Commons Sitting of 30 October 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

IMPRISONMENT OF A MEMBER.
MR. Speakerinformed the House that he had received the following letter relating to the imprisonment of a Member:—
"The Victoria Hotel,
"Sligo,
"29th October, 1902.
"Sir,—I have the honour to inform you that I have this day confirmed the sentence of two resident magistrates on Mr. P. A. M'Hugh, a Member of the House of Commons, which directed him to be imprisoned for criminal conspiracy for two months under the provisions of the Crimes' Act; but I have mitigated the sentence to the extent of not imposing hard labour.
"Mr. M'Hugh refused to enter into a recognisance to the Crown not to publish 'boycotting' or intimidating notices in the journal of which he was the proprietor, the Sligo Champion.
"I have the honour to be, Sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"WM. O'CONNOR MORRIS,
"County Court Judge and Chairman of "Quarter Sessions."

PETITIONS.
  CANADIAN CATTLE (IMPORTATION).
  Petitions for abolition of restrictions: from Bristol; Halstead; Braintree; Maldon; and Witham; to lie upon the Table.
  Petition from Cawnpore, for the release of Chhidi, a convict; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: from Lidlington; Houghton Conquest; Fivehead; and Bridgwater (four); to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration: from Brain-tree; Witham; Halstead; Maldon; and Bristol; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions in favour: from Liverpool; and St. Helens; to lie upon the Table.
  JAMMADAS, JOSHI.
  Petition of the widow of Joshi Jammadas, for the redress of grievances; to lie upon the Table.
  Petitions of Sampat, son of Koosaji, for redress of grievance; to lie upon the Table.
  PADAYACHI VEERABADRA.
  Petition of Veerabadra Padayaehi, for inquiry into his case; to lie upon the Table.
  PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE (EXTENSION TO WOMEN) BILL.
  Petition from North Brierley, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION IN TRADE.
  Petitions for legislation: from Bristol; Witham; Halstead; Braintree; and Maldon; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  SUPERANNUATION.
  Copy ordered, "of Treasury Minute, dated the 24th day of June, 1902, as to the pension to be awarded to Mr. G. R. Price, Registrar in the Chancery Division of the Supreme Court of Judicature, Ireland, on his retirement."—(Mr. Hayes Fisher)
  LOCAL RECORDS COMMITTEE.
  Copy presented, of Report of the Committee appointed to inquire as to the existing arrangements for the collection and custody of local records, and as to further measures which it may be advisable to take for the purpose [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION.
  Copy presented, of statement under administrative counties and county boroughs of public elementary schools which have received building grants, showing in each case the amount of such building grants, and the amount subscribed by the promoters at the time (so far as records exist); also, in the case of schools which have been transferred to the School Board or closed, the year of transfer or closure, with explanatory memorandum and appendix [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION
  Copy presented, of precedents of trust deeds settled for Church of England Schools, British Schools, Established Church of Scotland Schools, Wesleyan Schools, Free Church (Scotland) Schools, Roman Catholic Schools, Jewish Schools Episcopal Church (Scotland) Schools, and Undenominational Schools referred to in the Revised Code of 1870 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SHIPS COMMISSIONED (CHATHAM, PORTSMOUTH, AND DEVONPORT).
  Return presented relative thereto, [ordered 24 July; Mr. Reginald Lucas]; to lie upon the Table; and to be printed [No 363.]
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWEMS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    India—Special Irrigation Grants.
    MR. WEIRTo ask the Secretary of State for India, in view of the fact that the Government of India had sanctioned a special irrigation grant of 25 lakhs (£166,666, 13s. 4d.) to local governments for minor works such as village wells, tanks, and channels, is he yet in a position to state how much of this sum will be allocated to each province.
    (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) The special irrigation grant has been distributed as follows: Rajputana, Rs. 60,000; Coorg, Rs. 5,000; Punjab, Rs. 6,14,000; Bombay, Rs. 2,00,000; Sind, Rs. 7,20,000; North West Frontier Province, Rs. 1,65,000; Madras, Rs. 4,00,000; North West Provinces and Oudh, Rs. 50,000; Bengal, Rs. 20,000; Baluchistan, Rs. 60,000; Central Provinces, Rs. 2,00,000.

    China Operations, 1900—Sale of Surplus— Stores of Rum.
    MR. CAINE: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that on 20th September last the chief supply and transport officer at Tientsin sold, by public tender, 5,540 gallons of rum, part of the surplus stores of the British contingent; and will he state to whom was this rum sold, for what purpose was it originally placed in store, and is it now the rule to supply spirits to British soldiers in the field.
    1184
    (Answered by Secretary Lord George, Hamilton.) No report has been received from the general officer commanding the China force as to the sale of the rum referred to. A small daily issue of rum to men on active service is permitted by the regulations, at the discretion of the general officer commanding, on the recommendation of the medical officer.

    Army Medical Corps in India—Pay.
    DR. THOMPSON: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state when the increase of pay promised several months ago to the captains and subalterns of the Royal Army Medical Corps serving in India will be granted; the amount of the increase in rupees; and from what date will the increase count.
    (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) An increase in the pay of officers of the Royal Army Medical Corps below the rank of major, while serving in India, has been approved in principle, but the amount of increase is still under the consideration of the Government of India, who have been asked to telegraph their views as soon as they have arrived at them.

    Proposed Fishing Harbour at Swordle, Lewis.
    MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord Advocate if the Congested Districts Board will again consider the expediency of providing a grant in aid of the construction of a harbour at Swordle, Island of Lewis; and will he state on what ground this assistance has hitherto been refused.
    (Answered by Mr. Graham Murray.) Assistance has been refused on the ground that Swordle is only distant three miles from Stornoway and about two miles from Bayble, to which the Board have quite recently granted £1,640 towards a pier, and the Board have not hitherto felt justified in aiding works in such close proximity to each other.

    Evening Continuation Classes Grant.
    SIR MARK STEWART: To ask the Lord Advocate if he will state the reason why the reports and grants to the evening continuation classes of 1901–02 have not been sent out, although the school year ended on 31st

    1185
    July last; and, in view of the inconvenience caused to the managers by this delay, can he state when the schools are likely to receive the reports and grants.
    (Answered by Mr. Graham Murray.) More than one-third of the claims for grants to the continuation classes have already been paid, and the remainder are being dealt with as rapidly as possible. In the majority of cases it has been found necessary to refer back to the managers the forms of claim for grant, for more complete particulars or for corrected returns, before the calculation of the grant could be proceeded with. Every effort is being made to complete the payment of all the claims, but even now some managers have not yet submitted their returns in the first instance for the consideration of the Department.

    Employment in Government Departments of Discharged Soldiers and Sailors.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will issue an order to all Government Departments to carry out the expressed wishes of the House of Commons and the recommendations of Select Committees that no messenger or other officer in that category is to be appointed unless he has served in the Army, Navy, or auxiliary forces in the field.
    (Answered by Mr. Hayes Fisher.) The Treasury has no power to require all Government Departments to exclude from their employment as messengers and officers of that category all persons except those who have served in the Army, Navy, or auxiliary forces. The Treasury have, by Minute of 14th March, 1894, provided for the employment of a certain number of Army and Navy pensioners in the Departments under their control, and they understand that other public offices give a preference to men who have served, for all suitable employment.

    Education Bill—School Teachers' Superannuation.
    MAJOR RASCH: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether, in the event of the new Board of Managers getting rid of a teacher on account of age, provision will be made that he should not lose any benefit under the School Teachers' Superannuation Act.
    1186
    (Answered by Sir William Anson.) It is not proposed to insert in the Education Bill such a provision as the hon. Member suggests. The case of a teacher who has become permanently incapable, owing to infirmity of mind or body, of being an efficient teacher in a public elementary school is provided for by Section 2 of the Elementary School Teachers (Superannuation) Act.

    National Society's Schools.
    SIR HENRY FOWLER: To ask Mr. Attorney General what are the trusts relating to religious teaching upon which the elementary schools in connection with the National Society are held; and whether there are any provisions requiring that such religious teaching is to be controlled by any specific authority.
    (Answered by Sir Robert Finlay.) The trust deeds of schools connected with the National Society are varied in their character. A Return setting forth the earlier forms of such deeds has been already asked for and granted; the sheets are now with the printer, and it is hoped that they will be in the possession of the House in a few days. I find that the more recent forms of trust deeds employed since the cessation of building grants are not within the knowledge of the Board of Education, but they could no doubt be obtained from the National Society. It would not be possible within the ordinary compass of an Answer to set out accurately the various provisions of these trust deeds on the heads referred to in the Question.

    Bushey Park.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: To ask the hon. Member for North Hunts whether he will explain why the Office of Works has parted with a portion of Bushey Park to the United Tramways Company, Limited; and seeing that land needed to widen the road for a tramway might have been purchased by the Company on the opposite side of it, he will state whether the strip of Bushey Park was sold to the Company for a price equivalent to that which the Company would have had to pay for the same accommodation on the other side of the road.
    (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) There has been no sale of land to the

    1187
    United Tramways Company. The Office of Works is, however, disposed to entertain a proposal, which is strongly supported by the local authorities, for setting back the fence of Bushey Park for some distance along the tramway line where the road would be dangerously narrow. A piece of timbered land, of larger area than that to be thrown into the roadway, would be added to the Park free of charge, a substantial permanent fence would be erected along the new frontage line of the Park, and all structures would be reinstated free of expense to the Crown. There are various precedents for the widening of roads skirting the Royal Parks, to meet the wishes of the local authorities for the safety of the public.

    Irish Postmasterships—Appointment of Englishmen and Scotchmen.
    DR. THOMPSON: To ask the Postmaster General whether he will explain why the office of postmaster in the following Irish towns, viz.: Ballinasloe, Buttevant, Kilmallock, Kilrush, Kingstown, Lisburn, Londonderry, Newbridge, Roscrea, and Youghall has been recently filled by importations of English and Scotch postmasters to Ireland; and whether he will take steps to discontinue this system in future.
    (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) These offices were filled by the appointment of the most suitable candidates. I have no information as to the nationality of any of the officers selected, and I see no reason for departing from the present method of selection.

    Kilmallock (Limerick) Labourers' Cottages Scheme
    MR. LUNDON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that under the scheme in course of operation under the Labourers' Act in the Kilmallock District Council, County Limerick, a cottage and plot designed on the farm of Patrick Hayes, of Oldtown, Hospital, farmer, for Michael Hayes, agricultural labourer, were passed at the inquiry in Kilmallock, but that afterwards the engineer of the council mapped the site at the other side of the fence on the farm of a man named Thomas Murphy, and that when the engineer went to
    1188
    rectify the mistake Patrick Hayes would not allow him to enter on his land; and will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to remedy the matter as soon as possible.
    (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Local Government Board has no information as to the alleged refusal of the occupier to allow entry on his lands, but if he has so refused and the District Council has obtained the requisite certificate from the justices, under Section 7 of the 8 Vict., cap. 20, the Council should place the matter in the hands of its solicitor.

    Employment of Discharged Soldiers.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisability of appointing a small committee with an office in a central situation to endeavour, by communication with various parts of the country, to obtain employment for deserving men from the Front who have left, or are about to leave, the colours, and, in the meantime, to assist the meritorious by such means as can be placed in their power.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The National Society for the Employment of Reserve Men and Discharged Soldiers has been, and is now engaged in this important work. This Society is supported by contributions from Army funds. The office is being removed to a more commodious and central position in Victoria Street. It would not, therefore, appear desirable to take the organisation out of the hands of the Society, as suggested in the Question.

    Contracts for Canteens.
    MR. MOUNT: To ask the Secretary of State for War. having regard to the fact that the Army order dealing with contracts for regimental institutes expires on the 31st December, and in view of the uncertainty as regards the future conduct of regimental institutes, causing inconvenience both to officers commanding regiments and to traders, whether he will state when the Report on canteens will be made public.

    1189
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I am not yet in a position to make any statement on this matter, as the Report has only just reached me.

    Volunteer and Militia Statistics.
    MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the present number of effectives in the Volunteer forces, and the present strength of the Militia.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The strength of the Militia on the 1st October, exclusive of officers and permanent staff, was 104,380. The number of effective Volunteers on the 1st October was 272,957.

    South Africa—Outfit Allowances to Militia Officers.
    MAJOR RASCH: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether militia officers who went to South Africa with their own units will be granted the same outfit allowance of £100 as those who left their regiments and served with remounts and other corps.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) Militia officers attached to units other than their own were found to have incurred special expenditure for uniform and outfit. They were consequently given an allowance which was not given to officers serving with their own corps.

  (2.15.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Settlement of South Africa.
    SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if, with a view to encourage organised immigration of settlers in the Transvaal and Orange Free State and other parts of South Africa, the Government will consider the advisability of establishing an office or Department of immigration under the control of the Colonial Office to co-operate with the Departments of immigration in the various colonies.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,: In answer to my hon. friend I have to say that we are not yet in a position to encourage organised immigration into South Africa. For the present, it seems, the supply of
    1190
    agricultural settlers on the spot is as great as can conveniently be absorbed. Lord Milner will be consulted as to whether he thinks any such steps as my hon. Mend suggests could be taken, and how soon they could be taken.

    Somaliland.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Have the Government any further communication with reference to the Somali War?
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord CRANBORNE,: We have heard that Colonel Swayne has reached the coast at Berbera, leaving Colonel Cobbe in command at Bohotle. The garrison there is perfectly safe, and the guns have arrived. We have also heard that the wounded are doing very well.

    Royal Naval Reserve.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, with a view to encourage British seamen to enrol in the Royal Naval Reserve, arrangements can be made which will admit of Royal Naval Reserve men performing their annual drill at any naval station abroad.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,: Since 1891 arrangements have been in force for the drilling of a number of men in the Royal Naval Reserve serving abroad, who are unable to return to this country. The number of men, however, who have availed themselves of the privilege has been small. Only 102 men have been drilled at the outstations during a period of six years. Every facility is given to reserve men to perform their drills in advance of time if they are likely to be long from the United Kingdom. They are also permitted to perform arrears of drill on their return. It is not believed that by adding to the facilities for drilling abroad the number of Royal Naval Reserve men would be increased.

    Cruisers to Cope with Foreign Armoured Commerce Destroyers.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether there are now under construction or whether it is proposed to

    1191
    construct any cruisers of the "Drake" type capable of coping with the fastest and most heavily armoured commerce destroyers of foreign navies, such as the Russian cruiser "Novik," which steams twenty-five knots.
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I think the hon. Member is under a misapprehension. The Russian ship "Novik" is not one of the fastest and most heavily armoured commerce destroyers, but is a second-class cruiser of 3,000 tons displacement. Vessels of the "Drake" class are fully capable of coping with such a ship. None of the so-called commerce destroyers of foreign navies possess a speed of twenty-five knots.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: Has the "Novik" a speed of twenty-five knots?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: She is only a small second-class cruiser and not a commerce destroyer.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: Has the Admiralty any vessels under construction which will be able to cope with her?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The Admiralty is under the impression that the vessels of the "Drake" class are fully capable of that.
    SIR WILLIAM ALLAN: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the "Novik" cannot steam twenty-five knots for more than four hours?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER:I have every reason to believe that the hon. Member is quite correct.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Can the hon. Gentleman explain what is to be understood by the term "commerce destroyer"?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I was only using a term which is generally used by more than one of the Great Powers in regard to large, unarmoured cruisers built by them.

    German Locomotives for Indian Railways
    COLONEL DENNY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that in an order for locomotives, placed by the East
    1192
    Indian Railway in 1901, completion of which was to have been effected by August, 1902, the Chairman of the railway stated that the Company would save thirty-nine weeks by accepting a German tender as opposed to a British tender; whether he is aware that the contract period for the German locomotives expired in August, 1902, that none were delivered in August or September, and that the order is not expected to be completed until the end of the year; and whether, under these circumstances, he will see his way to advise State-supported Indian railways to accept British tenders.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON,: I have no knowledge that the Chairman of the East Indian Railway Company made the statement attributed to him in this question, but, otherwise, I believe that the facts are as stated in the Question. But while I wish to do all I legitimately can to help British industries, I cannot undertake to interfere in the manner suggested with the policy of the directors of guaranteed companies, who are responsible to their shareholders for the conduct of their business.
    SIR WILLIAM ALLAN: Is the noble Lord aware that the German locomotives which have been supplied to the Indian Government have soft cylinders and cannot run for any long time without becoming useless?
    LORD G. HAMILTON: I am not aware that these locomotives have as yet been supplied; I understand that the cause of the delay alluded to is that they have been subjected to precisely the same conditions of test as British locomotives.

    Christiania Fishery Conference.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that at the meeting of the Fishery Conference at Christiania in 1901, a resolution was carried in favour of areas such as the Moray Firth being closed against trawlers of all nationalities, will he state whether the signatories to the North Sea Convention have been communicated with on the subject; and, if so, with what result.
    LORD CRANBORNE: The Christiania resolution was not couched in any such absolute terms as would appear from the hon. Member's Question. No negotiations have passed on the subject.
    MR. WEIR: Is not the noble Lord aware that the Conference sat specially for the purpose of inquiring into illegal trawling round our coasts? Will he make further inquiries?
    LORD CRANBOENE: I will inquire into any Question the hon. Gentleman puts on the Paper.

    Hong Kong Cable.
    SIR EDWARD SASSOON: I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether he can instruct the Government of Hong Kong to make it publicly known that landing rights will forthwith be granted to any individual or company seeking for them in Hong Kong and its dependencies, under reasonable conditions, for purposes of laying cables.
    THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,: The Question should have been addressed to the Colonial Office. In the absence of my right hon. friend I will read his answer:—"The instruction suggested by the hon. Member cannot be given to the Governor of Hong Kong, in view of the terms of an agreement made in 1893 with the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company. The full text of the article of the agreement which gives a preferential right to the Company was given by me in answer to a Question in the House on the 8th May, 1899,† to which I would refer the hon. Member."

    Boer Generals at Cambridge.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the attitude of persons at a meeting addressed by three Boer commandants at Cambridge last Monday evening; and will steps be taken to prevent the repetition of such scenes of disorder at future meetings of a similar character.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (MR. AKERS DOUGLAS,: I have obtained reports on this matter
    † See (4) Debates, lxxi, 53.
    1194
    from the Cambridge police. The meeting; appears to have been orderly; but in the crowd outside the building some disorder occurred, hoots and cheers being mingled, and a few missiles were thrown on to the roof. The police had taken due precautions and, with the exception that a medical man was thrown down and slightly hurt in the excitement when the Speakers were leaving the building, no damage was done to person or property. No action on the part of the Government is called for; the matter is one for the local authorities: and the steps taken by the police appear to have been judicious and effective.

    Ventilation of the House of Commons
    MR. WYLIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury when the Report of the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the ventilation of the House of Commons building will be issued; and what steps, if any, have been taken during the recess for removing some of the insanitary conditions.
    MR. AILWYN FELLOWES: The Select Committee is still engaged on its inquiry, and is not expected to issue its further report this session. During the recess the sanitary conveniences behind the division lobbies have been remodelled, and also the Members' lavatory on the Terrace floor.

    Dublin Custom House.
    MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that on the pay days of those employed in the Custom House, Dublin, nuns are allowed to cross the barrier and beg for alms; and whether he will take steps to put a stop to the practice.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,: I have no information on the matter referred to. If by "barrier" my hon. friend alludes to the chains enclosing the space between the Custom House and the public street, he appears to have overlooked the fact that this space is open to and used by, all classes of the community.
    MR. TULLY: Will the hon. Member confine his nun and priest hunting to South Belfast?
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order !
    MR. SLOAN: Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that there is a public right to this place?
    MR. WYNDHAM: No doubt the public have a right to use it.

    Crimes Act Prisoners in Sligo Gaol.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can state the number of prisoners convicted under The Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, who were detained in the local prisons: in Sligo, Castlebar, and Mayo for the counties of Leitrim, Roscommon, Sligo, Mayo, Galway, Longford, and Westmeath, respectively, on 24th April last, and the number of such prisoners from these counties in custody in these prisons on Thursday last.
    MR. WYNDHAM: On the 24th April there were five such prisoners in Sligo prison, of whom two were from Sligo, and three from Roscommon. There were no persons in custody on that date from the other counties named, and none at all in custody on Thursday last.
    MR. TULLY: May I as a matter of personal explanation say that I handed to the Clerk at the Table a large bundle of Questions, and they should have been on the Paper that day, but they are missing.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I understand the hon. Member selected Questions put down by other Members, and one Question the hon. Member put down in the name of another hon. Member. That hon. Member stated that he had never seen the Question, and gave no authority for it to be put down.
    MR. TULLY: May I say respectfully, as a matter of personal explanation, that while I was in prison they pirated all my stuff about Sheridan?

