Commons Sitting of 23 June 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the clock.
ROYAL ASSENT.

  COMMISSION.
  Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
  The House went; and, being returned,
  Mr. SPEAKERreported the Royal assent to a number of Bills [see page 1329].

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—

  Barry Railway Bill [Lords.]

  Birmingham and Midland Tramways Bill [Lords.]

  1356

  Felixstowe and Walton Improvement Bill [Lords.]

  Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.

BEDFORD CORPORATION WATER BILL,
  SOUTH METROPOLITAN GAS BILL.
  Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
BRADFORD CORPORATION BILL [LORD].
As Amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
BUXTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [LORDS].
  NORTHUMBERLAND ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS BILL [LORDS].
    RUSHALL MANOR BILL [LORDS].
    As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
    BRISTOL WATER BILL [LORDS] (BY ORDER.)
    Consideration, as amended, postponed, under Order [1st May], till Thursday 3rd July, at the Evening Sitting, by the Chairman of Ways and Means.
BRISTOL CORPORATION BILL [LORDS],
  CENTRAL LONDON RAILWAY BILL [LORDS],

    CONSETT WATER BILL [LORDS],
    DEVONPORT CORPORATION (GENERAL POWERS) BILL [LORDS],
    DEVONPORT CORPORATION (WATER) BILL [LORDS],
    MENAI BRIDGE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [LORDS],
    NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE TRAMWAYS BILL [LORDS],
    ROSSENDALE VALLEY TRAMWAYS BILL [LORDS],
    WHITSTABLE IMPROVEMENT BILL [LORDS].
    Read a second time, and committed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to, Rathmines and Rathgar Urban District Council Bill, Bournemouth Gas and Water Bill, without Amendment.
Great Northern Railway (No. 1) Bill, with Amendment.
Amendments to, Longwood Gas Bill [Lords], Rhymney Railway Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to provide for the settlement of questions which have arisen between the preference shareholders and the ordinary shareholders in the Barrow Hematite Steel Company, Limited; and for other purposes." [Barrow Hæmatite Steel Company, Limited, Bill] [Lords].

BARROW HÆMATITE STEEL COMPANY LIMITED, BILL [LORD].
Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of petitions for private Bills.
SOUTH EASTERN, AND LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAYS BILL [LORD].
Reported [Preamble not proved]; Report to be upon the Table, and to be printed.
GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 1) BILL [LORD].
Read a second time, and committed.

PETITIONS.
MR. JOSEPH A. PEASErose to present a petition from the Durham County Council relating to the Education Bill, and to move that it be read at the Table.
MR. SPEAKERsaid a petition could not be presented during Question time. It was past 2. 15.
Mr. JOSEPH A. PEASE: May I submit, sir, that under Standing Order 79 such a petition may be brought to the Table by the direction of the Speaker, who shall not allow any debate, or any Member to speak upon or in relation to such petition, but it may be read by the Clerk at the Table if required. I beg to say I do require this petition to be read by the Clerk at the Table, and I may add that I do not think the new Rules have repealed this Standing Order.
MR. SPEAKER: Perhaps I did not make myself understood. I ought not to have called upon the hon. Member
1358
to present the petition at all after a quarter past two o'clock. At a quarter past two o'clock Questions are taken, and the hon. Member was too late by the accident of there being a Royal Commission.
MR. JOSEPH A. PEASE: Then is it not possible, Sir, under the now Rule for a Member of the House to present a petition under the old arrangement? Suppose the Lord Mayor of Dublin was to present himself at the bar with a petition, would be precluded presenting it under the new Rule?
MR. SPEAKER: it is enough to say that the Lord Mayor is not here.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: On a point of order, may I ask whether notices of new Sessional Orders, Petitions, notices of Motion, and so forth can only be proceeded with before a quarter past two o'clock? I desire to give notice of a Motion, and I wish to know whether I shall be prevented by the action of the clock.
MR. SPEAKER: I think when the Clock reaches a quarter past two I ought to begin Questions. If I am prevented by a Royal Commission, I ought to begin as soon as possible after.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: Prom Sheffield; Loughborough and Plaistow; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Bath, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions in favour; From Sleaford; Billinghay; Canning Town (three) and Ashburton; to lie upon the Table.
  LONDON ELECTIONS BILL.
  Petition from Hammersmith, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petitions against; From Longoboby (two) and Dunston; to lie upon the Table.
  PLUMBERS' REGISTRATION BILL.
  Petition from Walsall, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ARRESTS FOR DRUNKENNESS (IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 29th May; Mr. William Johnston]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 233.]
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Time Table of Examinations for 1902 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Rule made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland altering the Time Table of Examinations for 1902 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACT (IRELAND), 1877.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 19th June, 1902, giving effect to a Rule of Court [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  COLONIAL REPORTS (MISCELLANEOUS).
  Copy presented, of Report No. 19 (Selections from Colonial Medical Reports for 1900 and 1901, [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  MINT.
  Copy presented, of Thirty second Annual Report of the Deputy-Master and Comptroller of the Mint, 1901 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  FINANCE ACCOUNTS.
  Copy presented, of Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom for the year ended 31st March, 1902 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 234.]
  CIVIL LIST PENSIONS.
  Copy presented, of List of all Pensions granted during the year ended 31st March, 1902, and charged upon the Civil List [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 235.]
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 18th June, 1902, declaring that Christopher William Pegrum, second class labourer, Royal Gunpowder Factory, Waltham Abbey, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  DISEASES OF ANIMALS ACT, 1894 AND 1896.
  Copies presented, of Two Orders, entitled respectively the Foreign Animals (Amendment) Order of 1902 and the Jersey (Animals) Order of 1902 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  RAILWAYS.
  Copy presented, of Report by the Board of Trade on applications made during 1901 under The Railway Companies' Powers Act, 1864, and of the Proceedings of the Board of Trade with respect thereto [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No 236.]
  BOARD OF EDUCATION (SPECIAL REPORTS).
  Copy presented, of Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 11. Education in the United States of America [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION (SPECIAL REPORTS).
  Copy presented, of Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Supplement to Vol. 8. Education in the Netherlands [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 2826 to 2828 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Brussels Sugar Convention.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that a Bill to give effect to the Brussels Sugar Convention has passed the Belgian Legislature, and has been read a second

  1361
  time in the German Reichsrath, he will at once introduce a Bill to give effect to the penal clause enabling the prohibition of bounty-fed sugar, or the levying of countervailing duties upon it, similar to that recently passed by the Indian Government.
  (Answer.) It is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to enable them to give effect to the Sugar Convention. The penal clause in the Bill would not apply until the 1st of September, 1903, the date fixed for the coming into operation of the Convention.—(Treasury.)

  Coronation—Stands outside National Gallery—Precautions against Fire.
  LORD BALCARRES: To ask the First Commissioner of Works if he will give the most strict orders that no workman employed on the stand outside the National Gallery shall be allowed to smoke there, in view of the information sent him by the Member for the Chorley Division of Lancashire, that, on the 18th instant, at 12.58 p.m., he saw an artizan smoking while seated upon a pile of rubbish and dry wood in the most westerly gangway of the stand.
  (Answer.) Strict orders against smoking had been given, and have been reiterated with strong cautions. I am assured that the police are vigilant in enforcing them, and that a man could not escape detection for more than a very short time, but I am much obliged to my noble friend for bringing this case to my notice. I at once made inquiries and found that on the occasion referred to the regular watchman of the workmen was temporarily absent, and that the man in charge during his absence, who should have prevented such an offence, had been dismissed by the contractors.—(Office of Works.)

  Charity Commission—Division of Educational and Non-Educational Charities.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: To ask the hon. Member for the Tonbridge Division of Kent, as a Charity Commissioner, if, when the draft Order in Council, now upon the Table of the House, becomes law, the Charity Commissioners will of their own motion, and for England and Wales generally, divide mixed charities into educa-
  1362
  tional and non-educational, or whether such divisions will only be made from time to time on the special application of the trustees or governors of any charity or otherwise; and whether, until such division is made, the trustees of mixed charities will have to make applications to two Government Departments, and if any regulations or directions will be issued to guide them and prevent unnecessary correspondence and delay.
  (Answer.) The Charity Commissioners do not propose to determine forthwith the educational part of every mixed endowment in England and Wales, but to proceed to such a determination in each case where circumstances render such a determination necessary or desirable. Fending such determination, a mixed endowment remains within the jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioners, to whom any application relating to such endowment should be addressed.—(Charity Commission.)

  South Ambersham, Sussex, Postal Accommodation.
  MR. HEYWOOD JOHNSTONE: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he is aware that the inhabitants of South Ambersham, Sussex, have no means of posting letters within a mile and a half of them; and if he will reconsider the memorial addressed to him in March last, with a view to seeing if, by a re-arrangement of the letter carriers' rounds in the Midhurst Postal District, he could give the inhabitants the same facilities as are enjoyed by residents in other places of the same size in the district.
  (Answer.) The question of erecting a letter box at South Ambersham and affording an evening collection of letters therefrom was recently considered, and the result was communicated to the honourable Member in a letter sent to him from the Post Office on the 2nd of last month. The Postmaster General regrets that he is unable to afford the desired accommodation, as the expense involved would be greater than he would be warranted in sanctioning—. (Post Office.)

  Argyllshire Coast—Postal Arrangements.
  MR. NICOL: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he can state under what conditions and obligations the mail contract has been settled between the Postmaster General and the Campbeltown Steam Packet Company, so as to provide and maintain a daily and efficient postal service all the year round from Greenock to West Coast of Arran, the Cantyre District of Argyll, and the burgh of Campbeltown.
  (Answer.) The Campbeltown Steam Packet Company have undertaken to perform a regular mail service to and from Campbeltown every week day all the year round. The steamers will call at Lochranza, Pirnmill, and Carradale. There is to be no deviation or delay, though reasonable time is to be allowed for discharging cargo at the ports of call. Time bills showing the hours of working are to be furnished by the company. A contract is being prepared.—(Post Office.)

  Indian Famines.
  MR. LEAMY: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in order to make provision against the prolongation of the present famine in India, which began in July, 1899, he will consider the advisability of inviting Parliament to make an inquiry into the condition of the people affected by the famine, and to ascertain whether more effective means can be employed to deal with it, and also to ascertain whether it is possible to take better preventive measures against future famine; whether he has any official information showing what the supply of food in India has been during the present famine.
  (Answer.) The relief given in India to mitigate the distress to which the hon. Gentleman refers has, during the last two years, partaken very much of the character of poor law relief such as prevails in this country; and the numbers in India in receipt of such relief, in proportion to the population, are much less than those at the present moment in Great Britain receiving similar help. The most effective means of dealing with drought in India, which
  1364
  is the origin of the distress, has been exhaustively inquired into and reported on by the recent Famine Commission, and Railway and Irrigation Commissions are dealing separately with the preventive measures which their respective branches of inquiry suggest. I do not propose to order further inquiries. During the recent famine the supply of food has proved sufficient.—(India Office.)

  Irish Land Purchase—Creagh Estate, Lyre, Cork.
  MR. FLYNN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can say what is the cause of the delay in the sale of the Creagh Estate at Lyre Banteer, County Cork; is he aware that the first steps towards purchase were taken in 1898, and that the tenants have since made repeated applications for purchase; can he state who are the mortgagees of the estate; and whether steps will be taken to facilitate the sale through the Land Judges' Court.
  (Answer.) This appears to be the same property to which the hon. Member referred in a Question addressed by him on the 23rd March, 1900. As stated in reply to that Question, no petition has ever been presented to the Land Judges Court for the sale of the lands at Lyre. No order for sale has been made by any Court, and certainly none has been made by the Land Judge affecting these lands.—(Irish Office.)

  Irish Labourers' Act—Kanturk Scheme.
  MR. FLYNN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board can state why the application of a labourer, named John Ring, of Glen-collins, King william stown, County Cork, for a cottage and acre plot, and which was included in the scheme put forward by the Kanturk District Council, has been rejected; and seeing that this man's application has been for many years under the notice of the local authorities, and having regard to the condition of his present cottage, the Board will favourably consider the case of this man.
  (Answer.) The Local Government Board was prepared to sanction this application, provided the consent of the occupier to

  1365
  the acquisition of the site selected was forthcoming. In the absence of such consent the case has fallen through, and as the Provisional Order has been issued, there is no power now to take further action in the matter. It will be open to the Council to include the application in any fresh scheme that may be proposed hereafter, in which event it will be necessary to select another site for the cottage.—(Irish Office.)

  Irish Land Purchase—Reversionary Leases.
  MR. DOOGAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that a number of tenants residing in Altmore, County Tyrone, derive no benefits from the Land Acts because their landlord had granted reversionary leases of their holdings, a fact of which they were unaware till the said leases were produced in Court to bar their claim; will he cause inquiries to be made, and state how many tenants are similarly affected (by such leases throughout the country; and whether he will consider the advisability of promoting a short Bill to remedy this state of things.
  (Answer.) By Section 21 of The Land Law Act, 1881, a statutory tenancy does not arise in the case of a reversionary lease made bona fide before the passing of that Act. I am unable to say how many tenants are affected by such leases, and have no effective means at my disposal of ascertaining the number. I cannot undertake to introduce legislation dealing with the matter.—(Irish Office.)

  Irish Agriculture—Albert Institute— Discharge of Mr. P. O'Reilly.
  MR. SAMUEL YOUNG: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Patrick O'Reilly, after filling the position, without complaint, of teacher of mathematics and land surveying at the Albert Model Farm, was in October, 1901, discharged from the post; and seeing that in March last a mathematical teacher was appointed, and Mr. O'Reilly applied for the post, offering to compete for it by examination, and that a teacher named Stephenson was appointed without competition or advertisement whether he will explain why Mr. O'Reilly's claim to the position was passed over.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state who has been appointed teacher of mathematics and land surveying at the Albert Model Farm, Glasnevin; what are his qualifications, previous experience, and salary; whether, seeing that the young man who taught in the institution till December of last year applied and offered to submit himself to any test competitive or otherwise, he can say why his application was rejected and the position given to another person.
  (Answer.) The teaching of agricultural chemistry was formerly supplied at the institution by means of lectures only, and there was no teaching of physics, both being subjects which the new Department considers most essential to have taught practically. Mr. Stephenson, who has hitherto been Lecturer in Agricultural Chemistry and Physics in the Agricultural Department of the Yorkshire College, Leeds, and is a highly trained agricultural scientist, is now teaching these subjects at the Albert Institution as well as mathematics. In the opinion of the Department Mr. O'Reilly was not qualified to give the new instruction required by the Department.—(Irish Office.)

  Tipperary District Council Election— Alleged Illegal Conduct.
  MR. LUNDON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the deputy returning officer for the Temple bredin Division, of the No. 2 Tipperary District Council, on the evening of the 4th June, when taking the ballot box, after the voting in Temple bredin, into the town of Tipperary, did not, as required by statute, deposit the box in the board room of the workhouse, but took it to his hotel during the night, although the workhouse porter kept the door open to receive it; and will he cause inquiry to be made into the circumstances of the case, and take proceedings to prevent a repetition of such conduct.
  (Answer.) The Government has no knowledge of and no control over the matters alleged in the Question. If an illegality has been committed the parties aggrieved can seek redress by petition.—(Irish Office.)

  Food and Drugs Act—Irish Creameries.
  Mr. MACVEAGH: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state under what authority the inspectors under the Food and Drugs Acts take samples of milk delivered under contract at Irish creameries, seeing that the milk is for the purpose of having its cream extracted and not for human consumption.
  (Answer.) Under the authority conferred by Section 3 of The Sale of Food and Drugs Act Amendment Act, 1879.—(Irish Office.)

  Jersey Militia.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any steps have been taken towards the reorganisation of the Jersey Militia since the letter of the Committee of Council dated 12th May, in which the refusal of the Royal approval of the Organic Act of the 27th February was communicated to the States of Jersey; whether, pending any action to be taken by the States on the Report of the fresh Committee appointed on 9th June, the old Militia Law will be enforced.
  (Answer.) No further steps have been taken at present. In the meantime the existing law remains in force.—(War Office.)

  Army—Furnishing of Officers' Quarters.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the proposal to furnish officers' quarters will extend to the furnishing of the official houses of the general officers commanding large stations, such as Aldershot, having regard to the expense attending the taking over of such a command.
  (Answer.) No final decision has been given on this question, and each case will be taken on its merits.—(War Office.)

  Magazine Rifles—Clip Cartridges.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can inform the House when a clip cartridge will be adopted for the Lee-Metford magazine rifle; and whether he has any information with regard to the relative value of the Mauser clip and single loading magazine in the late war.
  1368
  (Answer.) Trials with chargers are-being carried out, and, until reports on these trials have been received, it is impossible to say whether they will be adopted. Reports on the different points in connection with small arms have been received from South Africa.—(War Office.)

  Under Age Enlistment—Private John Simpson, Royal Marines.
  Mr. YOXALL: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that in June, 1901, a boy of the age of thirteen years eight months, viz., 11,748, Private John Simpson, Royal Marines, Forton Barracks, Gosport, was permitted to enlist, during the absence of his father from home and without the knowledge of his mother; and that upon this boy going home on a short pass in May last, he refused to rejoin, was arrested for desertion by the police, and sent to the common gaol pending sentence; whether he is aware that at the date of the enlistment the boy's parents were liable to prosecution for his non-attendance at school; and whether, under the circumstances, he will procure the boy's discharge from the Army.
  (Answer.) The Admiralty are not aware that the facts are as stated in the Question. The marine referred to enlisted at Nottingham on the 18th June, 1901, when he stated that his age was seventeen years ten months. As he was apparently over seventeen years of age, the consent of his parents was not necessary to his entry. He absented himself from Portsmouth headquarters on the 12th May last, was apprehended at Nottingham on the 17th idem, and conducted to his headquarters, where he was dealt with for his military offence. If the hon. Member will send me the evidence upon which the statements in his Question are based, the case will be inquired into.—(Admiralty.)

  Brigade Surgeons.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether a medical officer who retired after thirty years service on the full pension of the old brigade surgeon, lieutenant colonel's rank, becomes eligible on re-employment for a period above two years for increased rank and pension;

  1369
  and, if not, how is it proposed to reward such officers, who came forward during the South African war when not liable to recall.
  (Answer.) Will the hon. Member be kind enough to forward me particulars of the case or cases to which he refers.—(War Office.)

  Army Pensions—Case of Pat Dolan.
  MR. JAMES O'KELLY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Pat Dolan, now resident at Cortobber, Carrick-on-Shannon, Ireland, enlisted on 20th January, 1857 in the 3rd Battalion 60th Regiment of Foot (regimental number 1,313); that he was discharged, after serving twelve years and 278 days on sixpence a day pension for three years; and that he was eighteen years of age at the time of enlistment; and will he say whether this man became entitled under the Chelsea Gift to a pension of sixpence per day on attaining the age of fifty years; and will he inquire into his case.
  (Answer.) This man was discharged as medically unfit owing to a self-inflicted wound. The temporary pension was granted as an act of grace, the regulations then in force giving him no claim to any deferred pension.—(War Office.)

  Provisional Cavalry Regiments.
  COLONEL BROOKFIELD: To ask the Secretary of State for War if the authorities have yet decided what is to be done with the eight regiments of Provisional Cavalry; and whether the expediency of retaining some of them, as they are at present organised, will be duly considered.
  (Answer.) No decision has as yet been made concerning these Provisional Regiments.—(War Office.)

  South Africa—Martial Law and Censorship.
  MR. BRYCE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can now state when the application of martial law and the existing Press censorship will cease in Cape Colony and in Natal.
  (Answer.) The stringency of martial law regulations is being relaxed, but I am
  1370
  not prepared to give any definite date for their complete abolition, which will, however, be hastened as far as is practicable. As regards censorship, will the right hon. Member kindly refer to the reply given to my right hon. friend to the Question put by the hon. Member for East Mayo. [First of the Questions asked in the House this day.]—(War Office.)

  Imperial Yeomanry Instructors—Arrears of Pay.
  MR. JOHN HOWARD: To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will say why some of the Yeomanry officers attached as instructors to the Imperial Yeomanry, who were training for South Africa at Aldershot, have not yet received their pay, which in some cases is three months overdue.
  (Answer.) It appears that the Imperial Yeomanry Depot at Aldershot failed to put in a claim for the pay of these officers; the causes of the delay are being investigated. The officers have, all but one, been settled with, and his case is being inquired into.—(War Office.)

  Hong Kong—Overcrowding and Sanitation.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state whether the provisions contained in Sections 73 to 80 of the Public Health Ordinance, No. 13, of 1901, relative to overcrowding in the city of Hong Kong, are enforced; and, if so, will he say how many persons have been deputed by the Hong Kong Government to enforce this Public Health Ordinance.
  (Answer.) The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. In answer to the second part, I can only say that the total number of the sanitary Staff of the colony is about 140.—(Colonial Office.)

  Education Bill.
  MR. LAMBERT: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can state the effect of the Education Bill upon endowments now applied to elementary education; whether these endowments will be diverted; if so, to what purpose.

  1371
  (Answer.) The Government propose to deal with the question of endowments in a new clause, which will be put on the Paper in due course.—(Treasury.)

  South Africa—Martial Law—Cape Colony Constitution.
  MR. HUMPHREYS-OWEN: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that agitation is now going on in Cape Colony with a view to the continued suspension of the constitution of the Colony, the Government will use their influence with the civil and military authorities there to induce them to abrogate the restrictions imposed under Martial Law to the exercise of the right of free discussion in the Press and otherwise.
  (Answer.) The Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Secretary of State for War are in communication with the civil and military authorities on the subject of the relaxation of the restrictions imposed under Martial Law.—(Treasury.)

  Port of London Commission—Premature Publication of Report.
  MR. DAVID MORGAN: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the Report of the Royal Commission on the Port of London appeared in a London newspaper on the 19th instant; and if be will explain how this occurred before the Report was in the hands of Members of this House.
  (Answer.) I have satisfied myself that no blame whatever attaches to the the printers in this matter. I have this morning received a letter from one of the Assistant Commissioners to the effect that, under a misapprehension that the complete Report had been laid—when in fact it was only the dummy—he wrote the article which is the subject of the Question.—(Treasury.)

  Coronation Expenditure.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that the Estimate placed upon the Table of the House of the probable expense of
  1372
  the approaching Coronation exceeds by £55,000 the expense incidental to the Coronation of William IV., and by £30,000 the expense incidental to the Coronation of Queen Victoria, any assurance will be given that the sum so estimated shall not be exceeded. And what precautions, if any, have been taken to control that expenditure, having regard to the fact that the expense of George IV.'s Coronation exceeded by £138,000 the sum voted for that solemnity.
  (Answer.) Every care is being taken that no unnecessary expenditure shall be incurred, and every effort is being made to make the expenditure fall within the Estimate of £100,000, though it was necessarily an Estimate framed on many-unknown considerations.—(Treasury.)

  Education—County and Borough Councils —Contracts under Seal.
  MR. LLOYD MORGAN: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is intended that the seal of a county or borough council (as the case may be) shall be attached to contracts and other undertakings into which the education committee of such council, acting in behalf of such council, may enter in pursuance of the powers delegated to them in that behalf.
  (Answer.) Where a contract in respect of education requires the seal of the Council, the seal will have to be affixed to it in the usual way.—(Treasury.)

  Education Bill—Mandamuses against Authorities refusing to supply School Accommodation.
  MR. LLOYD MORGAN: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in the event of the failure of any of the local education authorities which it is proposed to constitute by the Bill now before this House to provide sufficient school accommodation for the children of its area, the Board of Education will be enabled, under the provisions of the Bill, to apply for a mandamus; and if so, whether such mandamus will issue against the Education Committee to which the oversight of education is delegated, or against the local education authority.

  1373
  (Answer.) It is intended that a mandamus will lie against the local education authority in the case mentioned. The mandamus will be directed to the authority, not to the committee, as the authority are the persons responsible. If necessary, it may be made clear by verbal amendment that the authority can act in obedience to a mandamus without acting through the education committee.—(Treasury.)

  Education Bill—County and Borough Councils Scheme.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the periods for winch the Education Committees of County and Borough Councils are to be appointed will be specified in the schemes which, under Clause 12 of the Education Bill, are to be framed by the Councils and approved by the Board of Education; and, if not, whether he will propose an Amendment stating the time for which these Committees are to be constituted; and whether it is intended that all the Members shall retire in a body at the expiration of their office or that a certain number shall retire each year.
  (Answer.) It is intended that all these matters should be provided for by the schemes.—(Treasury.)
  MR. TREVELYAN: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the proceedings of Education Committees appointed under Clause 12 of the Education Bill are to be reported to and will require confirmation by the local education authority.
  (Answer.) I have already said that the Committee will have great weight with the Council, but the ultimate control will be in the hands of the Council and not of the Committee of the Council.—(Treasury.)

