§ As amended, in Committee and on re-committal, further considered—
§ (9.0.) MR. CHANNING, resuming his speech, said his object in moving his resolution was to challenge the poliy of the duty on flour, and to elicit 1051 further information as to the relative proportions of the new duty. Incidentally, he might mention that the Board of Trade Returns for the last month showed an increase in the imports of wheat under the 3d. duty, and a marked decrease under the head of flour under the 5d. duty. There surely was some force in the contention that there was no equality between these duties according to the Return moved for by his hon. friend the Member for the Rushcliffe Division. The Chancellor of the Exchequer estimated that an import of 22,578,000 cwts. of flour and meal would give him a revenue of £470,000, but he was not clear whether that included maize meal, as to which there would now have to be a reduction made. But he desired more particularly to draw attention to the differential duties. He maintained that flour in this Budget was taxed on a distinctly fallacious standard if it was intended to be a standard of equity. If the standard was not fallacious, the tax was distinctly Protective to the millers at home. The duty on 60 lbs. of flour would be equal to the duty on 100 lbs. of wheat. That 100 lbs. of wheat when operated upon by the home miller would produce on the average 72 lbs. of flour and 28 lbs. of offal. Thus the home miller got 12 lbs. more flour for the same duty for imported grain in addition to the 28 lbs. of offal. Assuming the uniform value of wheat to be 30s. per quarter, the sack of 280 lbs. would realise 22s., while the offal would probably be sold at 90s. per ton. The relative percentage ad valorem on these duties worked out as he contended at 3¾ per cent. on wheat and not less than 4½ per cent. on flour and offal. Thus there was a great advantage to the home miller. Originally he paid 5d. per sack of 280 lbs; now he was only to pay 3½d. The miller paid 10½d. per 100 lbs., while the importer would pay 1s. 1½d. or 3½d. more than the home miller. The old duties at 3d. and 4½d. were based on the 66 per cent. extraction, but at that time the offals were not taken into consideration. One hundred cwts. of wheat at 3d. paid £1 5s., while 66 cwts. of flour at 4½d. paid £1 4s. 9d. duty, thus being practically equivalent one to the other. The right hon. Gentleman this afternoon repeated his denial that the present duty 1052 gave a benefit of 20 per cent. to the home miller, but surely the figures absolutely proved that up to the hilt. By this Budget 100 cwts. of wheat at 5d. paid £15s. while the duty on the flour at 5d. would realise £1 10s. That was an advantage of 20 per cent. If the figures were worked out on the same basis as in 1867, 100 cwts. of wheat at 3d. produced £1 5s., while 72 cwts. of flour at 4½d. returned £1 7s. Then if they reckoned into that what Mr. Gladstone did not consider, viz., the value of the offal at the reduced duty of 1½d., that would give 3s. 6d., so altogether the home miller got the advantage of 5s. 6d.—that was the discriminating duty in his favour. The hon. Member for Devonport the other night suggested that the duty on wheat should be 3d. and on flour 4d., and it was said he was wrong in asserting that there would be a benefit to the home miller on that calculation. But, again, the right hon. Gentleman had not taken into consideration the value of the offal. One hundred cwts. of wheat at 3d. gave 25s.; 72 cwts. of flour at 4d. produced 24s., and thus there was nominally a benefit to the foreign importer of 1s. on the 100 cwts., but if they also reckoned in the offals the benefit to the home miller was 2s. 6d., another distinct advantage of 10 per cent. He hoped he had put the figures clearly. The present Budget was stated to be a Revenue Budget, and not a Protective one, but the figures thus worked out—
| £ | s. | d. | |
| 100 cwt. of wheat at 3d. as against | 1 | 5 | 0 |
| 72 cwt. of flour at 5d. and | 1 | 10 | 0 |
| 28 cwt. of offal at 1½d. | 0 | 3 | 6 |
| Total | £1 | 13 | 6 |
§ These were points of the greatest importance. He attached grave importance to any infringement of the happy and beneficent rule of absolute Free Trade and absolute equality for the foreign trader and the home producer and manufacturer, and now he would revert again for a few moments to the imports of wheat and flour into this country. During the 1053 month of May wheat itself showed a con siderable increase probably due largely to the rise in prices. In May last year, however, the imports of flour from the United States were 1,768,000 cwts. whereas last May they were only 1,280,000 cwts. On the other hand, there had been a sudden increase in the imports of flour for Canada; they had risen from 28,000 cwt. to 95,000 cwt. in the month, or in the five months from 235,000 cwt. to 434,000 cwts. There had also been a corresponding increase in the imports of wheat for Canada. He wished to ask, did the Canadians hope to get a rebate on this Hour afterwards by means of the colonial arrangements in prospect? If we discriminated against American flour by giving rebates to colonial Hour, there would be enormous difficulty in levying the duty all along the frontier between Canada and the United States, and a large amount of American flour would be fraudulently brought to this country as Canadian flour. There would be much commercial and fiscal friction. He protested strongly against the discrimination in favour of the home miller.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 5, to leave out lines 23 to 26, inclusive."—(Mr. Channing.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
§ (9.25.) SIR M. HICKS BEACHsaid the hon. Member had moved an Amendment, the effect of which would be to reject altogether the duty on flour, al though the House had already agreed to impose the duty on grain. That would be a ridiculous position, which surely the hon. Member himself could not desire, because they would be relieving the manufactured article of duty, while taxing the raw material out of which it was manufactured.