    Royal Patriotic Commission.
    MR. KEARLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Bill promised last session, dealing with the abolition of the Patriotic
    1196
    Commission and the future administration of the funds now controlled by the Royal Patriotic Commissioners, will be introduced and proceeded with this session.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have to express my great regret that the state of public business renders it practically impossible to deal with this matter during the present session.
    MR. KEARLEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman introduce the Bill during the present session to see whether it was controversial or not? There was a promise to bring it in this year.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If the hon. Gentleman presses me I shall be prepared to introduce it this session, but I frankly say I have very little hope that I shall be able to proceed further with it.

    Voluntary School Trust Deeds Return.
    MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury why the promised copies of precedents of trust deeds of voluntary schools have not been laid upon the Table.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Return to which the hon. Gentleman alludes has turned out to be an extremely voluminous one; the printers have been at work on it night and day, and it will very soon be out of their hands. Of course the information is not Government information; we have had to collect it, as there are no official documents.
    MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: What I asked for were the precedents of voluntary school trust deeds settled by the Education Department. These necessarily are official. As far as I know there are only five or six, and I hope they may be furnished before we conclude the consideration of Clause 8 of the Education Bill.
    SIR HENRY FOWLER: Will the right hon. Gentleman supply copies of the deed of the National Society, the deed which applies to the great bulk of the denominational schools of England and Wales?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There are a good many of them.
    SIR HENRY FOWLER: There is one model deed. It is contained in a very small pamphlet. I do not think there will be much discussion as to Roman Catholic or Wesleyan deeds, and I think for the purpose of our debates it will be sufficient to give us the deed which applies to the great majority of the denominational schools.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid the matter is not so simple as the right hon. Gentleman seems to suppose, but I will do my best to give him information as soon as it is placed at my disposal.
    MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Surely it would be easy to reprint the trust deed of the National Society published in 1864. There are only four pages of it, and it could be turned out by tomorrow.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Speaking without book, I should think a trust deed as old as 1864 would have had successors. I cannot promise more than that I will do my best.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. BRYCE: What business does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take next week?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I propose during the early part of the week to take the Education Bill at all the Sittings of the House.

EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.
(2.30.) [Mr. J. W. Lowther (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
THE CHAIRMANruled the first four or five Amendments on the Paper out of order, including one in the name of the hon. Member for the Rugby Division of Warwickshire, which he held did not constitute a condition of maintenance.
MR. BRYCE: Could that not be dealt with in a separate sub-Section.
THE CHAIRMAN: Not on this Clause. It should follow Clause 7. As to the Amendment of the hon. Member for the Elland Division of Yorkshire, the first part, that dealing with the use of the school for political meetings, is in order, but the second is not.
MR. TREVELYANsaid he proposed if it were in order to insert after the word "use" the words "free of charge."
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEpointed out, in regard to the hon. Gentleman's Amendment, that its object was to safe-guard the managers—a very different point from that decided on the previous day, which dealt with the damage that might be done either by the local authority or by the managers. His hon. friend proposed that the persons who convened the meeting should pay the managers for any damage that might be done.
SIR CHARLES DILKEsuggested that it might be more convenient to deal with this point on an Amendment which he had further down on the Paper, empowering the local authority to make regulations.
MR. TREVELYANsaid he thought he was quite in order in adding the words "free of charge," and that being so, it seemed to him to be a necessary sequence that provisions should be made, as he proposed in the latter part of his Amendment, for payment to the trustees for any damage done, seeing that the use of the room was to be granted free. The most important part of his Amendment, however, was the proposal to allow meetings to be held in the school in connection with political, municipal, or local elections—to enable them to be held as of right in any school not provided by the local education authority. As the law at present stood, under the Local Government Act, 1894, it was provided that if there were no other place in the village, the school-room should be used free of charge, at all reasonable times, and after reasonable notice, for meetings for the promotion of the candidature of any person

1199
for membership of the District or Parish Council. He now proposed to extend that provision to meetings in connection with Parliamentary and municipal elections. In most cases, no doubt, managers of schools would be willing to give every reasonable facility for the holding of meetings, but there were a certain number of cases, especially in county divisions, where the managers, no doubt out of rather stupid political motives, used their right to refuse the use of the school to political opponents. He thought everyone would agree that it was in the interests of the proper discussion of national as well as local politics that at all reasonable times the school should be thrown open to all parties to hold their meetings. His Amendment was confined to granting the use of the school while elections were proceeding, and, therefore, it was calculated to cause the minimum of hardship to the managers. Some, no doubt, might be occasionally inconvenienced by having to surrender the school on an evening on which it had been set apart for some festivity or other event. But if the concession were confined to periods when elections were actually in progress he was sure the hardship would not be at all considerable. There was further down on the Paper an Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for South Down which proposed that the school should be open at all times for political meetings. As far as he was concerned, he was quite ready to extend his proposal in that way, and he thought it might be done if the local authority or some superior body were given a supervising power to make regulations, so that no unreasonable demand should be made which would seriously injure the use of the school for educational purposes. But, as it stood, his Amendment only referred to times when a local or national election was taking place, and, in that form, he did not think it would cast any undue burden upon the managers to give this general right to the public.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, after the words last inserted, to insert the words, '(f) The managers of the school shall allow any room in the school to be used, at any time when the school is not being used for public education, for any meeting held in connection with a political, municipal, or local election; and if, by reason of such use of the room, any expenditure is incurred by the
1200
managers, or any damage is done to the room, or to any furniture or apparatus in the room, such expense or damage shall be reimbursed to the managers by the persons by whom, or on whose behalf, the meeting is convened.'"—(Mr. Trevelyan.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid the words "free of charge" had played a most important part in connection with the history of that subject. That history was a most interesting one. He gathered that there was to be some opposition to the Amendment from the other side of the House, but he would like to point out that only a few years ago hon. Gentlemen opposite freely accepted a Government Bill to carry out this very object which was embodied in a Resolution unanimously passed by the House of Commons. Certainly the words "free of charge" were not included in that Resolution, but when the Conservative Government of 1892 brought in their Bill they inserted the words. There had been some suggestion that this subject was outside the scope of Public Elementary Education Acts, but he would like to remind the Committee that the Bill to which he had referred was called the Public Elementary Schools Bill of 1892. Clause 3 of that Bill proposed to do exactly what his hon. friend's Amendment suggested. A good many stipulations were put in, and if any importance were attached to them by hon. Members opposite he thought he might say on behalf of his hon. friend that he would be prepared to accept any which would; safeguard the rights of the managers, if I the Amendment were agreed to. Personally, he thought it would be better to give the educational authority power to make regulations upon this subject. They would thus be able to avoid lengthened debates in the House upon the stipulations, and it certainly seemed to him by far the most satisfactory way of dealing with the subject. The present state of the law in regard to this matter could not be justified at all. If the use of the schools "free of charge" was allowed to one party it certainly should not be refused to another party. As a matter of fact, at present the school-room could be used "free of charge" for all meetings connected with the subject of allotments.

1201
It was also open gratuitously for Parish and District Council elections, but there was no right to use it for municipal or Parliamentary elections. How could they possibly justify such a distinction? If stipulations were required they could put in one making use of the word "reasonable," and that would give an appeal to the Board of Education if anything improper were proposed. There were very considerable debates on this subject at the time of the passing of the Local Government Act, and his right hon. friend the Member for East Wolverhampton would remember that at that time there was some disposition on the part of the Church party in that House, represented by the noble Lord who was now the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to oppose the words "free of charge." But their arguments were destroyed by the precedent set in the Allotments Act of 1890, and the case for this Amendment was even stronger today than it had ever been before, because more assistance was being given out of the rates to voluntary schools than was afforded at the time at which the debates he referred to occurred. Surely it was monstrous that in, say, a mining community, where rooms were not very easily obtainable, men who were standing for election as members of Parish or District Councils should be able to obtain the use of the school-room "free of charge," while if they sought to obtain election to Borough or County Councils, or to Parliament, it was to be refused to them.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he did not approach this question from the point of view of abstractor theoretical right. Parliament had thought fit, as to voluntary schools as well as to board schools, to say that they should be used free of charge for certain purposes. It was too late in the day to say—if ever it was proper to say it—that that was absolutely inadmissible. The question was really one of procedure and degree. As regarded procedure, he thought it would be pre posterous to make this regulation with regard to voluntary schools, unless it were also made with regard to board schools. This, however, was not the place to make such a regulation with regard to board schools, as the Clause only dealt with non-provided schools. Anything which the House did ought to be done on a general system.
SIR HENRY FOWLER: The Act of 1893–94 applied to board schools.
MR. A. J. BALFOURadmitted that, but said that if they were going to extend it it must be done in a provision which itself applied to board schools.
SIR CHARLES DILKE: The Government Bill of 1892 did not.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he had not the terms of the Bill with him, but he thought the general principle he had laid down should commend itself to common, sense. As to the question of substance, he pointed out that there had been a change of circumstances since the adoption by Parliament of the policy which it was now asked should be extended. About ten years ago the voluntary schools were made available for certain purposes, but he did not suppose those purposes required much time or took away from the uses to which the managers desired to put the schools, except for an infinitesimal fraction of the year. But if this extension were accorded, was it not manifest that the use of the schools would be largely impinged upon by the demands made upon managers of provided schools in connection with circumstances and events which might constantly repeat themselves? He left it to lawyers to determine how long before an election meetings were connected with an election. It was evident, however, that the scope of the Amendment was very large as regarded time. These extended demands, moreover, would be thrown on managers when the demands upon them for education purposes were augmented. An Amendment had been passed making it obligatory on the managers to give three nights of the week to education, outside the ordinary school hours. He thought, therefore, that to require that, on the demand of the education authority, they should give up their schools to every kind of political purpose would be taking too large a slice of the time at their disposal for their own purposes or for parochial purposes unconnected either with education or politics. In addition, such an arrangement might lead to considerable hardship. Supposing a General Election turned on this Bill, it seemed a little hard that meetings should be held in these schools for the purpose of destroying

1203
them. Taking a general survey of these objections, he thought it better not to introduce the Amendment into the Bill.
SIR HENRY FOWLERsaid he quite agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that they could not make this power applicable to one class of schools only. But he submitted that the words used in the Act of 1893–94, which provided for the use of the school-rooms receiving a grant out of moneys voted by Parliament was intended to impose the liability upon all schools alike. The right hon. Gentleman had put forward objections, one of time and one of substance. As to the first, when the Corrupt Practices; Act was passed the extraordinary words "before, during, or after" were introduced, and some hon. Members asked "Will that cover both time and eternity?" Practically he believed it was accepted that the Act referred to came into force as soon as the writ was issued for the election of a Member of Parliament, and he did not think that any gentleman who this year or next incurred expenses in holding public meetings on behalf of his candidature for the next General Election would be required to include those expenses in his election, return. It could not be suggested, therefore, that that particular objection put forward by the right hon. Gentleman was a very strong one. Then there was the objection of substance, the suggestion that, too much time would be taken out of the period left to managers when the school could be used for parochial and other purposes. Already three nights of the week were set apart for education, outside the ordinary school hours, and the right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the present Amendment would take too great a slice out of the remaining period. But was he prepared to say that no political meetings in connection with Parliamentary elections should be held in the school at all? They had heard a good deal said about the exercise of common sense by managers, but in the past the common sense exhibited had been to allow the use of the schools for these meetings to one political party and to refuse it to the other. In passing he might remark that in the Amendment there was a misprint and that the word "Parliamentary" should be substituted
1204
for "political." Was it proper, was it just, or was it right that on Monday evening there should be a political meeting held in support of Mr. A., who was to have the advantage of the room for the shelter of his auditors, while on the following evening, if Mr. B. desired to address his supporters, he was to be compelled to do so in the open, however inclement the weather might be. With regard to the suggestion that the adoption of the Amendment might cause interference with the educational work of the school he would suggest that that could be met by the insertion of some stipulations, but at any rate it must be made clear that if the use of the room was allowed to one side the other side should have an equal right to it.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEregretted that the Prime Minister had taken a rather illiberal view of the Amendment. On the question of procedure, his objection could easily be met by providing that the rule applicable to voluntary schools should be equally applicable to board schools, for he quite agreed that if the managers of voluntary schools were to be compelled by the Bill to throw open their school rooms for political meetings, board school rooms should be equally granted for the purpose; the same indulgence must be extended all round. It was perfectly true that his hon. friend might bring in his Amendment in the form of a new Clause at the end of the Bill; but they did not know what was going to happen, and they were bound to take the discussion when and where they could. It must be remembered that the situation had changed since 1893, that the demands for the use of the voluntary schools were greater than then, though it should also be remembered that the public subsidies to these schools were at present greater. He knew that an Amendment had been adopted the previous evening which gave the county authority the use of the schools for three nights a week for evening schools. His hon. friend the Member for North Camberwell had, however, shown that that was no great boon, for in less than 2,000 out of the 14,000 voluntary schools in the country were evening schools carried on. In fact in 12,000 schools no meeting was held in any one night of the week except, perhaps, on Sunday, His other point was that the use of the school was only to

1205
be given in connection with a candidature. He agreed with the Prime Minister that the moment a man became a candidate, although no election was imminent, the Corrupt Practices Act came into operation. But the Prime Minister talked as if political meetings were held by both sides twice a week. Why, a circus came round to these rural districts much oftener, and the result was that the agricultural labourers ran to these political meetings. He asked hon. Gentlemen opposite how often they went down to address their constituents. A Member of Parliament who went down once a week [laughter]—he meant once a year—regarded himself as a martyr. The Prime Minister talked as if these political meetings were to be held once a week, and that hon. Members became quite exhausted at the end of the vacation and took their holidays in the House of Commons. These political meetings were very rarely held, and he put it that there was really an educational purpose in them after all. [Laughter.] He did not mean merely Liberal meetings—that went without saying. But the conflict of meetings of men on both sides elucidating political questions—he would not object even to his friends of the Liberal League addressing the meetings so long as they discussed anything connected with the Government of the country)—would serve as a good sound political purpose. From that point of view, therefore, the Prime Minister ought to encourage such meetings. The right hon. Gentleman had said that it would be carrying the thing too far if they were to lend Church schools, built by Church money, for the purpose of advocating the destruction of those schools. But if it was Church money that had built the schools, it would now be Nonconformist furniture that was in the schools. In his own constituency four-fifths of the ratepayers were Nonconformists, and in the event of a row it would be their furniture that would suffer, and not the schools. The Prime Minister said it was going too far to say that a voluntary school should ring with the doctrines of Nonconformists, but it was much worse that the Nonconformist desk should be pounded by an Anglican orator in denunciation of Nonconformist heretics. Of course it was only fair that a rent should be paid for the use of the schools. The proposition of the Amendment was not so alarming, and he trusted
1206
that the Prime Minister would reconsider his decision and permit meetings to be held in the schools subject to regulations approved of by the Secretary to the Education Department, who would see that everything that was fair to the Church would be done.
SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid he hoped his right hon. friend the Member for Wolverhampton would pardon him for saying that it was not fair to the managers of the voluntary schools to allege they refused the use of their schools to one political party and gave it to another. His connection with voluntary schools extended over a considerable part of Yorkshire and Lancashire, and he maintained that any manager, or group of managers, would be denounced by the whole community if they did so. He believed that the cases where the use of the schools had been refused wore exceedingly rare, if they existed at all. His next point was that after the grant of the use of the schools for evening schools for three days in the week, scant time would be afforded to the managers for using the schools for the purpose to which they had been dedicated. Even in his own parish, without this restriction, there was difficulty in obtaining the use of the schools for any additional purpose; and if further restrictions were imposed the working of the trust-deeds under which these schools were conducted would be seriously hampered and prejudiced. In the Act of 1893–94 it was laid down that there was not to be any interference with the school hours of the voluntary schools, or of any evening school, but he found no reference to that in the Amendment of his right hon. friend.
SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that hon. Members on both sides were prepared to accept an Amendment to the Amendment in the sense of the Act of 1893–94.
SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid that in the Act of 1893–94 there were some provisions which would tend to mitigate the severity of the application of the rule in the proposed Amendment. Speaking for himself, on behalf of the voluntary schools he could not accept the Amendment as it stood.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONwas rather astonished at the statement of the hon. Baronet that the voluntary schools were so much in use in the evenings. Even after granting them for the purposes of evening schools three days a week, that only amounted to 150 days in the year. A Parliamentary election came, on the average, only once in five years, and that meant two meetings. Municipal elections were held once in three years, and that meant one meeting, or at most two. He thought that under these circumstances the contention of the hon. Gentleman opposite must fall to the ground.
MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid that when a proposition of this sort had been brought before the House he had always supported it. He thought that the use of the school should not be given to one party and refused to the other. But regard must be had to the fact that so many nights in the week were now to be given for the evening schools; and the rights of the voluntary school managers in the remaining nights ought to be safe-guarded. He thought that the words "in connection with" were much too vague, and that the right to use the schools should be confined to cases where no other room was obtainable.
SIR EDWARD GREYsubmitted that there was a general agreement that something should be done in the direction proposed by the Amendment, if not at this point in another part of the Bill. He entirely agreed with the Prime Minister as to the undesirability of running the risk of using the school buildings for other than educational purposes, and he, for one, would insist that regulations to that effect should be framed. But that duty should be left to the local education authority, as it would be somewhat invidious to place it on the managers. In the interests of compromise he thought the right hon. Gentleman should consent to grant that advantage to political candidates. He thought no real harm would be done by that. Would it not be hard lines on the local authority if their views could not
1208
be advocated in the schools for which they paid? In the villages, at all events, these political meetings were really educational. They occurred rarely, and the people were really interested in them, as they afforded the only chance to the villagers of hearing political arguments. He thought they should not look upon the school buildings as still retaining their private character. Whatever that might be under the trust deeds, they must now come into existence for public purposes, and where the schools were the only premises available, it was only right and fair that they should be available for public purposes. He himself admitted that he had never had any difficulty in holding meetings in his constituency; but an incident did occur at one of his elections which made him think that he owed the free use of the voluntary schools in his constituency to his political opponent. On that occasion the use of a schoolroom u as refused to him., but the school was afterwards made available for him through the representations of his political opponent; and the spirit which his opponent had then infused had governed the matter ever since. He made an appeal to the First Lord of the Treasury whether there was not an almost general agreement which would justify him in accepting the Amendment.
MR. JAMES HOPEsaid he desired to oppose the Amendment very strongly. It would very much interfere with the work of the schools at the very period of the year when time was most needed. Municipal elections were generally held in the autumn, and if the schools were to be used for election purposes, the whole winter session of classes organised by the managers might be interfered with. He opposed the Amendment also on a broader ground. He saw in it the thin end of the wedge. Hon. Members opposite were trying to make elections cheaper at other people's expense. They advocated that returning officers' fees should he paid by the public; and he regarded the Amendment as an attempt to enable candidates to hold their meetings at the expense of other people.

