Commons Sitting of 28 April 1904

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

COMMISSION.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
The House went; and, being returned—
Mr. SPEAKER reported the Royal Assent to—

1. Army (Annual) Act, 1904.

1422

2. Wild Birds Protection Act, 1904.

3. London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Act, 1904.

4. Young and Bell's Patents Act, 1904.

5. Appleby Corporation Gas Act, 1904.

6. Southend Waterworks Act. 1904.

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills. That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with. viz.:—Chesterfield Corporation (Tramways and Improvements) Bill [Lords].Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.
  Mullingar, Kells, and Drogheda Railway Bill. Read the third time, and, passed.
  Weston-super-Mare Grand Pier Bill [Lords]. To be read the third time Tomorrow.
  Local Government Provisional Order (Poor Law) Bill. Read the third time, and passed.

  RAILWAY BILLS (GROUP NO. 5).
  Mr. COMPTON RICKETT reported from the Committee on Group No. 5 of Railway Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, they had adjourned till Monday next, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
  Report to lie upon the Table.
  Thames River Steamboat Service Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Thames Steamboat Trust Bill. Reported [Preamble not proved]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  They have agreed to—Amendments to Amendment to Southend Water Bill: Amendments to Appleby Corporation Gas Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
PETITIONS.
  LICENCES (RENEWAL).
  Petitions against alteration of Law; from Hornsey; Rhosbeirio; Leyton-stone; Ilford; Reading; Crouch Hill; North Finchley; Clapham; Birmingham; Glasgow; Islington; Hucknall Torkard; and North Kensington; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSING KILL.
  Petitions against; from Lower Cross; Carlisle; Sunderland; land Barnsbury; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Lanark, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Petition from Lanark, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS AND ELECTIONS BILL.
  Petition from Lanark, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  RATING OF MACHINERY HILL.
  Petition from Birmingham, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  RE-VACCINATION BILL.
  Petitions in favour; from Chatham; and Sunderland; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF BUTTER BILL.
  Petition from Bermondsey, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 27th April; Mr. Gerald Balfour;] to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 145.]
  LABOURERS' COTTAGES (IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 9th February; Mr. O'Shaughnessy]; to lie upon the Table.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP (HOISTS AND TEAGLES).
  Copy presented, of Report by W. S. Smith, Esquire, one of His Majesty's Inspectors of Factories, on the construction, arrangement, and fencing of Hoists and Teagles [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE.
  Accounts presented, of the Metropolitan Police and the Police Pension Funds for the year ended 31st March, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 146.]
  PAPER LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
  Thames Conservancy. General Report and Accounts of the Conservators for 1903 [by Act]; to be printed. [No. 147.]
  ROYAL COMMISSIONS.
  Address for "Return of all Royal Commissions issued in each year from 1896 to 1903, inclusive, specifying the objects of each such Commission, the name of each Commissioner and Secretary, the date of each Report, or if still stitting, and the cost of each up to the 31st day of March, 1904 (in continuation of and in the same form as Parliamentary Paper, No. 338, of Session 1896)."—(Mr. John Ellis.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Repairs to Trinity and Irish Lights Yachts.
  MR. PLUMMER: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the amount of money spent on repairs to the Trinity yachts "Irene" and "Mermaid" and the Irish Lights yacht "Tearaght," since they were built; whether it is proposed to further repair the "Irene"; and, if so, what is the nature of such repairs and the probable cost.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I am informed by the Trinity House that the approximate amount expended in repairs to the hull and machinery of the "Irene," since she was built in 1890 up to the end of last year, is about £23,000, this amount representing ordinary and special repairs, as well as the cost incurred in respect of a collision a few years ago which was unrecoverable. In addition to the above the "Irene" has just undergone a thorough overhaul, including the fitment of new boilers, at a total cost of about £9,500, and it is anticipated that she will not require any further repairs for some time. As regards the "Mermaid," which was built in 1897, the total outlay for repairs to

  1425
  hull and machinery up to the present time amounts approximately to the sum of £1,900. I am informed by the Commissioners of Irish Lights that the total expenditure on the "Tearaght," under the headings of ordinary and engine room repairs, during the period from 1st April. 1893. to the 31st March, 1904, amounts to £9,518 4s. Id.

  Accidents to Dover Pier Works Lightships.
  MR. PLUMMER: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state how often during the period 1899 to 1903, the lightships placed by the Trinity House at the request of the Admiralty to mark Dover pier works have been run into, and sunk, or seriously damaged; what has been the amount of the loss which has thereby accrued to the Lighthouse Fund; and whether the Board of Trade proposes to make any application to the Admiralty to contribute towards such loss.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) During the period in question the lightship marking Dover pier works has been twice run into and sunk, and on three other occasions has been the subject of collision. In the latter cases the whole cost of the necessary repairs was recovered from the owners of the vessels causing the damage. In the case of the two vessels sunk a sum of £14,800 was recovered from the owners of the vessels which ran them down. The cost of the new vessels to replace those lost was £20,400, and a total expenditure of £5,600 has accordingly fallen on the general Lighthouse Fund, but, in view of the fact that the Trinity House were obtaining new vessels of the latest type in place of two that were respectively 54 and 40 years

  Stationed at

  Directing Officers.

  Examiners.

  Staff. Clerks.

  Second Division Clerks.

  Boy Clerks, etc.

  Total at each Station.

  Headquarters (London).

  29

  20

  7

  116

  15

  187

  Chatham Dockyard

  1

  1

  —

  3

  1

  6

  Devonport do.

  —

  1

  —

  4

  1

  6

  Portsmouth do.

  —

  2

  —

  4

  1

  7

  Woolwich Arsenal

  1

  —

  1

  6

  2

  10

  Pretoria.

  1

  —

  1

  3

  —

  5

  Outside of Headquarters

  3

  4

  2

  20

  5

  34

  old, it was held that the Admiralty could not reasonably be called upon to contribute to their cost.

  Qualifications of Examiners to Civil Service Commission.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state the qualification necessary for examiners and assistant examiners employed by the Civil Service Commission; and whether he will explain why vacancies in these posts have been filled by nomination.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The principal qualifications which the Civil Service Commissioners have looked for in selecting permanent examiners and assistant examiners has been high distinction in some branch or branches of study, according to the needs of the service at the time. Occasional examiners have been selected from among the number of those ascertained to be best qualified to conduct or take part in the particular examinations for which they are engaged. The Orders in Council from the first have given power to the Civil Service Commissioners, "subject to the approval of His Majesty's Treasury, to appoint from time to time such assistant examiners and other persons as may be required to assist them in the performance of their duties."

  Exchequer and Audit Officials.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state the number and rank of the Exchequer and Audit officials employed at headquarters, and the number and rank employed outside of headquarters, with the names of the different places at which they are so employed.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.)

  Report of Visit of H.M.S "Odin" to Tristan da Cunha.
  MR. LODER: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Report of the recent visit of H.M.S. "Odin" to Tristan da Cunha has yet been received, and, if so, whether it will be laid upon the Table, as has been done on former occasions.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The Report has been received, but as it is of no particular public interest this year, it is not proposed to lay it upon the Table, unless it is desired that this should be done.

  Promotions in Cork Post Office
  MR. J. F. X. O'BRIEN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether, in making the promotions pending at the Cork post office, he will carry into effect the recommendations of the Tweedmouth Committee, which stated that, on the

  Time of despatch from London.

  Delivery commences in Paris at

  9.5 a.m. viâ Dover

  5.45 p.m. the same day.

  10.0 a.m. viâ Folkestone

  7.40 p.m. the same day.

  11.0 a.m. viâ Dover

  7.10 a.m. the next day.

  2.20 p.m. viâ Folkestone

  9.5 p.m. viâ Dover

  Time of despatch from Paris.

  Delivery commences in

  (a) City of London at

  (b) Other London Districts at

  9.45 a.m. viâ Calais

  6.20 p.m. the same day.

  5.40 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. the sam day.

  11.35 a.m. viâ Calais

  8.30 p.m. the same day.

  7.0 a.m. to 7.20 a.m. the next day.

  4.0 p.m. viâ Boulogne

  7.20 a.m. the next day.

  7.0. a.m. to 7.20 a.m. the next day.

  8.40 a.m viâ Calais

  9.0. p.m. viâ Dieppe

  8.30 a.m. the next day.

  10.15 a.m. to 11.15 a.m. the next day.

  introduction of the amalgamation scheme, the higher postal appointments are proper to the old postal sorting clerks.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am not aware of such a recommendation having been made by the Tweedmouth Committee, and I can only repeat what I have previously said respecting the promotions at Cork, that I will endeavour to secure that the officers promoted are the best qualified for the higher duties.

  Postal Service Between London and Paris.
  MR. PIRIE: To ask the Postmaster-General if he can state the hours of the various daily despatches of letters from London to Paris, and vice versâ, with their corresponding deliveries.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The information required by the hon. Member is as follows:—

  Licences Refused on the Ground of their not being Wanted.
  MR. HENDERSON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the number of licences which magistrates in county boroughs and non-county boroughs, respectively, refused to renew during each of the past ten years on the grounds that they were no longer required for the neighbourhood; how many such refusals in county boroughs and non-county boroughs respectively, were appealed against, and what number of the refusals were confirmed by quarter sessions.

  Licences refused on the sole ground that they were not required.

  Appeals against all refusals.

  Appeal dismissed.

  Appeal allowed.

  Appeal abandoned, pending, etc.

  Total.

  1894

  County Boroughs

  14

  17

  27

  —

  44

  Non-County Boroughs

  6

  7

  8

  —

  15

  1895

  County Boroughs

  2

  18

  10

  2

  30

  Non-County Boroughs

  5

  7

  4

  —

  11

  1896

  County Boroughs

  2

  17

  10

  2

  29

  Non-County Boroughs

  1

  3

  2

  —

  5

  1897

  County Boroughs

  10

  17

  12

  1

  30

  Non-County Boroughs

  2

  3

  3

  2

  8

  1898

  County Boroughs

  8

  15

  22

  5

  42

  Non-County Boroughs

  2

  1

  2

  —

  3

  1900

  County Boroughs

  33

  44

  16

  2

  62

  Non-County Boroughs

  8

  5

  5

  —

  10

  1903

  County Boroughs

  57

  47

  45

  16

  108

  Non-County Boroughs

  35

  25

  34

  9

  68

  Total

  County Boroughs

  126

  175

  142

  28

  345

  Non-County Boroughs

  59

  51

  58

  11

  120

  No Returns were published for 1899 and 1901, and in 1902 no general annual
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) The only figures which I can give are contained in the Parliamentary Returns on the subject. In the second column of the table below will be found the numbers of refusals in boroughs on the ground that the licences were not required. It is not possible to distinguish in the figures of appeals between these cases and refusals on other grounds; but the remaining columns of the table show the total number of appeals and the results.
  Statement with regard to refusals to renew licences:—
  licensing meetings were held outside London.

  Workhouse Nursing—Report of Committee.
  MR. SCHWANN: To ask the President of the Local Government Board what steps, if any, have been taken to deal with the Report of the Departmental Committee on Nursing, which was made in November, 1902; and whether the recommendations of the Committee in that Report are to be adopted as they stand.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) As stated in the reply given to the hon. Member by my hon. friend, the Secretary to the Local (Government Board, on the 21st instant, † after the Report of the Departmental Committee on this subject was made I received a considerable number of representations on points relating to their recommendations. I have caused these representations to be brought before the Committee, who have duly considered them. I am now in possession of the views of the Committee, and I will shortly decide precisely what course shall be taken in the matter.

  Valuation and Population of Proposed Scotch School Board Districts.
  MR. CROMBIE: To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the Paper showing the population and valuation of the proposed school board districts under the Education Bill will be in the hands of Members before Monday.
  (Answered by Mr. A. Graham Murray.) I have been in communication with the Stationery Office, and I am told that the Paper will be delivered in the Vote Office to-morrow evening.

  Naval Speed Trials off the Coast of Cornwall Damage to Fisheries.
  SIR LEWIS MOLESWORTH: To ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, with the view of preventing damage to the fishing interest on the south coast of Cornwall from the proposed naval speed trials near the shore, the Government will consider the advisability of first taking the opinion of their
  † See page 849.
  1432
  fishing experts, and publish the report of such opinions.
  (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) We have not previously received any representations on this subject, and at the moment I can only refer to the statement recently made in another place by the First Lord of the Admiralty, with whom my noble friend the President of the Board has placed himself in communication. Any evidence which may be supplied to us in support of the suggestion that fishery interests have been, or are likely to be, adversely affected, will of course receive careful attention.

  Dog Tax in Scotland.
  MR. WEIR: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the expediency of arranging for the dog tax in Scotland to be reduced as in Ireland; and, if not, will he state on what ground Ireland is given a preference in this matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I do not propose to initiate legislation for the assimilation of Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom in the matter of establishment licences. As is well known, Ireland is exempt from payment of all these licences; and the small registration tax on dogs, imposed for local purposes, is neither collected by nor paid into the Exchequer.

  Proposed Alterations in Drawback on Tobacco.
  MR. BUCHANAN: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will state the proposed alterations in the drawback on tobacco as recommended by the Joint Committee of the Customs and Inland Revenue authorities appointed by him.
  (Answeredby Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I regret that I am not yet in a position to give the information desired by the hon. Member.

  Agricultural Banks in India.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state the number of agricultural banks in India, and

  1433
  the districts in which they are respectively situated.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The hon. Member is referred to the answer given by me to his Question on the same subject on 18th February last.† The Bill to provide for the establishment of agricultural banks has only just become law, and some time must necessarily elapse before its provisions will be practically operative, and before Returns are available of the banks established under it.

  Mahony Estate.
  MR. BOLAND: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the negotiations for the sale of the Mahony Estate, in which the Gap of Dunloe is comprised, have been completed; can he state how many applications from evicted tenants on that estate have been received by the Estates Commissioners, and how they have been dealt with.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) I understand that negotiations for sale have taken place between the owner and tenants of this estate, but so far no application in respect of the property has been made to the Estates Commissioners. Seven applications have been received on behalf of evicted tenants and will be considered by the Commissioners.

  Irish Constabulary Force Fund.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that members of the Royal Irish Constabulary retiring on pension are entitled according to Finance Code 656 to 4 per cent, on their pay from the Constabulary Force Fund, and that this amount was reduced in March, 1895, to 2 per cent, in consequence of the insolvency of the fund; will he say if the fund is now in a solvent condition, and what percentage it is able to pay to the remaining subscribers; and will he direct the Inspector-General to raise the percentage in accordance with the amount it is able to pay.
  †p Six; (4) Debates, cxxs., 234.
  1434
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The grant was calculated at the rate of 4 per cent, between the years 1891 and 1895, and was reduced to 2 per cent, in the latter year. It is payable only to members of the force who joined before 18th June, 1883, and its object is to cover the cost of expenses incurred when retiring from the service. The fund is solvent. The income of the reward branch of the fund, out of which the grant in question is paid, is not derived from subscriptions. It is not proposed to increase the percentage.

  Discontent among Maryborough Prison Warders.
  MR. JOHN O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is the fact that discontent exists amongst the warders at Maryborough Prison owing to the conduct of Chief Warder Murray in insulting and abusing the warders in presence of convicts and on other occasions; and whether, seeing that several warders have complained to the Governor of the Prison about the conduct of this man towards them, he has reported the matter to the General Prison Board; and, if so, what steps have been taken, if any, to prevent the continuation of such conduct on the part of this man.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) It is not a tact that discontent exists among the warders of this prison, or that several warders have complained to the Governor of the conduct of the chief warder. A complaint was preferred by one warder named MacMahon, and as a result of the investigation held he was removed from Maryborough Prison by the Prisons Board, who considered the warder to be unfit for convict service duty. The chief warder performs his duties to the satisfaction of the Board.

  Inspectors of Veterinary Branch of Irish Department of Agriculture.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the names and qualifications of the recently appointed inspectors to the veterinary branch of the Agricultural Department for Ireland, also their experience as veterinary surgeons and where

  1435
  they were last employed; whether he can state the names and qualifications of the ansuccessful candidates; whether he appointment of a veterinary inspector is made by the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture and Technical Instruction; and, if not, can he give the name of the official who selects and recommends the candidates for appointment to the veterinary staff, and by whom finally is the appointment ratified.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Two appointments have been made to the staff of temporary veterinary inspectors since November, 1902, namely, Mr. J. D. Whitty, V.S., Wexford, and Mr. J. R. Thompson, V.S., Londonderry. Mr. Whitty, during his professional course, was the winner of six gold medals; he practised at Drogheda and Strabane, and in the counties of Aberdeen, Forfar, and Midlothian; he was last employed at Brechin. Mr. Thompson has practised in the United States and in Londonderry. It would be contrary to practice to give the names of the unsuccessful candidates. The appointments were made by the Department.

  Commission on Irish Workhouses— Publication of Evidence.
  DR. THOMPSON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will arrange for the Departmental Commission on Irish Workhouses to publish the evidence already submitted to them; and if the Commission, having finished their investigations for Ulster, could furnish a Report of the recommendations they are prepared to make for that Province.
  (Ansuered by Mr. Wyndham.) This Question only appeared on the Paper for the first time this morning, and it is not possible to reply to it to-day. Perhaps the hon. Member will repeat the Question on Monday next.

  Increased Pensions for Crimean Veterans.
  COLONEL LOCK WOOD: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the number of Crimean veterans still living; and whether he can arrange as an act of grace that the pensions of these veterans shall be increased.
  1436
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The number of Crimean veterans still living cannot be stated at short notice. All those in receipt of small pensions, who are in necessitous circumstances, are now being granted special increases provided that they have either been wounded or discharged for disability or are at the present time suffering from a disability clearly due to their military service.

  Japanese System of Army Land Transport
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any officer of the Army Service Corps has been attached to Sir W. Nicholson or Sir Ian Hamilton for the purpose of acquiring information as to the Japanese system of army land transport.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) No officer of the Army Service Corps has been attached. The system of Army land transport will be reported on by the officers who have been attached, several of whom have had experience in dealing with transport, notably Sir W. Nicholson, who was Director of Transport during the recent war in South Africa.

  William Davies, of Dominica, V. The Crown —Delay in Settlement.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonics if he will give the reason for the delay in the case brought by Mr. William Davies, of Dominica, West Indies, against the Crown; and if he will use his influence to have the matter settled as soon as possible.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The Governor has been instructed to endorse his consent on the statement of claim as provided by Section 370 of the Leeward Islands Act, No. 8, of 1876, so that the case may be tried by the Supreme Court of the Leeward Islands. No complaint has reached me that any avoidable delay has occurred.

  Estate Schools in Ceylon.
  MR. SCHWANN: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any practical response has been made by

  1437
  estate owners in Ceylon to the information as to the terms on which Government aid can be obtained by planters towards the establishment of estate schools and procedure for obtaining registration of them, as set out in the late Governor Sir West Ridgeway's letter and memorandum to the Planters' Association of Ceylon, of 16th November last.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) I have no information as to this particular point. Before making inquiry I propose to await the arrival of the Report of the Committee on Education, which the Governor stated some weeks ago was being printed and would be sent shortly. In his telegram on the subject dated 10th March, the Governor added that steps are being taken to submit definite proposals as to estate schools.

  British-Indian Traders at East London, South Africa.
  SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the order of the Town Council of East London requiring British-Indian traders to vacate the town in fourteen days, regarding which he has called for an inquiry and report from the local authorities, will not be enforced until he has considered and given his decision on the report, and to state if definite instructions are sent out to hold the order in abeyance till then; and if he will lay the Papers on the subject upon the Table of the House.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) I am not in a position to give instructions in regard to a law in a self-governing colony under which powers have been conferred on a local authority. I am not able to lay Papers at present; the Governor has sent me a despatch on the subject which is on its way.

