§ [SECOND READING.]
§ Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Question [2nd May], "That the Bill be now read a second time."
§ Question again proposed.
continuing his speech, said, he had been a member of two School Boards and a county committee in twenty years, and he was not inclined to run one against the other. The work of the county committees could not be disregarded, but in this Bill the county committees were almost entirely ignored. The only reference to them which he could find in the Bill was in Section 48, but so far as he could see no provision was made for continuing the bursaries which had been given by them. The work of the county committees had to a 187 certain extent extended the opportunities of secondary and technical education, and he took it that what they all desired to see brought about was that higher education, whether secondary or technical, should be within the reach of every child in the country. From that point of view there was a good deal to be said in favour of having a larger area. The best secondary education in Scotland was now being given in the higher class schools and the endowed schools, which were schools receiving certain grants from the Department under the Minute of 1899. There were at the present time in Scotland fifty-nine schools receiving grants, and it should be possible for any boy or girl who was found fit to benefit from them to find their way into those schools, and if the district area was taken it would be a much more difficult matter than at present. In his own county there were five districts and in the county town there was a very well equipped secondary school, and at the present time the county committee was as far as possible bringing the clever children of those districts into that school. But under this Bill the tendency would undoubtedly be to set up in each district a secondary school, which would be a wasteful proceeding as they would not be so effective as one really good school for the county. It might be said that the other districts would suffer, but in the other districts there were higher grade departments which would not be allowed to suffer, and in those higher grade departments, to a certain extent, a good education was given. If they adopted the smaller areas a very great difficulty would arise with regard to fitting in the curriculum of the schools with the higher schools. There was not even power given in this Bill to the different School Boards to combine for the support of one of these higher-class schools. There was a provision that they might charge higher fees for pupils coming from outside their districts, but there was no power given to put these schools into combined districts.
The question of technical education was a question of very considerable difficulty. In Scotland there were three really good technical institutions, one in Edinburgh, one in Aberdeen, and one in Glasgow. 188 They were not, perhaps, quite up to the German standard, but they were fairly efficient institutions for technical education, and if technical education was to be advanced throughout the country it must be worked in co-operation with those central institutions. To some extent this had been done in Fife and in Aberdeen, and in Galloway agriculture was being taught in connection with the West of Scotland Technical College at the present time. That was now being worked by three county committees, but when this Bill came into operation there would be no less than eleven School Boards interested, and the result would be that the smaller outlying districts must suffer. It would be more difficult to get teachers and there would be eleven authorities trying to carry out the work which was now being carried out by three. In the interests of economy it was better that it should be carried out by three county committees as at the present time. He feared that if this Bill passed in its present form there would be retrogression instead of progress. It was not clear from the Bill how far the West of Scotland Technical College was to be assisted and run by a combination of authorities. At the present moment eight county committees contributed and had a right to nominate governors. When this Bill became law thirty School Boards would be entitled to nominate governors, but no provision had been made as to their contributing. Another argument in favour of larger areas was that in a small area there might be a conflict of opinion as to the industry to be taught, but if a county area was taken all industries would have a fair chance of being taught. The larger areas affected not only technical but to some extent elementary education. He foresaw that in small areas outlying districts would derive much benefit from this Bill. One great advantage of a larger area was the prospect of advancement for the teachers, a prospect they had not at the present time. The chances of promotion now were very small indeed, but in his opinion it would come about that those areas that were now suffering most would derive the largest benefit from this Bill.
The training of teachers was a matter of great importance, and it was improbable 189 that the present system could be maintained. The churches had done good work in the training colleges which they founded and maintained, but almost all the funds for those colleges were now derived from the State. He should much regret to see those training colleges made over to the State and worked as a State institution. In his opinion the solution of that problem lay in the ability of each local authority to maintain a training college of its own. It was rather remarkable that there should be such a marked dependency on the Department by the school authorities in this Bill. In England the education monies were left free to the authority to use as they wished, but under this Bill the whole of this money was put into the fund of the Education Department and dealt with from time to time by that Department, without the consent of which the education authority could do nothing, not even pay for the board of a shepherd's child who came down to school from the hills. He would be the last to say a word against the Scottish Education Department, but he was of opinion that it would not in the end be to the advantage of the education of Scotland if the powers of the educational authorities were so confined. The fortieth Section of the Bill seemed to him rather like the thin end of the wedge. They might under that section find Codes introduced in connection with the secondary schools. In Scotland they had had quite enough of Codes with regard to elementary schools, and he did not want to see them introduced in the higher schools. The whole matter came back to what was to be the size of the district. If the districts were to be small it might not be right to trust them too much, but if the district were large they would call forth the best intellect and the best people who would take an interest in the schools, and they could be trusted to a very large extent. In large districts also it would be necessary to have managers, but in small districts of four or five parishes not only would managers be out of place, but, like the fifth wheel in a coach, be a source of endless friction. He quite agreed that the managers, if managers there were, should not be entrusted with the power either to employ or dismiss teachers, 190 but on the other hand he would like to see large districts delegate large powers to managers.
He thought that provincial councils were quite unnecessary if the area was made sufficiently large. The danger was either that the powers entrusted to them would be so small that their opinion would be of little use, or the powers entrusted to them would be so large that they would interfere with the School Boards, and if the School Boards were interfered with in that way the utility of the provincial councils would be gone. With regard to the central council which had been stated to be the keystone of education in Scotland, its constitution had been sketched to the House. It was to be composed apparently of representatives of the Universities, of the teachers, and of the School Boards. He was afraid that there would be a permanent body of professors and one or two other persons in the educational centre where the council met—it might be Glasgow—and that they would not want to be dictated to, and such a condition of things would curb the usefulness of the large School Boards. And if such a body as this divided itself into committees all over the country, there would be less likelihood of the local committee taking any steps on their own initiative, as they would always be looking to these committees to advise them. He thought that no impediment should be placed between the local education authorities and this House, and in this regard he trusted the Government would not make a determined stand against some modification of the districts. He felt convinced that if the different districts were invested with considerable powers of initiative, and that if some funds were placed at their free disposal, Scotland in that way would best work out her own salvation.
§ MR. CROMBIE (Kincardineshire)
said he wished to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland in having introduced an Education Bill which in its essential features was non-controversial. If it were not controversial in some of its details, he would really believe that the Scotch people had lost that interest in education which had been their salvation hitherto. He should like to say a word or two on what was perhaps a more 191 controversial point than any other, and that was on the question of areas. It was an obvious criticism that some of the areas might be too large and some too small. What was the remedy? It was that if they were to have an ad hoc body, why not an ad hoc district? He quite admitted that that would be much the best solution of the question; but he very much doubted whether it was altogether practicable. It seemed to him that in this matter of choosing a district, there was the same difficulty as in choosing a house. There was a well known proverb which said that "fools built houses, and wise men lived in them." There were considerable difficulties, in his own county of Kincardineshire, in taking the county as the area, because two of the districts on Deeside were separated from the county town of Stonehaven by a mountain range; and if there was a central school at Stonehaven, pupils would have to take the train from Deeside to Aberdeen, and another train from that city to Stonehaven. Taking it all round, therefore, the county district presented a better area than the county. He hoped, however, that the Government would grant some elasticity in the system, so that it might be possible to join two small districts together, and that in other large districts they might be split up into smaller separate districts. Further, two neighbouring districts should be allowed to elect a joint committee of their different School Boards in order to arrange a scheme of secondary education common to them all. Where the districts were very big, he believed that it would be impossible to have fair representation on the School Boards, owing to the expense entailed on members; and he hoped that the Government would accept an Amendment making it possible for the travelling expenses of the members of the boards to be paid. It seemed to him that the present position of the managers was perfectly impossible, for whatever these managers were going to do, they were, at any rate, going to incur expense; and there would be considerable latitude of responsibility on the part of managers not appointed by the School Board. He thought that by far the best plan would be that where managers had to be selected, they should be selected entirely 192 by the School Board, and not by outside bodies. On the question of School Boards taking over the debts of various parishes, an exception was made of the debts on buildings. These school buildings would be taken over by the new district authority, and their rates to that extent would be saved, while the unfortunate parishes would have to pay for the school buildings and the rate as well. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary in his reply would be able to see his way to say something on that point which would ease the minds of the present School Boards. He was very glad that the Bill made such very fair provision for the teachers, and he was gratified that the School Boards would be able to add to the pensions of the teachers. When the Superannuation Bill was before the House he moved an Amendment to that effect, but it was rejected; and he was glad, therefore, that it had now been practically accepted.
What the hon. Baronet the Member for Renfrewshire had very properly described as the most important blot on the Bill, was the complete control given to the Education Department over the School Fund. That was a retrograde step. This Fund amounted to £500,000, part of which was at present administered by the local authorities. The Bill took away the money from the local authorities and gave them no say in the expenditure. He had no sympathy with part of the money being taken for the relief of rates. He thought that the autocracy of the Scotch Education Department had been one of the blots on the education system of Scotland. He wanted to make no personal attack on the officers of the Department. All of them regretted that they were to lose the eminent services of Sir Henry Craik, who had left his mark on Scotch education; but when all that had been said, the fact remained that the influence of the Department had been the scourge of Scotch education. If the Scotch educational system had formerly been chastised with whips, it was now to be scourged with scorpions. Of course it was said that Parliament had control over Scotch education; but he would ask what was the significance of a Minute of the Department lying on the Table of this House for so many days. For all practical purposes it might as well 193 lie on the top of Ben Nevis. He remembered that ten or twelve years ago they could raise a discussion on Scotch education after twelve o'clock, but that was impossible now, and that disability would be perpetuated under the present Bill. It was said that the provincial councils were to be a check on the higher education in Scotland. That he entirely denied. They would prove only a delusion and a snare; they could never have a real control over the development of the higher teaching any more than the committee of commercial experts which the Board of Trade called in as a useful advisory body controlled the Board of Trade. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland would give Parliament complete control over the Education Department, and allow the local bodies some control. He made these remarks in no spirit of hostility to the Bill. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would live up to his former reputation, and treat this Education Bill in the same manner as he did the Licensing Bill of last year. If the right hon. Gentleman trusted the Scotch Members, and allowed them to introduce necessary Amendments, he was sure that in the end the measure would redound to the advantage of the right hon. Gentleman and the Government, and confer a boon on Scotland.
§ SIR MARK STEWART (Kirkcudbrightshire)
thought he might congratulate his right hon. friend on the reception with which this Education Bill had been met. There had been criticism of a very important character, and some of which he hoped would be considered carefully in Committee, but it had been in no sense hostile criticism. In his opinion the Bill was a statesmanlike measure, and embodied a large amount of the opinion of Scotland. He was sure that all the Scotch Members were willing to combine and make it as perfect as possible. It must have struck Englishmen in the House how very different Scotch educational matters were treated when it was for the good of the nation than they were treated in England. He knew from long experience that when an English Education Bill was introduced, it was the signal for religious faction. They had no experience of that kind in Scotland. 194 He was one of those who took a very strong view on the necessity of making the county the unit of area, and if that were not possible, he hoped districts would be allowed to combine. There would be a good many heart-burnings and jealousies if one area was allowed to set up a good secondary school and not another. In regard to managers, he had been very much interested in the discussion as to their powers and duties. As chairman of a very large group of schools ever since 1873, he had seen how the whole matter worked out. In his opinion unlimited power should be given to the School Boards. The more they were trusted the better the results would be. If they were fettered by the Department in London, they would be deprived of half of their usefulness. There were some questions, of course, which could not be very easily unravelled by the School Boards, and in which they must be assisted by the Department. He had always found that the Education Department were glad to listen to any reasonable suggestion he had made. He supported what had been said on the other side of the House in regard to the head of the Department. That Gentleman would be missed, and many warm friends of education would be sorry that he was leaving the high position which he had so well adorned for so many years. Apart from that, however, he could not help saying that they in Scotland had been too much under the thumb of the Education Department. As he had said already, the more the School Boards were trusted, the bettor the work they would do.
He did not know how School Boards in very considerable parts of the country could work large schools and supervise small details, such as repairs of buildings, without a strong committee of managers. This it would be impossible for a School Board meeting fifteen or twenty miles away to do. The committee should consist of local men who understood local wants. He trusted that the managers would be able to assist the School Boards and would give them all the assistance in their power. He thought that every School Board should have a clerk of works. Hon. Members who did not study the matter practically had no idea of the amount of work that was to 195 be done and of the tens of thousands of pounds that had to be spent even in comparatively small parishes. There were sanitary arrangements to be seen to, as well as the general upkeep of the school, and many other matters for which a practical clerk of works would be required. He congratulated the Government on the manner in which they proposed to deal with the question of the teachers. As his hon. friend had stated, if a schoolmaster were allowed to change from one school to another he would have a better chance of promotion. It was no great, inducement, however, to a teacher to be allowed to go only from one parish to another; he ought to be able to go over the entire country, and in that way the best men would have the best chance. He trusted that something would be done with reference to the training of teachers. Unless they had good teachers they might as well stop at once. The difficulty at present in getting good teachers was very great, and he saw no reason to hope that more teachers would be forthcoming unless they were given greater encouragement. No doubt more money would be spent, but as long as the teachers were brought up to the highest standard he was perfectly certain that neither the Scottish Education Department nor the Scottish Members would object. He was also glad to see that under the Bill a teacher who had been dismissed would have the right to appeal; that was a great safeguard to a man who was striving to do his best according to his lights.
As regarded the provincial councils, he thought that if a national council met at Edinburgh every year to discuss educational matters it might be very useful. With reference to the denominational schools, he did not see any great harm in the School Boards, if they saw fit, giving them assistance. He was satisfied that School Boards would take a fair and reasonable view of this question; and if Parliament would only leave them alone everything would go smoothly in the future as it had gone smoothly up to the present. There were some parishes which had done excellent work in providing schools for the last thirty years. They had spent thousands 196 of pounds; but other parishes had done as little as they possibly could, and just scraped along. Were they to be put on exactly the same footing as the parishes which had possibly incurred a very large debt? That would not be fair, and he thought that parishes that had not their schools in order should be called upon to put them in order before they obtained any of the privileges under the Bill. He himself would rejoice if all the elections could be held on one day. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen stated that it really did not matter, as they had not too many elections. He, however, thought there were too many elections. In the United States, at a Presidential election, all the positions from the President downwards were set out on one voting paper, all the electors voted on the same day, and there was no confusion. Why should not some such system be adopted in Scotland? The Roman Catholics were in a different position now to what they were. They had been very strong on the School Boards because of the cumulative vote; but the cumulative vote was now to be taken away, and it was therefore only fair that they should receive the grant. In conclusion, he hoped that Amendments would be favourably considered by his right hon. friend.
§ * MR. JOHN DEWAR (Inverness)
said that it was difficult to make a speech without repeating to some extent what had been already said. He had, however, a subject which had not yet been touched upon, and to which he wished to direct the attention of the House. It was the manner in which the Bill would affect the Highlands of Scotland. Hon. Members were sometimes apt to forget that the people in the Highlands lived in practically a different world; they were a different race, spoke a different language, had a different religion, and lived under very different social conditions from those which existed in other parts of Scotland. There was also great poverty in the Highlands. The average education rate over the whole of Scotland was 11½d. in the £ but in one parish in his constituency the rate was positively 4s. and in another parish the whole of the rates amounted to 13s. 4d. in the £ There was nothing to 197 compare with that in any other part of Scotland; and those who paid those rates pot very little advantage indeed. In large town in England the rates might amount to 10s. in the £ but then tramways, electric lighting, free libraries, and other luxuries were provided; but in the Highland districts the people had no luxuries at all and very few conveniences. That had been recognised by the Government and the Department under what was known' as the Highland Minute of 1895, which provided for special treatment for Highland schools. He should like to ask if that special treatment was to be continued. As regarded rating, he wished to point out how very poor the Highland districts were, and how very little was to be expected from them. In one parish the rate able value was only 8s. per head of the population, and very little could be expected from a parish like that in the way of primary education, much less technical and secondary education. He was sure the House would understand that the Highlands deserved special treatment. As regarded the class of schools, no less than 43 per cent. of the schools in the Western Highlands had less than fifty pupils. Last year he drew attention to the matter and suggested that the grant which was then about to be distributed should be given with some regard to the difficulty of obtaining teachers with any degree of efficiency for schools in the Western Highlands. That suggestion was not given effect to; but under the new Bill the schools would receive what they deserved.
With regard to the question of the areas, it was suggested that these were too small. One or two hon. Members suggested that the county would be the better area; but in regard to counties like Inverness and Argyll that plan would not work at all. It was very important to retain in the management of the schools the local element, especially that of the parents. The County Council of Inverness was an admirably managed body; but he doubted if ten members of it had children at a parish school. If the county were adopted as the area, there would not be that interest taken in the parish school which ought to be taken in it, and for that reason he supported the proposal in the Bill. As 198 regarded management, he thought the Government had practically retained the local element which would be more interested in the success and efficiency of the school than others. He agreed that the appointment of managers should be in the hands of the School Board, not in the hands of the parish council which did not want it; but a provision ought to be introduced that a certain proportion of the managers should be the parents of the children attending the schools. In that way local interest would be maintained and stimulated. The question of the denominational schools was a matter of pressing interest in Invernesshire. There was a large body of Roman Catholics there; but the religious difficuly did not exist in any way. In the case of Barra, which had been mentioned, a large proportion of the children were Catholics; they had a Catholic School Board and Catholic teachers, and the Catholic teachers taught Protestant children everything but religion. Where there was a Protestant School Board and a Catholic school the appointment of the teachers of the Catholic school was left in the hands of the local priest and other members of the Catholic community in conference with the School Board. It was all carried on with the greatest goodwill, and no question of ill feeling arose. He thought that the proposal of the Government with reference to the denominational schools was the fairest and best that could be adopted. The local board would say whether or not a grant was to be given. He should like to ask the Secretary for Scotland what exactly was the meaning of the section which indicated that if a denominational school were refused support by the local School Board the managers might apply to the Department. Had the Department power to contribute to such schools in such cases. If it only meant that they were to be allowed the 3s. grant he had no objection.
* MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY
said that that was already done all over the country under the Minute in connection with schools with small staffs.
§ MR. JOHN DEWAR
said he thought the method adopted by the Government in connection with the denominational schools was an admirable one. He 199 regretted that the question of the training of teachers had not been more definitely mentioned in the Bill. With regard to the difficulty of getting teachers for the Highlands, a schoolmaster stated that of the seventy-seven adult teachers in a certain district in the Highlands, forty-seven were assistants, and of those only six were trained. One school with 130 children was being worked by a headmaster and two pupil teachers. In Glasgow the proportion was one certificated teacher for every fifty-one pupils; whereas in Lewis the proportion was one certificated teacher for every 102 pupils. He thought that something should be done in the Bill whereby teachers in the Western Highlands should receive some encouragement in passing on to the training colleges. There was one other matter he would like to mention. He knew that the Department had never encouraged the teaching of Gaelic as a special subject. He thought, however, that where Gaelic was the language of a district, the teacher ought to know both languages. He came across one school in the Highlands where the teacher was a Londoner, his wife being a London lady. The teacher did not know Gaelic and when asked how the children understood him he said they just picked it up as best they could. Education could not be carried on on that principle.
With regard to provincial councils, there were two hon. Members who did not v ant any councils at all, and other hon. Members only wanted one council. He himself, however, was one of the first to approve of the proposal in the Bill, which he heartily welcomed. It had been suggested that a provincial council would not be able to stand up to the Education Department. He was not so sure of that; but he wanted a council in the capital of the Highlands which would be able to bring before the Department the needs and requirements of education in the Highlands. If there were only one council meeting in Edinburgh, the representation of the Highlands would suffer, and he well remembered being told by a county councillor from the Hebrides that, although his council met in Inverness, he had to give up his office because it took five days to attend each meeting and cost him as many pounds. How much greater would be the difficulty 200 if the meetings were held in Edinburgh? He was sure they would have better results if they held the meetings at Inverness. The present Secretary for Education in Scotland and the Under-Secretary took special interest in education in the Highlands; they had visited the various districts and made themselves personally acquainted with their requirements. He was anxious, therefore, to have some guarantee that education in the Highlands should have special attention. There was a clause in the Bill which dealt with physical training, but neither physical training nor mental training was of any use unless the children were properly fed. This, too, was a subject in which the people of the Highland districts were specially interested. Their homes were widely scattered and the children had to walk long distances to school. They had to leave home early in the day and did not return till late. Some took provisions with them, but it was clear they could not carry on their studies without suitable food. He hoped that power would be given to the School Boards to contribute to a fund to provide, where it was necessary, a suitable mid-day meal for the children. He knew that in some districts schoolmasters and mistresses organised funds for the purpose of providing these meals, but it was not possible to do that in all places, and he therefore thought it would be well to give the School Board power to make necessary contributions for the purpose. Finally, he would like to point out that the effect of taking away the grant from the Government was to alter the incidence of the rates in many boroughs by putting a new rate on the occupiers and taking a rate off the owners. That was contrary to the trend of modern legislation and he thought, therefore, it was a matter which required to be looked into.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAY (Shoreditch, Hoxton)
said the discussion up to that point, had been almost entirely concentrated upon the structure of the educational body, the area of its authority and the influence of the teachers, and not a word had been addressed to the object of the education—the child, which was to have instruction foisted upon it at great expense to the 201 State. No reference had been made to the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Training, and the Bill failing to deal with the recommendations of that body, he could not join in the general chorus of praise which had been given to the Secretary for Scotland. What were the recommendations of that body? Put briefly they were that the provision of school meals should, where it was necessary, be part of the charge incident to school management. Returns which had been obtained showed that something like 9 per cent. of the school children in Aberdeen were badly nourished, and in Edinburgh the position was still worse. The Commissioners pointed out that, the housing difficulty was inseparable from the question of the condition of the children, and it was idle to spend all this public money and to squabble over school areas and the training of teachers while the bodies of the children were incapable of receiving the mental instruction which Parliament, demanded should be given to them. He, for one, held that it was a matter of considerable reproach to the authors of the Bill that they were not taking at least permissive power in the measure to give school authorities throughout Scotland the necessary authority to provide the children with food. He was not relying solely on the conclusions arrived at by a Royal Commission. He had noted with pleasure that the hon. Member for the Partick Division had admitted that the physical question was one of prime importance. One hon. Member had stated that the expenditure on education would be wasted unless the children were provided with spectacles to enable them to see the black-boards. Another had suggested that members of School Boards should be paid. Let them begin at the right end and realise that children should be physically capable of receiving the education provided, and that that was as important as that they should have glasses wherewith to read the blackboard. Let them strive to ensure that the children's eyes were not dimmed by misery and hunger.
This was not a difficulty which existed merely in the East-end of London. Anyone who read the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland would see that, whether in rural or in 202 urban districts, there were vast numbers of children unfitted to receive education by reason of parental neglect—through drink and other causes—to provide them with proper food and clothing. It was a well-known fact that agricultural labourers, who were among the poorest ratepayers, had readily contributed, with teachers, to the fund for supplying children with food, and the Government should take this opportunity of following the lead given them by their own Commission and add "meals" to those permissive matters with which the local authorities would be authorised to deal. The child who was made to submit to compulsory education should certainly be physically fit to undergo the intellectual strain it was desired to subject it to in order to enable it to become a capable citizen hereafter. They could not get away from the fact—and they might call it Socialism or what they liked—that, practically, under the present system of education they had taken the child away from its parents for educational purposes. The State had assumed the guardianship for nine years of the child's life, and it was bound to see that the money thus expended on the child was not wasted as it had been in the past. In other respects the Bill, he believed, merited warm approval, and ho trusted that when it had been amended in the direction he had suggested it would pass into law. Although ho had spoken strongly he did not wish to deny to the right hon. Gentleman all credit for the skill, energy, and sincerity which he had devoted to the production of the measure.
§ MR. URE (Linlithgowshire)
said it was difficult to make a Second Reading speech on a Bill with the principle of which they were all agreed, as consequently their criticisms had to be directed to details. If he could not join in the chorus of praise so cheerfully as his colleagues had done, the right hon. Gentleman would understand it was not because he grudged him and his colleagues all the honour and glory due to them as the authors of the measure, or because of the hint which had been thrown out that they found the Bill ready to their hands when they first entered upon office. His seeming stinginess of praise was clue to the fact that his constituents were fairly well satisfied with the system already existing in Scotland, 203 and none of them who had listened to the exposition by the hon. Member for the Border Burghs of the difficulties of education in Scotland, would find it hard to understand why it was that they were so much attached to their present system. The complaints which arose when the Scottish Education Department came into direct contact with a local authority and which would not be relieved or mitigated by the Bill had not been experienced to any extent in his own constituency, where the educational machine had worked smoothly and satisfactorily for many years past, and that constituency was, after all, typical of the great bulk of Scottish counties. Comment had been made on the fact that the Bill had not received much attention at the hands of the people of Scotland, and that very few meetings had been held either to protest against its provisions or to approve of them. No one need be astonished at that. It had been cynically observed that the best system of ventilation was one entirely under the control of the inhabitants of the building, and in the same way he supposed that the best system of education was one entirely under the control of the parents. Acting on that principle, he had not dreamed for one moment of summoning a public meeting to consider the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman; he had deemed it sufficient to seek the opinion of educational experts in his constituency—the opinions of those who passed their lives in educational work, on whose shoulders would rest the responsibility of working this Bill when passed, and upon whose, energy would depend the making or marring of the measure. In the few observations he had to make, therefore, he wished it to be understood that he was not merely expressing his individual opinion, but also the views of those on whom the success of the measure would ultimately depend. He represented an average Scottish constituency.
§ MR. URE
Well, an average Lowland constituency, and he had to say at once that those whom he had consulted accepted without comment as a matter of course the ad hoc principle. No other would, in fact, be suited to the peculiari- 204 ties of the Scottish educational system, and it was deeply rooted in their national history. It had been tested and had worked remarkably well. They also appreciated the advantages of a wider area and a larger electorate, and, so far as secondary and technical education were concerned, of the concentration of power, means, and authority these larger boards were designed to secure. On the whole, they preferred the areas proposed by the Bill to the county areas. It was all very well for hon. Gentlemen to say that sanitation, roads, and bridges were one thing, but that education was something entirely different. Geographical considerations and considerations of the distribution of population and of the means of transit across the counties had determined the divisions of counties into districts for roads and bridges, and the same considerations were decisive in the matter of education. The people of Scotland were not blind to the advantages of the ad hoc area, but they were a practical people, and they saw that the ideal was not always attainable; therefore, they were prepared to lay that on one side, not because it was a bad system, but because it was unworkable under existing conditions. The proposals with regard to the powers of the new authorities were, in the main, satisfactory, but there was one that would be, keenly challenged, viz., that of the delegation of duties to boards of managers. Unless that proposal were radically altered he would feel bound to vote against the Third Heading of the Bill. No self-respecting men would be found to serve on these boards of managers, because they would have, on the one hand, no honour or glory, and, on the other hand, no useful work to perform. Boards of managers were not to be allowed to raise, vote, or spend money, or to appoint, promote, or dismiss teachers; all that was to be left to them was the punishment of recalcitrant parents and the supervision of slatternly charwomen. The provision had doubtless crept in by a mistake, it was probably due to the draftsman of the English Bill, who had forgotten the radical difference between the two measures, because, while the English Act confided the administration of education to existing local bodies, the Scotch Bill dealt with bodies elected for educational 205 purposes only. The cure was extremely simple; it was that, the School Boards having been elected, full confidence should be placed in them. It should be left to them to appoint from among themselves committees to manage the schools in the districts under their charge; their own good sense would probably lead them to appoint the members most closely connected with the districts in which the schools were situated. If the right hon. Gentleman made Clause 19 applicable to county districts as well as to the enumerated districts, and dropped Clause 20, the thing would be done.
The manner in which the Bill dealt with voluntary and denominational schools was as sagacious as it was tactful. There was no disposition whatever on the part of School Boards to refuse grants of public money to such schools as were giving efficient instruction, but they would only do so provided there was a modicum of local control. So far as he could judge from the Roman Catholics in his own constituency, that modicum of local control would not be refused, provided it was confined to secular instruction. That point was met by the Bill, because the School Boards were to be entitled, before voting money to such schools, to impose certain conditions, so that if they thought fit they would be able to prescribe the modicum of local control that was necessary. It would probably be pressed upon the Government that this difficult, delicate, and sometimes disagreeable duty ought not to be placed upon the local body. He did not think that was a sound objection. These local bodies were to have large powers, and they ought to bear the corresponding responsibilities. They were to have almost unlimited powers of administration; therefore they ought to face the responsibilities and not shirk the accompanying disagreeable duties. He hoped the Government would stand firm to their proposals on this matter.
With regard to the finance of the Bill, there were at present five distinct channels by which money raised from taxation found its way to the aid of education. Under the Bill the full flow of those five channels was to be devoted to education. With 206 regard to four of those channels the Government would have no difficulty whatever, but the £100,000 under the Act of 1892 was a different question. Hitherto the bulk of that money had been devoted to the relief of rates, and the burghs pointed out, with a great deal of justice, that on the faith of receiving that money they had entered upon large expenditure, so that if this money were suddenly withdrawn it would mean an increase of rates to the extent of from l½d. to 3d. in the £. That was a serious consideration, and he was prepared to back the burghs in their request that the money should be retained for the purposes to which it had hitherto been devoted. Then there was the question of rating. Not a single voice had been raised in the House or in the country in favour of the proposal to lay upon enterprising parishes the whole burden of expenditure incurred in the erection of the buildings necessary for efficient education. He thought the provision was unjust to a degree. The School Board was to take over all the assets, but not the liabilities. The enterprising parish would have to bear those liabilities unaided, while the parish which had been lax or negligent would escape. To that provision he should certainly give his uncompromising opposition. The country had received the announcement with reference to the proposed provincial councils with perfect indifference, and the reason was not far to seek. The popular view was that they would do neither good nor harm, that they were perfectly harmless and innocent. Men of distinction in the educational world would never dream of sitting upon those councils, because if their recommendations were not in harmony with the view of the Scotch Education Department the Department would give them no heed, while, if their recommendations happened to be approved by the Department, the Department, would carry them out off its own bat and would need no jogging from the councils. Consequently it was clear that these provincial councils would be futile, and would entirely fail to effect the end the Government had in view.
* (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY
supposed the Minister was truly to be congratulated who had listened through a 207 long day to speeches which their authors admitted were not Second Heading speeches, and in which he had been again and again told that there was no intention of dividing against the Bill. It was true that notice had been given of an Amendment of grave importance, but the hon. Member for Banffshire had promptly run away from his proposal and declined to move it. The hon. Member for the Border Burghs had expressed regret that the Amendment had not been moved, but he had failed to face the alternative of moving it himself. The hon. Member had also given a curious explanation of the praise which was lavished upon the Bill when first introduced. He had stated that hon. Members opposite were in a state of trembling expectancy because of the misdeeds of the Government in connection with English education, and that when it was found that the English precedent had not been followed he had burst out into Te Deum, and now he seemed to regret that his praise had been so ecstatic—When the devil was sick, the devil a monk would be,When the devil got well, the devil a monk was heThe hon. Member for the Border Burghs did not persevere in that attitude, but he received the Bill and its provisions in what he was glad to recognise as a most friendly spirit to all its provisions. If he had been in the mood of a captious critic, he did not think he should have had much trouble in defending the various provisions of his Bill, not by taking counsel from the other side, but by pointing out that, although all the provisions of the Bill had been criticised, the critics were not agreed, and he had as many defenders as he had opponents amongst lion. Members opposite. Therefore, he proposed to say a few words, arranging his remarks in the order of the topics with which they dealt rather than in trying to deal with the remarks of each speaker who had addressed the House.
The most important topic of all was the question of the area. The hon. Member for Banffshire, who did not move his Amendment, formulated a distant proposition which had found but few supporters, but it deserved to be dealt with because it was distinct. He said that, inasmuch as the Government had 208 resolved on an an hoc authority, the proper corollary would be the selection of an ad hoc district. That proposition seemed to him to be fraught with difficulty, and, moreover, it was impracticable. No one who had anything to do with administration from a practical point of view could fail to agree that the overlapping of administrative, areas was an unmixed evil. During the past twelve or fourteen years they had been doing their best, and with success, to get rid of the overlapping areas which existed. To disregard existing territorial divisions and to take an arbitrary line, and carve out a new administrative area, would be, in his judgment, a very grave administrative defect. If they were to draw that line, as in a case, like Galashiels, they would have certain outlying portions for which, in respect to secondary education, there would be no provision made. They would, in fact, require to have a sort of boundary commission. He thought this was enough to enable them to dismiss the fantastic idea of ad hoc areas. He would now pass to the existing areas. The hon. Member who opened the debate appeared to quite forget the leading principle of this Bill, which so far as he knew bad not got a single dissentient voice raised against it in the House, and that principle was that there should be one authority for both primary and secondary education. The hon. Member for Banffshire mentioned some idea of an aggregation of parishes for primary education for one parish, and then a still further aggregation for secondary education. There at once they had two authorities instead of one. He liked but little the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen, whose contribution to this point was that there should be an aggregation of parishes for the purposes of primary education and then a secondary body, elected by the body dealing with primary education from their own number. That, of course, at once introduced the whole machinery of a secondary election and at once they had not that direct trust in the people which everyone seemed to think peculiarly appropriate to Scotch ideas and methods. Under that system a person in a rural parish forming an electoral district might be sure of sending a representative whom he trusted to the first School Board, but 209 he would have no security whatsoever that that representative would ever have anything to do with the question of secondary education, because when it came to this secondary election, formed out of the various School Boards and the different parishes, there would be no security that that particular representative would ever be so elected. He held that this left the idea of the Bill as to areas unassailed.
He did not think he was wrong in saying that general opinion was that the county was too large for primary education, therefore, of course, the system of districts taken in the Bill was a compromise. It was, indeed, a subject on which they must have a compromise. These districts had been taken as a compromise. They were formed originally for geographical considerations and consideration of access, and there was no reason why they should not be as useful for educational administration as for road and public health administration. To fix boundaries of any kind must always give rise to some difficulties and anomalies. One gentleman wrote to him stating that his house was built over a stream and that stream constituted the boundary between two districts, and he wished to know which district he was going to be in. He was afraid that no amount of ingenuity in the Bill would ever get over such difficulties as that. There seemed to be a radical misconception prevalent of the functions of the district authorities as to secondary education. It was supposed that each district must of necessity be self-supporting; but there was no such requirement in the Bill; and in practice the; case would often be otherwise. Each authority must see that proper provision for secondary education was made; but there was nothing to prevent an authority from making arrangements for the children under its care to go to a school in the district of another authority. Therefore all those illustrations which the hon. Member for Renfrewshire had given which arose in consequence of the delimitations of the two districts were really not to the point. But although he had defended the district, he thought with some success, because the difficulty in the parish and the county was so much greater than in the district, he did not take a rigid line in this matter, and he was perfectly willing to consider with 210 a favourable mind the insertion of such provisions as would make combination possible where local opinion thought that combination was necessary. He thought that was obviously a very much better plan than beginning at the other end, because they were bound to take the view that the length and breadth of Scotland would act well in this matter. Taking the district in the Bill as it stood, they had been able to create areas of manageable size. That was saying a great deal as to the workableness of the proposal, and the only exception was the case mentioned by the hon. Member for Renfrewshire, which he was quite satisfied would require exceptional treatment, and that was due to the incorporation in Renfrewshire of two large boroughs.
On the question of management, again, he thought several speakers had laboured under a misconception. The object of the management clauses was one in which he believed every one would concur. It was to retain local interest in the school. But his mind was more than open upon the point, and he was perfectly willing to give way to the general opinion of Scotland in the matter. He only wished to find out what the general opinion of Scotland was, and to that general opinion he was perfectly prepared to give way. He was perfectly willing to alter the proportion. If he gathered that it was really the feeling of the Scottish representatives that they would sooner the whole matter was left in the hands of the elected School Board, he was quite prepared to trust the School Boards to see that there was proper local management.
With regard to the financial portion of the Bill, three topics had been dealt with which were perfectly distinct. There was one topic which, as a matter of fact, was only dealt with by the hon. Member for Renfrewshire, but it was nevertheless an exceedingly important one, and a great deal of what the hon. Member had said was perfectly true. His point was that it would be very much better not to keep the old parochial rating, as they were no longer having the parochial area, and his great point was that if they gave up parochial rating they would have to give up that inequality which resulted from the system of classification and the system of deductions. If 211 he had more time he might explain these points, but hon. Members might take it from him that as a matter of fact it was in the power of one parochial Board to make the valuation on which the rating was actually calculated very different to the principle on which another Board might act. He was bound to say he thought there was a good deal in that. The reason why he put the provision as it stood in the Bill was that he thought ho knew what the opinion was. He thought the line of least resistance was to keep the School Board rate as it always had been. The school rate had been collected along with the poor rate, and therefore the poor rate was allowed to remain, but his hon. friend the Member for Renfrewshire and others came to him and argued that it would be better to secure actual equity by taking the rates on the gross valuation. Here, again, he had no desire to stick to the Bill rigidly, and he was ready to substitute the county for the local rate. As to the subject of the old debt, it was obviously a case in which they wanted to do what was most truly equitable, and he would be willing to find a solution of the problem in the direction which the Committee considered most likely to lead to that equity. But do not let anybody rim away with the idea that the equities were all on the one side. It was not at all a one-sided matter, and when the proper time came he thought he would be able to show ample justification for the proposition in the Bill.
He passed now to the very much more important question of the general finance of the Bill, and especially to what he might call "the pooling clause." He asked hon. Members to remember the state of things which he found and with which he had to deal. He thought it was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen who paid him the compliment that he was the only Member in the House who, without the books, could have told the sources from which the money came. Ho believed it was not an undeserved compliment. He did not suppose anyone could pass an examination on that subject except the hon. Member for Mid Lanark. He could assure the hon. Member that it was a great pleasure to him to be a yoke follow with him in any contest of that kind. The right hon. Gentleman the Member 212 for South Aberdeen was entirely in favour of the pooling clause. He did not think anybody was against it. But a great deal of the criticism had been as to the way the money was to be paid out. It was said, "Oh! you are putting the whole thing into the hands of the Department." The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen made a suggestion winch was really not practical, and it was one which ho did not believe ho would regard as practical when ho came to think over it. The right hon. Gentleman had suggested that some of the money should still be allowed to go to the local authorities to be appropriated as they thought fit to purposes other than education. It would be an expedient that for one thing would do away with the pooling, of which the right hon. Gentleman approved. The hon. Member for North West Lanark also made a serious mistake as to the amount of money which had been for the first time put under the command of the Department which was not under it before. The hon. Gentleman forgot entirely that a very large amount of this money was the aid grant which was the equivalent for the money provided under the English Bill—money in respect of which the claims, ho humbly thought, of the voluntary schools, especially the Roman Catholic schools, had not been absolutely understood. It was money which never passed under any local control at all. It was Imperial funds given to any local source of education which was doing the educational work of the country. He wished that time permitted to develop this subject further, but of course he would have an opportunity of doing it afterwards. All ho could say was that ho was prepared to maintain that, so far as the sum of £220,000 was concerned, it would be absolutely inequitable not to give it to the voluntary schools, and specially to the Roman Catholics, who from their numbers wore entitled to the largest share.
He asked hon. Members to look at the clause for a moment and to say how they could oust the Department. There were, in the first place, to be inspections and leaving certificates. Who could do that work except a central department? Obviously no one. Secondly, there was the establishment of a central fund to give grants in aid, and that must he under the guidance of a central department. When they passed from that 213 what else did they get. Money was to be given in aid of such educational institutions as might be expressly recognised by the Department under any Code or Minute for the purpose of the sub-section. That dealt with money either for problematical training colleges, or other central educational institutions which were doing special work in the country, and which were not necessarily under the control of the School Board at all. It was further provided that money might be given in aid of the provision of higher education whether the schools were available for Parliamentary grants or not. He asked the House to observe that all this could not be done in any favouring way. It must be done under the general rules which the Department put in the Code for the ordinary Government grants given for primary education. Money might also be given in aid of expenditure for bursaries. Then there was provision for payments in lieu of the old necessitous School Board divisions—the payment of 1½d. for each complete 2d. That was really a contribution to the poor neighbourhoods in respect of the £60,000 which was got. In regard to the particular Highland clause for dealing with cases where the rating was very high, it was obvious that the aid must be given by a central authority. But hon. Members had entirely forgotten as to the balance clause which, according to their calculation, gave at least a third of the whole fund to the local authorities. That money was neither spent nor controlled by the Department, it was given in hard cash to the School Boards and managers of voluntary schools, to spend as they pleased in their own control of education. Not a single speaker as far as he could tell from his utterances seemed alive to that very obvious fact which really destroyed the cogency of much of the criticism passed upon it. After all, there had been too much said about the Department. He must honestly say that the way in which hon. Members spoke of the Department puzzled him. They first of all indulged in praises which he would not call extravagant, but which were deserved of the very eminent gentleman who for so many years was the permanent head of the Department. He was always glad to hear those praises because 214 he knew how well deserved they were. Having said he was the most efficient servant the Department ever had, hon. Members turned round and said the one terrible thing had been the predominance of the Department and the effect which it had had on the development of Scotch education. He did not know where he was when he heard the hon. Member for the Border Burghs p tying a sort of panegyric when he spoke of the educational progress of Scotland, and then heard the hon. Baronet the Member for West Renfrew speak of the Department laying its chilling hand on the cause of education in Scotland. Surely they could not both be true.
A great many hon. Members entirely forgot what the Department was, and why it should be there. Not a single hon. Member had referred to the fact that a great deal more money was spent in education than this sum of £600,000; some £1,500,000 or £1,600,000 was spent on education which came from the Imperial Exchequer and was distributed through the Department. The Department was the only butter between the Imperial Exchequer and the spending authorities; how, then, could it be dispensed with? From some of the criticisms one would suppose that they could get on without any Department at all. Some of the gentlemen who wrote articles in the newspapers seemed to have no idea of what was meant by administrative control. He noticed an article written by a Mr. Leishman in one of the Edinburgh papers indicated that the idea of the Department having anything to do with the Treasury had practically no point at all, and that the whole idea was the convenience of the Secretary for Scotland. Well, the convenience of the Secretary for Scotland was neither here nor there, but for administrative reasons it was essential that the Scotch Education Department should be near the Treasury. As long as he had anything to do with the Department, he would absolutely resist to the utmost any proposal to take away the Department from actual touch with its political head, a contact whose influence for better control and the avoidance of friction could only be known to those who had practical experience of administrative working. But the Department had something else to do than with the Treasury. Did not hon. Members 215 reflect that if local bodies were allowed of their own sweet will to modify the Code as they chose, they could practically cost the nation any sum they liked for education? Did they not reflect that every alteration made in the Code had to be a matter of expert consideration between the Department and the Treasury to find out practically how much the alteration would cost. Unless that were done they could not possibly have equality of treatment in the different portions of the United Kingdom. Some forward local body would soon write out a Code which would enable a Scottish child to earn three times as much as an English child could, and therefore that would be impossible from a Treasury point of view. It showed how extraordinarily little gentlemen who wrote letters of that sort knew of the practical work of an administrative Department.
On the question of control it was often impossible, from the very nature of things, that they could have two really controlling bodies, but he was not insensible of the desire that there should be greater contact between the Department and Scottish opinion. The provincial councils were meant to be consultative and not administrative; and that being so he thought there was much in favour of keeping them as they were in the Bill and not amalgamating them into one larger and much more unwieldly council which would not know so much of the local needs. He was only too glad to accede to the suggestion that the Bill should not be treated by him in any controversial spirit. He hoped he had shown by what he had said that he accepted the suggestion in the friendly spirit in which it was given. In all minor matters he was quite willing to listen to any suggestions quite irrespective
§ of the side of the House from which they came. All he was greatly concerned to keep was the cardinal feature of the Bill, namely, the maintenance of one authority for primary and secondary education. He was equally interested in maintaining for Roman Catholics and Episcopalians what he considered was their proportion of the finances to which they were entitled. He believed that the clause to which so much criticism had been directed—the pooling clause—when further examined would be found as regarded the primary provisions of the Bill to be a practical expedient. He hoped the House would now grant the Second Reading of the Bill.
§ MR. WEIR moved the adjournment of the debate.
§ MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)
said he was surprised that the right hon. Gentleman wished to take the Second Reading now. He must be aware that there were fifteen Gentlemen who desired to state their views in regard to the local situation in their constituencies.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Weir)
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 128; Noes, 72. (Division List No. 102.)217
|Agg-Gardner, James Tynte||Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin||Davenport, William Bromley|
|Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden||Bignold, Arthur||Denny, Colonel|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Boscawen, Arthur Griffith||Dickinson, Robert Edmond|
|Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.||Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John||Dickson, Charles Scott|
|Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy||Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A.(Glasgow||Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-|
|Bain, Colonel James Robert||Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph C.|
|Baird, John George Alexander||Cavendish, V. C.W.(Derbyshire||Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers|
|Balcarres, Lord||Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J.A.(Worc.||Duke, Henry Edward|
|Balfour, Rt. Hon. A.J.(Manch'r||Coates, Edward Feetham||Durning-Laurence, Sir Edwin|
|Balfour, Capt, C B. (Hornsey)||Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.||Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r|
|Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds)||Compton, Lord Alwyne||Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst|
|Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.||Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile||Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Dalkeith, Earl of||Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne|
|Fison, Frederick William||Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage||Rasch, Sir Frederick Carne|
|Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon||Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.||Reid, James (Greenock)|
|Forster, Henry William||Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.||Ridley, Hon. M.W. (Stalybridge|
|Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W.)||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Bristol, S)||Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)|
|Fyler, John Arthur||Lowe, Francis William||Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter|
|Galloway, William Johnson||Loyd, Archie Kirkman||Round, Rt. Hon. James|
|Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick||Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth)||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool|
|Gordon, Hn. J. E.(Elgin&Nairn)||Lyttelton, Rt. Hon Alfred||Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)|
|Gore, Hn. G.R.C. Ormsby-(Salop||Macdona, John Cumming||Sinclair, Louis (Romford)|
|Gray, Ernest (West Ham)||MacIver, David (Liverpool)||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)||Maconochie, A. W.||Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)|
|Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)||M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)||Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)|
|Gretton, John||M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.||Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart|
|Hall, Edward Marshall||Malcolm, Ian||Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley|
|Hamilton, Marq of (L'd'nderry||Martin, Richard Biddulph||Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)|
|Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)||Maxwell, W.J. H (Dumfriesshire||Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.|
|Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.||Montagu, G. (Huntington)||Tufnell, Lieut. Col. Edward|
|Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.||Morgan, David J. (Walhamstow)||Tuke, Sir John Batty|
|Hickman, Sir Alfred||Morrell, George Herbert||Valentia, Viscount|
|Hope, J F.(Sheffield, Brightside||Mount, William Arthur||Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.|
|Houston, Robert Paterson||Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.||Warde, Colonel C. E.|
|Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil||Murray, Rt.Hn. A. Grahan(Bute||Whiteley, H. (Ashton und.Lyne|
|Hunt, Rowland||Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)||Whitmore, Charles Algernon|
|Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse||Nolan, Col. John P.(Galway, N.)||Willoughby de Eresby, Lord|
|Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)||Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley||Willox, Sir John Archibald|
|Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.||Percy, Earl||Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm|
|Knowles, Sir Lees||Platt-Higgins, Frederick||Wylie, Alexander|
|Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)||Plammer, Walter R.|
|Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)||Powell, Sir Francis Sharp||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir|
|Lawson, JohnGrant(Yorks. N.R||Pretyman, Ernest George||Alexander Acland-Hood and|
|Lee, Athur H.(Hants., Fareham||Randles, John S.||Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)||Reddy, M.|
|Asher, Alexander||Griffith, Ellis J.||Redmond, John E. (Waterford)|
|Asquith, Rt. Hon Herbert Henry||Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard R.||Rigg, Richard|
|Barry, E. (Cork, S.)||Harmsworth, R. Leicester||Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)|
|Black, Alexander William||Hay, Hon. Claude George||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)|
|Boland, John||Hayden, John Patrick||Roche, John|
|Brigg, John||Helme, Norval Watson||Seely, Maj. J.E. B. (Isle of Wight|
|Bryce, Rt. Hon. James||Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Shackleton, David James|
|Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn||Joyce, Michael||Sheehan, Daniel Daniel|
|Caldwell, James||Kilbride, Denis||Sheehy, David|
|Cawley, Frederick||Labouchere, Henry||Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Levy, Mauriee||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)||Lundon, W.||Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr)|
|Crean, Eugene||MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Ure, Alexander|
|Crombie, John William||MacVeah, Jeremiah||Wason, JohnCathcart(Orkney)|
|Cullinan J.||M'Hugh, Patrick A.||Weir, James Galloway|
|Dalziel, James Henry||Moss, Samuel||White, Luke (York, E. R,)|
|Devlin, Charles Ramsay(Galway||Murphy, John||Whitley J. H. (Halifax)|
|Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)||Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)||Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)|
|Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.||O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid||Wilson, John (Falkirk)|
|Doogan, P. C.||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)|
|Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)||O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—|
|Ellice, Capt EC(S Andrew's Bghs||O'Dowd, John||Mr. Herbert Gladstone and|
|Farrell, James Patrick||O'Malley, William||Mr. Causton.|
|Ffrench, Peter||Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||Pirie, Duncan V.|
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Debate be now adjourned."218
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 70; Noes, 127. (Division List No. 103.)219
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Brigg, John||Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)|
|Asher, Alexander||Bryce, Rt. Hon. James||Crean, Eugene|
|Asquith, Rt Hon. Herbert Henry||Caldwell, James||Crombie, John William|
|Barry, E. (Cork, S.)||Causton, Richard Knight||Cullinan, J.|
|Black, Alexander William||Cawley, Frederick||Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway|
|Boland, John||Condon, Thomas Joseph||Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)|
|Dewar, John A (Inverness-sh.||Lundon, W.||Roche, John|
|Doogan, P. C.||MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Shackleton, David James|
|Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)||MacVeah, Jeremiah||Sheehan, Daniel Daniel|
|Ellice, Capt E.C (S. Andrw's Bghs||M'Hugh Patrick A.||Sheehy, David|
|Farrell, Tames Patrick||Moss, Samuel||Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)|
|Ffrench, Peter||Murphy, John||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Flavin, Michael Joseph||Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)||Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr)|
|Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John||O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid||Ure, Alexander|
|Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E.(Berwick)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)|
|Griffith, Ellis J.||O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)||Weir, James Galloway|
|Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.||O'Dowd, John||White, Luke (York, E. R.)|
|Harmsworth, R. Leicester||O'Malley, William||Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)|
|Hay, Hon. Claude George||Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)||Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)|
|Hayden, John Patrick||Pirie, Duncan V.||Wilson, John (Falkirk)|
|Helme, Norval Watson||Reddy, M.|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Redmond, John E. (Waterford)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—|
|Joyce, Michael||Rigg, Richard||Mr. Buchanan and Mr.|
|Kilbride, Denis||Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)||Dalziel.|
|Levy, Maurice||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)|
|Agg-Gardner James Tynte||Calloway, William Johnson||Mount, William Arthur|
|Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden||Godson, Sir. Augustus Frederick||Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray 0.|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||(Gordon, Hn. J.E.(Elgin&Nairn)||Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham(Bute|
|Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.||Gore, Hn G. R. C. Ormsby-(Salop||Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)|
|Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy||Gray, Ernest (West Ham)||Nolan, Col. John P.(Galway, N.)|
|Bain, Colonel James Robert||Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)||Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley|
|Baird, John George Alexander||Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs)||Percy, Earl|
|Balcarres, Lord||Gretton, John||Platt-Higgins, Frederick|
|Balfour, Rt. Hon. AJ. (Manch'r||Hall, Edward Marshall||Plummer, Walter R.|
|Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)||Hami'ton, Marq. of (L'nd'derry||Powell, Sir Francis Sharp|
|Balfour, Rt. HnGerald W. Leeds)||Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th||Pretyman, Ernest George|
|Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.||Heath, James (Staffords, N.W)||Randles, John S.|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Henderson, Sir A.(Stalford, W.)||Rasch, Sir Frederic Came|
|Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin||Hickman, Sir Alfred||Reid, James (Greenock)|
|Bignold, Arthur||Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside||Ridley, Hon. M.W.(Stalybridge|
|Boscawen, Arthur Griffith||Houston, Robert Paterson||Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)|
|Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John||Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil||Rothschild, Hon Lionel Walter|
|Campbell, Rt. Hn. J.A.(Glasgow||Hunt, Rowland||Round, Rt. Hon. James|
|Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Jebb, Sir Richard Claver house||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool|
|Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire||John stone, Heywood (Sussex)||Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)|
|Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A.(Worc.||Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.||Sinclair, Louis (Romford)|
|Coates, Edward Feetham||Knowles, Sir Lees||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.||Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)||Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)|
|Compton, Lord Alwyne||Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)||Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)|
|Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile||Lawson, John Grant(Yorks, N.R||Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart|
|Dalkeith, Earl of||Lee, Arthur H.(Hants., Fareham||Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley|
|Davenport, William Bromley||Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage||Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)|
|Denny, Colonel||Leveson-Gower, Frederick N S||Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M.|
|Dickinson, Robert Edmond||Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.||Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward|
|Dickson, Charles Scott||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Bristol, S.)||Tuke, Sir John Batty|
|Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-||Lowe, Francis William||Valentia, Viscount|
|Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph C.||Loyd, Archie Kirkman||Walrond, Rt Hon. Sir William H.|
|Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers||Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth)||Warde, Colonel C. E.|
|Duke Henry Edward||Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred||Whitely, H.(Ashton und. Lyne|
|Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin||Macdona, John Cumming||Whitmore, Charles Algernon|
|Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J.(Manc'r||MacIver, David (Liverpool)||Willoughby de Eresby, Lord|
|Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst||Maconochie, A. W.||Willox, Sir John Archibald|
|Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.||M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)||Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm|
|Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne||M'Iver Sir Lewis(EdinburghW.||Wylie, Alexander|
|Fison, Frederick William||Martin, Richard Biddulph|
|Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon||Maxwell, W.J. H(Dumfriesshire||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir|
|Forster, Henry William||Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)||Alexander Acland-Hood and|
|Foster, Philip S.(Warwick,S.W.||Morgan, David.J(Walthamstow||Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.|
|Fyler, John Arthur||Morrell, George Herbert|
Bill read a second time, and committed for to-morrow.
§ Adjourned at twenty-two minutes after Twelve o'clock.