  Education Bill—Local Government Board Provisional Orders.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Local Government Board is to exercise its own discretion in making Provisional Orders under Clause 2 of the Education
  1374
  Bill, or whether it is to have regard to the interests of secular instruction, to the wishes of parents as to the education of their children, and to the economy of the rates in accordance with the conditions laid down for the guidance of the Board of Education in Clause 10 of the Bill.
  (Answer.) The Local Government Board will exercise its own discretion.—(Treasury.)

(2.30.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  South Africa—Censorship.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now say when the censorship in South Africa and on letters and news coming to this country from South Africa will be abandoned.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,): I have received a telegram from Lord Milner today, which is to the following effect:—It has been decided greatly to relax the censorship restrictions on Coronation Day. Private letters will no longer be censored. Press cables will still be liable to censorship for the present, and until the country is more settled, although this power will be sparingly used.
  MR. DILLON: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any answer to that part of the Question in reference to the censorship of newspapers and pamphlets?
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I have no information beyond that which I have already given. It says, "Private letters will no longer be censored." That means in the Colonies or elsewhere.
  MR. DILLON: I will put another Question in reference to publications such as newspapers.

  South African Finance.
  MR. ALFRED DAYIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, if he will give to

  1375
  the House the latest Returns of the revenue and expenditure in the Transvaal and Orange River Territories, and of the amount received from the taxation of the gold mining companies or of their output.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I will lay Papers at an early date, showing the latest financial Returns of the two new Colonies.
  Mr. ALFRED DAVIES: Seeing that the fight hon. Gentleman gave me Returns months ago for November and December, cannot he give me a little more information?
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir, not at present.

  The Colonies and the War.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: May I ask my amiable friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies, if he can state approximately the help afforded to the Empire by each of the Colonies during the recent South African War.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I decline to answer, Mr. Speaker.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: Mr. Speaker—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order If the hon. Member asks his Question in the usual way, no doubt he will get an answer.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: Then I will again ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer the Question on the Paper.
  [No answer was given.]
  MR. SPEAKER: The Question must be put down on the Paper again.
  Subsequently—
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker, I should like to know what I should do. I unwillingly offended the Colonial Secretary and got no reply to my Question.
  MR. SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. The matter is disposed of.

  Cape Constitution.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether a Minute by
  1376
  the Cape Ministers on the subject of a telegram addressed by the Prime Minister of Cape Colony to the resident magistrates and field cornets denying a statement respecting the contemplated suspension of the Cape Constitution, and forwarded by Lord Milner to the Colonial Secretary in a letter, dated 7th November, 1899, and received at the Colonial Office 5th December, 1899, still holds good; and, if not, will he say what is the reason for departure from the terms of Lord Milner's proclamation, dated 23rd November, 1899, that the inhabitants of Cape Colony would not be deprived of their constitutional rights.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: As far as I am aware, the present Cape Government adhere to the terms of the minute of their predecessors. There has been no departure from the terms of Lord Milner's proclamation.

  South African Census.
  MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the constitutional questions now arising in South Africa, which involve a consideration of the numbers and races of the populations in our various colonies, he will consider the advisability of a census of the whole of South Africa in the next twelve months by the Imperial authorities, with the consent of or in conjunction with the Governments of Cape Colony and Natal.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: No census can be taken in the new colonies until the work of repatriation and resettlement is complete, and consequently a census of; the whole of South Africa is not likely to be practicable during the next twelve months.

  Treatment of Boer Prisoners.
  MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, having regard to the fact that by the terms of peace signed some weeks since in South Africa the inhabitants of the late republics there have become British subjects, instructions have been given to relax and mitigate in every possible way the conditions of life of the prisoners of war in various places and especially to afford them unfettered communication, by post and otherwise,

  1377
  with their relatives and friends; and when it is likely that the process of repatriation of the prisoners will commence.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,): I have no specific information to enable me to reply to the points raised in the question, but every effort is being taken to proceed as rapidly as possible with the repatriation of the prisoners of War. As regards the censorship regulations, may I refer the hon. Member to the answer which my right hon. friend has given to the question put by the hon. Member for East Mayo.

  Cape Colony Prisoners.
  MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the number of persons now in gaol in Cape Colony who have been arrested under martial law but have not yet had any charge preferred against them or been brought to trial; and whether he can say how many persons have been removed for military reasons from their homes, and, without any actual charge being preferred against them, have been transported to a distance and there been placed under surveillance.
  MR. BRODRICK: There are no persons incarcerated in Cape Colony against whom a definite charge has not been formulated. I do not know the number of those deported under surveillance, but these persons are being released.

  Coronation Decorations—Welsh National Flag.
  MR. GEORGE KENYON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that several Welsh regiments took part in the recent campaigns in South Africa, he will explain why the national flag of Wales, the Red Dragon, is not displayed side by side with the flags of England, Scotland, and Ireland in the decoration of the War Office; and if he will give orders that the omission shall be rectified.
  MR. BRODRICK: If the hon. Member had waited until the decorations at the War Office were completed, he would have found that the Red Dragon of Wales was not omitted.

  Military Education Report.
  COLONEL WYNDHAM MURRAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state what action he proposes to take with regard to the Report of the Committee on military education.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY,): I am not at present in a position to make any statement on the subject, and seeing the importance of the question, and the immense pressure on the principal officials of the War Office in connection with the withdrawal of troops from South Africa, and the Coronation, I cannot promise that I shall be, at any early date, in a position to give the views of the Government to the House.

  Army Interpreters.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will say how many officers in His Majesty's Regular Army have passed the examination qualifying them as interpreters, and what percentage these form of the whole.
  LORD STANLEY: 384 officers of the Regular Army are qualified interpreters, being a percentage of 2·37.

  Military Manœuvres.
  COLONEL WYNDHAM MURRAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state what military manœuvres will take place this year.
  LORD STANLEY: No general manœuvres will be held this year. The annual course of training concludes with the combined manœuvres of all arms—the time allotted for the latter being decided by the general officers commanding Army corps and districts. A special grant of money has been given to general officers at homo and abroad to meet expenses beyond ordinary expenditure connected with the field training of troops in their command.

  Medal for Meritorious Service (Peace).
  MR. DAVID MORGAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a number of non - commissioned officers and men have been

  1379
  recommended by commanding officers of corps for the medal for meritorious service (peace) who have been waiting for such; and whether he will arrange that at the Coronation such men shall be granted the medal at once, even if they have to wait for the gratuity.
  LORD STANLEY: The hon. Member appears to be referring to the grant of a medal for meritorious service which is awarded only to soldiers above the rank of corporal who are selected for an annuity for long, valuable and meritorious service. The grant of the medal is dependent entirely on the grant of the annuity, and the grant of the annuity depends on the occurrence of a vacancy. It is accordingly impossible to accede to the hon. Member's request.

  Trooper Freer.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether a claim has been lodged by or on behalf of the parents of the late Trooper C. V. Freer, for payment of bounty due to him upon enlistment in the 74th Company Imperial Yeomanry, and also for three months pay due to him at the time of his death, viz. 14th April, 1902, as trooper in the Cape Mounted Specials, to which he was transferred; and, if so, will he say whether such claim has been investigated, and what decision has been arrived at.
  LORD STANLEY: The bounty was duo on discharge and not on re-enlistment. The claim for its payment is now under investigation and may involve reference to South Africa. The claim for the three months pay can only be adjusted locally, and application should be made to the Master of the High Court at Kimberley.

  Reserve Officers' Gratuities.
  MR. LABOUCHERE: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will say why reserve officers who have been working at depots for the last two years only receive a gratuity of £150 for the two years, i.e. £100 at the end of the first year and £50 at the end of the second year, whilst Militia and Volunteer officers employed in the same duties receive a gratuity, as mess allowance, of 5s. per diem, which in two years amounts to £182 10s.
  LORD STANLEY: The difference referred to arises from the different conditions of service in the two cases. The employment of reserve officers is compulsory, that of Militia and Volunteer officers for this duty is voluntary.

  Sara Ghat Ferry.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, in view of the fact that the Eastern Bengal Railway became vested in the Secretary of State for India in July, 1884, and that the steamers in use at Sara Ghat Ferry are under the control of the railway will he consider the expediency of superseding, the present fifty year old steamers by vessels of modern type.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON,): I have already informed the hon. Member that the matter is one for the consideration of the local authorities, and that any complaints should be addressed to the administration of the railway.

  Tientsin Agreement.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state if the American Minister at Peking is a party to the acceptance with modifications of the conditions made at Tientsin by the commanders of the allied forces.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE, FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord CRAN-BOKNE,): A final agreement has not yet been come to as to the conditions upon which the provisional Government is to be terminated. I can make no statement, therefore, as to the attitude of the representatives of the Powers.

  Hong Kong Fatality.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, having regard to the collapse of a house in Cochrane Street, Hong Kong, in August last, whereby twenty-two persons lost their lives, and seeing that other buildings in the city are built similarly to that which collapsed, will he state what steps are taken to secure the inspection of newly constructed

  1381
  buildings; will he state what sum of money is expended in the colony for this purpose, and to whom it is paid.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: There is a special inspector of buildings, and it is contemplated to meet the increase in building in the colony by additional inspectors. I cannot answer the last part of the Question.

  Hong Kong Plague Hospital.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that there is only one physician in charge of the Kennedy Town Plague Hospital, Hong Kong; and, in view of the requirements of the patients, will he consider the expediency of calling for a report on the subject, with a view to a larger and better trained staff being provided for this hospital.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The staff at the Kennedy Town Hospital for infectious diseases, which is, I am told, within easy reach of the civil hospital, includes a resident medical officer, two trained European wardmasters, and two trained sisters. According to the latest returns the total number of beds is twenty-eight, and the daily average of cases in hospital less than five. Under these circumstances, I see no necessity to interfere with the arrangements made by the Colonial Government, with the advice of the principal civil medical officer.
  MR. WEIR: Will the right hon. Gentleman call for a report?
  Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN: Certainly not. I think the answer complete.

  Italian Art Galleries—Regulations for Foreign Students.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether representations have been made to the Italian Government with a view to secure a modification of the recent regulation which requires all foreign artists who wish to study art in the Italian galleries or museums, to produce an academic diploma and a certificate from the Italian Consul in their native city or town that they are capable and respectable; and, if any such representations have been made, will he state the result.
  LORD CRANBORNE: The regulations to which the hon. Gentleman refers have relation to gratuitous admission to Italian galleries and museums, and for such a privilege the conditions do not seem unreasonable. It is not proposed to make any representations on the subject. A notice giving the provisions of the law as regards foreigners was sent to the papers for publication on the 17th instant. There are no fresh restrictions on visitors to the galleries and museums who are willing to pay the customary fees.
  MR. WEIR: The point of the Question is that it is absolutely impossible to comply with some of the conditions. I hope the Government will look into this matter.

  Great Eastern Railway—Workmen's Trains.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to announcements made by the Great Eastern Railway Company, that the workmen's trains on their lines will be suspended on the 26th and 27th inst.; and, having regard to the provisions of the Companies Act as to a daily service of workmen's trains, whether he can use any influence with the Railway Company to secure the maintenance of the usual facilities for working people on the two days of the Coronation.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): The Railway Company concerned do not admit that, having regard to the provisions of the Bank Holidays' Act, they are under legal obligation to run workmen's trains on the days in question; but they state that, having received representations from workpeople residing in the districts served by their railway, they have issued notices announcing that workmen who are bona fide travelling to their work on those days can obtain workmen's twopenny tickets by certain specified trains. They point out that, under the special circumstances affecting their traffic on the days mentioned, they could not maintain the full facilities ordinarily granted to workmen going to and returning from their work.

  Shipping Combines.
  MR. LABOUCHERE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that the Union Castle Steamship Company, the Clan Steamship Company, Messrs Bucknall, Ellerman, Harrison, and other shipowners trading between the United Kingdom ports and South Africa, have entered into a combine by which 10 per cent. of the primage on freight earned by them is held by the in for twelve to eighteen months and only paid to the shipper at the end of that period, provided that during the period the shippers have not shipped goods outside this combine; and, seeing that the Union Castle Company carry his Majesty's mails, and the other members of the combine are employed to carry Government stores, whether action will be taken to put an end to this combine by not employing the steamers of any company or persons who are connected with it, either for service of his Majesty's mails, or for carriage of Government stores.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I understand that an arrangement substantially, though not exactly, such as the hon. Member describes, has existed for some years between leading merchants and shipping companies not only in the South African Trade, but in that with other distant parts of the world. The latter part of the Question should be addressed to the Ministers in charge of the Departments concerned in the contracts.

  Coronation Processions.
  SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can arrange with the Stationery Office to supply Members of Parliament with copies of the official programmes of the Coronation Processions and the police regulations for street traffic on Thursday and Friday 26th and 27th instant, printed in a convenient form for use on those days.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBER lain,): I understand that the order of the processions has not yet been finally settled. As regards
  1384
  the police regulations, the Chief Commissioner of Police has been good enough to supply me with copies of these for the use of Members. They can be obtained at the Vote Office.

  Govan Telegraphic Arrangements.
  MR. HUNTER CRAIG: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that South Govan, containing a population of 6,000, has no telegraphic facilities at the post office there, and that persons desiring to telegraph have to travel to Fairfield, Govan, a distance of nearly a mile; would he therefore arrange to provide telegraphic facilities at the South Govan sub-post office at Linthouse for the convenience of this district.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Postmaster General is aware that the nearest telegraph office to Linthouse, South Govan, is that at Fairfield, nearly half a mile distant, and he will look further into the question of providing telegraphic facilities at the Linthouse office.

  Scottish Civic Titles.
  MR. HUGH LAW: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the fact that the lord mayors of some provincial cities in England, and of some cities in Ireland, are entitled to be addressed as the "right honourable," while the lord provosts of Glasgow and Edinburgh are described as the "honourable," he will endeavour to have the custom in this respect made the same in Scotland as in the rest of the Kingdom.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON,): The Lord Provost of Edinburgh is by custom styled "right honourable," and the Lord Provost of Glasgow "honourable," and it is not proposed to make any change in this custom.

  Clyde Herring Fisheries.
  MR. NICOL: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether it is the intention of the Secretary for Scotland

  1385
  to appoint a special Commission to hold a public inquiry respecting the various questions that have arisen in regard to the herring fishing industry in the Firth of Clyde and elsewhere on the West Coast of Scotland; and, if so, can he state the terms of the reference.
  MR. SCOTT DICKSON: The Secretary for Scotland has received from the Fishery Board the following telegram in regard to my hon. friend's Question, which only appeared on the notice Taper on Saturday—
  "The Fishery Board propose with reference to a close time for herrings on the West Coast of Scotland to hold a public inquiry in the autumn of this year into the whole question of the regulation of the herring fishing in the Firth of Clyde."

  Kew Gardens—Plant Nomenclature.
  MR. CREMER: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether, in order to increase the interest taken in horticulture, foreign shrubs, and trees, by the visitors to Kew Gardens and the public parks, he will issue instructions that the practice of labelling flowers, shrubs, and trees in Latin shall be discontinued and English substituted; or if the present method is continued, that side by side with the Latin description the name shall appear in English; and whether he will see that the same rule is applied in our national museums.
  MR. BRYCE: Is it not the fact that the great majority of these trees have no English names, and that it would diminish their value to foreign visitors if the practice of naming them in Latin were abandoned?
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (MR. AKERS DOUGLAS,): I understand the desire of the hon. Member is to have the name in both English and Latin. I shall be pleased to consider the hon. Member's suggestion, and have asked for the observations of the Director of Kew Gardens upon it. I have no objection to call the attention of the Trustees of the British Museum to the question, but I have no authority over their management of their museums.

  School Districts—Deficiency of School Places.
  MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he will grant a Return showing the number of school districts in which a deficiency of school places at present exists, and the extent of such deficiency in each instance.
  THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON EDUCATION (Sir JOHN GORST,): There are, so far as the Board of Education are aware, eleven such districts, in each of which notices have already been issued with a view to the deficiency being supplied. This can be given in the form of a Return if the hon. Member will move for it.

  Glenbeigh (Kerry) County Council Election.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that at the recent election for a county councillor in the division of Glenbeigh, County Kerry, a son of one of the candidates acted as personating agent for his father at the polling booth of Rosnoosane, in the electoral division of Dromore; that the candidate in question is land agent for the whole of that electoral division; that a number of the voters are illiterate; and whether, in order to ensure the security afforded by the Ballot Act, he will take steps to prevent the recurrence of this practice.
  THE CHIEF SECRFTARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): I have no information on the facts alleged, and no official right to acquire it. Any candidate or elector who may dispute the validity of the election can seek redress by means of a petition; but the Government has no power to take action in the matter.

  Ballinasloe Crimes Act Prosecution.
  Mr. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. William Hastings, editor of the Western News, Ballinasloe, was prosecuted this month under the Act of Edward III. on the charge of inciting certain persons to intimidate other persons; that no

  1387
  witness was produced to prove that any person had been incited or intimidated, or that any one had read the articles; whether he is aware that the articles on which the prosecution was based treated of the grazing question without reference to any persons, and that the case was heard by a Bench of nine magistrates, consisting of landlords and graziers, and two resident magistrates; and, seeing that the Bench stopped the Crown Prosecutor without hearing the accused, and intimated that they had made up their minds to convict, and that the Crown Prosecutor offered no comment, and that the Chairman pronounced a sentence of six months imprisonment in default of bail, he will recommend the Lord Lieutenant to exercise his prerogative and quash the conviction; and will he state what passages in the articles written by the accused were complained of by the Crown.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The particulars set forth in this Question are inaccurate. Mr. Hastings was not convicted of any offence, but, having for months published articles directly inciting to the boycotting and intimidation of persons in the neighbourhood, he was required to enter into recognisances to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. The accused was fully heard. He duly entered into recognisances and is now at large. There was only one dissentient on the Bench consisting of nine magistrates. I am not aware what pursuits may be followed by seven of them. They seem to have acted properly. There is no conviction to quash.
  MR. ROCHE: Will the right hon. Gentleman state what passages in the articles were complained of?
  Mr. WYNDHAM: Those directly inciting to boycotting.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Who instigated the prosecution?
  MR. ROCHE: May I point out that no particular paragraphs were specified? That is what I want to find out.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I do not see how that is relevant to the Question. The accused entered into recognisances, and there the matter ends.
  MR. ROCHE: But surely a defendant is entitled to know what is charged against him.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  Macroom Labourers' Cottages.
  MR. SHEEHAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of cottages erected and in course of erection under the Labourers' Acts in the Macroom rural district; how many schemes have been formulated by the council of that district; and the amount of the loans sanctioned for providing improved dwellings for the labouring classes.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Loans amounting to £42,980 have been sanctioned for 435 cottages, comprised in three schemes. 389 cottages were erected at the end of March, 1901, later information is not at present available. A fourth scheme authorising the provision of 129 additional cottages has been sanctioned. The District Council has not yet applied for the necessary loan to carry this scheme into effect.
  Mr. KENDAL O'BRIEN: Will the Local Government Board take steps to put the Act in force?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! Notice must be given of that Question.

  Ennis Crimes Act Prosecutions.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the circumstances under which Mr. Linnane, chairman of the Ennis District Council; Mr. F. Flanagan, chairman of the Corofin District Council; Mr. Griffy, chairman of the Corofin Guardians; and a number of other gentlemen were recently sent to prison with hard labour in Ennis for three months.
  MR. WYNDHAM: In this case the defendants were prosecuted on the charge of taking part in a criminal conspiracy to compel certain persons not to occupy lands of which they were in legal occupation. The sentences imposed on Messrs. Linnane and Griffy are not accompanied by hard labour, and the latter was

  1389
  committed for two months. The sentences on all the defendants, with one exception, were confirmed on appeal at the recent (Quarter Sessions, at Ennis.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if it is not a fact that the county of Clare is in a very peaceful condition, and under these circumstances, is not the continued imprisonment of these gentlemen likely to produce a different state of affairs?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That does not arise out of the Question. The Question on the Paper is under what circumstances these men were sent to prison.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Then I will ask a Question which does arise out of that on the Paper. It is whether these cases have not arisen out of a difficulty in connection with the taking of a farm in? County Clare, in a case which was recently before the High Court in Dublin, when Mr. Justice Gibson—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! I do not see how that arises out of the Question.
  MR. P. J. O'BRIEN: Is the gentleman who has been sentenced to hard labour a Justice of the Peace?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! If the hon. Gentleman wishes to attack the action of the Executive, he must do so in Committee of Supply. He cannot do it by means of Questions across the floor of the House.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I will do it in Committee of Supply. I was only asking these Questions in order to save time.

  Cork Constabulary.
  MR. EDWARD BARRY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that County Inspector Hamilton, in the west riding of the county of Cork, is compelling members of the force of twenty-five years service to retire on pension, thereby depriving them of then-privilege of attaining their full pensions; and will he say whether such power is vested in county inspectors; and, if not, will steps be taken to prevent this inspector from exercising it in this district.
  MR. WYNDHAM: No such power is vested in county inspectors; but the Inspector General is authorised by the 46 and 47 Vict. cap. 14, Section 3 (6) to require men to retire on pension when they have completed twenty-five years service. This course had been followed in the case of some members of the force in Cork.

  Roscrea Crimes Act Prisoners.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the treatment of the prisoners convicted under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act at Roscrea on the 14th May last, who were handcuffed for several hours while being conveyed from Roscrea to Clonmel prison; and will he state on what grounds were they subjected to this treatment.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The prisoners were handcuffed whilst being conveyed by car from Roscrea to Ballybrophy railway station, a distance of ten miles. The handcuffs were then removed and were not again put on. Considerable crowds were assembled along the route, and this course was adopted by the police as a necessary precaution for the custody of the prisoners. If there had been a place where the prisoners could have been properly detained during the night, that would have been the best course to pursue. But I understand that was not so.
  MR. DILLON: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman approves of this outrage?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I do not see how that question comes in. I have said it would have been better if the prisoners could have been kept in the place during the night, but the police say it was not possible, and they were quite right in taking all the necessary precautions in view of the large crowds which had assembled.
  MR. DILLON: Then it is the decision of the Executive Government that prisoners under the Crimes Act shall be handcuffed?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The Question on the Paper is on what grounds these prisoners were subjected to certain treatment. The right hon. Gentleman has stated those grounds, and the question whether or not they are sufficient must be discussed in another way.
  MR. DILLON: Then at the earliest opportunity I shall call attention to the matter.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: IS the right hon. Gentleman aware that these gentlemen—
  MR. SPEAKER: Older, order!
  AN HON. MEMBER: "Coronation handcuffs."

  Belfast Smallpox Hospital.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that it is proposed to erect a smallpox hospital for Belfast within the asylum grounds at Purdysburn, County Down; that there is an industrial and agricultural population in the immediate neighbourhood, and that objection has been taken to the erection of the hospital; and if he can state what the medical officers of the Irish Local Government Board have decided to be the striking distance of smallpox contagion; and if the asylum itself and the homes of the people are outside the distance.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The site of the temporary smallpox hospital is on lands acquired by the Belfast Corporation for Asylum purposes, but which were subsequently allocated to hospital purposes by the City of Belfast (Hospitals) Act of 1898. The site is 300 yards from the nearest dwelling houses. Some objections have been received by the Corporation to the erection of the hospital. Neither the Local Government Board nor their Inspectors have prescribed any fixed limit as the striking distance of smallpox contagion.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the striking distance of smallpox is clearly laid down
  1392
  by the English Local Government Board, and will he state whether two national schools and a large number of cottages are, in this case, within that striking distance?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am not responsible for the Local Government Board of England, but, on the facts before me, it seems to me the only alternative would have been to continue the hospital at the workhouse, in the centre of a thick population.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, seeing that considerable alarm exists in the locality, whether he will inquire as to the rules adopted by the Local Government Board in England in similar cases.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Yes, Sir. I shall be very glad to do that, if my hon. friend will direct my attention to the facts.

  Irish Board of Works—Age Regulations.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can state how many persons are employed by the Irish Board of Works at salaries above 50s. a week, in the departments of Phœnix and Stephen Green Parks, Harbour Works at Kingstown and Howth, River Shannon Navigation Works, and at any other permanent undertaking, subject to the control of the Irish Board of Works; and how many of the persons so employed at salaries of over 50s. a week are Roman Catholics.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The number of persons employed by the Board of Works in these cases at salaries above 50s. a week, is twelve. I have no knowledge of their religious beliefs.

  Ramsgrange Postal Arrangements.
  MR. FFRENCH: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that dissatisfaction prevails in the parish of Ramsgrange, and the surrounding district owing to the postal arrangements; and whether he can arrange that the English mails should go by way of Waterford as at present, and the principal portion of the mails be sent by way of Wexford, with a

  1393
  post ear running between Foulksmill and Fethard, so that the delivery of the latter would be at ten o'clock in the morning instead of three o'clock in the, afternoon, as at present.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: In a letter sent to the hon. Member from the Post Office on the 28th of February last, it was explained that it would not be practicable to serve the district in question partly from Waterford and partly from Wexford, and the Postmaster General fears that it will not be feasible to adopt the hon. Member's suggestion but he will have further enquiry made on the subject.
  MR. FFRENCH: But would it not result in a saving to the Post Office, if my suggestions were carried out?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am not aware of that. At any rate the Postmaster General considers it would not be feasible. If the hon. Member has any further information, and will communicate it to the Postmaster General, that may be the best way of bringing the matter to a satisfactory conclusion.