  The Licensing Bill.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will see that provision is made in the new Licensing Bill that any award made under the Act by way of compensation shall be clearly defined as between the licence-holder and the brewer, so that
  1438
  licence-holders shall have every protection.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) It is, of course, impossible in the Licensing Bill to define the manner in which the relative shares of the brewer and the licence-holder are to be determined in every case, owing to the immense variety which exists in the relations between the two. The Bill provides that the respective shares of the brewer and the licence-holder in the compensation money are to be determined by quarter sessions, who will consider the circumstances and determine what is fair in each case, and give full consideration to the claims of the licence-holder. The Government fully recognise the importance of the subject.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Birching Boys in the Navy.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that boys under eighteen are liable to birching over the bare back, not exceeding twenty-four blows, and caning on the back, with clothes on, the number of blows not to exceed twelve: that these punishments are inflicted by the ship's police, and in the presence of the boys on board ship; that the offences for which boys are liable to caning or birching comprise every offence against discipline and the slightest faults; and that it is stated in 759 of the King's Regulations for the Navy that birches are to be supplied from the dockyard and the callings are to be inflicted with light and ordinary canes, specimens of these birches and canes will be placed for the inspection of Members in one of the rooms of this House; and whether the Admiralty authorities are prepared to recommend any alteration in the present system of birchings and caning for trivial offences.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): The answer to both parts of the Question is in the negative.
  MB. SWIFT MACNEILL: Am I right in saying that these punishments have to be inflicted in the presence of all the boys on board ship?
  MR. PRETYMAN: Yes, Sir, that is the regulation, but the hon. Member is not absolutely right in all his own particulars.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I will give the hon. Gentleman an opportunity to put me right when the Vote for the salary of the First Lord is debated?

  The Capture of Fort Illig.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty a Question of which I have given private notice—whether it is the fact that a force of British sailors and Marines has attacked and captured Fort Illig in Italian Somaliland with the concurrence but without the help of the Italian men-of-war who were spectators of the action: for what reason was the attack made, and if made to destroy the power of the Mullah who is now located in Italian territory, whether the attack ought not to have been left to the Italians.
  MR. SPEAKER: The latter part of the Question is a matter of opinion; but the first part is in order.
  MR. PRETYMAN: The facts are as stated in the earlier part of the hon. Members Question, but as to the remaining part I am not in a position to answer it, as I have only received the Question to-day. I sent the Question to my right hon. friend the Secretary for War, to whom it would be more properly addressed, but it did not reach him in time. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give notice of the Question.

  Claim against the War Office by an Imperial Yeoman.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that a sum amounting to about £40 arrears of pay for service in South Africa, due to Sergeant W. C. Forster, 18th Battalion Imperial Yeomanry Corps, who, having served his full time with the colours,
  1440
  went into reserve, re-enlisted, and volunteered after discharge for South Africa, has not yet been paid him, notwithstanding numerous personal applications made by him to the War Office, and urgent letters written on his behalf to Lord Roberts, the Secretary of State for War, and the War Office; and what explanation, if any, can be given for the delay by the War Office in the payment of this sum which has caused Sergeant Forster inconvenience and distress.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,): The hon. Member appears to be misinformed. The rank of sergeant was not conferred on this soldier, and it appears clearly from the accounts that no further sum is due to him. It is a fact that he has made many applications to the War Office and to various-individuals. He has, however, been informed in writing more than once of the facts to which I have referred, and a verbal explanation to the same effect has also been given.

  Director of Supplies and Transport
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the appointments of Director of Supplies and Director of Transport have yet been made; and whether, contrary to the recommendations of the Esher Committee, it is intended to appoint a non-expert to either or both of these posts.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: By Part I.,. Section II., paragraph 24 of the Report of the Esher Committee, "the selection of military subordinates in each branch should be made by the Secretary of State upon the sole recommendation of the responsible member of the Council." The appointments of Director of Supplies and Clothing, and Director of Transport and Remounts, have been made on the recommendation of the Quartermaster-General, who is the chief of the Department concerned.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: Was it not recommended that these officers should be experts?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The head of the Department concerned

  1441
  was well aquainted both with the recommendations of the Commission, and with the qualifications of the officers in question before he made the appointments.

  The New Rifle.
  MR. HUNT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether each of the new rifles will be separately tested by being shot at various ranges, or whether only ten out of a hundred will be so tested as was the former custom. I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the new Government rifle, on account of the reduction in its weight and the increased twist of the grooving of the barrel, kicks so much as to seriously affect accurate shooting, he will consider the advisability of discontinuing the manufacture of this rifle until it has been thoroughly tested in India.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER;: In reply to these Questions, I have to say that each of the new rifles will be tested and sighted individually. The tests of the new rifle have been completed, and there are no grounds for discontinuing manufacture. The twist of the rifling has not been increased not the accuracy of the rifle impaired by the reduction in weight.

  Transvaal Labour Ordinance
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is able to state for how many Chinese coolies shipping accommodation has so far been provided by the agents of the Transvaal mine-owners; and what is the rate of wage which will be paid to the labourers
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,): I am not able to say for how many coolies shipping accommodation has been provided. I am still in communication with Lord Milner as to the rate of wage.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the plan of bringing to Hong-Kong all the Chinese labourers
  1442
  enlisted for the Transvaal will be adhered to or whether they will be shipped from other ports also; whether the official whose duty it will be to explain to the labourers the terms of their contracts has yet been appointed; and, if there is to be more than one port of embarkation, whether similar officials have been appointed to each.
  MR. LYTTELTON: The Convention with China will provide for the shipment of the labourers from all the Treaty ports. An official will be appointed at each port from which they will be shipped, and two of these officials have been selected.

  Kaffir Mortality in the Witwatersrand Gold Mines.
  MR. JOHN ELLIS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now lay Papers upon the Table giving the communications which have passed between himself and the High Commissioner, and the High Commissioner and the owners of the Witwatersrand Gold Mines, respecting the grievous mortality of the Kaffirs working in the mines, and also the promised Returns of such mortality.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I shall be in a position to lay Papers very shortly. I am waiting for a report by Sir G. Lagden, which I expect to receive by the next mail.
  SIR JOHN GORST: Will the Papers include the one promised as to the mortality among the thousand labourers brought from Central Africa?
  MR. LYTTELTON: Yes, Sir.

  Missing Property of the Late James Murray.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any reply has yet been received from Lord Milner in reply to the question addressed to him in reference to a missing sum of £25, the property of the late James Murray, alias M'Gowan, alias M'Gavan, of the Lendy-Estate, Rhodesia.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have not yet received a reply to my inquiry, and will remind Lord Milner.

  Income-Tax—Committee of Inquiry.
  MR. AINSWORTH: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will include among the subjects to be referred to the Committee on the Income-tax the question of the collection of the tax in Scotland, with a view to putting the proceedings in connection with this on the same footing as in the rest of the United Kingdom.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): No, Sir; this would I think, be a retrograde stop. The Scottish system is superior to the English system, and, if there were to be any change, it should be in the opposite direction to that suggested by the hon. Member. But an examination of the merits of the two systems would be outside the scope of the proposed inquiry. As it arises out of this Question, hon. Members may like me to give the exact reference to the Committee which is to inquire into the income-tax system, and to state the names of the members of the Committee, which I was unable to do the other day. The names are Mr. Ritchie. Chairman; Sir H. Primrose, Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue; Mr. Sydney Buxton, M.P.; Mr. Cosmo Bonsor, Chairman of the City Commissioners of Income-tax; Mr. Adam Murray, one of the General Commissioners for Manchester, and joint author of a guide to income-tax practice; and Mr. W. Gayler, Chief Inspector of Stamps and Taxes at Somerset House. The reference to the Committee is as follows:—"To inquire into and report whether it is desirable to effect any alteration in the system of the income-tax, as at present prescribed and administered, under the following heads:—(a) the prevention of fraud and evasion; (b) the treatment of income derived from copyrights, patent rights, and terminable annuities; (c) the allowances made in respect of the depreciation of assets charged to capital account; (d) the system of computing profits assessable under Schedule D on the average of the profits actually realised in the three years preceding the year of assessment; (e) the rules and regulations
  1444
  governing the recovery by taxpayers of overpayments of income-tax."
  MR. AINSWORTH: May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will undertake that whatever the result of this inquiry the system in the two countries shall eventually be the same?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir; that would require legislation, and it would be of a very contentious character.

  Licensed Houses and the Death Duty.
  Mr. I. A. THOMAS: I beg to ask Air. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, when the death duty has been paid on the full value of a licensed house based on the expectation, reasonably held, that such licence would be renewed, and this licence has not been renewed, the executors, if they have not already realised the full value, can recover any portion of the duty.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, Sir. The executors can recover the duty if application be made before administration of the estate has been closed.

  Education Act—Defaulting Authorities.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether, in view of the introduction of the Education (Local Authority Default) Bill, it is intended to proceed with the machinery for mandamusing local authorities provided in Section 16 of the Education Act of 1902.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,): The Board are not prepared to make any definite statement at present on the point named in the hon. Member's Question.

  Education (Local Authority Default) Bill Finance.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether it is contemplated that the Education (Local Authority Default) Bill will involve any additional expenditure of Exchequer grants on education; if so, whether provision has been made in the Estimates for 1904–5; and, if not, whether he will indicate from what source

  1445
  the funds are to be forthcoming for the purpose of rendering the non-provided schools specially assisted under the Bill more efficient than they are at present.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: The answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative. The answer to the last part is, I think, sufficiently indicated in the provisions of the Bill, which is now in the hands of hon. Members.

  Powers of Defaulting Education Authorities.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether it is intended that in the case of non-provided schools specially assisted under the Education (Local Authority Default) Bill the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Education Act of 1902, as to the appointment of managers by the local authority, the veto of the local authority over the appointment of teachers, and the general control of the local authority over the secular instruction given in such schools, shall continue to apply.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I must again refer the hon. Member to the provisions of the Bill. For a detailed explanation of these, he must await the discussion which will take place when the Bill is considered in Committee.
  DR. MACNAMARA: May I ask whether if a local authority has not rate-aided a denominational school it will therefore ipso facto lose its right to appoint the managers under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act of 1902?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: This is not the time at which we can discuss these points.

  Defaulting Education Authorities in Wales.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he will give particulars and names of the local authorities who have been defaulters in the performance of their duties as respects elementary schools.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I am not in a position to give the information desired.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: May I expect an answer a week hence?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I am afraid I shall be in the same position then.

  Roman Catholic Schools in Wales.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he will state the number of Roman Catholic schools, and children attending them, there is in each of the Welsh Parliamentary constituencies.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: The total number of Roman Catholic schools in Wales and Monmouthshire is fifty-two. The total average attendance is 11,246. The areas of Parliamentary constituences are not recognised for the purposes of educational administration, but, if the hon. Member desires it, I shall be happy to send him a statement giving the figures for each local education authority in Wales and Monmouth separately.
  MR. D.A.THOMAS: Do these figures include Monmouthshire?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: Yes, they are for Wales and Monmouthshire.

  Government Grants to Welsh Schools.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he will state the amount of Government grants given to Wales for educational purposes during the last financial year under the old system, and the prospective amount to be paid to the new educational authorities in Wales during the current year.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I presume that the hon. Member refers to grants paid to public elementary schools in Wales and Monmouthshire. The amount of these grants for the year ending 31st August, 1902, was, roughly, £554,000. No very accurate estimate can be made of the amount of the grants which will be paid during the financial year ending 31st March, 1905, but it may be estimated at approximately £680,000. The increase is due partly to the new aid grant, and partly to very considerable increase in the average attendance, which influences all the grants.

  White Estate, North Longford.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that negotiations are pending for the sale of the White Estate in North Longford; that amongst the farms offered for sale was the evicted farm of Mary Hand, Culleenmore, Granard; and that the planter tenant in this case is only an eleven months tenant who has neither resided on or tended the term since he got it; and, if so, will he direct the Estates Commissioners to take Mary-Hand's application into favourable consideration when the sale of this estate comes up for sanction.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,,N., for Mr. WYNDHAM): Negotiations are pending for the sale of this estate but so far no application in respect of the proposed sale has been brought before the Estates Commissioners. The tenant in occupation of the evicted holding referred to took it as an ordinary tenant in 1896, and not on the eleven months system; he resides on the farm and works it. The application of Mary Hand will be considered by the Commissioners.

  Dopping Estate, North Longford.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case of Dennis Mulligan, an evicted tenant on the Dopping property in the parish of Collumbkille, North Longford; whether he is aware that this man's house and farm have been taken by a policeman at present serving in the county Louth; and whether the Estates Commissioners intend to take any action towards providing Mulligan cither with an equivalent holding elsewhere or compensating the planter with a view to the restoration of the evicted tenant.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The evicted tenant who is dead, was Ellen Beglan, not Dennis Mulligan. The claim of Mulligan appears to arise from the fact that he is married to a niece of the evicted tenant. His application will Ire considered by the Estates Commissioners.

  Catholic Clerks in the Irish Agricultural Department.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain how it is that the Roman Catholic clerks in the veterinary branch of the Agricultural Department are debarred from all hope of promotion or increment of salary, while certain other clerks who were transferred from that branch to Merrion Street offices, were, with the exception of one Roman Catholic, all given substantial increases of salary, in contradistinction to those remaining in the veterinary branch. The hon. Member protested against the insertion at the Table of the word "Roman" before "Catholic," without consultation with him.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The position of the clerks who had been employed in the former veterinary department prior to their transfer to the Department of Agriculture has been explained on more than one occasion by my right hon. friend the Chief Secretary. There is absolutely no foundation for the suggestion that the Department acted to the prejudice of any of its officials in consequence of their religious beliefs, which are quite unknown to the Department and have never formed the subject of investigation.

  Maryborough Prison Warders and Insane Convict.
  MR. JOHN O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a convict, named Maurice Sheehan, was beaten by five warders in Maryborough Prison by order of Chief Warder Murray in December last; that the warders broke their batons on his head; that the Governor of the prison had him transferred to Dundrum Criminal Asylum with a view to preventing the prisoner from making a statement about the treatment he was subjected to; that the medical superintendent of the Dundrum Asylum certified the prisoner as not insane, and sent him back again to Maryborough; if so, what steps have been taken by the General Prisons Board in this matter; and

  1449
  whether a sworn inquiry will be held in connection with the case.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): Sheehan was convicted in March. 1902, of the crime of breaking into two Roman Catholic Churches at Mitchels-town and Kanturk and of stealing a sum of money from the former. He was also convicted of the crime of malicious wounding. He was sentenced to penal servitude for a term of five years. He was transferred to the Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum from Maryborough Prison in December, 1902. He escaped from the asylum in March, 1903, and remained at large for three months, when he was captured and recommitted to the asylum. Subsequently he was certified as sane and re-transferred to Maryborough Prison on the 24th June, 1903. In December he made a determined effort to commit suicide by setting fire to his cell. He made a murderous attack on the warders who succeeded in removing him, only after much difficulty, from the burning cell. He was examined by three local doctors and by the medical member of the Prisons Board who pronounced him to be a dangerous lunatic, of homicidal and suicidal tendencies, and he was sent back to Dundrum Asylum, where he remains. There is no foundation for the statement that Sheehan was assaulted, as suggested, in Maryborough Prisor. An allegation to this effect was made by the convict and, on investigation, was proved to be groundless. It is not proposed to hold a further inquiry.

  Ely Estate, County Fermanagh.
  MR. EDWARD MITCHELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that on the Ely Estate, count}' Fermanagh, over forty decrees have been recently granted for rent, and a promise given that they would not be executed till after the 2nd June, and. if so, whether he will take steps to expedite the passage of the Bill before that date, so that the estate may be sold to the tenants.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDAM): Fifty-five Civil Bill decrees for rent were obtained against tenants on
  1450
  this estate at the Enniskillen Quarter Sessions. An intimation has been given to the parties, I understand, that no further steps will be taken against them until after the 19th May, the date fixed for the collection of rents. The inquiry in the second part of the Question should be addressed to the Prime Minister.

  Ballina Boot Manufacturing Company.
  MR. EDWARD MITCHELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a case recently heard in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice in Ireland wherein application was made for the winding-up of a boot manufacturing company in Ballina, and where, in the course of the proceedings, it was stated that the Department of Agriculture for Ireland was a creditor to the amount of over £500, having lent that sum to subsidise the industry; and, if so, will he say whether the lending of money for such an object is one of the objects of the Department.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The Department made the loan in question for the purpose of providing machinery to be used in the school promoted by the Ballina Technical Instruction Committee, and to be employed by the committee, acting in conjunction with the boot manufacturing company, converting unskilled into skilled labour. The Department is empowered to provide machinery for the purposes of technical instruction.

  Drummeel Bog, County Longford
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the Estates Commissioners are bound to become public trustees for large tracts of bog sold under the Act of 1903 which are not in direct occupation of tenants, he will say if any application has been made to them to assume this position in connection with the Drummeel, county Longford, bog on the Granard Estate.
  MR, ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): No application his been made to the

  1451
  Estates Commissioners in respect of this bog. If made it will be considered.

  Use of Urlingford Union Board Room for Meetings.
  MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the-Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a resolution passed at a meeting of the Urlingford Board of Guardians condemning the action of the Local Government Board in refusing to allow a meeting to be; held in the board room of that union; whether he is aware that the room was unanimously granted by the guardians; and, if so, will he state why the permission granted was cancelled by order of the Local Government Board and the decision of the guardians overruled; is he aware that the promoters of the meeting only received a few hours notice that the permission granted was withdrawn, thus preventing them from securing another hall; and whether meetings, having no connection with Poor Law administration, have been previously held in the board room of this union.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): On the 31st March the guardians granted permission to the hon. Member to address a meeting in the board room of the workhouse. The Local Government Board were not made aware of the fact until the 6th April, and on the following day the Board informed the guardians that it had been decided in a Court of Law that the workhouse could not be used for any purpose unconnected with the administration of the Poor Laws. Previous to this decision the workhouse board room had been so used.
  MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: Have not Sir Horace Plunkett's committees held meetings in this room without objection being raised.
  MR. ATKINSON: I must ask for notice of that Question.

  Butson Estate, County Galway.
  MR. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what was the nature of the agreement entered into in
  1452
  May, 1902, in the Land Judge's Court by Mrs. Butson for the purchase of the Abbeylands, on the Butson estate, county Galway; and whether any limit was put to the time within which the purchase was to take place.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The agreement entered into by Mrs. Butson (as trustee for her son, the minor owner) was to take the lands of Great Abbey on the usual Court tenancy for seven years. At the same time she agreed to purchase the said lands for such sum, not exceeding £12,000, as the Land Judge should declare to be necessary to discharge the incumbrances on the lands. No limit of time was contained in the agreement for completion of the sale, and the actual price to be paid cannot be ascertained until the other portions of the estate have been sold.
  MR. ROCHE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this agreement was entered into two years ago? Is it to go on for ever?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  New College of Science, Dublin.
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the materials for the erection of the work in connection with the laying of the foundation stone, by His Majesty the King, of the proposed new College of Science in Dublin have been imported from London; whether he will give the name of the contractor entrusted with the work; whether tenders were asked for from Irish builders; whether the decorations for the platform were also imported; and whether he will take such steps as will secure the use of Irish materials and local workmen as far as possible in the erection of the building.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH;)Tenders for building were invited from Dublin builders, and one of these was accepted. This includes all the builder's work required in preparing the part of the site available, as well as the foundation piers on which

  1453
  the first stone will rest, and also the construction of the pavilion, approaches, etc. Messrs. Edginton, of London, have been selected to carry out the covering with canvas of the pavilion and covered ways, floor and seat covering, and internal decoration. This class of work is not done by Dublin firms; but with this exception all the work has been done locally. Irish materials are being used as far as possible.

  Dublin Telegraph School
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that the Telegraph School in Dublin is overcrowded owing to the presence there of several ladies who have passed no examination, and that as a consequence the learners who have every right to preferential treatment are placed at a disadvantage in the manner of attaining proficiency in the telegraph service; and can he say what object the Department has in view in so training these ladies, or if it is his intention to give them appointments in the instrument room.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY.): The hon. Member appears to be under a misapprehension, as out of the sixty-three persons who are receiving instruction in the Telegraph School in Dublin, not more than twenty-nine attend at the same time, whereas there is accommodation for forty-eight. The attendance of certain assistants and others—chiefly for the purpose of improving the working at sub-offices—does not in any way place the learners as a disadvantage.
  MR. NANNETTI: Is there any chance of employment for these girls?
  LORD STANLEY: Yes, for the learners. Those who are not learners in the technical sense of the word are connected with other post offices which will get the advantage of the experience they are gaining in the working of the instruments, etc.