§ MR. CHANNINGI made my Motion with two objects—
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHWe have heard that already three times.
§ MR. CHANNINGBut you are misrepresenting me.
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHsaid that ii the hon. Member desired that there should be a duty on grain and not on Hour he was probably the only one who wished it, and he need not trouble to deal with that point. The hon. Member had made some allusions to the diminution in the imports of flour from the United States during the last month or so, as compared with the corresponding time in the previous year. The imports of grain rose quite irrespective of the duty, because they were attracted by the great increase in the price of grain, which had risen in this country far in excess of the rise in the price of flour. Then the hon. Member said the imports of flour from Canada had increased, and suggested that this was because the Canadians expected that, under some of those arrangements which the Government were suspected of being about to introduce, there would be a rebate on this flour. Yet this flour was imported long before any such arrangement could be made. If the Canadians really supposed that the duty on Canadian flour would be lowered, as compared with American flour, it was quite certain that they would endeavour to delay their imports so as to reap the advantage of such an arrangement. The real point of the hon. Member's Amendment was as to the discrimination between the duty on flour or meal and the duty on grain. But the hon. Member made a great mistake in dealing solely with the question of wheat grain and wheat flour. The duty was so fixed as to cover all the kinds of grain and all the kinds of flour. Moreover, the hon. Member had dealt with the matter as if the duty on meal were a duty on fine flour only. But his arguments were altogether wrong. The duty had always been a discriminating duty. In 1864 Mr. Gladstone established an unvarying relation of 66 per cent. between all the grain duties and all the meal duties. That was exactly the relation which was established by the Bill now before the House when the offal duty was 3d. per cwt. Now that they had reduced the duty on offal to lid., the relation was more in favour of the foreign import than it was if they took, as they must take, the whole question of the flour and the offal, and did not consider the flour only. When Mr. Gladstone revised the duty in 1864 the 1055 value of grain was two-thirds of the value of flour, and the duty on flour was therefore put at 4½d. Since 1869 the value of grain had been lower in comparison with the value of flour than it was in those days. Taking all grain on one side, the value in 1901 of a cwt. of grain was 5.84s. and taking all meals on the other side, the value of a cwt. of meal was 9.04s., so that the proper proportion as compared with the 3d. per cwt. on grain would have been something between 4½d. and 5d. per cwt. on flour. He had given grain the advantage of a fraction. He could not give flour the advantage of the fraction without doing what he believed to be an injury to the agricultural interest of this country. He did not believe this was Protection, but if it was Protection, that
§ was all the Protection that was given in this country by the relations he had established between the duties on grain and flour. He took the old discrimination as a fair one, and he thought the relations so established were perfectly fair. The alteration since that time in the conditions of trade had justified an increase in the duty on flour, as compared with the duty on grain for the reasons which he gave in his Budget speech. He trusted the House would not disturb them on the Motion of the hon. Member.
§ (9.38) Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 143; Noes, 98. (Division List No. 237.)