  Rosscarbery Mails.
  MR. EDWARD BARRY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether inquiries have recently been made as to the cost of conveying a second daily mail from Clonakilty to Rosscarbery, a distance of eight miles; and whether a second delivery can be granted to Rosscarbery.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Further inquiry has recently been made, as to the possibility of establishing a second post to Rosscarbery, but it is found that the expense of providing such a service is still not warranted. The question will not be lost sight of, but will be again considered next year.

  Armagh Postal Staff.
  MR. JOHN CAMPBELL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that, owing to the introduction of women in the Armagh Post Office, and the withdrawal
  1394
  of a junior member who, has for some weeks been engaged in the duty of rearranging rural postmen's walks, the number of men available for work has been considerably reduced. Whether he is aware that, in consequence of this reduction, the remainder of the staff have been obliged to perform extra duty, so that men have had to work fourteen or fifteen hours per day, sometimes coming on at 2 a.m. after their work of the previous day; whether it is customary to attach such work to an ordinary officer such as the aforesaid junior member; and whether he will see that there is some redistribution of the work among the staff at Armagh.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The duties of the Armagh Post Office have not been prejudiced by the introduction of the three women clerks who now, with eight men, make up the established indoor staff, but recently some extra duty has been necessary in consequence of sick and other absences. This extra duty, of which the woman have generally taken a share, has been of very-moderate amount, except during one week when five men in rotation each worked overtime for six hours one night in the week. The circumstances were quite exceptional, and instructions have been given for such a distribution of the work as will not in future involve any officer in a prolonged night attendance in addition to his ordinary day duty. The junior officer referred to, as withdrawn for temporary special duty was considered the best qualified for that duty.
  Supplementary Questions were put by Mr. W. JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.) and Mr. JOHN CAMPBELL, but were not audible.

  Operation of the New Question Rule.
  At five minutes to three o'clock, the time appointed by the new Rule for the interruption of Questions, thirty-eight of the Questions on the Paper had been asked and replied to, and sixteen others, the majority of which were addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury, remained unanswered.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! It being now five minutes to three o'clock, it is my duty, under the new Rule, to interrupt Questions.
  MR. DILLON: As this is the first occasion on which Questions have been interrupted under the new Rule, I wish to ask what becomes of the starred Questions on the Paper which have not been reached. Will they be postponed till tomorrow, and then have precedence?
  MR. SPEAKER: That is provided for in the Rule.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: May I, as a point of order, call attention to the fact that Mr. Speaker has been called to the Bar of the House of Lords, and that, as a consequence, Question time has been encroached upon for several minutes.
  MR. SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. I am quite aware of the fact that I was called to the Bar of the House of Lords. I may say that Questions not answered by reason of the absence of Ministers can now be put.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): On the point of order, according to my recollection, this case was considered in the discussion of the Rule. It was felt that, at all hazards, we should avoid an accumulation of Questions carried over from day to day, and that each day should dispose of the day's starred Questions, either by oral answers or by printed answers in the Votes.
  MR. SPEAKER: I think I must correct my previous statement. I had not looked at the Rule when the Question was addressed to me, but having done so now, I must say I think the right hon. Gentleman is right in his interpretation of the Rule, and that the answers to Questions not reached by five minutes to three must be printed and circulated with the Votes.
  MR. DILLON: I beg most respectfully to differ from the right hon. Gentleman as to his interpretation of the intention of the House.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The question is not whether the right hon. Gentleman is right in his interpretation of the intention of the House, but whether I am right in the construction of the Rule.
  MR. DILLON: Seeing, Sir, that you gave a different ruling in the first place, would it not be reasonable under the circumstances to give hon. Members the privilege of postponing starred Questions till to-morrow? Your interpretation comes as a complete surprise to many of us. Evidently it will be necessary to give notice at the Table before Questions are called.
  MR. SPEAKER: I am bound by the Standing Orders; but, if I had discretion in the matter, and as this is the first time the difficulty has arisen, I would be glad to say that these Questions might, on this occasion, as the hon. Member suggested, be put down for tomorrow. But that cannot be done under the Standing Order.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he would like to call attention to the wording of the Rule. It was to the effect that in certain circumstance the Minister should cause the answer to be printed, unless the Member had signified his desire otherwise. The point was, when must that desire be intimated?
  MR. SPEAKER: I can only adhere to the view I have already expressed.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked whether a Member when giving notice of a Question at the Table could not intimate to the Clerks that if it were not reached it should be postponed instead of the answer being printed. Further, he inquired whether the Questions to the First Lord could not be taken.
  MR. SPEAKER: No, that cannot be done. The Questions must be taken in their order until five minutes to three.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: With great respect to you, Sir, the Standing Order does not prescribe any order for the Questions, and those addressed to the First Lord are put last as a matter of convenience.
  MR. SPEAKER: The fact remains that the time allotted for Questions having expired, those addressed to the First Lord must be dealt with in the same manner as the other Questions. I can make no exception.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I wish to ask you whether there was any warning given on behalf of the properly constituted authorities, whoever they may be, that the presence of this House would be required in the House of Lords, and if it would be possible to arrange so that such a step should not be taken on a day when there are a number of important Questions which might be prevented from being answered.
  MR. SPEAKER: The usual practice has been followed in this case—that is to say, a notice is sent to me, either on the day or the day before—I received it in the present case this morning—that there would be a Commission at two o'clock. I should hope that those who make the arrangements would endeavour as far as possible to arrange that a Commission should be taken on a day when it is likely that only a few Questions will be set down.
  Mr. WILLIAM REDMOND: I desire to ask for information on this question. May I inquire whether, if an hon. Member puts down a Question and by starring it thereby indicates that he requires a verbal answer to it, and it is not reached by five minutes to three, he is precluded from putting down that question as a starred Question for any other day? I would also ask whether an hon. Member is not at liberty, by giving notice when he puts the Question down, that if it is not reached by five minutes to three he prefers to have it answered verbally the next day, to have that done?
  MR. SPEAKER: Certainly an hon. Member cannot get round the Standing Order in that way. As to the first part of the hon. Member's Question, I can only repeat that the answer will be printed, and, if it is printed, the Question will be in exactly the same position as if it had already been asked and answered in this House. It cannot be put down again.
  Mr. WILLIAM REDMOND: But what I want to know is this. There may be a particular Question, which for sufficient reasons an hon. Member may desire to have verbally answered. Is he prevented for ever from getting that verbal answer if the Question does not happen to be reached before five minutes to three on the day on which he puts it down?
  MR. SPEAKER: "For ever" is a long time. I cannot add anything to what I have already said, viz., that if the answer is printed with the Papers, the Question will be in exactly the same position as one which has been answered in the House. †

Business of the House.
MR. GRETTON: May I ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is the intention of the Government to take the Licensing Bill at the Morning or Evening Sitting this day.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is in order in asking urgent Questions relating to the business of the House, and I think this one comes within that category.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have every reason to believe that the Education Bill will not be finished before the close of business and therefore anticipate that the Licensing Bill will not come on.
MR. LAMBERT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, the Questions I have on the Paper, viz., if he will state the intentions of the Government with regard to imposing on the local rates the whole cost if administering the Education Bill. I beg also to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can state the effect of the Education Bill upon Endowments now applied to elementary education; whether these endowments will be diverted; if so, to what purpose.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: May I say that in accordance with what I said to the House last Thursday I shall ask permission to make a statement with reference to the financial proposals of the Government.
† The points arising on the amendment of the Standing Order "Questions to Members" are fully stated in the Indexes to Volumes ci—cvii, under the title "Questions in the House." The Standing Order, as it finally emerged from the discussions, is set out in Vol. cvii, at page 285. Its concluding words may be reproduced here: "If [a starred Question] … is not reached by live minutes before three of the clock, the Minister to whom it is addressed shall cause an answer to be printed and circulated with the Votes, unless the Member has signified his desire to postpone the Question."—[ED.]
MR. SPEAKER: The righthon. Gentleman can, of course, do so by leave of the House.
SIR H. GAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: What is to be the business this week?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: At the evening sitting on Tuesday I shall move a Motion enabling the House to rise for the Coronation holidays. The Wednesday afternoon sitting will, I hope, conclude the Third Reading of the Finance Bill. The Education Bill will be proceeded with on Tuesday afternoon.
Mr. WEIR: I beg to move the unopposed Return which stands in my name.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member must now do that after 12 o'clock.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to certain of the Amendments made by this House to, Crernation Bill [Lords]. And disagree to one other of the said Amendments, for which disagreement they assign their reason.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable the Trustees of the British Museum to remove certain newspapers and other printed matter from the present Museum Buildings." [British Museum Bill] [Lords].

COMMONS (REGULATION OF THE COMMONS IN THE PARISHES OF CHIPPING SODBURY, OLD SODBURY, AND LITTLE SODBURY, COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER.
Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence relative thereto, brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 237.]
Minutes of Evidence to be printed. [No. 237.]

PUBLIC PETITIONS COMMITTEE.
Seventh Report brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
NEW BILL.
  MARRIAGES LEGALISATION BILL.
  "To render valid marriages heretofore solemnised at the Ellerker Chapel of Ease, in the parish of Brantingham, and at the church of St. Mark, in the parish of Marske-in-Cleveland, both in the county of York," presented by Mr. Jesse Collings, under Standing Order 31; to be read a second time upon Thursday, and to be printed. [Bill 249.]

EDUCATION BILL.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I beg to ask leave to make a statement.
MR. JOHN ELLIS: May I ask you, Sir, if the right hon. Gentleman makes a statement, cannot we ask a Question upon it or discuss it?
MR. SPEAKER: A Question may be asked, but certainly hon. Members would not be in order in discussing the statement. There is no Question before the House, and the right hon. Gentleman can only speak by the leave of the House.
MR. DILLON: Under these circum stances I think it would be much better for the right hon. Gentleman to make his statement on the Motion that Clause 2 be adjourned.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am by no means sure of that. The statement has only the most indirect and remote reference to Clause 2. The financial statement I have to make deals with the financial part of the Bill. I do not say that there is no connection between the two, but it would be remote, and moreover I have great doubt whether it would be in order.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Am I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman is to make this statement and I that the House is to have no opportunity of discussing it?
MR. JOHN ELLIS: That would surely be most unprecedented. Why not make it on a Motion to report progress when the Chairman is in the Chair?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The House will bear with me for a moment. It would have been perfectly competent for me to put down an Amendment on Friday night which would have embodied my statement, but I considered that there should be a brief explanation of the Government proposal, as it had only the remotest and most indirect relation to Clause 2. In my judgment the only convenient course is the one I have recommended; but if the House does not wish me to proceed, there is an end of the matter. [Hon. MEMBERS; Go on.]
I will endeavour to make the statement as brief and as clear as I can. The House will remember that since 1895 there have been two separate classes of grant made out of the public Exchequer in order to aid elementary education. There is a grant to voluntary schools, and a necessitous School Board grant. The one was intended to assist, the managers of the voluntary schools who had difficulty in carrying on their educational work; the other was intended to assist those districts which, by reason of the great burden of the rates, were in a difficulty in dealing with the obligations thrown upon them by Parliament. These two grants together amount in all to £860,000. The voluntary schools aid grant last year amounted to £64,000, and the necessitous School Board grant to £220,000—together making £860,000. Now, I am sure that everybody who has considered the matter will feel that these grants cannot remain as they are, and for reasons which the House will see are conclusive. As regards the voluntary school grant, it loses its original purpose as soon as the voluntary school in regard to maintenence is supported out of the general rates. That may be a good or a bad plan; but evidently it does away with the ground on which the 5s. grant was given; and moreover the Bill, as it stands, would have the effect certainly not desired by its framers, of giving a direct bribe to local authorities to use the voluntary machinery rather than any other machinery, if these schools had to be made to meet the growth of the population. Moreover, if these grants were stereotyped to the county authority, this great anomaly would be produced, that those districts in which there were an immense number of voluntary schools would get a dispro-
1402
portionate amount of public money, and other districts which were school board areas would get proportionately less, without there being any rational ground for distinguishing between the two cases. That is pretty conclusive as regards the voluntary school grant, and it is no less conclusive as to why the necessitous school grant should also be altered. That again is a case of merging one authority in a larger authority, and even as regards those Urban Districts which will retain their educational autonomy, it will be remembered that the Act of 1897 estimated the amount to be given by the number of children in average attendance in board schools. Under this Bill, as the House is aware, the local authority will be responsible for all the children in the schools in its district, the School Boards being abolished; and what were formerly board schools will become schools under the new education authority. Therefore, that grant no less than the other must I think be abolished. We propose to abolish them both, and to substitute a new grant in aid of elementary education. Now the question is what should be the amount of this grant. The amount I have been dealing with is, as the House will recollect, £860,000 a year. My right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is prepared to add to that £860,000 a sum of over £900,000 a year; so that the grants we have been giving since 1896 will not only be doubled, but more than doubled. The question then remains, how is this large sum of £1,760,000—that is about the sum I think that all the consolidated grants will amount to—to be distributed. The simple and obvious principle would be to give it per child all round to every district. I should imagine that the sum available would, roughly speaking, come to 7s. 6d. per child; but on consideration we have come to the conclusion that that simple and obvious principle, if carried out in its logical form, would lead, I will not say to considerable injustice, but to considerable anomaly. There are districts where to give 7s. 6d. per child would be to give more than they could reasonably claim from the Exchequer. There are other districts, less happily situated, which might perhaps receive even something less, not more at all events,

1403
than they receive under the existing system of distributing grants to necessitous schools. In these circumstances, we propose to abate the rigour of a simple distribution per child in average attendance, and we propose that the amount to be distributed in that way I shall be only 4s. per head. We start, in other words, by distributing to every educational authority in the country 4s. per child in average attendance in the schools for which that authority is responsible; and the remainder we propose to distribute according to what I may call the relative poverty or the relative want for capacity of districts to bear the burden thrown upon them by our elementary education system. Now, what is the test of capacity so far as elementary education is concerned? The test of capacity which we think on the whole is the fairest, and possibly the only fair one, is the amount per child produced by a penny rate. The amount produced by a penny rate is to be the rough test of the wealth of the district; but if we confined ourselves strictly to that test, it would not show any relation between the wealth of a district and the work that district has to do for elementary education. We must therefore bring in the number of children in average attendance, and our view of the test of capacity is the amount produced per child by a penny rate.
MR. DILLON: In what area?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: In the area of the education authority.
SIR CHARLES DILKE: The existing education authority?
Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: Oh, no; these grants will be made to the new education authorities. If I have put the thing too briefly. I am quite ready to expand it. These grants will be made to the new education authorities; and the test of their financial capacity is properly measured by the amount produced by a penny rate in proportion to the number of children in average attendance. To work that out into a practical system,
1404
we have to find a basis on which to take a line. So far as we are aware, there is no district in the country so rich that a penny rate produces more than 10s. per child. That is our starting point. If there be such a district, it will receive 4s. per child and nothing else; that is simply the grant per head according to the number of children in average attendance. But directly a penny rate produces less than 10s. per child, that district immediately begins to gain something from this part of the grant. And as the penny rate produces less and less, the district will receive more and more from the money at our disposal outside the fixed contribution of 4s. per head. If, for example, there was a place in which the penny rate produced only 1s. per head, that place would not only receive 4s. but would receive in addition 4s. 6d.; the grant would be more than doubled, and the poverty of the district would be assisted out of the Exchequer. I do not know whether I have made that quite clear; I hope I have. This was really one reason why I was anxious that the House should allow me to make this brief statement. I have to admit that the formula in which this system is embodied, is, as all formulaé must be, of a rather forbidding and, at first sight, of an obscure character. But if anyone will take the trouble to read through Section 97 of the Act of 1870 and see what our predecessors have done in this matter, I think he will not complain of the words in which we have embodied our scheme. The words are—
"One penny per scholar will be given out of the Exchequer for every twopence by which the product of a penny rate falls short of 10s."
If I had read that to the House without any explanation, I am perfectly certain that no human being could have understood it; but after the brief explanation I have given there can be no doubt as to the general principle we have endeavoured to embody, or as to the grounds on which that principle has been established. The leading points the House has to remember are these—that the original grants will not only be doubled, but more than doubled; that out of these grants we give 4s. per head all round; and that we give this extra grant

1405
in proportion to the poverty of the districts, which in extreme cases will be considerably more than double the original grant of 4s.
SIR W. HART DYKE: Can my right hon. friend give the total amount of the 4s. grant, and the total amount of the balance, remaining?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I ought to have anticipated that question; but the sum is easily done if anyone has by him the number of children in average attendance. These children all get. 4s., and the total amount to be distributed is about £1,760,000. If we subtract from that 4s. per child, the remainder will be the amount distributed in accordance with the relative poverty of each district.
MR. ERNEST GRAY: Is the rate for maintenance, or for maintenance and buildings as well? The buildings fall on the parish; the maintenance falls on the new authority.
Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: My hon. friend will see that it has nothing to do with one or the other. It is the amount which the penny rate will produce per child. That is the test, and the amount is distributed quite irrespective of the manner in which it is to be spent after it is allocated. I have only two other observations to make. We think that in no case ought the Exchequer to pay more than three-fourths of the total expended on education in any district; and we think there ought to be a provision that the counties should give aid, out of this large sum to be placed at their disposal, to those districts in its area which happen to be specially burdened. As to the details of those two points, Amendments will appear on the Paper explaining exactly what our proposal is.
MR. DILLON: Is it to be voluntary or compulsory?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Voluntary, within limits, but compulsory to a certain point.
MR. M'KENNA: What is to happen in London?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: This financial arrangement will only apply to those parts of the country to which the Bill applies. If the Bill is not accepted by any part of the country, that part will remain untouched.
MR. BRYCE: May I ask, in the first place, are we right in assuming that all this money is to go to elementary education, and no part of it is to go to secondary education; secondly, is there a limit of the grant to be payable to the local authorities—is there a maximum fixed of the sum per child which may be paid; and thirdly, are we right in assuming that a grant corresponding to this grant will be made to Ireland and Scotland?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: This grant solely contemplates elementary education; but as it is given, of course, to the authorities which will deal with secondary education, it will be pro tanto an addition to their resources. There is no maximum limit, except that as we are leaving the management of education to the local authorities, we think they ought to bear one-fourth of the total cost of education in their districts. As regards Ireland and Scotland, that is rather outside the limits of this discussion, but of course we shall do justice to the other portions of the United Kingdom.
MR. MATHER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman are we to take it in the future from the explanation given that three fourths of the cost of elementary education will be paid out of the National Exchequer, and only one-fourth out of other sources?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No. Sir, it is a limiting proposition. What I said was, not that the Exchequer would pay three-fourths, but that it would not pay more than three-fourths.
MR. JOHN ELLIS: Will the right hon. Gentleman lay this statement in print on the Table?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Well, I can lay the actual Amendment on the Table tonight. I am afraid my statement cannot be laid on the Table, because it was more in the nature of a speech than anything else, but I can read the Amendment now. It is very short—
(1.) In lieu of the grants under the Voluntary Sehools Act, 1897, and under section ninety-seven of the Elementary Education Act, 1870, as amended by the Elementary Education Act, 1897, there shall be annually paid to every local education authority out of moneys provided by Parliament—

(a) a sum equal to four shillings per scholar; and

(b) an additional sum of one penny per scholar for every twopence by which the product of a penny rate on the area of the authority falls short of ten shillings a scholar.

But the total amount paid to any local education authority on account of all the parliamentary grants in respect of elementary education, including the grant under this section, shall not in any year exceed three-fourths of the total expenses of the authority under Part III. of this Act, and the amount payable under this section to a local education authority shall, where necessary, be reduced accordingly.
(2) For the purposes of this section the number of scholars shall be taken to be the number of scholars in average attendance, as computed by the Board of Education, in public elementary schools maintained by the authority. "Then there will be an Amendment to Clause 13, page 5, line 36, after charge "insert" such portion as they think fit, not being less than one-half or more than three-fourths of."
That is what the right hon. Gentleman asked me about, and other consequential Amendments in the same terms. I think I have now made it very clear and I hope the House will forgive me for having dealt with it in this form. I am sure it never would have been fully understood if I had not done so.
DR. MACNAMARA: May I ask whether the change in the finance of the Bill has caused the Government to consider whether it will modify the permissive application of the Bill.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think we ought to defer that question until the proper time comes to discuss it.
COLONEL LONG: Will the subscriptions of subscribers to voluntary schools for increasing and maintaining in the future school buildings be recognised and included in the one-fourth which the localities have to find?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir, it only refers to the amount which is to be derived from the rates. I am not sure whether my hon. and gallant friend when he reconsiders the question will consider it to be relevant. I hardly think it is at present.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: May I ask whether, as these financial arrangements are in the nature of new clauses, it is not the case that the House will not be able to discuss them until all the rest of the Bill has been disposed of?
Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid, as I have had to point out to the right hon. Gentleman before, it is impossible to discuss the whole of the clauses of the Bill at once; they must be taken in order. There is no other expedient. At all events, I confess there is no other very convenient expedient which suggested itself to my mind for bringing these clauses under discussion. That was neither the fault of the Government nor the draughtsman nor anybody else. It would not have been possible to have done this at all but for the aid of a happy circumstance arising outside the discussion of the Bill, which enabled more provision to be made for elementary education than could possibly have been foreseen when the Bill was brought in. I do not gather that the right hon. Gentleman himself could suggest a more convenient procedure.
MR. DILLON: May I ask whether it I will not be necessary to have a Resolution brought forward with regard to this matter?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Clearly.
MR. DILLON: And will not that be the suitable opportunity for a general discussion?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think there is a tendency to abuse a Resolution, but that there must be a full opportunity given to the House to discuss it is quite evident.
MR. RENSHAW: May I ask whether the amount of £860,000 represents the amount payable

1409
to the whole of England and Wales, and whether the total amount of £1,760,000 represents the amount which in future will he available for the whole of the country, including London?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am glad the hon. Member has asked that question, as it is possible there might be a misconception following on the answer I gave the hon. Member opposite on the subject of London. The figures I have given apply to the whole of England and Wales, but the mode of distribution is not applicable to any part of the country where the scheme is not operative.

EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Mr. J. W. LOWTHERin the Chair.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNER-MAN: I do not think it will be a matter of surprise to the House at large, or to the right hon. Gentleman himself, if I rise to move that you do report progress, and to ask leave to sit again. The changes which the right hon. Gentleman proposes constitute in their most important aspects a new Bill. We are not aware of any inside or outside circumstances, either internal in the Bill itself, or external to it, which has occasioned this change of policy. The right hon. Gentleman said there were certain financial circum stances which were favourable. I suppose that may be taken to have reference to the corn tax. But, at all events, we have got tin's fact, that the Government, having had seven years to elaborate a great national scheme of education, with great deliberation, and no doubt, after ample consideration, have brought forward a Bill based on the one principle of a universal rate for elementary education. Now, at this early stage of the proceedings, they have changed their ground, and they are imposing a great portion of the expenditure as a charge upon the general taxpayer.
1410
My right hon. friend at once pointed out one little fact which affects this alteration. There is the Scotch and the Irish taxpayer, who are as much concerned as the English taxpayer; therefore this presages that before the end of the year, I suppose, there may be some new Education Bill which may effect fundamental changes in a system which, so far as I am aware, works very well as it is in Scotland. It may also presage the same thing in Ireland. And we have always to bear this in mind, that every change in the taxes involves a heavier burden proportionately on the poorer classes, on the lowest and most suffering clashes. There are these considerations to be taken into account, and then we have the further point, within the Bill itself, of the great difference in the way in which elementary and secondary education are treated. There are a great many of us who are of opinion that if this large sum of money is to be given for education out of the taxes, a great deal of it ought to go to secondary rather than to elementary education. We are now on Clause 2, the clause dealing with secondary education—dealing with the permissive powers given to the educational authority with regard to secondary and higher education—and I think we ought to have an opportunity of considering how far the very Clause we are now on, as well as other parts of the Bill, are affected by the changes the right hon. Gentleman has instituted. I am aware that it would not be in order now to discuss the merits of these changes, but I think I have said enough to show that we are not unreasonable in asking you to report progress, with leave to sit again, in order that we may have an opportunity of reconsidering the question. I am not without the hope that the right hon. Gentleman himself—I have stated at the beginning of my remarks that he would not be surprised at my action—I am not without the hope that the right hon. Gentleman has anticipated a Motion of this kind, because I observed, although he excluded the Licensing Bill from the Paper of the night, in an answer to a Question he said he did not know what accidents might not occur to interrupt the ordinary course of business. I am

1411
sorry to be the creator of accidents, but I think there is reason for asking you to report progress and to ask leave to sit again.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.)
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The right hon. Gentleman did more than justice to my powers of anticipation when he suggested that I looked forward to the; Motion, the dilatory Motion, which he has just moved. I confess I am utterly unable to understand, after listening attentively to the right hon. Gentleman, what the grounds for this Motion; are. We are now on Clause 2 of the Bill. Clause 2 deals with secondary education; the change I announced, whether it is good or bad as a matter of policy, deals with primary education. The only relation it can have to secondary education is this, that if you increase the resources of the education authority, it is possible for the authority to conduct both secondary and primary education on easier terms, and pro tanto lighten the burden of that authority and increase its readiness to deal with the problem of secondary education. Is that a reason to be alleged for not going on with the clause dealing with secondary education? Because under that clause secondary education is rendered less onerous to the counties, is that a reason for not discussing it? In no other way is it related to it, and in no other way does it touch secondary education, and I am utterly at a loss to understand why the right hon. Gentleman is unable to discuss a clause relating to secondary education, because he has not had time to discuss a primary education proposal. I think it is much to be regretted the right hon. Gentleman has taken this course. I gather that the right hon. Gentleman and the Party for whom he is responsible do not desire to see further aid given from the Exchequer to primary education, and that if further aid is to be given out of the Exchequer it should be given to secondary and not primary education. I
1412
am sorry the right hon. Gentleman takes that view. I am convinced it is not the view taken by the country generally, and it is certainly not the view taken by many distinguished Gentlemen on his own side of the House, who, in a deputation which waited upon me the other day, begged that we should do something out of the Exchequer in aid of primary education. Under these circumstances I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not press his Motion any further, but that we shall be allowed to proceed amicably and peaceably with the discussion of the policy with regard to secondary education which Clause 2 involves.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: I do not think anybody will object to proceeding with the discussion amicably and peacably either today or on any other day, but I think the right hon. Gentleman has entirely misapprehended what my right hon. friend said. He did not say that he objected to assistance being given out of the Exchequer to elementary education. I do not know why this particular sum of nearly £1,000,000 was stated, unless it be that it corresponds very nearly with the amount of the voluntary subscriptions. ["No."] £800,000, I think, is the amount of the voluntary subscriptions, and the charge on the Exchequer is as nearly as possible the same amount. If that sum is to be given from the Exchequer, what my right hon. friend said was that he thought it ought to be considered, in relation to Clause 2, whether a portion, at least, ought not to be given to secondary education. That is the proposition he stated, and it clearly does relate to Clause 2. It seems to me to be an extraordinary thing, if the Government by accident is able to spare this large, sum, that secondary education should not share in the benefit as well as primary. That is really the proposition stated by my right hon. friend, and not that which the right hon. Gentleman seems to have understood.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSasked whose fault it was that the present Motion—described by the Leader of the House as a dilatory Motion—had had to be made? The Bill had

1413
now been under discussion for a considerable time, and over and over again the right hon. Gentleman had been pressed to state what his financial proposals wore.
MR. A. J. BALFOURpointed out that for the last two weeks the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been engaged in the heavy work connected with the Budget, and that it had been impossible to make the statement earlier.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he was not blaming the right hon. Gentleman; he was simply trying, in a humble way, to justify the Motion before the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman had been enabled to make his proposal by circumstances which were beyond his control, but that was no reason why the Committee should not have an opportunity to consider the Bill with the alterations now proposed. The truth of the matter was that those proposals made it an entirely different Bill. Certain schools would be supported practically entirely out of the Exchequer. ["No."] At any rate, the right hon. Gentleman had stated that three-fourths of the total expense of education—not merely the maintenance—might in some schools come out of the Exchequer. That was a proposal which, on the Second Heading of the Bill, did not have the assent of the House. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouthshire had asked why this particular sum had been fixed upon. The Committee were entitled to have placed on the Table the estimate of the Government, showing, in regard to each local education authority, how the money would be divided. The Motion of his right hon. friend was thoroughly justified, and the Leader of the House would be well-advised to assent to it, because, otherwise, in the discussion, not only of Clause 2, but of all the remaining portions of the Bill, he would be hampered by questions, which could not at present be answered, upon points which would perhaps be cleared up if an opportunity were given to Members to consider the figures concerned and to form their own judgments on the matter.
MR. BARTLEYthought it was very unfortunate that they should have a complete change in the Bill at the present time. The question of secondary education formed a very important part of the Bill, and it was seriously affected
1414
by the large additional grant now to be made. The proposal raised an entirely new point, and it was not unreasonable that a little time should be allowed for its consideration. The change affected the ramifications of the entire subject, and could not be considered as touching only elementary education. It raised the question of whether they were to do more and more out of public funds for secondary education, to the relief of people who could afford to pay for it themselves. In the present spirit of the House he did not think much progress would be made by forcing on the discussion; much better results would follow if the further consideration of the subject were postponed for a day and the Licensing Bill proceeded with.
MR. BRYCE: The right hon. Gentleman does not seem to apprehend the ground on which we think this proposal is relevant to Clause 2. In the first place, there are many of us who think that the National Treasury ought to do something for secondary education. Our view is confirmed by the fact that the Government proposes to give this large additional grant to elementary education. We desire to see a part of that grant applied to secondary education, and to put down Amendments to that effect. We cannot put down those Amendments until we see the right hon. Gentleman's proposal on the Paper, and, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman ought to give us a day during which Amendments could be handed in, raising that very material question.
Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: It is not relevant to Clause 2.
MR. BRYCE: Oh, yes. If this new grant is to be made we should like to put down an Amendment giving power to the local authority to apply a part of it to secondary education.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is a new clause.
Mr. BRYCE: It would be relevant to this clause, because the question is as to what the rating powers are to be. The right hon. Gentleman can hardly remember what this Clause is. The clause gives power to the local authorities

1415
to impose a rate not exceeding 2d. There are some Members, such as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford, who desire that limit to be reduced to 1d., while, on the other hand, there are others who wish the limit to be raised to 3d. or 4d., or even removed altogether. Surely nothing can be more relevant to the question of what the rating power of the authorities shall be than the consideration of whether they are to be able to apply any part of this proposed new grant to secondary education, or whether words should be inserted in the clause providing that aid from the Exchequer should be given to secondary education. These are both questions which necessarily arise upon this clause, upon which we desire to put down Amendments, and which cannot be properly discussed or adequately-understood unless we see not only the Government proposal on the Paper, but also how it will work out with regard to various localities. This is a most complex question, and it is exceedingly difficult at the first blush to see what will be the result of the plan over the various areas. Therefore, I submit that we have a very strong case for requesting such a postponement as will enable the matter to be fully considered and proper Amendments to be placed on the Paper.
MR. CHAPLINconfessed that he was one of those who would be glad of an opportunity of seeing upon the Paper the proposals which had been made, because, owing to conversations around him or defective hearing, he had not been able to follow as clearly as he could wish the statement of his right hon. friend. One of his principal objects in taking part in the discussion would be, as it had been, to prevent the imposition of fresh burdens upon the rates, especially in particular districts. He agreed with the previous speaker that in the clause they were now being called upon to discuss there was the possibility of very large additions to the rates, and it was true that, with the purpose of raising the whole question, he had placed Amendments on the Paper, the objects of which he would be prepared to explain at the proper time. He might still desire to move the
1416
Amendment to which reference had been made, but he could not settle that point until he knew precisely what were the proposals of the Government and how the clause would be affected by them. As far as he was able to follow the statement of his right hon. friend, he believed a great change had been made in the Bill—a change in a direction of which he entirely approved, so far as it went, himself, but the Committee were entitled to an opportunity of seeing the proposals in print and fully considering, them.
MR. DILLONsaid the First Lord of the Treasury, with his large experience of the House, could not fail to have anticipated this Motion. Was there ever a case in which a great radical change was announced, involving the introduction of a totally new principle—
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: What is the new principle?
Mr. DILLONsaid the new principle was the subvention from the Imperial Exchequer. The result of the course which the right hon. Gentleman had taken for making this announcement would be that he would have two discussions instead of one. It appeared to him to be as clear as daylight that these new proposals were pertinent to the question whether Clause 2 should be postponed or not. The whole question would be discussed on Clause 2 of the Bill as to whether there should be a subvention to secondary education from the Exchequer, and how on earth could that be discussed without this large grant to primary education? He would conclude by emphasising what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen that the claims of Ireland and Scotland for an equivalent grant must be fairly considered.
MR. TOMLINSONsaid he hoped the Government would stand firm on this matter. What the country was looking for was that the House should get on with its business.
MR. MATHERsaid hon. Members on the Opposition side thought it would increase the progress of the Bill if the right hon.

1417
Gentleman would give them an opportunity of discussing amongst themselves the effect of the proposition which he had made to-day. Secondary education could hardly be dissociated from primary education, and as many of the Amendments on Clause 2 had to deal with the financial system which was to support secondary education, it was important that they should discuss those Amendments in the full light of the effect which this large grant from the Exchequer would have upon primary and secondary education.
SIR W. HART DYKEsaid that neither of the proposals which had been announced by the First Lord of the Treasury was a new one at all. His right hon. friend the Member for South Aberdeen said it might be possible at a later stage for a proposal to be made to take a large slice of this money and apply it to secondary instead of to purely elementary education, but in his opinion it was absurd to argue, from that fact, that they should consent to postpone discussion upon the Bill. The proposal of the First Lord of the Treasury abolished the former grants, but as regarded the new grants there was no new principle involved.
SIR JOSEPH PEASEsaid he did not think the First Lord of the Treasury could carry his recollection back to the time when a change like the present one was announced to the House, affecting the whole position of the measure, without progress being reported, in order to obtain time for the consideration of the proposed alteration. Every constituency desired to have the Papers in front of them, in order that they might see how this change would affect them and their revenue. The number of letters he bad received on the general merits of the Bill was nothing like the number he had received recently as to how constituencies were to be rated, and what for. There was an enormous desire in the North of England for further technical education, and many County Councils were now using the whole of the whisky money for that purpose. Adverse decisions in courts of law had, however, very much affected technical and evening education. Now a great change of front
1418
had been announced, and no time was to be allowed in order to ascertain the views of the constituencies. In this matter he I thought the usual course ought to be followed, and hon. Members ought to be given the opportunity of taking a quiet look at these proposals.
MR. A. J. BALFOURurged the Committee to come to a decision upon this matter. He did not think that hon. Members opposite were treating the Government quite fairly. If he was always to be met by the argument that he was proposing something which would make a vital change in the Bill, and that they must be allowed to go home and contemplate it in the quietude of their own chamber, they would never make any progress, and it was not a very convenient way of dealing with the business. He asked the Committee to allow them to proceed at once with the Bill.
SIR JOSEPH PEASEsaid that a a good many people in the country desired to consider the information which had just been given to them across the Table of the House. It was the easiest, quickest, and the best method to adopt, when a great change or a little change was announced, to report progress.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid the proposal which had been made introduced into the Bill an element which did in some measure, or at all events might, modify Clause 2 He agreed with those hon. Gentlemen who desired fuller information with regard to the absolute effect of the new proposals. He thought it might affect the discussion on Clause 2. In that clause there was a proposal that there should be a rate of 2d., but after this addition of£900,000, a Member might see a reason for limiting the rate to Id. He pointed out that it would be absolutely necessary to have a full discussion of the new proposal to grant £900,000, in all its effects and working, and that discussion should be taken in the form of a Money Committee. There must be a Money Committee for granting that amount or no new grant could be taken He submitted that that would be the proper occasion for discussing the change made

1419
by the new proposals of the Government. He could not agree that it made the Bill a new Bill. It certainly proposed to import a new contribution from the Exchequer for education, and so far as it went, it was a relief of the rating part of the Bill rather than a further burden; but the discussion of that should take place when Members had on the Paper before them the absolute proposals of the Government which had been stated verbally this afternoon. What they were now discussing would be more appropriately discussed when the Committee came to consider the Motion of which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Thanet had given notice, namely, that Clause 2 be postponed. He suggested to the Leader of the Opposition the propriety of withdrawing his Motion.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he was glad personally that the Government had decided to throw a larger proportion of the cost on the Imperial Exchequer. He thought the Government had been rather badly treated by one or two of their own friends. When it was proposed to throw the coston the rates, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford was seized with a sudden attack of agricultural depression, but now that it was proposed to give a larger Imperial grant, he did not seem to be satisfied with that. He wished to press upon the First Lord the question he put to him just now, and which, he thought, was very germane to the discussion on Clause 2. That clause provided that the local authorities should have some duties regarding secondary education, and other parts of the Bill provided that they should have obligations regarding elementary education. The Committee could not get from the Government even now whether these elementary education functions were compulsory.
THE CHAIRMAN: That does not arise on the Question now before us.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he wished to ask the First Lord whether the Government had come to any decision on the subject. Clause 2 would be efficient on not according as the local authorities were compelled or left the
1420
option to deal with elementary education. He submitted with all respect that that was a question which he might be allowed to urge at this juncture.
MR. M'KENNAasked whether, before the First Lord of the Treasury introduced his financial proposals by resolution in Committee, any Amendment could be moved by an unofficial Member on Clause 2, to allocate part of the new Exchequer Grant to the purpose of secondary education; and, secondly, whether if the First Lord had introduced his proposals in Committee, any unofficial Member could then move an Amendment, changing the, purpose of the Exchequer Grant from primary to secondary education.
THE CHAIRMAN: The reply to the first question is in the negative, and to the second question in the affirmative.
MR. M'KENNA: May I point out to the First Lord that by the present system of proceeding he does not allow us to move such Amendments on the second clause as we should have been able to move had he introduced his present proposals originally in the Bill?
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid his hon. friend had by means of these questions elicited answers which gave a strong case in favour of the Motion to report progress. Supposing it were proposed by Amendment to place secondary education on the same basis as under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act which provided that there was to be an equivalent grant for the I rate voted by the County Council, according to the answer which had just been given by the Chairman it would be impossible to change the Bill on those lines. That was very seriously to handicap the House of Commons in settling the question of secondary education. He would point out to the Committee that when they got to the Report stage they were limited in discussing financial questions altogether. Therefore although the Bill would be complete when they got to the Report stage they would not be allowed to move amendments on purely financial issues, and they would not be allowed to discuss

1421
what was far the most important point in regard to secondary education. Secondary education was very largely a matter of finance. Take the case of a School Board district where at present the rate was 1s. in the £1. That district felt that it could give 1s. for education, but, however much the zeal for education might be there, they could not see their way to give more than 1s. owing to the poverty of the district to other circumstances, or to the strength of the economy party. But one result of the proposals of the First Lord of the Treasury would be to reduce the rate in that district from 1s. to 8d. in the £1. Therefore in that district it would be a very fair thing to ask the local education authority whether they would give the balance of 4d. towards secondary education. Was that not a relevant question for consideration when they were discussing whether the rate was to be 2d., 3d., or 4d. They were really discussing the clause when they had in their mind that the argument would be affected by something which was not in the Bill, but which they knew would be introduced into the Bill. He thought the Leader of the House ought not to put the House in that position. They were discussing this question of a grant as if a grant came from nowhere. After all somebody paid this grant. It was part of the financial vice of the Government. When they were considering the question of the coal tax they were told that the Russians would pay; when they were considering the tax on imported corn they were told that the Americans would pay; and now on the question of this grant,
"It droppeth like the gentle rain from heaven,"
but after all the same people who paid the grant paid the rates. It was of vital importance that they should have a discussion on the resolution to make the grant first of all. He did not think they should have strongly controversial questions brought before the House this week. He should have thought that in the interest of concord, amity, and good feeling, they should have avoided a controversy which divided the country so actively and which practically amounted to a keen religious war. [AN HON. MEMBER, "No."] But it did. He did
1422
not recollect anything which had excited the same measure of bitterness and acrimony in the country. Was it really a tactful thing that a controversy of this kind which aroused the bitterest feelings should be proceeded with in coronation week when they were trying to shake hands and to be good friends with each other? He asked the First Lord whether it would not be better to proceed with the Licensing Bill which, he thought, would be very relevant to coronation week.
MR. CHANNINGsaid he spoke as one who had joined in the Agricultural Deputation to the First Lord, and welcomed to a certain extent the proposals of the Government because they were very much on the lines of Amendments which he had placed on the paper himself. He thought the discussion on the Bill should be adjourned until they were placed in a position to deal with it. There was to be an allocation of £900,000 for elementary education, but no announcement had been made that an equivalent sum would be allocated to the local authorities to help them in regard to secondary education. That seemed to him to constitute an irresistible reason for not going on with the discussion of this clause at the present time. He suggested to the First Lord of the Treasury that the wisest and fairest way of dealing with the question of assisting secondary education would be to introduce a bill of one clause making a grant of money which would enable them to move Amendments allocating a portion to secondary education. The other alternative was to announce the allocation of a further grant in favour of secondary education.
Mr. SAMUEL EVANSasked whether after the answers which had been given to his hon. and learned friend the Member for North Monmouthshire, the First Lord of the Treasury meant to pass Clause 2 through Committee without any unofficial Member having an opportunity of proposing Amendments which would encourage the counties in the matter of secondary education. As he understood him, the right hon. Gentleman, when he made his statement, said that

1423
a portion of this money was to be devoted to Secondary Education; but now they were in this position that no one except the occupants of the Treasury bench would be able to move any Amendment at all. He would give an illustration. The right hon. Gentleman said he was in favour of secondary education. Now, one way undoubtedly of securing the attention of the local education authorities to secondary education would be to give them a portion of this money. How were the agricultural counties to be encouraged to spend money at all on secondary education when no portion of this money was to be allowed them? If the right hon. Gentleman would propose or accept a reasonable Amendment which said that a portion of the money should be given to secondary education, the backward agricultural county authorities would be thereby encouraged to give something out of the rates towards secondary education. He thought they had a right to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it was in accordance to his view that he should press Clause 2 through Committee without their having an opportunity of moving Amendments. That would not be fair to the Committee. If progress was reported and Clause 2 adjourned, the Committee could devote the sitting to some other useful business.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he did not think the Government could accept the Amendment. He would point out that the Motion to report progress could only be justified, if it could be justified at all, on the ground that the Committee had not had time to consider the financial proposals of the Government. But even if these financial proposals of the Government had been introduced into the Bill originally, they would not have come before, but after, Clause 2—that was to say, on Clause 3, and therefore it would not have been competent to discuss them on Clause 2 at all.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that it would; the Chairman had ruled it so.
THE CHAIRMANsaid he ought to guard himself by saying that he had not yet had an opportunity of seeing the Reso-
1424
lution to be moved in Committee of Ways and Means. Much might depend on the terms of the Motion, but they might be so strict as to prevent any extension of the money from primary to secondary education. But, on the assumption that the proposed financial proposal was to be devoted to education generally, then it would be in the power of the Committee to allocate the money according to its judgment.
MR. M'KENNAsaid that a non-official Member was not debarred from moving an Amendment changing the allocation of the money voted in the Resolution, but he could not move an Amendment which would raise public money for another purpose than that mentioned in the Resolution.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid that they all understood that the Resolution was specially and absolutely confined to Part III.—that was, to elementary education—that it had nothing whatever to do with secondary education, and that it would be impossible to make any allocation to secondary education.
THE CHAIRMANsaid he would like to ascertain the exact terms of the Resolution. He understood that the intention of the First Lord of the Treasury was to devote the money to primary education, but he did not understand from the right hon. Gentleman that the terms of the Resolution were going to be so strict as to limit it in the way he had indicated.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the argument he was endeavouring to set before the House was quite independent of the terms of the preliminary Resolution. But suppose they confined it to Part III. it would not have been competent to discuss this question on Clause 2. He was totally unable to see how the Committee was in any way prejudiced by the course the Government proposed—to refuse to report progress at that time. He thought they ought now to proceed with the business.
(4.38.) Question put.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 171; Noes, 251. (Division List, No. 243.)

AYES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

Helme, Norval Watson

Priestley, Arthur

Allan, William (Gateshead)

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Rea, Russell

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

Reckitt, Harold James

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Holland, William Henry

Reddy, M.

Atherley-Jones, L.

Horniman, Frederick John

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Barlow, John Emmott

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Redmond, William (Clare)

Barry, K. (Cork, S.)

Hutton, Alfred R. (Morley)

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Jacoby, James Alfred

Rickett, J. Compton

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Jones, Day, Brynmor (Swansea

Rigg, Richard

Bell, Richard

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Boland, John

Joyce, Michael

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Broadhurst, Henry

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Labouchere, Henry

Robson, William Snowdon

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Langley, Batty

Roche, John

Burt, Thomas

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

Roe, Sir Thomas

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Runciman, Walter

Caine, William Sproston

Leamy, Edmund

Russell, T. W.

Caldwell, James

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Schwann, Charles E.

Cameron, Robert

Leng, Sir John

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Levy, Maurice

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Lewis, John Herbert

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Lloyd-George, David

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Causton, Richard Knight

Lough, Thomas

Soares, Ernest J.

Cawley, Frederick

Lundon, W.

Spencer, Rt. Hn C. R. (Northants

Channing, Francis Allston

MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Condon, Thomas Joseph

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Sullivan, Donal

Craig, Robert Hunter

M'Govern, T.

Taylor, Theodore Cooke

Crean, Eugene

M'Kenna, Reginald

Tennant, Harold John

Cremer, William Randal

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen)

Crombie, John William

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Dalziel, James Henry

Mather, William

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

Thomas, J A (Glam'rgan, Gower

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Mooney, John J.

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

Delany, William

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Toulmin, George

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Murnaghan, George

Tully, Jasper

Donelan, Captain A.

Murphy, John

Ure, Alexander

Doogan, P. C.

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Wallace, Robert

Duncan, J. Hastings

Newnes, Sir George

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

Edwards, Frank

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

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Ellis, John Edward

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maids'tne

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

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

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

Weir, James Galloway

Ffrench, Peter

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

White, George (Norfolk)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Flavin, Michael Joseph

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

Whitleey, George (York, W. R.

Flynn, James Christopher

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

Whitely, J. H. (Halifax)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

O'Mara, James

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Fuller, J. M. F.

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Partington, Oswald

Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Paulton, James Mellor

Young, Samuel

Haldane, Richard Burdon

Pease, Alfred E. (Cleveland)

Yoxall, James Henry

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir William

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

Pease, Sir Joseph W. (Durham)

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Philipps, John Wynford

Hayden, John Patrick

Pirie, Duncan V.

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Power, Patrick Joseph

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Price, Robert John

NOES.

Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

Baldwin, Alfred

Bignold, Arthur

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Bond, Edward

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Banbury, Frederick George

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Boulnois, Edmund

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Midd's'x)

Austin, Sir John

Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

Bowles, T. Gibson (Lynn Regis

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Beckett, Ernest William

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Bain, Col. James Robert

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Baird, John George Alexander

Beresford, Lord Chas. William

Brymer, William Ernest

Balcarres, Lord

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Bull, William James

1426

1427

Campbell, Rt. Hn J. A. (Glasgow

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Plummer, Walter R.

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Helder, Augustus

Purvis, Robert

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Pym, C. Guy

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Randles, John S.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

Rankin, Sir James

Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Chapman, Edward

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Reid, James (Greenock)

Charrington, Spencer

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Renshaw, Charles Bine

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hoult, Joseph

Renwick, George

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

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybdge)

Coddington, Sir William

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Johnston, William (Belfast)

Round, James

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Rutherford, John

Cranborne, Viscount

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Sackville, Col, S. G. Stopford.

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth)

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Lawson, John Grant

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Lecky, Rt. Hon William Edw. H.

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Dalkeith, Earl of

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants Fareh'm

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Seton-Karr, Henry

Denny, Colonel

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Dewar, T. R. (T'r H'lets, S. Geo.)

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Dickson, Charles Scott

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield.

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

Dillon, John

Long, Rt. Hn. Walker (Bristol S.

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

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dix'n

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Spear, John Ward

Dorington, Sir John Edward

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Macartney, Rt. Hn W G Ellison

Stewart, Sir Mark. J. M' Taggart

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Macdona, John Cumming

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Maconochie, A. W.

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Fardell, Sir T. George

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

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

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Majendie, James A. H.

Thorburn, Sir Walter

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

Manners, Lord Cecil

Thornton, Percy M.

Finch, George H.

Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H. E (Wigt'n

Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Fisher, William Hayes

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Warde, Colonel C. E.

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Warr, Augustus Frederick

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Middlemore, Jn. Throgmorton

Webb, Col. William George

Flannery, Sir Forteseue

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

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

Flower, Ernest

Milvain, Thomas

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Foster, Sir Michael (Lond. Univ.

Montagu G. (Huntingdon)

Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund. Lyne

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Galloway, William Johnson

Morgan, David J (Walthamst'w

Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell. (Birm

Gardner, Ernest

Morrison, James Archibald

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Garfit, William

Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

Mount, William Arthur

Wills, Sir Frederick

Gore, Hn G. R. C. Ormsby. (Sal'p

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Line.)

