Commons Sitting of 6 May 1904

Preamble
The House met at Twelve of the Clock.
UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—Ebbw Vale Urban District Water Bill [Lords]; Manchester Ship Canal (Finance) Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.
  Great Eastern Railway (Steamboats) Bill. Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  Doncaster Corporation Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Huddersfield Corporation Act, 1902 (Amendment) Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Strabane, Raphoe, and Convoy Railway Bill (King's Consent signified). Bill read the third time, and passed.
  Surrey Commercial Dock Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Crystal Palace District Gas Bill; Gosport Water Bill [Lords]; Metropolitan Railway Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Tottenham Improvement Bill; West Metropolitan Railway (Abandonment) Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Bolton, Congleton, Keighley, Newton-in-Makerfield, Oswestry, and Wisbech, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Walter Long.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Bolton, Congleton, Keighley, Newton-in-Makerfield, Oswestry, and Wisbech," presented, and read the first time: to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 182.]
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Chiswick, East Ham, Great Crosby, and York, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Walter Long.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Chiswick, East Ham, Great Crosby, and York," presented, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills and to be printed. [Bill 183.]
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 11). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Guildford, New Sarum, and the County of Wilts, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Walter Long.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 11) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Guildford, New Sarum, and the county of Wilts," presented, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 184.]
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 12). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to the Ashton-under-Lyne and District, the Congleton and District, and the Wath, Swinton, and District Joint Hospital Districts, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Walter Long.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 12) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to the Ashton-under-Lyne and District, the Congleton and District, and the Wath, Swinton, and District Joint Hospital Districts," presented, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 185.]
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 13). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Blackpool, Neweastle-upon-Tyne, Tynemouth, and Wigan, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Walter Long.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 13) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Blackpool, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Tynemouth, and Wigan," presented, and lead the first time: to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 186.]
  Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 3). Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local
  640
  Government Board for Ireland relating to Castlerea (Rural), Midleton (Rural), North Dublin (Rural), and Westport, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland and Mr. Wyndham.
  Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland relating to Castlerea (Rural), Midleton (Rural), North Dublin (Rural), and Westport," presented, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 187.]
  Elysée Palace Hotel Company Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—Wellington. (Somerset) Gas Bill, with Amendments.
  That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confer further powers on the Clyde Valley Electrical Power Company; and for other purposes." [Clyde Valley Electrical Power Bill [Lords.]
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confer further powers upon the Metropolitan District Railway Company; and for other purposes." [Metropolitan District Railway Bill [Lords.]
  Also, a Bill, intitled, "An Act to change the name of the Llanelly Harbour and Burry Navigation Commissioners to the Llanelly Harbour Trust and to alter the constitution of the Trust; to revive and extend the powers for the compulsory purchase of lands and for the execution of works under the Llanelly Harbour Acts, 1896 and 1901, and otherwise amend those Acts; to empower the Trust to borrow moneys with the consent of the Urban District Council of Llanelly and otherwise to alter and extend the financial powers of the Trust; and for other purposes." [Llanelly Harbour Bill [Lords.]
  And, also, a Bill, intitled, "An Act to empower the Governors of Saint Bartholomew's Hospital, in the city of London, to demolish the Church of Saint Bartholomew the Less and to use the site thereof and the burial ground adjoining

