Commons Sitting of 15 July 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the clock.
UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  BARRY RAILWAY BILL [LORDS].
  [Not amended], considered; to be read the third time.
  NORTH AND SOUTH SHIELDS ELECTRIC RAILWAY BILL [LORDS].
  Consideration, as amended, postponed by the Chairman of Ways and Means under Order [1st May], till Tuesday next at the evening sitting.
  YSTRADFELLTE WATER BILL [LORDS].
  Read a second time, and committed.
  PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  As amended, considered; read the third time, and passed.

  STANDING ORDERS.
  Resolution reported from the Committee, "That, in the case of the Saddleworth and Springhead Tramways Bill [Lords], Petition for dispensing with Standing Order 129 in the case of the Petition of the 'Limehurst Rural District Council' against the Bill, the said Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with."
  Resolution agreed to.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—
  West Gloucestershire Water Bill, without Amendment; Midland Railway (Steam Vessels) Bill, Midland Railway Bill, Norwich Corporation (Electricity, etc.) Bill, Great Central and Midland Railways (South Yokshire Railways) Bill, with Amendments.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: From Ledbury; Aberamon; Manchester; and Salford; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration: From Adlingfleet; Bexley Heath; Boyton and Corton; Hope Mansel; Shermanbury; Leicester (fourteen); Blackley; Kingston-on-Thames: Launceston; Birkenshaw; Standish (five); Bryngwyn; Hodnet; Stepney; Brook; Lambeth; Birmingham; Newbury; Newton Heath; Limehouse;. Leesfield; Eglwys Cummin; and South Wigston; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Bembridge, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  VACCINATION BILL.
  Petition from Catford, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  GAS COMPANIES (METROPOLIS).
  Copy presented, of Accounts of the Metropolitan Gas Companies for the year 1901 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 271.]
  EAST INDIA (NORTH WEST FRONTIER).
  Copy presented, of Papers relating to the Mahsud-Waziri Operations on the North-West Frontier of India [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  EAST INDIA (FAMINE).
  Copy presented, of Papers regarding the Famine and the Relief Operations in India during 1900–1902. Vol. I. British Districts [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  EAST INDIA (FAMINE).
  Copy presented, of Papers regarding the Famine and the Relief Operations in India during 1900–1902. Vol. II. Native States [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  QUEEN'S COLLEGE (GALWAY).
  Copy presented, of Report of the President for the session 1901–2 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS ACT, 1901.
  Copy presented, of Summary Jurisdiction Rules made by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland under the Youthful Offenders Act, 1901 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (MISCELLANEOUS SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Miscellaneous Series, No. 578 [by Command]; to lie upon the-Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 1285 to 2853 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  INCOME TAX ASSESSMENTS.
  Return ordered, "of the number of Assessments to the Income Tax for the year ending the 5th day of April, 1901, (in the same classes and in the same amounts as stated in, and in continuation of, Parliamentary Paper, No. 317, of session 1901)."—(Mr. Bartley.)
  PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
  Copy ordered, "of Statement of Particulars of Loans of which the balances outstanding are proposed to be remitted or written off (in whole or in part) from the assets of the Local Loans Fund."— (Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
  MEXBOROUGH AND SWINTON TRAMWAYS BILL [LORDS].
  Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  RAILWAYS (STOCK, ETC.).
  Return ordered, "showing the holding of Debenture, Preference, and Ordinary Stock of Railways of the United Kingdom, and Shareholders, in the following form:—

  1.

  2.

  3.

  4.

  Name of the Company.

  Total number of holders.

  Number of Debenture holders

  Number of Preference and Guaranteed holders.

  Number of Ordinary Stock holders.

  Average holding of—

  Capital.

  1.

  2.

  3.

  4.

  (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 219, of session 1886)."—(Mr. Claude Hay.)

  MUSICAL COPYRIGHT BILL [LORDS].
  Lords consequential Amendment to the Bill to be considered forthwith; considered, and agreed to.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Cromarty Firth—Fortification of the Sutors.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, in view of the fact that several vessels of His Majesty's fleet visited Cromarty Firth last summer, will he consider the expediency of calling on the Admiral in command for a Report as to the desirability of fortifying the two headlands known as the Sutors at the entrance to the Firth.
  (Answer.) It is not considered necessary for steps to be taken by the Admiralty to obtain a special Report as regards the desirability of fortifying the two headlands referred to by the hon. Member.—(Admiralty.)

  Deer Forest Return, 1899.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that the deer forest of Amat, Ross-shire, which is stated in the amended Deer Forest Return, 1899, to contain 950 acres, contains 3,500 acres, will he have some inquiry made on the subject.
  (Answer.) I have nothing to add to the answer given to the hon. Member on Thursday last.†—(Scottish Office.)

  Ordnance Survey—Coast Erosion in Yorkshire—Humber Navigation.
  SIR. JOHN LENG: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Ordnance Survey Department is in possession of maps showing the extent of the coast
  † See preceding volume, p. 1376.

  239
  of the East Riding of Yorkshire in or prior to the reign of Henry VIII.; whether there is any record of the acreage of land and the number of townships which during the last century have fallen into the sea; whether, seeing that the erosion of the coast near Spurn Head has compelled the removal of the Spurn Lighthouse, the Humber Conservancy has taken or proposes to take any measures for arresting the changes affecting the navigation of the mouth of the Humber.
  (Answer.) I am informed by the Ordnance Survey Department that the answers to the first and second paragraphs of the hon. Member's Question are in the negative. I am also informed that the Spurn Lighthouse was removed in consequence of defects in the old structure and not in consequence of the erosion of the coast. The Board of Trade, with the assistance of their technical advisers, carefully watch the position of matters at Spurn Point in order that any possible steps may be taken to guard against the inroads of the sea. I may mention that one of the professional officers of the Department had already arranged to visit Kilnsea, at the upper end of Spurn Point, during the coming week.— (Board of Trade.)

  Preservatives Committee's Report— Action of Eastbourne Sanitary Authority.
  MR. LAMBERT: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a circular, dated 10th June, which has been issued by the Sanitary Authority of the Borough of Eastbourne, setting forth; the recommendations of the Preservatives Committee, and expressing the intention of that authority to act upon them; whether, seeing the division of opinion that exists as to the practicability of the adoption of those recommendations, he can issue a circular to public authorities recommending them to await the decision of the Government before adopting them as a basis of procedure; whether he can inform the House when he proposes to deal with the subject.
  240
  (Answer.) I have seen a copy of the circular referred to in the Question. I am not at present in a position to make any statement as regards legislation on the subject of the Report of the Preservatives' Committee. I have no power to require the adoption of any particular course by local authorities with respect to the enforcement of the law as to food adulteration, and it does not appear that there would be any advantage in my issuing a circular as suggested.—(Local Government Board.)

  Indian Railways Inquiry.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state by whom the inquiry, which was instituted some time back into the working of the railway systems in India and the overcrowding of Native passengers in third-class carriages, was made; and whether the Report will be laid upon the Table of the House.
  (Answer.) The inquiry recently instituted into the working of railway systems in India is not yet complete. It is being conducted by Mr. Thomas Robertson, late General Manager of the Great Northern Railway of Ireland, and Chairman of the Irish Board of Works, who went out to India as a special commissioner in the autumn of 1901. I cannot say when his report will be received, nor can I give any undertaking at present with regard to its publication.—(India Office).

  Indian Railways—Locomotive Tenders.
  SIR JOSEPH LAWRENCE: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether contracts have recently been let for the supply of locomotives and carriages required by the Bombay and Baroda and East India Railway Companies to a firm or firms in Hungary; and, if so, will he state the differences in the amounts of the tenders of the different firms, English and Foreign: and whether the terms and conditions in the specifications were uniform in all particulars.
  (Answer). The hon. Member is no doubt aware that the Indian Railway Boards in matters of this kind act as they think best for the interests of their

  241
  undertaking, without direct reference to the Secretary of State. I expect to receive information on the subject of these contracts before long, but at present I am unable to give the facts for which the hon. Member asks.— (India Office.)

  Aden Defence Works—Charge on Indian Revenues.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state why the revenue of India has been charged with the whole cost of the barracks at Aden as well as the cost of the stores and ammunition, seeing that when the fortifications were initiated in 1882 it was decided that the expense should be divided equally between Great Britain and India, apart from which the Royal Commission on the Administration of the Expenditure of India recommended in their Report, dated 6th April, 1900, that the United Kingdom should bear one-half of the annual cost of the Aden garrison.
  (Answer.) In consequence of alterations in the scheme for special defence works and armaments at Aden, a new arrangement for the division of the charges was made with the Imperial Government in 1889, under which a maximum was fixed for the liability of the Imperial Government, in respect of special defence works and for the liability of India in respect of armaments. The exemption of the Imperial Government from liability for the cost of barracks and stores was a part of this agreement. The recommendation of the Royal Commission refers, as the hon. Member correctly states, to the annual cost of the Aden garrison, not to the charges for special defence works.—(India Office.)

  Shanghai — International Settlement Mixed Court — Action of French Representative.
  MR. YERBURGH: To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the representative of the French Government at Shanghai, in his capacity of member of the Consular Body of the International Settlement has refused to send his assessor to the Mixed Court of that Settlement, although this procedure is
  242
  adopted by all his colleagues; whether, also, the French Government maintains that in the Mixed Court of the French Settlement, assessors of nationality other than French are not entitled to sit in cases against Chinese subjects resident in that Settlement in which their nation's interests are involved; and, if so, whether His Majesty's Government will take-immediate steps to preserve our Treaty rights in China, and the interests of British and Chinese subjects at Shanghai.
  (Answer) It is the case that the-French Consul General at Shanghai has expressed himself unable to send an assessor to the Mixed Court of the International Settlement, the French Government not having concurred in the Rules of the Mixed Court of the International Settlement. A Report is expected shortly from His Majesty's Minister at Peking on the whole question. Pending its receipt, I am unable to make a full statement. His Majesty's Government are fully alive to the importance of the question. —(Foreign Office.)

  Constitution Hill—Scavenging.
  SIR HENRY FOWLER: To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the scavenging of Constitution Hill and to the condition of the road; and whether he will consider the desirability of the Office of Works contracting with the City of Westminster for the scavenging and repair of the roads in the parks which are within the boundaries of Westminster.
  (Answer.) My attention has not been called specially to the scavenging of Constitution Hill, although the general condition of the road was mentioned to me a short time ago. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that the subject of the road is by no means lost sight of by me. The scavenging is carefully attended to. Having regard to all the circumstances of the parks, I do not see my way to adopt the suggestion in the last part of the Question.—(Office of Works.)

  Local Taxation (Ireland) Account— Appropriation of Unexpended Balance.
  MR. JOHN CAMPBELL: 'To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to a resolution of the Armagh County Council, endorsing the action of the Kerry County Council, and urging that £50,000 of the unapportioned balance of £77,000 in the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account be distributed among the County Councils in Ireland; and whether he proposes to give effect to this resolution.
  (Answer.) I have not seen the resolution. But on the general question of the disposal of the unexpended balance of moneys lying to the credit of the Local Taxation Account under Section 58 of the Local Government Act, 1898, I would direct attention to the provisions of Sub-section (5) of that section—(Irish Office.)

  New Kilmainham Urban Council Audit.
  MR. DELANY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the final audit of the accounts of the late Urban Council of New Kilmainham was made on the 13th February, 1901, when the solicitor to the Council was represented by counsel; that his bills there presented for opposing the Dublin Boundaries Bill amounted to £2,292; and that the Bills contained disbursements which had not been certified for by the taxing officer; will he say whether any certificates were produced to the auditor; and, if so, for what amount; and, seeing that the solicitor in his bills admitted receiving £1,560 from the Urban Council, and produced a judgment of the High Court for £1,689, with £8 10s. costs obtained before the Council saw the writ or bills of costs, though his taxed costs only amounted to £1,711 10s. 8d., and that the amount claimed by the solicitor was allowed by the auditor, amounting to £4,982, of which £1,560 was discharged by Kilmainham, leaving a liability of £3,432 to be discharged by the Corporation of Dublin, can he say whether this liability, or any portion thereof, has been discharged by the Corporation, and whether he proposes to take action in the matter.
  244
  (Answer) The solicitor to the Council attended the audit, but the auditor cannot say if counsel was also there to represent him. Two bills of costs, amounting respectively to £1,737 15s. 6d. and £1,501 11s. 11d., were submitted to the auditor, and the total amount of each of these bills was certified by the taxing master of the House of Commons. The solicitor received two payments of £900 and £550 on account; and a judgment of the High Court for the balance, viz., £1,689 7s. 5d. with £8 9s. 10d. costs was produced at the audit. It appears on the face of this judgment that the Council was served with the writ of summons, and that notice of the issuing of the said writ was published in the Dublin Gazette and in the local press. The taxed costs of the solicitor amounted to £3,239 7s. 5d., asset out above, of which £1,550 was discharged by the Urban District Council leaving a liability of £1,689 7s. 5d., which has since been discharged by the Corporation of Dublin. It does not appear that any action is called for on my part in the matter.—(Irish Office.)

  Sandhurst College—Incendiary Fires and Disturbances—Indiscriminate Punishment of Cadets.
  MR. H. C. RICHARDS: To ask the Secretary of State for War if the inquiry into the matters arising out of the fires at Sandhurst can be held by some tribunal unconnected with the military authorities and not under the control or nomination of the Commander-in-Chief; if the twenty-nine youths will be allowed at such inquiry legal assistance at the expense of the War Office or of their own; and, if he will reinstate or transfer to some other position in the Army the three non-commissioned officers who have been removed from their positions by the action of the Commander-in-Chief.
  (Answer.) I am not prepared to take the discipline of the Army or the educational establishments out of the hands of the Commander-in-Chief, in whom His Majesty's Government have entire confidence. My hon. friend will find the answer to his last two Questions in replies already given.—(War Office.)

  Ceylon—Opium Shop Licences.
  SIR JOSEPH PEASE: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the increased number of opium shops licensed by the Ceylon Government (69 in 1901 against 63 in 1896), and to the greatly increased importation of opium into Ceylon (23,754 lbs. in 1900 against 14,976 lbs. in 1896); and whether he will suggest to the Government of Ceylon the desirability of diminishing the facilities for the spread of the opium habit amongt the Sinhalese.
  (Answer.) I have consulted the Governor, who is now in this country, on the subject of the hon. Member's Question. Sir West Ridgeway informs me that his attention is contantly being given to the question of the consumption of opium in Ceylon, but that, taking into consideration the growth of population, he is inclined to think that the increase in consumption has not been material. The matter will be carefully watched.— (Colonial Office.)

  (2.15.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    South African War—Government Communications with Mr. Kruger.
    MR. MARKHAM: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, during the war in South Africa, the Prime Minister received any cables from Mr. Kruger which have not yet been laid upon the Table of the House.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): The answer to this question is in the negative.
    MR. MARKHAM: Does that answer refer to the late as well as the present Prime Minister?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Certainly.

    Siege of Ladysmith—Sir George White's Despatches.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the statement laid by Sir George White before the War Office, detailing the history of the siege of Ladysmith and his observations thereon, will now be
    246
    published; and on what public ground, having regard to the fact that peace has been concluded, has the publication of this document been suppressed.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,): Sir George White's despatches on the siege of Ladysmith were presented to Parliament last year.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: But I want another Paper, the one he laid before the War Office with full details and comments.
    MR. BRODRICK: I do not know of any such Paper.

    Sir George White and Sir Redvers Buller.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what action, if any, has been taken by the War Office with reference to a statement made by Sir George White, shortly after the termination of the siege of Ladysmith, and permitted by the military press censor to be telegraphed to this country, that efforts had been made by the War Office to supersede him, and that these efforts were prevented by the action of Sir Redvers Buller.
    MR. BRODRICK: I know nothing of such a statement, and no action has been or will be taken.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the statement was made by Sir George White to the hon. Member for Oldham?
    *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

    "Military Notes on the Dutch Republics in South Africa."
    MR. BRYNMOR JONES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a book or document headed "Military Notes on the Dutch Republics in South Africa," compiled in Section B, Intelligence Division, War Office, Revised June 1899, was found on the person of a British officer at Dundee after the engagement at or near that town; and, seeing that extracts from that book or document have been published in a history on the recent war in South Africa, whether he will lay a copy of the whole book or document upon the Table of the House.
    MR. BRODRICK: The hon. Member is evidently unaware that copies of this work were placed in the library of the House on the 12th December, 1900.

    Sandhurst College—Incendiary Fires and Disturbances—Indiscriminate Punishment of Cadets.
    MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will lay upon the Table the Report of Sir Robert Grant upon the conduct of certain gentlemen cadets of the Royal Military College at the Camberley Fair.
    MR. BRODRICK: No, Sir. I am not prepared to lay on the Table Papers connected with this subject while the conduct of these cadets is under the investigation of the Commander-in-Chief.
    LORD HUGH CECIL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the nature of the inquiry the Commander-in-Chief intends to make into the case of the cadets rusticated from the Royal Military College; and whether the Commander-in-Chief will associate with himself in that inquiry the Judge Advocate General.
    MAJOR RASCH: Before this Question is answered, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether these general and corporate punishments are not uncommon in the Army, and whether there is any other practical way of dealing with such offences?
    MR. BRODRICK: My hon. and gallant friend. I am sure, reflects the general feeling that the Commander-in-Chief would not have resorted to this form of punishment unless he thought it absolutely necessary. The inquiry will be conducted personally by the Commander-in-Chief, and it is not proposed to associate the Judge Advocate General with him.
    LORD HUGH CECIL: Is it contemplated to accept the assurance of any cadet on his honour that he is innocent, supposing there is no evidence against him?
    MR. BRODRICK: I am afraid I must inform my noble friend that it is impossible for the Commander-in-Chief,
    248
    who is charged with the discipline of the Army, to conduct an investigation and give a decision if I am beforehand to announce the regulations that will guide him.
    MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us exactly what is going to be done?
    *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That is going beyond the Question on the Paper.
    MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of Gentleman-cadet Corporal J. S. Oldham, who was rusticated from the Royal Military College on 3rd July; whether he is aware that this cadet was absent on sick leave in London on 11th June, when the disorder at Camberley Fair took place; and, in view of the character borne by this cadet, will he say what evidence there is to connect him with the outbreak of fire on 25th June.
    MR. BRODRICK: This cadet was absent on the 11th June on sick leave. He was, however, present in "C" Company passage about the time the fire in No. 100 room took place, and he was, therefore, rusticated with the-twenty-eight others. The Commander-in-Chief will consider his case with the others.
    MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: Did the right hon. Gentleman not say that this cadet was implicated in the previous disorder?
    MR. BRODRICK: No, Sir, I did not. I said there were a large number of cadets who were implicated in this disorder, but I did not say that all the twenty-nine were implicated.
    MR. GALLOWAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can say what will be the expense of holding a special examination in London at the end of this month for the twenty-nine cadets who have been rusticated from Sandhurst; whether the expenses of the cadets in travelling to and from London for that

    249
    purpose will be defrayed by the State; whether notice has yet been conveyed to the parents that their sons should hold themselves in readiness to be examined.
    MR. BRODRICK: The expense of the examination will fall on Army Votes. The reply to the other two Questions is in the affirmative.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, at the investigation promised by the Commander-in-Chief in regard to the fire at Sandhurst, each of the twenty-nine cadets rusticated will appear separately before the Court, or whether all will be allowed to be present during the investigation; whether any cadet who pledges his honour that he was not in the passages leading into the room where the fire took place during the three-quarters of an hour before it was discovered, or that he does not know who was the author of the fire, will be relieved of his rustication; whether the three servants in the quarters of "C" Company on 25th June will be examined, and evidence taken as to the possibility of any person having been in the quarters of "C" Company during the three-quarters of an hour previous to the fire, and having left the building before the fire was discovered; whether the senior cadets wore invited to investigate the origin of the fire of 25th June and of previous fires at Sandhurst; and, if not, whether they will be invited to make such investigation, and be granted facilities for doing so.
    MR. BRODRICK: The Commander-in-Chief has undertaken to go personally into the case of these cadets. It is not proposed to hold a further inquiry by a Board. I cannot make a further statement on the matter till the Commander-in-Chief has made his investigations.
    LORD HUGH CECIL: When will the Commander-in-Chief make an investigation?
    MR. BRODRICK: He is carrying on the investigation, I think, today, and possibly on the following days.
    LORD HUGH CECIL: And when may we expect to know the result?
    MR. BRODRICK: I am not in a position to say, but the result will be communicated to the House.

    Volunteer Provisional Camps.
    MR. LLOYD MORGAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will state what arrangements, if any, have been made for the dates and places of provisional camps for Infantry Volunteers who have not and will not be able to attend their own camps this year; and whether due notice has been or will be promulgated as to the arrangements for such provisional camps.
    MR. BRODRICK: As these provisional camps are intended for Volunteers who are unable to attend their own camps, it is evident that the arrangements would only be made late in the season. These arrangements rest with the general officers commanding districts.

