, Charles P. (Leigh)

  Thomson, F. W. (York,W.R.)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Shipman, Dr. John

  Tomkinson, James

  Williams,Osmond(Merioneth)

  Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Woodhouse,SirJT(Huddersf'd

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Tully, Jasper

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Warner, Thomas CourtenayT.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Sullivan, Donal

  Wason, E. (Clackmannan)

  Sir Thomas Esmonde and

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Captain Donelan.

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood,Capt. Sir Alex. F.

  Doxford,SirWilliam Theodore

  Keswick, William

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Knowles, Lees

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Law, Andrew Bonar

  Allhusen, Augustus Hy. Eden

  Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir Win. Hart

  Lawrence, William F.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lawson, John Grant

  Archdale, Edward Mervyn

  Elibank, Master of

  Lee, Capt. AH (Hants. Fareham

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Arrol, Sir William

  Faber, George Denison

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Leighton, Stanley

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Fellowes,Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Long,Rt. Hu. Waiter (Bristol.S

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fergusson,Rt. Hn.SirJ(Manc'r

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Austin, Sir John

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lucas,Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Finch, George H.

  Lucas,Reginald J.(Portsm'th)

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fiulay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Macarctney, Rt.Hn. WGEllison

  Baird, John Geo. Alexander

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fison, Frederick William

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  FitzGerald, Sir R. Penrose-

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Balfour,Rt.Hon.A.J.(Manch'r

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  M. Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Balfour,Rt. Hon.G.W. (Leeds)

  Fletcher, Sir Henry

  M'Calmont,Col.J.(Antrim,E.)

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Flower, Ernest

  M'Iver,SirLewis(EdinburghW

  Hartley, George C. T.

  Forster, Henry William

  M'Killop,James(Stirlingshire)

  Beach, Rt. Hn. SirM. H.(Bristol

  Foster, Sir M, (London Univ.)

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Bigwood, James

  Garfit, William

  Malcolm, Ian

  Bill, Charles

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fred.

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin&Nairn

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Gore, Hon. F. S. Ormsby-

  Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Gorst,Rt. Hon. Sir JohnEldon

  Milner, Rt. Hn. SirFrederickG.

  Brassey, Albert

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Milton, Viscount

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Mil ward, Colonel Victor

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Butcher, John George

  Green,WalfordD(Wednesbury

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Greene, SirE. W. (BurySt.Ed.

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Cavendish, R, F. (N. Lancs.)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  More,Robt.Jasper(Shropshire)

  Cavendish, V.C. W.(Derbysh.)

  Gretton, John

  Morgan,DavidJ(Walthamst'w

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Groves, James Grimble

  Morgan, HnFred.(Monm'thsh.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Chamberlain,Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Morris, Hon. Martin HenryF.

  Chamberlain, J. Austen(Wore.

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Morton, ArthurH. A.(Deptford

  Charrington, Spencer

  Hamilton.RtHnLordG. (Mid'x

  Murray,RtHnAGraham (Buth

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Hamilton,Marq.of(L'donderry

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Hardy,Laurence(Kent,Ashf'rd

  Murray, Col. Wyndham(Bath)

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A.E.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Newdigate, FrancisAlexander

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H.Athole

  Heath, James(Staffords.,N.W.

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Cook, Frederick Lucas

  Helder, Augustus

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Corbett,A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Henderson, Alexander

  Pilkington, Richard

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hermon-Hodge,RobertTrotter

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Cran borne, Viscount

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Hobhouse, Henry(Somerset,E.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Cust, Henry John C.

  Hoult, Joseph

  Purvis, Robert

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Howard,Cap. J(Kent,Faversh.

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Davies,M.Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Ratcliffe, R. F.

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Dimsdale, Sir Jos. Cockfield

  Kennaway,Rt.Hn.SirJohn H.

  Renwick, George

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Kenyon, James (Lancs.,Bury)

  Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Kenyon-Slaney,Col. W. (Salop

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.