  641
  thereto for the purposes of the said Hospital and for uniting for ecclesiastical purposes the parish of Saint Bartholomew the Less with the parish of Saint Bartholomew the Great; and for other purposes." [St. Bartholomew's Hospital Bill [Lords.]
  Clyde Valley Electrical Power Bill [Lords]; Metropolitan District Railway Bill [Lords]; Llanelly Harbour Bill [Lords]; St. Bartholomew's. Hospital Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill. Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table. Bill to be read the third time upon Monday next.
  Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed); Report to lie upon the Table. Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
  Brymbo Water Bill; North Western Electricity and Power Gas Bill; Nuneaton and Chilvers Coton Urban District Council Bill [Lords]; Harlow and Saw-bridgeworth Gas Bill [Lords]; Cambrian Railways Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration; from Fraserburgh; and Dingwall; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Cathcart, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  ELECTIONS (HOURS OF POLLING).
  Petition from Hackney, for alteration of Law; to lie upon the Table.
  LAND VALUES TAXATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Cathcart, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LANDS VALUATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Cathcart, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENCES (RENEWAL).
  Petitions against alteration of Law; from Hanley (two); Stockport (five); Higher Tranmere; Everton; Nelson; Burslem (two); Liverpool; Enfield; Horsham (seven); Fenny Stratford (two); Hackney; Southampton; Wallsend on Tyne; Sunderland; Bolton; Cambridge; Brighton; Summertown; Allendale; Walton; Parton; Hove; Highgate Hill; Tiverton; Holloway; Manchester; and Bucknall; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSED PREMISES (HOURS OF CLOSING).
  Petition from Hackney, for alteration of Law; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions against; from Brixham; Gillingham; Paignton; New Southgate; Kennington; Liverpool; Kilmaurs; Choppington; East Ham; Halstead; Stepney; Calne; Staines; Northumberland; Birkenhead; Conway; Alnwick; Westminster; Newcastle; Nottingham; Victoria Docks; Halton le Gate; Dinnington; Leominster; Congregational Union of Scotland; Truro; Backworth; Forest Gate; City Road; and Temperance Committee of the Independent Methodist Churches; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Cathcart, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT (1894) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Petition from Cathcart, against; to lie upon the Table.
  MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Petition of the Scottish Trade Protection Society, against; to lie upon the Table.
  RE-VACCINATION BILL.
  Petition from Royal Leamington Spa, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF BUTTER BILL.
  Petition from Stamford, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  Copy presented, of Census of Ireland, 1901 (General Topographical Index) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Return of Prices of Agricultural Products and Live Stock for the year 1903 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Two Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland with respect to the Urban County Districts of Bangor and Ballymena [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRANSVAAL.
  Copy presented, of Correspondence relating to Conditions of Native Labour employed in Transvaal Mines [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 2nd May, 1904, granting to Henry Edwards, Preventive Officer (Lower Section), London. Customs, a Retired Allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLICE ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Correspondence relative to the refusal of the Secretary of State's Certificate under Section 17(2) of the Act to the River Tyne Police Force for the year ended 29th September, 1903 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Statement of modifications permitted by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to be made in the details of the London (Providence Place, Poplar) Improvement Scheme, 1901 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    Medical Staff of Meath Hospital—Election to Vacancies.
    MR. CLANCY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the medical staff of the Meath Hospital (County Dublin Infirmary) claim the right to elect to vacancies in their own body, and that this right is claimed by the members of the staff elected since the passing of the Local Government Act, 1898, as well as by those in office before that date, he can state if it has been actually exercised on any occasion since 1898 by members of the staff elected since that date; and whether any representations have been received in reference to this matter from the Infirmary Committee.
    (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Two gentlemen were elected to the medical staff of this hospital since the passing of the Act of 1898 by the Medical Board under the 55 Geo. III. The answer to the last query is in the negative.

    County Court Judges' Deputies.
    MR. BRYNMOR JONES: To ask Mr. Attorney-General whether, seeing that when a Judge of County Courts in England and Wales is unable, owing to illness or domestic affliction, to hold his Courts in person on the appointed days the expense of obtaining a deputy Judge under The County Courts Act, 1888, falls upon him, he will say whether a like obligation is imposed on other judicial officers of the Crown; and whether he can see his way to recommend that steps be taken to give relief to Judges of County Courts from this obligation.
    (Answered by Sir Robert Finlay.) I think my hon. and learned friend will find that in those cases in the judical service where a person may act by deputy he has to provide for the deputy himself. The matter will be brought under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor and the Treasury, but I cannot say that any change will be made in the direction indicated in the Question.

    Postal Facilities between London and Paris.
    MR. PIRIE: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that letters for England can he posted in Paris in the trains conveying the mails up to the moment of departure without extra fee, whereas in London these letters can only be posted in the station letter boxes which are cleared a quarter of an hour before the departure of the train, on the payment on week-days of a late fee of 4d.; and, if so, will he state what reason there is for this difference of treatment, and why the arrangements cannot be the same in the two countries.
    (Answered by Lord Stanley.) It is, I believe, the fact that letters for England can he posted in the station letter boxes at Paris up to the moment of departure without late fee; but the hon. Member is mistaken in thinking that similar letters for France must be posted at least a quarter of an hour before the departure of the train, as they can be posted in the box attached to the platform barrier at Cannon Street Station up to 9 p.m., or in the mad carriage up to the moment of departure. The late fee is charged, not for revenue purposes but in order to limit the number of letters so posted, as there is reason to think that there would otherwise be so many that the sorters, whose work is already very heavy, would have serious difficulty in dealing with them in the mail carriages during the short run from London to Dover.