1209
That was a very dangerous tendency. If gentlemen sought a seat in this House, they ought to be willing to bear the expense attaching to it.
MR. NUSSEYsaid he regretted that the First Lord of the Treasury could not see his way to comply with what was a general request on both sides of the House. He thought that he would not overstate the case when he said, there were 8,000 parishes in the country where hon. Members could hold meetings only on sufferance. They had to go, cap in hand, to ask the managers whether they would be good enough to allow them to express their political views in the schools, although the schools were paid for by the ratepayers' money. The first objection of the Prime Minister was that the proposal did not extend to board schools. He would have been very glad if the proposal were extended to board as well as to voluntary schools, so that these schools would have been open for legitimate discussion to responsible persons such as candidates at the County Council, municipal or Parliamentary elections. The second objection of the Prime Minister was that the meetings would take up too much time, but he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that in the country meetings did not take much time. He lived in a constituency which was represented by an hon. Member opposite who, with the exception of a meeting he addressed last summer, had not held a meeting in the constituency for four or five years. It was an anomaly that the schools should not be allowed to be used for local purposes, and that a certain number of hon. Members, most of them sitting on one side of the House, should be debarred from discussing matters involving great national interests. The schools themselves would have a most direct interest in the County Council elections, and what could be more fitting than that the County Council candidates who, when elected, would form the local education authority, should have free use of the schools, It was quite right that a code of regulations I should be inserted to prevent the right being abused. The hon. Member for the Brightside Division of Sheffield said the schools would be used at the very time they would be most wanted for educational purposes. He did not think that would be so, as ordinary elections in the country took place in March. If
1210
the Amendment were accepted, it would make matters fair all round. If not, the use of the schools should be prohibited to both parties. That would remove part of the grievance of which they complained.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he was quite prepared to admit that in the speech he made half an hour ago, he might have laid too much stress on the actual number of hours that would be employed in election meetings. He might have exaggerated that aspect of the case, though he was sure he did not exaggerate the fear which an Amendment of that kind would excite in the bosoms of the managers of voluntary schools, who had just had three evenings a week cut off the time in which they could use the schools. He did not rise to express his views in a modified form, but to appeal to the Committee as to whether it would be wise to introduce, in a Bill of this kind, a topic which, as the right hon. Gentleman himself observed, had formed a great part of a Bill introduced ad hoc 1892. He had looked at the Bill and could assure the Committee that the Clause which dealt with the question was the principal Clause in the Bill, and extended over more than a page of the inconvenient size on which they printed their Bills. He did not think they could really include a topic like that in a Bill which, whether it was a good or a bad Bill, did not deal with the question at all, except merely parenthetically. Even if they embarked upon it, they could not take the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman as their point of departure. If for no other reason, he objected to the Amendment on the ground—and he thought the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Wolverhampton agreed with him—that it was confined to the voluntary schools; and in the place in which it appeared, it must necessarily be confined to the voluntary schools. Any treatment of the subject should be general; and all the I safeguards to be introduced should be considered by this House in a manner in which they could not be considered on that occasion. He imagined it would be in order to introduce a new Clause, practically repeating the Clause in his right hon. friend's Bill of 1892; and if the House had ample time to consider it, they might knock it into some shape;

1211
which would not make it unjust to the voluntary schools. But in the present condition of the discussion of the Bill, it would be folly to make a promise that he would ask the Committee to find time for discussing a parenthesis, which was altogether outside the real topic dealt with in the Bill. He was not saying that a provision of the kind proposed, made universal, could not he so safeguarded as to make it a reasonable and proper addition to the Statute-hook: hut he ventured to suggest that it should be introduced as a separate Bill, and at a time when the House would have an opportunity of discussing it.
MR. BRYCEsaid he thought he was right in saying that the right hon. Gentleman had practically admitted that the queston was one which ought to be dealt with. The right hon. Gentleman's contention was that it should be dealt with in a separate Bill. Twenty-two years ago that might have been a reasonable argument; but, nowadays, when a private Member's Bill which was opposed had really no chance of passing, the right hon. Gentleman might just as well have given a blank refusal as to tell them to bring in a private Member's Bill on the subject. Why did not the right hon. Gentleman himself bring in a Bill?
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he did not exclude the possibility of the Government dealing with the subject; and he carefully abstained from giving or withholding any pledge. What he said was that it was quite clear that it could not wisely or possibly be introduced at that stage into the present Bill.
MR. BRYCEsaid he thought he was right in saying that the House passed a unanimous Resolution in favour of the proposal in the Amendment.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Government of which he was a member went out of office in 1892.
MR. BRYCEsaid that that side of the House was in office for less than three years, whereas the Government were in office for more than eight years; and if there was any desire on the part of the Government to redeem their promise, they had more than twice the opportunity the Opposition had had. The right hon.
1212
Gentleman must feel that he could not relegate to the dim, distant, and uncertain future a matter which could be so properly dealt with in the present Bill, and for this reason. The Bill made these schools the property of the ratepayers for educational purposes; it gave them a full right to use the schools for educational purposes. It changed the character of these schools by giving them assistance out of the rates, and made them public in a way in which they were not public previously. Surely, then, it was only right that the public should be allowed to meet in them and discuss public matters. It was not a grievance which affected municipalities so much as villages, because in the towns the Board school-rooms were invariably larger, but it was a very great grievance in the villages of this country, for the reason that the village school very often was the only place in which a meeting could be held. He could not, help, even at this late stage, making one last appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to agree now to a modified form of this Amendment and settle the question.
MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid the importance of the question had been shown by the arguments used against it. Years after the passing of the original Act, the House of Commons had to pass a special Act to rectify an omission in that Act, and that was a reason surely for not perpetuating the omission in this Act. The grievance, though not perhaps so apparent, was very real. Most hon. Members had felt the difficulty at election times of getting the use of a school-room for election purposes on a particular evening. He had experienced the difficulty both of giving and obtaining the use of a schoolroom for political meetings. In most cases, it was true, the managers let the schools to both sides, but not often for the same sum, and it was, he submitted, not fair, for the managers ought not to be allowed to charge one side more than the other. The Committee would be willing to accept a modified Clause in the Act. Let the Government put four lines in the Act, and leave it to the Education Department to make any recommendation they liked. The Department surely could put in a condition that would prevent any injury being done to the schools.
MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 187; Noes, 85. (Division List, No. 442.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Galloway, William Johnson

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Murray, Rt. Hn. A Graham (Bute

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

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

Myers, William Henry

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Nicholson, William Graham

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Arrol, Sir William

Graham, Henry Robert

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Greene, Sir E W (B'ry SEdm'nds

Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs)

Pemberton, John S. G.

Balcarres, Lord

Gretton, John

Percy, Earl

Baldwin, Alfred

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Pierpoint, Robert

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

Groves, James Grimble

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Plummer, Walter R.

Balfour, Kenneth R. Christch.

Gunter, Sir Robert

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Bartley, George C. T.

Hain, Edward

Pretyman, Ernest George

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Beckett, Ernest William

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Purvis, Robert

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Rankin, Sir James

Bignold, Arthur

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Heaton, John Henniker

Ratcliff, R. F.

Bond, Edward

Helder, Augustus

Remnant, James Farquharson

Boulnois, Edmund

Higginbottom, S. W.

Richards, Henry Charles

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn)

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Hope, J F (Sheffield, Brightside

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J, A. (Glasgow

Hoult, Joseph

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

Carew, James Laurence

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

Seton-Karr, Henry

Carlile, William Walter

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Jeeb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

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

Johnstone, Heywood

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

Kemp, George

Smith, HC (North'mb. Tyneside

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Spear, John Ward

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Kennedy, Patrick James

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

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

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Kimber, Henry

Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

Knowles, Lees

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Colombo, Sir John Charles Ready

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Tollemache, Henry James

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Leigh-Bennett, Heary Currie

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Davenport, William Bromley-

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Valentia, Viscount

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Faber, George Denison (York)

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell-(Birm

Fardell, Sir T. George

Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. Ellison

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Macdona, John Cumming

Willox, Sir John Archibald

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

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

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

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

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

Finch, George H.

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

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

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Majendie, James A. H.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Fisher, William Hayes

Manners, Lord Cecil

Wylie, Alexander

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Younger, William

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Flower, Ernest

Morrell, George Herbert

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Forster, Henry William

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Foster, PhilipS(Warwick, S.W.

Mount, William Arthur

Question put, "That the Question, 'That those words be there inserted,' be now put."

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Helme, Norval Watson

Rickett, J. Compton

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Horniman, Frederick John

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Schwann, Charles E.

Barlow, John Emmott

Jacoby, James Alfred

Shackleton, David James

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Joicey, Sir James

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Kearley, Hudson E.

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Brigg, John

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Broadhnrst, Henry

Labouchere, Henry

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Lambert, George

Soares, Ernest J.

Burt, Thomas

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Spencer, Rt. Hn. CR. (Northants

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Leng, Sir John

Stevenson, Francis S.

Caine, William Sproston

Lewis, John Herbert

Strachey, Sir Edward

Caldwell, James

Lloyd-George, David

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Cameron, Robert

Logan, John William

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Cawley, Frederick

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

Channing, Francis Allston

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

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

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Tomkinson, James

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Mather, Sir William

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Wallace, Robert

Duncan, J. Hastings

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Edwards, Frank

Norton, Captain Cecil William

Weir, James Galloway

Emmott, Alfred

Nussey, Thomas Willans

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Partington, Oswald

Yoxall, James Henry

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Paulton, James Mellor

Grant, Corrie

Philipps, John Wynford

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Price, Robert John

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Rea, Russell

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. Causton.

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Reckitt, Harold James

(3.51.) Question put accordingly.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 91; Noes, 189. (Division List, No. 443.)

NOES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Foster, Philips S. (Warwick, S. W.

Murray, Rt. Hn. A Graham (Bute

Aird, Sir John

Galloway, William Johnson

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

Myers, William Henry

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Nicholson, William Graham

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

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

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Arrol, Sir William

Graham, Henry Robert

Pemberton, John S. G.

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Percy, Earl

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Greene, Sir EW (B'ry SEdm'nds

Pierpoint, Robert

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Balcarries, Lord

Gretton, John

Plummer, Walter R.

Baldwin, Alferd

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

Groves, James Grimble

Pretyman, Ernest George

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Gunter Sir Robert

Purvis, Robert

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Hain, Edward

Rankin, Sir James

Bartley, George C. T.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Ratcliff, R. F.

Beckett, Ernest William

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Remnant, James Farquharson

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Richards, Henry Charles

Bignold, Arthur

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Heaton, John Henniker

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green)

Bund, Edward

Helder, Augustus

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Boulnois, Edmund

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Higginbottom, S. W.

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Hope, J.F.(Sheffield Brightside

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

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

Carew, James Laurence

Hoult, Joseph

Seton-Karr, Henry

Carlile, William Walter

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

Sharpe, William Edward T.

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

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Smith, HC (North 'mb.Tyneside

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Johnstone, Heywood

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A (Worc

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Kennedy, Patrick James

Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Colombo, Sir John Charles Ready

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

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

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Kimber, Henry

Thompson, Dr EC(Monagh'n, N

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Knowles, Lees

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Law, Andrew Bonar, (Glasgow

Tollemache, Henry James

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Davenport, William Bromley-

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Valentia, Viscount

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Long, Col. Charles. W. (Evesham)

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

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

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

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Whitemore, Charles Algernon

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell-(Birm

Faber, George Denison (York)

Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. Ellison

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Fardell, Sir T. George

Macdona, John Cumming

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

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

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

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Wilson-Todd, Wm. H.(Yorks)

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

M'Killop, James(Stirlingshire)

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

Finch, George H.

Majendie, James A. H.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Manners, Lord Cecil

Wylie, Alexander

Fisher, William Hayes

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Morrell, George Herbert

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Sir Alexander AclandHood and Mr. Anstruther.

Flower, Ernest

Mount, William Arthur

Forster, Henry William

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

THE Chairman: The rest of the Amendments on pages 14, 15, and 16 are not in order.
MR. WHITLEYagreed that the first part of his Amendment on page 14 was out of order, but ho submitted

1219
that he might be in order in moving the insertion of the words—
"At any meeting the presence of at least three shall be required to form a quorum."
THE CHAIRMAN: The question as to the number of the managers has already been dealt with in Clause 7. The next Amendment which is in order is that of the hon. and learned Member for Dundee.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I do not move now, because I

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Aird, Sir John

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Allhusen, Augustus H'nryEden

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Johnstone, Heywood

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Faber, George Denison (York)

Kemp, George

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Fardell, Sir T. George

Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Kennedy, Patrick James

Arrol, Sir William

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

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Finch, George H.

Kimber, Henry

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Knowles, Lees

Balcarres, Lord

Fisher, William Hayes

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Baldwin, Alfred

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Lee, Arthur H.(Hants, Fareham

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

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Flower, Ernest

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Bartley, George C. T.

Forster, Henry William

Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Be0njamin

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W.

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

Beckett, Ernest William

Galloway, William, Johnson

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Bignold, Arthur

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

Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. Ellison

Bond, Edward

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Macdona, John Cumming

Boulnois, Edmund

Goulding, Edward Alfred

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Graham, Henry Robert

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Greene, Sir EW (B'rySEdm'nds

Majendie, James A. H.

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

Manners, Lord Cecil

Carew, James Laurence

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Carlile, William Walter

Grenfell, William Henry

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Gretton, John

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

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

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Morrell, George Herbert

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Groves, James Grimble

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Mount, William Arthur

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Gunter, Sir Robert

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Hain, Edward

Murray, Rt. Hn. A Graham (Bute

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn J. A (Worc.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (MIdd'x

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

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

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Myers, William Henry

Coddington, Sir William

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Nicholson, William Graham

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Heaton, John Henniker

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

Helder, Augustus

Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

Cubit, Hon. Henry

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Pemberton, John S. G.

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Higginbottom, S. W.

Percy, Earl

Davenport, William Bromley-

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Pierpoint, Robert

Denny, Colonel

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Plummer, Walter R.

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Hoult, Joseph

Pretyman, Ernest George

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

Purvis, Robert

understood the question is to be dealt with in another part of the Bill.
MR. A. J. BALFOURclaimed to move, "That the Question' That the word "If," in line 25, stand part of the Clause' be now put:"—
Question put, "That the Question 'That the word "If," in line 25, stand part of the Clause' be now put."
The Committee divided; Ayes 211, Noes 86. (Division List No. 444.)

Rankin, Sir James

Smith, HC (North'mb. Tyneside

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

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

Ratcliff, R. F.

Spear, John Ward

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell-(Birm

Remnant, James Farquharson

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Richards, Henry Charles

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

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

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

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

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

Wylie, Alexander

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Tollemache, Henry James

Younger, William

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

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Seton-Karr, Henry

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

Valentia, Viscount

Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Rickett, J. Compton

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

Helme, Norval Watson

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Allen, Charles P.(Glouc.,Stro'd

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Horniman, Frederick John

Runciman, Walter

Barlow, John Emmott

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Sehwann, Charles E

Bayley, Thomas (Derby shire)

Jacoby, James Alfred

Shackleton, David James

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Joicey, Sir James

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Brigg, John

Kearley, Hudson E.

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Broadhurst, Henry

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Lambert, George

Soares, Ernest J.

Burt, Thomas

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Spencer, Rt Hn C. R, (Northants

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Leng, Sir John

Stevenson, Francis S.

Caine, William Sproston

Lewis, John Herbert

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Caldwell, James

Lloyd-George, David

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Cameron, Robert

Logan, John William

Thomas, J A (Glamorg'n, Gower

Cawley, Frederick

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

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

Channing, Francis Allston

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Cremer, William Randal

Markham, Arthur Basil

Wallace, Robert

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Mather, Sir William

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Weir, James Galloway

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

White Luke (York, E.R.)

Duncan, J. Hastings

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Edwards, Frank

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Emmott, Alfred

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

Partington, Oswald

Yoxall, James Henry

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Paulton, James Mellor

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Philipps, John Wynford

Grant, Corrie

Price, Robert John

TELLERS FOR THE NOES․

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

Rea, Russell

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. Causton.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Reckitt, Harold James

(4.14.) Question put accordingly.

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Carlile, William Walter

Aird, Sir John

Bartley, George C. T.

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

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Beckett, Ernest William

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Bentinck Lord Henry C.

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Bignold, Arthur

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

Arrol, Sir William

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bond, Edward

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

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Boulnois, Edmund

Coddington, Sir William

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Balcarres, Lord

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Baldwin, Alfred

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Cripps, Charles Alfred

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

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Crossley, Sir Savile

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 218; Noes, 90. (Division List No. 445.)

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Hogg, Lindsay

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Davenport, William Bromley-

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Pretyman, Ernest George

Denny, Colonel

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Hoult, Joseph

Purvis, Robert

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Houston, Robert Paterson

Rankin, Sir James

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

Rash, Major Frederic Carne

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

Ratcliff, R. F.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Remnant, James Farquharson

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred

Richards, Henry Charles

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Johnstone, Heywood

Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Kemp, George

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Faber, George Denison (York)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Fardell, Sir T. George

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop)

Rollerston, Sir John F. L.

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Kimber, Henry

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

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

Knowles, Lees

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

Finch, George H.

Lecky, Rt. Hon. William Edw. H

Seton-Karr, Henry

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

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

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Fisher, William Hayes

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Smith, H. C (North 'mb.Tyneside

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Spear, John Ward

Flower, Ernest

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

Stanley, Hon Arthur(Ormskirk

Forster, Henry William

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, SW.

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Galloway, William Johnson

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary, (St. Albans)

Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. Ellison

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Macdona, John Cumming

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

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

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n N.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Graham, Henry Robert

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Thornton, Percy M.

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Majendie, James A. H.

Tollemache, Henry James

Greene, Sir EW (B 'ryS'Edm'nds

Manners, Lord Cecil

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Grenfell, William Henry

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Valentia, Viscount

Gretton, John

Morrell, George Herbert

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Groves, James Grimble

Mount, William Arthur

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

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Gunter, Sir Robert

Murray, Rt. Hn. A Graham (Bute

Williams, Rt. Hn. J Powell-(Birm

Hain, Edward

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Myres, William Henry

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

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Nicholson, William Henry

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Nicol, Donald Ninian

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

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Palmer, Sir Gilbert

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Parker, Walter (Salisbury)

Wylie, Alexander

Heaton, John Henniker

Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Helder, Augustus

Pemberton, John S. G.

Younger, William

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Percy, Earl

Higginbottom, S. W.

Pierpoint, Robert

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Plummer, Walter R.

NOES.

Allen, Sir William (Gateshead

Cameron, Robert

Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John

Allen, Chas P. (Glouc., Stroud.

Causton, Richard Knight

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Cawley, Frederick

Grant, Corrie

Barlow, John Emmott

Channing, Francis Allston

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

Bayley, Thomas (Derby shire)

Cremer, William Randal

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Brigg, John

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Helme, Norval Watson

Broadhurst, Henry

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Duncan, J. Hastings

Horniman, Frederick John

Burt, Thomas

Edwards, Frank

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Emmott, Alfred

Jacoby, James Alfred

Caine, William Sproston

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

Joicey, Sir James

Caldwell, James

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Kearley, Hudson E.

1224

1225

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Kitson, Sir James

Partington, Oswald

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Lambert, George

Paulton, James Mellor

Thomas, JA (Glamorg'n, Gower

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Philipps, John Wynford

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

Leng, Sir John

Price, Robert John

Thomkinson, James

Lewis, John Herbert

Rea, Russell

Wallace, Robert

Lloyd-George, David

Reckitt, Harold James

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Logan, John William

Rickett, J. Compton

Weir, James Galloway

Lough, Thomas

Roberts, John H. (Denbigh.)

White Luke (York, E.R.)

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Schwann, Charles E

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Markham, Arthur Basil

Shackleton, David James

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Mather, Sir William

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Yoxall, James Henry

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Moulton, John Fletcher

Soares, Ernest J.

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Newnes, Sir George

Spencer, Rt. Hn C. R. (Northants

Mr. Trevelyan and Mr. Runciman

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Stevenson, Francis S.