Muntz, Philip A.

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Murray, Rt. Hn A. Graham (Bute

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Graham, Henry Robert

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Myers, William Henry

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Green, Walford D. (Wednesb'ry

Newdigate, Francis Alexander

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

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

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

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

Grenfell, William Henry

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Gretton, John

Parkes, Ebenezer

Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

Younger, William

Gunter, Sir Robert

Penn, John

Hain, Edward

Percy, Earl

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Pierpoint, Robert

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

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G. (Mid'x

Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

MR. JAMES LOWTHERsaid the discussion which had taken place had placed the Committee in a somewhat different position to that which it would have otherwise occupied if the right hon. Gentleman had not made his statement, and the object of the Motion he proposed to move was to defer the consideration of Clause 2 until an opportunity had been afforded to the Committee to gather all the financial facts. He approached this question from a different standpoint, from almost any other member of the Committee, because he was one of the few surviving members who had taken part in the discussions on the Education Bill of 1870. He had divided the House on that occasion against compulsory attendance, and ever since then he had always strongly opposed any charge being made upon either the rates or the National Exchequer for any education beyond rudimentary and elementary education. Under this Bill they had no control over the expenditure, there were various authorities more or less connected with the administration of educational affairs, every one of which had power to spend as much money as possible, and the Board of Education itself, so far from controlling the expenditure, if it interfered at all only interfered for the purpose of stimulating that expenditure.
THE CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Gentleman seems to he discussing the merits of the Clause and the general financial system. He would not be entitled to do that. He is only entitled to give reasons for postponing the discussion of the Clause to a later date.
MR. JAMES LOWTHERsaid he only drew attention to these matters to show that this Clause could not be discussed until the Committee had full knowledge of the facts with regard to financial control. If they passed the Clause as it stood the Committee would endorse a principle of practically unlimited expenditure. Unless an accompanying provision was inserted to control the expenditure, the financial control would be largely left in the hands of Committees who could not be controlled, and it would be like leaving the financial control of
1430
the Navy to a Committee presided over by the noble Lord the Member for Woolwich, or in Army matters to a Committee of Service Members.
THE CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Member is giving reasons against the Clause as a whole—reasons which would be in their proper place when I put the clause as a whole. He must confine himself to his reasons for the postponement of the Clause.
MR. JAMES LOWTHERsaid he thought they were not in a position to deal with this clause until the main essential with regard to the control of education was laid down. He begged to move.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 2 be postponed."—(Mr. James Lowther.)
MR. A. J. BALFOURexpressed the hope that this Amendment would not be pressed. There was no provision in the Bill for the control of the local authorities over the spending of money on education, the view of the Government being that the local authorities were perfectly competent to manage their own affairs in the matter.
MR. JAMES LOWTHER: And spend National money?
Mr. A. J. BALFOURsaid there was no National money involved, except the whisky money. He did not think anything would be gained from his hon. friend's point of view by the proposal he had suggested.
SIR EDWARD STRACHEYcontended that the Clause ought to be postponed on several grounds—first, because up to now the Government had never definitely declared whether they intended to stand by the provision that the County Council should have the option of adopting the Bill. This affected both Clause 18 and Clause 5. Clause 5 was the clause under which the counties were to have the right of adopting the Bill. The Committee was absolutely in the dark with regard to this matter, owing to the way in which the Government had chopped and changed about. Then there was the

1431
question as to whether the Local Education Committee would have to report to the County Council or not. That was a most important question, because if they were, the County Council had power to upset all their decisions under Clause 2; and the same might be said with regard to the Technical Education Committee. That brought him to Clause 18, and until the Government had decided whether these were coterminous authorities, the House should not determine whether or not the secondary education authority should have the power proposed in Clause 2.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is speaking at large on the Clause; he is not giving reasons for postponing it. He must give reasons.
SIR EDWAED STEACHEYsaid that this Clause ought to be postponed until the Committee knew what relief was to be given in respect of primary education.
MR. BRYCEsaid another matter arising out of Clause 18 made it desirable that Clause 2 should not be taken until after Clause 18. Clause 18 decided what was technical and what was elementary education; and until the House had decided that, they could not say whether the 2d. rate was adequate. Every Member had regard more or less to the effect the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman would have in his particular constituency, but he preferred to raise the point of whether the 2d. rate would or would not depend on what was to be done out of it. It was for secondary education. If secondary education included a vast amount of matter which until the present had been considered elementary, then 2d. would not be enough, but if not, a 2d. rate might be sufficient. It was impossible to judge whether a 2d. rate was adequate until the House had decided what was elementary and what was secondary education. He thought it was very desirable that the Clause should be postponed.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked the First Lord of the Treasury to tell the Committee at what time and in what manner it would be possible for them to express an opinion that some of this new grant from the Exchequer should be
1432
devoted to secondary education. This was a material question for discussion. Could it be done under Clause 2?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked, was he to take it that the answer of the right hon. Gentleman meant that at no time could it be discussed.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That was not my answer. I said it could not be discussed under Clause 2.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked, in that case, could the right hon. Gentleman say when it could be discussed, because it appeared to him that the House had been placed at a great disadvantage in this matter.
Mr. A. J. BALFOURsaid the right hon. Gentleman opposite had suggested that the House had been placed at a disadvantage, but it was impossible for the Government to acquaint the House with their financial proposals at an earlier stage. If they could have done so, hon. Members would have been in no better position in regard to moving Amendments. The Clause must be prefaced by a Resolution, and until he had considered the exact form the Resolution would take it was impossible for him to say, even if he were an authority on the matter, whether or not the question the right hon. Gentleman desired to raise could be raised.
SIR WILLTAM HARCOURTsaid it was plain that the House should have an opportunity of considering what proportion the contribution from the Exchequer to elementary education would bear to secondary education. If this new Clause had been in the Bill originally, and Part III. had been placed before Bart II., an opportunity might have been given to discuss it. The House might have refused to have given this money to secondary education until Part III. had been dealt with. If Part III. had been put before Part II. the House would have had an opportunity of considering what effect the grant by the Exchequer would have had upon elementary and secondary education. That was a very good

1433
ground for postponing the discussion on the method of secondary education until the House had determined what was secondary education.
MR. DILLONsaid that if the right hon. Member went to a division on this Amendment he would certainly support him, because in this matter, in his opinion, the Government had put the cart before the horse. The fact of putting secondary education before primary education had greatly increased the difficulty of discussing the Bill. He would explain why he thought it had greatly strengthened the case for the postponement of the second part of the Bill until after the consideration of the third part. If the statement had no special reference to Clause 2, as the right hon. Gentleman declared, why was it made on the eve of the consideration of Clause 2? It was perfectly manifest, from the fact that the further progress of the Bill was put off until today, so that the Cabinet might be in a position to announce their decision, that there was a direct connection between Clause 2 and the statement which had been made.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No.
MR. DILLONasked where, then, was the necessity for making the statement at the beginning of public business instead of putting the proposals on the Paper? The Committee would find themselves cribbed, cabined, and confined in discussing the Amendments already on the Paper with regard to Clause 2, by not knowing what were to be the policy of the Government and the decision of the House with reference to Part III. Then there was another aspect of the question, and that was as to whether the Bill was to be permissive or compulsory in its character. There were dozens of Amendments on the Paper having for their object the compulsion of the local authorities to adopt the Bill with regard to Clause 2. Was it not manifest that the decision of the Committee on that point would depend largely on the policy of the Government with regard to Section 5? If the third part of the Bill was to be optional, it would be a strong argument against
1434
making the second part compulsory But if Clause 5 was to be got rid of, and the Bill made into a real and courageous attempt to settle the education question, and not a mere scheme to be hung up before the local authorities for them to adopt or not, the measure ought to be compulsory as regarded the second as well as the third part. Then among the Amendments to Clause 2 was one commencing, "In any case where the School Board remains"—[An HON. MEMBER: That will be out of order.] He believed it would not be out of order.
THE CHAIRMAN: I may set the hon. Member's mind at rest on that point. The Committee has, by a decision already come to, practically abolished School Boards, and the Amendment would not be in order.
MR. DILLONsubmitted that if the optional clause was retained the School Boards were not abolished, but, on the contrary, had an indefinite lease of life. The waste of time arising from discussing Amendments as to what would or would not be done in the case of School Boards remaining would be enormous. If the discussion of the Bill was to be conducted on business lines, the Committee should first decide, as they had done, to set up the new authority; secondly, whether the measure was to be optional or compulsory, thirdly, the broad financial provisions; and then come to what was now the second part of the Bill, which was governed by the previous considerations. If the second part were now proceeded with, some points would inevitably be discussed over and over again, and the progress of the Bill enormously obstructed.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSwas not personally interested in whether the discussion of the Bill took a long or a short time, but he did desire that while the Committee were discussing the measure they should know exactly what they were doing. It was impossible properly to discuss the Amendments unless they knew what the scheme of the Government was. Clauses 2 to 4 dealt with higher education. He had been earnestly trying to find out what

1435
the intentions of the Government were, and the conclusion he had come to was that the Government did not want to do anything at all with regard to secondary education. That was his opinion, but the Committee were entitled to have the view of the Government on the point. Did the Government intend that the whole of the £1,730,000 should go to primary education? That was a plain question, and upon the answer would depend the action that ought to be taken with regard to Clause 2. But they did not know—
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he would repeat his statement. The Clause dealing with this money would be introduced in Part III. of the Bill. The grant had to do with primary education, but its relation, indirect but real, to the promotion of secondary education, was that the money was to be given to the same authority; it increased the resources of that authority, and, pro tanto, made it easier to carry out secondary education.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSconfessed that he was still not enlightened. If more money were given to the same authority, it, of course, made it easier for them to apply money to secondary education, if they thought fit to do so, but what he wanted to get at was the proposal of the Government themselves on the matter. The very first Amendment on the Paper was to insert after "authority" the words—
"Shall make adequate provision to the satisfaction of the Board of Education for secondary and technical education within their area."
That Amendment was in the name of a supporter of the Government. Did the Government propose, in view of the larger sum they were placing at the disposal of the education authority, to place any obligation upon that authority?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That should be discussed on the Clause.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is really going beyond reasons for a postponement; he is entering into a general discussion of the scheme foreshadowed by the Leader of the House.
MR. SAMUEL EVANScontended that it was in the interest of a proper explanation and discussion of the Amendments on
1436
the Paper that the Clause should be postponed. He assumed that the Board of Education or the Local Government Board possessed some sort of Return, showing the respective proportions of the grant that would go to particular counties, urban districts, or municipal boroughs, and the Committee ought to see that return before they discussed this Clause.
LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid he wished to take note of one observation made by the right hon. Gentleman. He said that the extra grant was to be given to the same authority as that which dealt with secondary education. That statement seemed to imply that the right hon. Gentleman had made up his mind to put an end to the adoptive Clause in the Bill. If this was not the case, the authority in a very large number of cases would not be the same as that which now dealt with other portions of education. This question about the adoptive Clause was constantly coming up. According to the ruling of the Chair they had abolished School Boards by the decision which the Committee had come to upon the first Clause, and, therefore, arguments to that effect would be out of order under that ruling. But if the adoptive Clause remained, School Boards would remain, and therefore, in that case, the ruling of the Chair would probably have to be modified. They were all in the dark upon this question, and he was not disputing what was the exact Amendment upon which the right hon. Gentleman should make his statement. He thought, however, that at a very early date they should be told what the view of the Government was with regard to the adoptive Clause in the Bill.
Mr. BRYNMOR JONESsaid he wished to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that there was already legislation existing in Wales and Monmouthshire in regard to secondary education under the Intermediate Education Act of 1899, under which Welsh County Councils had the right to levy a rate not exceeding one penny in the £ in a certain manner in respect

1437
of secondary education. That system was now in existence throughout the counties of Wales and Monmouthshire. He had looked carefully at the provisions of this Bill, and he was not at all sure whether this right which was to be left under Clause 2 of this Bill was to be supplemental to or exclusive of the powers given by the Act of 1899. That point ought to be cleared up before they considered the financial arrangements for secondary education over an area which was already satisfied with the provision made.
THE CHAIRMAN: That question can only be discussed when the question of imposing the rate is reached.
Mr. BRYNMOR JONESsaid his argument for postponing this Clause was that until they knew exactly what was the true construction of this Bill they ought not to agree to this proposal. They did not know exactly how it would
work out, and they ought to have a clear statement on the part of the Government as to their final scheme before they granted these great rating powers to the County Councils.
Mr. COURTENAY WARNERsaid the amount of money to be devoted to secondary education depended upon how much of the education was to be called secondary, and this question did not come up until a much later stage of the Bill. There was the great question yet to be settled of what was secondary education, and he did not see how this Committee could fairly consider the question at all when they did not know how much was to be called secondary and bow much primary education.
(5.38.) Question put.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 179: Noes, 267. (Division List No. 241.)

AYES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

Doogan, P. C.

Leng, Sir John

Allan, William (Gateshead)

Duncan, J. Hastings

Levy, Maurice

Asher, Alexander

Edwards, Frank

Lewis, John Herbert

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Ellis, John Edward

Lloyd-George, David

Atherley-Jones, L.

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

Lough, Thomas

Austin, Sir John

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Lundon, W.

Banes, Major George Edward

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

Barlow, John Emmott

Ffrench, Peter

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Flavin, Michael Joseph

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Flynn, James Christopher

M'Govern, T.

Bell, Richard

Fuller, J. M. F.

M'Kean, John

Boland, John

Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

M'Kenna, Reginald

Broadhurst, Henry

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Griffith, Ellis J.

Mather, William

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

Burt, Thomas

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

Mooney, John J.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Caine, William Sproston

Harwood, George

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Caldwell, James

Hayden, John Patrick

Moss, Samuel

Cameron, Robert

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Murnaghan, George

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

Murphy, John

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Helme, Norval Watson

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

Newnes, Sir George

Causton, Richard Knight

Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Cawley, Frederick

Holland, William Henry

Norman, Henry

Charming, Francis Allston

Horniman, Frederick John

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Craig, Robert Hunter

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

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

Crean, Eugene

Jacoby, James Alfred

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipp'rary Mid

Cremer, William Randal

Jones, D'vid Brynmor (Swansea

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Crombie, John William

Jones, William (Carnarv'nshire

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

Dalziel, James Henry

Joyce, Michael

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Kearley, Hudson E.

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

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

Delany, William

Langley, Batty

O'Malley, William

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

O'Mara, James

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Layland-Barratt, Francis

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Dillon, John

Leamy, Edmund

Partington, Oswald

Donelan, Captain A.

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Paulton, James Mellor

Pease, Alfred E. (Cleveland)

Russell, T. W.

Wallace, Robert

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Schwann, Charles E.

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

Pease, Sir Joseph W. (Durham)

Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Perks, Robert William

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Philipps, John Wynford

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Pickard, Benjamin

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Weir, James (Galloway)

Pirie, Duncan V

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

White, George (Norfolk)

Power, Patrick Joseph

Soares, Ernest J.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Price, Robert John

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R. (Northants

Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)

Rea, Russell

Sullivan, Donal

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Reckitt, Harold James

Taylor, Theodore Cooke

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Tennant, Harold John

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

Redmond, William (Clare)

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid.)

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries)

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

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

Rickett, J. Compton

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersfd

Rigg, Richard

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

Young, Samuel

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

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

Yoxall, James Henry

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Toulmin, George

Robson, William Snowdon

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. James Lowther and Sir Edward Strachey.

Roche, John

Tully, Jasper

Runciman, Walter

Ure, Alexander

NOES.

Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

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

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

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

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Graham, Henry Robert

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Green, Walford D, (Wednesbury

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

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

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Cranborne, Viscount

Grenfell, William Henry

Baird, John George Alexander

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Balcarres, Lord

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Groves, James Grimble

Baldwin, Alfred

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

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

Dalkeith, Earl of

Gunter, Sir Robert

Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Banbury, Frederick George

Denny, Colonel

Hain Edward

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Dewar, T. R (T'rH'mlets, S. Geo.

Hall, Edward Marshall

Bartley, George C. T.

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Dickson, Charles Scott

Hambro, Charles Eric

Beach, Rt. Hn Sir Michael Hicks

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Beckett, Ernest William

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield.

Hamilton Marq of (L'nd'nd'rry

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Beresford, Lord Chas. William

Dorington, Sir John Edward

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers.

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Bignold, Arthur

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Bigwood, James

Duke, Henry Edward

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Helder, Augustus

Bond, Edward

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Henderson, Alexander

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Egerton, Hon. A de Tatton

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Bousfield, William Robert

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

Faber, George Denison (York)

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Bowles, T. Gibson (Lynn Regis)

Fardell, Sir T. George

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Hoult, Joseph

Brymer, William Ernest

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

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Bull, William James

Finch, George H.

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Butcher, John George

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

Firbank, Joseph Thomas

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Carlie, William Walter

Fisher, William Haves

Johnston, William (Belfast)

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Fison, Frederick William

Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

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

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose.

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Flower, Ernest

Lawson, John Grant

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Foster, Sir Michael (Lond. Univ.

Lecky, Rt. Hon. Wm. Edw. H.

Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

Foster, Philip S (Warwick, S. W.

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Gardner, Ernest

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Chapman, Edward

Garfit, William

Leveson-Gower, Fredk, N. S.

Charrington, Spencer

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

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Clive, Captain Percy A.

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

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

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

Gordon, Maj. Evans. (T'rH'mlets

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

1440

1441

Long, Col Charles W. (Evesham

Percy, Earl

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

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

Pierpoint, Robert

Stuck, James Henry

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Lowe, Francis William

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Plummer, Walter R.

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

Pretyman, Ernest George

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

Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. Ellison

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Macdona, John Cumming

Purvis, Robert

Thornton, Percy M.

Maconochie, A. W.

Pym, C. Guy

Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Randles, John S.

Tritton, Charles Ernest

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Rankin, Sir James

Tufnell, Lt.-Col. Edward

Majendie, James A. H.

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Warde, Colonel C. F.

Manners, Lord Cecil

Reid, James (Greenock)

Warr, Augustus Frederick

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Renshaw, Charles Bine

Webb, Colonel William George

Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H. E. (Wigt'n

Renwick, George

Welby, Lt.-Col. ACE (Taunton)

Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

Welby, Sir Charles G. E (Notts.)

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Midlemore, Jno. Throgmorton

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Whiteley, H (Ashton-und. Lyne

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Fredk. G.

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Milvain, Thomas

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Round, James

Wills, Sir Frederick

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Royds, Clement Molyneux

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

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Rutherford, John

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Morgan, David (W'lthamstow

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford.

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)

Mount, William Arthur

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

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

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

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

Muntz, Philip A.

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

Wolff, Gustay Wilhelm

Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Grah'm (Bute

Seton-Karr, Henry

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

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

Myers, William Henry

Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

Smith, HC (North' mo. Tyneside

Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

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

Younger, William

Parker, Gilbert

Spear, John Ward

Parkes, Ebenezer

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Btomwich)

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

Pease, Herbt. Pike (Darlington)

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE(5.55.) MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE (Somersetshire, E.) moved an Amendment on Clause 2, substituting "shall" for "may" in line 18, the object being to make it obligatory rather than optional for local authorities to provide secondary education in their areas. He said the Amendment raised a very simple issue, but it was one which, be ventured to say, the Committee would consider of importance. The question was whether they should make any attempt under this Bill to have a system of higher education hitherto for ten or twelve years there had been a system of local option on the part of authorities who had power to spend money on higher instruction, but there was no obligation to spend a single penny. It was a sporadic unorganised system which was satisfactory in some portions of the country and eminently unsatisfactory in others The question was whether they should continue to have that unorganised, happy-go-lucky system, or substitute for
1442
it an organised system of higher education. He believed there had been for several years past a change demanded in the direction indicated by the Report of the Royal Commission of 1894. One of the first and most important of their recommendations, made unanimously, was that in their opinion the duty of seeing that an adequate supply of secondary instruction was provided ought to be imposed by statute on the local education authority. He believed that recommendation had been accepted pretty well unanimously by the various bodies and individuals interested in promoting higher education throughout the country. The present Clause in the Bill was a purely optional clause. If it were passed in its present form the only result would be to extend the field of higher education under the purview of the local education authority from technical instruction to secondary education. Beyond that it would have no effect except in so far as it removed

1443
various restrictions which had hitherto been found in the Technical Education Act. Under this Clause, if passed as it stood, no local education authority need spend a single penny on higher education, which was so important to the country. He supposed his Amendment would be met by an appeal to the House to trust the local authority. His answer to that was that the local authorities were creatures of the statute and bodies intended to carry out statutory duties. They could not be expected to carry out or to recognise duties which were not imposed on them. If Parliament had treated other local authorities, such as School Boards or County Councils, in the same happy-go-lucky system as this clause proposed to treat the new local education authorities, the state of the country would be very different today from what it was. Who would contend that they would have had the complete and thoroughly organised Sanitary system now existing if statutes had been passed, not imposing definite duties on the Sanitary Boards, but simply saying that they might do certain things if they liked? The other argument against the Amendment was that the Technical Instruction Act was a purely permissive Act, yet under it a great deal of good work had been done. He was bound to say that that work had been from the first necessarily of an experimental and imperfect character. In the original Act there was little guidance to the local authorities; there were no funds ever actually appropriated to higher education by this House. The funds on which they had had to rely had been perfectly precarious, and because of that there had been many failures in promoting higher education. In many of the Counties there were influential ratepayers—influential even in this House—who did not care to sec a single thing done for higher education by public action; and they would always influence these local bodies to devote this money rather to the relief of the rates than to promote secondary education. That was the real danger ahead to those who wished to erect a system of higher education. After all any system of higher education that was worthy of the name must be permanent, and ought not to be dependent on the will of a local body which was elective. If no
1444
funds were to be devoted to higher education in the future, and there was no statutory obligation to provide secondary education, the defects and drawbacks experienced in the past would not only remain but would very likely be very much increased. Different local authorities had taken extraordinarily different views of their duties under the Technical Instruction Act. Some of them had very restricted views, and only aided those Institutions which they were obliged to aid, such as Technical Schools. Others had taken such a wide view that he ventured to think that if there had been a Mr. Cockerton looking after the County Councils as carefully as the School Boards had been looked after, some of them would have been in a somewhat awkward position. Surely this shewed that the time had come for Parliament to say what the local authorities ought to do, and ought not to do, to organise a system out of the present chaos. He did not mean necessarily a uniform system all over the country, but an elastic system which would require the local authorities to provide a reasonable amount of higher instruction, including, at all events, a proper system of evening continuation schools. He had figures which showed the extraordinarily different views which different County Councils had taken within the last ten years in respect of evening continuation schools. He would not trouble the Committee by giving all of them, but would give three illustrations. Take the two comities, of Somerset, his own county, and Gloucester. He found that the average attendance at the evening continuation schools was more than five times higher in the former than in the latter. There was the same difference in the counties of Cambridge and Hereford. In Cambridge the average attendance was nearly 1500, and in Hereford only 300. The county of Devon was just three times as populous as the East Riding of Yorkshire, but the number of children attending the evening continuation schools was thirty times as numerous in the former as in the latter. Could any one say that that was a proper system of evening continuation schools? Yet this was a vital part of education, without which a great deal of our elementary education in day schools was absolutely wasted. Now that the School Boards were to be crippled there was no local authority that could deal efficiently