  152

  153

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  Round, James

  Stroyan, John

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Royds, Clement-Molyneux

  Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Russell, T. W.

  Talbot,Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox'dUniv.

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Rutherford, John

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York.E. R,)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Sadler, Col. S. Alexander

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Tomlinson,Wm. Edw. Murray

  Wilson-Tond,Wm.H.(Yorks.)

  Sandys,Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  Wodehouse,Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Valentia, Viscount

  Wylie, Alexander

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.)

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Smith,HC(North'mb.Tyneside

  Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E.

  Smith, Hon.W. F. D. (Strand)

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Spear, John Ward

  Wason,JohnCathcart(Orkney

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Welby.Lt. -Col. ACE(Taunton

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

  Welby.SirCharlesG.E. (Notts.

  MR. AKERS DOUGLASclaimed, "That the Original Question be now put."

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood,Capt. Sir Alex. F.

  Corbett, A. Cameron(Glasgow)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Gretton, John

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Groves, James Grimble

  Allhusen, Augustus Hy. Eden

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Archdale, Edward Mervyn

  Oust, Henry John C.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Arrol, Sir William

  Davies,M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Hamilton, Rt. HnLordG(Mid'x

  Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Hamilton,Marqof(L'nd'nderry

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Austin, Sir John

  Dimsdale, SirJosephCockfield

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Dorington, Sir John Edward

  Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

  Bain, Col. James Robert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Heath, J. (Staffords., N.W

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Doxford, SirWilliamTheodore

  Helder, Augustus

  Balcarres, Lord

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Henderson, Alexander

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

  Balfour, Rt.Hn.A.J.(Manch'r

  Dyke,Rt.HonSir William Hart

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Balfour,RtHnGeraldW(Leeds

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Hobhouse, Hy. (Somerset, E.)

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Elibank, Master of

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Bartley, George C. T

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Hoult, Joseph

  Beach,Rt. Hn. SirM. H. (Bristol

  Faber, George Denison

  Howard,CaptJ(Kent,Faversh.

  Bigwood, James

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Bill, Charles

  Fellowes, Hon. AilwynEdward

  Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Fergusson,Rt. Hn. SirJ(Manc'r

  Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Johnston, William (Belfast)

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Finch, George H.

  Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

  Brassey, Albert

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir J. H.

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Kenyon, James (Lancs.,Bury)

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Fison, Frederick William

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Butcher, John George

  FitzGerald,SirRobertPenrose-

  Keswick, William

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Knowles, Lees

  Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)

  Fletcher, Sir Henry

  Lawrence, William F.

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

  Flower, Ernest

  Lawson, John Grant

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Forster, Henry William

  Lee,Capt. A H (Hants,Fareham

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Foster,SirMichael(Lond.Univ

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J. (Birm.

  Garfit, William

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Chamberlain, J Austen(Worc'r

  Godson,SirAugustusFrederick

  Leighton, Stanley

  Charrington, Spencer

  Cordon, Hn.J.E(Elgin&Nairn

  Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Gore, Hon. F. S. Ormsby-

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. SirJohnEldon

  Lucas, Col. Francis(Lowestoft)

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Lucas, R. J. (Portsmouth)

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Macartney.Rt. Hn. WGEllison

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Macdona, John Gumming

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H.Athole

  Green, WalfordD(Wednesb'ry

  Maclver, David(Liverpool, W.),

  Cook, Frederick Lucas

  Greene,SirEW(B'rySEdm'nds

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Original Question put accordingly.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 229; Noes, 126. (Division List No. 26.)

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Talbot,RtHn.J G(Oxf'dUniv.

  M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim,E.)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  M'Iver, SirL. (Edinburgh.W.

  Purvis, Robert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  M'Killop,James(Stirlingshire)

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Rateliffe, R. F.