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Strachey, Sir Edward

MR. BRYCE(4.26.) MR. BRYCE moved to insert in Clause 8, line 25, after "If" the words "The managers of any school fail to comply with the above conditions no assistance from the rates or the Parliamentary grant shall be given to such school," and to omit all the words after "If" down to the end of line 29. His view was that in the matters dealt with in the sub-Sections of the Clause it was better that the local education authority should be the judge and that there should be no appeal at all to the Board of Education. That was also the view of his right non, friend the Member for West Monmouthshire who gave notice of the Amendment. His right hon. friend thought, and he agreed with him, that there ought to be a distinct and unequivocal assertion that as soon as a school failed to fulfil the provisions of any sub-Section no claim should be made for rate aid. Now there was a certain amount of justification for his proposal. It was to be found in the fact that within the last few days, during the consideration of this Clause, they had been piling up difficulties and ambiguities, and possibly questions on which divergence of opinion must arise, all of which were to be referred to the Board of Education. Those appeals would do a great deal to make the working of the whole Bill, if it became an Act, extremely difficult and extremely vexatious to the local education authorities; and unsatisfactory to the local managers. He did not think that there had ever been brought forward a scheme more complicated and more fertile in occasions for friction. It was an unsuccessful attempt to recondite principles which were fundamentally opposed. Take, for instance, the case of religious instruction, in regard to which
1226
it was very likely that appeals would be sent to Whitehall if this sub-Section were passed. The theory of the sub-Section was that the local managers were to be entirely responsible, and to have complete control over religious instruction, and that the local education authorities had no right to intervene in any way. But it had been at the same time urged, with great force, and, he confessed, with some appearance of truth, that if there was to be in the schools a religious atmosphere, it should pervade the whole school, that it should not be confined to religious instruction, but carried on and make itself felt in the secular education. Then they would have difficulty as to what were religious and what were secular hours. They had endeavoured to deal with one of those questions by proposing that the local education authorities should have power to enforce the Conscience Clause, and an extraordinary divergence of opinion had been elicited as to what the Clause meant, even in the mind of the Attorney General. It was admitted that there was a power of appeal, but how far could that appeal go or be reported to Whitehall? All that was left in the dark, and that was a darkness which was certain to produce friction. Take the case of the use of the buildings. The scheme of the Board was that the buildings of the voluntary schools were to remain the property of the managers, but at the same time the use of the buildings was to be in the hands of the local education authority during the hours of secular instruction. It could be easily seen that disputes would arise in regard to furniture, repairs, and the use of the school at other times, in regard to

1227
the claim made upon them by the local authority for the purposes of what was called secondary education. What struck him was the number of difficulties that would arise from the extreme complications of this scheme. How much simpler it would have been to transfer the property in the schools to the local education authority and make them masters. If that was objected to on pecuniary grounds, let the pecuniary difficulty be met and dealt with. He would take another point. It had been generally felt by educational reformers that one of the most important things for efficiency of local schools was that a good deal of power should be vested in the local managers, and if the Government had been free they would have listened to the voice of educational experts, and would have given to the local managers wide powers to carry on their schools in a manner which their local experience of local feeling told them would be best. Although it was true that the school managers in a borough were only the servants or agents of the School Board, yet they were constantly under the eye of the School Board; the School Board might delegate powers to them in a way not possible in the case of the managers of country schools. The Government had been unable to confer those wide powers on the rural managers because they were obliged to set up some sort of popular control. As they could not give it to the people on the spot, they gave a semblance of it to the local education authority sitting in the county seat. What was the result? The local managers were not to have the power they ought to have, and the local education authority was so far removed that it could not exercise control effectively over the managers in the rural districts. That being so, he thought that the next best thing they could do was to facilitate the working of the schools by vesting a wide and complete power in the local education authority, and to do that it would be necessary to get rid of the appeal to the Board of Education which was given by this sub-Section. He therefore proposed to leave out the words "appeal to the Board of Education." His Amendment was that the local education authority should be the final
1228
judge in these matters. He was quite sure that that was a plan which would be found to work easiest and simplest, and with most efficiency. They had had expressed from both sides of the House great confidence in the judgment and good sense of the local education authority. He was assured that they would have no motive in endeavouring to interfere with religious instruction, or the legitimate use of the school buildings by the local managers. He thought that this was one of those cases where they might, with great confidence, leave it to the local education authority, in the belief that they would not abuse their power, but use it in the public interest, and not to the disadvantage of the managers. Therefore it would be better not to check them in their work. It would be quite unworthy to subject these great local authorities to constant appeals to Whitehall. The First Lord had expressed a sanguine hope that the conferring of educational functions on these local authorities would induce a great number of able and publicspirited citizens to devote themselves to educational work; but what encouragement would be given them to undertake those functions if they were subjected at every point to an appeal to the Board of Education in Whitehall. He contended that not only on the ground of local interest, but of respect to the local education authority, these ought not to be subjected to such appeals. He feared that if this Section was passed in its present form it would be found impossible to work the scheme, and even if it did work, it could not last; and in the course of two or three years Parliament would have to tinker the Act by passing another Bill. They should endeavour to avoid that danger, and to avoid anything which would make the local education authorities resent the position of inferiority in which they would be placed by this Clause. They should trust them fully.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 25, to leave out the words from the word ' If,' to the end of line 29, and insert the words 'the managers of any school fail to comply with the above conditions no assistance from the rates or the Parliamentary grant shall be given to such school.'"—(Mr. Bryce.)
Question proposed, "That the words 'any question,' stand part of the Clause."
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,said that the right hon. Gentleman had raised a question which, no doubt, was of very great importance, in a speech of perfect clearness, and in a manner to winch no one, who was interested in education, could take the slightest exception, He desired very shortly to submit to the Committee his reasons for thinking that the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman was a mistake, and that they should reject it. His right hon. friend had spoken of the necessity of trusting the local education authority. He had said before, and he repeated it, that the Government had every confidence that the local education authorities would be reasonable, and that the spirit in which they would administer this Bill would be everything that could be desired. But that did not settle the matter. The question was, what was to be the machinery for solving questions that might arise in dispute between the managers and the local education authorities? He believed that both the managers and the local education authorities would do their best fairly and honestly to carry out the provisions of the Act; but it was possible that they might differ in some points, and in case of dispute who was to decide between them? The managers might take one view and the education authority another, and then who was to decide? As he understood it, the effect of the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman was that in a dispute between the managers and the local education authority the local authority should settle the controversy. With every confidence in the local authority and other representative bodies, he could not think it would be either wise or practicable to trust them with the decision of disputes in which, conceivably, feeling might run high and to which they had been parties. The right hon. Gentleman desired to leave all the decisions to the local education authority. To carry out that wish the introduction of other words into the Section would be necessary, because if the Amendment were carried in the form in which it was put down by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouthshire, or in the amended form of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen, these disputes would have to go to courts of law for decision, because they had Sections which provided that in various events the rights of managers should be
1230
forfeited. If a dispute arose as to whether those events had happened, according to the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman, a court of law would have to determine the point. He thought the Committee would be of opinion that it would be extremely undesirable that such a question as, for instance, the limit of religious or secular teaching, or abstruse questions of that kind, should be ventilated in the High Courts. They were questions of some delicacy; questions absolutely unsuitable, in his opinion, for decision by the best of County Councils, and he ventured to think that even the High Court was not the best tribunal to deal with these matters. But the Bill provided an effective and an easy way of determining any questions that might arise, which would be an appeal to the Board of Education. Looking at the section as amended by the Committee, the Committee would see that the nature of the questions that might arise made it necessary to provide some means of deciding them at once. As the whole question of the appeal to the Board of Education was raised by the Amendment, he would show the Committee how the right of appeal would work in the case of each of the sub-Clauses. The Committee would see exactly what questions would arise in the various sub-Clauses (a) (b) (c) (d) and (e). He reminded the Committee that the early part of the Clause stated the conditions on the performance of which the right of maintenance by the school out of the rates depended, and also made the performance of those conditions necessary in order to earn the Parliamentary grant. Who were to determine whether or not those conditions had been broken? The first condition was that any direction of the education authority as to secular instruction in the schools, including the number of teachers to be employed, and with reference to the dismissal of teachers on educational grounds, was to be carried out. That gave the educational authority the power to issue its directions to managers with regard to any matter of secular instruction, including the matters which it had been thought proper to specify so fully under that head. Directions given by the local education authority on those matters could not be questioned as being improper or unreasonable directions, because the local education authority

1231
had been made the judge in that matter, and in that case there could be no appeal at all. Someone must be trusted with some directions, and the Government trusted the local authority. But the difficulty might arise under this Section as to whether a matter referred to was a matter of secular instruction or whether it trenched on religious instruction. Did the Committee think that they should adopt an Amendment which would leave a matter of that kind to be settled by the courts of law? A speedy decision was necessary in order that the schools might go on without friction, and from the nature of the case itself, it was not one suitable for a court of law to decide On the other hand, did they think they could possibly adopt the proposal advocated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen which left the matter to be decided by the authorities who had first given the directions to the managers? He submitted that both alternatives were impossible, and the only remedy was to leave the Board of Education to deal with matters of this kind. These matters were in their very nature matters which had to be decided at once, and, by a process of exhaustion the Government were driven to a tribunal which was eminently competent and absolutely impartial. The only question under sub-Clause (a) was whether the directions had been carried out. He need hardly say anything as to Clause (b) because the only question that could arise upon it was whether the managers had been instructed by the local authority.
MR. BRYCEpointed out that "inspection" came into that sub-Clause, and that great difficulty might arise.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid the Board of Education dealt with such questions as that every day. Sub-Clause (c) was an important sub-Clause dealing with the appointment and dismissal of teachers, and the questions which might arise there were two: the first relating to the appointment, the second relating to the dismissal, of teachers. The consent of the local education authority was required for the appointment of the teachers, and they were not to be dismissed except on educational grounds. It might be said
1232
the consent was withheld not on educational grounds; that the circumstances were such as to show that the local education authority had refused their consent not on those grounds but on some others relating to the religious tenets or the political views of the candidate. He did not expect such a case to arise; the spectres which had been conjured up with regard to this Act were spectres conjured up under the stimulus of political oratory. He believed the Bill would work very smoothly; but if such a question did arise there must be some remedy. The Committee had passed the Clause that the local education authority should not refuse its consent except on educational grounds. Who was to decide whether it had or not? The right hon. Gentleman said the local education authority itself! But they could not go into it because their probity had been impeached. With regard to the dismissal of the teachers, the managers might allege that they were entitled to dismiss a teacher because he was giving religious education on lines against the religious doctrines of the school. The education authority might say their consent ought to be obtained; that the teacher was dismissed, not on religious grounds, but because of some personal jealousy. Who was to decide that? Somebody must, and it was suggested by the right hon. Gentleman that it should be decided by the body that made the charge. As to sub-Clause (c) a question might arise as to whether the school building was really required for educational purposes for the evenings of three days a week, and whether the local authority had not sufficient accommodation in their own schools. The managers might allege that the local authority were sparing the use of their own schools and making use of the non-provided schools. That would have to be settled by the Board of Education. The difficulty of the rent of the teacher's house could be solved by the rate book of the neighbourhood, but if a dispute arose some one must settle it. Repairs might give rise to questions. An obligation was imposed on the managers to keep the premises in repair. Suppose the local education authority said they were not in repair and the managers said they were? It was not a great question, but if issue was joined upon it it would have to be determined at once. That was a question

1233
which was constantly before the Board of Education, and he submitted there could be no better tribunal. "Alterations and improvements" might raise very important questions, because by the decision of the Committee the local education authority were only entitled to make "reasonable" requests for alterations and improvements. This was a point on which particularly disputes were most likely to arise. The local education committee might say they wanted certain improvements made in the building, and the managers might retort, "We think your request is unreasonable, and you are only entitled to request reasonable improvements." The right hon. Gentleman wished by his Amendment that the decision in such a matter as that should remain with the local education authority. The right hon. Gentleman would agree that they could hardly expect the managers, who had to find the money for improvements which they thought unreasonable, to be in entire agreement with him. He need not detain the Committee with regard to sub-Clause (e). The only question that could arise on that was as to the amount of damage done to the building and furniture, and whether the school-room had been put into a proper condition for scholastic work after it had been used for other purposes. He submitted that ho had shown that there might in a small number of cases be a small number of questions that might arise between the managers and the local education authority. The suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman was that the decision of those questions should be left with the local education authority, whilst that of the Government was that it should be left with the Education Department, and he left it with confidence to the Committee to say which of those solutions was the better.
MR. LAMBERTsaid the fallacy that underlay the whole of the Attorney General's argument appeared to him to be that he insisted upon putting the local education authority upon an equality with the managers, and for the right hon. Gentleman to further say that the County Council would be a party to a dispute was begging the question. If a County Council could be trusted to carry out its duties there should be no difficulty whatever in allowing them to do so.
1234
They had been told that the basis of this Bill was that the Education Department was unfit or was not so fit as the local education authority, to know what the requirements in the various districts were, and he submitted with confidence, even to the Attorney General himself, that the education authority was a much fitter body to deal with these matters than the Education Department. But the hon. and learned Gentleman had told them that in matters of this kind one of the best courts in the country would be a tribunal with the hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Board of Education at its head. For his part he should much prefer to leave this matter to the commonsense of the community. How was it possible for the hon. Gentleman representing the Education Department in this House to find out what was reasonable and what was not as between a County Council and voluntary school managers? The only possible way would be for the hon. Gentleman to send his inspector down to enquire into the matter, and then they would have the melancholy spectacle of a County Council being placed upon its trial before an inspector of the Education Department. That would be a most degrading position to place the authority in. Surely the local education authority constituted under this Bill must be as capable, or more so, of deciding this point than any inspector sent down. He could not conceive anything more humiliating than for the County Council to be summoned to give evidence before an inspector who had no knowledge of the subject which he had to investigate. He maintained that the Clause as it stood must be a constant source of irritation between the local authorities and the managers, and so far as appeals went, the managers could appeal to the Board of Education for the cost of the postage stamp which franked their letter. But if they had to appeal to a court of law, that would cost money, and they would, he thought, be chary of risking a lawsuit with the County Council. Giving to the Board of Education the power of deciding all these questions would not decentralise, but practically centralise, education, because the whole authority would rest with the Board of Education. One argument on which the Bill had been defended was that it would decentralise

1235
education, but under this Clause it would be directed from Whitehall as hitherto. The whole Clause was a perfect farce. It would create great friction and irritation. It showed a want of trust in the new authority, and as a member of a County Council he repudiated it most strongly and should support the Amendment.
MR. ERNEST GRAYthought there would be less opposition to this sub-Section if Members had a wider knowledge of what transpired under the existing law. It was a very common occurrence for the largest School Boards to apply to the Board of Education for its ruling on questions affecting the conduct of their own schools. The point had been argued as though the disputes would necessarily be of an acrimonious character. He did not anticipate that at all. What he expected was, that a County Council would take a certain view of the law and the local managers a slightly different one. The County Council might propose to establish in some voluntary school such a regulation which the managers claimed to be altogether inapplicable. Who was to decide such a point? Were they to waste the ratepayers' money in litigation, or to go to people who had spent their lives in determining these small points of detail, who knew exactly the effect of the last legal decision or the last decision of the Board of Education, and who could put the local authority straight without unnecessary delay or friction? He could hardly conceive antagonistic dealings arising when both parties knew that they would be appealing to an impartial tribunal which, without cost and with little delay, would settle the point at issue. There was one question, however, that he would like cleared up. He was not quite certain of the force of the provision that compliance with this section should be one of the conditions on which the Parliamentary grant would be paid. Would that empower the Board of Education to withhold the Parliamentary grants from the County Council? At present, in order to bring a School Board into subjection and compel it to carry out the law, the Board of Education was able to withhold from that School
1236
Board the Parliamentary grants with respect to the particular school in regard to which the difficulty had occurred. The withdrawal of the Parliamentary grants would tend to induce the County Council to carry out the decisions of the Board of Education, but it would have no influence on the school concerned, inasmuch as the latter would not in any case receive the grant. The local authority was charged with the maintenance of the school, no matter what Parliamentary grant it might receive; therefore, while no penalty was imposed on the school, a penalty might perchance be imposed on the County Council. In the event of the voluntary school managers declining to obey the decision of the Board of Education, they could be effectually reduced to subjection by the withdrawal of the entire support of that school by the County Council, and in an extreme case, the erection of another school. The point he desired to be informed upon was whether this last provision was intended to be a penalty applicable to the County or Borough Council; if so, not only was the sub-Section sound, but it was absolutely essential to the smooth working of the Bill.
MR. BROADHURSTreminded the Attorney General that the County Councils were advised by capable lawyers in the persons of their chief and assistant clerks, who were, so far as the interpretation of an Act of Parliament was concerned, as efficient a body as a court of law. If the object of the Section was to prevent delay, there could be no better way of securing it than by giving: the local authority power to stop supplies unless the management carried on the necessary instruction. The local authority in the case of a county was the High Court of the county for all civil purposes, and, therefore, it ought to, and could, be safely entrusted with powers such as the Amendment sought to confer. There was no fear of the County Councils making unreasonable demands on the managers; the tendency, in his view, was more likely to be in the direction of slackness than undue stringency. Speaking as a County Councillor, he thought these bodies, if they were to be endowed with

1237
the enormous powers proposed by the Bill, were worthy of having placed in their hands the power of withholding supplies, if, through stubbornness or stupidity, the managers failed to provide proper accommodation and appliances for the education of the children. The management was only a parochial committee, and to give that committee power to defy and wrangle with the great county authority was unwise, and would not tend to produce harmony in the administration of county affairs. Under those circumstances, he thought it was only reasonable to give the authority asked for. He was sure that for years to come the Education Department would find itself so bombarded from every part of the country, rural and urban, on questions of education, that they might very well throw overboard a comparatively small matter of this kind, which was, nevertheless, essential for the immediate and continuous progress of elementary education.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTOXsaid he had listened with some surprise and considerable alarm to the speech of the Attorney General. While discussing the previous sub-Sections the Prime Minister, on more than one occasion, told the Committee that his desire was that the local education authority should be supreme.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Supreme in its own sphere.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid the right hon. Gentleman had done his best to limit matters in which an appeal should be allowed. They understood that the only appeal would be between secular and religious sections. The right hon. Gentleman said there would be an appeal about sub-Section (d) for alterations and improvements, and it was said that those were large matters upon which there was to be an appeal. He did not think the First Lord of the Treasury would deny that those were the only two points upon which there was a right of appeal from the local authority. The Attorney General, by his speech, had put a, totally different complexion upon it. When he got to the sub-Section dealing with damage caused to furniture, he went so far as to say that where there was any
1238
question of dispute there an appeal would lie. If that was the way the local authority was to be treated, it seemed to him that the speech of the Attorney General put the managers absolutely on an equality with the local authority in regard to every question. There was, according to the Attorney General, an absolute right of appeal from the local authority, and it was not a question of one authority being superior to the other. Was this going to be the construction put upon the Clause which they under stood was going to be very much improved? The First Lord of the Treasury admitted that the drafting was too broad. If the construction of the Attorney General were right, that the managers were to have an appeal in ever single minute detail where there was friction, the education authority would be put in a difficult position and there would be an enormous amount of delay. Surely the obvious solution was to allow the right of appeal only in matters of very material and vital importance. The Attorney General said they were raising spectres of difficulties and disputes. He had had some experience in the management of elementary schools and he should like to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman if he had had any experience of these everyday matters which arose in schools. Had he ever been a manager or been in an elementary school in England? With all due respect, he ventured to think that the Attorney General was not capable of appreciating these matters. If his inter pretation was to stand, he hoped the Prime Minister would recollect the impression left upon the Committee on this point a few days ago, and do something to allay their alarms upon it.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSthought it was rather hard for the hon. Member for Poplar to say that the Attorney General was not qualified to give a legal view if he had never been to an elementary school. The matter they were now dealing with was really a very serious one. It might be regarded from three points of view. Many hon. Members thought there ought not to be any right of appeal at all, but assuming that there was to be a right of appeal to whom or to what body ought that right to be given? Again, if they had decided that the right of appeal must exist, and also decided upon the

1239
tribunal, the question remained in what cases might they have recourse to that right. They had already discussed this point, and he took it that the House of Commons had decided that in certain cases there should be an appeal. Therefore anything outside those cases was a legitimate subject for discussion upon this Amendment. With regard to the question as to what court, or what body, or tribunal they were to appeal, he agreed with the Government that it would be much better to have an appeal to some body like the Education Department rather than to a court of law. It was better to have an appeal upon administrative matters to an administrative body. He agreed that it would be hopeless to have appeals to Courts of Law upon any of the questions arising under this Section. There was another matter, and a most important one, and it was in what matters were they to have a right of appeal? The Committee ought to lay down that there ought not to be a right of appeal at all, except on most important subjects, and it was for the Government to decide what matters there ought to be an appeal upon. It was not for the Opposition to point out that they ought not to have an appeal in this or that matter, but it was for the Government to make up their minds what were the large matters and important subjects upon which the appeal was to take place. He agreed with his hon. friend the Member for Poplar that the appeals ought to be limited to two subject matters: (1) whether or not in any direction given by the local authority they were trenching upon the jurisdiction of the managers, because they were affecting to deal with religious and not secular instruction; and (2) that they were to have a right of appeal against any decision of the local authority referring not to repairs, but to the improvement or alteration of the building. Assuming that there ought to be a right of appeal, in order to define whether a certain direction or order on the line of religious or secular instruction, and that there ought to be a right of appeal on alterations and improvements, they ought now to consider whether they were confining the right of appeal to these subjects. He could conceive of no broader words, giving a right of appeal, than the words of this sub-Section, and he thought a court of law would say in every particular that there would be a right of
1240
appeal. Take seriatim some of the things. The first part of the Section said—
"In the case of a school not provided by them, the following conditions and provisions are complied with."
Obviously, a question which would come up would be the question whether any of "the following conditions" were complied with. That would open the door to an appeal in every case, and give a right of appeal to the managers. In sub-head (a) it was provided—
"(a) The managers of the school shall carry out any directions of the local education authority as to the secular instruction to be given in the school."
Whether or not that was complied with was a question which might very well arise. He asked whether or not, in the event of a direction not being complied with by the managers, there would be an appeal.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid it was very likely there would be an appeal.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that was a matter of very great importance. The appeal might be on the question whether or not a direction was to be carried out on the smallest matter in connection with the management of the school. He supposed that similar questions must arise with regard to the direction given as to the "number and educational qualifications of the teachers to be employed." He thought there ought to be an appeal within the meaning of sub-Section 2 in that case. Sub-Section (b) stated that—
"(b) The local education authority shall have power to inspect the school."
It did not appear likely that there would be an appeal under that. Sub-Section (c) said—
"(c.) The consent of the local education authority shall be required to the appointment of teachers, but that consent shall not be withheld except on educational grounds, and the consent of the authority shall also be required to the dismissal of a teacher unless the dismissal be on grounds connected with the giving of religious instruction in the school. Provided that assistant teachers and pupil teachers may be appointed, if it is thought fit, without reference to religious creed or denomination."
There might be a state of things where, under that sub-Section, an appeal might be taken. He wished to know whether there would be an appeal on questions of repairs dealt with in sub-Section (d).
SIR ROBERT FINLAYreplied that if the local education authority said the buildings were in need of repair and the managers said they were not, there must be some authority to decide the matter.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that was surely a matter which the local education authority ought to decide. It was idle to say that there ought to be an appeal in such a case. They were asked to say that the inspector or surveyor employed by the local authority was not competent to state whether a school was in sufficient repair or not. The terms of sub-Clause 2 were much too wide. It was not for him to indicate now what form of words should be put in the sub-Section, but he submitted that, with the view to the peaceful and successful working of Clause 8 in the educational machinery of the country, they ought to limit the right of appeal on questions which might give rise to dispute between the local authority and the school managers. It should also be made clear whether the local authority had the right to call upon the managers to make improvements or alterations which might mean structural alterations or additions to the school. Of one thing he felt confident, and that was, that on all these minor matters there ought not to be an appeal. The sub-Clause was now in a condition in which it ought not to emerge from the Committee.
MR. YOXALLsaid it must be apparent to the Government that the terms of the sub-Clause were far too wide. He did not say they were too wide as the Clause was drawn in its original form, but since that time all sorts of qualifications and additions had been made, and in consequence of the new wording there were now points on which appeals might arise, though appeals would not have been possible on them before. Therefore it seemed to him that, if the sub-Clause stood in its original form, the Board of Education would be overwhelmed with work during the next few years, and a very large staff would be required. He would point out to the Government that the multiplication of appeals on individual points would tend to bring about a deadlock in the management of the schools. Sub-Clause (2) contained a Condition
1242
which he supposed was intended by the draftsman of the Bill to give the Board of Education power over the managers as well as over the local authority. It was that—
"… compliance with this Section shall be one of the conditions required to be fulfilled by an elementary school in order to obtain a Parliamentary grant."
In the case of the managers being contumacious the Parliamentary grant was to be withdrawn from that particular school, but the Parliamentary grant was by Clause 13 to form a portion of the money of the local authority for educational purposes. The local authority could hardly be expected under the circumstances to maintain the school. Was that so?
THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir William ANSON,said that if a school ceased to earn the Parliamentary grant the local authority would be no longer liable to maintain the school.
MR. YOXALLsaid he wished to put this position. Suppose on an appeal the Board of Education decided in favour of the managers and the local authority refused to accept the decision, could the Board compel compliance? Unless they did so the school would come to an end and the whole process of the appeal would be rendered nugatory. No good would have been done to the school, but infinite harm. He was afraid that would happen again and again if the sub-Clause now before the Committee was sustained. They would hardly expect to get the great local authorities of Lancashire, the West Riding of Yorkshire or Birmingham to submit on infinitesimal points emerging under this Clause to the Board of Education in disputes as between a body of six managers and themselves. A dispute in the first instance would arise with the local education committee and the managers. The decision of that committee could be reviewed and if necessary reversed by the local education authority. This fact lessened the need for an appeal to the Board of Education. He urged upon the Government that, having regard to the statement in the text of Clause 8, to the new points which had been added, and in respect to the admirable additions—for they were admirable—which had been made to it,

1243
that it became necessary to revise the terms of sub-Section 2 in the direction of making them narrower. The sub-Section went too far, and would inevitably lead to acute disputes arising from political and doctrinal reasons, and from wounded pride and dignity. Another difficulty in the way of the smooth working of the Bill would be largely removed if the Government would consent to reconsider the terms of sub-Section 2, and insert some such words as would give an appeal from the managers to the Education Committee, and from the Education Committee to the County Council or the Borough Council. If the managers could not obtain what they called "justice" after that, it might be fairly contended that justice was not on their side, and that no appeal should lie to the Board of Education.
MR. BECKETTsaid that an appeal to the Board of Education was, in his opinion, right, desirable and necessary; but he had listened to the Attorney General's speech, and had been struck with the multiplicity of the points on which an appeal to the Board of Education might lie. He asked the Government whether it would not be possible to limit, or at least to specify, the points on which an appeal could be made to the Board of Education.
SIR EDWARD GREYsaid that the Attorney General had insisted that they had raised spectres of the friction which might arise, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman had in his speech proceeded to clothe those spectres with flesh and blood. He began by giving the Committee the points of appeal which might arise in reference to sub-Section (a), but as the Bill now stood it was evident that there might be a few on any part of the Clause as to what was religious education, what was control, and what was legitiemat expenditure? Suppose the local education authority said to the managers of a school—"We require you to build another class room," and that the managers considered that an excessive demand, the latter would, as he understood it, have an appeal to the Education Department. If the Department decided that an extra
1244
class room was not required, and the local authority said, "Then we will do with one teacher less," he supposed that the managers would have another appeal.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that that was not so. The directions of the local authority as to secular instruction, including the number of teachers, were conclusive.
SIR EDWARD GREYsaid that in that case the local education authority against whom the appeal went would be able to punish the managers, or to bring pressure to bear upon them through its control over the expenditure. The Clause as it stood provided for the possibility of friction, and allowed the local education authority to find their own way.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the local education authority would, in that way, punish the children and not the managers.
SIR EDWARD GREYsaid he would have thought that there was an appeal under the Bill as it stood. This brought him to the same point as had been raised by the hon. Member for Whitby, that it was desirable to restrict the possibility of these appeals as much as possible. He shared the terror of the Attorney General in regard to litigation in the Law Courts. He hoped the Committee would not put anything into the Bill which would bring the parties into the Law Courts. The First Lord had said that the local education authority should not be the judge in its own case. What did that mean? It meant that they were establishing a dual control, and they all knew that dual control had brought them into the greatest difficulty in Egypt, and in regard to the Irish land question. The Attorney General's speech showed an optimism which he could not share, because the right hon. and learned Gentleman had said how admirably the dual control would work between the Education Department and the local education authority. He however should say that they should limit the dual control on as many of these points as possible by making the managers subordinate to the local education authority. If there was to be an appeal, he would rather it was to be made to the Education Department than to the Law Courts, and therefore he should like to

1245
see words introduced into the section which would limit the points under which appeals could be made.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he desired to call the attention of the Attorney General to the fact that in many cases another education authority had been introduced. In urban districts the authority which used the schoolroom out of school hours would not be the elementary authority, but the secondary education authority. It was possible that under this Clause a dispute might arise between the managers of the school and the County Council, and between the Borough Council and the County Council. In that case who was to decide? Let the Committee take the case in which a County Council used the schoolroom out of school hours for an evening school, and refused to make good the damage which might be done to the furniture and the room. As regarded the furniture, the dispute would be between the County Council and the Borough Council, and as regarded the damage to the room the dispute would be between the County Council and the managers. If that was not covered by the words of the sub-Section, would the Attorney General have them altered?
SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that before the Attorney General answered the question of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, he wished to ask another, which seemed to him necessary after the speech of his right hon. friend. His question was whether the Government proposed to keep this sub-Section unchanged as it stood? If so, it applied to board schools as well as denominational schools.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that there was an Amendment on the point later down on the Paper.
SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that if that provision did not apply to board schools, which would be disastrous, then he would be satisfied. There could be no doubt whatever that the language applied to the other sub-Sections, and if the Government did not intend the language to apply to the first sub-Section, surely it should be altered.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that in regard to the point raised by his right hon. friend the Member for Cambridge University, probably the proper course would be to make the provision a separate sub-Section. For the reasons given by his right hon. friend below the gangway he thought that if the disputes referred to arose, and it was conceivable that they might, they should be left to the County Court. There could be no disputes between the managers in the case of provided schools, because they were purely agents of the local education authority, and might be discharged at their pleasure. The Government, however, had not the least objection to accept words which should make the point clear.
SIR WALTER FOSTERpointed out that under the Bill the pupil teachers would in many places be instructed and examined by the pupil-teacher instructor, who would be an officer of the Technical Education Committee of the District Council, a body outside and independent of the managers. Difficulties would arise between the two authorities; for example, the managers might not like the instructor to visit their schools and inspect the work of the pupil teachers, yet inspection was necessary for efficient training. In such cases he asked would there be an appeal to the Education Department or to the County Council as the highest local education authority. These difficulties might arise, and he thought a word or two of explanation from the Attorney General would be most desirable.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid it must depend upon the precise nature of the dispute, and if what he had already said were applied to each particular case it would furnish the answer.
MR. BRIGGrose to support the claim of every Member of the Opposition that the authority of the County Council should not by this Bill be diminished in power. The School Boards had gone, and all their works had departed, and the County Council was the authority set up by the Government in their place as

1247
the authority which must be entrusted with the work of education. It had therefore been a great pity to find that where this work was put upon them their power to a great extent had been taken away. They were entitled to some respect for the work they had done. Large sums of money had been entrusted to them to administer, and no appeal had been made, with regard to their actions, to a higher Court. He could see no necessity, therefore, to limit their dealings with the managers of the schools by a number of vexatious appeals, which could only give rise in the minds of the County Councils to a feeling that their authority was diminished. The confidence of the Government in the work of the County Councils had been shown by the fact that the South Kensington Department had now been ordered to hand over to them the whisky money, with the administration of which the Education Department had hitherto been entrusted. The County Councils had now been exercising their powers for thirteen years; they had proved to be efficient bodies, and, that being so, he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would not now diminish their authority.
MR. BUTCHERthought the House was generally agreed that some of these disputes must be decided by the Board of Education, but he wanted to know how the rest of the disputes were to be dealt with. He understood the suggestion was that those disputes which did not go to the Board of Education should be decided by one of the parties themselves, viz., the education authority. How did the matter stand? By this Clause certain obligations were imposed on the managers. If they discharged those obligations, they would have the right to call on the County Council for assistance; if they did not discharge them they could not call on that body. Disputes might arise between the managers on the one hand and the local education authority on the other. Was it conceivable that, in a dispute between those two parties, they should set up as the final court of appeal as to the merits of that dispute one of the parties themselves? The proposal was absurd on the face of it. The House, moreover, had already decided against
1248
that principle, the question having been introduced by way of Amendment on the 21st of the present month by one of the hon. Members for Birmingham.† On those two grounds he asked the House to reject the Amendment.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Might I appeal to the House to come to a decision now upon this point. I admit it is an important point, but it has been now a long time before the Committee, and it has been fully discussed. The speeches have not been by any means of a perfunctory character, and I suggest that the Committee should now be allowed to divide.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he viewed with the greatest apprehension this system of wholesale appeal which the sub-Section set up. The right of intervention on the part of the central authority to bring a local authority up to a higher standard, which had had a very beneficial effect, was one of the things which the Government proposed to strike out. The Government proposed to repeal all the sections of the Act of 1870 which gave the executive authority a right of intervention. This right of intervention which was now proposed was of quite a different character, and he looked upon it as tending to damp down progress, to veto the desire for educational progress in the localities. He agreed that a dispute as to what was secular and what religious was a subject which ought to be referred to a third party. What were the facts with regard to the financial condition of the voluntary schools? Many of them were in a hopeless condition, and there would be great difficulty in finding money to make repairs. Many of them had no voluntary subscriptions at all, and how were they to comply with the demands made on them as to lighting, heating, and sanitary and other arrangements? What would the Board of Education do? Eight hundred and eleven had no voluntary subscriptions at all; 715 had subscriptions which amounted to less than 1s. per child; in 1,370 the subscriptions were between 1s. and 2s. 6d. a child. All these schools being unable to meet
†See page 385.

1249
the requirements of the local education authority, the Board of Education would have to step in to examine whether the demands were reasonable. Who was at present at the head of the Education Department? Lord Londonderry, who recently went out of his way to meet the chief inspectors of schools, and to tell them with regard to the schools, some of which were not well suited for the work, that they must not

AYES.

Agg Gardner, James Tynte

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Aird, Sir John

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

Crossley, Sir Savile

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Heaton, John Henniker

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Davenport, W. Bromley-

Helder, Augustus

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Arrol, Sir William

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Higginbottom, S. W.

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E)

Balcarres, Lord

Dixon-Hartland Sir Fred Dixon

Hogg, Lindsay

Baldwin, Alfred

Doughty, George

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

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

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Hoult, Joseph

Banbury, Frederick George

Duke, Henry Edward

Houston, Robert Paterson

Bartley, George C. T.

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Howard, John (Kent, F'versham

Barhurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Beckett, Ernest William

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Beresford, Lord Chas. William

Faber, George Denison (York)

Kemp, George

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Kennedy, Patrick James

Bignold, Arthur

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Bigwood, James

Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir. J. (M'ne'r.

Keswick, William

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Kimber, Henry

Bond, Edward

Finch, George H.

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Knowles, Lees

Bousfield, William Robert

Fisher, William Hayes

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn)

Fitzroy, Hon. Ed ward Algernon

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Flower, Ernest

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

Forster, Henry William

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Butcher, John George

Foster, Philip S (Warwick, S. W

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Galloway, William Johnson

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

Carew, James Laurence

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Carlile, William Walter

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

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

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

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

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

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Cavendish, V. C. W. (D'rbyshire

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Lowe, Francis William

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Graham, Henry Robert

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn J. A (Worc.

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

Macdona, John Gumming

Chapman, Edward

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Charrington, Spencer

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Greville, Hon. Ronald

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Clive, Capt. Percy A.

Groves, James Grimble

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

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

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Majendie, James A. H.

Coddington, Sir William

Gunter, Sir Robert

Manners, Lord Cecil

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Guthrie, Walter Murray

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

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Hain, Edward

Middlemore John Throgmorton

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Hall, Edward Marshall

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Hambro, Charles Eric

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Cranborne, Viscount

Hamilton Rt. Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)

put the rules too rigidly into force. He felt that this veto would be disastrous.
MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the question be now put."
Question put, "That the Question 'That the words "any question," stand part of the Clause' be now put."
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 239; Noes, 100. (Division List No. 446.)

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Renwick, George

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Morrell, George Herbert

Ridley, Hon, M. W. (Stalybridge

Thornton, Percy M.

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Mount, William Arthur

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Murray Rt. Hn. A. Graham(Bute

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Valentia, Viscount

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Samuel, Harry S. (Limenouse)

Vincent Col. Sir C E H (Sheffield

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

Myers, William Henry

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Nicholson, William Graham

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

Welby, Lt-Col. A. C. E. (Ta'nt'n)

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

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

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Williams, Rt. Hn. J Powell-(Birm

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

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

Percy, Earl

Spear, John Ward

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

Pierpoint, Robert

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Stanley, Hon Arthur (Ormskirk

Wylie, Alexander

Plummer, Walter R.

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Younger, William

Pretyman, Ernest George

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Purvis, Robert

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

TELLER FOR THE AYES —

Rankin, Sir James

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (O'fd Univ)

Remnant, James Farquharson

Thompson, Dr E C (Monagh'n, N

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Helme, Norval Watson

Price, Robert John

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Rea, Russell

Ashton, Thomas Gair

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

Reckitt, Harold James

Atherley-Jones, L.

Holland, Sir William Henry

Rickett, J, Compton

Barlow, John Emmott

Horniman, Frederick John

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Jacoby, James Alfred

Runciman, Walter

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Joicey, Sir James

Schwann, Charles E.

Brigg, John.

Kearley, Hudson E.

Shackleton, David James

Broadhurst, Henry

Kinloch, Sir John GeorgeSymth

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Kitson, Sir James

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Burns, John

Lambert, George

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Burt, Thomas

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Soares, Ernest J.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Leng, Sir John

Spencer, Rt. Hn C. R (Northants

Caine, William Sproston

Levy, Maurice

Stevenson, Francis S.

Caldwell, James

Lewis, John Herbert

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Cameron, Robert

Lloyd-George, David

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Causton, Richard Knight

Logan, John William

Thomas, J. A. (Glam'n., Gower)

Channing Francis Allston

Lough, Thomas

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

Cremer, William Randal

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Tomkinson, James

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Wallace, Robert

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Markham, Arthur Basil

Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mather, Sir William

Weir, James Galloway

Dunn, Sir William

Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Edwards, Frank

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Emmott, Alfred

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Mewnes, Sir George

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth.

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Yoxall, James Henry

Grant, Corrie

Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham)

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Partington, Oswald

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Paulton, James Mellor

TELLERS FOR THE NOES. —

Harmsworth, R, Leicester

Philipps, John Wynford

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Pickard, Benjamin

(6.48.) Question put accordingly.

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Arrol, Sir William

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Aird, Sir John

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Allhusen, Augustus H'nryEden

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Balcarres, Lord

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 243; Noes, 102. (Division List No.447.)

Baldwin, Alfred

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

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

Flower, Ernest

Majendie, James A. H.

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

Forster, Henry William

Manners, Lord Cecil

Banbury, Frederick George

Foster, Philip S(Warwick, S. W.

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

Bartley, George C. T.

Galloway, William Johnson

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

Beckett, Ernest William

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Gore, Hn. G. R. COrmsby-(Salop

Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants)

Beresford, Lord Charles Wm.

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

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Morrell, George Herbert

Bignold, Arthur

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Bigwood, James

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Mount, William Arthur

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Graham, Henry Robert

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Bond, Edward

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Greene, Sir E. W (B'rySEd'mnds

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Bousfield, William Robert

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

Myers, William Henry

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

Grenfell, William Henry

Nicholson, William Graham

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Groves, James Grimble

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Butcher, John George

Gunter, Sir Robert

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Carew, James Laurence

Hain, Edward

Percy, Earl

Carlile, William Walter

Hall, Edward Marshall

Pierpoint, Robert

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

Hambro, Charles Eric

Plummer, Walter R.

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Lord G (Midd'x

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Pretyman, Ernest George

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Pryce-Jones, Lt.- Col. Edward

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Purvis, Robert

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

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Rankin, Sir James

Chapman, Edward

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Charrington, Spencer

Heaton, John Henniker

Remnant, James Farquharson

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Helder, Augustus

Renwick, George

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Ridley, Hon. M.W (Stalybridge

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Higginbottom, S. W.

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

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

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Coddington, Sir William

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hogg, Lindsay

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Hope. J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Hoult, Joseph

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Cox. Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Houston, Robert Paterson

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone. W.)

Cranborne, Viscount

Howard, John (Kent. Faversh'm

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

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Smith, H. C (North'mb Tyneside

Crossley, Sir Savile

Kemp, George

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Kennedy, Patrick James

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

Cust, Henry John C.

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Spear, John Ward

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Keswick, William

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Davenport, W. Bromley-

Kimber, Henry

Stanley, Hon Arthur (Ormskirk

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Knowles, Lees

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Doughty, George

Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

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

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Thompson, Dr. EC (Monagh'n, N

Duke, Henry Edward

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Thornton, Percy M.

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Faber, George Denison (York)

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

Valentia, Viscount

Fardell, Sir T. George

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H (Sh'ffi'ld

Fellowes. Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Lowe, Francis William

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

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

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

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

Finch, George H.

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Macdona, John Cumming

Williams, Rt. Hn. J Powell- (Birm

Fisher, William Hayes

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Willox, Sir John Archibald

1254

1255

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

Wylie, Alexander

TELLER FOR THE AYES, Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and MR. Anstruther

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

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

Younger, William

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Helme, Norval Watson

Pickard, Benjamin

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Hemphill Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Price, Robert John

Ashton, Thomas Gair

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

Rea, Russell

Barlow, John Emmott

Holland, Sir William Henry

Reckitt, Harold James

Bayley, Thos. (Derbyshire)

Horniman, Frederick John

Rickett, J. Compton

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Jacoby, James Alfred

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Brigg, John

Joicey, Sir James

Runciman, Walter

Broadhurst, Henry

Kearley, Hudson E.

Schwann, Charles E.

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Kinloch, Sir. John George Smyth

Shackleton, David James

Burns, John

Kitson, Sir James

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Burt, Thomas

Lambert, George

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Caine, William Sproston

Leng, Sir John

Soares, Ernest J.

Caldwell, James

Levy, Maurice

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

Cameron, Robert

Lewis, John Herbert

Stevenson, Francis S.

Causton, Richard Knight

Lloyd-George. David

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Cawley, Frederick

Logan, John William

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Channing, Francis Allston

Lough, Thomas

Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

Cremer, William Randal

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

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

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

M'Crae, George

Tomkinson, James

Davies, M Vaughan-(Cardigan

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Trevelyan, Charles Phillips

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Markham, Arthur Basil

Wallace, Robert

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mather, Sir William

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds.S

Dunn, Sir William

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Weir, James Galloway

Edwards, Frank

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Emmott, Alfred

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Moulton, John Fletcher

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Newnes, Sir George

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

Grant, Corrie

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Yoxall, James Henry

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Partington, Oswald

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Paulton, James Mellor

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

Phillipps, John Wynford

Mr. William M'Arthur.

MR. A. J. BALFOURclaimed to move, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause from the word "arises," in line 25, to the word "grant," in line 29, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause' be now put."

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Beckett, Ernest William

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Aird, Sir John

Beresford, Lord Chas. William

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Bignold, Arthur

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J A (Worc.

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Bigwood, James

Chapman, Edward

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Charrington, Spencer

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Bond, Edward

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Arrol, Sir William

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Cochrane, Hon. Thomas H. A. E.

Balcarres, Lord

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Coddington, Sir William

Baldwin, Alfred

Butcher, John George

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

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

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

Carew, James Laurence

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Banbury, Frederick George

Carlile, William Walter

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Bartley, George C. T.

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Cox, Irwin Edward Bain bridge

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

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

Cranborne, Viscount

Question put, "That the Question That the words of the Clause from the word "arises," in line 25, to the word "grant," in line 29, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause' be now put."
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 232;Noes, 100. (Division List No. 448.)

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Helder, Augustus

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Higginbottom, S. W.

Percy, Earl

Crossley, Sir Savile

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Pierpoint, Robert

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Cust, Henry. John C.

Hogg, Lindsay

Plummer, Walter R.

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Davenport, W. Bromley-

Hoult, Joseph

Pretyman, Ernest George

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

Purvis, Robert

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

Rankin, Sir James

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Remnant, James Farquharson

Doughty, George

Kemp, George

Ren wick, George

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Kennedy, Patrick James

Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Duke, Henry Edward

Keswick, William

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Darning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Kimber, Henry

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Knowles, Lees

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Faber, George Denison (York)

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Fardell, Sir T. George

Lawrence, Wm. F (Liverpool)

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

Lecky, Rt. Hon. William Edw. H

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

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

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.)

Finch, George H.

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Smith, H. C.(N'rth'mb. Tyn'side

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Spear, John Ward

Fisher, William Hayes

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich

FitzGerald Sir Robert Penrose-

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk

Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Flower, Ernest

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

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Forster, Henry William

Lowe, Francis William

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Foster, Phillip S. (Warwick, S. W

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Galloway, William Johnson

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Godson, Sir Augustus Fred'rick

Macdona, John Cumming

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

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

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Thompson, Dr. EC (Monagh'n N

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Gosehen, Hon. George Joachim

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

Thornton, Percy M.

Goulding, Edward Alfied

Majendie, James A. H.

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

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

Manners, Lord Cecil

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

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

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

Middlemore, Jno. Throgmorton

Valentia, Viscount

Grenfell, William Henry

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Vincent, Col. Sir C E H (Sheffield

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Groves, James Grimble

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

Williams, Rt. Hn.J Powell-(Birm

Gunter, Sir Robert

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Guthrie, Waiter Murray

Morrell, George Herbert

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Hain, Edward

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

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

Hall, Edward Marshall

Mount, William Arthur

Wilson-Todd, Wm. H (Yorks.)

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

Hambro, Charles Eric

Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

Wylie, Alexander

Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Ld. G (Midd'x

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Murray, Col Wyndham (Bath

Younger, William

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Myers, William Henry

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Nicholson, William Graham

Hatch. Ernest Frederick Geo.

Nicol, Donald Ninian

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Heaton, John Henniker

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Cremer, William Randal

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Burns, John

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Burt, Thomas

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

Atherley-Jones, L.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Barlow, John Emmott

Caine, William Sproston

Duncan, J. Hastings

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Caldwell, James

Dunn, Sir William

Beaumont, Wentworth C.B.

Cameron, Robert

Edwards, Frank

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Causton, Richard Knight

Emmott, Alfred

Brigg, John

Cawley, Frederick

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Broadhurst, Henry

Channing, Francis Allston

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

1258

1259

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Grant, Corrie

M'Crae, George

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Markham, Arthur Basil

Soares, Ernest J.

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Mather, Sir William

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

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Stevenson, Francis S.

Helme, Norval Watson

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Moulton, John Fletcher

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

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

Newnes, Sir George

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

Holland, Sir William Henry

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Tomkinson, James

Horniman, Frederick John

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Wallace, Robert

Jacoby, James Alfred

Partington, Oswald

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

Joicey, Sir James

Philipps, John Wynford

Weir, James Galloway

Kearley, Hudson E.

Pickard, Benjamin

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Price, Robert John

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Kitson, Sir James

Rea, Russell

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Lambert, George

Reckitt, Harold James

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Rickett, J. Compton

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

Leng, Sir John

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Yoxall, James Henry

Levy, Maurice

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.

Lewis, John Herbert

Runciman, Walter

Lloyd-George, David

Schwann, Charles E.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Logan, John William

Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

Lough, Thomas

Shackleton, David James

(7.13.) Question put accordingly.

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Forster, Henry William

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W.

Aird, Sir John

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

Galloway, William Johnson

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

Coddington, Sir William

Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

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

Arkwright John Stanhope

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Arrol, Sir William

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Cranborne, Viscount

Greene, Sir EW (B'rySEdm'nds

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

Balcarres, Lord

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Baldwin, Alfred

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Grenfell, William Henry

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

Crossley, Sir Savile

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Groves, James Grimble

Banbury, Frederick George

Cust, Henry John C.

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Bartley, George C. T.

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Gunter, Sir Robert

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Davenport, William Bromley-

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Beckitt, Ernest William

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Hain, Edward

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Hall, Edward Marshall

Beresford, Lord Charles William

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hambro, Charles Eric

Bignold, Arthur

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Lord G. (Midd'x

Bigwood, James

Doughty, George

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Bond, Edward

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Duke, Henry Edward

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Heaton, John Henniker

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Helder, Augustus

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Carew, James Laurence

Faber, George Denison (York)

Higginbottom, S. W.

Carlile, William Walter

Fardell, Sir T. George

Hoare, Sir Samuel

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

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Cavendish, V. C W. (Derbyshire

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

Hogg, Lindsay

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Finch, George H.

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Hoult, Joseph

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

Fisher, William Hayes

Houston, Robert Paterson

Chapman, Edward

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Howard, John (Kent, Favershrm

Charrington, Spencer

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Flower, Ernest

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 232;Noes, 98. (Division List No. 449.)

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Mount, William Arthur

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

Kemp, George

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Spear, John Ward

Kennedy, Patrick James

Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham(Bute

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Kimber, Henry

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Myers, William Henry

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Knowles, Lees

Nicholson, William Graham

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th)

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

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Lecky, Rt. Hon. William Edw. H.

Parker, Sir Gilbert

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

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Percy, Earl

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Pierpoint, Robert

Thornton, Percy M.

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Plummer, Walter R.

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

Pretyman, Ernest George

Valentia, Viscount

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H (Sheffi'ld

Lowe, Francis William

Purvis, Robert

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

Rankin, Sir James

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Williams, Rt. Hn. J Powell-(Birm.

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Remnant, James Farquharson

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Macdona, John Cumming

Renwick, George

Willox, Sir John Archibald

M'Arthur Charles (Liverpool)

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

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

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

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

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

Majendie, James A. H.

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Wylie, Alexander

Manners, Lord Cecil

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Maxwell, Rt. Hn. Sir HE (Wigt'n

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Younger, William

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants

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

Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Morrell, George Herbert

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

NOES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Price, Robert John

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Rea, Russell

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Helme, Norval Watson

Reckitt, Harold James

Atherley-Jones, L.

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Rickitt, J. Compton

Barlow, John Emmott

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

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Holland, Sir William Henry

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Horniman, Frederick John

Runciman, Walter

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Schwann, Charles E.

Brigg, John

Jacoby, James Alfred

Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

Broadhurst, Henry

Joicey, Sir James

Shackleton, David James

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Kearley, Hudson, E.

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Burns, John

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Hurt, Thomas

Kitson, Sir James

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Lambert, George

Soares, Ernest J.

Caine, William Sproston

Layland-Barratt, Francis

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

Caldwell, James

Leng, Sir John

Stevenson, Francis S.

Cameron, Robert

Levy, Maurice

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Causton, Richard Knight

Lewis, John Herbert

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

Cawley, Frederick

Lloyd-George, David

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

Channing, Francis Allston

Logan, John William

Tomkinson, James

Cremer, William Randal

Lough, Thomas

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

M'Crae, George

Wallace, Robert

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.)

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Markham, Arthur Basil

Weir, James Galloway

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mather, Sir William

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Dunn, Sir William

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Edwards, Frank

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Emmott, Alfred

Newnes, Sir George

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Yoxall, James Henry

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Grant, Corrie

Partington, Oswald

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Philipps, John Wynford

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Pickard Benjamin

Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee:—
  (In the Committee.)
  [MR. J. W. Lowther (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
  Clause 8:—
  SIR EDWARD GREYsaid the object of the Amendment he rose to move was to provide, in the event of conflict between the education authority and the managers, such a remedy as would not interfere with the education of the school, but would enable it to be carried on continuously and efficiently. He had no wish to enter into the controversies which had already occupied the attention of the Committee as to the probabilities of conflict, but his point was that the remedies already available under the Bill were not satisfactory. The power of the local authority to step in and carry out their own directions where they were neglected was not practicable without a power to appoint other managers. That power it was not proposed to give them. Neither would it be practicable to bring managers to reason by exercising their control over expenditure on salaries of teachers, as that remedy would defeat its own objects. It would be an unfair and cruel remedy. A third remedy—to treat the school as one which they were no longer bound to maintain—was also unsatisfactory, involving as it did a check to education during the conflict and the provision of a new school. The proposal of his Amendment was preferable because it would, in the event of a conflict, enable education to go on with out any check to its efficiency. It was really the natural remedy. The local education authority and the managers were under the Bill to be partners; if they pulled together no doubt education would prosper; if they did not it would suffer administratively. When two persons did not pull together the business suffered and the remedy was
  1264
  for one partner to buy the other out—the one bought out being naturally the smaller partner. In this case the education authority was the largest partner. The question of compensation would need considerable adjustment. Of course it would not be fair to confiscate the building without any compensation. Where the school was absolutely owned by an individual the building would have to be taken over and full compensation paid to the owner. Where there was no absolute owner and the school building was under some trust there would have to be an adjustment of the compensation in harmony with the terms of the trust. The trust would in many cases not provide solely for religious education, but for general education, with alimiting provision that it should be in accordance with the principles of a particular denomination. In that case, he suggested that the principle followed would be that which he understood the Prime Minister to have adopted in regard to endowments, which were to be apportioned between the education authority as the authority responsible for secular education and the managers as responsible for religious instruction. It would be found that in a good many cases the schools had not been built entirely with trust money, but with the aid of voluntary subscriptions paid for the purpose of avoiding a school rate. Where subscriptions had been given to avoid a rate there need be no compensation, because the avoidance of a rate would be secured by handing over the school to the education authority. On the question of the fairness of applying the principle of compulsory purchase, or acquisition of the schools for rent, he had no doubt whatever. He had included rent because rents lent themselves readily to adjustment in cases where the use of the building was to be left to the trust for use on Sundays. Private rights were increasingly held subject to the rights of the public, and were often subordinated to the public right on fair compensation. Schools, in the nature of the case, could not be used for private purposes and were, in fact, constructed for public purposes. If ever there was a case where purchase was beyond question fair, it was a case of this kind. No scruple was made about giving to municipal authorities powers

  1265
  of compulsory purchase for the purpose of supplying a public need, and now one authority was being set up for the purposes of education Parliament ought to be at least as free in giving that authority such powers. It might be urged that the danger of conflict was so remote that it was inadvisable to put such a provision in the Bill, but the Bill itself alluded to the possibility of questions arising, and in debate the "parties in dispute" had been spoken of. That was a very ominous expression. If there was a chance of the education authority and the managers becoming parties to a dispute the will of the education authority must be made to prevail, and in such a way that the education of the district was not interfered with. He thought his Amendment afforded the best means of providing a remedy in the event of conflict.
  Amedment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 29, after the word 'grant' to insert the words 'and, in event of failure on the part of the managers to comply with any of the conditions of this section the local education authority shall have power, subject to fair compensation to the owners, to acquire or rent the building and treat it as a school provided by them.'"—(Sir Edward Grey
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the right hon. Baronet had enumerated what he regarded as three possible ways of dealing with a body of managers who were either unable or unwilling to carry out the legitimate demands of the education authority. One of them he submitted was entirely illegitimate, and he agreed that the idea of punishing denominational or voluntary managers by mulcting the schoolmaster or starving the education of the children was out of the question. It was not desirable either in theory or in practice. But he did not take the same gloomy view of the remedies the Bill provided. It provided, in the first place, that where the managers did not carry out the orders of the education authority, that body might step in and carry out those orders themselves. The right hon. Baronet said that was quite impossible unless they had a new set of managers. That matter had been argued out at
  1266
  length, and he did not think it was desirable to reopen it; but in his judgment it provided a perfectly effective remedy. The education authority, without appointing new managers, would step in and give their orders to the schoolmaster and see that they were obeyed. The other remedy provided by the Bill was that if the managers declined to carry out the orders of the education authority, the school should cease to be a public elementary school or eligible to receive money out of the rates, and another school should be provided for the district, which should not be a voluntary school, but a provided school. At the first blush he would have thought that remedy would have been highly agreeable to hon. Gentlemen opposite. They had told the House over and over again that, even if they were forced to accept voluntary schools as a necessity, they looked to their extinction as an ideal, and he was greatly surprised that they should regard this remedy as not only impracticable and disagreeable, but also difficult to carry into effect. The right hon. Baronet had spoken of it as an impracticable remedy.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: I did not use the word impracticable. I said mine was preferable.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he would not pursue that line of argument, but would deal with what the right hon. Baronet regarded as the preferable method of turning a voluntary school into a provided school. He quite agreed that the right hon. Baronet's method would have at least one advantage if it prevented any gap in the educational accommodation of the district during the period of transition. But the right hon. Baronet proposed to transfer this property compulsorily from one set of persons to another, with all the safeguards and precautions, he presumed, with which Parliament had so sedulously surrounded the compulsory transfer of property; and he had never heard that that process had the advantage of being very rapid, expeditious, or cheap. Under the present system it was in the power of the managers to withdraw the school from the work of public elementary education, and the

  1267
  Amendment sought to render the consequent cost and inconvenience impossible. The right hon. Baronet had uttered a certain number of perfectly sound observations on the intrinsic justice of compulsory purchase for a great public object. He agreed with him entirely. That House had long ago laid it down that in the case of a public necessity, compulsory expropriation on fair terms was perfectly legitimate; but the right hon. Baronet recommended this plan because he thought it was a cheap method, and that these schools could be handed over at a relatively trifling price to the public for the purposes of education, because the existing voluntary schools were not in purely private ownership. He could not agree with him in that for he thought it was most unjust. No doubt the right hon. Baronet tried to make a point by saying that some of the trusts were intended to relieve the ratepayers of some of the money they would otherwise have had to pay to the rating authority; but what bearing had that? The proper course was to give full compensation to the trustees, and to see that the money was expended on a purpose either equivalent to the trust, or in some new scheme as nearly equivalent as modern arrangements would allow. In any case, they should start with the obviously fair and simple principle, and that when they took property compulsorily—whether it be property of individuals or of trustees—full compensation should be paid according to the well-established rules laid down in the House The right hon. Baronet appeared to think that it was a sufficient reason for not paying full compensation for the compulsory taking of these schools that some of the persons who had originally subscribed in order to provide them had been actuated by the desire to evade the rating involved by the introduction of a Board school. He did not think they could look into the private motives of the original donors of the trusts. Unless history greatly deceived us, some of the most liberal donors of great benefactions in the past had been influenced by the consideration of what would happen to their souls after death. Was that motive also to be taken into account when considering the question of the amount of compensation to be given to the present owners of the trust?
  1268
  He did not think the right hon. Baronet would carry his principle quite so far as that. On the whole he was disposed to think that the plan of the right hon. Baronet, which threatened the equitable compulsory transfer of property from trustees to the community—even if carried out on the sound lines of compensation laid down by Parliament—would still be neither economical nor fair to the community.
  MR. CRIPPS: I rise to order. This Amendment proposes to take property by compulsion. Is it in order to bring on an Amendment of that kind without due notice having been given to the owners?
  MR. BRYN ROBERTS: I rise to another point of order. Is it in order to object to an Amendment after it has been put from the Chair?
  THE CHAIRMAN: If this Amendment were accepted, the Bill would probably have to be referred to the Examiners of private Bills to see whether the notices had been complied with. But until the Amendment is inserted in the Bill I think we might go on.
  MR. LAWSON WALTONsaid that the First Lord of the Treasury had very properly stated that the Amendment of his right hon. friend the Member for Berwick, raised a question of very great gravity, because it invited the Committee to consider what was the best, the most expeditious, just, and economical method of dealing with the situation which was certain to arise from the operation of the Bill when it became law. He would endeavour to satisfy the Committee that, on occasions, some more effective remedy than was supplied by the Bill, might be afforded for the difficulties which must certainly arise. What was the situation which was clearly contemplated by the terms of the Clause the Committee were now considering? The managers of a denominational school were called upon to comply with the requirements of the local education authority, which admittedly might be of an onerous character, having regard to the fact that

  1269
  the voluntary contributions were falling off. Therefore the situation had to be faced of a school, the managers of which were unable to put it into a state of repair so as to satisfy the local education authority, and declined to carry out the reasonable requirements of the latter in regard to extension, and to meet the wants of an increasing population. How were they going to meet that situation? As the First Lord had told the Committee, the ordinary machinery of mandamus was inapplicable in regard to the managers of the denominational schools; it only applied to the education authority. Therefore, they would have a Board of Managers who said, "We neither will nor can extend the school; you must take it as it stands, for we will do nothing." Now, the school as it stood was the only provision for the education of the child fen of the parish or district in which it was situated, and the education authority would have to accept the situation. Here was an admittedly inefficient school which could not comply with modern requirements, and the Bill of the First Lord only increased the difficulties by cutting off financial supplies; and the school as an educational organisation would become derelict. Now, what were they going to do in such circumstances? His right hon. friend the Member for Berwick said: "Take over the building, and pay fair compensation for it; if you do that, you introduce the minimum of disturbance in the conduct of education in the parish." But the First Lord's proposal introduced the maximum of disturbance and expense. The children had still to be educated, because the compulsory Clauses of the former Education Acts had not been abrogated. His right hon. friend's Amendment provided for the local education authority paying a fair compensation for the school building which would then be turned in to a provided school. What was the alternative that the First Lord asked the Committee to adopt? It was that the old school, having become derelict, the local education authority must provide a new one. They must buy land, build a new school, and furnish it fit to do its educational work. That would lead to friction, controversy, and educational confusion. He believed that the local education authority would rather allow the gravest inefficiency to exist
  1270
  in the denominational school than face the situation of calling upon the ratepayers to provide the money for the building of a new school side by side with the old building which, owing to the action of the trustees, had failed to fulfil the purposes of the elementary education for which it was originally intended. He could not understand how an injustice would be inflicted on a public body, such as the trustees of these schools, by relieving them of their public obligations on the terms of paying them a fair compensation for their property. The First Lord said the other night that that would be a form of confiscation; but he replied that they would not be dealing with private property. These schools were educational institutions, and nobody proposed to disturb them except as educational institutions. No one had a beneficial interest in them except when they were being applied for the purposes of elementary education. In all the schools of the National Society the trust deeds set forth that they had been founded for the purpose of providing elementary education, and they could not be used for any other purpose. Therefore, if that purpose were frustrated by the erection of another school, they would have a building which would become useless to anybody else. What injustice would be done in taking possession of a building which, after paying fair compensation for it, was useless for any other purpose?
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid that he held in his hand a trust deed which stated that the school building was to be used for the purpose of a Sunday school.
  MR. LAWSON WALTONsaid that it was not suggested that the premises should not be used for every other purpose which had been put into the trust deed. But the main object for which these schools had been erected was the provision of elementary education for the district, and, consistent with that, they were to be available for ecclesiastical purposes. The whole question between them was this—if the main object for which these schools had been erected became incapable of enforcement because the duties had been undertaken by the State, and the trustees had been