1445
with these schools except the education authority they were going to set up under the Bill; and that authority ought to have some direction, whether the evening continuation schools were to be carried on or not. If they had not, there would be the same ignorance on this vital subject as existed at the present day. There was one other objection. Some people seemed to be afraid that if this Amendment were carried the expenditure on higher education in some counties might be excessive. Of course he had no answer to those who objected to any money, including the whisky money, being expended on the work of higher education; but he could re-assure those who believed that the whisky money should be spent on higher education that the only other fund that need be available for higher instruction was a limited rate left to the discretion of ratepayers in each district. With that restriction, with that veto in the hands of the local authority, and in the hands of the ratepayers there need be no fear that excessive sums would be spent on higher education. There should be a statutory minimum standard, which was bound to be a low standard, because it must be applicable to the country as a whole; but surely it was not too much to expect that in a rich country like England, the whisky money, which came out of the coffers of the State, and which had been applied, in most cases, to the work of higher education, should be spent on it in the future, and that the local authorities should be allowed to spend a certain sum out of the rates for this purpose. He would undertake that his own county would comply with any obligation imposed upon them in dealing with the very limited funds which they were likely to get out of the rates. Almost every civilised country in the world was doing a great work in improving its system of higher education. Other nations believed, although apparently we did not believe, that their future prosperity largely depended upon the training and applied knowledge obtained in technical schools, and to a large extent to secondary schools. He ventured to think if no obligation was imposed on the local authorities by this Clause, and if no funds were appropriated for
1446
higher education, we should lose a great opportunity. No one who was really interested in this work, and believed it to be of vital importance to the country, would earnestly oppose such an improvement on the higher education. He would be the last person to support this Amendment if he thought it was likely to wreck the Bill. He felt convinced that the Amendment he now proposed would improve and strengthen the Bill, and it was in that spirit that he appealed to the First Lord of the Treasury to accept it.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 1, line 18, to leave out the word 'may,' and insert the word 'shall.'"—(Mr. Henry Hobhouse.)
Question proposed, "That the word 'may' stand part of the Clause."
MR. BRYCEsaid he rose at once to make an appeal to the First Lord of the Treasury not to make up his mind on this subject until he had heard the different views that would be expressed upon it. This was eminently a matter on which there was no Party division. No one who valued this Bill, or who was anxious to see it passed, could think for one moment that the fortunes of the Bill would be endangered by acceptance of the Amendment, which had been put before the Committee by his hon. friend with a force and knowledge which few people inside or outside the House could equal, because he had had long experience of county Government, and had presided over the Technical Instruction Committee in his own county. His hon. friend opposite had referred to the unanimity of the Royal Commission of 1894 on Secondary Education, but there was a far more important fact than the unanimity of the Commission itself, viz., the unanimity with which their recommendations had been received by the country. He could not think that there was anyone possessing the slightest educational authority who did not concur in the view, that the duty of providing secondary education ought to be imposed on the local authorities. He had no doubt that many local authorities would do it, but it was just the authorities which were least willing to do it which would need to be required to do it. As his hon. friend

1447
higher education, they must lay upon the local authorities an obligation to start the organisation and development of that branch of work. For the last ten years they had had on their shelves, an exhaustive and unanimous Report, which set forth in the strongest language the urgency of the need for the development of secondary or higher education, but no steps had been taken in the direction of satisfying that need. He gathered that they were all agreed as to the necessity of doing something for the development of secondary education, but the First Lord of the Treasury insisted that they should not impose a statutory minimum upon the local authorities in the way of providing for higher education. He asked at an earlier stage of the debate, whether it would be competent for local authorities to set up a standard for elementary education lower than the Whitehall Code, and the First Lord replied, "Certainly not." He wanted to apply that answer to the matter before them. If it were possible to insist upon the locality coming up to a certain standard with regard to the Whitehall Code, surely they could set up a statutory minimum which they must be compelled to meet. The Government were not taking the stand they took in this matter of higher education in their previous Bills. In the Bill of last year it was laid down that these authorities must spend all the whisky money. He wished to know why it was impossible today to impose any obligation upon these local authorities. In the Bill of 1896 the word "may" was used in regard to secondary education, but it went on to provide for a very categorical description of the duties in respect of higher education. Clause 12 of the Bill of 1896 provided that the local authorities should provide land and buildings, whether by purchase or hire, for schools, supply teachers, and make inquiries with regard to the general need of higher education in the locality. Why were these specific obligations not placed in this measure? Could they fairly expect that the County Councils would make a real beginning with education if the matter was left absolutely to themselves. Out of forty-nine English counties there were ten which were spending large sums of the whiskey money on the relief of
1448
rating. For thirteen years they had had the right to rate themselves up to 1d. in the£. for technical instruction, and with what result? At the present time there were only two administrative counties which raised any money at all for higher education through the local rate, and the entire sum they raised was £433 3s. 2d. He contrasted this obscurantism with the extraordinary zeal of the thirteen Welsh counties, which had spent the whole of their whiskey money, £400,000, on higher education, and had, in addition, raised £30,000 out of rates, against the £430 raised by the whole of the English counties. He had no hope of the great bulk of the English counties following this example if they left the Bill in its present form. Some time ago the Vice-President of the Council received a deputation at Whitehall, and he said—
"Are the farmers in favour of education? Everybody who is connected with night schools and technical education in the country is aware that the opposition of the farmer to higher knowledge and technical training on the part of those they look upon as their future labourers is a difficulty that always has to be surmounted."
At a later stage of his speech, the Vice-President said—
"The landowners exhibit that dislike to intellectual development which was characteristic of a territorial aristocracy."
The right hon. Member for Thanet had spoken of too much money being "wasted on so-called education," while the right hon. Member for Sleaford had said they wanted to keep the agricultural labourers on the land, and that the more they were educated the more they were inclined to desire to settle in the towns. That was an economic question more than an educational one, and if they wanted to keep the labourer on the land, then the land must keep the labourer. It was not education, but the lack of education, which was the cause of agricultural depression. Gloucestershire, which had been referred to, spent last year on technical education £6,842, but at the same time it devoted to relief of rates out of the same educational fund £7,294. It had been said that education made these men unfit for agricultural labourers, but to his mind agricultural depression was very often synonymous with agricultural ignorance. He thought they

1449
could make a much stronger case to show that it was lack of education which was; responsible for agricultural depression. Another reason why they ought to lay this obligation upon the education authority was, that up to the present it was optional to spend the rates on elementary education. He believed that that option would be struck out now. All the evidence went to show that they could not safely leave the development of higher education to those who held the views of hon. and right hon. Gentleman opposite, I but must lay an obligation on the localities to make a start in this long-delayed and urgent reform.
MR. CHAPLINsaid he recognised the great importance of higher education, and the great interest which his hon. friend opposite had always shown in that question. There were, however, other considerations than those which had been pointed out by the hon. Member for North Camberwell. He was very glad to notice the line which had been taken up by his right hon. friend in regard to this question. Under the clause as it now stood the local authority had full power, and it might almost be said that it was one of their duties even now, to provide higher education, and for that purpose they might double the rate which they had the power to impose today. They might impose a 2d. rate, and as much more as they could get the Local Government Board to agree to when application was made to the Board for authority. His hon. friend proposed to make the clause compulsory. To his great surprise the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen and others seemed to think that there was nothing whatever contentious about that proposal. He was afraid that those hon. Gentlemen would be greatly mistaken. His hon. friend the Member for East Somerset said that the local authority under the Bill as it stood, could not spend a single penny for higher education, and that surely in a rich country like England there ought to be a fund from which secondary education could be provided for all who desired it. He agreed with his hon. friend; but let it come from the rich, well able to bear it, and not from some of the poorest and most I impoverished districts of the country, which were totally unable to bear any addition to their burdens at the present
1450
time, for a purpose which might not necessarily be beneficial to them. He had always contended that this purpose for which the country was asked by the Bill to spend money out of the rates would be, in one sense, to certain agricultural districts an injury rather than a benefit.
DR. MACNAMARA: Why?
MR. CHAPLIN: Because, in those districts, one of the chief difficulties was to keep the people on the land, and experience had shown that the more the agricultural population were educated the more they desired to leave the land and crowd into the towns; and, while the representatives of the rural districts were ready to bear their fair share of a national burden for education, which, they admitted, was of great national importance, they were not willing to endure an additional burden in their local rates for a purpose which, in their particular districts, might be the reverse of advantageous to them. He was told that, even with the word "shall" inserted in the clause, it would, after all, be very much a matter for the local authority. He thought that hon. Members who took that view were entirely mistaken. There was another clause in the Bill which in his judgment bore very distinctly on this proposition. Clause 11 said—
"If the local education authority fail to fulfil any of their duties under the Elementary Education Acts, 1870 to 1900, on this Act, in any part of their area, the Board of Education may, after holding a public inquiry, make such order as they think necessary or proper for the purpose of compelling the authority to fulfil their duty, and any such order may be enforced by mandamus."
The local authority would have the power, subject to the sanction of the Local Government Board, of spending money to an unknown and unlimited extent for this purpose out of the rates. If the clause were made compulsory, it would cast a burden upon the ratepayers to an unknown extent, which quite possibly would go far to counteract the concessions announced that afternoon by the First Lord of the Treasury. In the speech which he made the other day, and which the hon. Member for North Camberwell had quoted, he would find, by reading the whole of it, he

1451
likely to be but a barren effort, and that money spent upon it would be money thrown into the sea. But are Members of this House the only people capable of making that discovery? Are the County Councils and the local bodies, urban and rural, so far behind the public opinion which they are there to express, that it is not possible for them to discover that recondite truth? I do not think so. My own belief is that, though undoubtedly there will be laggards in the race, all will run and all will ultimately reach the goal. The right hon. Gentleman said there was a special danger to be guarded against, arising out of the fact that the Science and Art Department has given an unduly scientific tinge to our secondary education, to its great detriment. I am not going to enter into the discussion that is raging in every educational community throughout the globe as to the exact proportions literature and science should bear in the secondary education of our youth. The problem is very difficult, and I do not pretend to have arrived at any solution on which I can rest with perfect confidence. But, at all events, we may agree upon this, that a purely scientific education, to the exclusion of all the other aspects of education—of history, of art, and so on—is very one sided and narrow, and ought not to be encouraged cither by this House or by the Education Department. But I am told by the Vice-President of the Council that the Science and Art Department are now most careful in allocating their grants, and in seeing that the schools to which they are allocated have a sound curriculum of general as well as scientific education. It is true that the grant is a scientific grant, and that it is given in respect of the scientific side of education but so keenly alive are the Education Department to the very danger and evil of which the right hon. Gentleman has spoken, that they have taken care that the money which they give to those schools in which science is taught, is only given where, in addition to science, there is a sound general education afforded to the pupils. In these circumstances I venture to tell the Committee that, quite apart from the interests of the ratepayer—a person not to be left out of account, because if he set himself
1452
stolidly to oppose our educational scheme we might do what we liked in Whitehall, we should not get much further—that, putting his interests and perhaps his prejudices on one side, in the interests of secondary education itself, I do sincerely believe that we had better lead the educational authorities rather than endeavour to compel them. The particular method of endeavouring to compel them, which my hon. friend wants adopted, is one which I do not think would work in practice or could be enforced, and which, even if it did work or could be enforced, would only have a petrifying effect on the whole scheme of secondary education we desire to see established.
MR. ASQUITH: The right hon. Gentleman has devoted his speech to elaborating the somewhat paradoxical thesis that the best thing to do with secondary education is to leave it in the hands of local option. I cannot help thinking that the form which this Clause has assumed, and the opposition which the right hon. Gentleman on behalf of the Government is offering to the Amendment, is one of the unfortunate results of linking primary and secondary education in the same scheme. With the views which the right hon. Gentleman entertains—which he expressed on behalf of the Government with the immense weight and authority of the Report of the Royal Commission behind them, it can hardly be doubted that, if this had been a Bill dealing with secondary education alone, the duty would have been imposed in clear terms on the local authority. The right hon. Gentleman has told us how undesirable it is that the Education Department should be brought into constant collision, and possible friction, with the local authorities of the country. Here I cannot help remarking on the phenomenon which has struck me more than once during these debates, that we never hear at first hand what the views of the Education Department are. The Minister who is responsible to this House for the administration of that Department sits by the right hon. Gentleman's side. He listens in silence. We do not know what mental operations are going on beneath that unruffled surface, but he listens in

1453
silence to the depreciatory views which the First Lord of the Treasury takes as to the possible action of his Department in the future, and he has neither a word of protest nor a word of active assent. The state of his mind is one of those political problems which do not think any one of us has the means to grapple with. But I would point out to the First Lord of the Treasury that this very problem of imposing the duty on the one hand, and providing the sanction for its performance on the other, was confronted and settled by the authors of the Act of 1870. By that Act the very thing was done in regard to elementary education which we are here proposing in relation to secondary education. The duty was imposed upon the district of providing sufficient school accommodation for all elementary scholars; and, if that duty is neglected, the authors of the Act of 1870 did not hesitate to invoke the Education Department, and that Department has not infrequently interfered, and has compelled local authorities in default to perform their duty without any unnecessary friction, and with enormous advantage both to the ratepayers and the community. Both precedent and reason, therefore, I say, point to the imposition of this duty in clear and emphatic terms, in accordance with the intentions of the Legislature, and show that in point of practice there is no difficulty in providing for its enforcement by means of a Government department. I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman that we do not want to stereotype the form of secondary education over all the country. There ought to be great latitude allowed for local enterprise and for local judgment, which must be influenced not only by local requirements, out by the length or the shortness of the local purse. What we want is not a cast-iron system established in every county and every borough, but that there should be a statutory minimum up to which even' local authority should be obliged to conform. To say it is impossible at this time of day, with this growing and ever more urgent gap in our educational system, for Parliament to lay down as a duty, and for the Education Department to enforce that duty, that there should be a minimum standard of secondary education is a confession of impotence to which I hope the Committee will not be
1454
driven. As a whole, the local authorities throughout the country have done well under the technical education acts with the small resources placed at their disposal, but there are cases even now where the whisky moneys is not applied to education but to the relief of rates, and that is an additional argument for the view that there shall be a minimum standard. Was not my right hon. friend the Member for South Aberdeen right in saying, and docs not the right hon. Gentleman sympathise with him, that we ought to look forward to a form of instruction which is large, comprehensive, and humane, which does not merely comprise that which is useful as the foundation for technical knowledge, or professional pursuits, but which enriches the mind and makes the person who it the subject of it a better citizen and more capable of following a humane and refined life? But you have not got, for the purpose of providing that kind of instruction, even the comparatively slight motive that you have in relation to technical instruction. I cannot think that the right hon. Gentleman regards the retention of this word as essential to the integrity of his Bill; but, on the other hand, it would be of enormous moment if the House, on a question which is in no sense a party question, but in the largest sense of the word a national question, were at this time, by means of an unmistakeable vote, to declare its opinion that the duty of providing higher education is one which can no longer be neglected, and ought to be cast on the local authorities throughout the length and breadth of the country.
SIR JOHN DORINGTON, in opposing the Amendment, desired to speak on behalf of the counties, which had been so strongly stigmatised by the right hon. Gentleman opposite. He did not accept the view which had been put forward. So far as his own county was concerned, he believed they had done quite as good work as those counties who had spent the whole of the money, and they had more closely adhered to the intentions of Parliament in originally voting the money. A singular error prevailed among all parties as to what this money was really for. The Secondary Education Commission in their Report ignored the manner in

1455
which the money originated, and the purposes it was intended to fulfil. One half of the money was absolutely intended to go in relief of rates. It was voted for that express purpose, and it was only in the closing hours of the Session, when most people had gone away, that Mr. Acland proposed that a moiety should be applied to technical education. That was accepted, but some question arose as to the words in which the proposal was set out, and after the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouthshire had expressed the belief that so much as a moiety would probably not be required, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that he supposed they could trust the County Councils, and that, instead of disputing about the fraction, words should he inserted permitting the Councils to use the money for that purpose. That provision had been most erroneously interpreted as meaning the whole of the money. As Chairman of his County Council, on the the first occasion of their having to distribute the money, he reminded the members of the body that one-half of it came to them by accident and should be appropriated for educational purposes. ["Oh, oh."] At that time, in taking that view, he was looked upon as a very advanced person, and he was certainly in advance of many local bodies, including the; London County Council. His Council devoted to the relief of the ratepayers that portion which was unquestionably so intended by Parliament, one of his arguments being that, whereas the money was the property of the ratepayer as a whole, there were large parts of the county which would not benefit in any way from it being applied to technical education. In the Budget Speech in 1890 Mr. Goschen proposed to provide certain moneys for the purposes of County Finance, viz. £300,000 for the Superannuation of the Police, £382,000 to enable superfluous licences to be bought up, and a sum of about £393,000, called "the residue" to go in relief of rates, replacing the abandoned Wheel and Van Tax. The first and the last were never objected to, but owing to the failure to carry the sum for licences it was thrown into the residue clause, of which a moiety, as mentioned above, was proposed to be given to education, and the clause was so phrased as to lead to the misconception above mentioned. The hon. Member quoted a
1456
passage from the speech of Mr. Goschen, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, in support of his view with regard to the intentions of Parliament, and contended, that educationists had unduly pounced upon the grant, declaring it to be theirs, while virtually it was given for the ratepayers. He did not think the Government were altogether justified in diverting from the County Councils money which was given them in aid of the rates. They should be left to apply it as they pleased. Prom a financial point of view, a more wasteful thing could not be done than to enact that a definite sum should be applied to a specific purpose, whether it was required or not. His Council did not commence by spending all their money; but limited themselves to a moiety, which for the first few years was not exhausted, though it was now, but last year they voted another £1,000, and this year they would probably vote a further sum out of the other moiety. They adopted the plan because they were able by degrees to find out where the money could be applied most efficiently and practically for the purposes so well stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen. He entirely agreed with the view put forward by the right hon. Gentleman, but it could not be carried into effect by lavishly shovelling money into the hands of educators. They must get persons to appreciate education, and to know that as a result of the expenditure they incurred some adequate result was being obtained. After the first two or three years the County Council of which he was chairman carefully reviewed their methods, and decided that they must spend their money in blocks, and not in driblets all over the place. On that system they were organising now, and they would certainly spend such sums as were necessary, but they should not be forced to spend money which was not required. On their behalf he welcomed the Bill, because it would enable local authorities to do what they wanted, but which, at present, they had not the means to do in the right way.
DR. MACNAMARAhad listened to the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury with much misgiving and disappointment. It seemed to him that if they were really anxious to promote

1457
higher education, they must lay upon the local authorities an obligation to start the organisation and development of that branch of work. For the last ten years they had had on their shelves, an exhaustive and unanimous Report, which set forth in the strongest language the urgency of the need for the development of secondary or higher education, but no steps had been taken in the direction of satisfying that need. He gathered that they were all agreed as to the necessity of doing something for the development of secondary education, but the First Lord of the Treasury insisted that they should not impose a statutory minimum upon the local authorities in the way of providing for higher education. He asked at an earlier stage of the debate, whether it would be competent for local authorities to set up a standard for elementary education lower than the Whitehall Code, and the First Lord replied, "Certainly not." He wanted to apply that answer to the matter before them. If it were possible to insist upon the locality coming up to a certain standard with regard to the Whitehall Code, surely they could set up a statutory minimum which they must be compelled to meet. The Government were not taking the stand they took in this matter of higher education in their previous Bills. In the Bill of last year it was laid down that these authorities must spend all the whisky money. He wished to know why it was impossible today to impose any obligation upon these local authorities. In the Bill of 1896 the word "may" was used in regard to secondary education, but it went on to provide for a very categorical description of the duties in respect of higher education. Clause 12 of the Bill of 1896 provided that the local authorities should provide land and buildings, whether by purchase or hire, for schools, supply teachers, and make inquiries with regard to the general need of higher education in the locality. Why were these specific obligations not placed in this measure? Could they fairly expect that the County Councils would make a real beginning with education if the matter was left absolutely to themselves. Out of forty-nine English counties there were ten which were spending large sums of the whiskey money on the relief of
1458
rating. For thirteen years they had had the right to rate themselves up to 1d. in the£. for technical instruction, and with what result? At the present time there were only two administrative counties which raised any money at all for higher education through the local rate, and the entire sum they raised was £433 3s. 2d. He contrasted this obscurantism with the extraordinary zeal of the thirteen Welsh counties, which had spent the whole of their whiskey money, £400,000, on higher education, and had, in addition, raised £30,000 out of rates, against the £430 raised by the whole of the English counties. He had no hope of the great bulk of the English counties following this example if they left the Bill in its present form. Some time ago the Vice-President of the Council received a deputation at Whitehall, and he said—
"Are the farmers in favour of education? Everybody who is connected with night schools and technical education in the country is aware that the opposition of the farmer to higher knowledge and technical training on the part of those they look upon as their future labourers is a difficulty that always has to be surmounted."
At a later stage of his speech, the Vice-President said—
"The landowners exhibit that dislike to intellectual development which was characteristic of a territorial aristocracy."
The right hon. Member for Thanet had spoken of too much money being "wasted on so-called education," while the right hon. Member for Sleaford had said they wanted to keep the agricultural labourers on the land, and that the more they were educated the more they were inclined to desire to settle in the towns. That was an economic question more than an educational one, and if they wanted to keep the labourer on the land, then the land must keep the labourer. It was not education, but the lack of education, which was the cause of agricultural depression. Gloucestershire, which had been referred to, spent last year on technical education £6,842, but at the same time it devoted to relief of rates out of the same educational fund £7,294. It had been said that education made these men unfit for agricultural labourers, but to his mind agricultural depression was very often synonymous with agricultural ignorance. He thought they

1459
could make a much stronger case to show that it was lack of education which was responsible for agricultural depression. Another reason why they ought to lay this obligation upon the education authority was, that up to the present it was optional to spend the rates on elementary education. He believed that that option would be struck out now. All the evidence went to show that they could not safely leave the development of higher education to those who held the views of hon. and right hon. Gentleman opposite, but must lay an obligation on the localities to make a start in this long-delayed and urgent reform.
MR. CHAPLINsaid he recognised the great importance of higher education, and the great interest which his hon. friend opposite had always shown in that question. There were, however, other considerations than those which had been pointed out by the hon. Member for North Camberwell. He was very glad to notice the line which had been taken up by his right hon. friend in regard to this question. Under the clause as it now stood the local authority had full power, and it might almost be said that it was one of their duties even now, to provide higher education, and for that purpose they might double the rate which they had the power to impose today. They might impose a 2d. rate, and as much more as they could get the Local Government Board to agree to when application was made to the Board for authority. His hon. friend proposed to make the clause compulsory. To his great surprise the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen and others seemed to think that there was nothing whatever contentious about that proposal. He was afraid that those hon. Gentlemen would be greatly mistaken. His hon. friend the Member for East Somerset said that the local authority under the Bill as it stood, could not spend a single penny for higher education, and that surely in a rich country like England there ought to be a fund from which secondary education could be provided for all who desired it. He agreed with his hon. friend; but let it come from the rich, well able to bear it, and not from some of the poorest and most impoverished districts of the country, which were totally unable to bear any addition to their burdens at the present
1460
time, for a purpose which might not necessarily be beneficial to them. He had always contended that this purpose for which the country was asked by the Bill to spend money out of the rates would be, in one sense, to certain agricultural districts an injury rather than, a benefit.
DR. MACNAMARA: Why?
MR. CHAPLIN: Because, in those districts, one of the chief difficulties was to keep the people on the land, and experience had shown that the more the agricultural population were educated the more they desired to leave the land and crowd into the towns; and, while the representatives of the rural districts were ready to bear their fair share of a national burden for education, which, they admitted, was of great national importance, they were not willing to endure an additional burden in their local rates for a purpose which, in their particular districts, might be the reverse of advantageous to them. He was told that, even with the word "shall" inserted in the clause, it would, after all, be very much a matter for the local authority. He thought that hon. Members who took that view were entirely mistaken. There was another clause in the Bill which in his judgment bore very distinctly on this proposition. Clause 11 said—
"If the local education authority fail to fulfil any of their duties under the Elementary Education Acts, 1870 to 1900, on this Act, in any part of their area, the Board of Education may, after holding a public inquiry, make such order as they think necessary or proper for the purpose of compelling the authority to fulfil their duty, and any such order may be enforced by mandamus."
The local authority would have the power, subject to the sanction of the Local Government Board, of spending money to an unknown and unlimited extent for this purpose out of the rates. If the clause were made compulsory, it would cast a burden upon the ratepayers to an unknown extent, which quite possibly would go far to counteract the concessions announced that afternoon by the First Lord of the Treasury. In the speech which he made the other day, and which the hon. Member for North Camberwell had quoted, he would find, by reading the whole of it, he

1461
pointed out that some portion of the cost must be borne by the rates. If they were to have an effective check on extravagant administration, he further contended that that portion should be the smallest, and that the contribution from the national funds should be the largest which was consistent with economical administration. When the question was referred to in a large and powerful Royal Commission they came to exactly the same conclusion. They recommended that education should be treated as a national service, and, of course, that the cost should to a large extent be met from national funds. These were the grounds on which he would continue to protest against and oppose to the utmost extent of his power any proposal to provide for higher education solely out of the rates.
MR. HALDANEsaid the Member for the Sleaford Division had let the cat out of the bag. The right hon. Gentleman spoke for certain agricultural districts in England where the opinion was held that higher education was not a good thing for the farming interest, because it induced the labourers to leave the land. He also represented an agricultural constituency and a constituency which had suffered less than any other from agricultural depression. Why? Because fanning there was high, because every one there, from the farmer to the labourer, was educated on a scale and used machinery to an extent that were unknown south of the Tweed.
MR. CHAPLIN: The hon. and learned Gentleman should have mentioned another qualification. Land in that district happens to be some of the richest and most fertile in the whole of the kingdom.
Mr. HALDANEsaid it was also worked with machinery and a skill and energy which had no parallel in any other part of the world. If the First Lord of the Treasury had his way he would make the Bill a homogeneous whole with regard to education. The right hon. Gentleman knew as well as hon. Members on the Opposition side of the House that they could not make elementary education
1462
efficient so long as it was marked off and separated from that which was above. He thought there was nothing which the elementary teachers had more cause to complain, of than the way they had been treated with respect to the benefits of higher education. He appealed to the First Lord to allow the House of Commons to decide this issue. He was sure it was one they knew something of, and they were getting to know more and more about it. In his opinion the blot on the Bill, which in other respects he regarded as good, was the arbitrary distinction it set up between higher education and elementary education. They could not make elementary education efficient so long as they kept it marked off from the stage of education above it; and secondary education to be effective must be made a part of the great educational system of the country.
SIR ALBERT ROLLITsaid the speeches of the hon. Member for the Tewkesbury Division and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Sleaford Division explained the indisposition of a large number of boroughs to be subordinated to the County Councils.
It being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING.