  Dual Working in the Dublin Post Office.
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that several sorting clerks and telegraphists in Dublin of five years service are now
  1454
  employed on dual working in Dublin, although they have been employed soley in the Telegraph Department for some time; can he say why this is so, in view of the departmental evidence before the present Wages Commission that dual working has only to be undertaken for the first few years of service.
  LORD STANLEY: The officers referred to are liable to be called upon to work on either postal or telegraph duties if the exigencies of the service require them to do so, and the circumstances in the Dublin office have rendered it necessary to employ these officers for part of the day temporarily on sorting duties.
  MR. NANNETTI: Is the noble Lord aware that these dual workers are kept on sorting duties for a year at a stretch and then the next year do telegraph work? Is the object to increase their efficiency?
  LORD STANLEY: Yes.

  Duties of the Irish Postmen.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will state whether it is part of the duty of a night postman to do the work of a counter hand in making up parcels for despatch; whether he is aware that in most large post offices in Ireland postmen are called upon to sort, label, and cancel stamps on parcels, which in the daytime is done by the clerk on duty; and will he direct that either such work be done by the clerk on duty or that extra pay for the same be made to the postmen on night duty.
  LORD STANLEY: Primary sorting and stamping are part of the recognised duties of a postman. If the hon. Member will furnish me with particulars as regards the office at which a postman is employed in despatching parcels. I will inquire into the circumstances.
  MR. J.P. FARRELL: If I give the name of the postman will the noble Lord guarantee he shall not be dismissed?
  LORD STANLEY: Most certainly, that is never done.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Oh, no !

  Railway Delays in Dublin.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN): I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the delays that occur at Amiens Street and Kingsbridge Stations in connection with the transit of passengers and mails between Kingstown and the Great Southern and Western system; and whether, in view of the importance of an improved connection, he will press upon the companies concerned the necessity, in the public interest, of coming to some arrangement by which these delays may be avoided.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR, Leeds, I Central): I have been in communication for some time past with the railway companies concerned in this matter and regret that so far a satisfactory result has not been arrived at. The Board of Trade have no statutory powers to compel the companies to take action.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the time gained by improving the cross channel service at a cost of £500,000 is more than lost by these discreditable delays at Amiens Street.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, Sir, and we are doing our best to remedy it.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I have to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether there is any alteration in the order of business announced yesterday.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): In consequence of the fact that we were not able to get the Report of all the Budget Resolutions last night, I shall have to ask the House to finish that stage of the Budget next Tuesday. Monday next remains allocated, so far as the first order is concerned, to the Scotch Education Bill. On Monday week I
1456
propose to take the Second Reading of the Licensing Bill.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Cannot the Cunard Agreement (Money) Committee be taken at an early date as the right hon. Gentleman put it down as the second order for Tuesday?
MR. A.J. BALFOUR: The sooner that business is disposed of the better, and I will consider the propriety of putting it down as the second order on Tuesday.
MR. EDWARD MITCHELL: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any forecast as to when the Irish Land Bill is likely to be reached?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think much is gained by making forecasts of the course of business. In the first place, it depends not upon me but upon the powers of discussion of the House whether the forecast turns out accurate or not; and if it proves inaccurate hon. Members are apt to slip into the habit of thinking that I have broken an engagement. I therefore abstain from legislative prophecy.
MR. BRYCE: If the Scottish Education debate is not finished on Monday will it be continued on Tuesday?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I cannot imagine the debate on the Scottish Education Bill lasting more than one day; but, in any case, the following day must be understood to be distinctly allocated to the Budget.
MR. BUCHANAN: I hope the right hon. Gentleman will put on the Paper as soon as possible the terms of the Motion with regard to the Cunard Agreement.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—Army (Annual) Bill.

SUPPLY [7TH ALLOTTED DAY].
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[MR. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

SUPPLY [7TH ALLOTTED DAY].
  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DE-PARTAIENTS ESTIMATES, 1904–5

    CLASS 1.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £32.300, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1905, for the Houses of Parliament Buildings."
    MR. WYLIEsaid he had given notice of his intention to move the reduction of the Vote simply in order to call attention to the delay in carrying out the recommendatons of the Select Committee regarding the ventilation and sanitation of the House, and to suggest certain additional improvements which the Board of Works should carry out at the earliest possible moment. He ought, perhaps, to apologise to the Committee for his persistence in raising this question, but his excuse was to be found in his belief that what he suggested was for the benefit of the health of hon. Members, of the officials of the House, and of the occupants of the Press Gallery. When in March, 1902, the predecessor of the present First Commissioner of Works concurred in his (Mr. Wylie's) Motion and promised to appoint, and did, in fact, appoint, a Committee to consider the question of ventilation he was sanguine enough to expect that the necessary improvements would be speedily carried out and that by the beginning of 1903 the House would be placed under better sanitary conditions. But this had not yet been accomplished. The present Vote, however, included a sum of £3,000, which was to be spent in carrying out important recommendations of the Committee, including the substitution of electric fans for the present exhaust furnaces. He was glad that the antediluvian arrangements in use for many years past were to be got rid of, as they had proved very ineffective.
    1458
    He regretted that it was not proposed to substitute hot water pipes for steam pipes and radiating plates because he held that the working of the latter was most uncomfortable for hon. Members, and tended to produce thirst: but he noticed that hon. Members who were very careless about bacteria in the air were particularly careful to destroy them in the water they consumed, by adding a killer of, he believed, Scottish origin. What was needed was a better supply of air for the Ladies', Reporters', and Strangers' Galleries. Fans had been put in the Ladies' Gallery which did not draw fresh air from the outside or expel the bad air, while in the Press Gallery reporters had to work in a vitiated atmosphere. If the buildings had been under the Factory Act, the First Commissioner of Works, he believed, would have been summoned and fined for the condition in which they were. Next to the Members of that House, the reporters were the most important people in it, and he was therefore very glad that notwithstanding the absence of any recommendation, a sum of £500 had been put down for the purpose of improving the ventilation in the Press Gallery. He hoped that a larger sum would be applied to that purpose, and that they should very soon have the reporters in as good a sanitary condition as themselves.
    Then he would like to press upon the noble Lord the hon. Member for the Chorley Division the advantage which might be secured by introducing ventilating fans into the dining-rooms upstairs, and the ladies' dining-rooms downstairs, for these rooms, when crowded, and even when used in ordinary circumstances, required better ventilation. He wished to say that the official responsible for the cleaning of the House was carrying out his duties with great ability with credit to himself and with advantage to the health of the Members, and he thought the more frequent removal of the matting for the purposes of cleansing had been of much benefit and the vacuum cleaner had proved a great success He was informed that no less than 50 lbs. of dust weekly, or 10 lbs. per day, was being carried out of the House by means of this machine, a large portion of which used to be carried out in the lungs of hon. Members. I connection with the problems of

    1459
    ventilation an inquiry had been set afoot, and he believed men of considerable experience and ability were conducting it. They might hope for still better things in the future. Looking at the condition of the House at present as compared with two or three years ago, he must congratulate those who had to do with the bringing about of the marked improvement. He went into this question thoroughly some years ago, and he could state that under the new arrangements bacteria, which found a happy hunting ground there and outside, were now having a very bad time of it. In the House and in the library the thorough daily cleansing and disinfection were having a most beneficial effect. Under the old conditions he scarcely understood how the Whips and some regular attenders, like the hon. Member for Mid Lanark, existed. They must have had constitutions perfectly impenetrable to bacteria. With the improved conditions they might now expect to live very much longer than they otherwise would have done. He had devoted himself very persistently to this question, but necessity had compelled him to do so. He believed that in a few years this House would be a model in regard to sanitation, and, although he would not be there then, he would always have the pleasure of knowing that he had contributed to the giving of more sweetness and light to those with whom he had had such pleasant associations in that Assembly.
    MR.FREDRICK WILSONcalled attention to the evidence given by Dr. Graham Smith before the Select Committee on Accommodation which sat in 1901. In regard to what might be called the debating chamber it was found that the bacterial organisms in the air amounted to 5·8 per litre; in Committee Room No. 9,with fans working, and 150 persons present, the figure was 20·9 per litre; in the smoking-room at 9p.rn., when twenty-four persons were present, the bacterial organisms got up to 30 per litre; in Committee Room No. 1,fans not going, but windows open, and forty-one present, the figure was 34·6. Dr. Graham Smith reported that the unsatisfactory condition of the Committee rooms and smoking-room was due to insufficient ventilation. He thought some credit
    1460
    was due to the Committee for the improvement which had been effected in the ventilation of the debating chamber. Speaking of the time before the Committee sat, Mr. Francis Fox, C.E., said—
    "If there are fifty people in No. 6 Committee Room the air is not good for more than twenty minutes at the outside. The consequence is that you gentlemen are simply breathing and re-breathing the air over and over again, which is absolutely insanitary."
    But if that was the condition of the Committee rooms and the smoking room, what must be the state of the division lobbies when crowded? There the bacteria must be something tremendous. Hon. Members could not always be in the debating chamber. He could never tolerate long sermons. After three quarters of an hour in the debating chamber he liked to walk into the smoking-room or somewhere else. The smoking-room, which was in an unwholesome condition, was immediately over the kitchen. The kitchen got pretty hot about dinner time, with the result that thesmoking-room also became very hot on account of the fires underneath, and no amount of ventilation would ever make that room wholesome. But the Committee of 1901 not only pronounced the smoking-room unsatisfactory, but the kitchen underneath was said to be still worse—so bad, in fact, that one right hon. Member, a Member of the Government, went into it and deliberately smashed the windows because of its unwholesome condition. And if the smoking and Committee-rooms were unsatisfactory, what, the hon. Member asked, must the state of the lobby be on crowded nights? It must, he declared, be in a very shocking state. He commended the attention of the Government to the recommendations of the Committee of 1901. It offered for a very reasonable sum to make a nice suite of rooms all along the Terrace, and this, he added, would make the House increasingly popular, and keep a majority for the Government of the day. He suggested also that some of the rooms over the present Committee-rooms might be put to more useful purpose than such as the storage of the Journals of the House from the reign of Queen Anne. He submitted that if the recommendations of the Committee of 1901 were carried out

    1461
    they would have a satisfactory House of Commons.
    MAJOR EVANS GORDONsaid that in consideration of the long delay in carrying out the recommendations of the Committee, he would move a reduction of the Vote by £100. He called attention to the utterly inadequate telephone accommodation. At present it seemed more suitable for a third-rate "bucket-shop" in the East End than for the House of Commons. If the convenience of Members was a secondary matter, surely the moral welfare of the servants should be considered. He had been pained to hear language used by grey-headed venerable statesmen outside the telephone room which really might have been equalled, but he did not think could have been surpassed, during the progress of the Parliamentary Golf Handicap. It was certainly language unsuitable to be heard by the young people in charge of the telephone instruments. The inconvenience suffered by hon. Members was very great in that wretched box of a place when crowded with people who were trying to send messages. It was high time that bettor accommodation was provided. In the Legislative Assemblies he had visited in Paris and Berlin the telephonic arrangements were of the most perfect and commodious character. He trusted that his noble friend would take this matter into consideration and endeavour to bring about the changes which were urgently needed.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £32,200. be granted for the said Service."—(Major Evans-Gordon.)
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid that this was a Vote in which he had always taken a considerable interest, because amongst other reasons, he had been a member of the House of Commons Accommodation Committee. He agreed with the hon. Member for Mid. Norfolk that it was extremely regrettable that the recommendations of that Committee had been mainly ignored. He quite admitted that one or two things contemplated by the Committee had been carried out, but why should all the rest of their recommendations have been
    1462
    ignored? Anyone who read the evidence given before the Committee must come to the conclusion hat the alterations recommended by them in their Report were absolutely necessary in the interest of the health and well-being of the men who spent the greater portion of their lives in the House. The condition of the Members' smoking-room was a perfect scandal, and was a constant menace to the health and well-being of the Members. By some extremely ignorant people this House was supposed to be the best club in the world. There were 670 members of this club, and the only smoking-room was situated in the worst part of the building, over the kitchen, where the atmosphere was extremely hot; and which, they had been told by experts, was capable of accommodating not more than forty Members. Surely, that was state of affairs that ought to be remedied at once. They might be told that there was another smoking-room on the terrace, but that was not a Members' smoking-room; it was constantly filled with strangers. There should be a Members' smoking-room capable of accommodating 150. The Committee recommended that there should be a second Members' smoking room on the terrace where there was a whole series of rooms between the present strangers' room and the Speaker's residence, and which were now not, used for any particular purpose. He asked the noble Lord that that recommendation should be carried out. Then, although the ventilation of the kitchen had been considerably improved, it was, in his opinion, still in a shocking bad state, If hon. Members thought he was exaggerating let them visit the kitchen and they would find that they could not stand the heat, even in this cool weather, for more than a minute. By the expenditure of a small sum of money he was sure that something might be done to make the place habitable. There was no bakery or workshop in the city where such arrangements would be allowed to continue for a day by the Government Inspectors of Workshops and Factories.
    There was one item in the Vote, which gave him great satisfaction. At last something was to be done to improve the accommodation for the gentlemen representing the Press. There

    1463
    was to be a lift. Goodness knew it was time that that should be provided. The climb up the stairs to where these gentleman had to work was quite a severe piece of business, and the absence of a lift had been a scandalous disadvantage, and would not have been permitted in any other Assembly except the House of Commons. He trusted the work would be carried out with all expedition, and that everything else necessary to improve the accommodation for the gentlemen of the Press would be done. These gentlemen had to sit there just as long as hon. Members, and the hours during which they had to listen were far less entertaining to them than to hon. Members who did the talking. He was glad to see that recently there had been some extension of telephone accommodation. That was a great advantage. The Post Office staff used to charge Id. for the use of the telephone. That was a mean proceeding, and he was pleased that when a representation was made to the Postmaster-General on the subject that charge was put an end to. The hon. Member for Stepney had said that the telephone service in the Legislative Assemblies in Paris and Berlin as superior to that in the House of Commons, but even those were miles behind the accommodation provided for members of Congress in Washington. Everything connected with the working life of members and officials in the American Congress was infinitely superior to that provided in the House of Commons. He did not know why that should be so. The Americans seemed to think more of the comfort and well-being of their representatives than they did. But that was a matter which lay with the House of Commons itself. When Members were not paid a salary or even their travelling expenses, at least they ought to have every accommodation given to them in a proper way.
    He hoped the noble Lord would frankly admit at once the reasonableness of what he had said, and promise that during the recess all the reforms recommended by the Committee should be carried out. The recommendations of the Ventilation Committee had been carried out, and why not the recommendations of the House of Commons Accommodation Committee?
    1464
    The war came and the Chancellor of the Exchequer found it difficult to get the money. But the war was now over. They had, according to hon. Gentlemen opposite, a flourishing Budget, and the money market was reviving, and that being so, the least thing they could do was to make themselves as comfortable as they possibly could. Some hon. Members did not attend in the House, and the divisions-showed that a large number were in the habit of only dropping in to take part in divisions. Those who had to spend their lives in the House of Commons must smoke somewhere and they ought to have a suitable smoking-room. At the present time they could hardly ever find a vacant seat in the smoke-room, and they ought to have some place provided to rest themselves in. He appealed to the noble Lord opposite to meet him fairly. If he did, the noble Lord would hear no more from him upon this subject, but if he did not he would hear more of it.
    SIR MICHAEL FOSTERsaid he wished to make a few-general remarks with regard to the question of ventilation. The Committee appointed to investigate this matter had given its chief attention to the ventilation of the House of Commons itself. Those who had read the Report would see that the air of this Chamber, as compared with other buildings in which large assemblies of people were held, was very good. The air which they breathed under ordinary circumstances in the Chamber of the House of Commons was such air as was seldom breathed in other public buildings. Even from the bacteriological point of view it was also good, but in this respect they were dealing with a difficult subject, because our knowledge of bacteria was far less than that of the chemical constituents of the air. With reference to bacteria, he would remind hon. Members that some were their friends and some were their enemies, and they did not always know which were their friends and which their enemies. If a too zealous Committee had decided to deprive the air of the Chamber of all its microorganisms it was probable that the House would suffer from such a complete deprivation. But although the air of the House of Commons was found to be relatively good the House ought not to be content with air that was only relatively

    1465
    good, but the air ought to be as good as could be provided with all the modern resources of science. The Committee had considered what changes could be made, and they had taken into consideration the whole system of ventilation at present in use. One objection was that the air they were breathing in that Chamber was brought through the carpet on the floor. There was another objection which was that the air was brought from the Terrace through devious underground passages. And the Committee considered whether they should recommend a total change in the system. Several systems were strongly urged upon the Committee, and he might remark that when a man had invented a particular system of ventilation he was prouder of that system than anything else a man could be of. The Committee, however, came to the conclusion that they could not recommend any of the new systems suggested to them with the certainty that they would lead to a better condition of things than they bad at the present time. Therefore, they contented themselves with seeing if they could not make certain improvements in the present system pending the advancement of the science of ventilation. They found that the want of an adequate and proper system of ventilation was largely due to the backward system of the science of ventilation itself.
    To him few things seemed to be more in want of ventilation than the science of ventilation itself, and pending increased knowledge in this respect they desired to limit themselves to making certain obvious improvements. One of these, which he was glad to say had already been put in force, was increased cleanliness all over the House. He thought every hon. Member would have noticed that the House had been in a far cleaner condition recently than it had ever been before. The method of dealing with the exhaust air was somewhat antiquated, and they found that the engineer had not adequate control over the supply of air. They had, therefore, recommended that two new fans should be introduced. With regard to the system of heating, the artificial means adopted appeared to be in past at least the cause of that dulness in the air which they all
    1466
    complained of. But the present state of our knowledge did not permit any definite statement as to the exact cause of that dulness and how it could be prevented. He thought they wanted a large inquiry into the whole of this question, and until they had clearer evidence than they had that some system which would be successful could be introduced instead of the old system, they thought it was not worth while to recommend large expenditure and they confined their recommendations simply to those improvements which they knew would be efficient and would produce good. They had not been able, for want of time to devote much attention to matters outside the Chamber itself, and he desired to express his personal regret that the Report contained no specific recommendation with regard to the Reporters' Gallery. He thought it was absolutely impossible by any scientific method whatever to make the present smoking-room a place in which the Members of the House could smoke in a good atmosphere, and what they wanted was more complete accommodation. If they only knew more about the science of ventilation than they did he was sure they could supply very much better air in that Chamber and all over the House than they were getting at the present time. One of the recommendations of the Committee was that a definite inquiry should be instituted into the whole subject of the ventilation of the House, and by that he meant an extensive and complete inquiry using the best scientific power they could command. He regretted to say that that recommendation of the Committee had not been carried out. He knew that there was a small inquiry going on, but what he meant, and what the Committee meant, was that there should be be a very distinct and large inquiry into the whole system of ventilation, using the House of Commons as an example. He trusted that sooner or later that larger inquiry would be undertaken.
    COLONEL LOCK WOODsaid there could be no doubt that the accommodation of the House at the present time was far from adequate, but it must not be forgotten that the requirements of the Members of