    Crown Foreshore near Cork Harbour.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the extent of the Crown foreshore adjoining Cork Harbour which in November, 1899, was let to the War Department at a rental of 2s. 6d. per annum; and, seeing that the Commissioners of Woods and Forests state, at page 74 of their report dated 28th June, 1901, that no rent was paid, as in June, 1900, the War Department purchased the foreshore, will he state the amount of the purchase money.
    MR. BRODRICK: The extent of foreshore amounts to sixteen perches, and the purchase money to £3.

    Army Recruiting.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that the recruiting Returns for the quarters ending 31st March and 30th June show smaller numbers than those of previous years especially with respect to the Infantry of the Line and the Militia, although the additional inducements have been recently offered to recruits; and whether he will say what steps, if any, he proposes to take to deal with this difficulty.
    MR. BRODRICK: No, Sir. Omitting 1900, which was quite an exceptional year, the Returns show an improvement on previous years as regards the Infantry of the Line; and as regards the militia an increase over the figures for 1900 as well. But I must warn the hon. Member against comparing the figures of recruiting after the close of the war with the number raised during moments of great popular enthusiasm.

    Glasgow Electric Tram Fatalities.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the number of fatal accidents which have occurred on the Glasgow Corporation electric tramway system since the installation of electric traction on the 1st May, 1901; and what lifeguards and brakes are provided by the corporation under Articles 1 and 6, of sub section A, of the Glasgow Corporation Tramways Act, 1899.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): I am informed by the General Manager of the Glasgow Corporation Tramways that, since 1st May, 1901, twenty-two accidents attended with fatal results have occurred on these lines. It is stated that the great majority of the cars are fitted with a lifeguard of an approved type, consisting of a feeler and a dropping scoop. Other guards in use are (1) a wire guard, (2) a V-shaped double share, and (3) an angled single share. Two brakes are in use on every car, viz., a mechanical brake and an electric brake, the latter operating by short-circuiting the motors.
    MR. WEIR: Are these brakes in accordance with the Glasgow Corporation Tramways Act?
    MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I have no reason to suppose that they are not.

    Electricity in Mines.
    MR. MARKHAM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether His Majesty's Government have arrived at any decision with reference to the employment of electricity in mines and the means of avoiding the recent loss of life and injury resulting therefrom.
    *MR. RITCHIE: I have decided to appoint a Departmental Committee to inquire into the subject; and the Committee is now in process of formation.

    Queen's Cottage Grounds, Kew Gardens.
    MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the public now have access to the Queen's cottage grounds in Kew Gardens; whether the gates have been unlocked; and whether the grounds have been thrown open again to the public, in accordance with the permission given by Her late Majesty.
    THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,): Yes, Sir. The answer is in the affirmative.

    Extradition with the United States— Irish Crime.
    MR. LEAMY: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland if, under the provisions of the Extradition Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland and the United States, a person charged with cattle houghing, arson and perjury in Ireland, who has found refuge in the United States, can be brought to Ireland for trial there.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): Yes, sir. The Extradition Treaty between this country and the United States applies to some of these crimes.
    MR. LEAMY: Is it the intention of the Irish Government to apply for the extradition of Sheridan?
    MR. ATKINSON: I must have notice of the Question.
    *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member must put that Question down.

    Land Purchase in Ireland—Payment of Instalments.
    SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if, with a view to the convenience of tenant purchasers in Ireland, the Land Commission will notify to them that, when

    253
    distant from branches of the Bank of Ireland, their purchase instalments may be paid into any other bank for transmission to the Bank of Ireland.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The local branches of all Irish banks, as well as of the Bank of Ireland, accept lodgment of the purchase instalments, and an intimation to this effect is set out on the face of the Receivable Orders, which are filled up by the tenant purchasers.

    Technical Education in Ireland—The Equivalent Grant.
    SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state what steps the Government propose to take in the matter of the equivalent grant for technical instruction in Ireland, and when the arrears due to Ireland in relation to that grant will be paid.
    MR. WYNDHAM: This matter is still engaging the consideration of Government. There are no arrears due to Ireland.
    SIR THOMAS ESMONDEwas understood to ask if the result of the investigation would be communicated to the Irish Government before the end of the session.
    MR. WYNDHAM: It does not depend on myself. It rests primarily with the Treasury, with whom I am in communication. I will communicate the result as soon as it is arrived at.
    MR. JOHN REDMOND: May we hope for an announcement before the end of the session?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I hope so, but I cannot promise.

    Ancient Laws of Ireland.
    MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can give the names of the different libraries on the Continent to which reference is made in the recently issued Report of the Commissioners for the Publication of the Ancient Laws and Institutes of Ireland, as containing important Irish MSS.
    MR. WYNDHAM: A communication on this subject has been addressed to the hon. Secretary of the Commissioners. When I hear from him, I will write to the hon. Member.

    Lord De Freyne.
    MR. LEAMY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any communication has passed between him and Lord de Freyne, or between the Congested Districts Board and Lord de Freyne, with the view of ascertaining if Lord de Freyne is willing to sell his estate to the tenants, or to the Congested Districts Board.
    MR. WYNDHAM: No, Sir.
    MR. LEAMY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Lord de Freyne has publicly stated his willingness to sell, if the Government think it is in the public interest he should do so?
    MR. WYNDHAM: Not that I am aware of. I saw some reference to it in a local paper, but I have no knowledge of it.
    MR. JOHN REDMOND: The right hon. Gentleman, I presume, is not interested in the matter.
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL: May I—
    *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The Question on the Paper has been fully answered.

    Ex-Sergeant Sheridan.
    MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the names of the police constables connected with Sergeant Sheridan who received an indemnity at the secret investigation which preceded Sheridan's dismissal; how many of those constables are still in the force; and whether those who have retired received a pension or gratuity; and, if so, what amount.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The Question contains a serious misrepresentation of the order of events. The investigation did

    255
    not precede Sheridan's discharge. He was discharged on February 9th, and the investigation, beginning in May, was continued in June and July. The names asked for are Sergeant Keegan, Constables Anderson and Reid. One (Anderson) remained on at the Depôt. The others (Keegan and Reid) accepted the alternative of resigning. They received no pensions, but were assisted to make a fresh start in life by a compassionate grant of £200 and £50 respectively.

    Wexford Saw Mills Fatality.
    MR. TENNANT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fatal accident at Messrs. R. & R. Allen's Steam Saw Mills, Wexford, by which a boy named John Cullen was killed, and to the fact that the occupier, Mr. Moody, was prosecuted by Mr. Bellhouse, His Majesty's inspector of factories, for failure to fence part of the machinery; and, seeing that the Bench dismissed the summons, will he say whether he has received any official report showing the reason for the dismissal of this case; and will he state whether he proposes to take any action in this case.
    *MR. RITCHIE: I have received a report on this case, and find that the Bench refused to say more as to the grounds on which they dismissed the case than that their decision was based on a point of fact and not on a point of law. It would appear from this that they consider that such protection of the machinery as the evidence showed that there was constituted a sufficient fencing. In these circumstances no appeal lies, and there is no action which I can take on the case; but I may say that the inspector reports further that the fencing has, since the accident, been carried out in a proper manner.

    MR. KNOX MACINTYRE—PERSONAL EXPLANATION AND APOLOGY.
    MR. JOHN REDMOND: I wish, with the permission of the House, to make a brief personal explanation. The other day† I asked the Chief Secretary
    † See preceding volume, p. 696.
    256
    for Ireland a Question with reference to the employment, as an expert witness in handwriting in a criminal case, of an official assignee of the Court of Bankruptcy in Ireland named Mr. Macintyre; and in a supplementary Question I inquired whether the Solicitor General for Ireland had not described Mr. Macintyre as an I impostor. Since then my attention has been called to the letter in the newspapers from the Solicitor General for Ireland, in which he says—"I deem it but just to Mr. Macintyre to state that neither upon that nor on any other occasion did I refer to him as an impostor as suggested by Mr. Redmond. It is quite true that in the defence of my client I endeavoured, by very severe criticism, to discount his evidence as an expert in handwriting, but I did not use that expression." Although I hold the strongest possible views with regard to the employment of an official of the Bankruptcy Court as an expert in handwriting in criminal prosecutions in Ireland, I desire to express my regret for having unwittingly been the means of circulating a statement which was unfounded in reference to this Gentleman. The Solicitor General did riot use the word impostor, and I am sorry I suggested it.

    MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
    That they have agreed to, Labour Bureaux (London) Bill; University of Wales (Graduates) Bill.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
MR. HALSKY reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had added to the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures, the following Fifteen Members in respect of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Bill:—Sir William Arrol, Mr. Craig, Mr. Cripps, Colonel Denny, Sir William Dunn, Mr. John Edward Gordon, Mr. Bonar Law, Sir John Leng, Mr. M'Crae, Mr. Nicol, Mr. Thomas Shaw, Mr. Soames, Sir Walter Thorburn, Mr. Ure, and Mr. Wylie.
Report to lie upon the Table.

IMPRISONMENT OF A MEMBER.
Ordered, That Sir Herbert Maxwell be discharged, and that Mr. Cochrane be added to the Committee.—(Sir William Walrond.)
NEW BILLS.
  PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
  "To grant money for the purpose of certain Local Loans out of Local Loans Funds; and for ether purposes relating to Local Loans," presented by Mr. Austen Chamberlain, under Standing Order 31 to be read a second time upon Friday, and to be printed. [Bill 275.]
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACT, (1901) AMENDMENT BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to the provisions for escape from fire in Factories and Workshops." presented by Mr. Tennant, under Standing Order 31; supported by Captain Norton and Mr. Hugh Law; to be read a second time upon Friday, and to be printed. [Bill 276.]

  SUPPLY.
  [SEVENTEENTH ALLOTTED DAY.]
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. JAMES W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1902–3.

    CLASS IV.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £5,421,862 be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1903, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Education, and of the various Establishments connected therewith, including sundry Grants in Aid."
    DR. MACNAMARAsaid he wished to ask the Vice-President a question with regard to an acute difficulty that had arisen as to the temporary Act, passed last year, known as the Cockerton Judgment Act. That
    258
    Act provided that the municipalities should give their sanction to the evening continuation school work of the School Boards, which had been declared illegal by the Cockerton judgment, down to 31st July of this year only; and, as the Education Bill would not be passed until the autumn session, the evening continuation schools would have to come to an end on that day unless some way out of the difficulty was found. The situation was a very critical one, and he wanted to know if it was not possible for the right hon. Gentleman to find some way out of the difficulty. The Vice-President stated, in reply to a question by the hon. Member for North West Ham on the subject, that the municipalities might rely upon the assurance of the Government that they would not be surcharged if they carried on the evening continuation schools after 31st July. That was a somewhat clumsy, and certainly not a legal, way of dealing with the difficulty, and, notwithstanding the assurance thus given, it was quite possible that many municipalities would be chary to undertake this expenditure of money without legal sanction. He suggested, as a way out of the difficulty, the extension of the operation of the Cockerton Act for another year. It would surely be quite possible, with the consent of hon. Members on both sides, to allow such a Bill to go through without discussion, and he was sure hon. Members were equally, with himself, anxious that the excellent educational work now being done should not be brought to a standstill.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLIThoped the Vice-President of the Council would be able to give a favourable and explicit reply to the question of the hon. Member for North Camberwell. The municipalities wished to carry on the evening continuation schools, as the work seemed to them to be of great advantage. It was clear that the Education Bill debates would not be finished in time to enable this point to be dealt with in the measure, and if all parties, recognising the value of the work, would agree to the maintenance of the status quo there ought to be no difficulty in making the suggested

    259
    arrangement. Could the Bill not be included in the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill? He was confident it was the general wish of the municipalities that they should be authorised to continue the work, the value of which was greatly appreciated.
    MR. ALFRED HUTTON, whose voice was almost inaudible in the gallery, was understood to urge the necessity of preventing the work of the evening continuation schools being brought to a standstill. He thought that if an agreement could be come to it might also be possible in the same Bill to clear up some doubts which had arisen as to the transference of schools.
    MAJOR RASCHcalled attention to the grievance of teachers with reference to the insecurity of their tenure. Teachers were liable to be dismissed without any cause whatever. They were subject to the caprice of managers. They were a very hard-working body of men, and they felt this grievance most acutely. No class of civil servants in the country were so badly treated or had so insecure a footing. Even Members of Parliament knew two years beforehand what their fate was likely to be. Seeing that the House was going to sit till Christmas over the Education Bill, he suggested to the Vice-President that he should formulate a Clause dealing with the matter to be brought before the House on the Education Bill.
    *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member is not entitled to discuss in Committee of Supply a matter which he admits requires legislation.
    MAJOR RASCH: Then I hope the right hon. Gentleman will bring in a Bill.
    *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member has only made his position worse.
    MAJOR RASCH: Then may I say that I hope the right hon. Gentleman will give a categorical answer on this Question?
    SIR JOSEPH LEESEsaid he wished to associate himself with the appeal of the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite. He had several times asked questions of the right hon. Gentleman on the subject, and received very favourable answers. It was clear they had his sympathy with their efforts to find for the teachers who were wrongfully dismissed some means of redress, but they had been told also by the right hon. Gentleman that the remedy was in their own hands. If that were so, could he not find a place for a Clause dealing with it in the Education Bill? Let him give his sympathy a practical turn and help them in carrying such a Clause.
    MR. WHITLEYconfessed that he could see no solution of the Cockerton difficulty except the introduction of a short Bill by the Government to continue the Act passed last year. There might be a Bill merely extending the period of the Act, or a Bill going a little further and giving power to authorities to sanction the extension of the work. He thought the latter would be the easier one to get through the House. He feared that if a mere Continuation Bill were introduced some Members would feel it their duty to enter a protest.
    *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member is entirely spoiling his case by discussing legislation.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid this was a question closely connected with the administration of the Board of Education and surely they were entitled to discuss it on the Vote for the right hon Gentleman's salary. A serious state of things was likely to arise in the country and he was pointing out to the right hon. Gentleman that hon. Members on his side would be far more ready to let a proposal go through without opposition if it included powers—
    *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is again discussing legislation, and that is not in order in Committee of Supply. We can only discuss matters of administration.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid that under the circumstances he would merely press on the right hon. Gentleman the fact that there was danger of this evening school work being brought to a complete standstill for a second year. He was sure the House would gladly help the right hon. Gentleman in any efforts to remove the difficulty.
    MR. LLOYD - GEORGEasked when the proposals of the Prime Minister with regard to day training colleges would be put into operation. He did not suppose that in the first year a sum of more than £7,000 would be required, and the sooner they got the proposals into operation the better, because the university colleges might be making arrangements for the reception of students.
    MR. CHANNINGasked the Vice President whether he could not see his way to meet the Cockerton difficulty administratively. He suggested that the Local Government Board might issue a circular to School Boards, undertaking not to surcharge them for a specified period with the cost of carrying on evening classes and other work now declared to be illegal.
    THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON EDUCATION (Sir JOHN GORST,)said that after the ruling of the Chairman as to the, discussion of legislative proposals he was in some difficulty with a reply to the hon. Member for North Camberwell, but, perhaps he might be allowed to say that the difficulty in connection with the Cockerton Act had been present to the Board of Education for many months past, and they were quite alive to it. It was quite evident that the matter could not be put right administratively, as the Board had no power to enable people to spend money which they could not spend legally; and with regard to the suggestion that his right hon. friend the President of the Local Government Board should issue a circular inviting the School Boards to break the law, and assuring them that they would not be surcharged, he should think it was highly improbable
    262
    that it would be carried out. He was afraid that this was a matter which could only be cured by legislation; and he would merely say that the suggestion of the hon. Member for Camberwell seemed to him an eminently practical one, and if it could be carried out it would be effective for the purpose. But it was evident that some hon. Members were extremely anxious to introduce Amendments into the law, and if fresh Amendments were to be introduced, it was quite impossible to pass a Bill at this period of the Session. All that the Government could do had been done. A question was put to him by his hon. friend the Member for North-West Ham, and he not only answered the question, but, on behalf of the Government— they were not his own words, but words the Government desired him to use—he gave the assurance to the School Boards which the hon. Member for North Camberwell had read. Further than that he did not see how the Government could possibly go. He was certainly not authorised to say anything more. That was all the Government could do without legislation. They could only give that assurance. Not only was that assurance given by him to the House, but a circular was addressed to every School Board carrying on evening schools directing their attention to it. He could only say that the Government were quite alive to the difficulty, and they recognised the suggestion of the hon. Member for North Camberwell as an eminently practical one which they would be glad to carry out. Everything that could be done by the Government should be done. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs as to the Prime Minister's proposals with reference to day training colleges, they would be placed in the form of a minute before the House of Commons as soon as the Education Bill was disposed of by the House. As to the other point that had been raised, be could only repeat that the subject of teachers' tenure was germane to the Bill before the House, and would evidently be raised in the course of the debates on that Bill. He quite admitted that it was desirable that some measure should be resorted to by Parliament to prevent teachers being dismissed, without cause, in a summary manner.
    MR. BRIGGsaid he thought they were in a great difficulty at the present time; and he should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be possible to meet it, by altering the conditions of the higher elementary schools, which were affected by the Cockerton judgment. Those schools had not been successful, owing to the difficult conditions under which they were placed; and the reason he was pressing the point now was that he, saw the difficulty they would be landed in in endeavouring to pass from elementary to secondary work in the future. Some better method of co-ordination than that which now existed would be required. He wished to ask whether some modification was not possible without legislation which would make the higher elementary schools more acceptable generally. An assurance to that effect would be a great help in carrying out the work of secondary education in the country.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid no doubt there had been irregularities in the debate; but he trusted he should not fall into any himself. The Vice-President referred to the First Lord of the Treasury as the Prime Minister, an office entirely unknown to the British Constitution. The First Lord of the Treasury was engaged in forming a Ministry; he trusted the Vice-President would form part of it. If not, the right hon. Gentleman would probably be unable to introduce the Bill he had referred to. He wished to call attention to a matter strictly within this Estimate. The Vote amounted to very nearly £10,000,000, and consisted largely of grants to various schools based on registration. The Comptroller and Auditor General had, however, reported that the records of the registration were incorrect; and as the matter affected no less than £8,500,000 out of £10,000,000, he would read an extract from the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General—
    "A test examination by officers of my Department having brought to light numerous instances of incorrect registration and of consequent overpayment, I enquired whether the Board would itself institute a, complete audit of the Grants for the year."
    264
    The point of the Report was as follows—
    "In reply to a communication from my Department calling attention to the faulty certificate, it is stated that 'The Board have usually relied on the particulars and certificates given by the Managers and teachers on Form 65 as a prevention of such duplication of payment as has here occurred.' While this statement has reference merely to the certificates on Form 65, it offers a convenient opportunity for calling attention to the fact that the large Grants payable not only under this Sub-head but also under Sub-heads C2, C4, C6 and C7, are based upon figures certified by the Managers and that therefore the trustworthiness of such certificates becomes a question of much importance."
    He wished to call the attention of the Committee to the fact that Sub-heads C2, C4, C6, and C7 amounted altogether to £8,493,251, every half-penny of which was brought into doubt by the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. Every item depended on the certificates of the registration of attendance furnished by the managers; and as doubt had been cast on them, it behoved the Committee to ask for some assurance that these certificates would in future be really accurate and would represent the facts. In one item of £200,000 an error of about £6,000 had been discovered, of which amount £4,200 was actually admitted. It was absolutely important, nay, essential, that the figures on which the grants were based should be accurate. When an error, such as he had mentioned, had been discovered, doubt was cast on the entire Vote; and in view of the enormous sums now granted for educational purposes and the greater demands of the future, it behoved the Committee to ask why the Education Department had not, long since, taken steps to ascertain the correctness of the figures on which it based its grants. He did not know what answer his right hon. friend would make; but if it were not satisfactory as regarded the past, he hoped his right hon. friend would be able to give the Committee an assurance as to the future; and that there would be a careful audit of selected items, in order that the Committee might know that the grants were not inaccurate or falsified—of course he did not mean falsified purposely.
    *MR. YOXALLsaid that the hon. Gentleman opposite was