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clause 2:—
  SIR ALBERT ROLLIT, resuming his speech, said he desired to urge upon the Government in the strongest possible terms the wisdom of acceding to the Amendment of his hon. friend in the interests of the Bill and of the nation. It must be easy to understand the strong objection of non-county boroughs to be subordinated to the County Councils. In the vast majority of cases the practice

  1463
  of the County Councils had been to consider that the rates should be relieved at the expense of education, whereas the Borough Councils had held that education led to a saving in the rates. This Bill was primarily for the purpose of establishing a local authority for education, and it ought at least to define the duty of the local authority, and to convey from Parliament a mandate to the County Council as to the duty entrusted to it. They had heard a great deal about the variety and elasticity of education, but in some subjects at least, he had noticed that the sympathy had been in the direction of Mr. Squeers's style rather than that of modern education, and Squeers's methods were both various and elastic. But the great fault of the Bill was that it was purely permissive, and what the Amendment sought was to secure that it should be declared to be the duty of the County Council to aid higher education. Yet that was strenuously resisted on the part of the Government. He did not doubt for one moment that many County Councils would aid higher education. But he could not forget that the whisky moneys had as a general rule been devoted to the relief of rates—wholly in the great majority of cases, and partially in many others. Laggards ought not to be allowed to set the pace for the country in educational matters, and there was really more need for dealing with higher education than with elementary education. Unfortunately secondary education was still in a very chaotic condition. His own experience in Yorkshire was that for technical education, good primary and secondary education was absolutely necessary, and in too many cases the funds which should have been devoted to technical education had been applied to the teaching of those who ought to have been instructed in secondary education schools. After all, this secondary education was absolutely necessary in the interests of the business of this country. There were communities dependent on scientific knowledge and training for their business prosperity, but their trade had been diverted from this country, and the question was whether it was too late to recover those particular forms of industry from their competitors. He hoped that,
  1464
  so far from waiting, they would wait no longer, but would make a determined attempt to recover what had already been lost in our own spheres of industry. It was suggested that if the Bill were made mandatory it could not be enforced, but the reply to that was that its terms were practically those of the Bill of 1870. He quite admitted that the Amendment might require enlargement. There might be towns in which it might not be necessary to apply the whole of the whisky money to education. But precedent would be against that point. So far as it was wanted the money ought to be so applied, and it should be ear-marked if not used at the time; it should be kept separate and accumulated until it could be used for the purposes of education. Local authorities were most anxious to get a proper mandate from the House on this subject, and with one exception they were in favour of the Amendment. He would take first the city of Liverpool. The Council of that city passed a resolution, in which it was said that something should be inserted in the Bill which should declare it to be the duty of the local authority to make provision for secondary and technical education. Then he had a resolution passed by a non-county borough in Lancashire strongly maintaining that all moneys received under the Local Taxation Act should be ear-marked for technical education. His right hon. friend, in picturesque language, suggested that the policy indicated in the Amendment would have a petrifying influence, but as it was, when the boroughs asked for bread there was a strong disposition to give them a stone. He believed in the course recommended by the boroughs, which were consulting the greatest of all national needs. Education might be costly, but in education parsimony was not economy, and he agreed with the American statesman who said that, though the education rates were the highest of all rates, they ought to be willingly paid because they made the greatest of all possible returns to the State. Education had been too long neglected, and he hoped that the Government, realising this, would enable progressive communities to perform their educational duties with advantage to themselves locally, and to the nation at large, and thereby to consult not only

  1465
  the happiness and welfare of individuals, but the commerce and prosperity of the nation.
  MR. BONDsaid he had listened with profound disappointment to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman. He believed it would lean immense advantage to the country, if, when the local taxation money could not be usefully applied at once, it could be accumulated and used as educational needs developed. There ought to be some capital on which it was possible to fall back in order to establish the fresh educational institutions required by the needs of the day. If that course could have been pursued by the London County Council in employing the funds that had come into their hands, they would have had at their disposal at this time something like £1,200,000; and he asked the Committee to consider the immense advantage which would have resulted from the existence of such a large capital sum. They had been told that the Government were anxious to introduce a large measure of educational reform, but he could not help thinking that they had not risen to the height of the occasion, and that they were letting a golden opportunity go by. A great and crying need of our educational system on all hands was acknowledged to be a better and more universal provision for middle class education. Matthew Arnold called attention to it long ago, and the complaint had been re-echoed from many quarters since. Now that the moment had arrived, and a Government with a large majority behind them, though that majority were not all agreed on the subject, had the opportunity of doing something substantial for the improvement of that middle class education, and for the improvement of education other than elementary, they let the opportunity go by. The Bill, however, contained some provisions which were useful in that direction. It at least did away with the absurd restriction which tied down the use of local taxation money to technical instruction only. Technical instruction, as they all knew, received a very latitudinarian interpretation from the Board of Education. It would be a
  1466
  great thing, however, to get all ambiguity removed, and to have it made clear that the money could be applied by all county authorities for any purpose of education which was not elementary as defined by the Act. But that, of course, did not do away with the desirability of making such application compulsory. The Leader of the House need not be alarmed whatever amount of dissent there might be on the Ministerial side, if he declared himself in favour of the view he was supporting that the majority of his followers would leave him in the lurch. At all events they were assured by the speeches made that afternoon, and by the cheers which followed these speeches, of the support of hon. Gentlemen opposite, which he believed to be dictated not by partisan feeling, but by a sincere desire to promote the cause of education, and to bring about a better state of things than that which now prevailed a state of things which at this stage of our history was almost a disgrace to the country. He felt very keenly on this matter. He had watched with immense interest beneficial work in the application of the local taxation money for London education, and he believed the county and borough authorities, having sowed their wild oats in the application of the money, were coming more and more to the conclusion that it was not desirable to squander the sums placed at their disposal in giving sporadic village lectures on wood-carving or the principles of agriculture. He did not deny that those things might possess a certain amount of usefulness, but it was not the most desirable way of disposing of these large sums of money. Having served their apprenticeship he believed that a good many of these authorities had learned an exceedingly useful lesson, and would apply these funds in a much more admirable way in the future than had hitherto been the case. The Government were making a great mistake in not bringing the laggard counties to the standard of the progressive ones. As to the observations of his right hon. friend the Member for Sleaford, he thought he had misconstrued this Clause, and had not altogether realised what its effect might be. He seemed to think that if the word "may" was deleted, and the

  1467
  word "shall" inserted, a fresh rate would be imposed on the counties by the local educational authorities. But he did not agree with the right hon. Gentleman that by inserting the word "shall" instead of "may" they would compel the local authorities to impose upon themselves any greater burden than they carried at present. He regretted the course the Government had adopted, and he hoped that they would yet see their way to adopt another.
  MAJOR RASCHsaid he wished to congratulate the Government very sincerely on the fact that they had resisted the temptation to give away their agricultural supporters, and play into the hands of hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House. There were a good many who thought that this word "may" was the one thing which made the Bill worth the paper it was written on; at any rate, it was the one thing which stood between the agricultural interests and the increasingly profuse expenditure of educational zealots like his friend on the right, and many others. He did not think that if hon. Members knew the condition of agriculture, especially in the eastern counties, they would vote for this Amendment with so light a heart as they would otherwise do. He had been rather surprised to hear the hon. Member for North Camberwell stating that the agricultural interest could bear this tax very well, that there was nothing in it. And then the hon. and learned Member for Haddington said that the agricultural interest was doing very well, for they were getting £4 an acre for their farms. The hon. and learned Member must have forgotten that instead of getting £4 per acre of rent, it was £4 per acre for the sale of freehold. Hon. Members opposite were always talking about trusting the people. Why could they not trust the local authorities elected by the people in a matter of this kind? He himself was a representative of the class which sat on local Boards; he was a member of a Technical Instruction Committee, he had sat on School Boards, and was even a pious founder, but he should be blind to the merits of the permissive clause of this Bill, except on consultation with his agricultural friends. The
  1468
  agricultural interests had, in fact, never had fair play in this House, and he hoped that this was the dawn of an era of better treatment of the agricultural interest in these matters. The agricultural interest was absolutely uncomplaining. [HON. MEMBERS on the Opposition Benches: Oh, oh!] That was so. They never asked for anything, or if they did, they never got it. They did not ask for subsidies or doles, and other of these, things. And what was the result? As a rule, the agricultural interest was treated with less consideration than black people. He congratulated the Government very heartily on having shown a stiff back on this matter, and he was sure that the attitude adopted by the First Lord of the Treasury would make the passage of the Bill a good deal more facile.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid that those who had had the privilege of hearing the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury would have supposed that this Bill would create a revolution in the education of the country, and provide a true educational system. After having listened to the debate hon. Members would see what kind of revolution it was to be. The right hon. Gentleman had practically admitted, and he thought the subsequent course of the debate had demonstrated, that the amount of secondary education to be given in the counties would depend almost entirely on the character of the chairman of the County Council or of the Education Committee. If that chairman happened to be a representative of education of the character of the hon. Member for East Somerset, then in all probability some liberal measures in behalf of secondary education would be devised. But, unfortunately, chairmen such as his hon. friend were not very numerous, especially in the rural districts of this kingdom, and therefore the practical outcome of the Bill as it stood would be that the chance of the children in the rural districts getting a good secondary education would depend on the character of the chairman. He maintained that that was not the position in which

  1469
  national education should be left. Surely these children in the rural districts should have equal rights with those in the great towns to obtain educational advantages. In the hon. Members for East Somersetshire and the Tewkesbury Division of Gloucestershire they had typical representatives of the chairmen of County Councils. They took entirely different views in regard to education, and hon. Members would understand from that how desirable it was that some clear mandate should be given by this House as to how this money was to be spent. The hon. Member for the Tewkesbury Division said he apprehended that the intention of Parliament was very different from that of the hon. Member for East Somerset. Supposing that the County Councils administered the new funds according to the intention of Parliament, what would they understand by that if the Bill remained in its present state? For in regard to secondary education they might do certain things, but in regard to primary education certain duties were absolutely imposed upon them. If the County Councils gathered the intention of Parliament on the principle of the hon. Member for the Tewkesbury Division, they would say that they had certain duties to perform in regard to primary education which they had not in respect to secondary education. At this moment the one great need of the country was some better means of technical and secondary education, but the whole of that was dismissed in the Bill in a few lines, instead of being put forward in the forefront of the measure. Those of them who were engaged in commerce knew that their primary difficulty in conducting business was to get in their assistants practical knowledge combined with scientific training. They could sometimes get men with practical knowledge without scientific training, and sometimes men with scientific training without practical knowledge. Their great need was to have the two combined, and that could not be realised unless some great improvement was made in regard to scientific training under a secondary educational system. He submitted that this Bill left the position of secondary education even worse than it had been at any time during the last six or
  1470
  seven years, because they had lost under the School Boards their higher grade schools, and to a large extent the position of the evening continuation schools, and the science schools had been damaged. He thought that every educationist admitted that they needed a complete secondary education from a commercial point of view, as well as from those higher considerations which were common in all things. What were County Councils to do if this clause as to option was preserved? They had had expressions from the right hon. Member for Sleaford, and others had laid down the proposition that an advanced education was likely to damage the population in the rural districts, and that it was through education the population was migrating largely from the rural districts to the towns. In his own city of Norwich the Minister for Agriculture, accompanied by a late hon. Member of this House, had appeared on the platform of a large meeting and addressed the farmers on that very principle—that the agricultural districts were being depopulated on account of education. He was sorry to say that the Minister of Agriculture, who was present, did not rebuke the right hon. Gentleman, but said that a great deal of nonsense was being taught in the rural districts. He should say that if the success of agriculture depended on the ignorance of the people it was a bad look out for agriculture.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Has anything been said here to the effect that secondary education has depopulated the rural districts?
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid that if that sentiment had not been put forward in the debate it was because it would have been entirely out of order. What he maintained was that these sentiments were very largely held by those who would have the control of secondary education throughout the length and breadth of the land. That was not the time to indicate the causes which did lead to the depopulation of the rural districts; but he submitted that a great deal might be done through secondary education to enliven life in the rural districts. He was afraid that a large number of those who constituted the County Councils would not be disposed

  1471
  to do anything towards the spread of secondary education beyond he expenditure of the whisky money. They would not be disposed to rate themselves for secondary education. There were special reasons why the First Lord of the Treasury should yield and accept the Amendment before the Committee. He had heard the First Lord many times speak of many things as being in the Bill which he could not find there. If he could find them, it would, to a large extent, mitigate his opposition to the Bill. Among the things he desired was the possibility of providing pupil-teacher centres, special training colleges and making better provision generally for the teaching profession. The lack of these was, he believed, one of the most important deficiencies in the present educational system, and if this Bill did contain provisions for them, he would be glad. The First Lord of the Teasury believed that under the second clause, which the Committee were now discussing, undenominational training colleges, which were so greatly needed in the country, could be established, but they were not likely to be built without some mandate from Parliament.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is anticipating an Amendment lower down on the Paper. The Amendment now before the Committee does not refer to training colleges.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid he was pointing out the difficulty that unless a mandate was given to the County Councils for the purposes he had indicated, there was no chance of the County Councils making provision for them. He felt that a great deal had transpired during the debate which showed that there was a strong feeling on the other side of the House that the clause should not be entirely optional. He was quite sure that if the question remained where the clause left it they should make no progress under this Bill in regard to technical and secondary education.
  THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL ON EDUCATION (Sir JOHN GORST,)said that the present Amendment, in his view, was not one of great importance in itself, but the question which had been discussed
  1472
  by the Committee was one of very great importance; viz., whether we should trust the new local authority to carry out a scheme of secondary education, or whether we should prescribe and force upon them a system of secondary education. That was a point on which he wished, if the Committee would allow him, to make a few observations. There was obviously a great advantage in trusting to the local authority. In the first place the local authority would know the kind of secondary education suited to the needs of the districts. He could not too often impress on the Committee that there was a great variety of secondary education, and by trusting the local authority variety in secondary education would be secured and the variation would respond to the demand. It was not anticipated that people should be obliged to send their children to secondary schools whether they would or not, as was the case with elementary education. The number of school classes for secondary education would depend upon the demand. To some extent it would depend on the wishes of the rate payer as to the kind of instruction that was to be given and the amount of money that should be spent upon it. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North West Norfolk complained that the Clause dismissed the question of secondary education in a very few lines; but that was just what gave the local authority a sense of its power. If there had been a long Bill the local authority would have been hampered, whereas the very simplicity of the language used in the Bill gave them the most extensive powers. They could have science schools, literary schools, evening continuation schools, training colleges for elementary and secondary teachers—in short, every sort of Institution—[AN HON. MEMBER: Or none.]—which was not elementary He was quite surprised at the distrust exhibited by hon. Gentlemen opposite in the body which was to be elected by the ratepayers. There might, in some cases, be an authority which would be a bad authority, because the ratepayers chose to elect them; but the goodness of the authority would depend entirely on the capacity of the ratepayers and their willingness to choose a really effective authority. In this matter, the

  1473
  Committee was not left to conjecture, because for twelve years there had been in force the Technical Instruction Act, which was a purely permissive Act. There was no single authority under the Technical Instruction Act which had not spent, at least, some of the local taxation money in technical instruction; and very few which had not spent the whole of it. There were only about ten counties in England and Wales which did not spend the whole of the technical instruction money on education. Some years ago the counties and county boroughs were invited by the Science and Art Department to undertake the supervision of all the Science and Art schools in their districts; and the majority of the counties and about half the boroughs accepted that invitation, and were now engaged in superintending the whole of the Science and Art instruction in their districts. Besides that, there were a great many counties which had evening and other schools; and therefore there was no reason to suppose from past experience that the counties would be either willing or unable to carry out the powers to be conferred upon them by this Clause. A number of hon. Members were not satisfied with that; they wanted to put some kind of coercion on backward counties. There were only two ways by which that could be done. One would be by a regular scheme to be imposed by statute. He had heard hon. Members speak about the statutory minimum of secondary education provided under the Bill. He did not think that any hon. Member would venture to define that statutory minimum, or to propose any clause in which it was laid down. He had looked through the fifty-nine pages of Amendments to see if any hon. Member had suggested a statutory minimum, but not one had done so. He, therefore, presumed that the House of Commons found it quite impossible to lay down by statute what the local authorities ought to do. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Fife thought it would be the easiest thing in the world to do what was done in the Act of 1870 with reference to elementary education, and it was quite easy to do it because the law of the land required
  1474
  that every child should receive elementary education; the number of school places to be provided could be estimated perfectly accurately, and the local authorities could be made to provide them. That was going on every day. If there was a deficiency in school places, they could require theological authority to provide for it. But who was to say what amount of secondary education was to be provided. Who was to give notice to the local authority as to how many places were to be provided for secondary education. The thing was impossible and could not be done. It was possible under the Act of 1870 with reference to elementary education, but it was quite impossible under the present Bill. Then it was suggested that the Board of Education should; prescribe what secondary education should be provided in any particular district. That was the real reason why as representing in this House the Board of Education, he had ventured to trouble the Committee. The Board of Education would not be able to carry out any such duty. There would have to be an elaborate method of inquiry, in every part of the country into facts with which the local representatives of the people were perfectly familiar. It would take the Board a very long time to learn as much about the requirements of secondary education in Bradford, for instance, as the Bradford Town Council already possessed. Supposing the Board did succeed in acquiring as much information as the local authorities, they would be no better fitted to determine these matters than any intelligent County Council. He could not understand a proposal to put on the Board of Education the duty of saying what sort of schools there ought to be in, for instance the County of Gloucester, what their number should be, what fees should be charged, and how many free places there should be. That should be left to the local authority. The inevitable result of the interference of the Board of Education would be an inelastic cast-iron system imposed on the whole country, which would be extremely deleterious and damaging to secondary education. Whatever they did they should keep secondary education free and independent of Government control. They must not allow the central authority to dictate what was to be

  1475
  taught, or anything else connected with Secondary education. Secondary education should be suitable to the locality, and should be under the control of people who knew what was wanted. He would only mention one other point as an illustration of the impossibility of carrying out that which the Amendment did not carry out, but which some hon. Members wished to carry out, and which he believed would be extremely mischievous. In 1892 a Secondary Education Bill was introduced into the House of Commons by his predecessor in Office, just before he became Minister of Education. On the back of the Bill were the names of Sir Henry Roscoe, who was well known in this House as a singularly energetic and active supporter of secondary education, and his hon. friend the Member for East Somerset who had moved this Amendment. Did that Bill contain compulsory powers? Nothing of the kind. The local authorities occupied the same position under that Bill as they did under the Bill now before the Committee. The Bill of 1892 provided that it should be the duty of the local authority to make such provision as they might think fit for the secondary education of the inhabitants of their districts. That was exactly the duty of the local authority under the present Bill, namely, to provide such provision for secondary education as they might think fit. He did not see the slightest harm in using the word "duty" in the sense in which it was used, nor did he see any harm, on the other hand, in saying that the local authority should provide such secondary education as they thought fit. If the Committee went further, and attempted to lay down in the Bill itself a definition of what the amount of secondary education should be, if they put into the hands of the Board of Education a kind of general power to do what the Board thought fit instead of what the local authority thought fit, they would be taking a course which would be extremely disadvantageous to the cause of education.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he thought the Committee would congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the withdrawal of the muzzling order made, against him. He thought that the first Lord of the Treasury must have had an as-
  1476
  surance from the right hon. Gentleman that he would not bite before he consented to take that step. He trusted that in the future, notwithstanding that the right hon. Gentleman had opposed the Amendment, the Committee would have the benefit of his advice in the debate. The right hon. Gentleman objected to the Amendment on the ground that if it were carried there would not be a sufficient variation in secondary education under the scheme. He admitted it would not be the kind of variation they would get if the matter were left entirely to the discretion of the local authorities. What did the right hon. Gentleman mean by variation? He said that they should leave discretion to the local authority as to the places where the schools were to be planted, and as to the type of school. But surely no one had ever suggested that if this Amendment were carried, the duty would be cast on the central authority of fixing the place where a school was to be planted, or exactly the kind of school that was to be planted there. All that the Amendment contemplated was that it should be incumbent on the local authority to provide some efficient scheme of secondary education, having regard to the requirements of their particular district. The right hon. Gentleman asked how they were to discover what the requirements of a locality were, and he said that, with regard to elementary education, they knew the number of children to be provided for, and that, therefore, they could make the necessary provision. But surely the right hon. Gentleman could not have studied the experience of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act. The County Councils in Wales knew the amount of provision required, and they made that provision. The Act provided that it should be the duty of the Joint Education Committee to make a scheme, and that Act had been in operation for thirteen years, with the consent of both parties, and with the support of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dartford, without the least friction or difficulty having arisen. The localities were simply consulted as to the number of children to be provided for, and on that information, abundant provision was made for secondary education, and there

  1477
  was no difficulty whatever. It was no use arguing abstract propositions in the air, when they had an experience of that kind at their own doors. Again, in Switzerland, Germany, and the United States the local authorities knew what provision to make. It was not a question as to whether the central authority should do the work of secondary education, but whether the central authority should compel the local authorities to do it. It was quite open to a local authority to say that they were making adequate provision, and the central authority could then judge as to whether such provision was, or was not, adequate. There had been a great deal of argument from the First Lord of the Treasury, and the Vice-President of the Council, against compelling local authorities, and the First Lord of the Treasury asked how they were going to do it; he even thought the right hon. Gentleman went to the extent of saying that it could not be done. He did not think that the right hon. Gentleman could have his own Bill in his mind when he said that, because it was provided in the Bill that the local authority should maintain and keep efficient all public elementary schools. If the local authorities were to be compelled to provide elementary education, why should they not also be compelled to provide secondary education. The argument now was; Why did they not trust the local authorities? He would ask why were not the local authorities to be trusted as regarded elementary education. Section 11 of the Bill provided that if the local authorities failed to fulfil any of their duties under the Elementary Education Acts, 1870 to 1900, the Board of Education might, after holding a public inquiry, make such order as they might think necessary, and any such order might be enforced by mandamus. Was that trusting the local authority, when they were threatened with a mandamus. The argument about trusting the local authority was merely used for the purpose of defeating this Amendment, which would compel the local authorities to make adequate provision. He did not think that the right hon. Gentleman would have used that argument, if he had in his mind the whole system of local government in this country, and
  1478
  the relations that existed between the local authority and the central authorities. Take the question of drainage. The Local Government Board had power to compel the local authority to carry out every provision of the Public Health Acts. Take the question of police. The Home Office could compel the Joint County Committee to keep a sufficient number of police and keep them efficient. If they had all these provisions of central interference for the purposes of an efficient police, why not have it for the purpose of enforcing secondary education. If the central authority had power to compel local authorities to do their duty in respect of the Public Health Acts, he maintained that the central authority should also have power to compel the local authorities to do their duty with regard to secondary education. They had had the experience of Wales, where the duty was laid on the local authorities to establish secondary schools throughout the whole of their areas; and they had also the experience of England where the option was left to the local authorities. What was the experience of England? After twelve years, they had not yet spent the whiskey money which was originally intended for the establishment of secondary education. They could not altogether trust to the local authority without some pressure from outside, and, although they might be trusted in the great towns, it was not always safe to trust them in the rural districts, where the organisation of secondary education was as important, if not more so, than in the urban districts. Everyone knew the difference a secondary school made in an agricultural district. There was a case in Glamorganshire where it had made a difference in the whole character of the population, as well as in the quality of the agriculture; and when an attempt was made to remove that school, the farmers, instead of pleading that it should be taken away to an urban district in the interests of the rates, insisted on keeping it at a great sacrifice, with the result that there was a splendid system of education in that district which would make a difference for all time. That was an example of the advantage of a secondary school in a district. The best boys were