    1467
    the House now were vastly in excess of what they were a few years ago. Unfortunately, whilst the requirements of the Members increased year by year, the capacity of the building remained the same. The whole of the interior had been altered from time to time and every particle of room had been utilised without, however, carrying out all the requirements of the House. He agreed that no amount of ventilation would render the smoking-room of use for any large body of Members, but still something had been done by turning over what was called the Irish dining-room to the use of smokers after a certain hour. He did not, however, agree that the kitchen was badly ventilated. No doubt more accommodation was required, but it was fairly well ventilated.
    MR. JOHN CAMPBELLcalled attention to the meagre accommodation provided in the House for ladies, and contrasted the arrangements made by the House of Commons with those provided by the Upper House, which he stated were far superior. He called attention to the retention of the grille. He admitted that this question had been raised some half century ago, and that a predecessor of the noble Lord bad stated that he had taken the opinion of some hundreds of ladies who were in favour of the retention of the grille, but he invited the noble Lord to go up into the Ladies' Gallery now and take the opinion of those at present occupying it, by whose verdict he (Mr. Campbell) would be content to abide. He also asked for an annunciator in the Ladies' Gallery, in order that ladies should know who was addressing the House.
    MR. H. C. RICHARDSsaid, with reference to the question of ventilation, that all that was required was a little common sense on the part of those responsible. Between three and five in the afternoon the atmosphere of the House was most oppressive and not nearly so free and pure as at nine or ten at night. The reason was plain—in the early part of the day not a window was open or a ventilator working. The bad ventilation of the House was entirely due to a lack of common sense among the officials. He had been in the Con-
    1468
    ference-room when it had been impossible to get a breath of air without opening one of the large windows, and the un-ventilated condition in which the library corridors were allowed to remain when the House was not in session was, in his opinion, largely the cause of the absence of so many Members through indisposition early in the sessions. The Committee-rooms were more unhealthy than a Court presided over by a Judge of eighty years of age, who kept the temperature at such a height as to make it uncomfortable for everybody but himself. What was wanted in the Committee-rooms was a through current of air—a draught of fresh air running through them. They were the worst ventilated rooms for a tribunal in any Legislative Assembly in the world. He agreed that the condition of the tea-room was fearful. With regard to the accommodation for ladies, he thought the first thing to do was to provide for the Members and let the ladies shift for themselves. The House was not called together to give dinners downstairs and teas on the terrace. In his opinion the best thing to do would be to discourage female attendance at the House, and then perhaps hon. Members would be more in attendance in the Chamber. He objected to the House of Commons being made a place for social gatherings. So far from the House of Commons being the best club in the world, it was the worst to which he belonged, and certainly the most expensive. He appealed to the noble Lord to see that the attention of the officials was called to the state of the atmosphere in the House itself, and to the condition of the other rooms to which reference had been made. In those portions of the building where Members were compelled to be they had a right to demand that they should be enabled to live under healthy conditions.
    DR. FARQUHARSONsaid that considering the construction of the House it was surprising that the ventilation should be as good as it was. He remembered that the Committee on Ventilation, in the course of their labours, had great difficulty, owing to absence of plans, in finding out, where the drains really went, and one of the discoveries they made was, that

    1469
    Members were actually breathing sewer-gas. That condition of things, combined with the late hours which the House used to keep, made him wonder that any Members were left to tell the tale. It was probably a case of the survival of the fittest. He deeply sympathised with the occupants of the Ladies' Gallery; their lot was, indeed, not a happy one. If the House would appoint him a sub-Committee, with power to add to his number, ho, accompanied by some other intrepid Members, preferably married men, would be glad to proceed to the Ladies' Gallery and take a census of the opinions of the ladies as to whether the grille should be removed, and as to the conditions under which they would prefer to carry out their difficult task of following the debates. A great deal had been heard of the objective condition of the atmosphere in the House: but what Members were interested in was not so much the objective as the subjective conditions. He believed that much of the depression to which Members were subject was due to the condition of mental inertia to which they were reduced after a long day in the House. Members sat there for hours doing nothing beyond vainly endeavouring to catch the Speaker's eye. That was a terribly worrying process, and was largely responsible for the lack of capacity for work which so many hon. Gentlemen experienced. He fully agreed as to the desirability of better accommodation in the smoking-room and the tearoom. The great object of the authorities ought to be to induce men to remain in the House instead of causing them to go elsewhere by the lack of reasonable accommodation. The feeding arrangements were much better than was formerly the case, and the 2s. dinner was a perfect marvel. As to the artistic decoration of the House, much remained to be done before the House would be, as it ought to be. a treasury of art, both in painting and sculpture. In this connection, he desired to render his appreciative thanks to Professor Church who had so kindly—and, he believed, gratuitously- given his valuable services in restoring the frescoes, many of which had fallen into a very bad condition. Two more plaques—one Scotch and one Irish—were wanted in the lobby. He
    1470
    was aware that the present was not a favourable opportunity on which to ask for money for decorative purposes, but if any patriotic gentlemen were willing to provide the plaques at their own cost he would guarantee to find an excellent artist—hailing from Aberdeen—who would do the work both cheaply and well.
    MR. MILDMAYthought it was little short of scandalous that some better method of taking divisions should not have been devised. At present Members were jammed together at one end of the lobby while the House was being cleared, with the result that they were breathing one another's exhalations, and it should be remembered that towards the end of the session the health of many Members was not in the best possible state. The position was very disagreeable in another sense, because Members frequently found themselves next to their most importunate acquaintances from whom they could not then escape. An improvement might be effected by recurring to the system which, on the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon, was tried for a session, and by which Members proceeded straightway through the lobbies without any disagreeable waiting at the doors. There might be some slight structural alteration made which would provide them with an exit from the Outer Lobby, and in that way they would get rid of the disagreeable wait he had complained of, and they would save a good deal of time. He thought some alteration, at any rate in this particular, was really very necessary, whether they accepted his suggestion or not, because nothing could be more disagreeable than the way divisions were taken at the present time. As to the question of ventilation, the hon. Member for the University of London had condemned their present system. At the present time all the fresh air that came into that Chamber was pumped up through the matting on the floor of the House, upon which Members deposited the filth from the streets through walking upon it. If the Committee would report against this system he was sure they would have the

    1471
    hearty support of the whole of the House.
    MR. GODDARDsaid that a more important question than ventilation was the safety of the House of Commons buildings from fire. A little time ago a proposal was made with regard to the safeguarding of the House of Commons buildings from fire, by the Superintendent of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade. Soon after this proposal was made, the sum of £1,400 was voted as a Supplementary Estimate on the recommendation of the Chief Officer of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade, but he noticed, although at that time the matter was considered urgent, only £611 was expended, and it was stated, in a note of explanation, that it had not been found possible to give full effect during the year to all the recommendations of the Chief Officer of the Fire Brigade. He had tried to find the balance in the following year's Estimates, but no such Vote had been taken last year nor was it in the Estimates this year. He supposed, therefore, that those recommendations were not going to be carried out, and either there had been a mistake in assuming that the matter was urgent or else more money had been asked for than had been found to be necessary. As the House voted this money for this distinct purpose, he thought they had a right to know why those recommendations were not carried out, and why money had not been taken to complete the recommendations of the Superintendent of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade.
    COLONEL STOPFORD SACKVILLEsaid he could not understand what must be the feeling of the stranger who came into the most central part of the Houses of Parliament and found only two mosaics. He thought the noble Lord might afford a little more money to fill in those terrible gaps in the central part of the House. In thirty-six years since he first entered the House only one additional mosaic had been placed in the Central Hall. viz. that representing St. David. He joined in the appeal made by the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire that the Patron saints of Scotland and Ireland should be inserted in the vacant panels.
    MR. LAMBERT (Devonshire,said that what in his opinion was wanted to purify the, atmosphere of the House of Commons was a general election, because there were too many hon. Members on the Benches opposite. There was one complaint he had to make. The door behind the Speaker's Chair was extremely inconvenient, and common Members of Parliament like himself had to tap at that door to get it opened whilst Members sitting on the Front Bench were provided with a key. ["No. no!"] At any rate, Cabinet Ministers were provided with keys, and he thought all Members of Parliament ought to have the same privilege because at present it was a regular nuisance and the door might be kept open. Then there was the ridiculous notion of keeping the door leading into the cloak-room locked during a division. This was too ridiculous for words, and if the Whips could not keep their Party in order why did they not employ a couple of policemen? After hon. Members passed through the lobby and got into the central lobby, why they should not be permitted to go straight into the cloakroom he could not understand. If the noble Lord would give them free ingress and egress behind the Speaker's Chair, and open the door going straight down into the cloak-room, it would be a great convenience to hon. Members.
    MR. PEELcomplained that in the library they were constantly unable to find a place to sit down to work. He desired to ask the noble Lord if more provision could not be made in that respect; he was afraid, however, that they would get very little sympathy in that matter, because Ministers had their own private rooms.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid this debate had been fruitful in eliciting a useful speech from the hon. Member for the University of London, and he was delighted to find that the recommendations of the Committee did not call for any great amount of expenditure. Nearly every hon. Member had been calling out for expensive alterations, not for the benefit of the country but for the comfort of hon. Members of the House. One point,

    1473
    however, had been brought out, and that was that the atmosphere of the Chamber was as good as the atmosphere of any public assembly in the United Kingdom, and the experiments which had been made recently bore out that contention on scientific grounds. As regarded the Chamber itself they had no ground to complain of the condition of the atmosphere. The improvements made on the other side of the House in regard to introducing the air under the seats might be extended to the Opposition side. There was one point which had been brought out which he had contended for more than once, and it was that they did not want so much changes of structure as more attention to cleanliness. He was delighted that the House had been made cleaner that it ever was in his recollection before. There were, however, various portions of the Press Gallery which had not been attended to in this respect, and one place he desired to mention was what was known in the Press Gallery as the black room, the surroundings of which were not a credit to the House of Commons. He hoped the improved method of cleaning which had been adopted would be continued, because, if they kept the building clean they would do a good deal to improve the general condition of the House. He thought the cleanliness might be extended to the outside structure. One improvement he had noticed was that the lamps had been cleaned along the front of the House of Lords and the House of Commons, and that was an improvement.
    He was delighted that lately some enterprise had been shown in introducing incandescent lamps in some of the courts of the Houses of Parliament. The lighting was worse than that of any municipal building in the country. This was brought out strikingly when one walked into the street under the jurisdiction of the City of Westminster where there was a system of lighting which was modern compared with the almost antiquated system which was used to light the approaches to the House of Commons and the House of Lords. He hoped the noble Lord would give an assurance that the matter would be remedied in the near future. In regard to the warning of the rooms he said the temperature was exceedingly irregular. The temperature
    1474
    of the reading-room, smoking-room, and tea-room had risen to sixty-seven and sixty-eight, and on one occasion to sixty-nine. That was a dangerous condition for Members who had to go out of those rooms into the cold temperature outside. That was how they caught chills. He should like those who had charge of the thermometers to give a little more care and attention to that matter. The smoking accommodation was really a disgrace, and it ought to be improved, because, after all, the amenities in connection with one's duty in the House were really things which ought to be looked after, in order to keep Members within the reach of the division bell. He did feel that Members of the House of Commons had been treated rather badly in recent years in regard to accommodation. A large number of rooms had been taken away from officers of the House, and this proceeding had not given Members of the House any advantage. With a selfishness which was almost monumental, Ministers had kept all these good things to themselves, and they had now an opportunity of revelling in much better rooms than their predecessors ever dreamt of. The consequence was that the attendance on the Treasury Bench was much worse now than it ever was before. He thought Ministers ought to exercise self-denial and give, up some of the extra space they now occupied For the benefit of Members of the House. They might then get an adequate smoking-room, a room where one could write with com-fort, and a tea-room where a refreshing beverage might be taken in a not excessive temperature.
    LORD BALCARRESsaid the matter of the door behind the Chair and the doors in the lobby was one over which the Office of Works had no control whatever.
    MR. LAMBERT: Who is responsible?
    LORD BALCARRESsaid he was not. The Minister in charge of a Vote was only responsible for matters included in that Vote. He could not say who was responsible for the matter to which the hon. Member had referred. With regard to the suggestion that a change should be made in the system in the division

    1475
    lobbies, he did not think the Office of Works would be justified, on its own volition, in proposing to revolutionise a system which, however imperfect, had lasted a good many years. If the House were to direct that a new system should be adopted, the Office of Works would carry out any instructions given in that respect. The hon. Member for the Ilkeston Division had complained of the lamps outside. He had never heard a complaint about that matter before. The hon. Member had also complained of the variation of the temperature. The temperature no doubt varied here just as it did outside the Houses of Parliament, but hon. Members must in fairness recollect that what was hot for one Member was exceedingly cool for another. Varied temperaments had to be met, and it was not in their power to satisfy all. The hon. Member for Ipswich had asked about the fire protection arrangements. He was perfectly correct in saying that a Vote was taken which was not entirely expended, and that next year it was not placed on the Paper. The entire recommendations of the Superintendent of the Fire Brigade were carried out. The balance of the cost had been defrayed out of savings on other Votes. The whole of that question had been before the Public Accounts Committee.
    MR. GODDARD: The money that was voted was not really expended.
    LORD BALOARRESsaid it was expended later on. His hon. friend had asked about the mosaics in the outer lobby. If the Treasury would provide the money, the Office of Works would pro vide the mosaics. In regard to the Ladies' Gallery two suggestions had been made, namely, that the grille should be removed, and that an annunciator should be provided. His own experience was that ladies who applied for admission to the Ladies' Gallery would prefer that no alteration should be made. That was also the impression of hon. friends to whom he had spoken on the subject. In the absence of proof that the grille was a nuisance, he did not think they could be reasonably called upon to make that alteration. An annunciator was a noisy thing, but two annunciators would be
    1476
    required as there were too galleries. He agreed with a great deal of what was said by the hon. Member for East Clare, but he would remind him that the Select Committee on Accommodation a few years ago recommended the outlay of a large sum of money on certain alterations and improvements, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, in view of the cost which would have been involved, did not support the proposals. He admitted as freely as the hon. Member that the whole question of accommodation, not merely for smoking and dining-rooms, but for other purposes was one of very urgent importance. He had no-announcement to make on the subject, but the First Commissioner of Works realised that there were difficulties with respect to the accommodation for the Press, secretaries, and shorthand writers. Hon. Members were aware there was a plan of the House of Commons in the tea-room. If any hon. Member would refer to the plan and find where there was a vacant room available for any of the purposes to which allusion had been made suggestions on the subject would be considered. The fact was that at present there was only one unoccupied room in the premises. It was twelve feet long by six feet broad. There were rooms above the Committee-rooms, and he imagined that it was in that direction the extension of the accommodation could be made. In the Estimates for the year a considerable sum was taken for the improvement of the accommodation, chiefly in regard to the Press Gallery.
    As to ventilation, he would only deal with what the Select Committee recommended. What they had got to do was to place within the House air of sufficient quantity, proper purity, and moderate temperature, and to distribute it as best they could and finally to disperse the impure air. The air was drawn into a large chamber from the Terrace and by a long passage underneath the Cromwell Statue where it was heated in winter and cooled in summer, and, in foggy weather, driven through cotton wool, and thence distributed all over the House. The system, no doubt, was open to the objection that the air they consumed arose from their feet; but the hon. Member who raised this question,

    1477
    and those who supported him, had never been able to propose an alternative solution of the problem. The only alternative scheme that had been suggested was that mentioned in page 5 of the Report, the ruling feature of which was that no doors should ever be open. But considering that there were seventeen doors into the Chamber it was impossible either to control them, or to open the windows, and it would be out of the question to reverse the system by which hon. Members entered the Chamber. The Committee had pointed out various features in which the system could be improved, and he had concurred in making those improvements. At the present moment the air coming into the Chamber was afterwards drawn through openings in the glass ceiling where the gas, which was their illuminant, served as the motive power. Then it went up through an exhaust chamber above the public gallery and by that means was thrown into the open air. The hon. Member had suggested that the furnaces should be done away with; but it had not been possible to adopt that suggestion, for the immediate result would have been that the exhaust air would have been drawn up to the Ladies' Gallery and would have asphyxiated the Press in their gallery. It had been further suggested that the channels through which the air was carried should be simplified. That was going to be done. Then the air was to be purified by being forced through three streams of water. The intake fan would be made more powerful. One of the recommendations of the Committee was now being actually carried out as to the more frequent removal, for the purposes of cleansing, of the matting on the floor. Hon. Members should realise that although they had been complaining for years about the ventilation of the House of Commons, the diseases from which they suffered were of a zymotic character rather than those resulting from bad air. During the last few years progress had been made in tracing the origin of zymotic disease. The matting was going to be replaced by a matting of a superior character, and that had been provided for in the Estimate before the Committee. A disinfecting chamber was arranged for where the matting would be
    1478
    frequently cleansed, and, by adopting the vacuum system of cleaning, an enormous improvement would be effected in all the cleaning operations in the House.
    When hon. Members complained that the conditions prevailing in the House were such as would be invariably condemned by the factory inspectors, they very greatly exaggerated the state of things. He maintained that the ventilation and cleansing of the House was infinitely better than in any theatre, church, or public building at home or abroad. Moreover, the difficulties they had to face were very much greater. The session was very much longer, and there was a constant movement in every part of the House which made it very difficult to carry out cleansing improvements. He, therefore, claimed that enormous improvements had been recently made, and when, as he hoped, it was possible to extend the system of vacuum cleaning still further, every nuisance would be removed to all intents and purposes. The hon. Member had d me good service, in conjunction with his Committee, in this matter, with the assistance of Dr. Gordon, who had placed his services at their disposal. The Office of Works were, however, prepared to allow further claims for bacteriological investigations, but he asked for a sum of money to continue those scientific investigations not dealing primarily with our own problem, but with the problems from a general point of view. That was the reason why his hon. friend had to complain of the delay in carrying out the recommendations of the Committee. At the end of July or the beginning of August last, formal sanction had been obtained from the, Treasury to carry out the work; but the Office of Works concluded that further general inquiry should be made into the whole of this delicate problem. Therefore, in November, an Estimate was framed for £3,000, which he now asked the Committee to sanction, for further research which it was reasonably hoped would be for the benefit not only of the House of Commons but of other institutions in the country.
    MAJOR EVANS GORDON: What about the telephone service?
    LORD BALCARRESsaid that as regarded the telephone service, lifts, further accommodation and the newspaper room, much was to be desired in a general way, and the Office of Works was very anxious to do what they could.
    MR. JOHN ELLISsaid that the Committee must feel that they had had a most interesting discussion, and that they were indebted to the noble Lord for the very clear way in which he had explained the manner in which the various suggestions of the two Committees had been carried out. Anyone who had investigated the ventilation of the House must feel that it had been originally carried out on a system with which tricks could not be played. It would be, in his opinion, dangerous to meddle with, or to recast completely, the system as a whole, though here and there improvements might be carried out. As to accommodation he could not say that he was a non-smoker, although he seldom visited the smoking-room; but when he did go there occasionally he must confess that he found the atmosphere absolutely unbearable. He understood that the noble Lord was giving his serious attention to the whole question of accommodation in all respects, with a view, if at all possible, to make further improvements. He did not think that the resources of civilisation were exhausted yet in that direction. He believed that the House of Commons had not come off second best in recasting the accommodation for Ministers of high degree. One aspect of the question had been lost sight of. and that was economy. This Vote showed an increase of 10 per cent, over that of last year. No doubt the Committees had done their work-most efficiently, but it was now at an end and their suggestions were being carried out. The Commissioner of Works was now looked upon as being responsible. He said that between £5,000 and £6,000 had been spent already arising out of the suggestions of the Committees, and, having regard to the times we lived in, and to the discussion within the previous twenty-four hours, when Member after Member got up and spoke of the burdens that were being put on the people and the country, they ought to begin on
    1480
    those Estimates, and refrain from increasing expenditure. They should aim at keeping down expenditure in those matters. He did not see any advantage in pressing the Government to swell the Estimates, and then criticising them afterwards. He hoped the noble Lord would be able to give an assurance that next year, if he were responsible, the present 10 per cent, increase would not be maintained; but that, on the contrary, there would be a reduction in respect of improvements and new works.
    MAJOR EVANS GORDONsaid that after the explanation of the noble Lord he begged leave to withdraw his Motion.
    MR. WEIRobjected to the Motion being withdrawn.
    SIR HENRY SETON-KARRsaid he wished to make a suggestion in reference to the smoking accommodation. What was really wanted was a place where a Member could write and smoke. He was not concerned for idle and frivolous Members. As far as they were concerned the present smoking accommodation was, comparatively speaking, ample. But a Member who wanted to write and smoke had only two miserable little rooms at his disposal with two small tables which could accommodate only six Members. There was no other room in the House where a Member with serious work to do could do it and smoke at the same time. It could not be done in the large smoking-room, because there was a frivolous air about it which hindered writing, and there was a political atmosphere about the Irish dining-room which did not suit him. He did not mean that in any offensive sense. Why should not two, or at least one, of the compartments of the library be given over to smoking and writing? It would not cost any money except the cost, of a number of small tables, and would provide much needed accommodation.
    MR. MOONEYsaid that the hon. Gentleman made a characteristic remark about the Irish dining-room. He would only remark that, although the room was called the Irish dining-room, it was occupied more