  1271
  relieved of their obligations, what injustice was done to the trustees? The Member for Berwick, in his anxiety to deal fairly with the owners, had said that in such cases they should have fair compensation, and if the transfer interfered with the use of the school for Church purposes, the Church would get compensation for any disturbance, but the trustees could get no compensation because the school had been taken over and applied to the purposes of elementary education. Surely the proper course in the case contemplated was for the local education authority to come in and carry on the education.
  MR. CRIPPSsaid he would not follow the hon. and learned Member into a dissertation on principles of compensation. He objected to the whole principle. If he had his way he would fine the owners of schools who handed them over from the denominational to the undenominational system. His interest was to preserve the denominational system, and, in his opinion, it would be a monstrous thing in a Bill, which had nothing to do with the transfer of property, to introduce, by a side wind, a proposal which would enable denominational schools to be handed over to the new local education authority. That was absolutely alien to the whole principle of the Bill, and if such a proposal were included in it in the first instance, he should have opposed it, quite irrespective of any question of compensation at all. There would be absolutely sufficient sanction under the Bill, because not only the Education Department but the local authority could refuse grants. He protested toto cœlo against the notion of denominational owners being tempted under any scheme of compensation to get rid of their duties and obligations, and giving up the great principle of denominational education. He did not believe they would be so tempted, but he objected to the whole principle from beginning to end.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid the discussion illustrated the difficulty which arose when they were called upon to discuss questions such as that before the Committee without having the trust deeds before them. He was glad, however to know that the Return of trust deeds would be in the hands of hon. Members no Saturday morning. Six millions of money
  1272
  had been expended on these school buildings, and of that amount£1,500,000 had been contributed by the State. To that extent, therefore, the buildings were public property already. It was a fundamental condition in all cases where a building grant was given that there should be a trust deed, declaring that the premises were to be granted in trust for the education of the children of the poor, and for no other purpose whatever. Through the courtesy of the First Lord of the Treasury he had received an advance proof of the Return which was to be presented, and he saw that the trust deed in that Return contained, in most specific terms, the condition to which he referred. There could, therefore, be no compensation at all to private persons. He wished to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether there was anything in the regulations of the Department requiring, as a condition of a grant, that the building, when not used by the trustees for elementary school purposes, might be acquired by other persons without any rent being paid at all.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that the hon. and learned Member for the Stretford Division had arguedagainst the Amendment as if it were a proposal to transfer all the denominational schools to the undenominational system. That was not the proposal at all. The proposal was that where denominational trustees failed to carry out their trust, there should be a transfer subject to fair compensation. His right hon. friend the Member for the Berwick Division simply asked that there should be sanction for the purpose of carrying out the objects set before the country by the Government in their Bill. The Prime Minister said that a sanction was provided in the local authority, who could order the schoolmaster to carry out certain objects of the Bill. Surely one of the most important objects was to put the building into good order and repair. How was the schoolmaster to carry that object out? Suppose the school building was in an insanitary condition, was the schoolmaster to lay fresh drains; and if he did, who was to pay for them—the local authority or the managers; and if the managers, what means would there be of enforcing the debt? There was really no sanction at all at the present moment, except one which the Prime Minister deprecated, namely, the withdrawal of the

  1273
  grants from the school, and starving education in that particular district. It was said that the local authority might build a school of their own, but that would take eighteen months or two years, especially as every petty question was to be submitted to the Board of Education. That was the condition of things, and nothing would be done unless some such suggestion as that of his right hon. friend were put into operation. What fair compensation was, was a fair subject for discussion, and was an important part of the Amendment. It was clear that the controversy was not going to end with the Bill. They were only at the beginning of it, and, therefore, it was just as important that they should lay before the House of Commons and the country their views as to the right and proper settlement to be adopted as it was for the Government to place their views before the country. He did not understand his hon. and learned friend the Member for South Leeds to suggest that no compensation of any sort or kind should be given to the trustees. He should have been very sorry if his hon. and learned friend had taken that line. The schools were not merely for the education of the children of the poor; they were schools for the education of the children of the poor in the principles of the Church of England, but were not purely Church of England trusts. There were two objects attached to them. There was, first of all, the education of the children of the poor in the principles of the Church of England, and the second object was purely parochial. He thought, therefore, the Committee was entitled to take both objects into account in settling the principle of compensation. He had no doubt that many contributions had been given for purely Anglican and Church motives, but probably the majority of the contributions had been given in order to provide a local school. The Charity Commissioners investigated some of these cases in Wales recently, and in one case it was found that Nonconformists contributed in order to set up a parochial school, and they had no notion whatever that it would be converted into a Church school. A trust was not created by its subscribers, but by the man who gave the land; and as the land was generally given by an Anglican landowner the result was that he more or less dominated the trust. Therefore, a large
  1274
  number of schools which would otherwise have been parochial became, by this means, purely denominational. He thought that was a fair account of what had happened. The Prime Minister said that they were not entitled to inquire into the motives of those who created the trust. He did not agree. He thought the learned Attorney General would admit that the motives of the testator played a very important part in the interpretation of any trust. The Prime Minister instanced the case of a man who gave property to create a trust to have prayers said for his soul. There were many cases of that kind. For instance, one Thomas Smith provided a fund for masses for his soul. Surely they were entitled to take that into account if the property were confiscated. It was the very party who confiscated property for their own purposes, and who destroyed trusts, who denounced them as confiscators when they proposed to use property of that kind for public purposes. He did not think the Prime Minister had dealt with the matter as it ought to have been dealt with. The Amendment was the only possible way out of the difficulty. They would have to settle all these difficulties eventually by taking over the schools. Merely sending disputes to be settled by the Board of Education without having any authority to carry its decisions out would not be sufficient. The Church could not possibly keep the schools in a state of efficiency. They were in a very bad state of repair; they were exceedingly inefficient; and it would cost an enormous sum to put them into proper repair. It was therefore in the interests of education that an Amendment of the kind proposed by his right hon. friend should be introduced into the Bill. Further, he thought that such an Amendment would be very useful from the point of view of the inspectors of the Board of Education. He thought that, to a certain extent, the inspectors were not doing their duty rigidly with regard to these schools, as the only result of that would be to transfer them to the undenominational system. Rather than face that prospect the inspectors preferred not to report bad and inefficient schools; but if they knew that the result would be that fair compensation would be given, he believed that hundreds of these schools would be condemned, and the system of; education considerably improved and

  1275
  strengthened throughout the country. He would therefore support the Amendment of his right hon. friend.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid that the local authority would have to buy land to build the new school which would replace the old one. In many places, all the land belonged to one person, who might be a very strong sectarian, and the existing school might belong to his sect. Suppose he refused to sell the land——

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Horniman, Frederick John-

  Rea, Russell

  Allen, Charles P., Glouc. (Stroud

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Joicey, Sir James

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Brigg, John

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Kitson, Sir James

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Lambert, George

  Runciman, Walter

  Burns, John

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Shackleton, David James

  Burt, Thomas

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leng, Sir John

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell, James

  Levy, Maurice

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Spencer Rt. Hon. CR (North'nts

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lough, Thomas

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

  Cawley, Frederick

  M'Crae, George

  Tomkinson, James

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mather, Sir William

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Walton, Jn. Lawson (Leeds, S

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Newnes, Sir George

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Norman, Henry

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

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

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Partington, Oswald

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

  Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Perks, Robert William

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Price, Robert John

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Carlile, William Walter

  Digby, John K. D. (Wingfield)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn A. (Worc.

  Doughty, George

  Arrol, Sir William

  Chapman, Edward

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Charrington, Spencer

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Balcarres, Lord

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

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

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

  Dyke, Rt. Hn Sir William Hart

  Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Bathurst, Hn. Allen Benjamin

  Colston, Chas. Edwd. H. Athole

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Beresford, Lord Charles Wm.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Fergusson, Rt. Hn Sir J (Manc'r

  Bignold, Arthur

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Bigwood, James

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Finch, George H.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Bond, Edward

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose-

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Bull, William James

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Flower, Ernest

  Butcher, John George

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Forster, Henry William

  Carew, James Laurence

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Galloway, William Johnson

  MR. A. J. BALFOURwas understood to say that he could be compelled to sell.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid that answered his question.
  (10.10.) Question proposed—
  Committee divided:—Ayes, 85; Noes. 176. (Division List, No. 450.)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Gibbs, Hon. Vickery (St. Albans

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

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

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Greene, Sir E W (B'rySEdm'nds

  Macdona, John Camming

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Smith, H C (N'rth'mb. Tyneside

  Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs

  MacIver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W.

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

  Grenfell, William Henry

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Spear, John Ward

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Stanley, Edwd. Jas. (Somerset)

  Groves, James Grimble

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Hamilton, Rt Hn L'rd G (Midd'x

  Morgan, David J. (Walth'mst'w

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Mount, William Arthur

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox. Univ.)

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute)

  Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Helder, Augustus

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Myers, William Henry

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Hobhouse, Henry, Somerset, E.

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Valentia, Viscount

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  Hope, J. E. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Pease, Herbt. Pike (Darlington

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Peel, Hon. Wm. Rbt. Wellesley

  Williams, Rt. Hn J. Powell-(Birm

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Percy, Earl

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

  Kemp, George

  Pierpoint, Robert

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

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wylie, Alexander

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wyndham. Rt. Hon. George

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Younger, William

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Purvis, Robert

  Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

  Rankin, Sir James

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Carrie

  Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the Amendment which he wished to move had for its main object the carrying out of the view which was indicated in the Amendment accepted by the Committee a few days ago that the teaching profession should be thrown open in its early stages more widely to persons of all denominations. Where there were more candidates for the post of pupil teacher than there were places to be tilled, the appointment should be made by the local education authority, and they should determine the respective qualifications of the candidates by examination or otherwise. He thought the Amendment would commend itself to the Committee, and he hoped it would be accepted.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 29, at the end, to insert the words, '(3) In any case in which there are more candidates for the post of pupil teacher than there are places to be filled, the appointment shall be made by the local education authority, and they shall determine the respective qualifications of the candidates by examination or otherwise.' "—(Sir William Anson.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid that this Amendment was a most disappointing one. During the autumn, announcements were made, which he supposed would now be regarded as entirely unofficial; to the effect that the Government intended dealing very liberally indeed with the general public with reference, at any rate, to the lower grades of the teaching profession. They were led to believe that while the Government would insist on the appointment of the head teacher being reserved to the denomination, the appointment of assistant teachers and pupil teachers would be thrown open.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURasked who said that.
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid he was referring to statements constantly made all over the country.
  MR A. J. BALFOUR: By whom?
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid they were made by newspapers and different gentlemen, amongst whom the Member for Oxford University, now Secretary of the Board of Education, had advocated throwing open the lower grades of the teaching profession, but he supposed that they would now be regarded as unofficial in every way. They were given to understand that the appointment of assistant teacher, as well as that of pupil teacher, would be thrown open. How had that general expectation been met? The appointment of Pupil teacher was not to be placed entirely in the hands of the local education authority. What would happen? He would take the case of a populous parish with which he was well acquainted, and which contained a very large number of Nonconformists. In that parish not one single pupil teacher had been appointed from the ranks of Nonconformity for twenty-five years, although the schools were attended by hundreds of Nonconformist children. In that parish the majority of the local; managers would in the future, as in the past, be clerical. The First Lord of the Treasury said some time ago that that would be practically impossible; but it would be more than possible in the parish to which he was referring, and when vacancies in the post of pupil teachers were to be filled it would be quite possible for the local managers to arrange that they should be quietly filled without any competition at all. What provision was there in the Bill for advertising such vacancies. If the vacancies were not advertised, what could be easier than for the managers, who would naturally desire to keep the appointments in their own hands, to fill them up themselves The hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment said that what the Government wished was to throw open the teaching profession in its earliest stages as widely as possible, and it was in order to enable the Government to carry out that intention that he would move the Amendment standing in his name, which was to omit all the words from the beginning to the word "the" in line 2. There would be no difficulty at all in the local authority, if they thought fit, delegating the appointment to the
  1280
  managers, but his Amendment would confer upon them the very necessary power of seeing that every possible opportunity was given to those who might become candidates to hear of the vacancies and to be fairly dealt with. He ventured to commend the Amendment to the Government as a reasonable and necessary one, if the objects of the Secretary of the Board of Education were to be carried out.
  (10.35.) Amendment proposed to the Amendment—
  "In line 1, to leave out from the beginning, to the word 'the' in line 2."—(MR. Herbert Lewis.)
  THE CHAIRMANproceeded to put the Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."
  MR. WHITLEYon a point of order said that if the question were put in that form it would exclude the Amendment which he had on the Paper, which proposed to leave out the word "pupil" in line 1, in order to insert "assistant". He asked if the question could not be put down to the word "of" in line 1.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I am afraid I cannot do that. The Amendment of the hon. Member would re-open the question of the appointment of teachers, and that is concluded.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that, unless his memory deceived him, he thought the question that all teachers, except head teachers, should be appointed irrespective of denomination, had been already discussed.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that the only point decided in regard to assistant teachers was that they could be appointed without any reference to creed at all, notwithstanding the trust deeds; but nothing was decided as to who should appoint the assistant teachers. The point his hon. friend wished to submit was that the whole of the lower grade of the teaching profession, not merely the pupil teachers, should be included.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he would submit that the matter had been already decided. Sub-Section (c) provided that—
  "The consent of the local education authority shall be required to the appointment of teachers, but that consent shall not be withheld except on educational grounds."
  They had, therefore, decided that head and assistant teachers were to be appointed in that way, and he submitted that it would be out of order to attempt now to overrule that provision.
  MR. WHITLEYsaid he submitted that in that case the Amendment of the Government was also out of order. If they had decided the question of assistant teachers they had also decided the question of pupil teachers.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I think a distinction has already been drawn between teachers, assistant teachers, and pupil teachers. The appointment of teachers has been decided, but the appointment of assistant teachers has, I think, not been decided. Therefore, the hon. Member for Halifax is in order. The trouble has really arisen because of the hon. Member not having given proper notice of his Amendment. I will put the question down to the word "of" in line 1.
  LORD HUGH CECILasked if he understood the ruling of the Chair to be that the word "teachers" in sub-Section (c) only applied to head teachers?
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he would submit, on a point of order, that the expression "teachers" in sub-Section (c) included assistant teachers, as well as head teachers. It was certainly discussed on that basis. Pupil teachers were really not teachers at all; they were only learners.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I must say it does not seem to me to be very clear.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he would submit, on a point of order, that the word "teachers" in sub-Section (c) must include, not only head teachers, but also assistant teachers and pupil teachers,
  1282
  because in a subsequent part of the sub-Section, it was provided that assistant teachers and pupil teachers might be appointed in a particular way. Therefore, it had been practically decided by the Committee already that teachers of all kinds should be appointed by the managers.
  THE CHAIRMAN: In that case what is the object of the Amendment?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that on the Chairman's ruling, his Amendment appeared to be out of order. He was sorry.
  MR. BRYCEsubmitted that the Amendment was in order, as it applied to a case where there were more candidates than there were places to fill. It was a proviso which would be added to the general statement.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid the definition Clause provided that any expression to which a special meaning was attached should have the same meaning in this Act as in the Act of 1870. In the definition Clause of the Act of 1870 the term "teachers" included assistant teachers, pupil teachers, and so on.
  MR. WHITLEYsaid that there was nothing in Clause 8 which gave the appointment of the teachers to any one. It dealt with the consent of the appointment, but there was not a single word to show by whom the appointment was to be made. His Amendment dealt with the giving of the appointment of a certain class of teachers to the local authority.
  THE CHAIRMAN: As I have already pointed out, there is nothing in the Bill which directly gives the appointment of teachers. It is clear, I think, on looking at the definition Clause of the Act of 1870, that the word "teachers" includes assistant teachers and pupil teachers. Therefore we have reached this point, that the consent of the local authority must now be required to the appointment of pupil teachers. Then what is to

  1283
  happen if there were more candidates than one? This Amendment suggests means of ascertaining which of those candidates are to be appointed and the decision is to be taken, not by the managers, but by the local education authority. Therefore I think the Amendment is in order. I will only put the words down to "pupil."
  MR. DISRAELIasked, if sub-Section (c) governed the appointment of teachers, did not that also carry with it the question as to who should appoint them?
  THE CHAIRMAN: Not necessarily. This Amendment says that if there are two or more candidates then certain things are to happen. It may be that if there is only one candidate the appointment may be made by the managers under sub-Section (c), subject to the confirmation of the local education authority; but if there are two or more candidates then another state of things will arise.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid if the opening words were omitted, as proposed by the hon. Member, they would have the provision as to the appointment of pupil teachers, pure and simple, which had already been dealt with.
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid that the question his right hon. friend had raised was perfectly clear. It was that sub-Section (c) drew a distinction between head teachers on the one hand, and assistant and pupil teachers on the other, and that it did not deal in any way with the actual appointment of either assistant teachers or pupil teachers.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I think the real solution of the difficulty is that the Amendment suggested by the hon. Member for Flint Boroughs is out of order, because he proposes something that is already in the Bill, namely, that the appointment of the pupil teachers must be subject to the consent of the
  1284
  local authority. I think the hon. Member for Halifax will be in order if he proposes to insert the words "assistant and" before the word "pupil."
  MR. BONDreminded the Committee that sub-Section (c) dealt with the appointment of teachers, and provided that the consent of the local authority should be required. The Amendment of his hon. friend now suggested that in certain instances the appointment should be made by the local authority. Surely that was inconsistent with sub-Section (c), because in such a case the local authority would be consenting to an appointment made by itself.
  MR. WHITLEYthen moved to insert "assistant and" before "pupil." He said pupil teachers were apprentices. These young people became pupil teachers before they entered the training colleges, and it would be a cruel hardship if the Government said to this large class of civil servants, "We will accept you as apprentices, we will take you after examination on your merits, but after your apprenticeship you shall have no employment." That was practically what the Government would do unless they accepted his Amendment. They would admit a large class to a great profession under an entire illusion, and deny them employment after they had served their apprenticeship, practically for no wages at all, through years of drudgery. Moreover, while the Government proposed to throw open the apprenticeship, they were at the same time keeping closed the doors of two thirds of the training colleges which afforded the only means by which pupil teachers could obtain the training required for their profession. Pupil teachers were simply apprentices, and he hoped soon to see the system abolished in favour of a much better way of training teachers. What possible reason could the Government have for refusing this Amendment? The protection of the headmasterships was in the hands of the managers, and if there was any sincerity in the words used in this contest——
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Which words?
  MR. WHITLEYsaid the First Lord of the Treasury had over and over again stated that he desired to do every possible justice to Nonconformists consistent with the maintenance of the denominational character of the teaching. If those words had any real meaning, the right hon. Gentleman was bound, seeing that the managers retained the appointment of the headmasters, and thus secured the denominational character of the teaching, to concede that Amendment. Even then the provision would fall a long way short of what he considered to be justice. It was a terrible mockery of justice to hold out to half the people of the country an entrance merely to the apprenticeship, and then by tests to close the doors of the training colleges, and half the situations afterwards available, against them.
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
  "After the first word 'of,' to insert the words 'assistant and.'"—(Mr Whitley.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I cannot congratulate the hon. Member and his friends on the manner in which they have received an Amendment which undoubtedly, in full and express terms, does absolutely remove once and for ever a grievance with the reiteration of which they have stunned the Committee. I remember past debates on this subject long before the Bill was born or thought of, and a reply which the hon. Member for the Carnarvon Boroughs made to me when I was explaining that the existing system of voluntary and board schools was not one as to which any section of the population had ground for complaint, and that if there were any injustice or inequality in it that defect existed on both sides. The hon. Member got up and said that that was all very well; Churchmen, Roman Catholics, and Wesleyans might suffer under the board school system, but, on the other hand, the Nonconformists suffered under the single school Church system, and there was one grievance that
  1286
  no one could deny, viz., the pupil-teacher grievance, which we now absolutely remove.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I said the teacher grievance.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, the pupil-teacher grievance. One has only to look at the literature on the subject to see the pupil teachers over and over again used as the great stalking horse of Nonconformist grievance. [Several voices from the Opposition: "And the teachers."] That is another grievance.
  MR. TREVELYAN: This is the first time you have recognised it.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I did not say I agreed it was a grievance. Are we not to be allowed to deal with one thing at a time? This is a specific grievance, different from the other grievance and wholly separate from it. It has always been treated as separate from it, and has figured in the controversy as separate from it. [Cries of "No."] We bring forward an Amendment dealing with it completely and absolutely, and then, after some observations by a Welsh Member—to whose speech I will not further allude as his Amendment has been ruled out of order—an hon. Member representing a Yorkshire constituency gets up and says that not only does he not admit that this grievance, which has been constantly alleged, has been dealt with, but that the Amendment makes the situation worse than it ever was, and it is a mere mockery.
  MR. WHITLEY: I did not say that it made the situation worse than it was, but I did say that it was a mockery.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I did not use any words such as the right hon. Gentleman has suggested
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If I misrepresented the hon. Gentleman I am sorry, but the hon. Member for Halifax said