1057| AYES. | ||
| Aclaud-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F. | Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden | Flower, Ernest | Martin, Richard Biddulph |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Godson, Sir Augustus Fred'rick | Melville, Beresford Valentine |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn | Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G. |
| Arnold-Forster, Hugh O. | Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon | Montagu, G. (Huntingdon) |
| Arrol, Sir William | Goulding, Edward Alfred | More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Green, Walford D (Wednesbury | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Bain, Colonel James Robert | Gretton, John | Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptf'rd |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r | Groves, James Grimble | Murray, Rt Hn A Gr'h'm (Bute) |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill | Nicol, Donald Ninian |
| Banbury, Frederick George | Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Mid'x | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Beach, Rt Hn. Sir Michael Hicks | Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm. | Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Harris, Frederick Leverton | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Bignold, Arthur | Haslam, Sir Alfred S. | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bill, Charles | Heath, James (Staffords, N. W. | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Henderson, Alexander | Purvis, Robert |
| Brassey, Albert | Higginbottom, S. W. | Randles, John S. |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hoare, Sir Samuel | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Brookfield, Colonel Montagu | Hogg, Lindsay | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Renshaw, Charles Bine |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Hoult, Joseph | Renwick, George |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm. | Houston, Robert Paterson | Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson |
| Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r | Howard Jno. (Kent, Faversham | Ropner, Colonel Robert |
| Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Round, James |
| Charrington, Spencer | Hudson, George Bickersteth | Russell, T. W. |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Johnston, William (Belfast) | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Coghill, Douglas Harry | Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W. |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) | Kimber, Henry | Smith, H C (N'th'mb, Tyneside) |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | King, Sir Henry Seymour | Smith, James Parker (Lanarks |
| Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge | Knowles, Lees | Spear, John Ward |
| Cross, Alexander (Glasgow) | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Stanley, Lord (Lancs.) |
| Crossley, Sir Savile | Lawson, John Grant | Stock, James Henry |
| Cubitt, Hon. Henry | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Denny, Colonel | Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. | Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray |
| Doughty, George | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine | Tritton, Charles Ernest |
| Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers- | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Valentia, Viscount |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Wanklyn, James Leslie |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Lucas, Col. Fraucis (Lowestoft) | Warde, Colonel C E. |
| Fardell, Sir T. George | Macdona, John Cumming | Warr, Augustus Frederick |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Webb, Colonel William George |
| Finch, George H. | Maconochie, A. W. | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Fisher, William Hayes | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Willox, Sir John Archibald |
| FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose- | M'Calmont, Col. (Antrim, E.) | Wills, Sir Frederick |
| Wilson, John (Glasgow) | Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther. |
| Wolff, Gustay Wilhelm | Younger, William | |
| Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George | ||
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Horniman, Frederick John | O'Mara, James |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C. | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Joicey, Sir James | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire) | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.) | Rea, Russell |
| Bell, Richard | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Boland, John | Kitson, Sir James | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bolton, Thomas Dolling | Law, Hugh Alex (Donegal, W.) | Redmond, William (Clare) |
| Broadhurst, Henry | Leamy, Edmund | Rigg, Richard |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Leigh, Sir Joseph | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) |
| Burns, John | Leng, Sir John | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Caldwell, James | Levy, Maurice | Robertson, Edmund (Dundee) |
| Cameron, Robert | Lewis, John Herbert | Robson, William Snowdon |
| Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) | Lundon, W. | Roche, John |
| Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A. | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel |
| Causton, Richard Knight | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Crean, Eugene | M'Kean, John | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants |
| Delany, William | Mooney, John J. | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Dillon, John | Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen | Sullivan, Donal |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Moulton, John Fletcher | Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr |
| Doogan, P. C. | Murnaghan, George | Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gow'r |
| Duncan, J. Hastings | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.) |
| Emmott, Alfred | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Toulmin, George |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | Norman, Henry | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Whiteley, George (York, W. R.) |
| Ffrench, Peter | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.) | Young, Samuel |
| Grant, Corrie | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Dowd, John | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Channing and Mr. Kearley. |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N. | |
| Helme, Norval Watson | O'Malley, William |
§ (9.45.) SIR JOHN LENG (Dundee)said that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced the duty on grain it was generally understood that he referred only to wheat, barley, and oats, and few people imagined that the duty would apply to some twenty other articles, including such things as arrowroot and starch. He had an Amendment on the Paper to omit "starch." His hon. friend the Member for Lincolnshire had a similar Amendment on the Paper, but probably he did not move it because he was interested in the manufacture of starch. He had been assured by manufacturers of starch in his own constituency that this tax would affect them to the extent of hundreds of pounds annually. It might be said that this was not much to them, but the position of this trade was a peculiar one, and he wished to bring before the notice of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in case he had any idea of extending duties of this character, how difficult it was to foresee the curious ramifications of trade which might be affected by such taxes. The jute trade 1058 in Dundee was a peculiar one. The raw material came over 7,000 miles, from Calcutta, and 200,000 tons of this material were used every year in manufactures in Dundee and district. From the position of Calcutta that place had immense advantages in the manufacture of jute. Calcutta was in close proximity to the ground where the jute was grown, and labour there was exceedingly cheap, for there the natives would work for a few annas per day as compared with a few shillings per day paid for the same labour in Dundee. In Calcutta every jute mill had two shifts and sometimes three, and in this way they had a great pull over manufactures in this country who were limited to ten hours per day under the Factory Acts. The consequence was that the multiplication of factories for the manufacture of jute in Calcutta and district had gone on by leaps and bounds. This competition had taken away from Dundee and district the trade with China and Australia, and had it not been for the extension of our home trade, this branch of manufacture would have been extinguished and obliterated. 1059 What was the effect of this duty on starch, which was largely used in the dressing of jute? The difficulties which jute manufacturers had already experienced through competition would he greatly increased by this tax, for they were being embarrassed by legislation which would tend to the benefit of their competitors abroad. It might be said that it did not matter much whether this trade was carried on in this country or in one of our great dependencies, but the jute trade gave employment to a very large number of men and women in this country, and if manufacturers were over weighted by legislation, a serious injury would be done; because the conditions of life in Calcutta were not such as to encourage young men to go out there. Men might be tempted to accompany English capital to Calcutta in order to conduct jute works there, but the mortality of young men who went out to Calcutta was most alarming, and almost every newspaper contained an account of death of some of these young men, and therefore he had held that it was a great injury to this country that the jute industry should be subjected to difficulties of this kind. He had brought this matter before the House in order to show the necessity of the right hon. Gentleman being careful in legislation of this kind, and as a warning against extending what had been done this year. He did not wish to stand in the way of the Chancellor of the Exchequer getting his Bill passed, and as he had answered his purpose by the protest he had made he would not move his Amendment.
§ MR. CHANNING moved the omission of "arrowroot" from the schedule, as a protest against the policy of putting taxation on very small articles of import. It seemed to him ridiculous to tax an import like arrowroot, which was small in quantity but high in value. He believed that the cost of collecting the tax on such articles was enormous. The value of arrowroot, according to the quality, ranged from 5d per lb. up to 1s. 10d. per lb. It was really preposterous that on lower priced arrowroot the duty ad valorem should be 1 per cent. while
1060§ on the higher priced article the duty should be ¼ or ⅛ per cent. He begged to move.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 5, line 28, to leave out the word 'arrowroot'"—(Mr. Channing.)
§ Question proposed, "That the word 'arrowroot' stand part of the Bill."
SIR. M. HICKS BEACHsaid he had had occasion to deal in the course of the debates on the Finance Bill with statements as to the taxes proposed being such as would bear heavily on the poor man's food, having regard to the value of the articles; but it was reserved for the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire to object to one of the items in the schedule, on the ground that the tax was not high enough. He quite admitted that arrowroot was a small item, but it was necessary to retain it among the other items to safeguard the main tax.
§ MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON (Dundee)Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the financial effect of adopting the hon. Member's proposal would be?
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHI cannot say, but it would place the article in an unfair position.
§ MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)said the point raised by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire was a substantial one. It was a great pity that in the long debates which had taken place on the Bill there had not been an opportunity of speaking of the danger to which some small trades were exposed by these new taxes. It was the greatest mistake to suppose that injury would not be done to the small trades concerned in the items referred to. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer might be a little more yielding in regard to some of the items.
§ (10.3) Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 161; Noes, 107. (Division List No. 238.)