  Tomlinson, Wm, E. Murray

  Malcolm, Ian

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Tufnell, Col. Edward

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Maxwell,WJH(Dumfriesshire

  Rentoul, James Alexander

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Milner, Rt Hon. Sir Fred. G.

  Renwick, George

  Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E.

  Milton, Viscount

  Ridley,S. Forde'(BethnalGreen

  Warner,Thomas Courtenay T.

  Milward, Colonel Victor

  Ritchie,Rt. Hon.ChasThomson

  Warr, Augustus Frederick

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Ropner, Colonel Roberts

  Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Round, James

  Welby,Lt.-Cl.A.C.E.(Taunt'n

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Welby,Sir CharlesG. E. (Notts.

  More, Robt.Jasper(Shropshire

  Russell, T. W.

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  Morgan, D. J.(Walthamstow)

  Rutherford, John

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Wills, Sir Frederick

  Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Wilson, A.Stanley(York,E. R.)

  Morton, ArthurH. A. (Deptford

  Sandys, Lieut. -ColThos.Myles

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.

  Murray,Charles I. (Coventry)

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford,East)

  Wodehouse,Rt. Hn. E. R.(Bath

  Murray,Col.Wyndham(Bath)

  Smith,H C. (North'm. Tyneside

  Wylie, Alexander

  Newdigate,Francis Alexander

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D.(Strand)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Spear, John Ward

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Stirling-Maxwell,Sir John M

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Sir William Walrond and

  Pilkington, Richard

  Stroyan, John

  Mr. Anstruther.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

  NOES.

  Abraham,William (Cork,N.E.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mooney, John J.

  Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc.,Stroud

  Ffrench, Peter

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Field, William

  Murphy, J.

  Asquith,Rt.Hn HerbertHenry

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Barlow, John Emmot

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Nolan,Col. Jn. P. (Galway,N.)

  Boland, John

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Brigg, John

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipper'ryMid

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Burt, Thomas

  Hammond, John

  O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow,W.)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hardie, J. K. (MerthyrTydvil

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Caldwell, James

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  O'Doherty, William

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hayne, Ht. Hon. Chas. Seale-

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Dowd, John

  Cawley, Frederick

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, W.)

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  O'Malley, William

  Colville, John

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Mara, James

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Jones,David Brynmor(Sw'ns'a

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Crean, Eugene

  Joyce, Michael

  Rea, Russell

  Crombie, John William

  Kinloch, Sir Jn. GeorgeSmyth

  Reddy, M.

  Cullinan, J.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Daly, James

  Leese, Sir JosephE. (Accrington

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Levy, Maurice

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Delany, William

  Lough, Thomas

  Roche, John

  Dewar, John A,(Inverness-sh.

  Lundon, W.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitchapel)

  Dillon, John

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone,W.)

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Shipman, Dr. John

  Douglas, Charles.M. (Lanark)

  M'Crae, George

  Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Dermott, Patrick

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Duncan, James H.

  M'Govern, T.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Dunn, Sir William

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Stevenson, Francis S,

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Killop,W. (Sligo, North)

  Sullivan, Donal

  Fanrrell, James Patrick

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  156

  157

  Tennant, Harold John

  Wason, E. (Clackmannan)

  Woodhouse,SirJ T(Huddersf'd

  Thomas, David A. (Merthvr)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

  Thomson, F. W. (York, W.R.)

  White, Patrick (Meath,North)

  Tomkinson, James

  Whiteley, G. (York, W. R.)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Sir Thomas Esmonde and

  Tully, Jasper

  Williams, Osmond(Marioneth)

  Captain Donelan.