    265
    making a mountain out of a mole hill, when ho suggested that the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General cast doubt on every item in the Vote. As regarded science and art classes, and schools, the irregularities occurred in precisely the class of school which, owing to the administration of the right hon. Gentleman, could not be curried on by a School Board. In the right hon. Gentleman's process of running amuck at School Boards in his administration, he had forbidden the School Boards to become Committees for science and art schools and classes, although any congeries of private persons could constitute themselves a science and art Committee. If there was careless supervision the Committee could not wonder at irregularities occurring. With regard to registration, he would point out that there wore some 40,000,000 of entries every week as to the attendance and non-attendance of scholars; and the hon. Gentleman would see that it would be perfectly impossible for the Board of Education to audit such a number of entries. Ordinarily the managers of the schools were responsible for the accuracy of the entries—the large School Boards employed officers for that purpose; the inspectors and sub-inspectors of schools were also responsible, and if any doubt arose the Board of Education had the power to order an audit.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked if the Board of Education had an expert to conduct such an audit.
    *MR. YOXALLsaid that the Board had power to appoint Inspectors of Returns, but it had not been frequently exercised. Having in view the immense number of registrations, a complete audit would be out of the question; and, as far as he knew, the existing safeguards were quite satisfactory. Since the House sat a very strong case had been made out for some check upon the managers of schools. There was the instance of a school mistress dismissed by a manager without good cause within a few months of the time when she could have claimed her superannuation allowance, at the age of sixty-four, when she was not likely to obtain another engagement, a mistress whose work had been commented upon by the inspector in a creditable manner. The
    266
    result was that she was deprived of her employment and of any chance of the retiring allowance for that period to which she would have been entitled. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to amplify the statement he had already made today with regard to this matter. They might legislate for education and produce excellent schools, but if they had in those school teachers suffering from a sense of great injustice; if they were under the continual apprehension of some capricious action being taken against them which would deprive them of their means of livelihood, the country would not get from those teachers their best work, and education must suffer. It was not a question of the teachers alone. It was also a question of efficiency, and applied alike to the elementary and secondary schools. There was a general consensus of opinion among all teachers upon this point, it being equally strong among the secondary school teachers as among the elementary school teachers, and ho hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to say something which would allay the fears of all these teachers.
    SIR JOHN GORSThoped that the Committee would agree to take the Vote without prolonged discussion, having regard to the amount of Parliamentary time occupied with educational matters. In reference to what had been said by the hon. Member for King's Lynn, the difficulty of obtaining correct returns of attendance was ever present with the Board in its dealings with 20,000 schools. Rules, regulations, inspections, and all kinds of measures had been taken to secure as much accuracy as possible. This matter was under the most serious attention of the Department. A report from the Auditor General always demanded such serious attention and consideration for improvement in the system. The new Bill would give an opportunity for this. Returns would be less numerous, and, vouched for by municipal and county authorities, would be more reliable than those furnished by irresponsible, and often careless, school managers. He therefore hoped that a better system for ascertaining attendance, on which

    267
    the finance of the Department depended, would be carried out. He had often spoken on the subject of teachers' tenure of office, and, no doubt, would have to make many more speeches on that subject during the passage of the Bill now before the House. He really did not think he would be justified in inflicting another oration on the Committee, his opinions being well known and having been frequently expressed.
    MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEhoped the Department would take the greatest care in drawing up the new minute in reference to the training of teachers, a subject which had received new importance from the regulation in regard to registration. He hoped the Department would pursue a liberal policy, and not confine grants to hostels intended entirely for teachers. A case was brought to his attention recently of a class of young pupil teachers, who were being sent to the Oxford and Cambridge settlements, in the East End of London, a system which had produced excellent results. That was a movement which was now going on which might possibly be encouraged by the Education Department. From the point of view of general culture, it would be well to bring teachers into contact with other young men receiving a wider professional training. He congratulated the Vice-President on the better organisation of science and art instruction in higher schools.
    MR. HERBERT ROBERTSexpressed his desire to associate himself with what had been said as to the form of the new Minute dealing with the grants to be made to residential training colleges under the new Education Bill. He also wanted to emphasise in one word the necessity of giving more attention to securing reasonable tenure of office to the teachers of elementary schools. Having been brought into very close contact with the teachers throughout the county which he represented, he found there was practical unanimity amongst them in this matter. On this point all were agreed, and it was not often with regard to educational matters that unanimity could be found. The supreme consideration was so to
    268
    arrange matters as to draw into the teaching profession the men best adapted for the, work. So long as the sense of insecurity prevailed among this class of public servants, the best work would not be obtained, and the educational interests of the country would suffer. Personally, he regarded the speech of the Vice-President as full of sympathy on the particular question under discussion, and if only sufficient pressure were brought to bear on the right hon. Gentleman and the Government, he believed that at no distant date some satisfactory arrangement would be arrived at. He hoped that before the Vote came up for discussion next year steps would be taken to remedy this evil, so that the teaching profession of the country would be able to go forward with their great public task without any of that fear which now arose from their insecure position.
    MR. BRIGGwas understood to express his agreement with the remarks of the hon. Member for East Somersetshire. A suggestion had been made as to the possibility of training colleges for teachers being so far arranged that they might afford the education required for secondary purposes in almost every district. As pupil teacher centres ought to be within reasonable distance of the centres where they were likely to find students, they would consequently be within reasonable distance of those who desired secondary education. He would suggest to the Vice President that under the arrangements which were to be made for the purpose of training teachers this point should not be lost sight of. He thought that the training of teachers and the provision of facilities for secondary education might very well go together.
    MR. EMMOTTdesired to emphasise the point raised by the hon. Member for East Somersetshire as to the curriculum of science and aft schools. The curriculum imposed by South Kensington in the past had been too purely scientific. The number of hours devoted to science was about thirteen out of twenty-five, whereas in the realschulen in Germany, out of a week of twenty-nine or thirty hours the amount of time given to science was no

    269
    greater. In the re-organisation of secondary education, what above all else was wanted, was to turn out men, not machines, and that object would not be secured unless due weight was given to humanistic as opposed to scientific teaching. He hoped that in this matter the Board of Education would be more liberal in its ideas than the Department at South Kensington had been.
    *MR. HELMEcalled attention to what he considered was the inadequate support given by the Government to evening continuation schools. In reply to representations from the Lancashire County Council by a Deputation of which he was a member, the Vice President last year promised to look into the matter, and, if necessary, to make increased provision. The fears then expressed as to the insufficiency of the grant under the altered Minute of July 3rd, 1901, had been borne out by the facts. In the case of certain evening continuation schools, the balance sheets of which he held, conducted in the rural districts, in connection with the Lonsdale Division of the county, it appeared that, although the grants paid by the Board were the highest that could be earned, £26 3s. 6d., they were 37 percent, less than would have been received under the old scale which would have amounted to £40 12s. In country districts especially, there was great need to encourage local Committees to deal with this matter, but if there was to be a risk of pecuniary loss, the damage to the cause of education would be considerable. Everything possible should be done to develop this important section of educational work. Complaint was often made that the children from the elementary schools passed into the world, and lost the smattering of knowledge they had acquired, and were thereby rendered incapable of availing themselves of the opportunities for better employment which frequently came to them in later life. In consequence, the evening continuation school code had been developed to provide for the teaching of children of older growth and even of adults, and he thought the arrangements for developing that phase of the work should be as generous
    270
    as possible. The action of the Government in maintaining the severance of this work from the Department of elementary education was not to be commended. In large centres of population the day schoolmasters had frequently been willing to forego the opportunity of relaxation in the evenings in order to take charge of, and by their self-denying effort (which demanded recognition) support these schools, and so attract and keep in touch with the children who had previously come under their care. Such an arangement had been found to be most advantageous, because of the personal knowledge which these masters had of the children who had passed through the day schools. The evening schools ought to be fostered, and the Committee, should see to it that financial consideration did not tend to check the development of the work. In fairness to the Department it should be said that under the increased arrangements for the present year the loss on the grant would not be quite so large, but the amount that could be earned was only £30 10s. 9d. for the same work, and this was quite inadequate, and he hoped the Vice President would carefully consider the matter.
    MR. WHITLEYdesired to bring before the Committee two matters of economy in staffing. The first was one to which he called attention last year, viz., an item of £800 as salary to a senior examiner who did no examining. This gentleman also received a salary of,£350 a year as Secretary to the Duke of Devonshire, and his whole time was taken up by his secretarial duties. The Votes ought to represent payments for services rendered, and the salaries should correspond to work done. This particular item did not carry out that principle, and therefore he should move to reduce the Vote by £800. The other case was that of a second examiner who drew £150 a year as Private Secretary to the Vice President himself. Did this gentleman do any examining?
    SIR JOHN GORST: No, but both examiners do a very large amount of office work. Both of them had been employed, in the preparation of the Education Bill now before Parliament, very long hours indeed, and far beyond office hours. They do not do any examining at all. They do office work, correspondence, and

    271
    preparation of Returns. Why they were called examiners he did not know, because they did not examine.
    MR. WHITLEYasked if he was to understand that those who were called examiners under secondary education also did no examining.
    SIR JOHN GORST: Yes.
    MR. WHITLEY: Then they paid these salaries as examiners because they did not examine. He desired that this matter should be made as plain as possible. He felt certain that last year the Vice President of the Council said that this gentleman devoted his whole time to his duties as private secretary to the Lord President, and that was why his salary ought to appear in one sum as a salary and not under the Education Vote. Last year the Vice President of the Council made a most amusing speech in defence of the great amount of work which these examiners had to do, and he thought he was justified in claiming that these salaries ought not to appear on the Education Vote at all. His second point was in regard to the architect employed by the Board of Education. This official received a salary of £850 a year, fees £100, £150 a year as architect to the Scotch Education Office, and £105 and fees under Item A, Class III.. as architect to the reformatories and industrial schools. Was it a fact that this architect was allowed to engage in private practice as well?
    SIR JOHN GORST: That is so.
    MR. WHITLEY, said he should also like to know if this architect was allowed to do private consultative work with regard to the plans which had to be approved by the Department afterwards.
    SIR JOHN GORST: I believe that is so.
    MR. WHITLEYthought that was a very unsatisfactory system. He thought the architect to the Education Department ought not to engage in private practice to the detriment of other architects. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to assure him that such a state of things would not be allowed to continue, and he begged to move the reduction of this item by £200.
    Motion made and Question proposed "That Item A (Salaries, Wages, and Allowances) be reduced by £200."—(Mr. Whitley.)
    SIR JOHN GORSTsaid that these matters had been brought up for several years and had become hardy annuals. With regard to the private secretary to the Lord President his services were absolutely necessary, because it was impossible for the Minister for Education to know all the minute details of the Department, and he must keep an expert to advise him. The gentleman who had been referred to as the secretary to the Duke of Devonshire was his own private secretary at one time, and he proved so useful in that capacity that he had now been made a senior examiner at a salary of £650 a year and not £800. No one who knew the amount of work these two gentlemen did would make such a suggestion as had been made. With regard to one of them, he could assure the House that since the Education Bill first began to be talked about a year ago, this gentleman had done an amount of work far beyond what they would dream of exacting from any public servant. This gentleman had not only been most active in the preparation of the Bill and meeting the various objections which had been raised, but ho had superintended the production of an enormous number of Returns and statistics, maps, diagrams, and various other things to assist the Department and also to supply the First Lord of the Treasury and the Cabinet with information which it was necessary they should have for this extremely complicated Bill. He hoped the hon. Member would not reward the great public services of these two Gentlemen by moving this reduction, for the services of one of them had been recognised by the King. With regard to the architect, he was in existence before he came to the Education Department. He admitted that he did not think the arrangements as regarded this architect were satisfactory, and when there was a vacancy he did not think his successor would be appointed on the same terms. With regard to his services in the Scotch Education Office as architect, he had nothing to do with that, and the services he rendered with reference to the

    273
    reformatories carne under the control of the Home Office. He could assure the hon. Member that the architect was a gentleman of tin: highest honour, and he had taken care that no plan upon which he had acted privately should be passed by him, for anything in which he had been personally interested was handed over to the other officials. He admitted that the position was not satisfactory, and it would not be repeated in the case of a future holder of the office. He thought it would be a misfortune if any Vote in Committee of Supply were to interefere with their continuing an arrangement which had served the country in a very admirable manner.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid he accepted the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to private secretaries, and he would not press that matter further. The reply with regard to the position of the architect was eminently unsatisfactory. There would be no reform whatever so long as they went on the doctrine because a thing is, therefore it shall be. He did not care how eminent a particular form was. It was a rotten system to allow one office to be responsible for something which had to be passed by an official of that same office. He did not for a moment suggest that this architect would think of passing plans which he himself had prepared, but the system which enabled him to adjudicate on plans which had been prepared by his clerks or assistants was one which should not be permitted to continue.
    MR. BRIGGcalled attention to an item of £100 in the accounts as "fees for architect." There was no explanation whatever of that sum. As far as one could see it might as well have been £500 or £1,000.
    MR. YOXALLasked the Vice-President of the Council what the Education Department proposed to do in regard to building rules in future. Until recently there was a schedule of rules in the day school code, but that had been abolished, and only a vague article was found in regard to new buildings.
    SIR JOHN GORSTsaid that new building rules were about to be issued. They were now undergoing revision with the view of making them very much more simple. The last time he inquired he was told that they would be ready in about a fortnight. That was a fortnight ago. He fully expected that they would have been issued by this time.
    MR. YOXALL: There is no intention to relax the severity of the rules?
    SIR JOHN GORST: They will be relaxed in this sense that they will be less particular and complicated. They will leave a great deal more to the discretion of the local authority in regard to the buildings.
    LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid there was an amount of not unnatural anxiety in regard to this question. The rules in the past had been one of the reasons for the enormous improvement of school buildings in the country, and any relaxation in regard to vital particulars would be a serious thing. It would not be in order to discuss the Education Bill at present, but perhaps he would be allowed to say that there were to be certain powers given to the new authority under Section 9 in regard to the provision of new schools, and if the building rules were in any way relaxed the working of that Clause would be quite different from what it would be otherwise.
    MR. GODDARDsaid he understood that men were entered in high position in the service of the Education Department without passing through a civil service examination. In that way serious injustice was done to the ordinary clerks, in as much as it prevented promotion. It was very unjust that these men should be put over their heads in this way. He understood that they passed in without any examination whatever. That was a matter which required to be cleared up. In the Public Accounts Committee he asked an official in regard to the architect. He was told that according to the architect's agreement with the Department he should not be allowed to adjudicate on any plans that he had himself prepared or in regard to which he had

    275
    given advice. He thought at the time that that was a satisfactory answer, but he understood now that if he did not personally do it some of his subordinates did it.
    SIR JOHN GORST: Somebody has to adjudicate on the plans. I did not know there was an agreement; but I know what the practice is. The practice is that the architect does not adjudicate on any plan in regard to which he has been personally consulted.
    MR. GODDARDsaid that seemed to be very unsatisfactory. If a man immediately under the control of the architect adjudicated on the plans he really thought there ought to be an alteration.
    SIR JOHN GORSTsaid the examiners in future would be appointed from the junior inspectors. That was the intention which was in the mind of the Government at present. There was an enormous variety of schools to inspect, and in making new appointments, those best suited for the particular class of schools would be chosen. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that though not appointed by competitive examination, they were men who had taken good degrees at the
    universities or university colleges. They wore men who in every way had shown their general competence. They must also have had considerable experience in teaching in schools of various kinds.
    MR. BRIGGreminded the right hon. Gentleman that he had not answered the question about the fees of the architect.
    SIR JOHN GORSTgave an answer which was inaudible in the gallery.
    MR. BRIGG: He gets £850 for doing the work, and then he gets £100 besides.
    MR. SOARESsaid it was no answer whatever to say that the architect was an honourable gentleman. He ought not to be put in such a position that his private interest and his public duty might conflict with each other. That was a broad principle for which they had been contending on the Opposition side of the House from time to time. There should not be the faintest suspicion attached to those engaged in the public service.
    (4.13.) Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 123; Noes, 177. (Division List No. 291.)

    AYES.

    Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Ambrose, Robert

    Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

    M'Govern, T.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Fenwick, Charles

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Field, William

    M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Mansfield, Horace Rendall

    Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

    Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

    Boland, John

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Brigg, John

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

    Mooney, John J.

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Moss, Samuel

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Grant, Corrie

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Burke, E. Haviland

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

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

    Burt, Thomas

    Harrington, Timothy

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Caldwell, James

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Cameron, Robert

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

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

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Carew, James Laurence

    Helme, Norval Watson

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    O'Malley, William

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Jones, William (Carnarv'nshire

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Cremer, William Randal

    Joyce, Michael

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden

    Crombie, John William

    Kennedy, Patrick James

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

    Labouchere, Henry

    Priestley, Arthur

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

    Lambert, George

    Rea, Russell

    Delany, William

    Langley, Batty

    Reddy, M.

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Leamy, Edmund

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Doogan, P. C.

    Leng, Sir John

    Rigg, Richard

    Dunn, Sir William

    Lough, Thomas

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Edwards, Frank

    Lundon, W.

    Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

    Emmott, Alfred

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

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

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B)

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

    Wilson John (Durham, Mid.)

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Toulmin, George

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Trevelvan, Charles Phillips

    Young, Samuel

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Ure Alexander

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Sullivan, Donal

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Weir, James Galloway

    Tennant, Harold John

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

    Whiteley, George (York. W. R

    Mr. Whilley and Mr.

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Whit aker, Thomas Palmer

    Soares.

    Thomas F. Freeman-(Hastings

    Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid.

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Green, Walford D. (Wed'sbury

    Purvis, Robert

    Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

    Gunter, Sir Robert

    Randles, John S.

    Auson, Sir William Reynell

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midx.

    Rankin, Sir James

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Rasche, Major Frederic Carne

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Harris, Frederick Leverton

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Balcarres, Lord.

    Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

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

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon Chas. Thomson

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Higginbottom, S. W.

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

    Round, Rt. Hon. James

    Beach, Rt Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Bri'htside

    Rutherford, John

    Bignold, Arthur

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Bigwood, James

    Horner, Frederick William

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Hoult, Joseph

    Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse

    Bowles, T. Gibson (Lynn Regis)

    Howard, John (Kent, Fav'rsham

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Brassey, Albert

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Seely, Maj. J.E.B. (Isle of Wight

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Bull, William James

    Johnston, Heywood (Sussex)

    Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

    Smith, HC (North'mb. Tyneside

    Campbell, Rt. Hn. J A (Glasgow

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

    Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Kimber, Henry

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

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

    Knowles, Lees

    Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

    Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

    Stewart, Sir Mark J.M Taggart

    Clive, Captain Percy A.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

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

    Lawson, John Grant

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Coddington, Sir William

    Leveson-Gower Frederick N. S.

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

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

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

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

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

    Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M.

    Cranborne, Lord

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

    Macartney, Rt. Hon W G Ellison

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    M'Iver, David (Liverpool)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Warr, Augustus Frederick

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

    Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    M'Killop, James(Stirlingshire

    Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Maxwell, W. J H (Dumfriesshire

    Whiteley, H (Ashton-und-Lyne

    Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

    Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

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

    Finch, George H.

    Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Milvain, Thomas

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

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

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Mount, William Arthur

    Wrightson, Sir Thomas

    Flaunery, Sir Fortescue

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Wylie, Alexander

    Forster, Henry William

    Muntz, Sir Philip A.

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Myers, William Henry

    Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

    Gordon, Hon. J. E (Elgin & Nairn

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Younger, William

    Gore, Hn G. R.C. Ormsby-(Salop

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

    Sir William Walrond and

    Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Mr. Anstruther.

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    2, £78,706, to complete the sum for Universities and Colleges, Great Britain, and Intermediate Education, Wales.

