Commons Sitting of 7 November 1902

Preamble
The House met at Twelve of the clock.
ADJOURNMENT.
Resolved, That this House, at the rising of the House this day, do adjourn till Monday next.—(Sir Alexander Acland-Hood.)
NEW MEMBER SWORN.
Herbert Louis Samuel, esquire, for North Riding of Yorkshire (Cleveland Division.)
PETITIONS.
  CANADIAN CATTLE (IMPORTATION).
  Petition from Wednesbury, for abolition of restrictions; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Glasgow, against; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Wednesbury, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Enfield, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION IN TRADE.
  Petition from Wednesbury, for legislation: to lie upon the Table.
  SITE VALUES (INSANITARY AREAS).
  Petition from St. Pancras, for legislation; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  SUPERANNUATION.
  Return [presented 31st October] to be printed. [No. 367.]

  FISHING PIERS (IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 17th July; Sir Thomas Esmonde];
  382
  to lie upon the Table, and to be printed [No 368.]

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Royal Parks—Concessions to Local Authorities—Bushey Park.
  MR. CLAUDEHAY: To ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware that endeavours have been made by local authorities and others to obtain concessions of portions of the parks around London which have been refused; whether he is aware of the condition of the road along the side of Bushey Park which has been made over to the London United Tramways Company; and whether the exchange which has been effected by the Office of Works of a portion of Bushey Park against the land given by the London United Tramways Company is of equal value to that of the amount of land necessary for the London United Tramways Company to buy in order to lay down a tramway without danger to the public.
  (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes) The First Commissioner is not aware that concessions of portions of Royal Parks around London have been refused to local authorities when it has been established that such concessions were necessary in the public interest and for the public safety, but concessions have been refused to private individuals. The road along the side of Bushey Park is under the control of the local authority, and the First Commissioner is in no way responsible for the condition thereof. No exchange of land has been effected by the First Commissioner with the United Tramways Company; the use of the strip of land to be added to the road by setting back the park fence will be handed over to the local authority.

  India—Cultivated and Waste Lands Statistics, 1880–1902.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state approximately the number of acres of land in each province of India which were under cultivation in 1880 and are now lying waste.

  383
  (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) I am unable to give the hon. Member the information asked for, as the agricultural statistics of the several provinces do not show the lands which were cultivated in 1880 and are now uncultivated.

  Rupee Coinage, Gold Reserve, etc.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state the number of rupees coined during the financial year 1901–02, the net profit derived therefrom, and the amount of the gold reserve fund which not long since was established in connection with the currency system of India.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) The number of rupees coined in 1901–02, including old rupees recoined, was 495,20,460. The profit that accrued to the gold reserve fund during the year was £415,100. The gold reserve fund now consists of £3,738,000 Consols in England and £175,000 gold in India.

  Indian Currency—Closing of Mints in Native States.
  SIR JOHN ROLLESTON: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether, concurrently with closing the mints in British India to the free coinage of silver in 1893, the mints of all, or any, of the native states were then or subsequently closed; and, if so, will he say in which States the mints have been so closed.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) Since 1893 the following native states in India have closed their mints and abandoned their local silver currencies in favour of the Government of India's rupee:—1894, Dewas States; 1895, certain states in Bhopowar Agency, and Western Malwa Agency; 1896, Palanpur; 1897, Bhopal and lesser neighbouring states; Kashmir; 1900, Radhanpur; Nawanagar; Jodhpur; Baroda; 1901, Jhalawar and Kota; 1902, Indore.

  Expenses of Indian Guests and Troops at the Coronation.
  MR. CAINE: To ask the Secretary of State for India, with reference to the charges incurred
  384
  in connection with the official Indian visitors in this country for the Coronation, whether the British Exchequer is to pay only charges in respect of the representatives of the Presidency towns and the Provinces; whether the British Exchequer will defrar any, and, if so, what charges in respect of visitors who were Indian princes or chiefs; and who will defray the expenses of the Indian military contingent, of transport of the troops to this country and back to India, and of the reception held at the India Office on 4th July respectively.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) The Treasury has undertaken to bear the whole of the expenditure incurred in this country on account of the visit of Indian princes, delegates, and troops on the occasion of the Coronation, including the cost of the reception at the India Office; but, in accordance with the course followed in the case of Colonial visitors, all transport charges will be borne by India.

  Indian Budget—Notation Employed in Explanatory Memorandums.
  MR. CAINE: To ask the Secretary of State for India if it is due to the altered significance of the symbol £, as used during the last two years, that while in the Explanatory Memorandum of the Indian Budget for 1899–1900 the capital liabilities of the Government of India exceeded the assets by £53,029,000, in the present year the assets exceed liabilities by only £1,240,000; if not will he explain to what is the reduction due.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) I understand the hon. Member to suggest that in the Explanatory Memorandum published in 1899, it was stated that the liabilities of the Government of India exceeded their assets by £53,029,000. This suggestion is erroneous. On page 25 of the Memorandum in question the balance of assets and liabilities was shown as follows: Excess of assets over liabilities in India, Rx.32,010,000; excess of liabilities over assets in England, £53,029,000. Converting the Indian figures at the rate of 15 rupees to the pound, the excess of liabilities over assets

  385
  in both countries on the 31st of March, 1899, is thus £31,689,000, or.£21,340,000 less than the figures given by the hon. Member. The improvement shown in the statement for the present year is not due to the change in the form of accounts. The chief items contributing to it (besides the normal growth in the value of railway and irrigation works due to expenditure on construction beyond the amount provided by borrowing) are the acquisition of the Great Indian. Peninsula Railway by the creation of annuities, according to the system explained in the footnote to the statement, and at greater length on page 10 of the Explanatory Memorandum of July, 1901, the creation of a Gold Reserve Fund from the profits on coinage, the increase in the loans made by the Government of India from their balances to corporations and Native States, and the increase in the cash balances in India and England.

  London Water Bill—Remuneration to proposed Commissioners.
  SIR JOHN COLOMB: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can now state, or before Clause 23 of the London Water Bill is reached he will promulgate information showing, the amount and nature of the remuneration to be assigned to each of the Commissioners by the Local Government Board.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I gave careful consideration to this matter before the Bill was introduced; but I felt then, and still feel, that it is impossible to determine the amount of the remuneration to be paid to the Commissioners until the extent of the ditties which they will be called upon to perform is ascertained. For this reason I am unable to give the information desired by my hon. friend. I have satisfied myself, however, that no undue cost will be involved.

  Army—Average Annual Cost of various Arms.
  SIR EDGAR VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the approximate average, annual cost of an infantry soldier of the line, a cavalry soldier, a militia man, an Imperial yeoman, and a volunteer.
  386
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The average annual cost of a private of each of the arms mentioned is approximately as follows:—Infantry of the Line, £52 6s. 4d.; Cavalry of Line, £58 16s. 9d.; Militia (Infantry) £18 12s. 6d.; Imperial Yeomanry, £19 13s. 6d.; Volunteers, £6 0s. 0d. The cost of infantry and cavalry respectively after 1st April, 1904, when the increased pay takes effect, will be £59 6s. 1d. and £65 16s. 6d.

  South Africa—War Losses Loan—Distribution.
  MR. CHANNING: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the distribution of the two millions to persons other than burghers who have suffered losses because of the war, compensation will be given to those British firms who declined to remain in Johannesburg and Pretoria after the beginning of the war, to help the Boers by continuing to trade with them, and were in consequence exposed to losses by confiscation of stock-in-trade and otherwise.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain H.) The only limitation with regard to those who will be entitled to participate in the grant of £2,000,000 on proof of war losses, is that companies and large firms will be excluded, in accordance with the principle on which compensation has been awarded in Natal.

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
  Clause 12:—
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY (Somersetshire, S.)moved to include Rural District Councils specifically among the bodies which should nominate persons of experience in education to serve on the Education Committee. He said the Amendment was supported on both sides of the House. It was felt by the Rural District Councils that they

  387
  were rather left out in the cold as compared with the Urban District Councils, and the noble Lord the Member for the Horncastle Division of Lincolnshire had, with himself, been requested to put this Amendment on the Paper by the Rural District Councils Association, a body which represented 200 Rural District Councils. If the hon. Baronet in charge of the Bill could not now accept the Amendment, he hoped that at any rate he would promise it favourable consideration.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 36, after the first word 'of,' to insert the words 'Rural District Councils.'"—(Sir Edward Strachey.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON, Oxford University)declined to accept the Amendment, urging that it was better to leave the words perfectly general, so that the education authority might be at liberty to make its selection from any public or other body it might choose. If it should be thought desirable by a local authority to apply to the Rural District Council, it would be able to do so as the Bill now stood. If not, the Bill enabled the authority to have recourse to such other bodies as it judged desirable. He could not help thinking that the Amendment was an objectless Amendment, so far as extending the powers of local authorities was concerned. In addition, it was open to the objection that it inserted the name of one body, but did not enumerate the others. He hoped the Amendment would not be pressed by the hon. Baronet.
  MR. BARTLEYsaid he felt very strongly that these local Education Committees should be as representative as possible, and he objected to this Amendment because he thought it would tend to limit the discretion of the local authority. One of the most important features of this Clause was that it gave the local authority the power of appointing the best committee it could obtain. In some cases, no doubt, the
  388
  representatives of Rural District Councils would be desirable, but he thought those cases would not be very common, and he was in favour of leaving to the local authority the fullest discretion.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLsuggested that the Amendment commanded the Council to perform an impossibility. How many Rural District Councils were there in the cities of Liverpool, Manchester, or Leeds? On the ground of number alone it would be impossible to give them all a representation on the Committee.
  MR. ERNEST GRAYsaid that to his mind this was a most ridiculous Amendment. It was as he understood it a proposal that the Rural District Council should have the right of nominating a person to serve on the local Education Committee. The result would be that if the majority of the Education Committee were to be members of the County Council as was already provided by the Bill, and every rural district were to nominate a member of the minority, either there would be more persons with a right to sit on the committee than there would be seats available, or the County Council must undertake the invidious task of choosing between different District Councils. This would set up friction which would do, incalculable injury both to education and local government. So far they had been careful to do nothing likely to cause friction between the supreme Council of the county and the Urban and Rural District Councils. Every effort had been made to secure that they should work harmoniously. This was the first note of friction, and it seemed to him that the Government had no alternative but to offer the Amendment the strongest possible opposition. Nothing worse could happen than that it should be carried.
  MR. JAMES HOPEsaid the Amendment showed extraordinary inconsistency on the part of the hon. Baronet who moved it. Members of the Rural District Councils were usually men who had great difficulty in finding time to discharge their public duties, and it was preposterous that the

  389
  County Council, when selecting experts to advise them in their educational work, should have to go to a body which was composed of neither educational experts nor leisured men, and the members of which would in consequence of the difficulty of having to go to the county town to attend meetings, abstain from putting in an appearance. He strongly opposed the Amendment.
  MR. HEYWOOD JOHNSTONEsaid he was much struck by the sudden cessation of talk on the part of the Opposition, after the Amendment had been moved. There must be surely something very remarkable in this unexpected silence. He felt sure the Opposition would not have been so anxious to divide so early had this Amendment been submitted from the Government side of the House. He did not in the least undervalue the work of Rural Councils, but it could not be said that the members of those bodies had much experience in educational work. The Clause, as it stood, gave ample power to the County Councils to select
  the men most fitted to divide them, and he had no doubt that among the Members of Education Committees would be found some who filled the position of Rural District Councillors.
  MR. SPEAR (Devonshire, Tavistock)pointed out that if Rural District Councils were given the right to nominate representatives on the Education Committee an equally good claim might be advanced on behalf of the Urban District Councils and small boroughs, and if the rights of both kinds of bodies were conceded, the Education Committee would be filled by their representatives to the entire exclusion of other representatives of educational bodies who would be specially fitted to advise the County Councils in this important work entrusted to them. Therefore, while recognising the reasons for the Amendment, he was unable to vote for it.
  (12.33.) Question put—
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 74; Noes, 117. (Division List No. 485.)