  Resolutions to be reported.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £35,200, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1901, in respect of sundry Public Buildings in Great Britain, not provided for on other Votes."
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I wish to ask for information with regard to this Vote. In the Votes we have been discussing this evening, our chief difficulty has been that we have not had that information which would be thought requisite in submitting an original Estimate. My contention is that these items ought not to appear as Supplementary Estimates at all. They ought to have been anticipated at the time the Estimates were framed, and it is not right or fair to the House of Commons, which has to vote the money of this country, that these enormous Supplementary Estimates should be introduced in this fashion, We have before us today I believe the largest Supplementary Estimates that have ever been presented to the House of Commons. A few years ago it was the exception to introduce Supplementary Estimates except under special circumstances. Year by year, however, an increasing number of Supplementary Estimates are being presented to the House of Commons, and it is on that point that I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman a few questions. In the discussion on the last two Votes, the right hon. Gentleman said he was not personally responsible; that one Vote had reference to the Foreign Office, and the other to the Post Office.
  158
  No doubt to a certain extent the right hon Gentleman was in the hands of these, offices, but he is directly responsible for the Estimate which I now desire to criticise. The first item is Census Buildings, £2,100. The right hon. Gentleman, when we were discussing the Foreign Office Vote, said that the reason for the Supplementary Estimate was that it could not be anticipated, inasmuch as some of the ambassadors had been moved from one place to another, and the houses had to be altered for the new occupants. That to a certain extent is reasonable, but surely the right hon. Gentleman must have known that the Census comes every ten years, and that a building for the taking of it would be required this year. We know that during the last year or two the Government have never anticipated anything, and that the expected was the one thing they were never prepared for. Here was an Estimate which could have been anticipated with the greatest ease, and there is no possible excuse for presenting the House of Commons with a Supplementary Estimate regarding it. The next item is the fitting up of Hertford House, Manchester Square. That is a matter that has been going on for some years, and which might have been fully anticipated if the right hon. Gentleman had only chosen to anticipate it. Further on, there is an item for the Royal Mint, and also for the introduction and extension of electric lighting in the principal public buildings. I ask the right hon. Gentleman how it is that all these items were not anticipated 1 Not only might they have been anticipated, but it was his bounden duty to anticipate them. This is a matter in which this House is very much concerned, because if Estimates are so under-estimated,as they would seem

  159
  to have been from these huge Supplementary Votes, the annual statement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has to make is really totally misleading to the country. The only conclusion that I can draw is that the finance of last year was so bad, and the Government thinking the war was coming to an end, all these different Departments were instructed to keep back every possible Estimate and have it introduced subsequently as a Supplementary Estimate. Even to this Govermnent, a million is a considerable item, and therefore I think we are entitled to ask the right hon. Gentleman, how it is that such items as Census buildings, Hertford House, the Royal Mint, and the introduction of electric lighting were not anticipated in the Estimates that were originally framed? I hope he will be able to give us a satisfactory explanation, but if he does not, I shall certainly vote against the Estimate.
  MR. BROADHURSTsaid there was one item of a very interesting nature in the Vote, and that was the alteration of Winchester House, to be adapted to the Intelligence Department of the Government. If the Government would increase that item to some extent, he was sure it would be readily passed. A larger devotion of Government resources to the Intelligence Department would have obviated many of the blunders committed by the Government during the last few years. He especially desired to request information in respect to the moiety of the further portion of the cost of site and erection of buildings for the King's Bench and Probate Registries of the High Court of Justice, of which the total estimate was £19,800. What part of that was the cost of the site, and what part was the cost of the building? There was another item, Patent Office extension, acquisition of site and erection of buildings £3,000. It would, he thought, much facilitate the passing of these Votes if more detailed
  160
  information regarding them was given. The amount given for the site and the amount to be expended on the building should be given separately, and he thought that the House of Commons was also entitled to know what class of building it was proposed to erect, what was the material to be used, and what provision had been made to see that the material agreed upon was really used by the contractor, and that the work was carried out in accordance with the specification. He asked for information on these points,
  MR. FLYNNsaid he was surprised at the innocence of the hon. Gentlemen, above the gangway, who, however, he was glad to see were waking up to a sense of their duty as the representatives of the taxpayers. The hon. Member for Poplar spoke of the absent-mindedness of the Government. Surely it was not a matter of surprise that the Government had only now awakened to the fact that there was a census every ten years. It was only yesterday that they discovered that the 1st of April this year fell on a Sunday. There was one very remarkable sum in the Vote, and that was in connection with the Wallace Exhibition. He believed that no one would grudge money for housing such a priceless collection of ancient and modern art, but surely the buildings ought to have been provided before the collection was arranged. The gallery was opened last May, and how it was that nearly twelve months afterwards there should be a Supplementary Estimate passed his comprehension altogether. He was delighted that hon. Gentlemen above the gangway were waking up to their duty. The Government had hoped to slip all these Estimates through without protest or examination, and would have succeeded were it not for the more or less accidental presence of a large number of Irish Members. There was also an item in the Vote of nearly £10,000 for the