    Employment of Rural Postmen on Extra Postal Duties in their Spare Time.
    MR. JAMES O'CONNOR (Wicklow, W.): To ask the Postmaster General whether there is any official regulation or rule prohibiting a rural postman, on fixed wages of 16s. per week, being regularly employed in his spare time as an assistant to a sub-postmaster.
    (Answered by Lord Stanley.) There is no general rule on the subject. If the assistance rendered is in the sub-postmaster's official duty it would depend upon the circumstances of the case whether it could be allowed. If the hon. Member will give me particulars of the case to which he refers I will have inquiry made on the subject.

    Annual Cost of Maintenance in Commission of a First-Class Battleship.
    MR. HARCOURT: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state the average annual cost of a first-class line of battleship in commission, for salaries of officers and crew, victualling, coal stores and repairs, and powder and ammunition respectively.
    (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The average annual cost of maintaining in commission a first-class battleship of, say, 13,000 tons, is, approximately, as follows:—Full pay, wages, etc., of officers and crew, £40,369; victualling, £14,604; coal, £23,600; stores and repairs, £9,548; naval ordnance stores, £5,500; or, in round figures, a total cost of, £94,000.

    Licences Refused—Position of Licensee as to existing Covenants.
    MR. GRETTON; To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state what will be the position of persons holding long leases of premises the licences of which are taken away, under the Licensing Bill, in regard to the existing covenants in such leases undertaken by the leaseholder in consideration of the premises being licensed; and would the leaseholder for the remainder of the term continue liable for the full rent he agreed to pay for the premises as licensed premises.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) It seems to me that the position of leaseholders of premises of which the licences may be extinguished under the Bill will not differ (except in so far as they may receive compensation) from the position of leaseholders in similar circumstances under the existing law, and will depend in each case on the terms of the lease. If the lease were accurately drawn, the covenants entered into by the tenant in consideration of the premises being licensed would, I suppose, be expressed so as to be operative only so long as the premises were licensed. If, however, it appears in discussion of the Bill that further provision on this point is desirable, an amendment can be considered.

    Population of Local Education Authorities in Wales and Monmouthshire.
    MR. J. H. LEWIS: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether he can state what is the population of every local education authority in Wales and Monmouthshire.
    (Answered, by Sir William Anson.) The population within the areas of the local education authorities in Wales and Monmouthshire according to the census of 1901, is as follows:—County Councils—Monmouth, 187,867; Anglesey, 50,606; Brecon, 54,213; Cardigan, 61,078; Carmarthen, 99,686; Carnarvon, 114,380; Denbigh, 116,616; Flint, 81,485; Glamorgan, 270,574; Merioneth, 48,852; Montgomery, 54,901; Pembroke, 72,041; Radnor, 23,281. County Borough Councils—Newport, 67,270; Cardiff, 164,333; Swansea, 94,537. Borough Councils—Carmarthen. 10,025: Neath, 13,720; Pembroke, 15,853; Wrexham, 14,966. Urban District Councils—Aber-tillery, 21,945; Ebbw Vale, 20,994 Aberdare, 43,365; Barry, 27,030 Llanelly, 25,617; Merthyr Tydvil, 69,228 Mountain Ash, 31,093; Pontypridd 32,316; Rhondda, 113,735.

    Students in the Marlborough Street Training College.
    MR. BOLAND: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now in a position to give the promised information with reference to the students trained in the Marlborough Street Training College.
    (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) I have now communicated the promised Returns containing this information to the hon. Member.

    Ballinasloe Lunatic Asylum—Election of Dr. Kirwan.
    COLONEL NOLAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if Dr. Kirwan has been elected medical superintendent of the Ballinasloe Lunatic Asylum by a majority of the joint Galway and Roscommon Committee; and if his appointment to this position has as yet
    648
    been confirmed by His Excellency the Lord-Lieutenant.
    (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The reply to the first inquiry is in the affirmative. The appointment has not yet been confirmed by the Lord-Lieutenant.