  AYES.

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Allen, Charles P. (Gloue., Stroud

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Runciman, Walter

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Brigg, John

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Shackleton, David James

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Burns, John

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell, James

  Lambert, George

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Spencer, Rt. Hn C.R.(Northants

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Lena, Sir John

  Thomas, JA(Glamorgan, Gower

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Lewis, John Herbert

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

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Lloyd-George, David

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Elibank, Master of

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Wason, Eugene

  Ellis, John Edward

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

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

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Perks, Robert William

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Price, Robert John

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Rea, Russell

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Sir Edward Strachey and

  Grant, Corrie

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Mr. Thomas Bayley

  NOES.

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Bond, Edward

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Atkinson, Rt. Hn. John

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Carew, James Lawrence

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Purvis, Robert

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Kemp, George

  Pym, C. Guy

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A. (Worc.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

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

  Lawson, John Grant

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

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

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Finch, George H.

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  MacIver David (Liverpool)

  Smith, HC (North'mb. Tyneside

  Fisher, William Hayes

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh W

  Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.)

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Malcolm, Ian

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

  Flower, Ernest

  Maxwell, W.JH(Dumfriesshire

  Spear, John Ward

  Forster, Henry William

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Foster, Philip S.(Warwick, S.W

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Greene, Sir E.W (B'rySEdm'nds

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Valentia, Viscount

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Gretton, John

  Nicholson, William Graham

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

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts)

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  O'Doherty, William

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

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Hobhouse, Henry(Somerset, E.)

  Percy, Earl

  Hope, J. F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Plummer, Walter R.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Howard, John(Kent, Faversh'm

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N.R.)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  MR. CHANNINGmoved to leave out "other bodies" and insert "educational institutions in or near the district not themselves subject to the control of the local education authority, such as universities, colleges of university rank, non-local schools, and local endowed schools." He said it would be observed that this Amendment dealt with the question of the representation of educational bodies in no sectarian or sectional spirit. If they were to have nominations from any bodies at all it was desirable to restrict them to such bodies as proceeded on broad national lines. He wished to point out that there were other bodies, such as trade unions and co-operative societies, which he had no desire to exclude. He wanted, in fact, to bring in bodies which sought to promote, the general welfare of the whole body politic. He regretted that they had not on the previous day an opportunity of arriving at some compromise as to the form of nomination. What he was contending for in his Amendment was that the bodies which should contribute to the membership of the local committee should be bodies of an educational character as distinct from
  392
  sectional or sectarian interests, and the Amendment was pressed upon him by those who were interested in higher education in Birmingham and the Midlands generally. The Government had intimated that the Board of Education would carefully weigh the claims of strictly sectarian bodies, and press those claims upon the County Councils. Now, one of the main objects of the Bill, as he understood it, was that it was to be a really educational measure, bringing all branches of education together; but the Board of Education, by pressing the claims of purely sectarian bodies on the County Councils, would be importing into the new educational machinery the very evil of sectarian strife and animosity which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, while in office, again and again protested against—the evil which resulted from the popular election of School Boards under the cumulative vote.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 36, to leave out the words 'other bodies,' and insert the words 'educational institutions in or near the district not themselves subject to the control of the local

  393
  education authority, such as universities, colleges of university rank, non-local schools and local endowed schools.—(Mr. Channing.)'"
  Question proposed, "That the word 'other' stand part of the Clause."
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.)said he imagined no one would object to the enumeration of the bodies which the hon. Member desired to see represented on the Education Committee. But he did not see on what principle of justice the hon. Gentleman desired to exclude any other institution, such as the Association of Voluntary Schools, from representation, They were going, rightly or wrongly, to place the denominational schools under the control of the education authority, and to insist that upon every board of management of the voluntary schools there should be a representative of the local education authority. Was it not common fairness that they should have, not a preponderating representation, nor even a numerically important representation, but at all events someone on the Education Committee through whom they might make their views heard? Although that was a perfectly sound view as regarded all denominational schools, probably it was of less real importance when they were dealing with Anglican schools, or even Wesleyan schools, than it was when they were dealing with Roman Catholic schools. There ought to be some one on the Education Committee to represent Roman Catholic schools in regard to any action the committee might take which specially affected those schools. To try to prevent that simple measure of fairness from being carried out by using such phrases as "sectarian" and "anti-national" was not very wise. He believed the Committee, except for the purpose of sectarian controversy, did not really desire such an exclusion, and he trusted the Amendment would be rejected.
  MR. BRYCEthought a strong case existed for the Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman had not given any reason why these sectarian associations should be represented on the Education Committee. No difficulty would arise in regard to the Roman Catholic schools, because, with sonic exceptions, those schools were only used by members
  394
  of their own denomination. He could not conceive that anybody wanted to injure them or to deal unjustly by them. Yet their case was always trotted out in the front rank of the schools as to which difficulty was likely to arise. He protested against the use that was made of the Roman Catholic case.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he thought that the case was strongest in regard to the Roman Catholic schools; but there was a case with regard to the other schools.
  MR. BRYCEsaid by Clause 8 they had subjected the denominational schools to the control of the local authority for all the purposes of secular instruction. Therefore, so far as secular instruction was concerned, the denominational schools were on a level with other schools. For the purposes of religious instruction the denominational schools were absolutely under the control of their own managers. No question could come before the Education. Committee which involved religious instruction, and, therefore, so far as he could see, the raison d'être for the representation of these bodies on the committee entirely disappeared. The object of the Government was to give them a double control.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No.
  MR. BRYCEsaid their managers were to have complete and absolute control over religious instruction, and yet religious instruction was the reason for giving them representation on the committee. It was an illustration of a familiar proverb—they wanted both to eat their cake and have it. He entirely failed to see the ground or justice of the right hon. Gentleman's demand. If the local education authority had been given any power to interfere with religious instruction, this claim to representation would have been well founded. But there was no such power, and the claim, therefore, fell to the ground. He saw no reason why any sectarian association should be given representation on the committee. Nothing could be worse for the good working of the committee than that certain persons should be put on it to be the champions of sectarianism. That would introduce into this new body an element of discord

  395
  which need not be there at all, and it was a very bad omen for the working of the committee, for there could be nothing more likely to introduce the party element and the germ of discord than the adoption of such a policy.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Committee will allow me to say one word in reply to what has fallen from the right hon. Gentleman. He talks in the first place as if the allowing of a single representative of a Roman Catholic Voluntary School Association in the district to be on the committee is to give them a controlling voice, or something like a controlling voice. [An HON. MEMBER: No.] At all events an important voice in the management of the schools of the district. That I understood to be the right hon. Gentleman's argument. But it should be remembered that in respect of these very Roman Catholic schools you have put, not one out of forty-five or fifty, but two out of six, who are to represent the local education authority on the board of managers. If that is not interference with sectarian education, surely he might allow the whole body of Roman Catholic schools in a district to send one representative to the Education Committee in case something should arise which specially affects their interests. Other questions than religious education would be of interest to the denominational managers. The very preservation of these schools is not a question of religious teaching, but it is a question of the greatest interest of the denomination, and surely they might be allowed to make their voices heard if any policy is initiated which would have a destructive effect.
  MR. BRYCE: But the Education Committee will have no policy. It will be the policy of the County Council.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Surely they might be allowed to explain or, at all events, to make their voice heard in the committee which is to advise the Council in these matters. But that is not all, although I think that would be enough. I think the fact that this Education Committee is to advise not only upon broad policy but upon other matters is
  396
  a sufficient reason for giving these schools some way of making their voices heard. But there is more than that. Let the Committee remember what the right hon. Gentleman has asked. It is that the education authority shall have the right to veto the appointment of a teacher. The Education Committee have to advise on that point. Is it not fair and commonsense that at all events before so drastic a policy is pursued the voluntary schools concerned should have some methods of explaining their views? I do really think that if hon. Members would approach this question in a more impartial spirit than the right hon. Gentleman has done, they would not attempt to force on the House or into the Bill provisions which would be inequitable in working.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)said he did not think the Prime Minister had quite fairly stated the objection of his right hon. friend the Member for South Aberdeen. His right hon. friend had never objected to allowing a Roman Catholic to sit on the committee.
  MR. BRYCE: I did not understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that I had done so. If he had said so I should have contradicted him. I have not the slightest objection to Roman Catholics being on the committee. I think it might be a courteous thing to invite persons of all denominations. My objection is to their being on the committee in the capacity of Roman Catholics.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he understood that his right hon. friend objected to a Roman Catholic or anyone else being forced on a body of that character merely because of his faith.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: To represent the schools.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: But after all it was a theological test, and no such test should either qualify or disqualify for membership of the committee. Let no man sit in this governing body with regard to his religious faith or sect. If the Government were anxious that Roman Catholics should have a voice in