  161
  London University. The Irish Members would certainly inquire as to how that money was to be spent. They could not get £1,000 for the Queen's College in Belfast or Cork, while £10,000 was to be given to the London University. He did not know what genius was responsible for the Imperial Institute, but everyone knew it was a dismal failure, and now, at very short notice, it was to be dedicated to the purposes of the London University. The Irish Members strongly objected to that, first of all on the general principle, and secondly because money was being spent with a lavish hand in this country, while £10 would not be given for obviously necessary purposes in Ireland. These Supplementary Estimates called for the strongest protests from hon. Members representing the taxpayers. They were now on the threshold of a new financial year, and these huge sums were asked for instead of the Estimates being submitted to the House in a businesslike manner.
  MR. LOUGHsaid there was one point about the Estimates which he thought was possibly a mistake, but which certainly deserved the attention of the right hon. Gentleman. Only one item—item A—was explained, and no explanation whatever regarding the others was given. Item B was for maintenance and repairs—£2,000. Maintenance and repairs of what? The object to which this sum was to be devoted should be stated. The Committee ought not to be called upon to pass Supplementary Estimates which could have been fairly included in the Estimates for the year. Surely the Government knew what their rent, tithe rent-charge, and insurance would be. There was another point on which he believed the Committee would desire an explanation. A sound canon which ought to be observed in connection with Supplementary Estimates was that nothing should be included in a Supple-
  162
  mentary Estimate which could stand over. He did not believe in such financial juggling. The new buildings mentioned in the Supplementary Estimates I could have remained over until they could be included in the finances of the; next year. Then there was a serious item with reference to the extension of the Royal Mint, which he understood had nothing to do with the new Sovereign. Why could that building not remain; over until next month? He asked the right hon. Gentleman to explain why none of the items except item A were I explained, and, secondly, why the proposed new buildings could not have stood over.
  MR. DILLONsaid that there was one item to which he desired to direct attention, and that was the sum of £2,950 for additional accommodation for the War I Office. It was only two years since they were called upon to vote a sum of two millions to erect a gorgeous new palace for the War Office. He himself and other hon. Members resisted that Vote for a considerable period on the ground that the country ought not to be called upon to spend an enormous sum of money for the erection of a new War Office until they had a Department fit to put into it. What had the War Office done during the last two years to entitle it to demand an additional sum of money? In his opinion, the performances of the War Office had been of such a character; that the Committee ought to be very slow to grant any money to it until it was reformed. When he voiced these sentiments he was not speaking the; opinion of the Irish and Radical Members, but the opinion of that large section of the public represented by the Daily Mail and The Times newspapers, who denounced the War Office as the source of all the misfortunes of this Country in the field. Why could not the War Office get along in the buildings that had been in existence for the last