1063| AYES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F. | Anson, Sir William Reynell | Arrol, Sir William |
| Age-Gardner, James Tynte | Arkwright, John Stanhope | Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John |
| Allhusen, Augustus Hen. Eden | Arnold Forster, Hugh O. | Bain, Colonel James Robert |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Green, Walford D (Wednesbury | Morton, Arthur H A (Deptford |
| Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey) | Gretton, John | Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Groves, James Grimble | Nicol, Donald Ninian |
| Banbury, Frederick George | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill | Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay |
| Beach, Rt Hn Sir Michael Hicks | Hamilton, Rt Hn Ld G (Midd'x | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Hanbnry, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm. | Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard |
| Bignold, Arthur | Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm. | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Bill, Charles | Harris, Frederick Loverton | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Haslam, Sir Alfred S. | Pryce Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Boscawen, Anthur Griffith- | Heath, James (Staffords, N. W. | Purvis, Robert |
| Brassey, Albert | Henderson, Alexander | Randles, John S. |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Higginbottom, S. W. | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Brookfield, Colonel Montagu | Hoare, Sir Samuel | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Butcher, John George | Hogg, Lindsay | Renshaw, Charles Bine |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Renwick, George |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh. | Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry | Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Hoult, Joseph | Ropner, Colonel Robert |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm. | Houston, Robert Paterson | Round, James |
| Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r | Howard, John (Kent, F'versh'm | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Chamberlain, T. (S'thampton | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Charrington, Spencer | Hudson, George Bickersteth | Seely, Maj J E B (Isle of Wight |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Johnston, William (Belfast) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Coghill, Douglas Harry | Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex) | Smith, H C (North'mb, Tyneside |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H. | Smith, James Parker (Lanarks. |
| Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow | Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh | Spear, John Ward |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop | Stanley, Lord (Lancs.) |
| Cox, Irwin Edward Bain bridge | Kimber, Henry | Stock, James Henry |
| Cranborne, Viscount | King, Sir Henry Seymour | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Cross, Alexander (Glasgow) | Knowles, Lees | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Cressley, Sir Savile | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow | Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray |
| Cubitt, Hon. Henry | Lawson, John Grant | Tritton, Charles Ernest |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Valentia, Viscount |
| Denny, Colonel | Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie | Wanklyn, James Leslie |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. | Warde, Colonel C E. |
| Doughty, George | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine | Warr, Augustus Frederick |
| Douglas Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Webb, Colonel William George |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore- | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Whiteley, H (Ashton-und. Lyne |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Fardell, Sir T. George | Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth | Willox, Sir John Archibald |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Macdona, John Cumming | Wills, Sir Frederick |
| Finch, George H. | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Maconochie, A. W. | Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks. |
| FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose- | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Wolff, Gustay Wilhelm |
| Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon | M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E. | Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart- |
| Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire | Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George |
| Flower, Ernest | Majendie, James A. H. | Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H. |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Younger, William |
| Gordon, Hon J E (Elgin & Nairn | Melville, Beresford Valentine | |
| Gore, Hn G R C Ormsby-(Salop | Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G. | |
| Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther. |
| Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon | Montagu, G. (Huntingdon) | |
| Goulding, Edward Alfred | More, Robt, Jasper (Shropshire | |
| Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Morrell, George Herbert | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E. | Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) | Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H. |
| Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud | Delany, William | Horniman, Frederick John |
| Ambrose, Robert | Dillon, John | Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C. |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Donelan, Captain A. | Joiecy, Sir James |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Doogan, P. C. | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh. |
| Bell, Richard | Duncan, J. Hastings | Joyce, Michael |
| Boland, John | Emmott, Alfred | Kearley, Hudson E. |
| Bolton, Thomas Dolling | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan | Kitson, Sir James |
| Broadhurst, Henry | Fenwick, Charles | Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W. |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Ffrench, Peter | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
| Burns, John | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Leamy, Edmund |
| Caine, William Sproston | Gilhooly, James | Leigh, Sir Joseph |
| Caldwell, James | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Leng, Sir John |
| Cameron, Robert | Grant, Corrie | Levy, Maurice |
| Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) | Griffith, Ellis J. | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Harmsworth, B. Leicester | London, W. |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Hayden, John Patrick | MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A. |
| Grean, Eugene | Helme Norval Watson | MacNeill, John Cordon Swift |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | O'Malley, William | Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants |
| M'Kean, John | O'Mara, James | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Sullivan, Donal |
| M'Laren, Charles Benjamin | Power, Patrick Joseph | Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr |
| Mansfield, Horace Kendall | Rea, Russell | Thomas, J A (Gl'morgan, Gower |
| Mooney, John J. | Reddy, M. | Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.) |
| Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen | Redmond, John E. (Waterford | Toulmin, George |
| Murnaghan, George | Redmond, William (Clare) | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Rickett, J. Compton | White, Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Rigg, Richard | Whiteley, George (York, W. R. |
| Norman, Henry | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Nussey, Thomas Willans | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary, M. | Robertson, Edmund (Dundee) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Robson, William Snowdon | Young, Samuel |
| O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Roche, John | Yoxall, James Henry |
| O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel | |
| O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Shipman, Dr. John G. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Channing and Mr. Lough. |
| O'Dowd, John | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) | |
| O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N | Soares, Ernest J. |
Question put and agreed to.
§ Other Amendments made.
§ Bill to be read the third time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 242.]