  397
  the management, not merely of their own schools, but of the educational system of the country, why did they abolish the School Board? There were districts in which Roman Catholics were in a small minority, but one belonging to their religion got on to the School Board. Was not that a better system than the system now proposed? It was idle for the Prime Minister to curry favour with Catholics by proposing to allow them to become members of the committee. By the system which the opponents of this Bill wished to retain, Roman Catholics were allowed to represent their educational interests on almost every School Board throughout the country. It was assumed, because a body was more or less in the hands of Nonconformists, that therefore Anglicans and Roman Catholics were necessarily excluded from a voice in its affairs. That was perfectly absurd. The governing bodies in Wales did not exclude Roman Catholics. If a Catholic was willing to work for the general interest of the community they selected him without regard to his creed. In the county of Merioneth, which was as Nonconformist as any in Wales, they a short time ago selected a Roman Catholic for a teachership because he was a better man than the Nonconformist candidates. It was Idle to talk as if there was a dead set against Roman Catholics because of their faith.
  MR. HUMPHREYS-OWENsaid that in his county there never had been any religious difficulty at all, and that was not because the members of the governing body did not hold strong opinions one way or another, but simply because they were willing to work in the general interest of education. Of course they were aided by the fact that under the Welsh Act there was complete exclusion of sectarian influences. The non-sectarian character of the bodies contributed to their harmonious working, and he sincerely trusted that nothing would be done by future legislation which would infringe that principle.
  MR. EMMOTTsaid it seemed to him that the real difficulty about the Clause, as it stood, was that it would be
  398
  possible for sectarian bodies to nominate persons to the Education Committee who would be firebrands, and who might do a great deal of mischief. He noticed that the Prime Minister was making more and more use of the Roman Catholic case. It was a separate case, but he fully admitted, with the Prime Minister, that it could not be treated separately. He only wished that it could be treated separately. But that case should not prejudice the wider case. If these denominational representatives were put on the Education Committee, what became of the complete control of secular education by the local authority. The parents of the children attending the elementary schools elected the local Councils. While the question of religious instruction was excluded from the purview of the Education Committee, was it necessary to have these elementary schools specially represented on the Education Committee? He fully agreed with his hon. friend who moved the Amendment that the bodies he named were those most suitable to nominate their own representatives. He did not himself see that it was necessary to have special representatives of the elementary schools, although he admitted that in many cases it would be very wise if men of that kind were on the committee. But surely they were covered by the words "persons of experience in education." On the other hand, they did want experts such as would be appointed by the bodies named by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE (Somersetshire, E.)said that he thought the Clause should be modified in some direction. He had no objection at all to the County Councils voluntarily giving the right of nomination to other bodies which were interested in education, but that was a different matter from allowing a Government Department to force on the County Council the right of nomination in favour of another body against the will of the local authority. It seemed to him that the words of the Clause put it in the power of the Board of Education to force on the County Council the acceptance of a scheme which would give the right of nomination to a body to which the County Council distinctly objected. He viewed with

  399
  great apprehension the friction and opposition which was sure to arise between the Education Department which had decided views and a County Council which entertained equally decided views in an opposite direction. He thought it would be most unfortunate if there was a struggle between them, and that controversies on such delicate questions should arise. The position of the County Councils would be very uncomfortable, and even intolerable; and for these reasons he should like to see some modification introduced, if not now, at a future stage—some such limiting words as "where it appears desirable," so as to give the County Council the option to say whether these other bodies should have the right of nomination or not.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid he had an Amendment lower down on the Paper which substantially raised the same points involved in the discussion of the Amendment of his hon. friend, and he asked the permission of the Committee to make a few general observations on the subject. They had heard a great deal from the Prime Minister and the Attorney General the previous day and that morning, about the wishes and the position of the local authorities, the County Councils in particular. It occurred to him that it was a curious thing that the natural course had not been adopted by the Government of trying to find out from the municipalities, and the County Councils themselves what they wanted, for surely they were the best judges in this matter. The representative Municipal Associations, and the Association of County Councils had given no approval whatever to bringing in representatives of bodies unless these were educational bodies. The words of the Clause were carefully considered by both these Associations when the Bill was first printed, and when there was a desire to place the most favourable construction upon the words, some of which seemed to be rather vague, and they drew up a resolution in regard to the matter. The deputation which waited on the Duke of Devonshire was specifically of opinion that a majority of the Education Committee should be appointed from their own number. He was sure that if these mysterious words in the Clause had been explained in the manner
  400
  given by the Attorney General, it would have brought down the condemnation of these important bodies. However Conservative a body the County Councils Association might be, there was a division of opinion amongst the members that did not correspond with party. It was a division between the lay and the clerical mind which was far more serious than party distinction. He believed that the County Councils Association and the Municipal Association would resent having forced on them gentlemen, however eminent, respectable, and personally popular, who were sent to "roll the log" of some particular religious denomination. The Prime Minister had used an argument with the spirit of which he entirely sympathised, but he could not agree with the conclusion which the right hon. Gentleman drew from it. He said how hard it would be if a Roman Catholic or Church of England teacher were dismissed by the interference of the managers, or the County Council itself, and there was nobody to speak for the teacher, or as it were to hold a brief on the Committee to defend the cause of the denomination. Now, he contended that cases of that kind ought to be judged impartially, and the incriminated party ought himself to be heard. He could hardly imagine anything more objectionable than that when a case of a Roman Catholic, or Church of England, or Wesleyan school came up, there should be sonic gentleman at the table whose bounden duty would be to get up on the Committee and argue in behalf of his particular client. That was his answer to the Prime Minister. He regretted that the hon. Member for North West Ham was not now in his place, because he had told the Committee the previous day that what he desired was a system of representation which he found last year on a visit to Zurich in Switzerland. The hon. Member for North West Ham had told the Committee that his ideal was that the nominations should come from great educational bodies, as was the ease in Zurich. That was what was proposed in the Amendment, which might be called the Zurich Amendment. Let it not be said again that the Opposition were opposed to co-optation. What they were opposed to was nomination by sectarian and denominational bodies. They knew the machinery of co-optation

  401
  and were strong partisans of it. He knew gentlemen who had been originally opposed to co-optation, but who had been converted to it by the admirable manner in which men, chosen by co-optation, did their work. He wanted to ask the Prime Minister whether the meaning of these two sub-Sections, taken together, was that the committees should consist entirely of representatives of the County Council, and those persons nominated by the representative bodies, or whether the scheme also provided for co-option. Suppose the committee consisted of twenty members, and that the County Council only appointed one, were the remaining nineteen to be all id the class described in sub-Section (b); or was it to be in the power of the County Councils to appoint four or five representatives from public bodies, and the others by co-optation?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The second alternative is the right one.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid that that should be made clear in the Clause, because it was not clear now. He hoped that before the Report stage of the Bill was reached, the Government would carefully consider the views of the great municipal bodies and County Councils who, he was sure, did not wish sectarian and denominational interests thrust into their midst. They ought to be free from the unfortunate animosity that had done so much to injure the cause of education in the past.
  MR. BONDsaid he quite agreed that the kind of bodies the hon. Member indicated in his Amendment were bodies which might naturally have the power under the scheme of appointing members of the Education Committee, but these were not all the bodies which ought to have a right to that privilege. As an hon. Member who had had practical experience upon this point, he should like to state what took place in regard to the London County Council and its Education Committee. The London County Council was not obliged to admit anybody but members of its own body, but they adopted a very much wiser course, and while maintaining that a majority of the committee should be members of the Council they admitted an almost equal
  402
  number of other people. Amongst the bodies represented on the London County Council Education Committee were the London Trades Council, the London School Board, the Association of Headmasters, the National Union of Teachers, the City of London Guilds Institute, and the City Parochial Trustees who were concerned with the London Polytechnics. In addition to these there were two or three members appointed by co-optation. University College and King's College were also represented. The circumstances of different districts differed enormously, and it was useless to prescribe that what was suitable for London would lie suitable for a remote district of Devonshire, and some latitude must be given to the local authority and the Board of Education as to what sort of people should be co-opted. The more freedom of choice they gave the better, because different circumstances required different treatment, and in this way they were more likely to get suitable people. With regard to this sectarian question he did not know that it should have been raised at all. There might be districts in which the diocesan associations should have a nomination, but there were districts where this would not be advisable. He did not recognise that any particular denomination or association had ally claim, except under very special circumstances, to nominate a member of the Education Committee. They ought to trust their officials to behave like reasonable and sensible people, and to do their best to find in each particular district the representatives who would be of the greatest service.
  MR. PERKSsaid they had not all got the same child-like faith as to the manner in which this Act would be administered as the hon. Member. Religious difficulties had caused much sectarian strife in the past. This Clause appeared to him at the outset a very curious Clause to construe, and still more difficult to enforce. He understood it could be enforced by mandamus. The new construction put upon the Clause by the explanations of the Prime Minister had produced a very dark outlook. Take the county of Lincoln. The Prime Minister said it would not be merely permissive but obligatory on the County Councils to appoint even a representative of the

  403
  Roman Catholic Voluntary Association in the county of Lincoln. If that were correct, it was a very unjust condition.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: But it does not do that.
  MR. PERKSsaid he understood now that there was no obligation of this kind on the County Councils to appoint representatives of voluntary associations, and it was permissive.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: That is so.
  MR. PERKSsaid there were in the county of Lincoln not more than twenty Roman Catholic schools in the villages, and not more than forty or fifty Wesleyan schools, while there were 350 Anglican schools. Surely the Anglican and the Wesleyan schools would not wish to have representation except through the favour of the elected representatives. Surely the Anglican schools had sufficient protection by the preponderance of the representation on the managers board and the influence they exercised over the County Council. Why should they recognise the voluntary associates and diocesan conferences which in his county were remarkable only for the line of cleavage between the views of the laymen and the clergy, especially on educational questions. It was impossible to take up any report of a diocesan conference or congress in his county without seeing that they were constantly at loggerheads, particularly in regard to the administration of the Elementary Education Act. This exception was not wanted by the great Nonconformist Church of this country, who did not ask for it, and though there might have been some compact made between the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church to secure this exception, he ventured to say that this was a phase of the question which had not been disclosed to Parliament, and it had not dawned upon the electors of the country, and certainly not upon the educationists in the rural districts, to whom this Clause would prove to be a very objectionable one.
  MR. SHACKLETONin a maiden speech, said he wished to touch upon one or two
  404
  points in the Amendment. He thought there were other bodies who ought to assist in the work of the committee. If Government would allow the present conditions to remain unaltered, and gave the County Council the entire right to call in whom they liked, he would favour allowing the Clause to stand as at present. It was because the Government refused to allow the present municipalities and County Councils to have the powers they now possessed that he rose to object to the position they took up. If it was desired to include the special bodies mentioned in the Amendment, he would move a further Amendment that trades unions, and co-operative associations should also be included. He desired to give one or two reasons for holding that those two organisations should be so included. Take the case of trades unions. He was connected with one that gave ten free scholarships for certain branches of technical instruction, and was closely connected with another that gave every year thirty free scholarships, and a prize of 5s. to everyone that passed certain examinations. He was also connected with a co-operative society which gave a free scholarship to the children of its members who took advantage of the opportunities offered by the Technical Instruction Committee. He contended that those bodies had certain claims, but he did not trust the Government with respect to them. The reason was because he had in his hand a few words which were used by an official of the Government who had charge over a certain Department. That official said: "I must decline to recognise the union as intermediary or to receive a deputation which may purport to convey the views of its members." When a Government permitted any official to use words like that in connection with their trades union he was not prepared to trust them in that matter. He asked that the Government would permit the powers referred to to be given to the local authorities as at present, and said then be would support any resolution which distinctly stated what societies were to be brought into that Clause.
  MR. JAMES HOPEsaid he did not believe that in one case out of ten would any serious difference arise between the County Council and the Education Department upon the point suggested by