  163
  twenty years? It was monstrous to I bring forward as an urgent matter suitable for a Supplementary Estimate expenditure on a temporary building for the War Office, when they were spending £2,000,000 in erecting a new palace in Whitehall for the accommodation of that incapable. Department. He accepted the evidence of The Times—which he read every morning with great interest—and had come to a conclusion, with The Times, that there never was a more incapable Department in any country than the War Office. Let the War Office conduct its ill-omened operations in the buildings in which it had worked for the last twenty years. He considered it a scandalous waste of public money to spend the sum mentioned in the Estimates for the temporary accommodation of these gentlemen. Every page of the Supplementary Estimates bore evidence of the fact that all the Departments had adopted the policy which was preached the other day by the First Lord of the Treasury—namely, that it was not the business of the House of Commons to examine Estimates at all, and that Departments requiring money could claim it without instructing the Member of the House who represented them as to how it was to be spent. In old days when a Minister had to introduce a Supplementary Estimate he did so with an apology, but no apology was made nowadays. The items under discussion should not have appeared in a Supplementary Estimate at all, because they were not urgent, and they could have been easily anticipated, or could have remained over until the 31st March. The Vote was an instance of the slipshod and reckless way in which the Estimates were prepared. He would move a reduction in the Vote, but did not wish to interfere with other lion. Members who might desire to adopt that course.
  MR. KEIR HAEDIE: said he would ask the First Commissioner of Works to explain certain of the items. He wished to know whether the Government had considered the advisability of doing its own insurance. Great municipalities were now insuring their own property, and were thereby saving in
  164
  some cases as much as 75 per cent, of what they had formerly paid to the insurances companies. The insurance charges of the Government must be very heavy, and ho trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would inform the Committee whether Government insurance was effected in private offices, or whether the Government had an Insurance Department of its own. Then with reference to the items for fuel and household articles, they were all aware of the tremendous increase in the cost of coal, and some of them were equally aware, that practically every penny of that increase found its way into the pockets of the employers. It would be interesting to know from the First Commissioner of Works how many contracts for fuel were placed with members of the House of Commons or with companies in which hon. Members were shareholders. It was of the utmost importance to know exactly how public funds were being spent. With reference to the item for the supply of water, he should like an explanation from the right hon. Gentleman as to the sum of £1,200 extra which was required. They were all aware that the London water companies had that day withdrawn a most absurd proposal with regard to making cisterns-compulsory in connection with the water supply of dwellings. It might he that the £1,200, or some part of it was required to enable the Government to comply with the demands of the water companies in regard to cisterns. If that were so, the money would not now be needed. The water cisterns which were to be made compulsory were specified in the proposal put forward by the companies, and part of the specification was that the drainage pipe should be placed a few inches from the bottom of the cistern, the reason given being that if the exhaust pipe were placed at the bottom of the cistern dead cats, etc., would find their way down the drain pipe, and the companies would have to bear the expense of cleaning out the cisterns. Therefore the pipes were to be so arranged that dead cats and so on might remain in the cisterns and improve the quality of the water. IL-entirely agreed with what had been said with reference to bringing forward in a Supplementary Estimate items