    CLASS V.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £277,570, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1903, for the expenses in connection with His Majesty's Embassies, Missions, and Consular Establishments Abroad, and other Expenditure chargeable to the Consular Vote."
    SIR ALBERT ROLLITsaid that on a former occasion on the Diplomatic and Consular Vote he had tried to resume the discussion interrupted on the Foreign Office Vote, and draw attention to the question of the relation which ought to be maintained between the diplomatic and consular service on the one hand, and the commerce of the country on the other. He thought that a comparison between the condition of affairs in this and other countries led one to the conclusion that both in diplomacy and consular action the promotion of commerce took a much more direct and important part in foreign than in our own service. At the same time, he was glad to acknowledge that he had frequently heard diplomatists state that one of the duties of the representatives of this country was to, have regard to its commerce, and to promote good commercial relations between the country which they represented and the countries to which they were accredited. He knew that in many instances our representatives had done their best to promote British commercial progress. From that point of view the consular service was perhaps of even more importance than the diplomatic service; and he could not help saying that in that branch there was a greater disparity between our own and other countries. That might be due to the fact that in foreign countries the consular service was more organised commerically, and was certainly dealt with on a footing which was not general in our own country. For instance, in the case of France, he found that not
    280
    only was there a course of education in the higher, commercial schools and colleges particularly adapted to the training of consuls, but there was a gradation in the consular ranks, which led to the higher branches of the service. Young men commenced as cadets and ultimately, after a severe course of training, took a high position in the consular service. Therefore, it was eminently desirable that our consuls, though they had other duties to perform—and that, after all, reduced itself to a question of salary—ought to be the out-posts of British commerce, and the Intelligence Department available for the help of our commercial people. Now, the system of the appointment to the consular service was very different in this country from that which obtained in any other country. It was mainly a system of patronage, which was difficult to defend. Of course it was impossible to imagine that that system could be abused by such statesmen as Lord Salisbury or Lord Rosebery; but the expression made use of on the occasion of the last debate by the noble lord the Under Secretary with reference to the reward of men who had served the country in distant parts of the world showed that it was a system which was advisedly not only adhered to, but put in practice in certain cases. The noble Lord said they had to provide for those who had done service to the State in such undeveloped countries as Africa. It was perfectly true that such parsons were entitled to recognition, but he did not think the reward of gentlemen of that class was, as a rule, properly carried out when they were put into consular posts. It must end in a large measure in putting square men in round holes, and although their service was ripe for reward he did not think the reward should take the form of positions for which these gentlemen were not trained. He admitted that there had been considerable improvement in our diplomatic consular service, and that the increase in the number of commercial attachés was beneficial, although there was room for more, and there were one or two places where at present there were no attachés, but where their presence was desirable. Though that was so, he believed the attaches who had been appointed had

    281
    rendered real service. Consular agents also had recently been appointed, and their visits here to a number of Chambers of Commerce to confer with those directly interested in commerce was a desirable step, and he desired to acknowledge it. He thought there was some need for a larger representation of our commerce in the colonies, and appointments made in that direction in some of the larger colonies would be most desirable. Recognition was also due to the Foreign Office for the improvements made in the regulations relating to consular duties; nevertheless, he thought there was room now for greater expansion in that direction. Having regard to the steps which had been taken by foreign countries to make their consular service as useful as possible to the commerce of their countries, we certainly ought, at all events, to watch, if we were not able to follow in their footsteps, although we could follow to a considerable extent. The action of the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office in securing recognition for colonial demands was a great step in the right direction. Having made those acknowledgments, there were one or two points on which he desired to make some observations of a somewhat different character. Complaint had been made that consuls were not sufficiently familiar as a rule with the language of the countries in which they represented us. He was informed that in Russia there were not more than six who wore able to converse in the language of that country. In other years it was not so important to know Russian, a knowledge of French and German being quite sufficient for consuls in that country, but owing to the development of the interior it had become absolutely necessary to be able to converse in the Russian language. Exception had also been taken to the large number of foreigners who represented this country in consular offices. That was a matter it was not, perhaps, always possible to avoid; there were exceptional cases in which persons of influence among men of business abroad might make the best representatives. But as a general rule our own countrymen were the best representatives of our own country. There were a considerable number of foreigners representing us in Switzerland, for instance.
    282
    Of course it might be a question of salary, and after looking through the list some of the salaries did appear to him to be most inadequate. Then with regard to the consular reports. Some were most excellent, as witness the report of the Consul at Stettin, which was only a sample of many others which might be cited, but one bad only to read some of the more meagre to see how inadequate they were. If comparison were made between the speed of publication of our consular reports and those of other countries, especially the United States, the comparison would not be to our advantage, and in these days, when time was money and despatch meant business, publication almost contemporaneous with the course of events was necessary to give the reports any value at all. One point in which we were excelled by the United States was in the publication of special reports in connection with sudden developments of new or special branches of industry. On such occasions it was impossible to wait for the annual report, and it was then important that we should have special reports; and in comparison with those of the United States, the special reports of this country were very few. He had given, he thought, reasonable and proper praise for the work which had been effected, but on the other hand he would suggest that there was still room for improvement, and he hoped the noble Lord would reconsider the propriety of placing gentlemen who had done admirable service in savage and undeveloped countries in the position of consular agents, where they had to deal with cute business men. He hoped some other mode would be adopted of rewarding them. The reforms to be carried out by the Foreign Office might not be such as he had ventured to suggest in detail, but reform was certainly required, and he thought that nothing would be effected until there was a great reorganisation in the Departments dealing with the consular work. He heard demands made for a Minister of Commerce. He himself was content to accept the President of the Board of Trade as the Minister of Commerce; but trade matters, he thought, ought to be dealt with by one Minister, who should be responsible to Parliament.

    283
    At present, there seemed to be a great want of organisation in dealing with these matters; the Board of Trade represented trade interests in general; the Foreign Office managed foreign affairs and the consular service; and in addition there was the representation of the Colonies, and India, and the like. Let him take an illustration. He was a member of the Commercial Intelligence Department of the Board of Trade, and the work of that Department had been done as well as the resources would permit. Steps had been taken to ascertain the state of trade in Persia, Siberia, and other places, but to show the bodies with which they had to deal it was only necessary to look at the constitution of that Department. It was a Department of the Board of Trade, and in it there were representatives of the Foreign Office, commercial side; of the India Office, of the Board of Trade itself, of the Colonial Office, and others. They did excellent work, but he felt that that organisation was not a proper one when there were so many different Departments to consult and take into account. He thought the responsibility and management of commercial matters should be placed in the hands of one Department, and the head of that Department should be the Minister of Commerce in this country. He wished to say one word on the subject introduced by his right hon. friend in the most able speech which he had delivered in relation to the Diplomatic Vote. When it was sought to discuss commercial matters on that Vote, the Chairman ruled that it was out of order to do so, but he thought he was in order in saying that he could express the fullest concurrence of the commercial community in what was then said, that the difficulties which arose between us and other countries should be disposed of before they became the source of acute difficulty to this country. He referred particularly to the desirability of finding an amicable solution of the New found land difficulty with France. Public opinion in France was directed to the same end, and our interest pointed in the direction of establishing the best relations with France and Russia. Consular representation should be made as commercial as possible, and we should
    284
    be then placed in more close relations with those actually engaged in commerce. That consultation of those directly interested in the trade and commerce of the country would be useful to diplomacy was shown by the fact that the opinion of the Chambers of Commerce was adverse to the taking of Wei-Hai-Wei, and favourable as an alternative to the choice of Chusan or some position nearer to the Yang-tsze than Wei-Hai-Wei. He impressed upon the Foreign Office the fact that they had in their care commercial duties of the highest character, and he hoped the matters to which he had drawn attention would receive the consideration of the noble Lord.
    MR. BRIGG, speaking as a Member who took great interest in this matter, and who took care that consular reports were distributed amongst those most likely to read them, thought he might be permitted to say a few words upon this Vote. He was not in entire agreement with all his hon. friend had said, and he desired to point out the difficulty in which the Foreign Office was placed in collecting that information which was valuable to the manufacturers of this country. It was not so essential for the consular agents to send over the number of ships carrying merchandise as to send over a classification of the goods used. The method in which the information was supplied could, he thought, be improved. In the first place, any information with regard to railway and other charges on the Continent might be supplied in such a form that it could be most useful, and the amounts might be given in English money, and if in other matters the English equivalent for foreign weights and measures was given, the information would be much more useful and the Returns of much more value. This should be no trouble to our consular agents.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsympathised with the references made to the Consular service, and thought there could be no doubt but that the Foreign Office had looked with disfavour on researches of a consular character. The consul abroad was originally senior British merchant in the place of his appointment. For years past he had been

    285
    something very different—a retired officer, who perhaps might be a most deserving person, but who was often not thoroughly competent to deal with commercial interests. An overhauling of the consular service was required, but he thought it must still remain under the Foreign Office. But the Foreign Office should realise that it was the Foreign Office of a commercial country. As to the consular reports themselves, the Committee could scarcely realise the incapacity shown by the Foreign Office in elementary matters of business. He complained that the consular reports often did not show clearly from whom they came and the year to which they referred. For example, a report in his hand purporting to deal with the trade of Lorenzo Marques for 1900 contained accounts for 1899, 1900, and 1901. It was the report of a consul-general—where, he was not told. The expression "this year's census" occurred in the report, but what year was meant he did not know. It was painful to find the Foreign Office betraying such a want of knowledge of commercial affairs, and he hoped the Department would realise the importance of attaching to consular statements the date when written, and the writer's name. As to ambassadors, the rules for their election appeared to be very vague, and the Committee had little opportunity of gathering any account of their demeanour, or of estimating the amount of success due to their personal influence and tact. Ambassadors had one advantage over Ministers, viz., that they were compulsorily retired at the age of seventy. He would commend that rule to the right hon. Gentleman who was now forming an Administration, because it might very well be applied to other Departments. If an ambassador was too old properly to discharge his duties at seventy, a Lord Chancellor was not too young to retire at seventy-six. On the general duties of ambassadors, he was by no means satisfied with the ambassadorial work of recent years. Its effect had been the alienation of Persia and Turkey; Persia had been thrown into the arms of Russia without any agreement having been come to, and there was the undoubted fact, referred to by the right hon. Baronet on a previous
    286
    occasion, of a considerable change in the attitude of Italy towards this country. He was sorry to say that he believed that change of attitude was entirely due to our Ambassador at Rome. Lord Currie had been pushed on with great assiduity in the diplomatic service, but the rapidity of his promotion was not warranted by his diplomatic achievements. Certainly in Constantinople Lord Currie managed to make himself extremely disagreeable to the Powers, and in consequence England lost advantages she might otherwise have gained, and things contrary to her interest, which might have been prevented, had been carried into effect. On the whole Lord Currie could not be considered to have been a decided success at Constantinople. He went to that post in 1894, in 1898 he was translated to Rome, where his career had not been attended with any greater success. He believed he was right in saying—but on this point the Under Secretary of State would correct him if he was wrong — that so disagreeable had been the demeanour of this Ambassador at the Court of Italy that positively a request had been addressed to the Foreign Office for his recall. If that was the case, and he was informed on excellent authority that it was so, a great responsibility rested upon the Foreign Office for keeping him there. But whether that were true or not, the mission of Lord Currie to Rome had not been the brilliant success that might have been expected from the rapid promotion of which he had been the subject, and he believed he was justified in saying that the change in the attitude of Italy was very largely due to the non-success of his diplomatic efforts. He was perfectly aware that there might have been great difficulties and extenuating circumstances, and to ensure an answer on this matter he moved to reduce the Vote by £1,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £276,570, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Gibson Bowles.)
    MR. YOXALLasked for information as to the present condition of matters relating to the British Consulate at

    287
    Odessa. A complaint had been made of the removal of the Consulate from the commercial part of the city to the vicinity of the tennis grounds. It was alleged by those who knew that too many of our consuls abroad neglected their proper duties for other considerations, and the removal of the Consulate from the commercial quarter of Odessa was merely typical of a general defect in the consular system. In this particular instance it caused a great deal of inconvenience, additional expense, and loss of time to British shipmasters. Upon making representations to the Foreign Office he received a letter promising something in the nature of redress, and he desired to know whether that promise had been carried out. He agreed to a large extent with the remarks of the hon. Member for King's Lynn on the question of the consular service generally. Great improvements were necessary, not only in regard to the number of consular officers, but also as to their location, authority and nationality. We employed nearly 1,000 consular servants who were not of British nationality at all, and these persons came into contact with official secrets, and with matters referring to British Imperial interests in what seemed to him to be a very loose and unsafe way. He did not suggest that it was impossible for a foreigner to be a faithful servant of the British Crown, but he did suggest that when British born subjects were scattered all over the world, it would be worth the while of the Foreign Office to take some pains to secure as consular agents in remote places British born persons, instead of appointing men of foreign extraction The present State of affairs was very much the result of the desire of the Foreign Office to run the service on the cheapest possible basis. By the employment of unpaid consular agents the service worked out at a cost of about £19 per man per year, whereas in the Diplomatic Service the cost per man per year was something like £1,700. He thought it might be well to spend a little less than £1,700 per man on the Diplomatic Service, and a little more than £19 per man on the Consular Service, which was naturally more extensive, had representatives in many more places, and had to do with very important British interests—
    288
    particularly those relating to British trade, it was a mistake of organisation that the Consular Service should be under the Foreign Office at all. So long as British consuls were expected to deal with matters of trade, he thought that, where-ever possible, men acquainted with commerce, and formerly engaged in trade, should be appointed. Since, however, they had also to do with diplomatic work, he thought they might, perhaps, criticise the way in which the Foreign Office had of recent years withdrawn some of the consular officers from quarters in which eyes and ears for this country were particularly necessary, as, for example, had been done in Asia Minor and Morocco. Whether the Committee considered the location of the consular agents, or their nationality, or the way in which, in order to save expense, unpaid agents were employed, and it was rendered impossible for the Foreign Office properly to check their work, at every point it would be found that the Consular Service required revision, amendment, and improvement, and he would be heartily glad to learn that something in that direction was being done. He was glad to learn that on two points, at any rate, improvement had been effected—viz. in the appointment of commercial agents at Zurich, and in the abandonment of fees to British subjects who sought trade advice.
    MR. MOONagreed with what had been said as to the importance of our consuls knowing the language of the country to which they were appointed. The reputation gained by Sir William White in the early days of his career was largely due to his mastery of the vernaculars in different parts of the south-east of Europe, because, from a diplomatic point of view, he obtained a great deal of useful information. But the duties of the, consuls who had been spoken of were, of a very different character. With regard to Odessa he noticed that the salary was a large one, the amount being £900 a year, with an allowance of £450 for office expenses, and there was also a vice-consul at £300. To carry out what the hon. Member for South Islington had suggested, would require a special Russian Consular Service, on the footing of the China, Japan, and Siam services. He had several times tried to master the Russian language, and though he had succeeded in many other languages

    289
    he had not succeeded with Russian. He was sure that the time required to acquire the Russian language would necessitate special training. There were both redundances and deficiencies in the Foreign Office Vote. The absence of a British representative at Bolivia had already been referred to. If we needed a representative there in the '40's, surely there was more need for one now than sixty years ago, with all our great increase in trade. He was in the capital of Bolivia last August, and he knew that this country had a very considerable trade there in minerals and rubber. The rubber grown there was said to be quite equal to that grown near the mouth of the Amazon. He noticed that nearly £2,000 was spent at Munich, and he did not think it would be too much to spend £500 or £600 at Bolivia, where there were already about 200 Englishmen. In the case of a firm in Bolivia composed of an Englishman and a German, their dispute had to be settled by the German representatives, because there was no British Consul there. That state of things involved a loss of prestige to Britishers there. Before leaving South America, he wished to impress upon his noble friend the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, the necessity of watching very carefully the way in which the authorities of the Argentine Republic followed up what seemed to be an exceedingly brutal murder which occurred, not in a very remote part of the Argentine, but in a fairly central region. A young Englishman was charged upon some frivolous pretext, and was wounded with a pistol by a police officer, and the wound proved to be a mortal one. The Argentine Republic was a set of States in which the Federal principle was highly developed, and the provincial governments had a very free hand and did not always treat matters in a European manner. He wished to have the views of His Majesty's Government pressed upon the central government. The hon. Member for King's Lynn seemed to have been very unfortunate in regard to these consular reports, for a great many of them appeared to him to be exceedingly useful. Those reports went to show that English merchants did not get foreign markets because they did not publish their catalogues in the vernacular, and would not get the weights and
    290
    measures and prices of foreign countries. Again, no steps were taken to produce the article required, and our merchants continued to send out the same article time after time. Whether anybody except theoretical people read these reports he did not know, but as soon as a merchant heard of anything good, he did not wait for the report of the Foreign Office. With regards to this country being represented abroad by foreigners, Lord Curzon, when he represented the Foreign Office in this House, said that that was practically the universal custom. He thought the hardship alleged would have to be much more strongly made out before any such drastic steps as those suggested could be taken.
    MR. LABOUCHEREsaid that he understood that sometimes a subordinate member of the consular staff was a foreigner, but he thought the idea of the Foreign Office was, that so far as they could do it, they got men of British nationality in the consular service. There was a case in Berlin some time ago, where this country appointed the banker of Prince Bismarck, and it struck him at that time that a man more unfit to represent British interests in Germany could not be found than Prince Bismarck's banker. His hon. friend said they had no consuls in Morocco and Asia Minor. Our consuls there used to be military consuls, not intended to look after commercial interests, but to watch and guard us against Russian aggression. There was no good object served by having a commercial consul in places where they had no trade, or only a very small amount, as was the case with Morocco and Asia Minor. He was very glad that his hon. friend opposite had raised this question, because it was a most important one. He was what was called a little Englander. He was opposed to the wild and reckless militarism which, at present, was in favour with hon. Gentlemen opposite, and with some on this side of the House. He was a strong advocate of large expenditure being undertaken by the Government for the spreading and looking after of our commerce, but he did not think, considering what we spent on our Army and Navy, we spent a sufficient amount on our consular service. The

    291
    primary mistake in connection with the consular service, was that it was not made a profession. What happened was that Ministers — he was not speaking particularly of Ministers at present on the Treasury Bench—who did not know what to do with a tenth cousin, or hanger-on, tried to get him appointed as a consul. That person was a decent, respectable man; he did not offend or lower the dignity of the British Empire, but, unfortunately, he knew nothing about commerce. The hon. Member had come across consuls who were charming men; he knew nothing personally against them, but certainly no country would think of having these men as commercial agents. They could not write reports, but they went to some merchant, perhaps their tailor or somebody, and asked him to write a report. They signed it, and sent it home. These reports were, in many cases, not worth the paper they were written on. Some of the reports were very good, but many of them were very poor. Those men had no commercial education. The Foreign Office must recognise that this must be made a profession. They must take young men who had passed an examination, and put them as pupils in divers Consulates, giving them a small salary. Then, according to their fitness for the work they could be promoted to be vice-consuls, consuls, and consuls-general with larger salaries. Our consular service in the matter of commercial intelligence was below that of France. He could not agree with his hon. friend opposite that the consular service should be put under the Board of Trade, and separated from the Foreign Office. The negotiations with foreign countries would not be put in the hands of the Board of Trade; they would be carried on by the Foreign Office. But they might attach more importance to the commercial department of the Foreign Office. They ought to have a very good man at the head of it, and he should look well after the consuls and the staff, and there should not be this tenth-cousin system of appointment. The reports received from the consuls should be sent to the Board of Trade, and if necessary communicated by the Foreign Office to the great towns and the commercial agencies in the United Kingdom. Then, he thought, we should have a much better service than at the present time.
    292
    The hon. Member for King's Lynn complained of the policy of His Majesty's Government in Italy, and stated that it had led to the friendly feeling which used to exist between the two countries being considerably weakened. In that he entirely agreed with his hon. friend, but he went on to say that Lord Currie was absolutely responsible for this.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Not wholly.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: Well, that Lord Currie was in part responsible. Lord Currie had to obey orders in Italy. His hon. friend said that the Italian Government had made application that His Majesty's Government should withdraw Lord Currie. He was very curious to hear whether that was a fact.
    *THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord CRANBORNE,): No.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: The noble Lord said it was not a fact. If Lord Currie, or any other person, made himself politically or socially disagreeable to the Government in the place where he resided, and that Government asked that the gentleman should be changed, he could perfectly understand that it would be wise on the part of His Majesty's Government to listen to that demand, and to put him in some other place. But he gathered that that was not the case in Rome. He thought it was hardly fair that his hon. friend should make the general railing accusation he had made against Lord Currie without giving the Committee chapter and verse. His hon. friend had said that Lord Currie's promotion was exceedingly quick. He had been in the Foreign Office for the last forty years, and rose gradually until he became Assistant Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He had been sufficiently long in what might be called the diplomatic service to entitle him to become an ambassador. The late Lord Pauncefote was very much in the same position as Lord Currie, and he made an excellent ambassador, who rendered valuable service to the country. He did not think it was fair of his hon. friend to suggest that Lord Currie had been

    293
    pitch-forked into the position of ambassador in order to throw upon him the blame for what possibly the Foreign Office was responsible, unless he could show, chapter and verse, that he had bungled his instructions, or done something personally to produce ill-feeling between Italy and England, irrespective of the policy which was pursued by the Foreign Office.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid his remarks had been based on information given to him, from a source which he could scarcely have doubted, that the Court of Rome had absolutely requested the Foreign Office in London to recall Lord Currie; but if the noble Lord denied that, of course a large part of his argument fell to the ground.
    THE MASTER OF ELIBANKasked whether, in view of the increasing importance of Vladivostok, the Foreign Office would not follow the example already set by Germany, and appoint a consul for that district.
    LORD CRANBORNEsaid they were quite alive to the importance of representation at Vladivostok. Germany had nothing quite so important as a consular agent there; they had, however, a commercial agent, which was, perhaps, a humbler form of the same article. No doubt it would be very much to the advantage of this country if we had a similar representative, and the matter was under consideration. The greater part of the debate had turned on the consular service, but some reference to the diplomatic service had been interposed. His hon. friend the Member for King's Lynn, with the passion for condemnation that always pursued him, had condemned the whole diplomatic service of the Empire as inefficient.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: No.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid the ambassadors only shared the condemnation with the Government. He did not believe he had ever heard a single word of approval, either of his political friends, or of the public servants, from his hon. friend. He certainly should not
    294
    subscribe to his condemnation of our ambassadors. He thought his hon. friend was very properly answered by the hon. Member for Northampton. In attacking Lord Currie, he took no account of the policy that ambassadors had to pursue. It did not follow because an ambassador had not always been on good terms with the Court to which he was accredited that, therefore, it was the fault of the ambassador. An ambassador was a confidential person who carried out the instructions he received, and, if that occasionally brought him into conflict with the Court to which he was accredited, it only meant that he was a faithful servant in the discharge of his country's interests. For his part he had never heard that there was any unpopularity attaching to our ambassadors at St. Petersburg, Paris, or Berlin. What, then, became of his hon. friend's general condemnation?
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he did not say a word about the ambassadors at St. Petersburg or Berlin. The only general reference he had made was as to the unfortunate result of recent Foreign Office policy in Turkey, Persia, Spain, and France.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid, on the contrary, his hon. friend attributed unfortunate results to the incapacity of the British representatives.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: No.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid he need only appeal to the record which must inevitably appear to prove that that was the case. The hon. Gentleman was quite entitled to attack the Government; he always did. But he left it to the Committee to say whether he was not wrong in first attacking the diplomatic representatives of this country throughout the world, and then attempting to explain it away by saying that what he really condemned was the policy of the Government. He did not share the hon. Member's views. Our ambassadors were placed in an especially difficult position, because this, being a world-wide Empire, we were brought into conflict, to some extent, with the interests of nearly every country in the world. He did not mean