  1479
  picked out, and they had sound, healthy, sane minds to operate on. Those boys afterwards became the leaders of the community, with the result that it became more enlightened. He was convinced that unless the system were compulsory, and unless the central authority were empowered, not merely to recommend and advise, but to bring pressure, they would not be able to secure proper secondary schools in the rural districts. It had been said that the result would be to take children away from the rural districts to the towns. His experience, as a resident in an agricultural district, was that one of the things that took a population away from the rural district was that educational facilities were better in the towns than in the rural districts. Every man with independent means lived in a town, although if left to his own inclinations, he would prefer to reside in the country. He went to the town because of the greater educational facilities for his children it posessed. That was really the value of an Amendment of this kind. The towns could take care of themselves, but the agricultural districts could not. The right hon. Gentleman had the means of forcing a great system of secondary education on the country, especially in the rural districts. Why did he not use the pressure which was now used in regard to the efficiency of the police. That pressure was a financial pressure exercised by the Home Office, which said that unless the police were efficient the grant would be withdrawn. Why should not the local authorities be also informed that unless they had an effective system of secondary education, a portion of their grant would be withdrawn. They were really losing a very great opportunity, and he very much regretted that the right hon. Gentleman could not see his way to accept the Amendment.
  MR. BOUSFIELDsaid he thought that there was a very general agreement on both sides of the House, with perhaps the exception of a few members, that it was desirable that the local authorities should concern themselves seriously with higher education. That was the object of the Government in introducing the clause now before the Committee, which gave very
  1480
  wide powers to the local authorities with reference to the matter. The argument which had just been addressed to the House was in effect that as they compelled local authorities to make provision for primary education, they should also compel them to make provision for secondary education. But the cases were extremely different. In the case of primary education, there was not the slightest difficulty in compelling a body to do a thing, when they knew definitely what was wanted. They all knew the minimum which it was desired that every child should learn, and it was, therefore, perfectly easy to say to a I local authority: You must make provision that all children in your district shall learn so and so. But secondary education was of so wide a range that it must vary in every case, according to the needs of the locality, the number of students presenting themselves, and half a dozen other different circumstances; and therefore it would be absolutely impossible to say in any particular district what they wished to compel the local authority to do. They had heard during the debate of hundreds of things which might be done under the clause, from continuation schools on the one hand to training colleges on the other. It was all very well to give power to do these things, but when they came to compulsion they should define that which they intended to compel the authorities to do. The Amendment had served a most useful purpose in bringing the matter definitely to a head, but it would be a quite impracticable and inefficient one, because it would be absolutely impossible, having regard to its frame work, to turn this Clause into a mandatory Clause. They had the widest possible language in the Clause, as the powers under it were defined in a negative way. It did not say what the local authorities would be given power to do, except in the sense that they were given power to do anything they liked with reference to education other than elementary education. Those were very wide powers, which would be ample to; cover all the varying needs of the different neighbourhoods to be dealt with; and they were all very glad that the Government had seen their way to insert such powers in the Bill. The

  1481
  Government could not possibly concede the Amendment, and he thought they had met its object in a very generous spirit by the Clause as it stood He was going to make one suggestion, which he did not know whether the Government would be able to assent to or not. While it was desirable to trust the local authorities to carry out the power to be given to them under the Clause, there were a certain number of local authorities who would possibly pass over the Clause altogether, or give very little attention to it. That was possible, but he did not think it was at all probable, after the experience they had had in regard to technical education. The Clause might, however, be overlooked, and there was nothing to draw the attention of the local authorities to it. If they could insert words that the local authorities "shall inquire into and may" supply education other than elementary, that would impose a duty on them while leaving them a very freehand; and it would indicate to them that they would be expected to concern themselves in the matter. If the Amendment were accepted, it would throw the whole Clause out of gear, as they would have to cut down the ample powers given in the Clause, because they could not make it mandatory to exercise them. The words he proposed would be useful as directing the attention of the local authorities to the matter, and he ventured to suggest them as an intermediate course. It was absurd to contend that secondary education would be in a worse position than formerly, and he thought that a great deal would be done for secondary education if the attention of the local authorities were directed to the matter in the manner he had suggested.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: May I say that if it would produce general harmony on both sides of the House to make the Clause less neutral in character, as my hon. friend now suggests, and to direct the attention of the local authorities to the needs and problems of secondary education, I should be prepared to accept—I will not say my hon. friend's words, because I could not accept absolutely mandatory words—but words of an analogous character. If
  1482
  I had any indication that peace would be produced by such a solution, I should be prepared to move such words.
  MR. LAWSON WALTONsaid the concession of the First Lord of the Treasury was one of enormous importance. As to the construction put upon the Clause, his hon. friend the Member for North Hackney had endeavoured to reconcile the versions which the right hon. Gentleman had given of it, and his hon. friend had the sympathy of every legal member of the Committee in his endeavour. The right hon. Gentleman said that the Clause meant that it was the duty of the secondary authority to provide such means for secondary education as it should deem fit. In the words now proposed, the duty was imposed on the educational authority to take into consideration the need of secondary education in its particular district, to determine that in a detached and impartial spirit, and having determined that question, then a duty arose which became a duty cognisable by the law, and enforcible in the ordinary course. The right hon. Gentleman knew very well that this was a form of Clause with which they were perfectly familiar in legislation. The right hon. Gentleman was perhaps aware that the Metropolis was drained under a Clause of this character. Under the Metropolis Management Act it was provided that the drainage of London should be carried on in such a way and by such means as would commend themselves to the responsible authority. Was the Clause before the Committee framed in such a spirit. It was an enabling Clause, with a limitation; but there was no sort of duty of any kind cast upon 'the educational authority to take any matter into their consideration. It simply enabled the educational authority, if they thought well to entertain the subject, to give effect to their views, if they chanced to have formed them. There was no duty imposed on them to make any inquiry, or to come to any conclusion, or to give effect in any way to the Clause. He could not in the least understand the difficulty the right hon. Gentleman had in giving effect to the obligatory words of the Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman said that the

  1483
  result of such a provision would be that they would formulate a cast-iron system which would be administered without any discrimination by the Education Department, and would apply to the whole country alike. The answer to that argument was to be found in Clause 11. Under that Clause there was machinery by means of which local opinion could be ascertained by inquiry, and effect given to it. The Board of Education were charged with the duty of enforcing the obligations imposed by the Act, and might direct a public inquiry to be held, and after such inquiry they were empowered to make such order as they might think necessary and that order might be enforced by a mandamus. That was very elaborate and complicated machinery, which was quite sufficient to prevent undue effect being given to imperative language, if it were introduced into the Clause. Suppose they put in "shall" instead of "may," and that after a public inquiry it was reported to the Education Department that a particular Committee had not taken the subject of secondary education into consideration at all, but had arrived at a conclusion that the whole of the money should be devoted to reducing the rates. He was putting an improbable case, but assuming that such an intractable spirit existed. Under the Clause as it stood, all the benefits of the Act in regard to secondary education would be rendered nugatory by a spirit of resistance such as he had indicated. The First Lord of the Treasury said that if "shall" were put in it would provoke resistance, that it would be taken as a challenge, and that friction and a dead lock would result. But the right hon. Gentleman would not have the smallest difficulty. He would only have to dispatch a Commissioner to hold a local inquiry and ascertain the views not only of the County Council, but of the most enlightened section of the community, and, even then, under Clause 11, the right hon. Gentlemen would have ample discretion. Supposing the right hon. Gentleman did not make an order the status quo would continue. If he did make an order, there was ample machinery by which it could be enforced. In his opinion the right hon. Gentleman's apprehension of mandatory language was utterly unfounded. He could not conceive a case in which effect would be given to mandatory language
  1484
  which was not a case in which justice demanded that something should be done in the interests of the locality. He did not wish to meet the concession of the right hon. Gentleman in any hostile spirit, because it appeared to him to be an enormous advantage, to those who supported the Amendment. It was an immense step as compared with the Clause as it stood, which imposed no duty of any sort, but simply enabled the local authority to carry on secondary education if they thought proper, and with any restrictions they liked. He thought that the right hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment might well accept the concession.
  SIR W. HART DYKEsaid he was sure no one could complain of the tone in which the debate had been carried on They were really discussing a very intricate, and to his mind, very difficult problem, and they all wished that the Bill should become operative as soon as possible. He would make an appeal to his right hon. friend. If the Clause could not be made compulsory, there was surely no harm in leading the local authorities as far as possible on the right road towards secondary education. For himself, he should be obliged to support the Amendment unless some words of that kind were inserted; and he would do so partly on educational grounds, but also very largely on economical grounds. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen referred to the great evil which beset technical institutes and other educational machinery on account of the neglected condition of the students as regards education, and the right hon. Gentleman said that there was only one way of finding a remedy for that state of things, and that was through the medium of secondary education. He did not go quite so far as the right hon. Gentleman; but unless some system of evening continuation schools were established, they might be perpetuating for a very long time a very grievous evil in their midst. If they could only secure continuation schools throughout the country, they would have taken a very long step forward in the right direction. Taking all the usual grants for elementary education during the present year, he found that they amounted to no less than £8,493,000; and during the

  1485
  last ten years, allowing for the gradual increase of the estimates, they had spent no less than £60,000,000 on elementary education. What had they got for that? All who studied the question knew that there were not only thousands but millions of children in the country on which money had been squandered during that period, because they left the elementary schools at from twelve years to fifteen years of age. Just at the very time that their intellects were expanding, and when they were most receptive of knowledge, they were cut adrift absolutely and entirely from school life. That was a waste of brain power and money which was simply deplorable in a practical nation such as we pretended to be. Therefore, unless some method were found to strengthen the language of the Clause, he should vote for the Amendment, because he thought it would give some assistance, at all events, towards getting rid of a very serious evil.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid that the observations which fell from the First Lord of the Treasury had, in reality, made that interesting discussion enter on a perfectly new phase. It was not, therefore, his intention to go over the ground which had been so ably traversed by many hop. Members on both sides. The important matter was to agree on a form of words embodying the important concession that the right hon. Gentleman had agreed to make. He suggested that at the beginning of the clause there should be inserted the words "It shall be the duty of." The clause would then become a mandatory clause, and would follow the precedent of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act.
  MR. J. W. WILSONjoined in the appeal to the First Lord to accept some modification of the clause. He honestly believed that from an educational point of view the clause dealt with one of the most serious subjects in the Bill, and that if public attention had not been so much given to one of the later clauses, considerably more would have been heard of this clause in the country. He felt very anxious with regard to the prospects of
  1486
  secondary education. Having served on technical committees since their inauguration, he desired to emphasise very strongly the uselessness of spending the ratepayers' money' on technical education, unless good and well-maintained continuation schools were provided. When he first read the Bill, he felt that the immediate effect of throwing upon the local authority an increased burden for elementary education, would be to starve secondary education. Clause 2, instead of giving any indication of the intentions of Parliament, was very permissive, with two "mays" coining close together; and it seemed to offer every invitation to the authorities who had not made use of the previous permissive powers to abstain from using those now proposed. The usual practice of the House was to introduce a reform by permissive legislation, and then, after a certain number of years, when the great majority of authorities had availed themselves of the permissive powers, to step in and say that the other authorities "shall" use the powers. It would, perhaps, meet the ease if words were inserted to the effect that the local authority should apply the residue of the local taxation money to secondary education, and should consider whether any further sum was necessary. The clause would still be permissive, but a distinct lead would be given. If a limit was to be put later in the Bill, they need not be afraid to give a mandatory power to that extent, especially considering the large amount of work that was to be placed upon these local authorities.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that several, Members had looked upon the suggestion he had made as an important concession. He did not know whether that was the view of the Committee or not; but if it would be a compromise acceptable to both sides, he was prepared to introduce it in the clause. It did not, however, make the Bill mandatory; it did not throw on the Education Department the duty of declaring what were to be the adequate needs of secondary education in each county. He sincerely believed that these were not the steps which the Committee ought to take in the interests of secondary education. But it did do away with a defect which many Members felt, viz., that the clause was of too neutral a character. The

  1487
  words to carry out the general scheme which he would suggest were, if generally acceptable—
  "The local authority shall consider the needs and take such steps as may seem desirable to aid the supply of education other, than elementary."
  DR. MACNAMARA: "To supply or aid the supply? "
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he would be quite ready to agree to that. It was not intended to go the length desired by some hon. Members, but he offered the suggestion in the interests of harmony between both sides of the House. This was not a Party question which raised any of the unhappy and bitter controversies that some parts of the Bill raised, and if the Amendment would produce peace he would be prepared to introduce those words.
  Mr. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid that he thought the words, though not going so far as he should desire, went a very long way, and, if the right hon. Gentleman would introduce the words he had suggested, he would be willing to withdraw his Amendment.
  Mr. YOXALLhoped the Committee would adopt the words suggested by the First Lord. If the local authorities had to consider the existing supply they would very likely do much more than was in the draft of the Bill.
  EARL PERCYdid not wish to disturb the harmony of the compromise, but he could not possibly vote in its favour unless there were inserted some such words as "such as may seem to them desirable."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is the same thing.
  SIR EDWARD GREYthought that the words would improve the clause, but he did not think that they went far enough to secure the point which hon. Members really desired. He suggested that the Government, in laying on the authority the duty of considering the needs, might also impose the duty of drawing up a report, and submitting a scheme. In that way they would secure what they wanted.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURthought it hardly desirable to require the education authorities to decide too quickly.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEpointed out that in Wales it was not done quickly at all. There was a great deal of correspondence, and the Education Department and the Charity Commissioners helped very materially in the framing of the schemes. There was no friction, but it was two or three years before they got a practical working scheme.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsuggested that it would probably be rash to compel action on the part of the County Councils too early. He was also told that the early experiments of some of the counties in technical education had had to be revised, and probably it would be inexpedient to compel them too early to come to a decision on this matter. He, therefore, deprecated the suggestion of the hon. Baronet.
  MR. CHANNINGrecognised the spirit in which the concession had been made. He pointed out, however, that if a scheme was submitted to the Board of Education, the consideration of it need not be hurried, and the variety of treatment to which the Vice-President had alluded could be secured. It was of the utmost importance that in the co-ordination and development of secondary education the fullest consideration must be given to private schools, endowed and other schools, from all points of view. This could only be secured by the making of a scheme, and any reasonable time could be fixed by the Board of Education for carrying it out.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLdeeply regretted the action of the Government in departing from the Bill of 1900, and inserting "may" instead of "shall."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That is the other "may."
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid the action of the Government created bitter disappointment, and, therefore, he was glad that this important concession had been made. He believed great good would

  1489
  be done by the proposed alteration. Many districts had suffered far too long from the want of education, and he hoped that the Bill, and particularly this clause, would be so worded that many of the evils at present existing would be removed.
  MR. M'KENNAsaid that if the Amendment were withdrawn and the words suggested by the First Lord inserted, he would be precluded from moving an Amendment of which he had given notice. He felt that he must reserve his right, and, therefore he submitted that the First Lord, could not get more than the substitution of "shall" for "may."
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid in that case he would have to adhere to the word "may." He had no desire to press the Bill through without compromise, but he could not be expected to make an alteration which he honestly thought would not be in the interests of education. He had offered a compromise, and he still hoped it would be accepted.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was prepared to meet any reasonable compromise; but he thought the compromise suggested was simply a circumlocutory way of saying "may." It really made no difference at all. What possible objection could there be to adopting the Welsh scheme? That had worked very well. A scheme had to be submitted. In the meantime the funds accumulated, and they were used for the purpose of building schools. The difficulty now was that there was no building fund, and they could not provide the schools out of a twopenny rate. If the funds were allowed to accumulate they would be able to build the schools in poor districts where secondary education would be of use. This clause ought not to be controversial, and seeing that there were hon. Members on both sides who were simply desirous of advancing the interests of education, he thought the Government might meet hon. Members on the Opposition side by consenting to the withdrawal of this Amendment, which would save time.
  SIR EDWARD GREYasked if it would be in order on the Amendment inserting "shall," to discuss the importance of framing a scheme. Would it be in order to have the debate continued on that Amendment?
  THE CHAIRMAN: The Amendment which the hon. Baronet alludes to does not appear on my Paper.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: It appears on the top of page 25.
  THE CHAIRMAN: It does not appear on my white Paper, but in any case, the present Amendment must be got rid of first.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he desired to put a point to the right hon. Gentleman which was in the minds of most of them. They were all grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's concession, so far as it went, but the difficulty of it was that it left the matter absolutely to the discretion of the County Councils, and there was no certainty that the legitimate pressure of another authority would be forthcoming. On every side there was a disposition to dispose of the difficulty in an amicable way. If the right hon. Gentleman would modify his Amendment, so as to provide that the Board of Education should require a Statement to be submitted to them, with a view to enabling them to make representations to the local authorities, it would go a long way to meet the views of the Opposition. The Royal Commission dealing with this subject recommended that the Board of Education should be enabled to require the local authority to take steps for making due provision for secondary education.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that as far as he understood the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion it would be carried out by these words—
  "The local education authority shall consider the needs and take such steps after consultation with the Education Department as may seem to them desirable to aid the supply of education other than elementary."
  The whole spirit of the Bill was a decentralising spirit. He certainly believed that the Education Department ought to play a great part in all these

  1491
  things as advisors, and that, he understood, was what the right hon. Gentleman desired.
  MR. CHAPLINsaid his right hon. friend began by saying that he was willing to move the words he had suggested if they produced general harmony. He was afraid, however, that they would not produce the general harmony which he desired. The effect of the proposal now put forward would be to make this clause more mandatory than it was at present, and for what? Simply to provide secondary education, and that at the expense of the rates and the rates alone. [Cries of "No, no."] He wished it to be understood that it would not produce harmony and that he intended to oppose it.
  SIR EDWARD GREYsaid that the real object they had at heart was to escape from the great danger of the County Council letting secondary education drop altogether. The Amendment proposed by the First Lord of the Treasury did not give them exactly what they wanted, but it did ensure that the County Council should take some steps. If they could not have anything else in he preferred to have those words, because they would secure that the County Councils must take some steps, and if they did not do all they wanted them to do, they must put pressure upon them to do more.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that it appeared that, if after consultation with the Education Department the two bodies disagreed, the view of the local authority of what was necessary would be paramount. That went further than the original proposal of the Bill and could not be accepted as satisfactory. The First Lord of the Treasury should introduce words which would provide that after a certain period of time the Board of Education should come in and have the right to insist upon this. They were still left in the position that the local authority could please itself.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsuggested that they should now close with the offer, and he wished to say a word from this point of view. Like some of his hon. friends who had spoken, he was the Chairman of a County Council, and he could assure hon. Members that although there were County Councils
  1492
  which would require screwing up to the mark, nevertheless, he believed they were the exception, and, as time went on, the great County Councils would rise to the level of public expectation. On the whole, he thought they had now arrived at a very sound compromise, and if they did not altogether agree with the compromise there were other Clauses upon which they could raise some of the points mentioned by his hon. friend. He trusted they would now accept the words offered, which would make a very great improvement in the Bill.
  EARL PERCYsaid he could not accept the new form of compromise which seemed to him to infringe a very important principle of the Bill.
  MR. TALBOTsaid that what they all desired was that they should make progress with secondary education, and it was rather strange that it should be left to him to defend the freely elected local authorities. He thought that their past history showed that they were fit to be trusted with those duties. They had done much already for Secondary and Technical Education—and he could not doubt that they would act in the same spirit in the future.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment made, by in inserting, after the last Amendment, the words—
  "Shall consider the needs and take such steps as seem to them desirable after consultation with the Board of Education to."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
  MR. MATHERsaid the object of the Amendment standing in his name on the Paper was to clearly define secondary education instead of providing for "education other than elementary." He desired that the education authority should understand that their duties were extremely important and of a very responsible character, namely, that they shall supply
  "Secondary, technical, and higher education, and shall provide for the organisation and coordination of all forms of education, including the training of teachers, within their areas."
  The right hon. Gentleman ought to give some attention to this Amendment, because it fulfilled what he

  1493
  had expressed as his desire that secondary education should become an extremely important duty to be imposed upon the local education authority. What they wanted in their country districts at the present time was that they should be provided with an education which would fit them for the industrial and commercial world, and for the great duties which faced them at the present time. He did not think it was sufficient to define this education simply as "education other than elementary." It was important that the new education authorities should clearly understand what Parliament expected from them. It expected that they should provide for all the stages of education, such as evening continuation schools formerly conducted by the School Boards, and higher grade elementary schools such as were under under the School Boards until the Courts declared it to be illegal, should be continued by the local education authority. But in addition to that there should be secondary education in the sense of a high school course to prepare for instruction in technical education in the true sense of the word technical; that was not merely night schools providing certain classes of instruction for artisans, but also facilities in all school areas for a systematic course of day instruction to those scholars who had passed through the elementary schools. There should also be provided high school training for commercial and other pursuits, so that students who passed through these stages might be made fit to enter the higher technical schools which they hoped to establish later on. Under the Technical Instruction Acts the local authorities had certain powers of rating, but he would remind the right hon. Gentleman that only £100,000 per annum had been levied under the 1d. rate up to the present day. That sum did not in any way touch the question of secondary education, nor did it adequately provide for technical instruction in the true sense of the term. He earnestly hoped that the First Lord of the Treasury would permit the words proposed to be inserted in the Bill. If the words he suggested were adopted, it would impress upon the local authorities the gravity and magnitude of the re
  1494
  sponsibility Parliament had placed upon them, but the words in the Clause would leave them in doubt as to what Parliament expected of them. What was wanted as quickly as possible was that there should be placed in the hands of the authorities all the resources Parliament could give them for the education of the people, so that they might be able to conduct the great industries of the country, and be capable of grappling with the great problems which were coming up every day. In America it was computed that nearly 1 per cent. of the population had received a college education. The Technical Instruction Act of 1889, with all its benefits, had imperfections, and it was not sufficient at present merely to follow on the lines of that measure. We must rise higher in the future, and if the words of the Amendment were inserted, the local authorities would be impressed with the importance of the patriotic duties they had to perform in providing for higher education.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 19, to leave out the words 'education other than elementary,' and insert the words 'secondary, technical, and higher education, and shall provide for the organisation and co-ordination of all forms of education, including the training of teachers, within their area.'"—(Mr. Mather.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
  LORD HUGH CECIL: Are the words "shall provide" in order?
  THE CHAIRMAN: Those are the words proposed to be inserted. They do not contradict any decision of the Committee.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid the Amendment in no way increased the power of the local authorities. All that was in the Amendment was included in the words in the original Bill, and when for general words they substituted specific words they ran the risk of leaving something out. If one wished to give extensive powers it was better to use wide general words than to specify the particulars which they comprised. As the Clause stood, it gave the local authority power to supply every kind of education

  1495
  whatsoever except elementary education. Then the hon. Member said it was necessary to put in words of this kind, in order to instruct the local authority as to the various kinds of education it might give. That had been rendered quite unnecessary by an Amendment which the Committee had just adopted providing that the local authority should consult the Board of Education. In that consultation quite ample provision was made to see that nothing was left out. The Board of Education having experience of what was being done by local authorities generally, would at once call upon an authority to provide a particular kind of higher education, if it were found that such provision had not been made.
  Mr. ALFRED MUTTONasked whether in defining secondary education as education other than elementary, the Committee would not be running into the opposite danger to that which they sought to avoid. Elementary education had not been closely defined.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Government had feared to exclude something which they wanted to put in by defining secondary education—for instance, such a case as that of a contribution by the County Council of Birmingham to the Birmingham University.
  MR. ALFRED HUTTONsaid [he did not wish to shut out any form of education. It was often argued by some that secondary education must begin when the scholar was ten or eleven years of age. Would the schools be able to claim assistance from the County Councils under the words "other than elementary" for children of ten or eleven years of age who were in schools formally approved by the] Education Department? He was afraid that money intended for secondary education might go to preparatory schools, because of the view taken of the status of the latter in a report issued by the Board.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he would consider this point.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid the aim seemed to be the same on both sides of the House, and the point was what words were to be used. He thought it was extremely doubtful if the words "other than elementary" stood part of
  1496
  the Clause, whether a court of law would hold that the training of teachers was covered by these words. His hon. friend proposed to insert the specific words "including the training of teachers." He pointed to the words contained in the Government Bill of 1896, as justifying the Amendment now proposed. He thought Parliament should bring these matters to the attention of the local authorities in order that they might know definitely what they could deal with. Either the words were entirely unnecessary in the Bill of 1896, or they were necessary in this Bill. The Amendment did not seek to exclude anything at all from the operation of the Clause. What it did was to call the attention of the local authorities to the matters they ought to direct their attention to.
  It being midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his report to the House.
  Committee report progress; to sit again Tomorrow.

  PAROCHIAL MEDICAL OFFICERS DISMISSED IN HIGHLAND CROFTING COUNTIES.
  Return ordered, "showing the number of Medical Officers dismissed by Parish Councils in each Crofting County during each of the seven years 1895–1901, name of the Parish Council, and the cases in which a cause of dismissal was assigned."—(Mr. Weir.)
  LOCAL TAXATION LICENCES, 1901–2.
  Return ordered, "of the amount received in respect of each administrative county and county borough in England and Wales for Local Taxation Licence Duties and Penalties, under The Local Government Act, 1888, in the year ended the 31st day of March, 1902."—(Mr. Grant Lawson.)

  COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS, 1898 AND 1901.
  Return ordered, "showing, for each administrative county in England and Wales, the total number of Electoral Divisions and the number of such Divisions in which the elections of County Councillors were contested in each of the years 1898 and 1901."—(Mr. Lough.)
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock