§ 4. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1904, for certain Miscellaneous Legal Expenses."
§ Resolutions read a second time.
§ First Resolution.
§ MR. WHITLEY
said he wished to move to reduce this Vote by £100. In Committee some discussion took place in regard to Osborne. He noticed that in the new Civil Service Estimates this. Vote had been put into an item by itself. He did not think that that was in accordance with the pledge given from the Treasury Bench twelve months ago, when the Committee was distinctly promised that it should no longer appear in the Civil Service Estimates but would be transferred to the Army and Navy Estimates, where the cost properly belonged. He wanted to ask the noble Lord in charge of these Estimates whether he could not see his way, as had been promised by the representative of the Admiralty a few days ago, to put in an amended page in the Civil Service Estimates to carry out the promise given to the Committee twelve months ago. He begged to move.
To leave out '£7,300,' and insert £7,200.'"—(Mr. Whitley).
§ Question proposed, "That '£7,300' stand part of the said Resolution."
§ LORD BALCARRES (Lancashire, Chorley)
said that, unfortunately, he had not by him the report of last year's debate, as he did not know the hon. Gentleman would raise the question. They had no other option than to submit the Supplementary Estimate in the manner in which 441 it was now before the House. As to the propriety of putting Osborne House on a separate Vote, he submitted that that question could be more properly discussed when the Estimates for 1904–5 were under consideration. The pledges which had been already given to the House on the subject would be fulfilled.
§ MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON (Dundee)
said he wished to ask whether any part of the expenditure connected with Osborne House was borne on the Votes for the Navy and the Army.
§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,) Derbyshire, W.
said he understood that the Secretary of State for War would have no objection to the amount spent in connection with the Army on Osborne House appearing on the Army Votes.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES
said that the noble Lord stated that by Statute the expense of Osborne House was charged
§ to the Office of Works. If that were so, how was it that £60,000 was charged in the Navy Votes in connection with Osborne House. Surely the noble Lord was under some misapprehension. There appeared to be a mystery in connection with the matter which ought to be solved. A new Vote was put on the Estimates for Osborne House; and it had not been submitted to the Public Accounts Committee. The so-called explanation of the noble Lord only led to further confusion. Would the noble Lord deny that money was charged on the Navy Votes in respect of Osborne House?
§ LORD BALCARRES
said that the site of the stables had been set apart for the purposes of the Navy, but they were entirely distinct from Osborne House.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES
said that the distinction which was drawn was a very fine one. He still failed to understand why a new Vote, which was not submitted to the Public Accounts Committee, should be set up.
§ Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 215; Noes, 148. (Division List No. 68.)445
|Agg-Gardner, James Tynte||Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ||Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph|
|Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel||Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon|
|Allhusen, Augustus Hen. Eden||Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire||Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.|
|Allsopp, Hon. George||Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Doughty, George|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A (Worc.||Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Chapman, Edward||Doxford, Sir William Theodore|
|Arrol, Sir William||Clive, Captain Percy A.||Duke, Henry Edward|
|Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John||Coates, Edward Feetham||Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin|
|Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt, Hn. Sir H||Cochrane Hon. Thos. H. A. E.||Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart|
|Bailey, James (Walworth)||Coghill, Douglas Harry||Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton|
|Bain, Colonel James Robert||Cohen, Benjamin Louis||Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas|
|Baird, John George Alexander||Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse||Faber, George Denison (York)|
|Balcarres, Lord||Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready||Fardell, Sir T. George|
|Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds||Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole||Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc.|
|Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.||Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge||Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.||Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne|
|Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)||Cripps, Charles Alfred||Fisher, William Hayes|
|Bartley, Sir George C. T.||Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)||FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose|
|Bentinck, Lord Henry C.||Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)||Flannery, Sir Fortescue|
|Bignold, Arthur||Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile||Flower, Sir Ernest|
|Bigwood, James||Dalrymple, Sir Charles||Forster, Henry William|
|Blundell, Colonel Henry||Davenport, William Bromley||Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S.W.)|
|Bond, Edward||Denny, Colonel||Fyler, John Arthur|
|Brassey, Albert||Dickinson, Robert Edmond||Galloway, William Johnson|
|Brotherton, Edward Allen||Dickson, Charles Scott||Gardner, Ernest|