  405
  the hon. Member for East Somerset. With regard to what had fallen from the lion. Gentleman who last spoke, he t bought there were cases where the trades councils ought to be represented on the educational body. In his own constituency he thought it would be right that there should be some trade union representation. All he said was that the demand for representation by all these bodies on the Educational Committees could only be justified on grounds of educational interest. He utterly denied that because a body is denominational it might not also be educational. The denominational associations were working, and did their part, and took their place in the great work of national education. He supported the proposal on the converse ground that if they did not give this representation they would exclude the energy and zeal of large bodies of men, and estrange them from this great work. The School Board had, as a fact, through the cumulative vote, brought to education the sympathies of large bodies of men who worked harmoniously together, and if in the future the right of minorities to take their part in the system of the education of this country, which they had in the past, was denied, it would estrange some very valuable elements which our national system could ill afford to part with.
  MR SAMUEL EVANSsaid he thought the sound thing to do in this case was to allow the County Councils themselves, as part of
  their duty, to consider the claims of everybody, upon purely educational grounds, and in that way make provision for the representation of all persons interested in education. The objection to the proposal of the Government was that they were giving to the denominational bodies a status which they never had before: they would give them a power of nomination, which would never be taken away, and thereby give them a status, not as an educational but as a denominational body. The really sensible thing to do was to leave it to the educational body to exercise their judgment and bring in those they thought were best. It must be remembered that these committees would deal with secondary as well as elementary education. Up to now, they had been successful in excluding this denominational strife, of which they were all sick and tired, from questions relating to secondary education, but now, if these bodies were given the power to nominate persons to serve on these committees, they would introduce all this old strife into not only elementary education, but, for the first time, into the secondary system as well.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question be now put."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 158; Noes, 90. (Division List No. 486.)

  AYES.

  Aird, Sir John

  Carew, James Laurence

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Cavendish. V.C.W. (Derbyshire)

  Flower, Ernest

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Forster, Henry William

  Ark wright, John Stanhope

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A (Worc.

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Gardner, Ernest

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Chapman, Edward

  Garfit, William

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

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

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Graham, Henry Robert

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

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ryS Edm'nds

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

  Beckett, Ernest William

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Gretton, John

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Bigwood, James

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Bond, Edward

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Helder, Augustus

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Finch, George H.

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J.A (Glasgow

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred

  Murray, Rt Hn. A Graham (Bute

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Kemp, George

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

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

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  O'Doherty, William

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Lawson, John Grant

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Spear, John Ward

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M Taggart

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Percy, Earl

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Plummer, Walter R.

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

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter(Bristol, S

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Pryce-Jones, Lt-Col. Edward

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Purvis, Robert

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Pym, C. Guy

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

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh W

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

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

  Malcolm, Ian

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Maxwell, WJH(Dumfriesshire

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Middlemore John Throgmorton

  Renwick, George

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Ridley, Hon. M. W(Stalybridge

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Morgan, David J(Walth'mstow

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Harwood, George

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Allen, Charles P.(Gloue., Stroud

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Runciman, Walter

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Brigg, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shackleton, David James

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Burns, John

  Lambert, George

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Caine, William Sproston

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell, James

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Leng, Sir John

  Spencer, Rt Hn C.R. (Northants

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Changing, Francis Allston

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E)

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Thomas, JA(Glamorgan, Gower

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

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

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Edwards, Frank

  Moss, Samuel

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S

  Ellis, John Edward

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Wason, Eugene

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Perks, Robert William

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Pickard, Benjamin

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Price. Robert John

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Rea, Russell

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rigg, Richard

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone

  Grant, Corrie

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  and Mr. Wm. M'Arthur.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  (2.3.) Question put accordingly, "That the word 'other' stand part of the Clause."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 156; Noes, 85. (Division List No. 487.) (2.15).

  AYES.

  Aird, Sir John

  Garfit, William

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Allhusen Augustus Henry Eden

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St.Albans)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Ark wright, John Stanhope

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Percy, Earl

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ry S Edm'nds

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Gretton, John

  Purvis, Robert

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Pym, C. Guy

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

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Randles, John S.

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashford

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Helder, Augustus

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Bigwood, James

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Bond, Edward

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Renwick, George

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Brown, Alexander H (Shropsh.

  Kemp, George

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Campbell, Rt Hn. J.A. (Glasgow

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Carew, James Laurence

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cecil. Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Lawson, John Grant

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A. (Worc

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Chapman, Edward

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

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

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Spear, John Ward

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

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

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chiehester)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Lucas, Reginald J (Portsmouth)

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

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

  Valentia, Viscount

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Malcolm, Ian

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

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Williams Rt Hn J. Powell-(Birm

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

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

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Morgan David J (Walthamstow

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Finch, George H.

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Murray Rt Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Flower, Ernest

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Forster, Henry William

  Nicholson, William Graham

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Foster, Philip S.(Warwick, S.W

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Galloway, William Johnson

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

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Gardner, Ernest

  O'Doherty, William

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Harwood, George

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Edwards, Frank

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Brigg, John

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Jones David Brynmor Swansea

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Lambert, George

  Burns, John

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Caine, William Sproston

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Caldwell, James

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Leng, Sir John

  Cameron, Robert

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Grant, Corrie

  Lloyd-George, David

  Cremer, William Randal

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  410

  411

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Middlemore John Throgmorton

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

  Morgan, J. Loyd (Carmarthen)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

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

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Moss, Samuel

  Shackleton, David James

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Wason, Eugene

  Perks, Robert William

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Pickard, Benjamin

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Price, Robert John

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Rea, Russell

  Spencer, Rt Hn C. R. (Northants

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Mr. Channing and Mr.

  Rigg, Richard

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Henry J. Wilson.

  SIR ROBERT FINLAYrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause to the word "acts," inclusive, in page 4, line 39, stand part of the Clause,' be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause to the word "acts," inclusive, in page 4, line 39, stand part of the Clause,' be now put."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 157; Noes, 88. (Division List No. 488).

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nryEden

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gardner, Ernest

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Garfit, William

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St.Albans)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Atkinson, Ht. Hon. John

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

  Murray, Rt Hn. A Graham (Bute

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ryS Edm'nds

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Hain, Edward

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G(Midd'x

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Percy, Earl

  Bigwood, James

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Bond, Edward

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

  Helder, Augustus

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Brown, Alexander H.(Shropsh.

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Purvis, Robert

  Bull, William James

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Pym, C. Guy

  Butcher, John George

  Hobhouse, Henry(Somerset, E.

  Randles, John S.

  Campbell, Rt Hn. J.A. (Glasgow

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Rankin, Sir James

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.).

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Cavendish, V.C.W (Derbyshire

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Chamberlain, Rt, Hon. J.(Birm.

  Kemp, George

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A(Worc.

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Chapman, Edward

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm

  Renwick, George

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Lawson, John Grant

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Robertson, Herbert) Hackney)

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Bristol, S.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Durning,-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Fergusson, RtHn. Sir, J (Manc'r.

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

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

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

  Spear, John Ward

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

  Flower, Ernest

  Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Forster, Henry William

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

  Morgan, David J (Walthamst'w

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

  Tollemache, Henry James

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

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Tomilinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Valentia, Viscount

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir William H.

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Sit Alexander Acland-

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Allen, Charles P (Gloue., Stroud

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Runciman, Walter

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Brigg, John

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Shackleton, David James

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bryce, Rt. hon. James

  Layland-Barratt. Francis

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Burt, Thomas

  Leese, Sir Joseph F(Accrington

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Caine, William Sproston

  Legg, Sir John

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell. James

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Lloyd-George, David

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C.R (Northants

  Channing, Francis Allston

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cremer, William Randal

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Davies, M Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

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

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Moss, Samuel

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Edwards, Frank

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Elibank, Master of

  Partington, Oswald

  Wason, Eugene

  Ellis" John Edward

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Evans, Samuel T.(Glamorgan)

  Pickard, Benjamin

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

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Price, Robert John

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fitzmaurice, Loral Edmund

  Rea. Russell

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Mr. William M'Arthur

  Grant, Corrie

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  and Mr. Causton.

  (2.53.) Question put accordingly.
  The Committee divieded:—Ayes, 169; Noes, 91. (Division List No. 489.)

  AYES.

  Aird, Sir John

  Cavendish. V. C.W. (Derbyshire

  Gardner, Ernest

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Garfit, William

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Champerlain, Rt. Hon J A (Worc.

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

  Arnold- Forster, Hugh O.

  Chapman, Edward

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Bagot Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Colomb, Sir. John Charles Ready

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cox, Irwin Edward (Bainbridge

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ry S. Edm'nds

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

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

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hain, Edward

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Hamilton Rt Hn Lord (Midd's

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf're

  Bigwood, James

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Bill, Charles

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Haslett, Sir James Homer

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Bond, Edward

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

  Helder, Augustus

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hermon- Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Brown, Alexam H. (Shropsh.)

  Fletcher, Ht. Hon. Sir Henry

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somesset, E.)

  Bull, William James

  Flower, Ernest

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Butcher, John George

  Forster, Henry William

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Campbell, Rt Hn J.A. (Glasgow

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Carew, James Laurence

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Kemp, George

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

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

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

  Lawson, John Grant

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

  Parkes, Ebenezer

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

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Spear, John Ward

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Percy, Earl

  Stewart Sir Mark J.M Taggart

  Loiter, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Long Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Lowe, Francis William

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M.

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Purvis, Robert

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Loyd Archie Kirkman

  Pym, Guy

  Take, Sir John Batty

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Randles, John S.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Rankin, Sir James

  Walrond Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

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

  Maxwell, W. J. (Dumfriessh

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Mleysey-Thomson, Sir H. M.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Williams, Rt. Hn J. Powell-Birm

  Milvain, Thomas

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Renwick, George

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

  Morgan, David J (Walth' mstow

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalyb'dge

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn Chas. Thomson

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Robertson. Herbert (Hackney)

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Saekville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Harwood, George

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

  Hayne. Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc. Stroud

  Hamphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Runciman, Walter

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Homiman, Fredrick John

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Brigg, John

  Jones, David Brynmor (Sw'nsea

  Shackleton, David James

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Layland Barratt, Francis

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Burt, Thomas

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Caine, William Sproston

  Leng, Sir John

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell, James

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Lloyd-George, David

  Spencer, Rt Hn C.R. (Northants

  Channing, Francis Allston

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cremer, William Randal

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Thomas. David Alfred (Merthyr

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Berconshire)

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

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Moss, Samuel

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Edwards, Frank

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Elibank, Master of

  Partington, Oswald

  Walton .Joseph (Barnsley)

  Ellis. John Edward

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Wason, Eugene

  Emmott, Alfred

  Philipps, John Wynford

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Pickard, Bejamin

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Price, Robert John

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Rea, Russell

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rickett, J. Compton

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Grant, Corrie

  Rigg, Richard

  Mr. William M'Arthur

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  and Mr. Causton.