  165
  which ought to be included in the general Budget. It was a method of spending public money which should be censured in the strongest possible manner. He was a strong advocate of direct taxation, because if taxation had to be paid direct there would be economy, and fewer filibustering wars would be entered upon; but he was also in favour of direct account keeping. He hoped the right lion. Gentleman would give the information he asked for.
  MR. GODDARDsaid that it was rather surprising that no amount of criticism seemed to be able to draw any reply from the right lion. Gentle man in charge of the Vote. Surely the criticism which had been advanced was sufficiently serious to warrant some kind of reply, Attention had already been directed to Item C, for which £5,500 was asked. He thought it a very dangerous practice for Estimates of this kind to be passed without a proper explanation. The Committee had a perfect right to demand full details, and he would give an illustration to show the necessity of having them. Last year a question was raised by the Auditor General with reference to certain items in the furniture account. Among them was an item of £100 for the purchase and restoration of two portraits of King William IV. and Queen Adelaide for the Foreign Office, and the Auditor General reported that that item should not have appeared under the head of furniture, and should have obtained the special sanction of the Treasury. There was no information as to how the sum of £1,325 now asked for was to be expended, and it could not be known what the items were until the Estimates came before the Public Accounts Committee; but that was simply shutting the stable door after the steed had been stolen, as the expenditure could not then be prevented. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would no longer delay giving the information asked for with reference to the various items.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I was waiting to reply until hon. Members had
  166
  I finished. First of all, I may take the point raised with regard to the explanation which is given regarding Item A and not given regarding the other items. It has always been the practice to give items for new works I in detail, but not items for maintenance. Then with regard to the Census, Buildings, we have been told-that we ought to have foreseen the expenditure on regard to them, and that therefore there was no necessity to bring forward, as a Supplementary Estimate. I think a; sum of £4,000 was taken last year for the preparation of buildings for the purpose if collecting the census. Since then very considerable additions to the information to be collected have been asked for by hon. Members, with the result that an extra staff has to be provided. Therefore it can hardly be said that we could have foreseen what might have been required in the year to come. Then I was asked by the: hon. Member for Leicester a question with regard to the Vote for the King's Bench and Probate Registries Buildings in Manchester. He also asked me the separate cost of the site and buildings. The total estimated cost is £19,800, of which the site cost £11,100 and the buildings £8,700. As against that, the old buildings are being sold for some £4,500. He also asked me for particulars with regard to the material used in the buildings, and also as to proper supervision during their construction. The materials are properly selected and every care is taken by competent surveyors to see that the Government gets value for its money. The hon. Member for West Islington asked me a question with regard to the Patent Office Extension, and he said that at all events in this case we might have foreseen the extra expenditure. I think, however, that he will absolve us from any want of prevision when I tell him that our object is to hasten on the erection of this building in order that we may provide library accommodation for the Patent Office, and thereby set free a sum of £700 a year now paid for the use of a temporary

  167
  library. The lease for the temporary library terminates this year, and if we are unable, to give up the premises we may have to renew it. Then there was a question raised with regard to the Royal Mint. That item is required by a slight addition which is required by the Mint authorities. With regard to Hertford House, the supplementary sum is for extra furniture which is desired by the trustees and which was not contemplated when the original estimate was prepared. Having regard to the enormous value to this country of this collection, I hope the Committee will not grudge this money, especially when the great taste shown by the trustees in the preparation of the building is considered. Then I was asked about the War Office accommodation. The supplementary sum is explained by the necessity of acquiring a fresh office in consequence of the very large amount of work which has been thrown on the War Office during the past year. I should like to point out that this expenditure will tend towards the concentration of the clerks and the offices of the Department. I do not know whether it will surprise hon. Members when I tell them that only last year the War Office was working under no less than seventeen different roofs, some of them a mile apart.
  It being midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Resolutions to be reported to-morrow; Committee also report Progress: to sit again to-morrow.

  MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
  Clause 1.
  Committee report Progress: to sit again upon Wednesday, 12th June.

  PRESENCE OF THE SOVEREIGN IN PARLIAMENT.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it is expedient that a Select Committee be appointed to join with a Committee of the Lords to consider the accommodation available in the House of Lords when the Sovereign is personally present in Parliament, and the advisability of substituting Westminster Hall on such an occasion for the House of Lords:
  That a Message be sent to the Lords to acquaint them therewith."—(Sir William Walrond.)
  MR. FLAVIN: I object.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Sir William WALROND,)said ho hoped the hon. Member would not persist in his objection, as there was a general desire that the Committee should be appointed.
  MR. FLAVINsaid he understood, the Committee was being appointed in connection with the King's Coronation, and if the right hon. Gentleman would give him a guarantee that that portion of the King's Coronation Oath which was objectionable to Catholics would be removed he would consider the advisability of permitting the motion to pass.
  SIR WILLIAM WALRONDsaid the Committee would have nothing to do with the Coronation.
  MR. FLAVIN: I object.
  Motion deferred.
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve of the clock.