    1481
    by Members of the Party to which the hon. Member belonged than any other room in the building. The noble Lord had expressed his individual opinion that the whole question of accommodation should be looked into. They had all heard these pious opinions before, they generally, however, came from the Chief Secretary for Ireland when he was about to take up a non possumus attitude on behalf of the Government. When the Committee reported in 1901, there were a series of rooms on the Terrace, and the Report recommended that they should be thrown into one large room; but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon objected to that on the ground of expense, not because the accommodation was not available. Since that time two of the officials of the House had died, and the rooms which they occupied were not transferred to their successors. The Government thought those rooms were very desirable, and appropriated them for their own use. The fact was that private Members might talk as much as they liked, but the Front Bench annexed all the available accommodation for themselves, and accordingly took a very languid interest in the complaints of private Members. He listened to the extremely interesting statement of the noble Lord as to how they got their air. The hon. Member for the London University stated that they had no scientific ventilation at all. He himself thought they were suffering from too much ventilation. He was in the smoke-room the other night, and finding one side too hot crossed to the other to find a hurricane blowing down the wall. He complained to the attendant, and five minutes afterwards an official from the ventilation department appeared. He told him that there was a horrible draught, but the official answered that the temperature was 60 degrees, that there was a fan working over his head, and a pump beneath his feet, and appeared to think he was an unreasonable person altogether. He repeated that there was an awful draught, but the official said that was not in his department. He did not care what the temperature was as long as he could bear it; he did not care about the working of a fan or a pump; but he did care about a draught down the back of his neck. They had a choice
    1482
    of two evils in the smoke-room; they could either be roasted or frozen. At least the room might be rendered habitable. He also thought there should be an annunciator in the tea room. It was quite true that the room was not full for the greater portion of a sitting, but it was generally full at a time when interesting speeches were generally delivered. That would only be a matter of £70 and he hoped the noble Lord would favourably consider it.
    LORD HUGH CECILsaid he wished to suggest that one of the library rooms should be devoted to reading only. It would be a great convenience if the room next to the Speaker's Library were furnished entirely for reading. It would be the one quiet room in the building where a Member could read undisturbed. At present Members were continually passing in and out to write letters. If more space were wanted for writing why should not the Committee-rooms upstairs be used for that purpose after the Committees had risen? They were admirably suited for writing rooms.
    MR. WEIRsaid he wished to know if the noble Lord had come to any decision with reference to the ventilation of the Vote Office. The officials in the Vote Office must-suffer intensely in consequence of the want of ventilation, while the man who blocked up the fireplaces ought to be turned out of his office neck and crop, as he evidently knew nothing whatever about the principles of ventilation. The place was not fit for pigs to live in. He desired to suggest an alternative plan to that proposed by the noble Lord in charge of the Vote. In Japan nobody ever dreamt of entering a house or public building without removing his boots, and what he suggested was that eight Japanese girls should be brought over and placed two at each door of the House; then as soon as Members entered their boots would be quickly removed by these girls and a pair of comfortable slippers substituted. None of the filth and dust of the streets would then be brought in, and the result would be a great increase in the comfort, and an enormous improvement in the health, of the Members. He noticed an item of £900 for the supply of water. Surely that sum was

    1483
    not required for the pumping of water from the artesian well; if so, there was something wrong somewhere. Another matter which, in the interests of economy, ought to be looked into was the item of an increase of £1,000 for furniture. These might be said to be small matters, but he intended carefully to scrutinise every Vote and demand explanations, as that was the only way in which economies could be effected. If the pence were looked after, the pounds would take care of themselves.
    MR. RITCHIEsaid the existing method by which divisions were taken was objectionable from two points of view—first, that of the enormous waste of time involved, and secondly, that of the inconvenience caused to Members by their being shut up in the lobbies for a considerable time. If any method, not open to serious objections, could be devised it ought certainly to be tried. Some years ago a plan which he suggested to the then Speaker was put in operation for a session. Instead of the "Ayes" and the "Noes" going through different exits, they both went, out behind the Speaker's Chair, and as soon as the swing-doors were locked and the tellers had gone through, the Members passed into the outer lobby without any delay whatever, and the divisions occupied only half the time now taken. The system was abandoned for certain reasons, one of which was that much irritation existed amongst the Irish Members on various topics, with the result that they were very active in their opposition and were not at all desirous that business should proceed rapidly. The plan could be rendered successful only by the co-operation of all Members of the House. Another reason was that the doors leading to the tea-room and other places were kept locked until the division was over, and this led to a block of Members. Neither of those causes would now operate, and he would greatly like to see the experiment given another trial. No expenditure of money would be required; it was entirely a matter for the authorities of the House; and he was satisfied that if a general disposition was evinced for some alteration to be made, Mr. Speaker would be perfectly willing to consider the matter.
    MR. THEODORE TAYLORurged that one room should be set apart in which Members might both write and smoke, and that another should be appropriated by Members who wished simply to sit and chat. At present the only places where that could be done were the tea-room and the division lobbies. Accommodation ought to be provided for both smokers and non-smokers. He was not one of those who complained of the temperature of the House itself; he thought the air was remarkably equable and pure; but the side rooms upstairs would be more used if they were better warmed in winter. He was altogether in favour of economy, but it was economy of the truest kind to take care of the health and lives of Members. In the past there had been a great wastage of life, owing partly to the long hours and partly to the nature of the accommodation provided. He could not agree that a system of ventilation by which a draught was caused to the feet was a good one. It was bad for the health, especially in exciting times, that while one's head was hot one's feet should be made cold by a draught. The air ought to be so introduced that no draught was caused to any part of the body whatever. The present system was almost too scientific; it certainly was not perfect. The objection which had been raised to the annunciators on the ground of their noisiness might possibly be got over if certain parts were made of india-rubber. There could be no objection to ladies knowing who was addressing the House. He shared the objection to the House of Commons being made a society meeting-place, but while their lady friends were there they ought to treat them as courteously as possible and if by a little trouble on the part of the maker the annunciators could be made noiseless it would be a great boon to the ladies and little expense to the State.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid that with regard to annunciators being rendered noiseless he did not quite understand whether the suggestion applied to those within or without the Bar. As to the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon, he did not think it was altogether desirable that the time occupied by divisions should be

    1485
    shortened. It was on such occasions that Members were able to meet other Members of their Party whom they rarely, if ever, saw at other times, and the few minutes thus afforded was often invaluable for purposes of consultation and advice. He well remembered, when the Unionists were in opposition, conspiracies being hatched in the lobbies which eventuated in great results—results which, but for the opportunity of consultation afforded by the time spent in the division lobbies, would not have been achieved. A further point to be considered was that if both Parties were sent in the same direction, it might, in times of political excitement, lead to awkward encounters and scenes. Suggestions had been made for the setting apart of separate rooms for reading and smoking. The library consisted of five rooms. Could not a compromise be effected by which a room at one end should be given to the readers and a room at the other, say the chart room, to the smokers? Smoking would preserve the books, and there would still be three rooms left for those who desired to write and not to smoke. The suggestion that the Committee-rooms should be utilised as smoking-rooms was impracticable, as it was essential that the main accommodation should be on the same floor. Moreover, it could be so arranged. At present one end of the building was crowded to overflowing, while the other was practically empty. Could not some arrangement be made with the authorities of this august Assembly at the other end of the building by which a portion of the accommodation there existing might be rendered available for Members of this House? Another question that might be considered was that of the officials' residences. He had no desire to interfere with the Speaker's house, but the Clerk at the Table had a residence, and he suggested that that might be given up. Black Rod, too, had a whole suite of rooms. In short, there was room enough in the building if only the great question of redistribution were properly faced. With regard to ventilation, he did not believe that so much science was necessary. All that was necessary was that the windows should be opened and left open. If they had ventilation they would have draughts or they could not have the fresh air.
    1486
    As for all these devices of straining the air through water and cotton wool he was a little bit afraid of them, because he did not know how the air came out. As they had just been told, there were friendly microbes and unfriendly microbes.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Free-fooders.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid that by this straining process they might strain out some of the friendly microbes. If he could have his way he would adopt the simple method of opening the windows. If that was not agreeable to the House, perhaps the windows might be opened at the break of day and left open till the House met.
    LORD BALCARRES: That is done.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he was glad to hear that. This question could only be solved satisfactorily if the building was used as it might be used by getting some consideration from the other House into which all the great men of the country went. As regarded the question of additional smoking-room accommodation, and the other necessary rooms, they must be on the same floor as the Chamber of the House of Commons. He thanked the noble Lord for the attention he had paid to the question of ventilation, and he trusted that he would pay the same amount of attention to the question of the general accommodation of the House.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid the noble Lord had practically admitted the genuineness of the grievances, but he had practically said that nothing could be done. He had admitted that a good case had been put forward for increased smoking-room accommodation and yet he could not promise any reform. That was not satisfactory, and it would be the duty of hon. Gentlemen who felt strongly upon this subject to divide the House. The hon. Member for St. Helens said he agreed that there was insufficient smoking-room accommodation for those who wanted to write and smoke at the same time, but when it was pointed out that after nine o'clock hon. Members were at

    1487
    liberty to cross the corridor and smoke in the Irish Members' dining-room, he said that that did not meet his views, because there was a flavour about the Irish Members that he did not like. He might consider that a remark of that kind was smart, but it was just one of those tactless English statements which were extremely offensive to Irishmen, and which went a considerable distance to widen the gulf between the English and the Irish people in spite of 100years of union.
    SIR HENRY SETON-KARRsaid the hon. Member had entirely misconstrued what he said. He assured the hon. Member that he had no intention whatever of saying anything of that kind, and he was very sorry if he had said anything which hon. Members opposite considered offensive.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid that if the hon. Member stated that he did not mean anything offensive, of course he must accept that disclaimer. The hon. Gentleman had a constituency in St. Helens where there were a number of Irish voters and he wished to know if the hon. Member had the same objection to the flavour of Irish voters as he had to Irish Members of Parliament.
    SIR HENRY SETON-KARRsaid he had already withdrawn his expression, and stated that he did not mean anything offensive. He hoped that the hon. Member for East Clare would, in the future, be ready to act on the principle he preached when he made statements about our soldiers abroad.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid there was no parallel in regard to the action of our soldiers a broad, or anywhere else, and the observations made between men who were supposed to be Gentlemen in this House. Irish Members fought for what they believed was right, but it was not in the power of any hon. Gentleman to say that they had personally been offensive in any way, for that had never been the intention of any Irish Member. It had been said that there ought to be a room where hon. Members might talk and read without smoking, but what
    1488
    they were complaining of was the failure to carry out the recommendations of the Committee. There was widespread dissatisfaction in all parts of the House in regard to the accommodation. It was no use arguing now that they must economise, because if they wished to do that they might commence at once by stopping the war against the Mullah and little things of that kind, but he did not see why they should economise at the expense of the Irish Members. For all evils there was generally a sovereign remedy, and a remedy for the difficulty they were in with regard to accommodation would be found by granting Ireland Home Rule. They had been told that they were going to have, more indicators and a fresh one in the tea-room and the Ladies' Gallery. He hoped they would have some assurance that those indicators would be accurate. An indicator that was accurate was an exceedingly useful thing, but, if they could not rely on it, it was no use and it was inconvenient and misleading. He remembered being in the Members' smoke-room upon one occasion when the indicator clicked, and to his astonishment it announced that he himself was speaking. He mentioned the fact because he had to undergo the humiliation of seeing all the hon. Members in the smoke-room settle themselves back in their chairs and order fresh cigars. If the First Commissioner of Works would take cognisance in some indirect way of what he had asked for it would be an improvement.
    CAPTAIN NORTONsaid that if the change which had been suggested in the method of taking divisions was introduced divisions would be taken much more rapidly. He thought, at any rate, that the new method might be given a trial for a time, and, if it did not meet with the approval of hon. Members, it could be dispensed with. Any hon. Members, who sat in the House between 1892 and 1895 when the Home Rule Bill was considered, and who had to crowd in the lobbies, knew the state of the atmosphere at that time and the great inconvenience to which hon. Members were put. He supported the suggestion that a room should be provided for those Members who wished not to smoke or read but to confer with each other. He wished to

    1489
    direct the noble Lord's attention to a matter on which he had already communicated with him privately. It was within the knowledge of Members that much inconvenience was caused to those who came in from Westminster Hall through the door leading to the cloakroom, because the door opened only in one direction. There was no reason why it should not be a swing-door, and he hoped that the suggestion would be considered.
    MR.J. P. FARRELLsaid he was a Member of the House when the method of taking divisions which an hon. Member had suggested was tried. It was done when the Irish permanent Coercion Bill was under discussion, and the object, no doubt, was to expedite the taking of divisions. He believed it did hasten the work of taking divisions, but he reminded the Committee that the Bill was passed, although fourteen of its clauses were not discussed at all. As a result of the trial given to the method then, the verdict was against it. He thought a great deal of the inconvenience complained of would be obviated if more doors were opened. He suggested that the authorities of the House might consider whether some means could be adopted whereby Members of this House who might be at the Bar of the other House could be informed of divisions. He objected to the suggestion that an indicator should be provided in the Ladies' Gallery because of the noise it would make. He suggested that an effort should be made to get some form of indicator which would make less noise than that now in use.
    MR. JOHN BURNScalled attention to the practice of clearing the permanent officials and distinguished strangers out of the benches reserved for them when divisions were taken. The occupants of the strangers' gallery were very properly allowed to stay where they were during divisions, and there was no reason why those in the benches referred to should not also be allowed to remain, instead of being hustled out to the inconvenience not only of themselves but of Members. He suggested that the noble Lord might make a representation
    1490
    to the Speaker, or some other authority, with the view to an alteration in the practice.
    MR. JOHN ELLISrose to a point of order and asked whether the head of an executive Department such as the Commission of Works, who might even be a Member of the other House, could possibly have anything to do with arrangements respecting divisions of that House.
    MR. JOHN BURNSsaid that what he suggested was that a representation should be made to the Speaker, or some other authority. If the hon. Member thought the suggestion meant that a Member of the other House should infringe the rights of this House he had misconstrued his remarks.
    MR. JOHN ELLISsaid he was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the suggestion, but he strongly protested against the idea that any head of a Government Department had any connection with such matters as the internal procedure of that House.
    THE CHAIRMAN: The regulation affecting the withdrawal of strangers is provided for by Standing Order 90, and the proper course is really to move an Amendment of the Standing Order. The matter does not rest with the First Commissioner of Works.
    MR. JOHN BURNS: I gather from you that the Standing Order can only be amended by the House itself.
    LORD BALCARRESsaid the Office of Works could not alter the arrangements made by the House for the taking of divisions. That was beyond their province, and it would be most imprudent for them to interfere in the matter. The hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty had drawn attention to the condition of the post office. He had had no notice that the matter would be brought up, and he suggested that the hon. Member should put a Question on the Paper on the subject. The increase for the cost of furniture was due to necessary changes, and also to the charge for recovering some of the Benches in the House.

    1491
    The amount paid in connection with the water supply was a payment to one of the water companies for an improved supply. He would make further inquiries as to the question of the doors. The hon. Member said that the indicators were inaccurate, but the explanation was simply that some hon. Members only made speeches two or three minutes in length, and had consequently sat down before Gentlemen came from the smoking-room.
    MR. DALZIELsaid the debate had been a very useful one so far as results were concerned. He had sat on two Committees in connection with the management of the House. One of these Committees ten or eleven years ago made a recommendation that new smoking-room accommodation should be provided, and that in the event of any room becoming vacant, it should be utilised for that purpose. His complaint was that when hon. Members gave their services on the Committee upstairs, and carefully considered a Report, the Government of the day took no notice of it. The rooms of the late Chief Clerk were at the disposal of the Government, and instead of carrying out the recommendation of the Committee, he understood that they were given over to the accommodation of Ministers. If so, hon. Members ought to enter an emphatic protest against it. He thought that Ministers had quite sufficient accommodation and comfort without encroaching on the privileges of private Members. He imagined that one of the reasons why they did not now see one or two Ministers on the Treasury Bench was the luxurious surroundings they enjoyed in the neighbourhood of the, Chamber. In dealing with this matter hon. Members could not complain of the noble Lord, who had given most courteous replies, but the unfortunate thing was that the noble Lord was not the First Commissioner of Works; he was only there to hear complaints, and to represent them to a higher authority. The time had come when the House itself should take the matter into its own hands. He suggested that the best way to make the Government realise the importance of this matter and desire to carry out the reforms recommended by the Committee, was that hon. Members should have the
    1492
    courage of their opinions, and go into the division lobby against the Vote. He agreed with the hon. Member for Clare that the smoking-room accommodation was a scandal, whereas it ought to be one of the most comfortable rooms in the House. There were half a dozen rooms which were never utilised by the House of Lords which ought to be appropriated. There was too much Ministerial influence against the interests of private Members, especially when the House was up. The First Commissioner of Works, who was not a strong man, was badgered by Ministers: and in that way the interests of private Members were left out of consideration. In order to give hon. Members an opportunity to protest against their treatment, he should divide the Committee.
    MR. T. W. RUSSELLsaid that hon. Members ought to recognise the fact that the House had outgrown its accommodation. They must get a new House, enlarge the present one, or make a raid on the House of Lords. The last speaker had pointed out that rooms had been appropriated to Ministers which ought to have gone to private Members. It was quite true that the beautiful house formerly occupied by the late Chief Clerk had been appropriated to Ministers. But it should be remembered that Ministers had to do a great deal of work in the House, and formerly they had to do it in what were no better than cells. He had had one of those cells for five years, and he told the House candidly that the accommodation was so wretched that it was scarcely possible to do a scrap of work in it. Why should not Ministers have a comfortable room in which to do their work, which was national business? He, for one, preferred that the work of the country should be done in comfortable surroundings, rather than that smoking-room accommodation should be provided for private Members. He did not smoke himself, although he had not the slightest objection to the fullest accommodation for smokers being afforded. He agreed with the hon. Member for Greenwich that a room next the Speaker's room should be set aside solely for reading, and he thought that the suggestion of a writing-room was an excellent proposal. He

    1493
    was all for making a raid on the premises of the House of Lords, and that on the grounds of economy. It was no use for hon. Members to talk of economy in the House and in the country, and then, the first week after an alarming Budget was presented, propose that thousands of pounds should be spent on a new smoking-room. He did not believe that the public outside would view such a proposal with satisfaction. A good deal of nonsense had been talked about the ventilation of the House. He thought it was very good. Open windows were the best ventilation in the world. Early in the debate the Ladies' Gallery had been referred to. Why should there be a separation of the sexes in two galleries? It was absurd that when an hon. Member brought two of his constituents. a lady and a gentleman, to the House, he should have to take the lady up to one gallery, and make a long roundabout to take the gentleman to another gallery. He believed in the mingling of the sexes.
    MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid the matter was simply a question of re-arrangement. There would be no expense involved in turning one of the library rooms into a smoke-room. As to getting some more rooms from the House of Lords, something might be done in that direction. He thought the noble Lord might be able to arrange that Members should have the use of the Lords' tea-room and join with them in the catering. The House of Lords catering was in difficulties because there
    was not enough custom; the ' House of Commons catering was in difficulties because there was too much custom. It was quite right that the House of Lords should be exclusive; but the two Houses might join together in a catering arrangement. If pressure were exercised, he thought the House of Lords would grant that concession. Other points which would not involve expenditure might also be taken in hand. There were rooms in the building which were scarcely used at all, and which might be turned into smoking-rooms. He hoped the noble Lord would give an assurance that something would be clone.
    MR. JACOBYsaid he wished to ask the noble Lord what became of the Report of the Accommodation Committee. It contained several important recommendations, such as the construction of another smoking-room downstairs, better accommodation for ladies' dining-rooms, and other arrangements. He hoped that the Government would carry out some at least of the recommendations of the Committee. The arrangements for ladies' dining at the present time were a positive disgrace. The hon. Member for South Tyrone thought a great deal about the country, but he ought also to have regard for the health of Members of Parliament. He wished to know if the recommendations of the Committee were to be entirely overlooked.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 158: Noes. 243. (Division List No. 99.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

    Cameron, Robert

    Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

    Asher, Alexander

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Elibank, Master of

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Cawley, Frederick

    Ellice, Capt E. C (S. Andrw'sBghs

    Austin, Sir John

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Emmott, Alfred

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    Hayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidstone

    Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

    Crean, Eugene

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Black, Alexander William

    Crombie, John Willian

    Farrell, James Patrick

    Boland, John

    Cullinan, J.

    Fenwick, Charles

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

    Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

    Ffrench, Peter

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Delany, William

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Devlin, Charles Ramsay (Galway

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

    Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

    Burns, John

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Burt, Thomas

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Glihooly, James

    Caldwell, James

    Doogan, P. C.

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Grant, Corrie

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Sheehy, David

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Mantagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    Mooney, John J.

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

    Slack, John Bamford

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Moss, Samuel

    Smith, Samuel (Flint)

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Murnaghan, George

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

    Murphy, John

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Norton, Capt, Cecil William

    Sullivan, Donal

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

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Horniman, Frederick John

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

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

    Humphreys-Owen. Arthur C.

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid.

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

    Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Thomas, J. A (Glamorgan, Gower

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

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

    Tillet, Louis John

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

    Tomkinson, James

    Kilbride, Denis

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Lambert, George

    O'Dowd, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

    O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

    Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

    O'Malley, William

    Wallace, Robert

    Laylard-Barratt, Francis

    O Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Leamy, Edmund

    Partington, Oswald

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

    Long, Sir John

    Perks, Robert William

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

    Levy, Maurice

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Weir, James Galloway

    Logan, John William

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    While, George (Norfolk)

    Lundon, W.

    Rea, Russell

    Whiteley, George (York, W. R.

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Reddy, M.

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Redmond, William (Clare)

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

    M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

    Rob-son, William Snowdon

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    M'Crae, George

    Roche, John

    Young, Samuel

    M'Fadden, Edward

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Yoxall, James Henry

    M'Hugh, Patrick A.

    Runciman, Walter

    M'Kean, John

    Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Dalziel and Mr. Jacoby.

    M'Kenna, Reginald

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Carlile, William Walter

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Carson, Rt. Hon Sir Edw. H.

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Faber, George Denison (York)

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

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

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

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitzroy

    Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

    Fieldon, Edward Brocklehurst

    Bailey, James (Walworth)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Give, Captain Percy A.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Balcarres, Lord

    Coates, Edward Feetham

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

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

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

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Flower, Sir Ernest

    Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor

    Colomb, Rt. Hon. Sir John C. R.

    Forster, Henry William

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

    Foster, Philip S. (Warick, S. W.

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    Fyler, John Arthur

    Bignold, Arthur

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Gardner, Ernest

    Bigwood James

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

    Garfit, William

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

    Bond, Edward

    Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Saville

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

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

    Oust, Henry John C.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Davenport, William Bromley

    Graham, Henry Robert

    Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F (Middlesex

    Denny, Colonel

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

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

    Dewar, Sir T. R. (TowerHamlets

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Brassey, Albert

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Dickson Poynder, Sir John P.

    Gretton, John

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Gunter, Sir Robert

    Butcher, John George

    Dixon-Hart land, Sir Fred Dixon

    Hall, Edward Marshall

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

    Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

    1496

    1497

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

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

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

    Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire

    Samuel, Sir Harry S. (Limehouse

    Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. Edw. J.

    Haslett, Sir James Horner

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

    Heath, James (Staffords N.W.

    Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

    Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

    Helder Augustus

    Milvain, Thomas

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)

    Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

    Sloan, Thomas Henry

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Molesworth, Sir Lewis

    Smith, H. C. (North'mb. Tyneside

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Spear, John Ward

    Hobhouse, Rt Hn H. (Somers't, E

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    Hornby, Sir William Henry

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A Graham (Bute

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Hoult, Joseph

    Murray) Charles J. (Coventry)

    Stroyan, John

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Howard J. (Midd., Tottenham)

    Newdegate, Francis A. N.

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Ceci

    Nicholson, William Graham

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

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

    Hunt, Rowland

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Thompson, Dr. E. C. (Monagh'n N.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

    Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Percy, Earl

    Tuff, Charles

    Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Valentia, Viscount

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop)

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H (Sheffield

    King, Sir Henry Seymour

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

    Knowles, Sir Lees

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Webb, Colonel William George

    Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th)

    Rankin, Sir James

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

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. N. R.

    Ratcliff, R. F.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Farcham

    Reid, James (Greenook)

    Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

    Renwick, George

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

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge)

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

    Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)

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

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson

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

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Roberts. Samuel (Sheffield)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Lowe, Francis William

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Younger, William

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Rose, Charles Day

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Round, Rt. Hon. James

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Allwyn Fellowes.

    M'Calmont, Colonel James

    Russell, T. W.

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

    Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

    Bill read the third time, and passed.

    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. MACVEAGHasked if the noble Lord could see his way to having annunciators and an Exchange Telegraph Company's machine placed in the writing-room of the Press Gallery for the benefit of those engaged there, to whom they would be of great utility, and expressed a hope that provision would be made for the purpose. He further desired that the lobbyists should have the use of the Ladies' Gallery lift, which was not overworked, and which would be a great convenience to them if they were allowed to use it.
    LORD BALCARRESpointed out that the Government proposed to give a new lift for the use of the Press Gallery. It would not admit into the corridors at the back and around the Chamber, in which the public were not allowed unless accompanied by a Member. They would have to consider whether it would be desirable to allow these gentlemen to have admittance to them. He would communicate with the hon. Gentleman later as to the tape machine. The whole question of providing fresh instruments would come up for discussion later on, and it was possible the annunciators would be more useful in the House than in the Press Gallery.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £18,930, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1905, for maintaining certain Harbours under the Board of Trade, and for Grants-in-Aid of Harbours."
    MR. SOARESmoved to reduce the Vote by £100, in order to call attention to the need of a harbour of refuge on the north coast of Devon and Cornwall. Previously he had brought up this question on the salary of the President of the Board of Trade; but they had then been confined to a criticism of his administrative action and had not been allowed to go into the merits of the case. With this Harbour Vote before them he hoped they would be allowed to go thoroughly into the matter. This was in no sense an electioneering matter. There was no Party political capital to be made out of it in any shape or form. They recognised that both Governments had been to blame, and they were only anxious whatever Government was in power should perform the duty incumbent upon it. It was quite true they had not yet succeeded in making this a national question, although there could be no doubt that everyone who thoroughly investigated it would come to the conclusion, as hon. Members concerned had done, that that should be the ease. If the President of the Board of Trade would investigate the matter personally, he was quite sure he would agree with them, and he would almost risk the right hon. Gentleman going into his constituency to address a Primrose League meeting if he would have a look round this most dangerous coast the day following his labours. In order to prove his case there were two things he had to do. Firstly, to show the necessity of such a harbour; and secondly, to prove that it was a proper subject for the expenditure of public money.
    Before, however, dealing with the merits of the case, he must give a short history of the matter. He admitted the
    1500
    subject was an old one, and it was a curious fact that it was difficult to arouse popular enthusiasm about, some questions which had been before the public for some considerable time; but he hoped when the facts of the case were put before the President of the Board of Trade in a thorough manner, he would come to a different conclusion to the conclusion he came to in the previous year. The matter was first brought before the House of Commons by the Report of a Royal Commission in 1859, which recommended harbours of refuge on this coast, picturesquely and appropriately calling them life harbours. The members of that Commission described the coast as a long iron-bound coast, having a deadly lee shore during the heaviest and most deadly gales. Nothing was done and then a Select, Committee on harbour accommodation was appointed. It reported in 1884, recommending a national harbour somewhere between Land's End and the Welsh coast, and it also recommended a harbour of refuge on the north coast of Cornwall, notwithstanding the fact that harbours of refuge were net within the terms of reference to the Committee; but nothing at all was done with regard to that Commission, and in 1885 a deputation waited upon the hon. Member for West Birmingham, who was then President of the Board of Trade, under a Liberal Administration. The right hon. Gentleman said they laid too much stress on the humanitarian argument, and he told the deputation that it must dismiss from its mind the slightest probability that any Government would be so imprudent as to initiate a series of eleemosynary grants for such a purpose. They could only hope the right hon. Gentleman had changed his views in this respect, as he had done in others since that date. They all knew that since that date he had begun to think Imperially, and surely he must admit that it was as much an Imperial duty, and as proper a method of spending public money, to save the lives of British sailors as to spend it on those enormous wars in which they had recently been engaged. The matter, after this snub of the right hon. Gentleman, was allowed to rest till 1887, when it was brought up in that House by Mr. Yeo. In 1886 there had been a

    1501
    great storm, in which 400 sailors lost their lives, and when the Government gave the same answer as had previously been given, the House was not in any mood to stand it. and the Government only escaped defeat by a majority of five. After that successive Governments gave specific assurances. Last year they succeeded in getting a little shade of hope from the President of the Board of Trade, but he hoped to-day the hope would be very much greater. The right hon. Gentleman said last year that he was prepared to urge on the Treasury, in this particular case that they should not require the full contribution which, under the Treasury rules, would be ordinarily required from a local authority making an application. It was a shade of hope, but it was not enough.
    And now he would, having given a history of the matter, proceed to deal with the merits of the question. The coast was one of the most deadly description, consisting of sheer cliffs rising from the sea to a tremendous height. He could most easily bring the nature of the coast before the Committee by describing a wreck which happened within the last two or three years, and of which he had personal knowledge, It was the wreck of the schooner "Goonlaze." Owing to the lack of a harbour of refuge, this vessel was driven on to the rocks close by Cockington Point. All hands were lost at sea with the exception of one man who clambered to the top of those terrible cliffs only to be found dead from exhaustion the following morning. He was a fine young fellow in the Naval Reserve, and he confidently asserted that such incidents ought not to happen. There was no harbour of refuge from Land's End to the Severn, and the only place of refuge was the lee of Lundy, which was not a suitable place. Yet, in spite of that, whenever there was a likelihood of a storm vessels crowded in, and the lights of the ships looked like the lights of a town. Smaller vessels dared not enter for fear of being crushed by the large steamships. But perhaps the most positive proof of the need of such a harbour was furnished by the Wreck Returns of the Board of Trade. From them he found that in the year ending 30th June, 1902, there were 371
    1502
    casualties in that district alone, sixty eight being from Hartland Point to Land's End, and 303 to the north of Hartland Point. The total number of casualties around all the coasts of the United Kingdom amounted to 2,272, so that in that comparatively small strip of coast they had the sixth of the total casualties of the United Kingdom. That fact in itself was a very strong one, and surely it was one which ought to make the Government consider the desirability of constructing a harbour of refuge. It must be remembered that the Royal Commission in 1879 reported in favour of it; the Select Committee on Harbour Accommodation also reported in favour of it; everyone acquainted with the district was in favour of it; and last, but not least, an undue proportion of the wrecks round the coast of the United Kingdom appeared in that particular neighbourhood.
    He thought he had proved the necessity for such a harbour on the merits of the question. and now he would prove that this was a proper object for the expenditure of public money. There was no danger whatever of such a harbour of refuge ever being in competition with private enterprise. The fact of the matter was that if the Board of Trade did not make it no one else would. No one who knew the district would say that it could ever come into competition with the great commercial ports of Bristol and South Wales. It was conclusively an Imperial matter and not a local matter. No one would deny the great importance of the shipping trade. No one would say it was not an Imperial trade: it was the trade of which this country was proudest, and in which it was facile princeps; and he thought it was as much the duty of the Government to look after the lives of the men engaged in that trade as it was their duty to make every legitimate effort to protect it by every means in their power. He wished to indicate what other countries were doing in regard to this matter of harbours of refuge. There was only one country to which England need ever look forward with any degree of fear as a competitor in the shipping industry and that was America, and he admitted that such a position could not arise until that country altered its present fiscal system. A little time

    1503
    ago he wrote to the United States Government to ascertain what they were doing with regard to the question of harbours of refuge, and he received the following reply from the Treasury Department—
    "Deaf Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd ult. stating that you have been told that the United States Government sometimes make harbours of refuge in dangerous places on their coasts with public money, not asking for any contribution from the locality, and requesting that you be informed whether such statement is correct. In reply, I have to say you have been correctly informed. Not only are harbours of refuge on the coast constructed by the general Government without any contribution whatever from the locality, but the improvement of the harbours and navigable waters of the United States are so met."
    If the United States could do that, surely, having regard to the stupendous magnitude and vast interests of the shipping trade of this country, the Government should not be behind hand in the matter. It was no good for the President of the Board of Trade to say he would give them a portion of the money if the locality would find the rest. That was nothing more nor less than a refusal, and a refusal of the most cruel description, for he would be asking them to do something which it was out of their power to do. It must be remembered this coast was inhabited by farmers, the soil was poor, the population sparse, and it was impossible to ask those farmers to rate themselves in order to provide a harbour of refuge for shipping. If the Board of Trade did not make that harbour nobody else would, and if it were not made the loss of life and property would continue in the future as it had done in the past until every single yard of the coast would have it own tale of bloodshed and horror to recall.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum. not exceeding £18,830, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Soares)
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid the speech to which they had just listened had been delivered under false pretences: it was a speech apparently advocating reduction in the Estimates and at the same time pressing extra expenditure on Ministers.
    MR. SOARESsaid the hon. Gentleman knew very well that under the Rules of the House it was not possible for him to bring the matter forward by any other method.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he was not quite so sure of that. The ballot on Tuesdays and Wednesdays would be a more appropriate method. At any rate, he protested against Committee of Supply being used not for the purpose of economising in national expenditure. but for the purpose of pressing extra expenditure on the Government. The hon. Gentleman talked about a harbour of refuge and said that a great many lives had been lost on that part of the coast to which he referred. He himself thought that was to be expected, because the traffic off that coast was very great. The hon. Gentleman did not tell the House exactly where he wanted to put this harbour. He would not, however, follow the hon. Gentleman's arguments as he did not approve of this method of using Committee of Supply. He thought, on the contrary, that the time had come when they should address themselves to the Estimates with a view to the strictest parsimony. To that end, he desired to direct attention on this Vote to the enormity of the system of grants in aid. The whole Vote amounted to £31,530 of which £23.563 consisted of grants in aid; and. therefore, the proportion of grants in aid to the whole Vote constituted an extreme case. It would not be necessary for him to describe what a grant in aid was, but he might be allowed to say that the essence of a grant in aid was this. it was a grant not made for the purpose of national public expenditure and it was not to be expended by any public office. It was a grant for outside purposes, made once for all, and made under conditions which enabled it to escape all the financial securities whereby the House exercised financial control over public affairs. He thought that it would be recognised generally that it was only by insistence on parsimony, whore it could be insisted on without affecting the public welfare, that the House could ever succeed in diminishing expenditure on the part of the Exchequer. If the hon. Gentle man had not moved a reduction of £100 he himself would have moved a reduction

    1505
    of £18,000, as he desired to get rid as far as possible of grants in aid.
    There were two kinds of grants in aid; in some cases the grant was allowed to be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. In other cases that was not even allowed: so that the moment the grant was made it passed out of the control of the House of Commons and was left to be dispensed as it might. The Public Accounts Committee stated that in the interests of financial control the use of grants in aid should be restricted as far as possible, and the Treasury also stated that they regarded grants in aid as an exception to the rule which should prevail in the financial system of the country, and that they desired that such grants should be restricted as much as possible to those cases to which ordinary grants were not applicable. So far however, from grants in aid being restricted they had increased enormously; they were still increasing, and they ought to be and must be diminished, if this House were to achieve anything in the nature of economy. In 1901 the total grant in aid amounted to £1,600,000; in 1901–2 to £7,600,000; and in 1902–3 to £12,600,000, so that the exceptional grants in aid which the Treasury said ought to be diminished had now reached proportions of the most extravagant character. One of the chief culprits was the Colonial Secretary. He freely admitted that there were certain kinds of grants in aid, few in number and small in amount, which were justifiable, such as grants in aid to the National Gallery for the purchase of pictures, grants to schools, and grants to certain colleges. Against such grants he had nothing to say; but it was the enormous increase in the amount of money that was absolutely withdrawn from the control of Parliament against which he protested. Sir Edward Hamilton than whom there was no greater authority on finance in the country, and who had presided at the birth of many a successful Budget, said in 1902 that the Treasury were fully alive to the importance of this matter. He objected in the cause of economy to the grants in aid for Fraserburgh, Pwllheli, and Macduff Harbours. These were particularly obnoxious grants in aid because they escaped the examination of
    1506
    the Comptroller and Auditor-General and the control of the House of Commons.
    MR. LAMBERTsupported the plea that had been put forward in favour of a harbour of refuge on the North Devon coast. It was not an extravagance on the part of the Government to devote money to the saving of human life, and some remedy ought to be evolved for the enormous loss of life which occurred annually on the North Devon and Cornish coasts. He would infinitely rather see the Naval Votes cut down and less ships built, and the money saved devoped to this purpose. Every year it was becoming a more and more important trade and shipping route, and there certainly ought to be a harbour of refuge into which vessels might run when storms swept the Channel. He further pointed out that such an expenditure, in the amount of life and property saved, would be a reproductive expenditure.
    And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
    Resolution to be reported upon Monday next; Committee also report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING.

  BAKER STREET AND WATERLOO RAILWAY BILL (BY ORDER) KING'S CONSENT SIGNIFIED).
  [THIRD READING.]
  Order for Third Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a third time."
  MR. CAUSTON, on the Motion for the Third Reading of this Bill, said he was glad to be able not to ask the House to divide on this question. At a previous stage it was his duty to move a new clause to compel the railway company to carry out its Parliamentary bargain to create subways in the crowded area of the Elephant and Castle.

  1507
  His Besolution was rejected by a majority of ten. The Chairman of Committees was good enough to repeat in the House what he had said to the parties in his own room, that he thought this was a case for compromise. Since the division an interview had been arranged between Mr. Yerkes, a representative of the company, and himself, and the result was that a satisfactory arrangement had been come to between the company and the corporation of Southwark. Mr. Yerkes did not admit his legal liability, but at the same time desired to act honourably and liberally towards the corporation. He said he should like to do something towards the construction of subways. The estimate on one side was £15,000 and on the other £10,000, and so he suggested £12,000 would probably be the price they would cost to construct, and he was prepared to give half that amount. A satisfactory arrangement had been come to. The terms were that the company should contribute £6,000 towards the subways at the Elephant and Castle, the council to find the remainder of the money necessary. This was to be carried out by the insertion of a clause in the Bill which was to be introduced in the House of Lords. The borough council was to be empowered to construct the subway and borrow the necessary additional money. At present the borough council had not power to do this. On the other hand, the company agreed not to construct the underground station at the Elephant and Castle referred to in the Act. He hoped the Chairman of Committees would facilitate the arrangement being carried through. If this clause found its way into an Act, it was the intention of the Corporation to commence the construction of these subways at once.
  THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Mr. J. W. LOWTHER,)congratulated the parties on the arrangement they had come to. All he had to do was to play the part of [the heavy father in the comedy and say, "Bless you, my children."

SUPPLY [7TH ALLOTTED DAY].
(Considered in Committee.)
(In the Committee.)
[MR. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

SUPPLY [7TH ALLOTTED DAY].
  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1904–5.

    CLASS I.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £18.930 be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1905, for maintaining certain Harbours under the Board of Trade, and for Grants in Aid of Harbours."
    MR. LAMBERT. continuing his speech, said the building of this harbour of refugee as essentially a national matter. It concerned British seamen and those concerned in British maritime enterprise. He personally had no interest in the matter, representing as he did a purely inland constituency; betook the matter up from a purely humanitarian point of view. It seemed to him that though they had many claims upon the finances of the-country, there could be no greater claim for the expenditure of money than the saving of the lives of "those who go down to the sea in ships." The whole question was. Was this harbour of refuge necessary? Anyone who had listened to the speech of the hon. Mender who had moved the reduction and who had told the Committee that one-sixth of the wrecks that occurred on our shores occurred on the coasts of Devon and Cornwall, must come to the conclusion that there should be some kind of harbour of refuge for the protection of the people who navigated this Channel. In this country we rightly had a great regard on human life. The President of the I Board of Trade was almost continuously engaged in evolving all sorts of regulations to be imposed on railway companies in order to prevent loss of life, and it was a most surprising thing that we could not spend a small sum in making more secure the lives of those engaged in maritime enterprise. A good deal had been said of late about the development

    1509
    of the Empire, but it was most important in the interests of the Empire that this country should be developed, and it would surely have been better if one-tenth of the sum that had been devoted to the Somaliland campaign had been diverted to the construction of this harbour. It was no doubt a laudable object to devote money to the experiment of growing cotton in West Africa, but it was far more necessary to provide harbours on bleak coasts where they were necessary for the protection of life. In conclusion, he hoped some favourable consideration would be given to this matter.
    MR. DUKEsaid it was a curious reflection upon the course of Parliamentary proceedings that for the last half century Royal Commissions and Committees of the House should have over and over again recognised the public duty of providing a harbour of refuge in the Bristol Channel on the plainest ground of humanity, and that now when the Government was invited to take some practical action his hon. friend the Member for King's Lynn with the pedantry of a practised financier should seek to divert attention from the matter by starting a purely academic discussion about grants in aid. He did not propose to describe the geographical characteristics of the Bristol Channel, nor to draw any harrowing pictures of the wrecks that constantly had occurred, constantly did occur, and, unless something was done by the Government of this country, constantly would occur on that coast. Year after year, as long as records and statistics existed, the Bristol Channel and its shores had been marked with enormous loss of life in a manner which had attracted attention, not only among sailors and people connected with commerce, but among public men. One of his hon. friends had suggested that it was quite to be expected we should lose some hundreds of lives every year in the Bristol Channel, because there was a great deal of commerce there. It was true the commerce of the Bristol Channel was probably one-fifth of the commerce of the country, and the wrecks were not more than one-fifth of the wrecks round our coasts; but the coast-line of the Bristol Channel was not one-fifth, it was not one-twentieth, of the coast-line of
    1510
    the country. It was a comparatively small part of the coast-line upon which wrecks occurred, and in that part of the coastline they would not find a parish which had not evidences of disaster to vessels plying their commerce to and from ports of the Bristol Channel. The Commission of 1857–9 had been referred to. That Commission insisted on the necessity of a harbour of refuge somewhere between St. Ives and Bristol. The public duty had become more urgent since 1857 because the commerce of the Bristol Channel had increased enormously, yet the Board of Trade had done nothing.
    It was asked why did not the shipowners or the locality do what was needed? His answer to that was that they could only raise the money by taxation. and. as the greater proportion of men who used the Bristol Channel were foreign ship-owners, how could they tax them? It was not a merely local affair for the towns along the coast. Surely a great commercial country like England could protect the shipping which came to our coasts. In 1884, in the evidence given before a Committee in that year, Admiral Bedford declared that this was one of the most crying cases for additional harbour accommodation in the whole of the British Isles. The Committee reported to that effect, and it specified places where a harbour could be constructed, and even went so far as to estimate the cost. It was a common saying that Parliament never did anything in a hurry, and now again, after twenty years, the demand for a harbour was repeated. In 1886, between October and November, no less than 300 lives were lost through shipwrecks in the Bristol Channel, because no sort of provision had been made for performing a public duty. This loss of life recurred as often as the coast was visited with severe storms. In 1893, just round St. Ives, four steamers went ashore and two steamers were lost at sea, and these losses must have involved at least £100,000. The real question was what was the Board of Trade going to do? Last year when the matter was discussed it was said that if the people of Devon and Cornwall would provide two thirds of the

    1511
    cost the Board of Trade would provide the balance. He supposed that was the highwater mark of the official idea of a recognition of humanitarian duty. The two counties were among the poorest in the country. He did not think this was a year in which they could go to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for a considerable sum. A good scheme would involve at least £500,000, whether they extended the shelter at Lundy or improved the Roads at Clovelly or Padstow. That £500,000 would no doubt represent the cost of a second-class cruiser, the object of which wag certainly not to save lives. But this coast was a shambles for mariners, and he associated himself most strongly with the demand for official action which should put an end to the disasters which yearly occurred. If it was a public duty to save the lives which were now squandered for want of proper harbour accommodation, he asked his right hon. friend who was responsible in this matter what he was going to do to bring it home to the conscience of the country?
    SIR FREDERICK BANBURYsaid that he would put in a plea for economy. In the afternoon hon. Gentlemen wished more money spent upon a smoking-room, and that evening hon. Gentlemen interested in the southern parts of England wished money spent on harbours of refuge. This was a matter for which he thought the localities or the shipping interest ought to find the necessary money. He hoped the House would reject the scheme, not on the ground that it might not possibly do good, but on the ground that it was a business institution and not a philanthropic institution, and that it could not afford to spend money in every possible way in order to make this era a millennium.
    MR. ELLIS GRIFFITHsaid he proposed to address himself to another matter which was specifically mentioned in this Vote—that of Holyhead Harbour, concerning which he had troubled the Presiden of the Board of Trade and his predecessors on various occasions during the last ten years. That harbour seemed to be dominated entirely by the Board of Trade on one
    1512
    side and the railway company on the other. Between them there was nothing left for the poor people who lived there. As a matter of fact, the Urban District Council of Holyhead did not possess a single inch of foreshore in that place. The matter had been before the right hon. Gentleman and his predecessors, and from time to time they had given what was technically called a sympathetic answer. By that means a division was averted, and the whole controversy then assumed its old position and nothing was done. He felt that if the President of the Board of Trade realised the hardship which existed at Holyhead he would do something in the matter. At present there was no pier there at which to land passengers. They had to be landed by boats, and the result was that passenger steamers did not touch at Holyhead. The railway company was assuming a monopoly of the traffic of the place. There were several matters which might be done in Holyhead at very little cost. In the first place the water at Pelham Quay might be deepened. At present it had only a depth of eight or ten feet at springtides, and it was dry at low water. A wharf might very well be built at Salt Island within the limits of the harbour of refuge, and the harbour of refuge itself was not complete until some such facilities had been provided. If the President of the Board of Trade did not agree with that, there was what was now called the Mackenzie Pier, which might be extended for a considerable distance to give some facilities to the town for the landing of passengers and goods. He did not say anything about the length of the period for which the right hon. Gentleman might preside over the Department. Promises had been made by some of his predecessors, and he did ask him to seize the time while it was still his, or to do something in a matter which he could assure the right hon. Gentleman would bring great facilities and advantages to the town of Holyhead.
    MR. WEIRsaid the hon. Member for Plymouth had spoken sympathetically of the necessity for harbours of refuge but he had confined his attention to one particular part of the country. It should be remembered that there were many other places around our coasts where

    1513
    there was danger. The hon. Member for Peckham suggested that the cost should be borne by the localities and the shipping interest, but that was not a practicable way of obtaining the accommodation required. In the Highlands and Islands of Scotland how could poor crofters, cotters, and fishermen, the majority of whom paid rentals of from £1 to £4 a year, provide two-thirds of the cost of a harbour of refuge? It was the greatest nonsense to talk in that way. It was impossible for these poor people to provide the money, but the Treasury went on cast-iron rules and insisted on what was an utter impossibility. It was the duty of the Government to see that the lives of fishermen and seamen were protected. An enormous sum was spent on the Navy, and he for one did not grudge it. It was, and always would be, a costly Department. The Government could afford to go to war in Somaliland and Tibet, and carry out the road-making fads of the Colonial Secretary in the West Indies for the benefit of lazy, idle planters who would not work, but money was not provided for necessary improvements a home for the benefit of our own people. In I890 a Commission reported in favour of the construction of a harbour of refuge at Portnagurin, Broad Bay. Island of Lewis, and since then he had repeatedly brought the matter under the notice of the Board of Trade, but nothing had been done. He asked himself whether anything would ever be done by this warlike and extravagant Government. That would cost £30,000, and the Board of Trade said that the shipping interest should provide the whole or the greater part of the money. The great shipowners were not interested in providing this harbour but the fishermen and the owners of fishing boats. who were unable to provide the money. He wished also to urge the claims of Avoch, Ross-shire. That matter had already been brought before the Board of Trade, and an application had been made for financial aid to construct a harbour. He had that day received a letter from a clergyman stating that nearly £1,800 had been raised in the locality, and requesting him to support the application to the Treasury for the further sum required to carry out the work.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): As a matter of fact the application has not yet been made.
    MR. WEIRsaid he was informed by the people who had the matter in hand that the application had been made. By the screwing down process of the Board of Trade they were told that they must provide more money. Two years ago a dozen fishing boats were destroyed at the place in one night. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would look into the matter and see that the Treasury provided the necessary funds. Only a few bundled pounds more were required to carry out the work. Let economy be practised in the right quarters and especially in connection with warlike matters and wild-cat schemes, but not in connection with works required for the saving of valuable lives. This was one of the most important fishing stations in the North of Scotland, and the sum proposed to be devoted to that harbour was insufficient. Then there was the case of the harbour at Pwllheli. in Wales, for which there was £14,000 on the Estimates. He would like to know whether the people in the locality had been asked to provide two-thirds of the cost of the harbour.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that the people of Pwllheli had provided two-thirds of the money.
    MR. WEIRsaid there had been some doubt certainly about it. It was utterly impossible for these poor districts to provide two-thirds of the cost of a harbour. As the saying was, "How can you take the breeks off a Highlandman?" It was simply playing with the question and with the lives of the fishing population. He was patriotic, and supported a strong Navy. He wanted to see our Navy well manned by hardy men who knew something of sea life; and he regretted that the Government Department miserably neglected to look after the welfare of that important section of the community.
    MR. SPEARsaid he wished to support all that had been said by the hon. Members for Devon and Plymouth in regard to the necessity

    1515
    of a harbour of refuge in the Bristol Channel. He had lived for a long time on that coast, and knew it was one of the most dangerous coasts in the British Islands, and in the event of a severe storm it was almost impossible for vessels to escape shipwreck. He ventured to urge upon the Government the necessity of doing something to prevent the serious loss of life which frequently took place, simply because there was no harbour of refuge there. He was confident that the President of the Board of Trade was anxious to save life, and he did not forget the sympathetic speech which the right hon. Gentleman, had made when this matter was last discussed. The right hon. Gentleman however, seemed to be under the impression that a large share of the cost of the harbour of refuge should be raised locally. That he considered to be both impossible and unfair, because While it might afford some protection to the local fishermen the chief advantage of a harbour of refuge would be for vessels going up the Channel. He hoped the Presidenr of the Board of Trade would make inquiries as to the place where this harbour of refuge should be constructed. Something had been said about economy, but it seemed to him that the economy of human life was of far more importance than mere economy of expenditure.
    MR. MOULTONsaid he wished to join in earnestly appealing for notice by the Board of Trade of the great need of a harbour of refuge on the coast of Cornwall and North Devon. It was not only a most important but also a very practical question. They contended that of all the coasts of England there was not one so iron-bound, so dangerous to life and property, and so ill-provided with refuge, and he claimed that the case should be treated first and promptly. For the past fifty years there had been a. consistent responsible admission by the Board of Trade that the need of a harbour of refuge on that coast was great. Although he felt the difficulty of appealing for the expenditure of large sums out of the national purse, the Board of Trade's consistent admissions proved the justice of their claim. On 28th December. 1900, the ship "Capri-cornia," went down at Bude, and twelve
    1516
    lives were lost, and at the inquiry an official gave evidence as to the number of strandings. The chart of strandings between Trevose and Tintagel was a most appalling one. The report of the inquiry was that if a harbour of refuge could be erected there would be a great saving of life and property. This was a case in which the Board of Trade had admitted a great public duty, and it was for the House to put pressure upon the President of the Board of Trade to take up the duty promptly. Another question was, were the localities prepared to pay a part of the expense? He contended that this was a case which from its nature excluded such a demand. An iron-bound coast like this was not likely to be a rich one. In fact great tracts of it were desolate. The danger was chiefly to the ships that passed, and not, to the ships that visited the coast. He had fifty miles of it in his own constituency, and there was not a single port which even a small vessel could make, except in the smoothest weather. When the north and north-west winds blew no vessels except steamers had sufficient room to get round the headlands but came to grief in the small bays. They had no right to come upon the poor agriculturists of Cornwall to contribute to the protection of the shipping. As to the particular place which should be selected he admitted there was a natural conflict of opinion upon the subject. In a matter like this the Board of Trade ought to appoint an impartial authority to investigate the circumstances of the case and report as to the best place suitable for the harbour. If it was taken up promptly the people in the different localities would be satisfied.
    SIR JOHN KENNAWAYsaid he just wished to add a few words in support of the practical suggestion made by the hon. and learned Member for Launceston. It might bring this matter within the range of practical affairs. He had no connection with that particular part of the county, because he resided on the southern coast of Devonshire, where they had not the same severe storms as on the north coast. The important trade route round the Southwest of the island had claims on the Treasury second to none. He and his

    1517
    friends wished to remove the stain which rested on Parliament through their neglect of the lives of those who contributed so greatly to the prosperity of the country. He hoped that something practical would come of this discussion.
    MR. WILLIAM McARTHURsaid he protested against the doctrine laid down that these harbours of refuge were, in any sense, a local matter not concerning the country as a whole. It seemed to him that the credit of the country was involved in setting right a state of things so appalling. Surely where, as had here been most clearly shown, they had got one of the most dangerous coasts in England, where they had wreck after wreck and the most serious loss of life possible, they were not going to neglect to prevent that loss of life simply because the locality was not rich. The argument that the locality should bear its share of the expense of establishing works for the purpose of Riving life seemed to him one which should not have been advanced. Moreover, they had in this case a particular and pressing claim on the Board of Trade because it was one which had been recognised for years, one which had been proved by the Commission and the officials of the Board of Trade. and one which had been proved also by the loss of life which regularly took place on the coast. It was not, he admitted, fair to ask the President of the Board of Trade to tell them what money he was going to spend and where he was going to establish the harbour; but seeing that there was a unanimous consensus of opinion in the whole of the west country as to the absolute necessity of something being done, he did feel justified in pressing him to tell them that, at all events, his Department was really taking the matter up in earnest. The situation of the harbour was, after all, a matter for experts to decide.
    MR. WILLIAM JONESsaid that in connection with the Holyhead Harbour the matter had been engaging attention for quite ten or twelve years, but the reply that was given was always unsatisfactory. All that they wanted was that the harbour should be rendered capable of
    1518
    accommodating vessels. Already £2,000,000 sterling had been spent on the harbour, but the result achieved was by no means commensurate with the expense incurred. A very narrow channel led into the inner harbour, and when a south-westerly gale was blowing no sailing vessel could pass through it. Consequently a number of vessels were always in the outer harbour and there was danger of their dragging anchor and being driven on the shore. The question of making Holyhead Harbour a harbour of refuge for the shipping of the whole world had been raised again and again in the House yet nothing had been accomplished. They asked now for an undertaking that something tangible would be the result of the present discussion; if so, a great boon would be conferred on the shipping community at large.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that the hon. Member for Barnstaple had truly said that the topic he introduced had been before the House again and again. It had certainly been discussed in every one of the three or four years that he had been at the Board of Trade. He did not complain of that, but the repetition of the same arguments could only be met by a repetition of the same replies. The proposal of the hon. Member for Barnstaple was that public money should be spent on a harbour in the locality in which he was interested, and that without the special provisions which the Treasury had advised in analogous cases. He had raised that claim mainly on the Report of the Select Committee appointed in 1884. There appeared to be a considerable confusion of ideas among those who supported the hon. Member's proposal. The Select Committee made two recommendations, and the first was that it would be desirable to establish a great national harbour at some point between Land's End and the coast of South Wales. That was the proposal that the hon. Member for South Molton appeared to have in his mind. The hon. Member said that it was essentially a commercial proposal, and that while the agriculturists of Devonshire should not be expected to pay money for this expenditure, it would be

    1519
    reproductive because it would enable goods to be carried at lower rates than at present. What he had in his mind, therefore, was a great harbour of refuge for the extensive commerce running up the Bristol Channel. That. he ventured to say. was not the proposal which the hon. Member for Barnstaple had in his mind. What he had in his mind was the second recommendation of the Select Committee. which was that a small harbour of refuge should be established between Hartland Point and Land's End.
    MR. SOARESsaid he was quite prepared to leave the kind of harbour and the site to any committee of experts that the Board of Trade might appoint.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that even if a large harbour of refuge were constructed somewhere on the coast of South Wales that would be, of exceedingly little advantage to the hon. Member's constituents. He would deal with the proposal which appeared to commend itself to the hon. Gentleman the Member for South Molton. What the Committee said was that it was not expedient to make grants of public money for harbour construction, but to give the necessary aid at a low rate of interest. There was one class of harbour which it was evident should be constructed at the public expense, namely, those great national harbours, the site, extent, and mode of construction of which should be determined, not by considerations of the mercantile marine of the country, or of the Navy, but by considerations of strategic defence and Imperial policy. It was evident that what the Committee had in their mind was a great harbour such as the Admiralty were now constructing at Dover. A harbour of that class, however, could not be discussed on the present Vote. The other proposal of the Committee was that grants of public money might, to a limited extent, be given in aid of work to provide a harbour of refuge chiefly for fishermen on certain portions of the coast: and the Committee added in another paragraph that it fell entirely within the province of the Government to provide this needed reform in those districts. it being absolutely impossible that the
    1520
    fishermen themselves could raise sufficient funds or find security to borrow money. The Committee then enumerated six places where such works were most needed. The Committee, it would be observed, made those recommendations in the interests of the fishing industry, not in the interests of commerce. and among numerous proposals of the same kind was a harbour of refuge on the north coast of Cornwall, which was sixth on the list. Anyone listening to the discussion would come to the con conclusion that the one proposal which the Committee made was in connection with this harbour of refuge on the coast of Cornwall, and that successive Governments had been very remiss in not giving effect to that recommendation. He would add, however, that not one of the proposals of the Committee for harbours of refuge had been carried out. The hon. Gentleman and his friends seemed to think that whenever a Committee made a Report in favour of expenditure on a particular harbour that that recommendation should finally decide the question. He was afraid he was unable to accept that view. He could not regard the recommendation of any Committee as necessarily inspired; and the fact that the Committee referred to had reported twenty years ago, and that successive Governments had had the matter repeatedly under consideration and had done nothing, was not necessarily a proof that they had been remiss, but rather indicated that in their opinion the recommendations of the Committee went beyond the real necessities of the ease.
    He did not wish to prejudge the question whether a harbour of refuge should or should not be made on the north coast of Cornwall. He admitted that it was a dangerous coast. The hon. Member for South Molton said that no amount of money value could be placed upon human life, and he seemed to argue that, if a single life could be saved by the construction of a harbour of refuge at whatever cost, such expenditure would be economical; but while he had great sympathy with the views of the hon. Member, it must be admitted that this was a counsel of perfection. If they were to proceed on this principle it was clear that they would have to dot the

    1521
    coast of the United Kingdom with harbours of refuge. But when they came to consider whether such harbours should or should not be constructed in particular instances, it was clear that they were bound to take other matters into consideration. After all, the seafaring calling was necessarily dangerous, and all that could be done was to diminish the dangers, not remove them altogether. The hon. Member for Barnstaple gave certain figures which he quoted from the official wreck Returns for 1903, giving the total number of casualties on this part of the coast as 371–68 being from Hartland Point to Land's End, and 303 to the north of Hartland Point. But the hon. Member seemed to have forgotten that if the harbour of refuge was to be made between Hartland Point and Land's End the proper number of casualties to quote was sixty-eight.
    MR. SOARESsaid he did not say that a harbour of refuge ought to be constructed between Hartland Point and Land's End, but somewhere between Land's End and the Severn.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that in that case the hon. Member no longer had support for his proposal from the recommendation of the Select Committee, which was that a fishing harbour should be constructed on this coast. If it was to be a great national harbour as distinguished from a harbour of refuge for fishermen it did not come within the scope of this Vote; if it was to be a harbour for the benefit of fishermen the statistics quoted by the hon. Member were hardly relevant. He had asked the expert adviser to the Board of Trade to analyse very carefully the wrecks that had taken place on this coast, in order to ascertain what proportion might have been avoided if there had been a harbour of refuge, or two harbours north and south of Trevose Head respectively. Casualties occurred repeatedly from causes which the existence of a harbour of refuge could not possibly prevent. Captain Fresericks had gone most carefully into the figures for the last twenty years, with the result that he had discovered that the total number of casualties which might be attributed to the absence of harbours of refuge was forty-eight. and that the number of lives lost was 118. So it worked out in this
    1522
    way, that on this rock-bound coast of between seventy and eighty miles in length the number of casualties which might have been prevented had there been harbours of refuge amounted on the average to 2½ a year and the number of lives lost to six a year. Captain Fredericks told him also that he was himself astonished at the smallness of the numbers, but the reason was no doubt clear; the coast was known to be dangerous; it was known that in heavy weather vessels would be in a position of great peril and they consequently avoided it. Another interesting point was that although the amount of traffic had enormously increased the actual number of casualties and of lives lost had not shown a proportionate increase, and probably the lesser total of small coasting vessels wrecked was due to the fact that more of them were now worked by steam. Although he did not wish for one minute to minimise the seriousness of these figures, still he thought the state of things they revealed was not nearly so serious as the hon. Member had indicated. He had not quoted Captain Fredericks in order to show that it would not be desirable to construct a harbour of refuge on this coast, but he thought he showed that it was very doubtful whether it would be worth the enormous expenditure for original construction and maintenance that would be involved. The character of the coast was such that if they were really to deal with the problem they would have to construct not one harbour, but two. The force of the seas on this coast was terrific, and consequently the original cost of construction would be heavy as well as the cost of maintenance. These reasons made him doubt whether it would really be worth while to spend public money on the construction of the harbour which was asked for.
    But there was another objection. If the proposal were acceded to it would have the effect of giving the go-by to the rules laid down by the Treasury with respect to the construction of harbours of refuge. So much pressure had been brought to bear on respective Governments for the construction of these harbours that the Treasury were obliged—quiterecently, within, he believed, the last five years—to lay

    1523
    down the conditions that the application for a harbour of refuge should come from the local authority, and that it should be accompanied by an undertaking to contribute to the original cost and to provide for the maintenance of the harbour. No application had come from a local authority in the present case. He had offered before, and he repeated the offer now, that if such an application came from the local authority, and it it were favourably viewed by the Harbour Grants Committee, to whom it would be referred, he would press the Treasury to forego the contribution which under their rules they would require from the local authority.
    MR. SOARES: To what local authority does the right hon. Gentleman refer?
    MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I suppose the county council.
    MR. SOARES: Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman requires an application from the county councils of Devon and Cornwall?
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid an application from any local authority would be sufficient to initiate the matter but it was necessary it should be accompanied by an offer to contribute part of the expense.
    MR. LAMBERT: Have they the power?
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid clearly there was some such power because under the Treasury regulation sums had actually been subscribed. He rather thought the county council had the power.
    MR. SOARES: This is most important. Does the right hon. Gentleman require an application from the county councils of Devon and Cornwall.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid he had already stated that an application from some local authority with an offer to pay part of the estimated expense would be sufficient to initiate the movement. No such application had been made and hon. Members had instead come to the House and asked it to adopt a procedure in direct contradiction of the rules laid down by the Treasury. The hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty had put forward certain proposals affecting the
    1524
    North of Scotland, and he could only promise that if proper representations were made to the Board of Trade they would he duly considered. With regard to Holyhead Harbour, very considerable sums of money had been spent on its improvement during the last five years, but if any special additional expenditure were required the matter would be carefully considered by the Board of Trade. Not long ago a rather extensive scheme was brought forward and actually received the assent of the Treasury but further investigation showed that the cost would considerably exceed the estimate and it had consequently to be dropped.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsuggested that the non possumus attitude of the right hon. Gentleman was more applicable to a coast line where there were mercantile ports capable of making representation. But here they had a long coast line, known to be one of the most dangerous around the country, and there was no mercantile port along it. to make the application which the right hon. Gentleman had said was essential; and it was scarcely a matter for the county council, or for any smaller local authority. The position of this coast line was unique, and. being unique, the reply of the President of the Board of Trade might have been more sympathetic. What were the facts? Every Committee of inquiry which had considered this matter had reported in favour of providing harbours of refuge. It had been proved that there had been a lamentable and unnecessary loss of life on the iron-bound coast of Cornwall, and it would have been more to his credit if the right hon. Gentleman had been more sympathetic in his reply. It was not the duty of a Minister to be bound by rules and regulations, it was for him, if necessary, to break the rules in the interests of the people at large; and in this case, if there was no precedent for the present demand, the right hon. Gentleman might make a precedent where the saving of life at sea was concerned. If the right hon. Gentleman chose to put it on economical grounds, surely if they had to spend £50,000 or £60,000 on harbours of refuge they would get a good return for their money in the shape of the saving of life and the protection of property. There could be no better investment of public money.
    MR. FFRENCHproposed to discuss matters connected with Wexford Harbour, but was ruled out of order by the Chairman.
    SIR JOHN BRUNNERsaid that no doubt it was well the Treasury should lay down strict rules with regard to the expenditure of public money, but, when the right hon. Gentleman suggested it was desirable that some application should be made from the district where this harbour of refuge was required, he would like to ask whether similar applications were insisted on before the grants were made for the relief of the West Indies. Again, did the local authorities in Uganda guarantee interest on the £6,000,000 required for the construction of the railway? Nobody accused the President of the Board of Trade of extravagance; but they asked the Government to observe a certain proportion in their expenditure, and have some regard to the relative importance of these islands as compared with, say, the West Indies or Uganda, on which so much was so freely spent. The Committee appointed in 1884 reputed two years later that a certain number of harbours was required in the public interest, yet not one of them had been made! He would like to be able to convince the right hon. Gentleman, or his successor, whoever he might be, that there were better ways of spending public money than scattering it in all parts of the world except at home, even if they only applied it to the saving of life. Now he was well acquainted with the coast of France and there he found that they studied the interests of the coasting trade and provided harbours of refuge for its benefit instead of limiting their expenditure to military harbours. He had come to the conclusion that they ought to follow the example of France, and instead of spending money almost exclusively on military harbours, the Treasury should do something for harbours of refuge in poor but important districts on the coast. It was just in the most poverty-stricken districts where the greatest danger existed, and as long as the Treasury maintained its present rule, it was those very districts which would suffer most If they could not convince the right hon. Gentleman, then it was to be hoped the right hon. Gentleman would soon have a
    1526
    successor who would prove more approachable to reason in this matter.
    MR. DUKEasked whether, if a joint application was made by the county councils of Devon and Cornwall, the right hon. Gentleman would direct a public inquiry to be held, with a view to some practical action being taken in the matter.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURreplied that if the county councils made an application, accompanied by a statement as to where they thought such a harbour was desirable, an estimate of the cost, and an expression of their readiness to bear a proportion of the expenditure, the matter would go before the Harbours Committee and an inquiry Would be made.
    MR. LAMBERTsaid that that was practically no offer at all. It was impossible for the county councils to submit estimates of the cost; they had not the necessary officers and machinery for the work. He understood that the Treasury required two-thirds of the cost to be borne by the locality.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that that was the rule of the Treasury, but if it could be shown that this harbour was really desirable he would be prepared to urge that the severity of that regulation should be relaxed.
    MR. LAMBERTpointed out that a penny rate in his county would produce only £8,000, and they could hardly expect inland ratepayers to bear a sixpenny rate for this purpose. Moreover, it was not a local affair at all; it was a matter of national concern, and should be dealt with by the Board of Trade. Would the right hon. Gentleman meet the demand which had been made so far as to send an inspector or engineer to make inquiries?
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid he was not prepared to take the initiative by sending down an inspector, because, in his opinion, that would be begging the principal question at issue, viz., whether such a harbour should be made or not.
    MR. LAMBERTcontended that the Board of Trade were just the body who

    1527
    should decide that question. The county councils certainly could not do it. The right hon. Gentleman had really not made a fair offer at all. If the Board of Trade were to do their duty, it was necessary that they should send down an inspector or engineer to ascertain whether or not such a harbour was a pressing necessity.
    MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that if such an argument were admitted, it could, and immediately would, be used in reference to many other districts in the country.
    MR. SOARESsaid that unless the right hon. Gentleman consented to the appointment of a committee to examine into the matter he would be obliged to take a division. The Board of Trade had all the necessary machinery at its command, and that machinery was paid for by the State. The county councils had not the necessary machinery. Why. then, could not the right hon. Gentleman allow it to be used? The right hon. Gentleman had referred to a private Report; but hon. Members were in entire ignorance of the contents of that Report and of the evidence upon which it was based. What they wanted was that the evidence should be taken locally, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would grant the committee for which he had been asked.
    SIR ROBERT ROPNERsaid that if this harbour of refuge was intended simply for fishing boats and small coasting vessels he could understand the demand being made, but if it was meant to benefit the mercantile marine it would be an absolute waste of money. Sailing vessels were rapidly becoming obsolete: the mercantile marine was now mainly composed of steam vessels, which, in case of necessity, could always leave the coast and get out of danger.
    MR. RUNCIMANsaid that this particular part of the coast was that where sailing vessels most abounded. In the Bristol Channel ports last year 3.000 sailing vessels arrived and only 11,000 steamers. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to the Report of 1886, and had said that none of its recommen-
    1528
    dations had been carried out. Two of those recommendations referred to the coast between Duncansby Head and Aberdeen, and between the North Foreland and Beachy Head. He would call the attention of the President of the Board of Trade to the fact that the refuge harbour of Peterhead, between Duncansby Head and Aberdeen, was built out of public money. As to the coast between the North Foreland and Beaehy Head, was not the new harbour at Dover a refuge harbour? Whether it was an Admiralty harbour or not, it was a refuge harbour on one of the most dangerous coasts, and would be very largely built out of funds that would have to be guaranteed by the Exchequer. Therefore the statement of the right hon. Gentleman on that point was inaccurate. The opinion of the county councils as to a suitable site for a refuge harbour on the coast of North Devon or North Cornwall would not be worth the paper it was printed on; they were not harbour authorities. The Board of Trade would compromise neither their dignity nor independence by sending a man down to inquire into-the feasibility of the proposal. But he feared the only way to persuade the President of the Board of Trade to alter his mind would be to take him down the Bristol Channel when there was a strong nor wester blowing and leave him under the lee of Lundy Island for a couple of tides, with the wind blowing first with the tide and then against it. He was convinced the first act of the right hon. Gentleman on his return to terra firma would be to grant the prayer which had been made.
    MB. AINSWORTHremarked that the country had no more valuable asset than its fishing population. The fact that sailing vessels were becoming obsolete in the mercantile marine was an additional proof of the value of the fishing fleets. because it was only on sailing vessels that sailors could be properly educated His constituency had a coast line of over 100 miles, but a penny rate in Argyllshire would probably produce only £800, so that it was just in those places where the need for protection was greatest that the power of local assistance was smallest. It was high time that the-officials of the Board of Trade should be

    1529
    aroused to a sense of the responsibility resting upon them, and immediate steps ought to be taken for the encouragement of one of the most important interests of the British Empire. It was much easier to build ironclads than to get sailors to work them, and without sailors of what value were the ironclads? He hoped the interests of the fishing industry would no longer be neglected in the manner they had been.
    MR. HUMPHREYS-OWENpointed out that the long stretch of Cardigan Bay, although it possessed several places well adapted for the purpose, was entirely destitute of small harbours of refuge for fishing boats. The Welsh people had been taunted with not being good sailors, but the reason was that their coast was altogether wanting in harbours. Their kinsmen in Brittany provided the French navy with many of its most illustrious seamen. He pressed opon the Board of Trade the desirability of an amendment of their policy in this respect. A very small percentage of the scandalous waste on the Army might well be applied to the provision of harbours on the coast of Wales.
    On the House being cleared for a division.
    MR. SOARES, seated and with his hat on, said that he had moved an Amendment, whereas the Chairman had put the Main Question.
    THE CHAIRMANexplained that the Amendment had been moved before the dinner-hour, and that all Motions for reductions dropped when Progress was reported.
    MR. SOARESpointed out that at the time of the adjournment for dinner an hon. Member was in the middle of a speech on the Amendment, which speech he resumed at nine o'clock. Under those circumstances was it necessary that the Amendment should be again moved, and, if so, by whom?
    THE CHAIRMANsaid it was certainly necessary that the Amendment should be again moved. It was a well-known Rule of the House that on Progress being reported all Motions for reduction dropped. The Amendment could have been moved by any hon. Member.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes. 164; Noes, 105. (Division List No. 100.)

    AYES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Compton, Lord Alwyne

    Gardner, Ernest

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

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

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

    Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'r Hmlets

    Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

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

    Asher, Alexander

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

    Gretton, John

    Balcarres, Lord

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'ndery)

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

    Davenport, William Bromley

    Hardy, Laurenes (Kent, Ashford

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

    Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Heath, James (Staffords, N.W.

    Bignold, Arthur

    Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Bigwood, James

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Helder, Augustus

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)

    Brassey, Albert

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

    Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Faber, George Denison (York)

    Hunt, Rowland

    Cavendish V. C. W. (Derbyshire

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

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

    Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

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

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

    Clive, Captain Percy A.

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Low, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Coates, Edward Feetham

    Forster, Henry William

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

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

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R

    Colomb, Rt. Hon. Sir John C.R.

    Fyler, John Arthur

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Farehair,

    Legge, Col. Hon- Heneage

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Strutt, Hon- Charles Hedley

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Rankin, Sir James

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Long, Rt. Hon. Walter (Bristol. S

    Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

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

    Lucas Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Renwick, George

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Macdona, John Gumming

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green)

    Tuff, Charles

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    M'Calmont, Colonel James

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Valentia, Viscount

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire

    Round, Rt. Hon. James

    Webb, Colonel William George

    Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

    Rutherford. John (Lancashire)

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

    Milvain, Thomas

    Sackville, Col. S. G.

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton and. Lyne

    Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Saunderson Rt. Hn. Col. Edw. J.

    Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

    Murray, Rt. Hon A Graham (Bute

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

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

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

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

    Percy, Earl

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Younger, William

    Pilkington, Colonel Richard

    Smith, H. C. (North'mb. Tyneside

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Spear, John Ward

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork. N. E.)

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    O' Dowd, John

    Ainsworth, Jonn Stirling

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O' Malley, William

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Helme, Norval Watson

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Partington, Oswald

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

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

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Waiden)

    Black, Alexander William

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Boland, John

    Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Broadhurst, Henry

    J ones, William (Carnarvonshire

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

    Joyce, Michael

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Caldwell, James

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roche, John

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Lambert, George

    Runciman, Walter

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Leigh, Sir Joseph

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Crean, Eugene

    Leng, Sir John

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Cremer, William Randal

    Levy, Maurice

    Sheehy, David

    Cullinan, J.

    Lough, Thomas

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    London, W.

    Slack, John Bamford

    Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Sullivan, Donal

    Delany, William

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

    Devlin, Chararles Ramsay (Galway

    M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

    Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

    M'Hugh, Patrick A.

    Thomas, J. A. (Glamorgan, Gower

    Doogan, P. C.

    M'Kean, John

    Tomkinson, James

    Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Elibank, Master of

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    Farrell, James Patrick

    Moss, Samuel

    Weir, James Galloway

    Fenwick, Charles

    Murnaghan, George

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Ffrench, Peter

    Murphy, John

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Field, William

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Nohn, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T. (Huddersf'd

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Young, Samuel

    Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

    O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)

    Gilhooly, James

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Soares and Mr. Fletcher Moulton.

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

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

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

    Grant, Corrie

    O'Doherty, William

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Question put, and agreed to.

    Motion made, and Question proposed. "That a sum, not exceeding £35,500, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge
    1532
    which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1905. for Expenditure in respect of Royal Palaces."
    MR. WHITLEYthought that this Vote needed some further explanation, for he would be able to show that the promises made by the Government in regard to this expenditure had not been carried out. This Vote was for £61,500, and it had increased during the past four years by no less than 60 per cent. Two years ago the reason given for this increase was on account of alterations carried out in consequence of His Majesty's accession to the Throne, and it was then stated that this was purely a temporary increase. Now they discovered that this excessive sum was being maintained permanently. On the 15th May. 1902. when the present Home Secretary was First Commissioner of Works, he stated that although this Vote was larger than the normal Vote it was accounted for by the extra expenditure rendered necessary by a change in the occupancy of the Throne and the accession of His Majesty, and the right hon. Gentleman also stated that this extra expenditure would disappear from the Estimates in future years. He wished to know where the disappearance was, because the Vote had shown no signs of any reduction, and he felt sure it was much higher than it ought to be. The two items which were excessive were those for new works, alterations and additions, and for maintenance and repairs. They all recognised that substantial alterations went required to bring the Royal Palaces up to date, but they did not anticipate that temporary additions to the expenditure would remain as permanent increases. If this kind of thing was allowed to go on economy would never be attained by the Committee. Last year they complained of the large sums of money spent upon new works, and they were then told that those works had brought the Royal Palaces up to date. He did not see why they should continue spending £40,000per annum upon maintenance and repairs and in order to elicit an explanation and to get to know why the promise of the Home Secretary had not been carried out, he begged to move a reduction of this Vote by £5,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed. "That a sum, not exceeding £30,500, be granted for the said service."—(. Mr Whitley.)
    MR. DALZIELsaid they were accustomed to extraordinary precedents in connection with the business of the House, but he looked with surprise at the reluctance of the noble Lord to reply upon this point. If the noble Lord was ready to reply he would give way at once. He associated himself entirely with the protest which had been made by the hon. Member for Halifax. This Estimate was on a par with several other Estimates which had been before the Committee during the last week, in which temporary expenditure in previous years had now appeared as permanent expenditure. He did not care whether it was for Royal Palaces or for any other building, but he thought£40,000a year put on the Estimates year after year for maintenance and repairs was a great deal too much: more especially when they remembered that upon the last occasion when this Estimate was before the Committee the Home Secretary distinctly stated that this expenditure was purely consequent upon the lamented death of the late Queen, and that it was only a temporary matter. It had not been suggested that any new or expensive building had been put up. He hoped the noble Lord would be able to give them more information in regard to this Vote. There was another matter he wished o raise. He would like to know if the noble Lord got estimates for all this expenditure. There seemed to be a general feeling amongst contractors that if they only got a Government job once for a Royal Palace they would keep it for all time, and if they got the original contract they could have as many additions as they liked. It was the habit in some Government offices where contracts were invited, to leave the whole thing to one particular official, and no matter whether thirty or forty large contractors spent thou ands of pounds in preparing estimates, the work invariably went to some particular contractor. He hoped that was not the case with the Department for which the noble Lord was responsible. but he wished to know who had the giving out of those contracts and who was responsible for seeing that the work was properly carried out. These items now appeared to be permanently charged on the Estimates, and

    1535
    he would like to know if the noble Lord had any suggestions to make that, in regard to this Vote, it was not a permanent charge and that his predecessor was not mistaken in regard to the statement he had made.
    LORD BALCARRESsaid he meant no discourtesy to the hon. Member in not rising when he was invited to do so. for he was fully prepared to deal with the Question which had been put to him. The hon. Member opposite had asked a Question in regard to a pledge given by the Home Secretary that the expenditure upon new works was of a temporary character. He wished to point out that when the Home Secretary made that statement he was not dealing with item E but item D.
    And, it being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
    Resolution to be reported upon Monday next: Committee also report Progress: to sit again upon Monday next.

INTOXICATING LIQUORS (LICENCES REFUSED).
Address for "Return of the number of victuallers', beerhouse, and other Licences for the sale of Intoxicating Liquors the renewal of which has been refused at the general annual licensing meetings and adjournments thereof held in England and Wales during February and March. 1904, showing in each case the ground of the refusal, especially where such ground was in any instance that the Licence was not required; with the number of cases in which notice of appeal was given, and the result of such appeal
1536
(in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 194, of session 1908)" — (Mr. Cochrane.)

SAVINGS BANKS ACTS AMENDMENT [DEFICIENCY ANNUITY],
Order lead, for resuming adjourned debate on Question [25th April],"That this House doth agree with the Committee in the Resolution, 'That it is expedient to authorise the continuance of the payment of the terminable annuity payable under Section 1 of the Savings Hanks Act. 1880, in each year up to the end of the half-year ending on 20th May. 1917, in pursuance of any Act of the present session to amend the Savings Hanks Acts'"
Question again proposed.
Debate resumed.

MOTOR CARS (LICENCES).
Address for "Return showing the number of Motor Cars (distinguishing Motor Cycles from other Motor Cars) registered by each registering authority in the United Kingdom under the Motor Car Act, 1903, up to the 1st day of January. 1904, and the 1st day of April, 1904, respectively; together with the number of licences under the Act granted to drivers of Motor Cars by each authority at the same dates, distinguishing between licences limited to the driving of Motor Cycles and licences not so limited."—(Mr. Scott Montagu.)
Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.