  MR. BRYNMOR JONESin moving the next Amendment, said that, as he understood the Clause as now construed by the Attorney General, it was quite possible that not a
  416
  single Member of the County Council might be on the Education Committee, although the right hon. and learned Gentleman said that it could hardly be conceived that any County Council would

  417
  adopt that extreme course. However even if the County Council did not adopt such an extreme course as that, it might appoint only a certain number of its own members, and ten or twelve from outside. It seemed to him, in regard to the nominees of the County Council, that it was highly important that they should be substantial persons, acquainted with the interests of the locality in which they were to act, and not merely educational experts. Unless a qualification of the kind he proposed were introduced, the object they had in view would not be obtained.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 39, after the word 'acts' to insert the words 'provided that two-thirds of the persons appointed by the Council shall be resident ratepayers in such area.'"—(Mr. Brynmor Jones.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that the Amendment followed the analogy of the practice of the Local Government Board. Where the Local Government Board had the power of adding persons to local bodies, such as Boards of Guardians, there was invariably the qualification that all of them should be ratepayers in the locality. The reason for that was obvious. It was that they should be persons interested in economy. Though the analogy was complete, he thought his hon. friend was right in putting in two-thirds, because the effect of a complete restriction would be to prevent the appointment of married women.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG, Bristol, S.)said that there was a substantial difference between the bodies mentioned by the right hon. Baronet and that which was now under consideration. The committee now proposed to be set up by the Bill was an advisory committee, the rating powers and the power of spending money being expressly reserved to the Council. If the committee had had the power of expending the rates, then the argument of the right hon. Baronet would have been a strong one, but in
  418
  this case in the committee was only to advise as to what was necessary in the interests of education, and in that case it did not seem desirable to limit the local authority, in the selection of gentlemen to act on the committee, to those who were resident ratepayers in the area. He maintained that the argument of the Attorney General was sound; it was ridiculous to suppose that any County Council, being given full powers to select an advisory committee as they liked, should only choose outsiders. Such a case had never existed, and he did not believe that it could exist. Why should Parliament make it impossible for the Councils to select somebody in their neighbourhood who, although they were not ratepayers, might be well worthy to be on the committee? He himself felt strongly that the County Councils and the great Borough Councils had shown themselves deserving of having complete confidence being placed in them. If the County Councils and great Borough Councils could not be trusted to select proper persons, whether ratepayers or not, to serve on the committee, they were not fit to be trusted with any of the duties to be imposed upon them under this Bill.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that the President of the Local Government Board had now discovered, after sub-Section (b) was passed, that the County Councils of the country were worthy of the most complete confidence. If so, why not trust them altogether? The Government, however, declined to do so, and forced upon them the nominees of other bodies which they did not want. The President of the Local Government Board had forgotten that it was not the County Councils which the Opposition were afraid of, but the foreign elements which were being introduced into the Committee. Under the Clause there might be placed on the committee bishops, prebendaries, and other people who had no interest, and were not resident in the district. What an extraordinary position for the Government to take! They said they trusted the County Councils, and yet imposed all sorts of limitations upon them. The only complete and absolute trust they had was in the sectarian managers.
  MR. ASHTONsaid he objected to the Amendment of his hon. friend, and for this reason. In the county of Chester they had not a very large number of bodies to which the County Council would like to apply to choose outside representatives; but just over the border, in Lancashire, there were many institutions such as Owens College, Manchester, or University College, Liverpool, which the might like to ask to nominate representatives. There were also great technical schools in the county of Lancashire, and in the county boroughs, which might well be asked to nominate representatives. The Amendment would prevent the Cheshire County Council from doing that. So it was also in the case of Birmingham. He thought it would be a great pity to limit the number of representatives from outside authorities to one-third.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid they were under a difficulty in discussing Amendments of this description, because they did not yet know what was to be the size of the Education Committee. A phrase had been used by the Prime Minister in the course of the morning in which, while deprecating the objections of the Opposition to representatives of outside bodies, he said that there might be only two or three out of forty-five or fifty. That was the only indication which they had had as to the size of the committee. He assumed that in many cases it would be larger, and in other cases smaller. He regarded the Amendment of his hon. friend as sound, and he was rather astonished to hear from his hon. friend the Member for Luton, that in the county of Chester they could not find enough ratepayers fitted to form at all events two-thirds of the Education Committee, and that they must go to Liverpool and Manchester, or even to Birmingham for them. In regard to
  the argument of the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Local Government Board, whose intervention in the debate he welcomed most heartily, that the Opposition did not trust the County Councils. Now, what they had said all along was that the County Councils ought to be trusted so fully that the educational work ought to be done by the members of the Councils themselves; at any rate, that they ought riot to go out of the jurisdiction of the County Councils for members of the Education Committee. Now, it was said that they did not trust the County Councils because they would not allow them a discretion! The right hon. Gentleman had argued that resident ratepayers were not necessary, as the committee was merely an advisory body, a chameleon body. It was quite true that it was an advisory body, and that it did not actually spend the money any more than it raised the rates. But it was the body that advised the spending of the money, arid unless its advice was thrown overboard, which would be the exception, it was tantamount to being the body that spent the money.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid he would point out what had been forgotten by the President of the Local Government Board, that the Education Committee was a great deal more than an advisory body. It might be an executive body, because by the Bill as it stood the Council might delegate the power of so acting that the raising of a rite to carry out the inevitable consequence of its action must be unavoidable. He thought it was quite unfair, therefore, to say that the Education Committee was only an advisory body.
  (3.23.) Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 92; Noes, 170. (Division List No. 490.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Caine, William Sproston

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Caldwell, James

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Cameron, Robert

  Edwards, Frank

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Elibank, Master of

  Brigg, John

  Chanting, Francis Allston

  Ellis, John Edward

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Cremer, William Randal

  Emmott, Alfred

  Burt, Thomas

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthan

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Moss, Samuel

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Newnes, Sir George

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Grant, Corrie

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham)

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Partington, Oswald

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Harwood, George

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Pickard, Benjamin

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Price, Robert John

  Thomas, J A .(Glamorgam, Gower

  Horniman, -Frederick John

  Rea, Russell

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

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Reckitt, -Harold James

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Lambert, George

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Rickett J. Compton

  Wason, Eugene

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Rigg, Richard

  White, Luke (York, W. R.)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Leng, Sir John

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Wilson, Henry (York, W. R)

  Lloyd-George, David

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Yoxall, James Henry

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Rumanian, Walter

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  TELLERS FO THE AYES—

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Shackleton, David James

  Mr. Brynmor Jones and

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawiek B.)

  Mr. Samuel Evans.

  NOES.

  Aird, Sir John

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lowe, Francis William

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Flower, Ernest

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Forster, Henry William

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Foster, Philip S.(Warwick, S. W

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Galloway, William Johnson

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

  Gardner, Ernest

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh, W

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Garfit, William

  Maxwell, W.J H. (Dumfriesshire

  Bam, Colonel James Robert

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

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

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Balfour, Capt. C B. (Hornsey)

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

  Milvain, Thomas

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Morgan, David J (Walthamstow

  Beresford, Lord Charles William

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Bigwood, James

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ry S Edm'nds

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Bill, Charles

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Greene, W Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Murray, Rt. Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Bond, Edward

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Bowles T. Gibson (King's Lynn

  Gretton, John

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

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hain, Edward

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.)

  Hanbury, Bt.Hon. Robert Wm.

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Butcher, John George

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington

  Campbell, Rt Hn. J.A (Glasgow

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Carew, James Lawrence

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Percy, Earl

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

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Higgin bottom, S. W.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Brim.

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

  Pryee-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Chamberlain, Rt Hon. J A (Worc.

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Purvis, Robert

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hutton, John (Yorks. N.R.)

  Randles, John S.

  Chapman, Edward

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cochrane, Hon. Thomas H. A. E.

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Rasch, Major Frederick Carne

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Kemp, George

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Colomb. Sir John Charles Ready

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Kimber, Henry

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Lawson, John Grant

  Renwick, George

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Lecky, Rt Hon. William Edw. H.

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Scalybridge

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon Chas. Thomson

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

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

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter (Bristol, S

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  422

  423

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

  Valentia, Viscount

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

  Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstron

  Spear, John Ward

  Walrond, Rt. Hon. Sir William H.

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

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

  TELLEIZS FOR THE NOES—

  Talbot, Lord K (Chichester)

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

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Talbot, Rt. H n. J. G. (Oxf'd Univ

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

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Question put and agreed to.

  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid he wished to move to insert "(c) For the inclusion of women as well as men among the members of the committee." He should have thought the committee would be agreed that the work of women on educational bodies was of great value, and that their presence on them was desirable from all points of view, but for some remarks of the hon. Member for Glamorgan yesterday. He wished to remind the Committee of the invariable good work that women had rendered on School Boards in the past; and considering that the Bill abolished School Boards, they ought to see, in doing that, that the opportunities of women for taking part in educational work were not diminished. Personally, he had had experience of the valuable work of women in educational matters, and he wished to vouch for the great assistance they had been. If it were necessary to add anything on the subject, he would quote the words of the Lord President of the Council in the House of Lords a few years ago, in which the noble Lord bore testimony in the most sympathetic language to the admirable way in which women discharged educational duties. When it was considered that half of the young people in the schools were of the female sex, and no less than two-thirds of the teachers in the elementary schools were of that sex also, would any one deny the claims of women to be duly represented on the bodies which guided and presided over education? Some hon. Members might be inclined to say, "That is all very well, but the Bill proposes to put them on equal terms with men in this respect." It was true that the Bill proposed to make them eligible; but did it propose to put them on equal terms with men? Would they have the same opportunities, and would they have the same likelihood of getting
  424
  on Education Committees as men? He thought not, considering that the Education Committees would be appointed by bodies from which women were at present excluded. Women were, rightly or wrongly he would not now argue, excluded by law from County Councils-and Borough Councils; and that made it very unlikely that they would have the same opportunity of getting on Education Committees that men would possess. They had had recent and extensive experience of the matter. On Technical instruction Committees women were equally eligible to serve with men; but what was the fact? Out of 115 bodies that appointed Technical Instruction Committees only 20 had appointed women on them. That was the experience of the last ten years on the subject most analogous to that before the Committee. The Royal Commission on Secondary Education pointed out some years a go that there was a risk that women would not be chosen on a body like that proposed unless some special provision were made to include them; and he ventured to think that the experience of the past few years had gone far to emphasise their words. Indeed, most of those who had considered the subject agreed that there was serious risk that women would not be appointed on many of these bodies, unless some provision were inserted to ensure their presence in due numbers. There would be no difficulty in doing that. It could be done in the scheme, as was constantly done in schemes drawn up by the Charity Commissioners, and in various other ways. He wished to say a word to the rather timid members of the Committee who appeared to fall into a state of exaggerated alarm whenever the word woman was mentioned. He wished to assure-them that there was no covert purpose in Ids proposal, and no suggestion that municipal bodies should admit women. He had hitherto been personally opposed