|Bull, William James||Digby, John K. D. Wingfield||Garfit, William|
|Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow||Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.||Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.|
|Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)||Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham||Royds, Clement Molyneux|
|Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)||Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.)||Russell, T. W.|
|Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon||Lowe, Francis William||Rutherford, John (Lancashire)|
|Goschen, Hon. George Joachim||Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)|
|Graham, Henry Robert||Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth||Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. Edw. J.|
|Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury||Macdona, John Cumming||Seton-Karr, Sir Henry|
|Grenfell, William Henry||M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)||Sharpe, William Edward T.|
|Gretton, John||Majendie, James A. H.||Simeon, Sir Barrington|
|Groves, James Grimble||Martin, Richard Biddulph||Sloan, Thomas Henry|
|Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.||Maxwell, W.J.H. (Dumfriessh.)||Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)|
|Hambro, Charles Eric||Mildmay, Francis Bingham||Smith, H. C (North'mb. Tyneside|
|Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry||Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)||Milvain, Thomas||Spear, John Ward|
|Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th||Moore, William||Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset|
|Haslam, Sir Alfred S.||Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)||Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs|
|Hay, Hon. Claude George||Morrell, George Herbert||Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart|
|Heath, James (Staffords., N.W.||Morrison, James Archibald||Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.|
|Helder, Augustus||Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer||Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)|
|Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.||Mount, William Arthur||Thorburn, Sir Walter|
|Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.||Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.||Thornton, Percy M.|
|Hickman, Sir Alfred||Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute)||Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.|
|Hogg, Lindsay||Newdegate, Francis A. N.||Tritton, Charles Ernest|
|Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside||Nicholson, William Graham||Tuff, Charles|
|Hoult, Joseph||Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)||Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward|
|Houston, Robert Paterson||Pemberton, John S. G.||Tuke, Sir John Batty|
|Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)||Percy, Earl||Valentia, Viscount|
|Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil||Pilkington, Colonel Richard||Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H (Sheff'ld|
|Hudson, George Bickersteth||Platt-Higgins, Frederick||Walker, Col. William Hall|
|Hunt, Rowland||Plummer, Walter R.||Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.|
|Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.)||Powell, Sir Francis Sharp||Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton|
|Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse||Pretyman, Ernest George||Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.|
|Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.||Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward||Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd|
|Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)||Pym, C. Guy||Whitmore, Charles Algernon|
|Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.||Randies, John S.||Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)|
|Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.||Rankin, Sir James||Wilson, John (Glasgow)|
|Kimber, Henry||Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne||Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)|
|Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.||Reid, James (Greenock)||Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm|
|Laurie, Lieut.-General||Remnant, James Farquharson||Wood, James|
|Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)||Renwick, George||Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart|
|Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monmouth)||Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green||Wrightson, Sir Thomas|
|Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)||Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson||Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George|
|Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks., N.R.||Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)||Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.|
|Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)||Rolleston, Sir John F. L,|
|Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage||Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.|
|Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.||Rothschild, Hn. Lionel Walter|
|Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.||Round, Rt. Hon. James|
|Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)||Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)||Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)|
|Allen, Charles P.||Crombie, John William||Furness, Sir Christopher|
|Asher, Alexander||Cullinan, J.||Gilhooly, James|
|Ashton, Thomas Gair||Dalziel, James Henry||Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton|
|Barry, E. (Cork, S.)||Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)||Hammond, John|
|Bell, Richard||Delany, William||Harwood, George|