    295
    to say that they were uniformly in conflict, but there were points and elements about the policy of this country which were in conflict with the interests of nearly every foreign country. Our interests, therefore, must be represented by our diplomatic representatives, and it was not surprising that on occasions they were not absolutely upon as good terms as he believed generally characterised their position. In regard to other countries, one of the difficulties which our policy had to encounter was that we were essentially non-aggressive in our policy; and the barbarous, or he meant rather the less civilised, countries were naturally enough strongly impressed with the influence and importance of Great Britain in the councils of the world. Notwithstanding the fact that our policy was non-aggressive and all for the maintenance of the status quo, we were able to exercise a great influence on the less civilised parts of the world. Reference had been made by his hon. friend to Lord Currie. This ambassador had been a very distinguished public servant for many years. He served his time in the Foreign Office, and rose to be the Principal Permanent Undersecretary of the Foreign Office. In that capacity Lord Currie had earned the greatest credit to himself, and had conducted the affairs of the Foreign Office in a way which was beyond reproach. After this he was promoted to be an ambassador. As had already been pointed out, exactly the same course had been pursued in the case of Lord Pauncefote; and now the hon. Member attacked Lord Currie as an ambassador. What had been his recent history? He ventured to say there was no country in Europe with whom we had worked on such cordial terms as Italy at this moment. Not only in Europe, but in Africa, many questions of great difficulty and delicacy arose between the British and the Italian Governments along the north-east coast of Africa. We had worked hand in hand in Somaliland. All the difficulties there of late which had been considerable, had been conducted without any friction whatever between ourselves and the Italian Government. The same thing could be said of the Sudan frontier; and he had occasion a few days ago
    296
    to explain to the Committee that the recent difficulties with regard to Malta and Tripoli had been admirably solved. Were we to deprive our ambassadors abroad of the credit of this state of things? Was it fair of his hon. friend to gibbet Lord Currie as an incompetent ambassador when he had to his credit the solution of these several questions, and the smooth working of the international relations between this country and Italy? It was not fair; and the hon. Member ought to give Lord Currie the credit, which was his due, of having conducted to a successful conclusion these difficult matters which he had mentioned. As far as he was able to judge, our representatives in the diplomatic service were at least as good as those of any other country in the world, and we had no cause to be ashamed of them. They were quite ready in diplomacy to take account of commercial interests. The Foreign Office was in constant communication, for example, in regard to Chinese questions, with the commercial interests of this country. Perpetual communications were passing between ourselves and the China merchants in London, and those interested in the China trade and the Chinese question. Although he fully recognised that in modern times the consular service required to take special account of commercial considerations, he could not honestly say that there was an enthusiastic opinion on the subject among the best trading interests in this country. If the leading traders and manufacturers were asked whether they required assistance from our Consular agents, they almost invariably said "No; we mind our own business; we understand it twenty times better than your consuls; we have our own representatives, and this is part of the enterprise in which we are engaged." Though he recognised that they must do all they could in respect of the consular service, a word of caution was not out of place in pointing out that this was not the view of a part of the best trading interests of this country. He regretted that the hon. Member opposite had not given him notice as to the subject of Odessa, but he would make inquiries on the subject of the Consulate. With regard to Bolivia he could not subscribe to

    297
    the statement that our trade with that country was a large one. There was, however, a great deal to be said for the necessity of commercial representation. As to the promotion of Protectorate officials, he was afraid that something he said the other day had been misunderstood. He did not mean for a moment to say that our consular service ought to be entirely recruited from the administrators in our East Africa Protectorate. Not at all; but he repeated that it was not unfair that the administrators, who were able men, should look to some kind of reward where opportunity offered, consistently with the public service, in being removed, if they had done yeoman's work in those protectorates, to conditions more comfortable and constituting some kind of reward for their years of toil. They always gave a preference to British subjects in the appointment of consular officers, but the services of many foreign officials of the British Government were of the greatest value, and the sweeping condemnation which had been passed on them was quite undeserved. He cited the case of a Swiss gentleman in the British service, a man of distinction, who from his commercial knowledge and literary accomplishments had been of considerable service in acquainting us with the opportunities for British trade in Switzerland. When persons spoke of the defects of the consular service, the real difficulty was money. If they could persuade the Treasury to give unlimited funds the Foreign Office could have the best Englishmen that this country produced in order to represent it in the service, but they had not succeeded in persuading the Treasury to go to that length. They had the greatest difficulty in persuading the Treasury to increase by a single sovereign the amount which was devoted by this country to the consular service. He spoke as the representative of the Foreign Office, but he recognised the difficulty which the Treasury was placed in. It had to meet enormous calls in every service, and unless the. House of Commons could persuade the Treasury to increase the sums of money at the disposal of the Department they could not increase beyond a certain point the status of their representatives all over the world.
    MR. MOON: I suggested rearrangement and distribution of the money already in hand.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid it was not an unfair suggestion, and he would give the subject his consideration. But had the Department done nothing? They had appointed a Departmental Committee to overhaul the whole conditions of entrance and qualifications for the consular service. It would be obviously premature and absurd on his part to discuss the subject while the Committee was inquiring into it, but he thought that commercial considerations ought to be taken more into account in the appointments made. He also thought that something might be done to give consuls a certain amount of commercial training, perhaps even after their appointment. The question was worthy of consideration, at any rate. Then as to their reports. They varied; some were better than others; but he did not think the universal condemnation of the reports was quite fair. The hon. Member for King's Lynn condemned one report.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he condemned no report at all; what he complained of was that the reports mentioned neither the date nor the place at which they were written.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid that in the particular case mentioned by the hon. Member it was stated that the report was for the year 1901, and was written by His Majesty's Consul-General; and statistics were given on such subjects as railway traffic and Custom-house returns for a series of years up to 1901. Why did the hon. Member always condemn without consideration?
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: What is the date of the report?
    *LORD CRANBORNE: For the year 1901; it is as plain as the nose on your face. Recently the Foreign Office had been attempting to specify in rather greater detail the kind of commercial relations which were expected of consuls in dealing with traders. It was not easy. Anything like using public servants as

    299
    advertisers or touts for particular articles had to be avoided. Such a thing would be greatly resented in this country. On the other hand, consuls were in a position to acquire a great deal of information, and the Foreign Office had laid it down that all the information which consuls could communicate without breach of confidence should be placed at the service of British traders. In order that the consuls might be of more direct use for the assistance of colonial trade, the Foreign Office had also arranged, on the application of one of the colonies, that they should be allowed to correspond directly with the Colonial Governments, and so establish one more proof of the usefulness of the Imperial connection with the colonies. But, though it was desirable that the consuls should subserve commercial interests, that was not the only thing they had to do. They were concerned with matters of shipping, marriage, bills of exchange, wills, and declarations; and many other matters with regard to the maritime part of their work. In one year the Consular Office at Antwerp was instrumental in engaging nearly 16,000 seamen, and in discharging rather more. One of the duties of the consul was to act as a sort of intermediary in sending home the money of British sailors; and from the office at Hamburg alone as much as £19,000 was remitted in small sums for the benefit of British sailors. That corresponded with a very widely extended sphere of work of the consuls, and it was only fair to bear in mind that in addition to their commercial work they had these other obligations of very long standing also to attend to. It was not only consuls that were used by the Foreign Office to further commercial interest. Recently the Foreign Office thought it would be advantageous to bring the commercial agents—whose work was still in an experimental stage—into direct contact with the trading centres of this country; and so the two most important of those agents, from Russia and America, came to England, and visited many of the large centres of industry. Their reception was very instructive. In many places there was no enthusiasm, and it was evident that there was no consensus of opinion,
    300
    as to the importance of these agents' work, among the best commercial men. The secretary of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce wrote to ask whether the agents represented the Government, because he had never heard of them. The Belfast Chamber of Commerce said that the Chamber did not think fit to take any action; and the President of the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce stated that the larger manufacturers thought they could obtain all the necessary information from their own agents, and that, as the smaller manufacturers sold their produce to the larger, they were not concerned. It was easy to understand that while this departure was in an experimental stage there should be a certain amount of indifference to it among commercial classes; but he had said enough to show that, while the Foreign Office was making every effort to assist commercial interests, they had some difficulties to contend with. But the Foreign Office would persevere, because they believed that the information which the commercial agents were able to acquire, and the representation of British interests which they were able to provide, was a useful thing; and they hoped that, as the great trading centres became more accustomed to the work of the agents, the indifference now displayed would disappear.
    SIR EDWARD GREYsaid that no one would grudge the time which the noble Lord had taken in dwelling upon the importance of the consular service. What the House of Commons desired to be assured of was that the growing importance of that service was receiving adequate recognition from the Government of the day. He had heard a great deal of sound doctrine from the hon. Member for Northampton on this subject. The hon. Member said that one Front Bench was as bad as the other in this matter. For thirteen of the seventeen years he had been in Parliament he had scarcely seen a Liberal Government in power, and he must say that the atoms of responsibility which might rest on a Liberal Government seemed to him to have quite disappeared in the much larger share of responsibility monopolised by

    301
    the other side. The object, as laid down by the hon. Member, was that of having better trade and a more energetic, consular service. Of course he advocated that; but let the Committee bear in mind that where there were shortcomings in the consular service it was simply because economy had been so pressed on the Government of the day. In order to secure a sufficient service a considerable amount of money must be spent on it. He quite agreed that a rearrangement and redistribution of the amount now spent might do something, but it would not do all that was wanted. He thought that more would have to be spent; and he would ask hon. Members to bear in mind that, though in times of peace we should spend much less than in time of war, there were services which required considerable expenditure in times of peace. He thought the noble Lord should bear in mind that one Department of the Government ought not to compete against another. What they desired was to have a policy on the part of the Government. The Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being must follow in the lines of the policy of his Government. Of course it rested with the Treasury to demand from the Government that a good case should be made out for any increase of expenditure in any Department; but it must rest with the Prime Minister of the day to decide, as between the Treasury and any other Department, whether this increase should be granted. If the House of Commons was to depart from the rigid application of economy in these matters, it must be invited to do so by the Government of the day. He was most reluctant to see the House of Commons force further expenditure upon the Government. He thought when the Government were obliged to admit short-comings, as the noble Lord haddone, they should be more ready to come forward and say that these shortcomings were inevitable because not enough money had been spent. What they would like to see was a more professional consular service, and men being specially trained for the work. But, having got men specially trained for the work, they must see that their promotion in the consular service was as far as possible in accordance with merit. Men who had
    302
    been specially trained for the work must receive adequate recognition whenever they responded to the training that had been given them. The hon. Member for Northampton would have to bear in mind that if they got a highly trained, intelligent, and universal consular service, men who had been highly trained, and had not only great ability but energy, were rather apt to he active supporters of British interests in whatever part of the world they were placed. If they had an active, intelligent consular service, the House must be ready on occasion to support the Government of the day in hacking up the pushing of British interests in places where an ergetic consular officer had decided that support was needed. In fact, the House of Commons must be ready to vote more money for the consular service, and to place more confidence in it, and to expect to see the Government support British interests in those places where support was needed. In regard to the consular Reports, he thought it unfair to pick individual Reports out of the whole mass. The number of Reports was so large that there must be a great variety of merit amongst them. He thought everything should be done to encourage good Reports, Not nearly enough had been done by the Government or by public opinion to crystallise any standard of what was a good Report. He doubted whether a consular officer, in drawing up his Report, had a sufficiently clear idea of what the Government wished him to do. Consular officers should be made to feel that the excellence of their Reports did not pass without notice, but that it resulted in improving their own position in the consular service. The Chambers of Commerce ought to explain to the Government what they wanted. Whenever a trader found a consular Report which was useful to him he should bring it before his Chamber, and the Chamber of Commerce should, in turn, lay it before the Government as the sort of Report that was useful to them. That would enormously help the Government the day in advising consular officers as to the sort of Reports which were really of use to this country. The noble Lord had told them that in many places Chambers of Commerce were comparatively indifferent to the consular work that was being done. Well, we had to remember that we were passing

    303
    through a time of very great prosperity, which he hoped would continue. In a time of great prosperity, when the country was turning out as much work as it could do, there was always a certain danger of indifference growing up in commercial circles as to consular work. When the great trading districts of this country were turning out as much work as they could do, they were not likely to be very anxious about whether new markets were being formed, or whether a market was being lost, in another part of the world. That was just the danger against which they must endeavour in every way to guard. They must not lose that general level of industry in which the consular service would be doubly advantageous to this country in bad times. There were difficulties connected with the use of our consular service or diplomatic service as a means of pushing British industry abroad. In a country where British trade had been established for a long time they would probably find many British firms, and if there was a contract to be given or a piece of business to be obtained, they might find three or four British firms competing. But if there was a foreign country which was anxious to get a footing in that country, the Government of that foreign country might say to a firm of their own nationality, "There is no firm of our nationality doing business in this country, and there is considerable feeling. If you will go there we will support you." And, if that foreign firm went to that country, it had the full support of diplomatic and consular influence behind it. If, where there were three or four British firms, the British consular agent were to set himself to work entirely on the side of one firm, it would be said that he was doing something that was unfair. That was a condition of things that would be altered in the course of time, because as the number of foreign firms increased, foreign Governments would have to deal with the same difficulties that we had had to deal with. He thought it would be interesting if, on a future occasion, the Foreign Office would give them a synopsis of what other countries had been doing in regard to their: consular services. They heard that the United States and Germany had increased their
    304
    trade enormously; and it would be interesting to know what use they had made of their consular services in the matter, how much more had been spent on their consular services, and how many new posts had been established. The time had come when we must be more than ever alert to learn the extent to which other countries—those which were our especial rivals—were increasing their consular services, and the amount of money they were spending on the salaries they gave to their consular officers in different parts of the world. That information would be interesting as a test of comparison as to how we stood ourselves. He now passed from the consular service to the diplomatic questions affecting the larger issues of policy which had been raised. He was sorry he had not heard the speech of the hon. Member for King's Lynn, but he regretted to hear that for once, in an unwonted anxiety to relieve His Majesty's Government, he had attacked one of His Majesty's Ambassadors. He was glad the hon. Member had already modified his criticism on the statement that the noble Lord had made that no demand had been made for the withdrawal of Lord Currie by the Italian Government.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he had explained that his remarks were based on information given to him that the Court of Home had absolutely requested the recall of Lord Currie.
    SIR EDWARD GREYsaid he was glad the matter had ended in that way. He was sure that anybody who had been associated with Lord Currie in public work would understand his being a persona grata wherever he was placed, and would be very glad to be associated with him in public work again. It was quite true it might be difficult, in some circumstances, for ambassadors to be popular with the Governments to whom they were accredited. The noble Lord opposite said we had so many points of conflict with different countries. We had a great many points of contact, and it was the first duty of an ambassador, while upholding British interests, to prevent points of contact becoming points of conflict. There were times

    305
    when that became impossible, and when it had been stated or hinted in debate that Lord Currie failed to be popular at Constantinople, he would say that that was distinctly a case in which he should not blame the ambassador. The circumstances were such that he thought it would be impossible for a British Ambassador to be popular at Constantinople in the trying times through which Lord Currie passed during the first years he was there, consistently with his doing his duty to his own Government at home, and to the great international and moral questions that were raised at that time. But though he would be entirely against attacking an Ambassador on any occasion at the expense of His Majesty's Government, he thought the noble Lord went a little too far when he claimed such great credit to Lord Currie on the ground that the Italian policy had been so successful. He had no criticism to make on Lord Currie in the matter of policy. On matters of policy the Government alone must be held responsible. He did not think the Italian policy had been so conspicuously successful that it was entitled to be given as an instance of great diplomatic achievement. He should be glad not to be misunderstood in this matter. Criticism had been passed because a friendly understanding had been brought about between the French and Italian Governments. He would not have had Lord Currie or His Majesty's Government do anything in the world to prevent that good understanding being brought about. A few years ago it might have sounded like a paradox, perhaps, to say that His Majesty's Government and the French Government should go hand-in-hand in African and Mediterranean questions, and that, therefore, if His Majesty's Government were going hand-in-hand with Italy, it would be impossible that Italy could go hand-in hand with France. Things had changed in the last few years. Some causes of friction with the French Government had become very ancient, but, what was still more, many of those almost innumerable points of contact in Africa, which many of them feared were likely to become points of conflict, had been adjusted in a peaceable and satisfactory manner between the
    306
    two countries, with the result that boundaries had everywhere been drawn between British and French Possessions in Africa, and the French had now got an enormous territory in Africa, along which boundaries had been drawn mutually between the two countries in so far as they touched our own territory—an enormous territory, which was not open to the reproach that it was not worth having, but which, on the contrary, when it was developed, might become an enormous and valuable French Empire in Africa. That excited, he believed, neither apprehension nor jealousy, nor grumbling in this country. While boundary questions were pending in West Africa, there was, perhaps, some apprehension. But now that they had been settled, though criticisms were passed at the time that too much was being given away, the settlement had been accepted by this country, and we looked forward to being occupied in developing our own territory; and he believed we had not an atom of jealousy or apprehension in the matter, or any desire that the French territory should not succeed as well as our own. That being so, he saw no reason why the French and Italian understanding should result in England being on worse terms with the Italian Government. But he was not sure that His Majesty's Government had managed matters satisfactorily. Why he did not criticise Lord Currie in the matter was simply this. The point which occurred to his mind was that this was just one of those agreements which we made with the French Government some years ago, which did give rise to apprehension in the Italian mind that Italian interests, present or prospective, in Tripoli, were in some way being affected by the agreement which had been come to. He thought there was no need for that apprehension, but there was need of tact and foresight by which all suspicion and apprehension in the Italian mind had been prevented. It was almost impossible, if they did not do these things at the time, to entirely get rid of apprehension. What he should like to be quite sure about was that the agreement between France and Italy had not been arrived

    307
    at at the expense of our own relation with the Italian Government. He thought he might urge that because it was not a counsel of perfection which was unattainable. Lord Currie's action was not the question; he could not possibly adjust the relations between the British the Italian and the French Governments unless he had instructions from home. Where it was a question of preserving the good relations between the three countries, it was largely a matter of policy for which the Ambassador could not be held responsible. He would only say, in conclusion, that he did not grudge in the least the better understanding between Italy and France. In fact, he welcomed it, because he had always felt it to be a most undesirable situation that it should be supposed that any understanding between England and Italy should make it impossible for ourselves or Italy to arrange affairs with France in the same cordial way. He welcomed it as a great obstacle to peace which had now been removed. He was glad that the Italian Government did arrange its own affairs with the French Government in the manner in which it had arranged them. But what he contended for was that there should be tact and watchfulness on the part of the British Government, so as to make it perfectly clear to both parties that this country regarded the arrangement as one which should not impair its relations with either. He expressed his satisfaction at the fact that the hon. Member for Lynn Regis did not intend to press his Motion which he made—that the salary of the Ambassador at Rome should be reduced—because he was sure it was one which could not be supported by anyone who had ever been associated with Lord Currie in public work.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES, in asking leave to withdraw his Motion, said that, as the noble Lord had stated most distinctly that His Majesty's Government had not received any demand from the Italian Government for the withdrawal of Lord Currie, he thought he ought to express his regret at having given currency to a statement which he, at the time, fully believed to be founded on fact.
    SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that he agreed with his right hon.
    308
    friend (Sir K. Grey) as to ninety-nine-hundredths of what he had said, and therefore he would not occupy the time of the Committee by referring to the points of agreement, but simply deal with one or two matters in regard to which his views did not fully coincide with those of his right hon. friend. On the question of Consular representation there was a tendency on the part of all who had been connected with the Foreign Office to ignore the fact that there had been a good deal of jobbery in connection with Consular appointments. Personally he was acquainted—as other Members must be— with notorious cases in which men, by an undue use of the patronage of various Secretaries of State, had been "jobbed" into Consular appointments for which they were totally unfit, and the interests of the country had suffered in very high degree in consequence. There was also the fact that most meritorious Consuls had for years laboured very hard indeed in the service of the country, and in the commercial work to which so much importance was properly attached, and had then frequently been passed over, and men from outside had been "jobbed" over their heads into posts which were regarded as the prizes of the profession, and to which these Consuls ought to have been appointed as a reward for the good work they had done. Subject to these remarks—and he thought there was already some improvement in regard to the matters to which he referred, which improvement, under the watchfulness of the House, must be constant — he concurred in all that had fallen from his right hon. friend on the subject. Passing to the more important question of the diplomatic relations of this country, he did not think that, in his heart, any Member of the Committee could really be of opinion that our Consular and; Diplomatic Services were what they might or ought to be. The Under Secretary of State had said, as regarded the Consular Service, that a Departmental Committee was now sitting; and he had stated what that Committee was considering, and what he hoped it might do. But all the Departments of the State were in some degree like the War Office in this respect—that Committee after Committee was appointed, excellent reports were made, but little action resulted. It was