  1287
  that unless the provision is extended to those learning and those practising the profession we are guilty of nothing short of mockery. Just consider what this Bill does for the teaching profession and for the Nonconformist portion of it. For the first time it enables the local authority to provide secondary education for Nonconformists; for the first time it enables the education authority to provide training colleges for Nonconformist teachers; for the first time it thrusts aside the trust deeds of voluntary schools so that Nonconformists can be elected to all posts except the headmastership; it demolishes the Nonconformist grievance; and yet, with all that, hon. Gentlemen object that it is a mockery, knowing all the time that if they came into power tomorrow they could do nothing to reform the existing system. After all, I have done my best with this Bill, largely with a view to remedying Nonconformist grievances. I quite grant that I never anticipated gratitude from Nonconformist politicians. I admit I have not got it; but, however that may be, I hope the House will pursue the policy which the Government have indicated, and that they will remove those grievances completely without confusing them with an entirely different question.
  MR. BRYCEdid not desire to imitate the somewhat unnecessary heat which the right hon. Gentleman had introduced into a debate which had been singularly pacific and conducted with good humour on both sides. He wished to point out why the right hon. Gentlemen and the Ministry must not expect what the right hon. Gentleman called gratitude.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not expect it.
  MR. BRYCE: The right hon. Gentleman admitted that he did expect it, because he spoke in a tone of disappointment.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There is a medium between gratitude and being
  1288
  told that what you are doing is a mockery.
  MR. BRYCE, continuing, said that if his hon. friend had used any word which had ruffled the right hon. Gentleman's susceptibilities he was doubtless sorry for it. After all, the Ministry were not there in the position of a despotic monarch who out of the plenitude of his grace threw down favours to his helpless subjects. The Opposition were there as British citizens. They considered that the system of education which had gone on in this country from 1870 was one which ought never to have been admitted or tolerated by the Nonconformists. It had been a standing injustice to them, and they considered that this injustice was aggravated by the Bill, and that all the concessions, so called, made did not in their totality amount to anything like the additional injury which was inflicted upon those who objected to sectarian schools by being required to support them out of the rates. That being so, there was no question whatever of any spirit of submissive gratitude and obligation.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONreminded the right hon. Gentleman that in moving the Amendment he made no suggestion of either concession or gratitude. What he said was that it would serve two purposes—first, to open the teaching profession more widely than before; secondly, to put into the hands of the local authority the means of beginning a system in the general organisation of the training of teachers.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he was not referring to the words of the hon. Gentleman, who no doubt introduced the Amendment in the best possible spirit. He rose simply because the Prime Minister's language betrayed a misconception of the feeling with which the Bill was regarded by the Opposition, and as to the way in which they ought to conduct the discussion. They were there as Members of the House of Commons, all having equal rights, representing constituencies with equal rights, and they

  1289
  would debate the Bill with a view to what they believed to be the best interests of the country.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he did not know what had ruffled the Prime Minister. Apparently ho did not mind being opposed by Wales alone or by Yorkshire alone, but what he objected to very much was a combination of Wales and Yorkshire. He agreed with his right hon. friend that they had no cause to be grateful for this Bill, but if the right hon. Gentleman would indicate to him what was a happy medium between an allegation of mockery on the one hand and an expression of gratitude on the other he would be glad to take that line. What was the Amendment? It seized upon an admission of the Government that hereafter they had a right to expect that the pupil teachers should be elected by the local authority in certain events, and the Opposition wanted to know what was the difference in this matter between pupil teachers and assistant teachers. Nonconformists could no longer hope in the future to secure the position of head teacher in denominational schools. With regard to the position of every other teacher, he contended that Nonconformists ought to be as eligible as any other section of the community. It was a very extraordinary thing, but his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General had stated that a pupil teacher was not a teacher at all. It had been said that the pupil teacher system now in vogue was destined to be destroyed very soon. He was rather inclined to think that the late Vice-President of the Council was a greater influence outside the Government than in it, and the right hon. Gentleman had never concealed his opinion that the pupil teacher system in this country was an evil and ought to be destroyed as soon as possible. If the present pupil teacher system was about to come to an end, what was the value of the Amendment of the Government as a concession to Nonconformists? This Amendment was only allowing Nonconformists to have the appointment of something which was going to vanish very shortly. What was the use of an Amendment of that description? If they were establishing a scheme for pupil teachers as a permanent part of their
  1290
  educational system, then, of course, this Amendment would be some extension of the rights which Nonconformists could properly demand. But when they said that the present system was an evil one, what in the name of goodness was the meaning of an Amendment when the system would soon come to an end? The Amendment was to the effect that assistant teachers should be appointed in the same way as the pupil teachers. The hon. Member for Somerset stated that in order to preserve the denominational character of the schools, they ought to keep in the hands of the denomination the appointment of the head teacher. Would hon. Gentlemen opposite like to be told that in all the other schools in the country Churchmen would be disqualified from being assistant teachers? The general system might be divided in two parts, namely, the Anglican schools and the board schools. This Bill sought to exclude from every position in the denominational schools anybody who was not a member of the Church of England. How would hon. Gentlemen opposite like that kind of justice meted out to them, and be told that no member of the Church of England was entitled to come in as teacher in a board school? Every argument that could be adduced in favour of the Amendment of the Secretary to the Board of Education could be used with equal force in favour of the Amendment of his hon. friend. Under these circumstances he thought they had an absolute right to demand that in denominational schools they should throw open the teaching profession, with the exception of the head teacher, without reference to any denomination.
  MR. TREVELYANsaid the Prime Minister had stated that he could not congratulate the Opposition upon the way in which they had received this supposed concession. He thought they had a right to retort that they could not con-

  1291
  gratulate the right hon. Gentleman upon the way he had received the Amendment of his hon. friend. He thought the Amendment deserved more attention than the First Lord of the Treasury had; given to it, because it had an episcopal origin—it was the proposal of the Bishop of Hereford. Although this was an Amendment which they did not regard as entirely satisfactory, yet it had the support of a large number of people outside the House. Although a great many people agreed that the head teacher ought to be appointed by the denomination, yet they held the opinion that the assistant teachers ought to be appointed by the local authority. Not only had the Amendment of his hon. friend an episcopal origin, but it also had the Birmingham imprimatur upon it. At the Liberal Unionist Conference in Birmingham amongst the questions put by the Colonial Secretary was "With a view of safeguarding religious instruction are you ready to leave the election of the head teacher in the hands of the managers?" That obviously meant that the appointment of the assistant teachers should be in the hands of somebody else. The supporters of the Colonial Secretary voted by an immense majority in favour of that proposal. Therefore this Amendment should not be treated with such scant courtesy as not to have a word said about it by the Premier, and he might at least have treated an Amendment which had the sanction of the Colonial Secretary, and which, he believed, had the sanction of more than one bishop, with Some respect.
  MR. LUGASsaid there was an old saying that "What
  1292
  Lancashire thinks today, England will think tomorrow." It seemed to him to be the opposite in regard to this debate, for it appeared that what Wales and Yorkshire thought today, England thought yesterday. He had listened to the debate with great interest, and his opinion, from what had taken place, was that hon. Members opposite were endeavouring inch by inch, and bit by bit, to rob the voluntary schools of that authority which it was intended in the original draft of the Bill to give them. The right hon. Baronet the member for the Berwick Division this afternoon made a speech which was intended to make a very serious inroad into the rights which still remained under the Bill to the voluntary schools. He thought it was only proper that some hon. Member on this side should stand up and assert that voluntary schools should not be robbed, as it seemed to him they were being robbed, of their rights. From the drift of the speeches which had been made by hon. Gentlemen opposite their one effort appeared to be to take away from the voluntary schools such privileges as the Bill would give them. The tendency of the Bill as originally introduced was to leave considerable powers with the managers, but as the debate went on the growing tendency seemed; to be to take away powers from the managers and hand them over to the local authority. A large number of people in the country were watching this Bill very carefully. He did not presume to dictate to the House, or to speak as an expert upon educational matters, but he thought it was well that from time, to time ordinary Members of the House should stand up and express the views of their constituents just to

  1293
  show that they were there, and let the Committee know that they were pledged to represent the interests of voluntary schools and they ought not by their silence to allow those interests to suffer without an occasional protest. In making these persistent attempts to rob voluntary schools of their rights and their privileges hon. Gentlemen oppiteos were bringing forward grievances which had never been heard of before. Many hon. Members sitting on the Ministerial side of the House did not wish to waste time by intervening too frequently in the debate, but he thought it was their duty to let the Government know that they objected to voluntary schools being, handed over lock, stock, and barrel to the local authority.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid the hon. Member for Portsmouth had just informed the Committee that they were hearing now for the first time of some Nonconformist grievances. Even the Prime Minister had admitted this evening that there was a grievance in reference to pupil teachers years ago. He wished to ask the Prime Minister if he had just been out to look the matter up.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, I have not.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he had some hope that before the Prime Minister left office he would have an opportunity of dealing with the larger Nonconformist grievances. He invited the right hon. Gentleman to deal with those grievances now because he did not think he would have much of an opportunity later on. The Prime Minister
  1294
  said that Nonconformists had no grievances at all after those concessions had been made, and he stated that this Bill had been introduced in order to remedy Nonconformist grievances. It was a very extraordinary thing that this Bill should be exactly on the lines of the demands made not by the Free Church Council but by Convocation. Consequently, they were in this extraordinary position—that the real exponents of Nonconformist views were not the Free Church Council but the Archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops and clergy in Convocation assembled. He could quite understand why the Prime Minister mistook the Nonconformist view, for it was because he went to the wrong quarter. He assured the Prime Minister that the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich was not the exponent or the advocate of Free Church principles. With regard to the combination referred to between Wales and Yorkshire he might be allowed to point out that a similar union existed in the eleventh and twelfth centuries when they were supposed to be the best singers, and they had kept up their reputation in this respect up to the present day. [An Hon. Member: "Yes, you have."] Just as they were in harmony then with Yorkshire then they were in harmony on this Bill. His hon. friend had said that the Amendment put forward by the Government was a pure mockery, and he had no hesitation in supporting that statement. Suppose they had at Sandhurst the whole system of cadets thrown open to every creed? [An Hon. Member: "That is so at present."] Suppose they laid it down that two-thirds of the commissions in the Army should be confined to members of a particular creed, would it not be a mockery after that to throw open the places for cadets

  1295
  to all denominations? One had almost to apologise in the House of Commons for mentioning Wales, but Welshmen had to pay rates like anybody else. [An Hon. Member: "But you say you will not pay the education rate."] Yes, but the Government had got to collect that rate. How would this proposal operate in Wales? In the country which he represented there were ninety schools in which Nonconformist children could serve their apprenticeships. According to this proposal Nonconformist children could serve in the whole of those ninety schools, but when their time was finished eighty of those schools would say to them, "Oh, you cannot come here," and there would only be ten schools out of the ninety in which they could utilise their services. [An Hon. Member: They are not obliged to stick to one county."] Practically the hon. Member opposite said, "Let them go elsewhere; drive them out of their own county." [An Hon. Member: "What about Halifax?"] At Halifax they had a very liberal system, under which even the hon. Member who interrupted would be treated fairly. The present proposal was a perfectly unfair system, and from the point of view of the State it was a mockery to say that these pupil teachers were to be trained at the expense of the State and then to say that in two-thirds of the schools in the land "No Nonconformists need apply.' They might even be better teachers, but nevertheless they were going to say to them, "We have no need of your services because of your creed." That was the way the Government proposed to deal with this question, and then the Prime Minister complained that Nonconformists were not grateful for such concessions. The right hon. Gentleman said that if the Opposition came into power they
  1296
  could not have done this wonderful thing, but let the Government give them the chance. If the right hon. Gentleman had any doubt on this question let him submit this Bill for the redress of Nonconformist grievances to the judgment of the country. In this case he could not offer the electors an extra shilling a day, as was done at Devonport. The Secretary to the Board of Education, upon the second reading of this Bill, said he was in favour of throwing open the lower grades of the teaching profession to everybody without distinction of creed. Did the hon. Gentleman adhere to that view now? If he did, then he ought to support the Amendment of his hon. friend the Member for Halifax. Did the Secretary to the Board of Education agree that it was a right and just thing to extend this privilege to the lower grades of the teaching profession? If so, what did he say about the charge brought by the Prime Minister against the Nonconformists because they had moved an Amendment which was the very proposal suggested by the Secretary to the Board of Education.
  MR. BOND: The charge was that his proposal was a mockery.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: So it was, and there was nothing which proved it more conclusively than the statement made by the hon. Member himself. This was not the first time in the course of these discussions that the Nonconformist grievances had been admitted, but although they were admitted the Government said they would not remedy them. That was because there were hon. Members to remind them of the forces behind who desired to take another course.
  Lord HUGH CECILsaid the hon. Member in his interesting speech made use of an ingenious analogy between pupil teachers in schools and army cadets. It did not occur to him that a much more appropriate analogy was to be drawn between army chaplains and the teachers who gave religious instruction in schools. At any rate they had this in common, that both were teachers of religion. No one supposed that it was a grievance to any of the denominations concerned that they could not hold the chaplaincies attached to the other denomination, although the whole fabric and pay was borne by the State. No Nonconformist said "What a shame that I can't be a Church of England chaplain." [An Hon. Member: "They are not trained by the State."] What difference did that make? They were paid by the State. Hon. Members were all agreed about pupil teachers. Every teacher of religion must be to some extent under restriction. He must be a person deemed suitable to teach religion. They could not escape from it in an undenominational school, except by admitting a very much worse evil, if they escaped at all. In a denominational school religion avowedly Christian was taught. How could they admit to a school to teach Christianity a person who rejected Christianity? If they did it would be an intolerable grievance to those who sent their children to the school and who believed that they were being brought up in Christianity by persons who believed in that religion. The only real logical result of the hon. Member's speech was to have simply a secular system and have no religious teaching at all. Would the hon. Member go to the country on that issue? He must shrink from that alternative.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I have always said that in this House.
  LORD HUGH CECILsaid his complaint was that knowing a secular system was impossible, and that they must have a religious system, hon. Members opposite tried to make cheap capital about religious tests. Everybody knew that if they had a religious system they must have tests. If hon. Members opposite wished to abolish tests they must go in for a secular system, and if so, they ought to spare the Committee the rhetoric which they had inflicted. That was his answer to the hon. Gentleman. The object of the Government was not to exalt one denomination at the expense of another. They were asked on this side how they should themselves like to submit to such a test. They should receive it with absolute enthusiasm. If the hon. Member for Carnarvon would get up and propose a denominational system he should be one of his warmest supporters. The fact was that the teachers existed for the children, and not the children for the teachers. Therefore every consideration must stand on one side where the welfare of the children was concerned, and it was for that reason that they had all along supported not merely the denominational character of their schools but the denominational character of the teachers in these schools. It was on that ground that they had brought forward the Bill and on which they would go to the country.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIEShoped the Prime Minister after his warm speech would reconsider the matter and try to accept the Amendment. Many hon. Members sent their

  1299
  sons to our public schools where there were Nonconformists as under masters. As they did that, why should they not consent to have Nonconformists as well as Conformists as assistant teachers in all schools maintained from rates and taxes throughout the country. He would give one out of several instances of Nonconformists being under masters at our great public schools. Now, at Rugby for some years, Mr. Paton, a Nonconformist, was one of their under masters; he is now head master of University College School. Further, he was informed that in our public schools, under masters were elected without any reference to religion. Is this opposition to the Amendment, therefore, real on the part of some Members? It was an unjust Bill, and it was impossible to make it acceptable to Nonconformists unless it could be completely changed from beginning to end. Did the Tory Party remember the time when a Bill, unacceptable to them, was before the House, they said, "Ulster

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Allen, Charles P.(Glouc., Stroud

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lough, Thomas

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

  M'Crae, George

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Brigg, John

  Harmsworth, R. (Leicester)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Broadhurst Henry

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Mather, Sir William

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morgan J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Burns, John

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Newnes, Sir George

  Caldwell, James

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Norman, Henry

  Cameron, Robert

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Joicey, Sir James

  Partington, Oswald

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Kitson, Sir James

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Labouchere, Henry

  Perks, Robert; William

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lambert, George

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Price, Robert John

  Duncan, J. (Hastings)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Priestley, Arthur

  Edwards, Frank

  Leng, Sir John

  Rea, Russell

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Levy, Maurice

  Reckitt, Harold James

  will fight, Ulster will be right." Nonconformists were too patriotic to fight with the sword, but they would protest against the Bill in every way possible. The Prime Minister was so amiable at the Welsh dinner the other day, that he confidently ventured to appeal to him to mete out justice to the majority of the people outside the State Church in the matter of education. If the Prime Minister's amiability could be assured on all occasions, he ventured to believe that they would cheerfully entertain him once a week instead of once in six years. Nonconformists only wanted their just rights. He hoped the House would consider whether it would not be an act of justice to the people of this land to allow the best assistant teachers to be appointed without any reference to State Church religion.
  (11.43.) Question put.
  Committee divided:—Ayes, 85; Noes, 197. (Division List No. 451.)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Runciman, Walter

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

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

  Shackleton, David James

  Tomkinson, James

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Archdale, Edward Mervyn

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Fielden, Edward Broeklehurst

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Arrol, Sir William

  Finch, George H.

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

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lowe, Francis William

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Foster, Philips. (Warwick, S.W

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Galloway, William Johnson

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

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

  Beresford, Ld. Charles William

  Gore, Hn G. R. COrmsby-(Salop

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Bignold, Arthur

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Bigwood, James

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Bond, Edward

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ryS Edm'nds

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Morgan, David J. (W'lthamst'w

  Bull, William James

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Butcher, John George

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Carew, James Laurence

  Gretton, John

  Mount, William Arthur

  Carlile, William Walter

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Murray, Rt. Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Cavendish. V. C.W. (Derbyshire

  Groves, James Grimble

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Myers William Henry

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon J A (Worc.

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G(Midd'x

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Chapman. Edward

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashf'rd

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

  Charrington, Spencer

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Helder, Augustus

  Percy, Earl

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

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Cook, Sir Fredrick Lucas

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield Brightside

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Hoult, Joseph

  Purvis, Robert

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Ratcliff. R. F.

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Kemp, George

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Dixon-Hartland Sir Fred Dixon

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Doughty, George

  Keswick, William

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Law, Andrew Bonar, (Glasgow

  Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isleof Wight

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Seton-Karr, Henry

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  1302

  1303

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

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

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

  Smith, HC (North'mb. Tyneside

  Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

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

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

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

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Wylie, Alexander

  Spear, John Ward

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

  Valentia, Viscount

  Younger, William

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir. William H.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid he wished to move the Amendment standing in his name as follows—
  "In page 3, line 29, at end, to insert—'Religious instruction shall be given in a school not provided by the local education authority, in accordance with the tenour of the provisions (if any) of the trust deed relating thereto, and shall be under the control of the managers.'"
  The hon. and gallant Gentleman said there was not time at that hour to enter into a detailed explanation of the objects of the Amendment. [Cries of "Progress."] He was perhaps entitled to ask that Progress be reported.
  After a brief consultation with the right hon. Gentleman on the Treasury Bench,
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY, who spoke amid cries of "Progress," said the Amendment had certain objects which he thought would appeal to the Committee.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNEKMAN, intervening: Really, Sir, the House of Commons is being played with. My hon. and gallant friend must do one thing or the other. He must move his Amendment or move to report Progress. But, as a matter of fact, he is doing both.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY: Well Sir, I have an exceedingly good precedent for taking more courses than one.
  It being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress.
  To sit again Tomorrow.

  EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Preamble.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this be the Preamble of the Bill."
  Committee report Progress.
  To sit again Tomorrow.
  MR. Speaker, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 16th October, adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.