|Black, Alexander William||Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway||Hayden, John Patrick|
|Blake, Edward||Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)||Helme, Norval Watson|
|Boland, John||Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)||Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.|
|Bowles, T. Gibson(King's Lynn||Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles||Henderson, Arthur (Durham)|
|Brigg, John||Dobbie, Joseph||Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)|
|Broadhurst, Henry||Donelan, Captain A.||Horniman, Frederick John|
|Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)||Doogan, P. C.||Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.|
|Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn||Duffy, William J.||Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.|
|Burke, E. Haviland||Dunn, Sir William||Jacoby, James Alfred|
|Caldwell, James||Ellice, Capt E. C (SAndrw'sBghs||Joicey, Sir James|
|Cameron, Robert||Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)||Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea)|
|Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)||Esmonde, Sir Thomas||Jones, William (Carnarvonshire|
|Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton||Farquharson, Dr. Robert||Jordan, Jeremiah|
|Causton, Richard Knight||Farrell, James Patrick||Joyce, Michael|
|Cawley, Frederick||Fenwick, Charles||Kearley, Hudson E.|
|Clancy, John Joseph||Field, William||Kilbride, Denis|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Flynn, James Christopher||Kitson, Sir James|
|Labouchere, Henry||O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)||Schwann, Charles E.|
|Langley, Batty||O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.||Shackleton, David James|
|Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)||O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)||Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)|
|Leamy, Edmund||O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)||Sheehan, Daniel Daniel|
|Leng, Sir John||O'Dowd, John||Sheehy, David|
|Levy, Maurice||O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Lewis, John Herbert||O'Malley, William||Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)|
|Lloyd-George, David||O'Mara, James||Smith, Samuel (Flint)|
|Lough, Thomas||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.||Soares, Ernest J.|
|Lundon, W.||Parrott, William||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Lyell, Charles Henry||Partington, Oswald||Sullivan, Donal|
|MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)||Tennant, Harold John|
|MacVeagh, Jeremiah||Power, Patrick Joseph||Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.|
|M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)||Price, Robert John||Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)|
|M'Crae, George||Rea, Russell||Thomas, J. A (Glamorgan Gower|
|M'Fadden, Edward||Reddy, M.||Wason, Jn. Cathcart (Orkney)|
|M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)||Redmond, John E. (Waterford)||Weir, James Galloway|
|Markham, Arthur Basil||Redmond, William (Clare)||White, George (Norfolk)|
|Mooney, John J.||Rickett, J. Compton||White, Luke (York, E. R.)|
|Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)||Rigg, Richard||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Moulton, John Fletcher||Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)||Whittaker, Thomas Palmer|
|Murphy, John||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)||Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)|
|Nannetti, Joseph P.||Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)||Yoxall, James Henry|
|Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)||Robson, William Snowdon|
|Nussey, Thomas Willans||Roche, John||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Whitley and Mr. Wallace.|
|O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)||Rose, Charles Day|
|O'Brien, Partick (Kilkenny)||Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)|
Bill read a second time and committed.
§ Second Resolution.
§ MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)
said this was the first time this Vote had come upon the Estimates, and in order to give the hon. Member in charge of that Vote an opportunity of stating whether this amount covered what was to be expended or whether some further sum would be required next year, he moved that the Vote be reduced by £100.
To leave out the sum of '£18,800,' and insert the sum of '£18,700.'"—(Mr. Labouchere.)
§ Question proposed, "That '£18,800' stand part of the said Resolution."
§ LORD BALCARRES
said the works which this Estimate was intended to cover was the work from the Duke of York's steps westward. The extension eastward depended on the passage of the Vote for Metropolitan Improvements which was on the Paper.
§ MR. FLYNN (Cork County, N.)
criticised the increase in the revised, as against the original, Estimate. He expressed the opinion that the money spent on London was too lavishly spent, and thought these Votes should be scrutinised in the closest 446 possible way. In this particular case he had walked over the district and had been unable to imagine even how such a sum could possibly be spent. His own idea was that the so-called improvements would be a disfigurement to the fine avenue know as the Mall. He could not see why the revised estimate should be three times the amount of the original.
§ Third Resolution.
§ MR. WILLIAM REDMOND (Clare, E.)
asked whether, since the discussion on this Vote, the Secretary to the Treasury had considered the suggestion that all debates and proceedings affecting Ireland should be collected and published separately at the end of the session. The practice was adopted with regard to certain of the public Departments, and the Irish debates were kept in a separate form by the Irish Office. He understood the additional cost would be very small, and he hoped the Secretary to the Treasury would give a favourable answer.
§ MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH
said that since the matter was discussed in Committee he had given his 447 attention to it. The hon. Gentleman was correct in his statement that extracts from The Debates were published at the end of the session for various Departments. The Irish Office, too, provided special volumes for themselves, but not under this Vote. He had decided to give an order that, starting at Easter, the Irish debates should be kept separate, and at the end of the session bound in the manner suggested. This would be done as an experiment for the session to see whether the separate volumes proved to be a matter of utility, and to ascertain how the proposal worked out in the matter of cost. He could not see his way, however, to distribute the copies free at the end of the session, as was done with the daily editions or ordinary volumes; that would be going much beyond the terms of the contract, but he would consult the authorities as to whether three or four copies could be placed in the Library. Many complaints were made of the increases in the Stationery Vote, but the House should note that whenever the Estimates were under discussion proposals were made involving extra expenditure. If Members required further records of the proceedings of the House—frequently of their own speeches—and alterations in the way in which The Debates were produced, he hoped they would not mind being called upon to vote the extra expenditure involved.
§ MR. WILLIAM REDMOND
thanked the hon. Member for his promise, and said that if he would look into the matter he would find that the cost of supplying free copies would be very small.
§ SIR EDWARD STRACHEY (Somersetshire, S.)
moved a reduction of £100 in order to call attention to the great delay which arose in connection with the printing of local Acts. Local Acts, until they received the Royal Assent, were printed by the various agents for the promoters, but they had then to be printed by the King's printers. The Acts had afterwards to be exceedingly carefully examined, and as the number of examiners was small great delay ensued. Either there should be more examiners, or the local Acts through all their stages should be printed at the promoters' expense by 448 the King's printers, instead of by private printers. Private Acts were frequently of great importance to largo local interests and to Government Departments, and complaints were constantly being made of the delay in the printing. He begged to move.
To leave out '£31,000,' and insert '£30,900.'"—(Sir Edward Strachey.)
§ Question proposed, "That £31,000 stand part of the said Resolution."
§ MR. CATHCART WASON (Orkney and Shetland)
asked whether the concession with regard to the binding of The Debates was to be confined to Irish questions, or whether it would extend also to Scotch and Welsh matters. It would be extremely inconvenient if Irish debates alone were to be published in a separate form, and it would also, to a great extent, complicate the proceedings of the House. The better way would be to publish separately the debates affecting the different parts of the Kingdom, and bind them in a compendious volume afterwards.
§ MR. J. H. LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)
asked whether it was possible to accelerate the reporting and printing of Hansard. In this respect the British Parliament was vastly inferior to many of the Colonial Parliaments, particularly to the Canadian Parliament, every Member of which received on his breakfast table the report of the previous night's debate. If that was possible in Canada, surely something approaching thereto was possible in the Metropolis of the Empire. By the time the copy of Hansard was received, Members had lost interest in the debate of which it contained the report. About ten days elapsed before the daily parts were available, and Members who preferred the volumes had to wait from three to six weeks. He hope I the Secretary to the Treasury would endeavour to accelerate the pace at which the copies were supplied.
§ MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH
said he would make further inquiries as to whether the issue of The Debates could be accelerated. The progress was doubtless slow, but they had the terms of the 449 contract to deal with. He would, however, do his best in the matter. The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland was apparently labouring under a misapprehension. There was no intention of making any difference in the copies now issued; the only alteration was that at the end of the session there would be issued a volume or volumes containing extracts relating to Ireland from the volumes of Hansard already published. Having made that announcement, a demand for a similar concession with regard to Scotch and Welsh deflates was immediately made. He could not give an answer on that point at once; but he would consider the matter between this and Easter. As far as the question raised by the hon. Member for Somersetshire was concerned, that had already been brought to his notice and he was doing all he could in the matter.
§ MR. BLAKE (Longford, S.)
thought there ought to be no difficulty whatever in regard to getting the local Acts. He agreed that the hon. Member had got himself into rather a false position by having agreed to supply the Irish debates separately.