    309
    a curious fact that the very points selected by the noble Lord as being matters on which, because of the appointment of this Committee, he could not speak, were most fully considered by the Ridley Commissioners a few year. ago, and recommendations were made, which had been only in part acted upon. These very points of jobbery were dealt with not obscurely in the Report, and steps ought to have been taken to avoid the repetition of such proceedings. It was only by constant watchfulness on the part of the Committee and of the public generally, that the Consular and Diplomatic Services would be kept up to the mark. As to the diplomatic side of the question he was confident that the a was not a Member of the Committee who, in private, would for a moment maintain that our diplomatic representation, either at Rome or at Pekin, during recent events, had been what it might have been. Too good a face was being put upon facts when it was suggested that our representation had been the most competent in affairs of such moment to the State. He fully agreed that the main responsibility for what had occurred at Rome — to which, on the present Occasion he would confine his remarks—must rest upon the policy of the Government. But were His Majesty's Government thoroughly well informed by their Ambassador at Rome as to what was passing? Did any Member of the Committee believe that while the French Embassy at Rome was in the hands of Monsieur Barrère we were adequately represented by our Ambassador, and that the Government had been thoroughly informed? It was impossible to watch what occurred at Rome during last winter without seeing that there had been failure, both of policy and of the agent of the policy, and that we were not competently represented throughout those transactions. He agreed very largely with the right hon. Gentleman as to the general nature of what those transactions might have been, and the general turn which might usefully have been given to the negotiations, but he was amazed at the statement of the noble Lord that our relations with Italy had never been more cordial, and at his claiming
    310
    for Lord Currie the credit of having restored those relations to the position of extreme cordiality. No member of the Committee who had followed the official declarations of the Governments of Austria, Italy and France upon this subject could believe that our relations with Italy at present were restored to the position of cordiality of a few years ago. Then we had an agreement on the lines of our general policy of the maintenance of the status quo in the Mediterranean, whereas now, so far as could be gathered from the explanations given in Austria, Italy and France, that agreement had been replaced by an arrangement to which Italy had come having in view not the maintenance, but the disruption of the status qou.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. BOLANDwho also had on the Paper a Motion to reduce the Vote for the salary of the Under Secretary of Stats by £1,000, said that he regretted the noble Lord had not dealt more exhaustively with the criticism of the extravagance with the arrangement of the Consular service. In addition to the Ambassador at Berlin, Ministers were maintained at Bavaria, Darmstadt, and Saxony. He should have thought that the Minister at Berlin would be able to deal with all the affairs in Germany, and in this connection he desired to know whether these small States had representatives at the British Court. £3,550 was voted annually for the maintenance of these Ministers and their underlings. It might be said that it was extremely useful for young diplomats to have an opportunity of learning their business at small and unimportant courts. As regarded the economic question, as an Irish Member he was deeply interested in this matter, because a certain portion of it came out of the pockets of the people of Ireland. Therefore he trusted that there would be an adequate explanation given of this matter. It had been stated by the noble Lord that the Maltese question had been solved, but was the Foreign Office ignorant of what was going on there? Far from this question being solved, it was in a condition which was anything but I satisfactory.
    * LORD CRANBORNE: What I said was that all the soreness which existed in Italy with regard to the Maltose question had been removed.
    MR. WEIR: That is not so.
    * LORD CRANBORNE: Does the hon. Member say that I am not stating correctly what I did say?
    MR. WEIR: Oh, no!
    MR. BOLAND: I understand that this question is not solved in regard to Malta?
    * LORD CRANBORNE: I am not responsible for the Government of Malta.
    MR. BOLANDsaid he was glad to have this explanation, and he hoped the noble Lord would show why this enormous sum of £3,550 was spent in this way
    MR. LOUIS SINCLAIRthought that these Consular Reports should at least be business-like, otherwise they were not worth the paper they were printed upon, and it would be a waste of time to read them and publish them. It was well known how unbusiness-like the Foreign Office were in these matters, and our trade and commerce suffered in consequence. Our Consular Reports compared very unfavourably with those of the United States. America spent a much larger sum of money, and employed fifty one Consuls in Germany, as compared with five paid officials representing Great Britain in Germany. That showed how unbusiness-like the Foreign Office method was, and, in his opinion, this Department ought to be placed in charge of a Minister of Commerce. This question very much affected the Colonies, because foreign Governments had Consulsand commercial attachés in all our Colonies, with the result that they snatched the trade which should come to this country. They had no information sent them to guide English traders and manufacturers. This was not the only point in which this country was behind, for in South Africa and Japan similar things were occurring. In South Africa, during the
    312
    war, France and Germany sent out agents to report what could be done there for their manufactures, and all kinds of trade in manufactured articles and contracts had been taken away from us. That was the result of inadequate commercial information, for they had a right to demand reliable information for the money which was spent. The noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs seemed to be satisfied that the amount of commerce with Bolivia was so small that it was not worth considering.
    *LORD CRANBORNE: I did not say that. What I said was that the trade was comparatively small.
    MR. LOUIS SINCLAIRsaid that Bolivia did a large trade with this country. He wished to point out to the noble Lord that our commerce and diplomatic relations with Bolivia had been interrupted on account of the unwarrantable action of the British agent out there. Since the year 1840 there had been no commercial or diplomatic relations with that country owing to the action of this agent. Some promises had been made upon this point, and he trusted good results would follow. They ought to have some better assurance that these matters would be looked into. The allocation of the money in these Estimates was absolutely unbusiness-like, and he questioned whether the Committee knew what these Consuls actually did. Anyone who travelled on the Continent knew that if he required the assistance of a British Consul he often had to drive four or five miles away from the town to find him. Our Consuls were generally called in chiefly to settle disputes in regard to the bills of boarding houses, but if the representatives of this country abroad were appointed on account of their qualifications and understood our commercial requirements, he was sure they would have infinitely better results and better reports. The British commercial attaché in France had not only to look after France, but also Italy and Switzerland, and our German representatives had also to look after Norway, Finland, and portions of Russia. Under those circumstances could they hope to get any

    313
    useful information from men who had to cover so much ground? The Foreign Office might bean excellent Department in regard to diplomacy, but when it undertook duties which properly belonged to the Board of Trade, such as the appointment of the commercial attachés and Consuls, it must result in bad work. They had always had had work and bad reports, and this state of things would remain as long as the Foreign Office undertook to do what it could not possibly perform satisfactorily. His noble friend the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was excellent in diplomacy, but what did he know about trade and commerce? It had been clearly shown in the past that it was not to the advantage of this country at large to combine these two important offices. He hoped it would be realised that a Minister of commerce was urgently needed, and it was on these grounds that he ventured to bring those matters before the Committee.
    MR. BRYCEsaid the hon. Member who had just sat down appeared to have a most exaggerated idea of what could be accomplished by the Foreign Office if they had a Minister for commerce. He was of opinion that if British manufacturers and merchants were to be helped, they must in the main help themselves. What the Foreign Office could do was, by comparison, trivial. The whole subject was inquired into, and a new departure was taken during the eighties, with which the commercial men of the country expressed themselves satisfied. The debates which had since taken place bad not advanced us much. An addition had been made to the number of commercial attachés, and on one occasion a certain number of persons were sent out, who travelled through a considerable area and sent reports. If anything else were to be done it must be an entirely now departure. It was perfectly true, as had been stated, that at various times in the past there had been great abuses of patronage in the Consular Service, and a great many people had been put into it who were not fit for the work, while, on the other hand, the efforts of many conscientious and able men bad been overlooked, and they had
    314
    not received the promotion which was their due. He regretted that he had not heard from the noble Lord a much more distinct acknowledgment that the time had come for making the Consular Service a proper branch of the Civil Service. If they had a regular system of changes, and gave the Members that knowledge of languages and commercial law which would fit them to give good reports, and then assured them that their work would be carefully watched and adequately rewarded, they would secure a service which would be much more efficient than the present, and would meet the demands of the commercial world. He agreed with the noble Lord that it was to a considerable extent a question of money, but it was not a question of a large sum of money. The amount required to make our Consular Service equally competent with that of Germany or France or the United States was a mere trifle compared with the amount spent on the Diplomatic and Consular Services altogether. Although something might be done in the way of rearrangement, it would be necessary, in order to have that properly settled, that the Treasury should take a much more enlightened view of this matter than it did at present. When he was at the Foreign Office he found that when an application was made to the Treasury for a grant of money for a new purpose, such as the appointment of a consular agent, the Treasury said they would give the money if the Foreign Office would undertake to make a reduction in some other quarter. The Treasury accepted the reduction in respect of some other expense which was being incurred, but did not make the new appointment. The consequence was that the Departments, were not nearly so ready to go to the Treasury as otherwise, and the Treasury lost the opportunity of benefiting the public service. There was something grotesque about the way in which, under our system of Government, one Department blamed another. But the Government ought to have one policy in this matter, and the noble Lord could not shield his Department by coming down and saying that it was all the fault of the Treasury.
    *LORD CRANBORNE: I added to the observations I ventured to make, that, on these pecuniary subjects, I fully recognise that the Treasury have some case, because they have immense obligation in other directions.
    MR. BRYCEagreed that they had; but said that at the same time the expenditure in this case, if properly made, would be reproductive expenditure, and therefore it ought to be fairly considered by the Treasury. A sum of £10,000 or £15,000 might very usefully be added to our Consular expenditure, but he would spend that money not so much in establishing new Consulates as in extending the system of commercial attachés. Something had been said about the Consular reports; they could not be criticised as a whole. There were good and bad among them. They might as well try to criticise the novels of the last five years. Some of the reports were so scanty as to be nothing better than a few tables of statistics. He had seen a good many of the reports of United States Consuls, and he would suggest to the Foreign Office that our representatives abroad should furnish us with similar reports. They were short treatises on the commercial possibilities of the future. If the commercial attachés would endeavour to produce something like the United States Consular reports, they would add very much to the resources of our commercial men. He was glad to hear that a Committee was sitting upon the subject, and he only hoped that a little more would be done as a consequence than was done after the report of a former Committee. In regard to Italy, he was glad to hear the noble Lord express the belief that our relations with that country were as cordial as ever they had been. He entirely agreed that the conclusion of the agreement between France and Italy ought not to give any umbrage to this country.
    *MR. WYLIEsaid that, in the debate which took place recently, the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs stated that the Government were abandoning their efforts to obtain the abolition of likin duties in China. In regard to that statement, he was afraid
    316
    he had nothing but disapproval to express. He did not concur in the sweeping criticism made from the opposite Benches on the occasion of the last debate, to the effect that every European Government looked after the interests of its subjects in China except our own. He would make quite a contrary statement. This country was the first to initiate the armed interference which had secured the tranquillity of China. It had also been foremost in pressing for the abolition of restrictive duties, and, in fact, it had encouraged the policy of the open door. In regard to other countries getting concessions to make railways, he said that if we maintained the policy of the open door, the more railways were constructed by other people the better it would be for British merchants. He had been connected for a long period with many experts in the China trade, and the opinion expressed by almost every one of them with regard to the abolition of the likin stations was that final success was almost certain, if the Government persevered in their efforts. The noble Lord mentioned that the difficulties, would be almost insurmountable, because the larger part of the likin duties was raised on native and not on foreign trade. He quite concurred with the noble Lord as to the difficulties of abolishing these duties. Probably the difficulties of the Chinese Government in raising the indemnity fund had magnified their other difficulties. He, however, was encouraged to hope from the further statement of the noble Lord that they would be able, by fiscal arrangements at any rate, to relieve foreign trade in China from those enormous and uncertain burdens imposed upon it. Perhaps, as one having had some experience in the China trade, he might be allowed to give a little advice, and that was that in pursuing their more moderate policy the Government should follow as much as possible Article 28 of the Treaty of Tien-Tsin of 1858, when, after defining the method of the payment of transit dues, declared that the Chinese Government should issue certificates which should exempt British goods from all further imports under whatever name. If the Government were to insist on the observance of that Article, British merchants would be relieved, of an intolerable burden to

    317
    which they had been subjected for many years past. But the total abolition of likin would be not only to the enormous benefit of the British merchants, but of the Chinese themselves.
    *LORD CRANBORNEsaid that his hon. friend who had just sat down seemed to imagine that the Government had abandoned all hope of the abolition of the likin. He must remind the Committee that likin was imposed upon two classes of merchandise — foreign and native. As far as the interests of this country were concerned, all that we cared for was to relieve foreign merchandise of this burden. Native likin was far larger than foreign. It had been said that unless the likin stations were abolished altogether, illegal impositions would continue. The Foreign Office were at first impressed with that view, and entertained a hope that they should persuade the Chinese Government to abolish the likin stations altogether. But when they began to inquire into the matter, they found that a large trading opinion in this country was against them. Those engaged in the China trade, in Manchester, Blackburn, Bradford, and elsewhere, and the China Association in London, were all agreed that the total abolition of the stations was impossible, and for this reason, that the amount of money involved in the abolition of native likin was so considerable that no increase in Customs duties would make good anything like the deficiency which would result. In deference to the views of those trading interests which were urged upon the Foreign Office, they were reluctantly compelled to abolish that policy. But as to the abolition of likin upon foreign merchandise, that they still hoped to achieve. His hon. friend the Member for the Romford Division had said that we were very much under represented by Consular agents in China as compared with Germany. The hon. Member was under a total misapprehension. Our Consular and diplomatic agents numbered thirty-five. As regards the character of the Consular reports on trade, he pointed out that it was impossible for the Consuls to go into the elaborate technical details which some gentlemen seemed to require,
    318
    but, on the other hand, he admitted that some of those reports might be better. One of the things which the Foreign Office was at present engaged in was to raise the quality of the Consular trade reports which were under the standard, and with that view they were now in communication with the Board of Trade in the hope of enlisting their assistance and co-operation.
    *MR. WEIRsaid he trusted the noble Lord would see the importance of the reduction of the likin, especially on foreign goods. That tax affected British industry to a serious extent. There should be either the abolition of the likin or the imposition of a single tax at the port of entry, which would cover both likin and transit. He called the attention of the noble Lord to the fact that the British Consular offices in the East were only kept open from ten to twelve and from two to four, whereas the American Consular offices were kept open for two hours longer every day. He was not surprised, therefore, that the American merchants were getting larger orders than the British. There was not that go on the part of the British Consuls which there ought to be. Again, he wanted to know why the British Consul at Kobe failed to refer in his Consular Reports to industries in his district, the export value of which through the Kobe Customs did not exceed 200,000 yen annually. For instance, an industry such as the Tansan Mineral Water in which the population of all the villages around the "source" near Kobe were employed. This natural mineral water was the favourite water of the East, and not only largely exported from Kobe, but from Nagasaki, Yokohama and other Japanese ports, yet no reference whatever has been made to it in the Consular Report, although it is owned and conducted by an Englishman.
    It being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
    Resolutions to be reported tomorrow; Committee also report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING.
  THE CHAIHMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS.
  The Clerk at the Table informed the House of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means.

  SUPPLY [SEVENTEENTH ALLOTTED DAY].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.) in the Chair.]

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1902–3.

    CLASS IV.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £707,712, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1903, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland, including a Grant in Aid."
    MR. CALDWELLsaid that undoubtedly in Scotland, as in England, education was on the eve of considerable change, and that probably this would be the last occasion on which the Committee of the House would be able to express itself before these changes were brought forward by the Government. Under the Education Bill for England, the entire burden of elementary education and of secondary education up to a certain extent would be placed upon the ratepayers, the system thereby created thus approaching very closely to the existing Scottish system. To give effect to that system, the Government proposed to give to the English ratepayers a sum equal to 7s. 6d. per child in average attendance, and it was obvious that Scotland had a claim for an equivalent payment. The number of scholars in average attendance in Scotland was 645,404, which at 7s. 6d. per scholar would be £242,000 per annum.
    THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order, order! If the hon. Gentleman wishes to discuss an increase in the Grant that will require legislation, which, of course, is out of order on this vote.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid it was admitted on all hands that, owing to the payments made to England, Scotland would be entitled to the sum. He hoped therefore that, in the negotiations of the Scottish Education Department with the Treasury—
    THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order, order ! It is quite out of order to discuss the Education Bill upon this vote.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid he did not wish to discuss that Bill, but the policy which the Education Department would pursue in the matter with the Treasury.
    THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Of course, whatever future negotiations may take place, they will have to result in legislation if an increased grant is given, and to discuss that would necessarily be out of order.
    MR. CALDWELLsuggested that legislation was not necessary. This was the only way in which they had an opportunity of expressing an opinion.
    THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I must rule the hon. Member out of order. We have only to deal with money granted out of the Estimates, and not with money which may in future be granted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid his point was that it would be quite competent to increase the grant by a Vote of the House under the Code. He hoped that the Scottish Office would insist on Scotland receiving equal treatment with England. When the Vote was last before the House, it was suggested that secondary education in Scotland should be dealt with on one uniform system, apart from the elementary system of education. He hoped the Government would not give any effect to a suggestion of that kind, because in Scotland—unlike England—their system had been entirely parochial, and had embraced in the same school secondary as well as elementary education. Another suggestion was that of the hon. Member for Haddingtonshire, that education in Scotland should be divided into centres connected with the four universities. A system of that kind would be foreign to Scottish education, and would, he thought, meet with very

    321
    strong opposition. He was likewise entirely opposed to freeing secondary education, just as elementary education was free, because in Scotland they had already ample provision by which any child could make his way from the elementary school right on to the university. In these Estimates, only 3s. a head was given to the voluntary schools in Scotland, while the grant was 5s. a head in England, and that was another grievance. He moved to reduce the Vote by £100.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £707,612, be granted for the said service."—(Mr. Caldwell.)
    THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,)said that the hon. Member had stated truly that the general policy of education in Scotland had been discussed on former occasions. With regard to the proper disposition of the secondary education money, it had always been the pride of the Scottish elementary school that the pupil could go on to the secondary education, and that position was acknowledged by the Act of 1872, which gave the School Boards not only the direction of elementary, but of secondary education. He understood the view of the hon. Member was that the best disposition of the money would be to encourage local effort, According to the best educational views, they did not do the best for secondary education by dribbing their help into what were essentially primary schools, but it was better to take advantage of what secondary schools existed at present, and make them better. There were parts of the country where there were excellent secondary schools, and where the task was a comparatively easy one; but there were other parts where there were no secondary schools, and that was one of the difficulties which they had to encounter, and in these circumstances, when they had only a certain amount of money, they must do the best they could with it. He did not think that it was for the benefit of education in the proper sense of the word and the public generally that necessarily they should pay at the expense of the State for the secondary education of every child. The proper view was rather to encourage the bursary
    322
    system, or, in other words, the promotion of the child who was best fitted to go on to secondary education. But it was quite obvious that what was happening in connection with English education indicated a new departure on the part of the State, and in connection with this question they had to consider the situation in Scotland from its beginning. He had the assurance from the Prime Minister that equal justice in this matter would be done to Scotland and Ireland. It would be premature to consider how that was to be worked out, as the situation was different from that of England. They in Scotland might thank their stars that they never had had the religious difficulty as in England. In Scotland they were frankly denominational, and there was no difficulty in being denominational. They had the universal Board system, because they had not the denominational difficulty; but do not let them be trammelled by English precedent. The question would receive the earnest consideration of his noble friend; and there was no Scotsman who had given more earnest consideration to the question, or had a greater personal regard for the educational system, than had the present Secretary for Scotland. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman would not persist in his Motion.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid he moved the reduction in respect of the voluntary schools.
    MR. A. GRAHAM-MURRAY: It was obvious that they would have to begin on a new basis. As the hon. Gentleman was aware, the grants now given in England would have to be surrendered under the Bill now before the House; and when Scotland received a new Imperial contribution, that would also apply. Therefore, the question raised by the hon. Gentleman was, perhaps, a matter of historical discussion between the hon. Gentleman and himself, but he did not think it was a sufficient ground on which to base a reduction of the vote.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid he had been ruled out of order when he attempted to deal with the new state of things; and, therefore, he would fall back on the existing state of things. He was not to