  425
  to the political claims of women, but for that very reason it was more incumbent on him than on other hon. Members to declare his view that in a matter. If matter such as that before the Committee women should not suffer any injustice. There were several Amendments to his proposal. He would welcome the Amendment of the right hon. Baronet opposite, but in reference to other Amendments he wished to assure the Government that if they would only sympathise with his proposal, the express form of the words mattered little to him, as long as they secured a due proportion of women on the committees, and not only made women eligible, but gave sonic security for their presence on these bodies.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 39, at end to insert, '(c) For the inclusion of women as well as men among the members of the committee.'"—(Mr. Henry Hobhouse.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted,"
  MR. BRYCEsaid he was glad the Amendment came from the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Somerset, because that showed that the question was not one which in any sense divided the Committee on Party lines. He assured Government that many Members had been recipients of communications which had convinced them of the width, depth, and strength of the feeling that existed, not only among women, but among men, in favour of some compulsory provision for the inclusion of women. It was not necessary that he should add anything to what had been said as to the value of the work which had been done by women. As the hon. Gentleman said with great truth, now that School Boards, on which women had done such excellent work, were to be abolished, and as they could not by law sit on County Councils, it was all the more necessary to make a very clear and emphatic provision for their presence on the Education Committees. Like the hon. Gentleman, he himself had never been able to vote for giving the Parliamentary franchise to women, but that was all the more reason why those of them who had always said that women could safely trust to the goodwill and fairness of
  426
  this House to make provision for giving them their due share in the public life of the country should endeavour to secure it for them in this women were asked to be content with the goodwill and care of Parliament, surely this was a case in which that goodwill and care should be shown. It had been his privilege, along with the hon. Member for East Somerset and the hon. Member for Cambridge University opposite, and with the hon. Member for West Nottingham, on his own side of the House, to sit on a Royal Commission on Education on which there were three ladies. They were not only among the most valuable members of the Commission, but their knowledge, their experience, and their practical suggestions bearing on education questions were invaluable, and the Commission separated with the feeling that they could not possibly have dealt with the questions submitted to them in what they hoped and believed was a fairly exhaustive fashion if it had not been for the help these ladies afforded. The remarkable change in the position of women in the last thirty years and the part they now took in many occupations and professions for which special instruction was necessary, from which they were formerly debarred, party through want of knowledge and special training, and party through old-fashioned prejudice, suggested an additional reason for supporting this Amendment. One of the most important parts of the work of these committees would be that which concerned technical instruction, and he thought women would be of the utmost possible value on the committees when questions concerning the employment of women and the fitting of women for professions were considered, ant that any committee would be lame and imperfect in the discharge of its duties concerning technical instruction, without their presence. For these reasons he appealed to the Committee to secure that women should be placed on these committees. It would, unfortunately, not be in order to secure under this Bill that they should sit on the Council as elective members. What was left to the Committee to do was to secure that they should be members of the committees. As evidence that it was necessary to make an absolute provision he would point to the Act of 1869, which extended to women

  427
  the benefits of educational endowments. That had been carried out to a very limited extent; and every educational authority would agree that much more might have been done by the Charity Commissioners in order to make educational endowments available to women. With regard to the proposal on the Paper defining women as "married or single," he suggested that the Attorney General should give an opinion as to the necessity for this Amendment, on which he looked with a little uneasiness hitherto women had been allowed to serve on School Boards and other bodies without any question as to whether they were married or single and it occurred to him that there might be a risk in introducing the Amendment, as it might by implication be held to raise a doubt as to the status of women who on other bodies served without question of disqualification by marriage. The Committee should not be content with any Amendment that merely expressed an opinion favourable to the appointment of women on these committees. They could not leave the claims of women in this matter to the casual benevolence of any County or Borough Council, but should secure their presence on the committees by making it a matter of law.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid with regard to the question put to his hon. and learned friend, he understood that the Attorney General was inclined to think that some method of dealing with the legal difficulty the right lion. Gentleman had suggested ought to be found, but this was clearly not the place to insert what would be more suited to a definition Clause. On the merits of the question he thought they were all of one mind—that women ought to serve upon these committees. He did not think anybody doubted that women had now an enormous share in the education of the country; and having that enormous share they ought to have some share in the counsels by which the educational policy of the country was to be directed. There was probably no district of the country where there were not either educational establishments specifically devoted to the education of girls and women, or where, if
  428
  there was none, the question of the special needs of women and girls would not come within the purview of the new education authority. The only doubt, therefore, was whether this should be made mandatory. He observed a somewhat remarkable change of front on the part of hon. Gentlemen opposite as to the mode in which County Councils should be treated as to the co-optation of members under this Clause. In the early part of the discussion, not to trust the County Councils to select what bodies they should have represented on the committees was regarded as perfectly monstrous, and an insult to, and a degradation of, those education authorities; now it was said they must not trust to what the right hon. Gentleman termed the casual benevolence of County and Borough Councils. Why they might be absolutely trusted when dealing with other interests, but might not be trusted when dealing with the interests of more than half the community, he could not imagine. If it were worth while to challenge hon. Members opposite on the logical consistency of their scheme of argument, it would be interesting to know how this could be explained. Speaking for himself, he would support his hon. friend, the only possible question, he thought, being whether the proposal should be in a mandatory form, or in the milder nature of a recommendation. He, at all events, could say that, as regarded any charge of inconsistency in this matter, his withers were unwrung.
  SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid the answer to the right hon. Gentleman's charge of inconsistency in this matter was that women had now an assured and honourable position in connection with education by their position as elective members of the School Board, and they were being deprived of that position by the destruction of the School Boards. The proper remedy would be to make them eligible to the Councils. Thirty years ago, or even twenty years ago, that could have been done under the Bill by means of an Instruction on going into Committee; and he believed the majority of the Committee would have been favourable to it were it now possible. But it was not possible; and 'that was why they were driven to this unsatisfactory way of dealing with

  429
  the question. Therefore, they were unharmed by the charge of inconsistency made by the right hon. Gentleman. With reference to his Amendment, he would not deal with it at length, as its principle had been accepted by the hon. Gentleman opposite. It was, however, quite true, as his right hon. friend had said, that the words he proposed would, to some extent, weaken the position of women on School Boards if they continued to exist; but they were to be abolished. Further, legal opinion was that the position of married women was more than doubtful. He therefore joined in the request of his right hon. friend to the Attorney General for his opinion on the question. His own view was that it was most dangerous to leave the question to the courts of law, remembering what the courts had already done in passing over the plain intentions of the Legislature as to peaceful picketting the Truck Law, and also in these questions relating to women. It was essential that what they meant should be made clear in the Bill. There was the famous case decided in 1872 as to the meaning of the Act of 1869, of which he was one of the promoters, giving the municipal franchise to women. In that ease it was held that a woman who was rightly on the register could not vote, because she had married before the election; and in face of the arguments by which that view was unanimously maintained by a very strong court, it was obviously most dangerous to leave the question vague. In the decision to which he had referred, the Lord Chief Justice said that it was quite certain, by common law, that a married woman s status was so merged in that of her husband, that she was incapable of exercising almost all public functions. The Committee would observe that the word "almost" disappeared from the decision of Lord Esher in the Sandhurst case, and having regard to the language used by Lord Esher in that decision with regard to the disability of women to exercise any public function, it would be most extraordinary if the Government did not agree to the Amendment.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY, Inverness Burghs)said the right hon. Baronet had dealt with the manner in which the Courts
  430
  had ignored the "plain intentions" of the Legislature. All the Courts had to do was to interpret the Acts passed by t he Legislature, and any complaint that they declined to go outside the four corners of the Act was neither relevant nor called for. There was enough doubt about this matter to make it proper that in the definition Claus they should say that marriage should not be a disqualification in the case of women or of men. It could be put in here, but as it was desirable that it should also apply to the managers of schools, he would embody the words in the definition Clause.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he regarded the question of what rights women should have in matters pertaining to the State as an exceedingly grave and serious matter, and a great constitutional question. This was a matter which ought not to be dealt with piecemeal. They had the opinion of the right hon. Baronet that women should occupy the same status as men, even up to the right of sitting in this House. If that was the general opinion, the matter should be dealt with constitutionally once and for all. In his view, however, in all matters of administration and government; men could do all that was required without the assistance of women at all, and in ninety-nine cases out of 100 could do it better. He did not say that women had not been useful members of School Boards and Local Government Boards, but those women still remained exceptions to women as a rule. Men had dealt with education for years, and women previously had taken no part in it. It j was now suggested by the hon. Member for East Somerset that it had not been dealt with properly because they had not employed women. The position was this that women where they were eligible by Act of Parliament had not taken any active part in educational matters.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: That was not the fault of the women, but of the men who were put on the appointing bodies.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSthought the hon. Member would not say that the Technical Instruction Committees had not done their work properly without the assistance of women. What it was now sought to do was to make it compulsory