    323
    be prevented from presenting his case to the Committee by the new proposals, which did not meet his objection at all. It was all very well for the Lord Advocate to say that the system was to be swept away; but how did they stand in Scotland at the present moment? In Scotland they only got 3s. per child in the voluntary schools, whereas 5s. per child was paid in England. All the other money required for education in Scotland was supplied from Scottish sources, and not a penny beyond 3s. per head was paid by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That was an undoubted fact; and, therefore, so far as the estimate was concerned, it was unfair to Scotland.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAYsaid that if the hon. Gentleman would not take a reasonable view of the matter, he was quite prepared to argue with him a twice-told tale. The hon. Gentleman was in the illogical position, perhaps, because of the forms of the House, that he was moving to reduce the estimate because he had not got more. The hon. Gentleman would remember that his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated again and again that he entirely repudiated the idea of an equivalent grant—the idea that because England in one year got a certain sum of money for educational purposes, Scotland should also get a certain proportion calculated on the ratio of el even to eighty, or any other figure. That was really what was at the bottom of the hon. Gentleman's contention. What his right hon. friend said was that if England were given a certain additional subvention from the Imperial Exchequer for educational needs, that would necessarily raise a concomitant claim on the part of Scotland for her educational needs, but that they should look upon the situation as a whole. He had heard, he was sure, the speech of the hon. Gentleman at least seven times. What the Chancellor of the Exchequer said on the occasion to which the hon. Gentleman referred was that he would keep up the 12s. subvention to Scotland instead of the 10s. given to England. The hon. Member now said that that had not cost the Chancellor of the Exchequer a penny. That was true. But why?
    324
    Simply because the produce of the probate duty had, owing to the prosperity of the country, turned out so much larger than was expected that there was no necessity to have recourse to the guarantee obligation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer made a promise which did not ring into money, but that was not the point on which the right hon. Gentleman was to be judged. The point was the total subvention from Imperial contributions for education in Scotland as against England. The hon. Member knew as well as he did that, taking every contribution to education from Imperial sources, it would be found that more per child was given in Scotland than was given in England. To a certain extent children in Scotland earned the money, but he could not think it could be regarded as a grievance when Scotland was paid more out of the Imperial Exchequer than England, and it did not seem to be a good reason for moving the reduction of the Vote. The real point of the speech of the hon. Gentleman was that he wished to have justice done to Scotland, in connection with the new arrangements. There he was entirely with the hon. Gentleman; but whether he would satisfy the hon. Gentleman in the application of the money was a different thing, as he would have to choose between the hon. Gentleman's views and the views of the hon. Member for the Border Burghs and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Haddingtonshire. With reference to the past, there was no real grievance, and as regarded the future, there would necessarily have to be a new departure. Therefore, although he could not prevent the hon. Gentleman from moving his reduction, he thought he ought to be satisfied.
    MR. RENSHAWsaid that, speaking as one deeply interested in Scottish education, he could not contend that Scotland did not receive a very substantial grant from the Imperial Exchequer; and, although no doubt the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lanark believed he had a legitimate grievance, it was more apparent than real. He did not intend to answer any of the statements of the hon. Gentleman,

    325
    but he wished to call the attention of the Lord Advocate to a point which he had brought before the Committee on a previous occasion. Under the provisions of the new code, larger grants had been given with a view to encouraging the establishment of higher departments in elementary schools in Scotland. The average grants varied from £3 10s. to £3 15s. per scholar, and there could be no doubt that the effect of establishing there higher departments, which had followed the giving of larger grants, had affected the attendance in the secondary schools. He did not think that that could be doubted. In many countries large sums were given to secondary schools on condition that a certain number of free places were provided for scholars who had passed an examination, had obtained the merit certificate, and had shown a capacity to benefit by secondary education. The secondary schools were to a certain extent competing schools with the higher departments. That being the case, he thought it was only right that the right hon. Gentleman should consider how far the dual system now established was calculated to effect really good work in regard to secondary education in Scotland. The question was one which was seriously exercising the minds of educationists in Scotland at present. If the existing system in Scotland were to be altered, then it seemed to him they would have to consider not only the system under which grants were at present distributed to higher departments in elementary schools, but also the system under which grants were distributed to secondary schools in which there were, elementary classes which were entirely attended by fee-paying scholars. As the right hon. Gentleman knew the County Committees had recently been appointed, and they were at present considering how they were to frame schemes for the ensuing three years. These schemes had to be framed with regard to the larger grants to be given to the higher departments in elementary schools; but there could be no doubt that the establishment of free scholarships in the secondary schools was, to some extent, driving out fee-paying scholars from the secondary schools. That was a result which it was not anticipated would follow
    326
    from the distribution of the larger sums from Imperial sources. They knew very well that fresh legislation in regard to secondary education was imminent. No long period could elapse before it was dealt with, and, that being the case, he would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to endeavour through the Department to collect information as to what the effect had been of the distribution of the larger funds and the establishment of free scholarships in the secondary schools He thought it would be regarded by all who knew the work carried on by the secondary schools in the past as unfortunate if an apparent competition was established between the higher departments of the elementary schools and the secondary schools proper. It was possible they were weakening the existing secondary schools; and he would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to bring the matter before the Department with a view to its being carefully considered, and to ascertain whether the expenditure of money in providing free places in secondary schools—the junior departments of which were only attended by fee-paying scholars—unless in very exceptional cases.
    SIR JOHN LENGsaid that from observation in his own constituency he was very much in agreement with what the hon. Gentleman opposite had just said, and he thought the hon. Gentleman's views were strictly correct. He had not spoken on the English Education Bill, but he had observed day after day discussions on the denominational colleges in England and their future treatment. It appeared to him that there was a way of escape from many of the difficulties which had been discovered with regard to England, and that was by following the example of Scotland in encouraging training departments for teachers in connection with colleges and universities. He had never been much in favour of denominational colleges, even in Scotland, because he regarded them as institutions for the cheap turning out of, in the main, an unsatisfactory class of teacher. The right line to take was to encourage students who proposed to make teaching their profession to pass through the universities. They could not accomplish everything at once, but they might develop the system of King's students in

    327
    connection with the ordinary colleges and universities. It was most important that the teachers should be thoroughly competent and efficient; and it was with reference to the training of teachers that they had fallen behind Germany, America, and other countries. He knew from observation that the training department established in connection with the University College in Dundee, although only in existence for a comparatively short time, was attracting great attention, and was drawing to it the best class of young people who intended to make teaching their profession. Fortunately, they had at the head of the Scotch Education Department one of the most enlightened men who could hold that position. They had comparatively few grievances in connection with the Education Department; but, although there were defects to be remedied, and much to be done to bring themselves into line with what was being done abroad, still they were moving gradually and steadily in the right direction. He had no reason to complain of the Department, but rather to commend the work which had been already done. He only desired to strengthen the hands of the Department, and encourage it to pursue the line it was now taking.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAYsaid he did not know if the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dundee was present when the question of the training of teachers was previously discussed.
    SIR JOHN LENG: No.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: If the hon. Gentleman had been present he thought he would have been quite satisfied, because he said then, and would repeat now, that there was every wish now on the part of the Department to amplify as far as possible the rôle played by the Universities in the training of teachers. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that that view had their entire sympathy. As to the view of his hon. friend the Member for West Renfrew, his hon. friend considered the matter from a wide point of view. He did not doubt that what his hon. friend had said might be a practical disadvantage; but, as had been said, they could not have everything at once. If he had any knowledge of his hon. friend's
    328
    educational views, and he thought he had, his hon. friend would be the last man to support the views of the hon. Member for the Border Burghs that there should be free secondary education everywhere. But surely his hon. friend would be the last to say, if there was a really clever boy in a remote district who could not have the advantage of secondary education in that district, that he should not have a chance under any perfect educational system; and he did not know how that chance could be given except by a bursary. In justice to the individual they should have a number of free places. The views of his hon. friend would not be lost sight of in the scheme which they certainly would have to adopt at no distant date.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid that with regard to the 12s. per child the Lord Advocate distinctly stated on a former occasion that there would undoubtedly be a deficiency, which he estimated at £26,000 a year. He confessed that at that time that estimate was entirely erroneous. The Lord Advocate suggested that the probate duty was increased. It was not; but, even supposing it were, England had received her proportion of the increased probate duty, and had applied it to the relief of local rates. If they in Scotland applied their money to education, what had the Imperial Exchequer to say to it? He raised the question to show that whenever Scotch interests were concerned, they invariably met with opposition from Members representing Scottish constituencies on the other side of the House. They were told that it would be absolutely necessary to get £20,000 from the Imperial Exchequer. They had not got a penny of it; and yet it was now contended that it would have been paid had there been a deficiency. The Imperial purse was paying 5s. per child in England and only 3s. per child in Scotland; and the Government had no right to claim that because Scotland paid 2s. extra, the Exchequer was entitled to the benefit of it. That was the point on which he was prepared to take a division, and allow hon. Members opposite to vote against it.
    MR. BANBURYsaid that as one of the few English Members who happened to be present, he wished, with great deference, to say a word or two in reply to the hon. Gentleman. He had listened to the speeches of the hon. Gentleman on many previous occasions, and, as far as he could make out, the claim of the hon. Gentleman was that the Chancellor of the Exchequer promised £20,000 if it were required.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid that the Lord Advocate had stated it was required, and was absolutely necessary.
    MR. BANBURYsaid that he had great admiration for the Lord Advocate, but even he could make a mistake. Apparently his right hon. friend had made
    a mistake, provided always that the statement of the hon. Gentleman was accurate. The money was to be given for educational purposes. It was not wanted for educational purposes in Scotland; but the hon. Gentleman said that, although it was not wanted for educational purposes, it could be applied to something else. He objected to that. Scottish children were more clever than English children, and no doubt could be educated more cheaply. If the money were required for education in Scotland, it should be given—not otherwise.
    (10.6.) Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 72; Noes, 123. (Division List No. 292.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E)

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

    Rea, Russell

    Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

    Jordan, Jeremiah

    Reddy, M.

    Boland, John

    Joyce, Michael

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kennedy, Patrick James

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Labouchere, Henry

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Leigh, Sir Joseph

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Cremer, William Randal

    Leng, Sir John

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Delany, William

    Lough, Thomas

    Sullivan, Donal

    Doogan, P. C.

    Lundon, W.

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

    Dunn, Sir William

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Fenwick, Charles

    M'Govern, T.

    Tomkinson, James

    Flynn, James Christopher

    M'Kean, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Foster, Sir William (DerbyCo.)

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Weir, James Galloway

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Whiteley, George (York. W. R.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Moss, Samuel

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Harms worth, R. Leicester

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Harrington, Timothy

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Young, Samuel

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Helme, Norval Watson

    O'Mara, James

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Mr. Caldwell and Mr.

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    George Brown.

    Jones, Dav. Brynmor (Swansea

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Bignold, Arthur

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Bigwood, James

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Bill, Charles

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Archdale, Edward Mervyn

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Arrol, Sir William

    Bull, William James

    Finch, George H.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Bain, Col. James Robert

    Butcher, John George

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

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

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Wore'r

    Flower, Ernest

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Chapman, Edward

    Gibbs, Hn A. G. H. (City of Lond.

    Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

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

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Rutherford, John

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G. (Mid'x

    Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriessh.

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

    Milvain, Thomas

    Sadler, Col Samuel Alexander

    Heaton, John Henniker

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

    Henderson, Sir Alexander

    Morgan, David J (Walthamst'w

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

    Higginbottom, S. W.

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Smith HC (North'mb. Tyneside

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Mount, William Arthur

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Hope, J. K. (Sheffield, Brigh side

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Pilking on, Lt.-Col. Richard

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Valentia, Viscount

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Purvis, Robert

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Lawson, John Grant

    Pym, C. Guy

    Wentworth. Bruce C. Vernon-

    Lewson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

    Randles, John S.

    Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund, Lyne

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

    Remnant, James Farquharson

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

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Wylie, Alexander

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Wynoham, Rt. Hon. George

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Macartney, Rt Hn W G Ellison

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Maclver, David (Liverpool)

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Sir William Walrond and

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Mr. Anstruther.

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

    Russell, T. W.

    Original question again proposed.
    *MR. WEIRsaid he wished to direct attention to the condition of the Highland schools. When he brought the question forward on a previous occasion, it was treated in a very cavalier fashion by the Lord Advocate. He was glad to observe that under the new Code the local contribution had been reduced to one-eighth. He could not understand why the Secretary for Scotland could not see his way to remove even the one-eighth as far as the Highland schools were concerned. The Highland districts were too poor to pay it. If the right hon. Gentleman would visit the island of Lewis and the outer Hebrides, he would realise the miserable condition of the people, and that they were too poor to provide even a contribution of one eighth. When the matter was last before the Committee, he suggested that the Lord Advocate should consult with the Secretary for Scotland and the Department on the subject, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would now be in a position to tell the Committee that it had been satisfactory settled, and that the one-eighth contribution had been knocked off in the Highland crofting counties. He also
    332
    wished to impress on the right hon. Gentleman the necessity for continuing evening continuation schools, and the great advantage conferred by them. In one, of the Western districts of Ross-shire, a schoolmaster informed him that thirty young men attended the classes during the winter, so anxious were they to obtain knowledge. The right hon. Gentleman two or three years ago brought in a Bill, with the object of providing better educational facilities in the congested districts of the Highlands, but because a few Members placed a "block" on the Paper the measure was dropped. Surely the Government with its enormous majority could have swept the "block" out of the way. These children had special claims to consideration. They had no chance of getting on in the world unless they were given a fairly good education. If that education was forthcoming, much less would be heard about congested districts and crofters' difficulties. He also desired to call attention to the Report by Mr. Walker, the Chief Inspector of the North of Scotland, in which complaint was made of, the unsatisfactory ventilation, imperfect heating of schools, want of shelters for the children, and

    333
    the insanitary state of many of the school offices. According to the right hon. Gentleman, that Report had been ignored.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAYdenied that he said the Report was ignored. On the contrary, he said that every Report of that kind received the consideration of the Board of Education.
    *MR. WEIRsaid that at any rate the right hon. Gentleman treated the matter in a very airy fashion, and referred to the ventilation of the House of Commons. What had that to do with the Highland schools? The right hon. Gentleman had failed to realise the seriousness of these matters, and in the hope of obtaining some more satisfactory information he moved to reduce the Vote by £200.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £707,512, be granted for the said Service."— (Mr. Weir.)
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAYsaid the hon. Member had raised exactly the same points on a former occasion. He complained that under the Continuation Code the Highland schools had not been exempted from all local contributions. When the matter was previously discussed
    it was explained to the hon. Member that an exception had been made in their favour, in that their local contribution was reduced to one-eighth, whereas, in other parts it was one-fourth. It was the view of the Education Department that it would not be wise to exempt them entirely from local contribution. That was a point of settled policy, with regard to which the hon. Member moved a reduction of the Vote, and it really seemed to be an abuse of the forms of the House that he should again move a reduction on the same point on the ground that the Board of Education had had a fortnight in which to consider his complaint. With regard to the matter of ventilation and so on, he entirely denied having treated it in a spirit of levity. Every one of these Reports received the most careful consideration of the Department, and were not in any way ignored.
    *MR. WEIRagain rose to speak.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAYrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
    (10.33.) Question put, "That the Question be now put."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 127; Noes, 70. (Division List No. 293.)

    AYES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Knowles, Lees

    Archdale, Edward Mervyn

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Finch, George H.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Arrol, Sir William

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lawson, John Grant

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

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

    Flower, Ernest

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

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Gibbs, Hn A. G. H (City of Lond.

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin & Nairn

    Lucas, Reginald J (Portsmouth)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Macartney, Rt. Hn W. G. Ellison

    Bignold, Arthur

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Bigwood, James

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nd'rry

    Maclver, David (Liverpool)

    Bill, (Charles

    Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Heaton, John Henniker

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Henderson, Sir Alexander

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Higginbottom, S. W.

    Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

    Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

    Milvain, Thomas

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Wdre'r

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

    Chapman, Edward

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Morgan, David J (Walthamstow

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Morgan, Hn. Fred.(Monm'thsh.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

    Howard, John (K'nt, Faversham

    Mount, William Arthur

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Tufnell, Lieut-Col. Edward

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Valentia, Viscount

    Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Russell, T. W.

    Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Rutherford, John

    Wharton, Rt. Hn. John Lloyd

    Purvis, Robert

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Pym, C. Guy

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

    Randles, John S.

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Wylie, Alexander

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

    Wyndham, Rt. Hn. George

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Renwick, George

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Sir William Walrond and

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Mr. Anstruther.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Thornton, Percy M.

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Boland, John

    Jones, David Brvnm'r (Swansea

    Rea, Russell

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, William (Caroarvonshire

    Reddy, M.

    Brigg, John

    Jordan, Jeremiah

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

    Joyce, Michael

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Kennedy, Patrick James

    Rigg, Richard

    Caldwell, James

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Leigh, Sir Joseph

    Runciman, Walter

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Leng, Sir John

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Cremer, William Randal

    Lundon, W.

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Delany, William

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Doogan, P. C.

    MacVeagh, Jeretmiah

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    M'Govern, T.

    Sullivan, Donal

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    M'Kean, John

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

    Flynn, James Christopher

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Thomas, J A (Glamorgan Gower

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Moss, Samuel

    Tomkinson, James

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.

    Harrington, Timothy

    O'Brien, P. J. (Pipperary, N.)

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    O'Mara, James

    Mr. Weir and Mr.

    Helme, Norval Watson

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Harmsworth.

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    (10.43.) Question put accordingly, "That a sum, not exceeding £707,512, be granted for the said service."
    The committee dividend:—Ayes, 71; Noes, 135. (Division List No 294.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    M'Govern, T.

    Boland, John

    Harrington, Timothy

    M'Kean, John

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Hayden, John Patrick

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Brigg, John

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

    Helme, Norval Wason

    Moss, Samuel

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Caldwell, James

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Jones, David Brynmor (Sw'nsea

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshre

    O"Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Jordan, Jeremiah

    O'Mara, James

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Cremer, William Randal

    Kennedy, Patrick James

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Delany, William

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Doogan, P. C.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Rea, Russell

    Dunn, Sir William

    Leigh, Sir Joseph

    Reddy, M.

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    Leng, Sir John

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    Lough, Thomas

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Lundon, W.

    Rigg, Richard

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Runciman, Walter

    Sullivan, Donal

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Thomas, J A (Glam'rgan, Gower

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Tomkinson, James

    Mr. Weir and Mr. Harms-

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    worth.

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex F.

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Purvis, Robert

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Randles, John S.

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Henderson, Sir Alexander

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Archclale, Edward Mervyn

    Higginbottom, S. W.

    Ratcliff, R. F.

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Arrol, Sir William

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Hope, J. F (Sheffield, Brightside

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Bain, Col. James Robert

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Renwick, George

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Richards, Henry Charles

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

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Beach, Rt Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Knowles, Lees

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Bignold, Arthur

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Bigwood, James

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Russell, T. W.

    Bill, Charles

    Lawson, John Grant

    Rutherford, John

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Leve-on-Gower, Frederick N.S.

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Seely, Maj. J.E.B (Isle of Wight

    Chapman, Edward

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

    Stewart, Sir Mark J.M 'Taggart

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Cranborne, Viscount

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Maxwell, W.J.H (Dumfries-sh.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Milvain, Thomas

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Finch, George H.

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Morgan, David J. (Walth'mso'w

    Webb, Col. William George

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

    Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Mount, William Arthur

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Rt Hn. A Graham (Bute

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

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Gibbs. Hn. A G H (City of Lond.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Sir William Walrond and

    Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Mr. Anstruther.

    Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY claimed, That the original Question be now put."
    (10.54.) Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding" £707,712, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending
    on the 31st day of March, 1903, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland, including a grant in aid."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 141; Noes, 66. (Division List No. 295.)

    AYES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Arrol, Sir William

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Archdale, Edward Mervyn

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Beach, Rt Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

    Bignold. Arthur

    Bigwood, James

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Bill, Charles

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Renwick, George

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Brodrick Rt. Hon St. John

    Knowles, Lees

    Rigg, Richard

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Caldwell, James

    Lawson, John Grant

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (W'rc'r

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Chapman Edward

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Charrington, Spencer

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

    Russell, T. W.

    Churchill, Winston Spencer

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Rutherford John

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Colomb, Sir John Charle Ready

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Cranborne, Lord

    Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Macdona, John Cunnning

    Scott, Sir S (Marylebone, W.)

    Douglas Rt. Hn. A. Akers

    Maclver, David (Liverpool)

    Seel, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Seely, Maj. J.E.B. (L of Wight)

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

    Spear, John Ward

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

    Finch, George H.

    Maxwell, WJH (Dumfriesshire

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Milvain, Thomas

    Steward, Sir Mark J.M 'Taggart

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Flower, Ernest

    Morgan, David J. (W'thamst'w

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Morgan, Hn. Fred. (M'nm'thsh.

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lon.

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Moss, Samuel

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

    Mount, William Arthur

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Gorst, Right Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Valentia, Viscount

    Gunter, Sir Robert

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Warde, Col. C. E.

    Hamilton, Rt Hn LdG. (Midd'x.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Webb, Colonel William George

    Hamilton Marq. of L'nd'nderry

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

    Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Wharton, Rt. Hn. John Lloyd

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Platt,-Higgins, Frederick

    Willox, Sir John Archibald

    Henderson, Sir Alexander

    Plummer, Walter R.

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

    Higginbottom, S. W.

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Wylie, Alexander

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

    Purvis, Robert

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Randles, John S.

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Ratcliff, R. F.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Sir William Walrond and

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Mr. Anstruther.

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

    Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Boland, John

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

    Rea, Russell

    Brigg, John

    Jordan, Jeremiah

    Reddy, M.