  431
  to elect women on these educational bodies. He understood this was to be an open question. He had a strong opinion that they ought not to compel the local education authorities to appoint women to these committees, whether they could find suitable women or not. Women in general had no desire to enter into public life at all. There was a great deal about public life, and even about elections, that it was desirable that women should not come into, and to say in this Bill that they must be elected was taking a very rapid step in advance. He recommended the Committee very strongly not to make it compulsory.
  MR. BARTLEYsaid he should really like to know what the issue was. He agreed with the hon. Member opposite. I le agreed that women should he eligible, but if the Amendment meant that it should be compulsory that a certain number of women should be placed on these committees, he should vote against it. They ought to know what the! Government intended.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid, as he understood it, women were by law eligible for these committees. The question at issue was whether the local authority should have regard to the representation of women on the Committee, or whether the scheme should provide compulsorily for the inclusion of at least one woman.
  MR ERNEST GRAYsaid that, when this subject was referred to at an earlier stage of the Bill, he had expressed a hope that it would be finally settled that on every one of these committees a certain number of women should be included. It was absolutely essential that women should come into close connection with the working of the schools. There were many thousands of children under seven; many thousands in girls' schools, and many more in what were known as the mixed schools. How were they to get satisfaction unless the teachers could turn to some woman on the Board? On the grounds of health, and comfort, and sanitation in the schools, it was absolutely necessary that the teachers should be able to approach a woman and tell her the position. These matters could not be left to chance. He entirely agreed that, so long as the
  432
  appointing body was composed of men, there was a danger that the claims of women would be overlooked. He did not approach this question with any view to giving women more power, but entirely from the standpoint of the children instructed in the schools, and they had unanswerable arguments which, viewed from the children's point of view, showed that further needs would arise in future. He might mention the excellent work done by women in some parts of the country in that type of school in which women were trained, a type of which they knew far too little. The desire was evidently to make women more decorative than useful, but when women were brought into close connection with this work, there was a strong desire to make them useful as well as decorative. He should go into the Lobby in support of this. Amendment without hesitation, and he trusted all his friends, on that side of the House would support him. Some of the best friends children ever had were women, married as well as single.
  SIR JOHN GORST (Cambridge-University)said that the debates of the House had been conducted on the supposition that the new local authority ' would have the charge and care of schools only. As a matter of fact, it would also have charge of a large number of nurseries where very young children—far too young to instructed and who ought, not to be instructed at all in the ordinary sense of being instructed—were kept in order that their parents might go to work. He had as profound a faith in the capability of men for managing schools as the hon. Member for Mid Glamorgan, but none in their capability for managing nurseries. There it was absolutely necessary to have the advice of women, and a great number of matters connected with the health of the very young children in our schools urgently demanded more of the attention of women than they now received. Though reluctant to interfere with the discretion of the new local authorities, he could not object to this direction being given to them.
  MR. A. K. LOYDsaid that in the absence and at the

  433
  request of the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tewkesbury, he had consented to move tile Amendment standing in his right hon. friend's name. The Amendment proposed to extend to the nominated and co-opted members of the Education Committee the disqualification which already attached to members of the County Council. It followed the language of Section 12 of the Municipal Corporation Act of 1882 which, by the Act of 1888, was applied to County Councils. He understood from his right hon. friend that the Government, at first disposed to accept the Amendment, were subsequently inclined to think that eminent educationists, such as the Principal of Owens College, would be disqualified merely because the institutions to which they belonged were subsidised by the local education authority. The last sentence had been added to the Amendment to provide against that possibility. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 39, at the end, to insert the following words: 'Provided that a person shall be disqualified for being a member of and Education Committee, who, by reason of holding an office or place of profit, or having any share or interest in a contract, or employment, is disqualified for being a member of the council appointing the Education Committee. But no such disqualification shall apply to a person by reason only of his holding office in a school or college aided, but not provided or maintained, by the Council.'"—(Mr. A. K. Loyd.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that he was doubtful as to the proper line for the Committee to take on this Amendment. His first instincts had been entirely in favour of the Amendment.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: The first part.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Exactly, but without the rider which had been added to it many persons who ought to be included would be excluded; and with the rider, a very invidious distinction was drawn between institutions which were aided and those which were provided by the public authority. Therefore his whole feeling had undergone a charge with regard to it. He was now
  434
  inclined to think it would be better to rely on the fact that the Education Committee was a purely advisory body, the mere creature of the County Council, and that there was no popular election to it or the possibility of such canvassing by interested persons as had done harm in some cases. On the whole, the disadvantages associated with the Amendment outweighed the advantages, and he should recommend his hon. friend not to press the Amendment.
  MR. BRYCEthought that there was great force in what the right hon. Gentleman had said. There was one aspect of the subject, however, which should be considered. The Council might delegate large spending powers to a committee which might be entrusted with a considerable control of accounts.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEagreed there ought to be a provision inserted in the Clause which should prevent a contractor from being on a committee controlling expenditure. But he did not think there was so much difficulty with regard to the second part as the Prime Minister seemed to apprehend. His own objection to the Amendment was that it excluded the possibility of a teacher of a primary school being on the committee, and in that way it limited unfairly the discretion of the Council. The only teacher who could be put on would be a teacher of a secondary school, whereas it was much more important that a teacher in a primary school should be on, because most of the expenditure would be in connection with primary education.
  MR. A. K. LOYDsaid he felt sure that no such result was intended by the right hon. Baronet, who had drafted his proviso to meet the doubt suggested by the Government as to the exclusion of teachers from aided institutions like Owens College. This effect of the limited terms used to carry out that purpose was wide altogether of the evil aimed at, and if the case of admitting the elementary teachers had not been already provided, for the proper words should be used to include them as eligible for these committees.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that in regard to the county governing bodies in

  435
  Wales, it had been made an absolute condition that a teacher should be appointed, and the teachers amongst themselves elected the most efficient representative. He moved to omit the words "but not" so as to make the closing portion of the Amendment read, "But no such disqualification shall apply to a person by reason only of his holding office in a school or college aided, provided, or maintained by the Council." The Council ought to be perfectly free to put a teacher on the committee if they chose, no matter what school he was in, but at the same time it was very undesirable that contractors should be on a committee practically dealing with their own work.
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
  "In line 6, to omit 'but not.'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'but not' stand part of the proposed Amendment."
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONthought that just as it might be advantageous to have a teacher on the committee, so sometimes it might also be advantageous to have a clerk or some other official receiving a salary from the local authority. The real question to consider was the exclusion of jobbery, leaving an option to the authority to put a teacher or a clerk on the subordinate bodies, and he ventured to suggest that some form of words should be devised by which that would be possible.
  Mr. A. BALFOURsaid he was informed by the Attorney General that while the word "contract" was perfectly clear in the connection in which it occurred in this Amendment, it would not be so clear if they cut out the words "office or place of profit" or "employment." He thought, however, that the suggestion of the hon. Member for the Carnarvon Boroughs would meet the case.
  SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid it was the invariable rule of large municipalities not to have on their committees persons in any way engaged in contracts or work connected with the Council, or anyone in its employ. The first part of the Amendment would deal
  436
  with that matter, while if the Amendment of his hon. friend were accepted it would be possible to secure the services of persons specially acquainted with the work of primary education to the great advantage of the general administration of primary education. They ought, however, absolutely to exclude from the committee all persons directly employed by the Council or interested in any contract or work undertaken by the Council in connection with the administration of the Act.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLwas afraid that the Committee by drawing the line too tight in imposing disqualifications would exclude the valuable services of many competent persons. He cited a case where the chairman of a large technical school had devoted a great deal of time to developing and executing a plan, in addition to giving a large amount of money. He discovered accidentally that one of his subordinates had made, without his knowledge, a very small contract with one of the authorities. The result was that the chairman withdrew, and the town lost the benefit of his services. It would be lamentable if through the operation of such a provision as that proposed the Councils were deprived of the advantage of such valuable services.
  MR. EMMOTThoped that the Committee would accept the Amendment as amended by the hon. Member for the Carnarvon Boroughs. Such a ease as that mentioned by the hon. Baronet the Member for Wigan would open wide the door to any kind of jobbery. Hard cases might arise, but the Committee could not allow for them in a matter of this sort.
  MR. ERNEST GRAYendorsed the view just expressed, and hoped the First Lord of the Treasury would accept the suggestion of the hon. Member for the Carnarvon Boroughs. According to a return he had read, there were 600 teachers engaged in primary and secondary schools who had already been invited by the Borough Councils to share in the work of technical education. It would be a gross misfortune if the committees of the future were to lose the services of these people which had been so gladly given in the past, and the

  437
  Amendment of the hon. Member would provide against any such loss. The country having spent large sums of money in training teachers had a right to say that the experience and acquired knowledge of those teachers should be at the service of the State when required. There was also the case of the inspectors. It was the almost universal rule on the Continent for the inspectors to be on committees of this description. But they, being persons in receipt of salaries from that authority, would not be covered by the suggested Amendment, and to meet their case a further alteration would be required.
  SIR JOHN BRUNNERunderstood that there was no general law applicable to this case. What was wanted was to provide against any member of the committee giving a vote which would in any way benefit himself. He suggested that members of the committee who were not members of the local authority should have no vote, but only power to advise, and he had placed an Amendment on the Paper to that effect.
  MR. LAWSON WALTONhoped the Amendment, so far as its first Clause was concerned, would be adhered to in the form proposed. As he understood, the hon. Member desired to apply to the constitution of the education authority the same principle of qualification as applied to the Council which created the authority. Unless such a provision were made, the mischiefs that had been guarded against in the case of members of the Council would creep into the constitution of the Education Committee. The standard proposed was one that had been construed; it was defined in the statutes, and well understood, therefore if it was applied to the new body, no confusion or difficulty would arise. If, however, the Government listened to the appeal to allow more latitude in regard to the constitution of the education authority, new words would have to be framed and another interpretation given, and there would be a class of persons who, though not eligible for the Council, were eligible for the education authority. The Council would thus be able to put on the education authority persons who, by
  438
  reason of their interest, would be ex, eluded from the membership of their own body, and an anomaly would be introduced. That difficulty would be guarded against by the words as originally proposed.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURrecommended the Committee to bring the discussion to a conclusion by adopting his hon. friend's Amendment, subject to the alteration proposed by the hon. Member for Carnarvon. That seemed to be the general view of the Committee, and though he was quite ready to consider the matter again before Report, he was pretty sure it was the right thing to do.
  Amendment to proposed Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
  MR. PLUMMER (Newcastle-on-Tyne)moved the insertion of a new sub-Section—
  "(e) For the appointment, if desired, of members of School Boards existing at the time of the passing of this Art as members of time first Committee."
  He could conceive of only two objections being urged against the proposal— first, that owing to its non-compulsory character it was valueless; and, secondly, that owing to the fact that the suggested course would be almost invariably followed, it was unnecessary. He contended, however, that the provision was neither so valueless nor unnecessary as it might at first sight appear. As to its general desirability, he thought there could be no two opinions. No one could deny the desirability of the experience of the past being taken advantage of in the operation, of the future. To those who Viewed with no little regret the fact that the uniformity and co-ordination required by the Bill involved the extinction of the School Boards in the large cities, it would be some compensation if they could feel sure that the services of the experienced men who had been members of those Boards could be utilised by the new bodies about to be created. He trusted that the Amendment would have the effect of causing the local education authority to include in their scheme some members of the existing School Boards, and, wherever possible, lady members. It would be in the nature of a suggestion to the local authority to take

  439
  that course. He believed County and Borough Councils would in many cases be anxious to avail themselves of this experience in a twofold way. In selecting members of their own body they would, wherever possible, choose those who had had experience of School Board work in the past, and, in selecting the additions to the Education Committees, they might appoint those who have the present experience. In this way the transfer would be effected with as little interruption as possible, and the new bodies would be kept in touch with the whole staff of the existing School Board. To the teachers and others there would then appear on the Education Committees, if not old friends with new faces, at anyrate old friends in new places, and the change would be made with as little friction as possible to the great advantage both of education and of the children and of all concerned. The Amendment was limited to the constitution of the Committee in the first instance, and in no way tied the hands of the local authorities in the future. Moreover, its acceptance would show that the charge sometimes levelled against hon. Members on that side, of hostility to School Boards, was not justified. He had always declared that School Boards, as a rule had done their work well. Where they had come in conflict with public opinion was in a few cases in large towns by exceeding their duty, and in not a few cases in country districts by too often neglecting their
  duty. But it was one thing to affirm that they had on the whole clone their work well, and another to approve the continuance of an educational system under which, financially, the schools educating more than half the children of the country had in the past been unduly handicapped. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "After the words last inserted, to insert the words, '(e) For the appointment (if desirable) of members of School Boards existing at the time of the passing of this Act as members of the first committee.'"—(Mr. Plummer.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think the Amendment of my hon. friend would be an improvement, and we are prepared to adopt it.
  MR. CORRIE GRANTmoved to leave out the words "if desirable," so as to make it mandatory on the County Councils to appoint members of the School Boards.
  (5.3.) Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
  "To leave out the words 'if desirable.'"—(Mr. Corric Grant.)
  Question put, "That the words proposed to he left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 185; Noes, 93. (Division List No. 491.)

  AYES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Campbell, Rt Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Aird, Sir John

  Carew, James Lawrence

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

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

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cavendish, V.C. W. (Derbyshire

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J.(Birm.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Worc.

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Baird, john George Alexander

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Flower, Ernest

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

  Chapman, Edward

  Forster, Henry William

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Charrington, Spencer

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Churchill, Winston

  Gardner, Ernest

  Banbury, Frederick George

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

  Garfit, William

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Beresford, Lord Charles William

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredrick

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

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

  Bignold, Arthur

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Bigwood, James

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Bill, Charles

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Dixon- Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bond, Edward

  Doughty, George

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

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

  Brown, Alexander H (Shropsh.

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bull, William James

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Butcher, John George

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Hain, Edward

  Malcolm, Ian

  Renwick, George

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Staly bridge

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Massey. Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Maxwell. WJH (Dumfriesshire

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Rolleston, Sir John E. L.

  Haslett, Sir James Homer

  Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Hay, Hon. Clause George

  Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Helder, Augustus

  Milvain, Thomas

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone. W.)

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Higgin bottom, S. W.

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

  Morgan, David J (Walthamstow

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Morrison, James Archibald

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

  Horner, Frederick William

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Spear, John Ward.

  Hutton John (Yorks, N. R.)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Stewart, Sir Mark, J M'Taggart

  Kemp, George

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Nicol Donald Ninian

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

  Kimber, Henry

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

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Orr-Ewing. Charles Lindsay

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Law, Anderew Boner (Glasgow)

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lawson, John Grant

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington

  Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir William H.

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Percy, Earl

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pierpoint, Robert

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

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E. (N otts

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Pryce-Jones. Lt.-Col. Edward

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

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

  Purvis, Robert

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

  Lowe, Francis, William

  Randles, John S.

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Lowther, C. (Cumb, Eskdale)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries)

  Allen, Charles P (Gloue, Stroud

  Harmsworth, Leicester

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Harwood, George

  Rigg, Richard

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hemphill, Ht. Hon. Charles H.

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Brigg, John

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Runciman, Walter

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Burns, John

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Shackleton, David James

  Burt, Thomas

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Caine, William Sproston

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Caldwell, James

  Leng, Sir John

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Cameron, Robert

  Lloyd-George David

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  M'Arthur, William Cornwall

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Spencer, Rt. Hn C.R. (Northants

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cremer, William Randal

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Morley, Charles (Brecoushire)

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

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

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Moss, Samuel

  Tervelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Norman, Henry

  Wason, Eugene

  Edwards, Frank

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Partington, Oswald

  White, Luke (York. E.R.)

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Philipps, John Wynford

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

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Pickard, Benjamin

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Price, Robert John

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. Corrie Grant and Mr.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

  Rea, Russell

  John Ellis.

  Words inserted
  MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the

  443
  Question 'That the words of the Clause to the word "made," inclusive, in page 5, line 15, stand part of the Clause' be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause to the
  word "made," inclusive, in page 5, in line 15, stand part of the Clause' be now put."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 179; Noes, 90. (Division List No. 492.)

  AYES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Aird, Sir John

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

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

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

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

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

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Pemberton, John S. G.

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

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Percy, Earl

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Balfour, Rt Hn Generald W. (Leeds

  Hain, Ed ward

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Beresford, Lord Chas. William

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Pryce-Jones, IA.-Col. Edward

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Purvis, Robert

  Bignold, Arthur

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Randles, John S.

  Bigwood, James

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bill, Charles

  Helder, Augustus

  Rasch, Major Frederick Carne

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Bond, Edward

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Bull, William James

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Renwick, George

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Horner, Frederick William

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hutton, John (Yorks. N.R.)

  Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson

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

  Kemp, George

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. V. (Salop.

  Robertson, Sir John F. L.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Kimber, Henry

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon J. (Birm.

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J.A (Worc.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Chapman, Edward

  Lawson, John Grant

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Charrington, Spencer

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Lees, Sir Elliott, (Birkenhead)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

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

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

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

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Spear, John Ward

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M 'Taggart

  Cook. Sir Frederick Lucas

  Long, Col Charles W. (Evesham

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Cranborne, Viscount

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

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

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Lowe, Francis William

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Lowther, C. (Comb. Eskdale)

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Doughty, George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Darning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Vincent, Col Sir C.E.H (Sheffield

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Malcolm, Ian

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Welby, Lt.-Col. ACE (Taunton

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

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Maxwell, W.J.H. (Dumfriessh.

  Whitmore, Algernon

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm.

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Middlemore, John Throgm'rton

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

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

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Milvain, Thomas

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Flower, Ernest

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Forster, Henry William

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Galloway, William Johnson

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Morgan, David J (Walthamstow

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Garfit, William

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Mowbary, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham. William (Rhondda)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Burns, John

  Allen, Charles P. (Gloue., Stroud

  Brigg, John

  Burt, Thomas

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Caine, William Sproston

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Caldwell, James

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Cameron, Robert

  Lambert, George

  Runciman, Walter

  Campbell-Bonnerman, Sir H.

  Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Shackleton, David James

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Leng, Sir John

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lloyd-George, David

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Spencer, Rt. Hn, C. R (Northants

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Morley, Rt Hon, John (Montrose

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Edwards, Frank

  Moss, Samuel

  Strachey, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Ellis, John Edward

  Newnes, Sir George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Emmott, Alfred

  Norman, Henry

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

  Evans, Sir Francis H.(Maidstone

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Partington, Oswald

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Wason, Eugene

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Philipps, John Wynford

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Pickard, Benjamin

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Grant, Corrie

  Price, Robert John

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Priestley, Arthur

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

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Rea, Russell

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Rigg, Richard

  Mr. William M'Arthur

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  (5.23.) Question put accordingly.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 177; Noes, 90. (Division List No. 493.)

  AYES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Higginbottom, S. N.

  Aird, Sir John

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset E.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Hope, J. F. Sheffield, Brightside

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dix'n

  Horner, Frederick William

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Doughty, George

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Kemp, George

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Kimber, Henry

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

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Fellowes, Ron. Ailwyn Edward

  Limbton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lawson. John Grant

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lecky, Rt Hn. William Edw. H.

  Beresford, Lord Chas. William

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Lees, Sir Elliott. (Birkenhead)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Bignold, Arthur

  Fletcher, Rt Hon. Sir Henry

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Bigwood, James

  Flower, Ernest

  Leveson Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Bill, Charles

  Forster, Henry William

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Bond, Edward

  Gardner, Ernest

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Garlit, William

  Lowe, Francis William

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Bull, William James

  Godson, Sir Aughstus Frederick

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Campbell, Rt Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

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

  Lucas, Beginald J. (Portsmouth

  Carew, James Laurence

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Graham, Henry Robert

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Malcolm, Ian

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

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ry S Edm'nds

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Cavendish, V.C.W (Derbyshire

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Maxwell, WJH (Dumfriesshire

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Meysey-Thompsen, Sir H. M.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J.A (Worc.

  Hain, Edward

  Milner, Rt Hon. Sir Frederick G

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Milvain, Thomas

  Chapman, Edward

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G. (Mid'x

  Montagu, Hon, J. Scott (Hants

  Charrington, Spencer

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  More, Robt, Jasper (Shropshire

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

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Morgan, David J (Walth'mstow

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Helder, Augustus

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Murray, Rt Hn. A Graham (Bute

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M.

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

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

  Renwick, George

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  O'Doherty, William

  Ridley, Hon. M.W (Stalybridge

  Valentia, Viscount

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Walrond, Rt Hon Sir William H.

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

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

  Percy, Earl

  Royds, Clement Molyneus

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E. (Notts.

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Pryce-Jones, Lt,-Col. Edward

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

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

  Purvis, Robert

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

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Randles, John S.

  Spear, John Ward

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Rankin, Sir James

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M 'Taggart

  TELLEES FOR THE AYES—

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Grant, Corrie

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshed

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Allen, Charles P (Gloue., Stroud

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Riekett, J. Compton

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Rigg, Richard

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Brigg, John

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Runciman, Walter

  Burns, John

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Burt, Thomas

  Lambert, George

  Shackleton, David James

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Caine, William Sproston

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Caldwell, James

  Leng, Sir John

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Cameron, Robert

  Lloyd-George, David

  Sloan, Thomas Henry.

  Campbell-Bannerman. Sir H.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

  Spencer, Rt Hon. C.R (Northants

  Cremer, William Randal

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John (Montrose

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Moss, Samuel

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

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Norman, Henry

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Ed wards, Frank

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Wason, Eugene

  Ellis, John Edward

  Partington, Oswald

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Paulton, James Mellor

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidst'ne

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Pickard, Benjamin

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Price, Robert John

  TELLERS FOR TIIE NOES—

  Foster. Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. William M'Arthur

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Rae, Russell

  and Mr. Causton.

  It being after half-past Five of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

  NOTICE TO EXPEDITE DEBATE.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is irregular, but it may be convenient to the House that I should say that on Tuesday Next I propose to move a Resolution (which will be placed on the Paper tonight) which will, I hope, have for its object to enable Parliament to deal with the Bill on which we are now engaged before the Christmas holidays.
  SIR. H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Striling Burghs): All I need say is this. The right hon. Gentleman makes his announcement in somewhat covert language. If it implies the abridgement of debate, we shall meet any such Resolution with the most determined opposition.

  SUPREME COURT OF JEDICATURE BILL [LORDS].
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time upon Monday next.
  Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 16th October last, adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned at twenty-five minutes before Six o'clock till Monday next.