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

    Joyce, Michael

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Kennedy, Patrick James

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Leigh, Sir Joseph

    Runciman, Walter

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Leng, Sir John

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Cremer, William Randal

    Lough, Thomas

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Delany, William

    Lundon, W.

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Doogan, P. C.

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Scares, Ernest J.

    Dunn, Sir William

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Sullivan, Donal

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    M'Govern, T.

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

    M'Kean, John

    Thomas, J A (Glamorg'n, Gower

    Flynn, James Christopher

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Harrington, Timothy

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Connor, James Wicklow, W.

    Mr. Weir and Mr. Harms-

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    O'Mara, James

    worth.

    Helme, Norval Watson

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,316,770, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1903, for the salaries and expenses of the Inland Revenue Department,"
  MR. O'MARAcalled attention to the sums paid to members of the Royal Irish Constabulary for the discovery of illicit stills. He suggested that the enormous number of discoveries was due to the reward paid, as in Scotland, where no reward was offered, only four illicit stills were discovered. As not a single hon. Member sitting upon the Irish Benches had been able to come across an illicit still in Ireland, he thought the fact that the Royal Irish Constabulary had discovered so many required some explanation. Before the Estimates next year were presented he hoped the Inland Revenue Department would inquire fully into this matter. The House last year was satisfied with the promise of an inquiry which was then given, and he understood that some inquiries had actually been carried out. The result of those inquiries he had endeavoured to elicit by Question and answer in the House, but he had been unable to obtain the result of those inquiries, and the Return he asked for had been refused. He had asked for information as to who these illicit stills had been discovered by, and whether prosecutions had taken place, but the information was refused. He protested against the way these inquiries were made, and the manner in which the publication of this information had been shirked. He could not call to mind any case in which any punishment had resulted from those inquiries. He understood that 1,826 illicit stills had been discovered, and more than 75 per cent, of them were discovered in one province, and over 600 in one county. It seemed extraordinary that under those circumstances no prosecution had followed. He ventured to assert that the same still did duty in one district repeatedly, in order that the police might obtain the rewards. When the reward was paid, the still was planted out again, and the police went out next morning and seized it, so as to secure payment of another
  342
  reward. In the particular district to which he referred, there were 200 "discoveries" of illicit stills, but he was assured that it was the same still in each case. [Laughter.] He was stating what he believed to be a fact. It might seem very funny to hon. Members, but after the exposure which had recently been made in the Sheridan case, this was quite a minor matter. Surely the House would be inclined to believe him, when he said that the same still had done service in 200 or 300 "discoveries" of illicit stills. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury had admitted that such was probably the case.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): No; I did not admit that.
  MR. O'MARA: Well, you admitted that there was some irregularity in the matter.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. If any words of mine could be capable of such an interpretation, I can only say that they wore used by inadvertence.
  MR. O'MARAsaid he certainly understood the Financial Secretary of the Treasury to admit that there was some irregularity. In any case, the way in which this inquiry had been conducted, and its results, would lead one to suppose that the facts were as he had stated. His information was that the police had planted out this still for the purpose of "discovering" it. He was not aware that 1,826 stills had been discovered in Ireland legitimately. If all these stills had been discovered with worms and all the other paraphernalia surely there would have been more than twenty prosecutions. That seemed a ridiculously small number of prosecutions compared with the number of discoveries. He asked the Financial Secretary of the Treasury whether an inquiry had really taken place, and if so, what irregularity, if any, had been discovered, and what steps had been taken to prevent police men from getting rewards for stills planted out.
  MR. HUGH LAWsaid he had learned with absolute amazement within the last hour or two that in the past year there were some 1,800 illicit stills discovered in Ireland. He thought there was some ground for amazement, because he knew, speaking for his own district, and he believed the case was not singular, that illicit distillation, which at onetime, undoubtedly, was very common in certain out of the way districts, had almost totally disappeared. In this particular instance there was no doubt peculiar circumstances. The influence of Dr. O'Donnell had been thrown very strongly against the practice, and he had good reason to believe that in that district illicit distillation had entirely disappeared. He should be glad if the Financial Secretary would tell the Committee whether any cases had been found in the diocese of Raphoe. He awaited with very great interest the reply of the hon. Gentleman.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I think the hon. Gentleman who has raised the question does not quite recollect what was said a year ago, or what exactly was the nature of the statement I made. He has spoken of the inquiry which I promised as if it were to be some form of public inquiry almost in the nature of a trial or a Committee of Inquiry. He has spoken of the result of this inquiry having been kept secret, and he has given an air of mystery to it which would lead one to suspect the worst. Certainly, I am not going to shelter myself by attacking the conduct of the police. In this matter I am to a certain extent responsible. When I spoke of an inquiry I had nothing in my mind in the nature of an inquiry such as the hon. Member has described. The subject was one which was quite new to me. Hon. Members will remember that I had not been long in my present office, and having had my attention called to the subject, I was struck by the very large number of cases that occurred in Ireland. When I found that the rewards in Ireland appeared to be on a higher scale than in other parts of the United Kingdom I thought that there was good ground for inquiry, and that inquiry I
  344
  proposed to make myself with the Board of Inland Revenue and the Constabulary authorities in Ireland. That is the kind of inquiry which I had in my mind. It never entered my head that any hon. Gentleman would expect me to give a formal Report with regard to the confidential communications which passed, and which it would be quite impossible and contrary to practice to lay on the Table of this House. As the result of the inquiries I have made, I have not the least reason to suppose that there are any such malpractices as the hon. Member for South Kilkenny thought it right to suggest exist on a large scale. It is, of course, not possible for me to pledge myself that throughout all the United Kingdom there is not a single officer of the Board of Inland Revenue who has not committed a fault, but what I can say is that nothing has come to my knowledge to lead me to suspect anything of the kind of which the hon. Gentleman spoke. He said, speaking what he honestly believes to be true, that one still—whether originally genuine or not, I know not—was planted out 200 times or so under the direction of the Constabulary, or at their instigation, and that they, on each occasion, sought the reward for its detection. I say, then, that I am entitled to ask the hon. Gentleman to give me the information on which he makes that statement, and to put me in possession of the evidence he must have, and if there be a case of such grave misconduct, I shall do my best to bring the offenders to justice.
  MR. O'MARA: The facts I have stated to the Committee are the common talk of the country side.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Are these charges to be made on the common, talk of the country side? Surely the hon. Member will see that it is not right for a Member of the House to use his position as a platform from which to disseminate charges of this grave character in this form on the strength of common rumour, which is notoriously a lying jade.
  MR. O'MARA: The hon. Gentleman can make inquiries. I have given him the name of the town, and, if he finds the common rumour is wrong—
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir, I will not make inquiries. I do not think it right to make inquiries on these conditions. I assumed, when the hon. Gentleman said he had this information, which he gave to the House, believing it to be true, that he had something more. I think I am entitled to ask the hon. Gentleman for something more, in order that the inquiry may be a serious one and not a farce. If the hon. Gentleman will give me any evidence which, in the opinion of such legal advisers as I should naturally call to my assistance, will show a primâ facie case for prosecution in a court of law, I shall not be slow to take the action demanded. But I decline to go on rumour, and to invite all the gossip of the country side. I decline to put these men on their trial without some better evidence that there is, at any rate, a primâ facie case against them. The hon. Member for West Donegal spoke of the surprise which he felt when he heard of the large number of seizures which had taken place. I think he was referring to the figures of a year ago. I ought to say that my opinion is that many of the seizures included in these figures are of a trivial kind. They were seizures of instruments used in illicit distillation, but it would be an abuse of language to call them illicit stills. The figures give the idea that the process of manufacture on an extensive scale had taken place in a large majority of these cases. I have no later information with regard to Ireland at the present moment before me. I have no information as to the number of seizures with regard to the special district of which the hon. Member for West Donegal spoke. I can only join my testimony to his in regard to the work Dr. O'Donnell has done, and express the hope that what he has done may strengthen the hands, and be an encouragement to others in Ireland who are seeking to deal with the evils of drunkenness. What did appear to me to be the case as the result of the inquiry I made was that rewards were paid in cases of seizures which were altogether too trivial to justify any reward at all, that the rewards paid in other cases were too high, and sufficient endeavour was not made when a seizure had taken place to
  346
  bring home the ownership of the article, seized to the person who was guilty. I think it is of enormous importance to do so. Having these facts in view, the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, with the full assent and approval of the Treasury, proceeded to revise the scale of rewards. We abolished rewards in certain cases altogether. Those are cases of seizures of parts of illicit stills, minor parts and so on. We abolished rewards for seizures of small quantities of liquors; rewards for larger seizures-were reduced; and restrictions were placed on the charges that might be incurred for prolonged duty, absence from quarters, and mileage. I speak with a little hesitation, because, after all, I would like to see our new scheme at work for a time before expressing confidently an opinion upon it, but I think what we have done is a movement in the right direction. I am not certain but that after further experience of its working it may be right for me to bring the matter before the Board of Inland Revenue, with the view to proceeding further on the course upon which we have now embarked; but I think this is one of those matters which require rather definite information. I will act on the advice I receive from those more experienced than myself, and who are responsible for the protection of the revenue. I do not think it right to press them to go further than they have gone at the present time. I shall watch the result of that with the view of seeing whether we should carry the experiment further. I hope that the Committee will see that the pledge to give this matter my personal attention has been carried out, and that the inquiry was started by me after discussion in the House. I have had conversations with the Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue on the subject. I hope this will be considered by the Committee as on the whole a satisfactory statement for the time, subject to what may be necessary after further experience. Before I sit down, lot me repeat in all seriousness what I have said already, that I regard these charges of widespread fraud against a great body of men without names, without details of the crime, without any kind of evidence to go upon, is a most regrettable proceeding. Let

  347
  me have the facts which you can readily understand are necessary for the investigation of the case, and I will certainly have it investigated. I believe the Committee will see that it is not the interest of the Government to shield malpractices if they can be proved on the part of anyone connected with the revenue.
  MR. FLYNNsaid his hon. friend had made a general accusation. Common rumour might be, as the hon. Gentleman had said, a lying jade, but he had ample means in his power to make inquiry. This question was brought before the House last year. The people had a most damnable suspicion about it. He used the word in the Parliamentary sense. When his hon. friend asked for a Return which would have gone towards probing the matter, the hon. Gentleman refused it. His hon. friend wished to know where the seizures took place, who made them, and the districts in which the prosecutions were held. That information was refused point-blank. There was something behind the scenes. Charges had been made against the Royal Irish Constabulary. Had they been justified within the last week. The Chief Secretary himself had admitted the charges against the Constabulary were well founded. In this case they made no specific charge against any constable or constables. His hon. friend said there were 200 cases, but if there were only 150 or 100 cases why should not an inquiry be made?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: If the hon. Member gives me any information sufficient to show a primâ facie case I shall inquire, but I will not proceed upon common rumour. It is not a question whether there are 150 or 200 cases. If there is evidence in a single case, I would desire it to be probed to the bottom.
  MR. FLYNNsaid that when his hon. friend took the first step in the direction of probing the matter he was stopped by the hon. Gentleman himself. The Return which his hon. friend asked
  348
  ought to have been granted in the public interest. It was not the duty of an Irish Member to become a public prosecutor. It was the business of a Department that was well paid for. It was the business of the Constabulary in conjunction with the Inland Revenue. There were only [our cases in Scotland as against 1,800 in Ireland. Did the hon. Gentleman know what an illicit still was? He was pretty sure that the hon. Gentleman did not know. They were very difficult things to establish and keep up. The whisky turned out of these stills was so vile that no one would think of drinking it, and the Inland Revenue laws were so strict that the illicit distillation never paid. There was never more than a case of suspicion, and he pressed on the hon. Gentleman to make a public inquiry. On a former occasion the hon. Gentleman had stated that he would do his best, in conjunction with the Inland Revenue, to make a full inquiry and afterwards to make a full statement on the matter, but he had made no such full statement. All that he had said was that in certain districts in the West illicit distillation prevailed. He knew the wilds of Donegal, and he was not aware of any part of that county where illicit distillation was carried on. He thought they were justified in asking why this £3,000 was asked for, and the Secretary to the Treasury need not have assumed an indignant tone when his hon. friend called attention generally to the practice of the police in discovering illicit stills. The inquiry which was asked for should include the number of prosecutions which had taken place, and the localities where these had occurred.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELLsaid he considered that it was a gross reflection on the people of Ireland to say that there were 1,800 seizures of illicit stills in Ireland in one year. The House must recollect that this had been going on for a very long time indeed—ever since the Irish Constabulary had been substituted in this detective work for Inland Revenue Police. He did not believe anything of the kind. His hon. friend had made a candid confession that night, that in a large number of those cases there was not the slightest

  349
  evidence; and that in others the seizures were trivial, and did not mean the seizure of a still, but only parts of the machinery of distillation. He believed that these figures were piled up under the system of rewards that have been offered. He was glad that his hon. friend had abolished the rewards for unimportant seizures. The Irish Police in the remote country districts had not much to do. There was no country in the world, in fact, in which the police had less to do, and if this duty was imposed upon them and a reward was offered, it was only human nature that they should pile up every year figures of illicit distillation which were wholly misleading. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would give attention to that fact, because it was ridiculous to imagine that there had been 1,800 seizures of illicit stills in Ireland as compared with four in Scotland where whisky was much more prized, and where there were greater temptations than in Ireland to illicit distillation. If the hon. Gentleman would overhaul the whole system he would find that the figures would go down immediately. He made no charge against the Irish Constabulary, but they should not act unless they had absolute proof in their hands, and where proved, the offence of illicit distillation should be pressed relentlessly home. But where there was nothing but common rumour the Government ought not to take action of any kind.
  *MR. WEIRsaid he wished to call attention to the unsatisfactory manner in which the officers of the Inland Revenue discharged their duties in Scotland. For instance, the surveyor of taxes in Inverness was also the assessor for Ross-shire and Inverness-shire, and he took his information in regard to the acreage of deer forests from the landlords and the landlords' factors. It was a physical impossibility for him to ascertain for himself the value and extent of the properties. He had never seen a more shameful document in his life than a Return issued some time ago as to the value of deer forests in Scotland. It was a most unsatisfactory method of conducting business to rely on Returns made by landlords or their
  350
  factors, because they were not subject to any penalties for giving inaccurate information. This practice could not work well. The assessor should not be the paid servant of County Councils, as well-as the Government. The system is unsatisfactory.
  MR. H. C. RICHARDSasked if the hon. Gentleman was in order in stating that a public servant was getting tips.
  *MR. WEIRsaid that this gentleman was remunerated from several sources. In his opinion every Government employee should be employed by the Government exclusively and paid by salary only, not by fees or commissions, the same as some professional men were.
  MR. H. C. RICHARDSasked whether the hon. Member was in order in charging him with receiving; commissions.
  THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANsaid that if the hon. Gentleman charged the hon. Member with receiving commissions he was out of order.
  *MR. WEIRsaid of course he did not charge the hon. Member with anything of the kind. What he said was that legal gentlemen received commissions, and why should he not refer to that matter? What were commissions but a system of tips?
  THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANsaid that he must ask the hon. Member to confine his remarks to the Vote under discussion.
  MR. WEIRsaid that, but for the interruptions of the hon. Member, he would have confined himself to the Vote. He wanted the hon. Gentleman to give him some satisfactory reply that this system would cease, and that public servants would not be allowed to undertake work which it was utterly impossible for them to perform.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINadmitted that he had promised the hon.

  351
  Member for Ross and Cromarty that he would make inquiry into the matter he had referred to. He had consulted the Board of Inland Revenue on the subject, and they told him that the duties of the Inland Revenue at Inverness were by no means too heavy for one man to discharge. He thought that he had communicated that view to the hon. Member by letter. The assessors were appointed by the local authorities, and if the hon. Member asked him to upset the whole of that system, and that no surveyor of taxes should act as assessor, even when appointed by the county authorities, then he thought that that would be a very dangerous task for him to undertake. However, he would convey the objection of the hon. Gentleman to the Lord Advocate to employing an official of the Government in collecting information as to land valuations, but personally he did not think that he would be able to persuade Members for Scotland to accept a proposal that surveyors of taxes should not be allowed to act as assessors when required to do so in special circumstances.
  MR. WEIRsaid he thanked the hon. Member for making the promise; but his point was that the assessor, instead of making the inquiry himself, which he knew was impossible, got the information as to acreage and value from the landlords or their factors.
  MR. FLYNNsaid that in view of the statement of the hon. Gentleman he moved to reduce the Vote by £2,000 as a, protest.
  Motion made and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,314,770, be granted for the said service."—(Mr. Flynn.)
  (11.59.) Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 56; Noes, 134. (Division List No. 296.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork.N.K)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Boland, John

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Partington, Oswald

  Caldwell, James

  Joyce, Michael

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Labouchere, Henry

  Rea, Russell

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

  Reddy, M.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Delany, William

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Leng, Sir John

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Elibank, Master of

  Lundon, W.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  M'Govern, T.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Kean, John

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk, Mid.)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Moss, Samuel

  Harrington, Timothy

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

  Sir Thomas Esmonde and

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Malley, William

  Mr. Patrick O'Brien.

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Mara, James

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

  Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Beckett, Ernest William

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bignold, Arthur

  Ceilings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Archdale, Edward Mervyn

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bond, Edward

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Arrol, Sir William

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire)

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

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

  Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

  Chapman, Edward

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Charrington, Spencer

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Finch, George H.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Macartney, Rt. Hn. W.G. Ellison

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Gibbs, Hn. A.G.H. (City of Lond.

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Russell, T. W.

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Rutherford, John

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

  Maxwell, W.J.H (Dumtriesshire

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'mlets

  Milvain, Thomas

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Gore, Hn. G.R.C. Ormsby- (Salop

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

  Morgan, David J.(Walth'mstow

  Seely, Maj. J.E.B. (Isle of Wight)

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

  Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew)

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G. (Midd'x

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Spear, John Ward

  Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

  Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford)

  Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Mount, William Arthur

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M'Taggart

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Hebhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Hope, J. F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Valentia, Viscount

  Howard, Jno. (Kent, Faversham

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Purvis, Robert

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Randles, John S.

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Lawson, John Grant

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Renwick, George

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

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Wylie, Alexander

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Ridley, Hon. M.W. (Stalybridge)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

  Rigg, Richard

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Sir William Walrond and

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Mr. Anstruther.

  Original Question again proposed.
  It being after midnight, and objection being taken to further proceeding, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Resolution to be reported tomorrow; Committee also report progress; to sit again tomorrow.

  PUBLIC OFFICES (DUBLIN) BILL.
  Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment to Question. [28th May.]
  "That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee of five Members, three to be nominated by the House, and two by the Committee of Selection."—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
  Which Amendment was—
  "To leave out the word 'Five,' and insert the word 'Fifteen.'"—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
  Question again proposed, "That the word 'Five' stand part of the Question."
  Debate resumed.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Ordered, That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee of nine members, five to be nominated by the House, and four by the Committee of Selection.
  Ordered, That all Petitions against the Bill presented three clear days before the meeting of the Committee be referred to the Committee; that the Petitioners praying to be heard by themselves, their counsel, or agents be heard against the Bill, and counsel heard in support of the Bill.
  Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.
  Ordered, That five be the quorum.— (Mr. Austen, Chamberlain.)

  PUBLIC OFFICES (DUBLIN) [ADVANCES.]
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Motion made and Question proposed, "That it is expedient to authorise the issue, out of the Consolidated Fund, of such sums, not exceeding in the whole £225,000, as may be required for the purposes of any Act of the present session for the acquisition of certain land in Dublin, and for the erection and equipment of a Royal College of Science. and other buildings for the public service, and to authorise the Treasury, for the purpose of providing for the issue and repayment of such sums, to borrow money by means of terminable annuities for a period not exceeding thirty years, such annuities to be paid out of moneys to be provided by Parliament for the service of the Commissioners, and if those moneys are insufficient, out of the Consolidated Fund."—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
  Committee report progress; to sit again tomorrow.

  YARDLEY CHARITY BILL.
  Read a second time, and committed for tomorrow.

  PAUPER CHILDREN (IRELAND) BILL [LORDS].
  Considered in Committee.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that this Bill did not go quite so far as the English Act, but it went a long way towards it.
  Bill reported, without Amendment; read the third time, and passed.

  PUBLIC LIBRARIES (IRELAND) BILL,
  As amended, considered; Bill read the third time, and passed.

  IRISH RECORD COMMISSION.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDErose to move "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying His Majesty to assent to the establishment of an Irish Record Commission and an Irish Historical Manuscripts Commission, for the better and more speedy publication of the Ancient Manuscripts and Records relating to Ireland."
  *MR. SPEAKER: This is not a proceeding under a statute. On what ground does the hon. Baronet claim to move what I assume is an opposed Motion?
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDEsaid he thought that this was the only manner in which he could raise the question.
  *MR. SPEAKER: Yes, if no one objects it can be done.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Government objects.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: Will the hon. Gentleman give me facilities for raising this question?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: There can be none.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: We will have the Yardley Charity Bill objected to the next time it comes up.
  Adjourned at twenty-five minutes after Twelve o'clock.