REGISTRATION OF CLUBS (IRELAND) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order for the Second Reading read.
MR. O'NEILLsaid that in moving the Second Reading of this Bill he was happy to say he occupied a rather pleasant position with regard to it, unusually so, because, as far as he knew at present, there was no opposition. It had been approved by the licensed victuallers of Ireland, who were particularly desirous to have this registration; it was also approved by people in favour of temperance reform, and by those who recognised that our indulgence in strong drink had been, and still was, a great distress of which Ireland was the victim. All these agreed that the promotion of temperance was very much interfered with by the establishment of clubs solely and entirely for the purpose of drinking, and not for the ordinary purposes of a club. This Bill was also approved of by the Irish Members on both sides of the House. On the back of the Bill there were eight names, four names of Irish representatives from each side. He deeply regretted that since the names were put on the Bill one of the hon. Members (Mr. McGovern) had been taken away from them. A great many measures had been passed for the furtherance of temperance in the United Kingdom. They bad done, no doubt, a great deal of good, but they were very easily evaded by the establishment of these drinking clubs, which he might call bogus clubs, where drink could be sold at all hours irrespective of those which applied to public houses generally. It was to try to put a stop to these bogus clubs that this Bill was brought in; and he would like the House distinctly to understand that it was in no way aimed at legitimate and genuine clubs established for social purposes. It did not in any way interfere with the freedom or the habits of members of these clubs. The only way it affected them at all was that in future they would have to pay

649
a fee of five shillings, and would be liable, if they did not conduct the club in the proper way, to prosecution. That was to say if sufficient information was given on oath that the club was not managed in a legal and proper manner.
The Licensing Act of 1902 was passed for England and fortunately a large portion of that Act contained powers for the registration of clubs. He was informed that it had had a very beneficial effect. If that Act had done good for England he did not see why there should not be one for Ireland. There was also a Licensing Bill passed last year for Scotland. That Bill, too, dealt with the registration of clubs. The Bill now proposed for the acceptance of the House was word for word the same as the Scotch Bill of last year, with only the necessary alterations to make it apply to Ireland. That Bill having been introduced and carried by the Government, he hoped the Government would help them to carry this Bill to-day. He would merely mention the main provisions of the Bill, without entering into details. In the first place the Bill provided that a registrar should be appointed, who was to be a petty sessions clerk. He was to keep a register of all licensed clubs in his district. When a club desired to get a certificate the secretary or the chairman would have to apply to the registrar, send him a copy of the rules of the club, a list of the names of the members, and also the certificate referred to in the first schedule of the Bill. That schedule contained the terms and form of the certificate which was to accompany the application by a club for registration or renewal, and it would have to be signed by two magistrates, certifying to the best of their knowledge and belief that the club was to be conducted as a bona fide club, and not merely for the supply of excise-able liquor. The registrar had also to give notice of the application for registration in some daily paper circulating in the district; and after that, if no objection was taken in the form provided for in the Bill, the Court should grant a certificate. If objections were taken the Court would then investigate them and grant a certificate or not, as they might think fit. If at the end of twelve months a renewal of the certificate was desired similar forms would have to be gone through. Clause 4 of the Bill provided
650
that the rules of the club qualifying for registration should be strictly laid down, so as to ensure that the club was a genuine and legitimate club, and not merely a bogus club. In the first place the club must be managed by a committee, and no members of that committee, or any servant, should have any kind of personal interest in the sale of intoxicating drink in the club. The names of persons nominated for membership must be posted in a conspicuous place on the club premises for at least a week before their election. The rules would further provide that no visitor would be supplied with any drink except on the invitation of one of the members, and that no drink should be supplied outside the club in any case whatever Clause 5 stated the objections which might be urged against the granting or the renewal of a certificate. The first objection that might be taken was that the application was not in conformity with the provisions of the Act. Another was that the club was not conducted in good faith as a club. A further one was that where there, was frequent drunkenness on the club's premises, or if the club WHS conducted in a disorderly manner, the certificate should not be granted or renewed. There were other grounds of objection which he need not enumerate. If these objections could be supported by proof a certificate would not be granted or renewed. Clause 6 dealt with the inspection of a club. It provided that if information was given by anyone and laid before a justice of the peace of any county, or divisional magistrate of Dublin metropolitan district, that the club was not being conducted in conformity with the law he might grant a search warrant to the police. The rest of the Bill merely laid down the penalties that might be inflicted for breaches of the law. He sincerely hoped the House would in the interests of temperance agree to the Second Reading of the Bill which he now begged to move.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON, Londonderry, N.)said he did not rise in any spirit

651
of hostility to the Bill or to oppose the passing of the Second Reading. The Government were most anxious that its main provisions should be extended to Ireland for the purpose of securing that bonâ fide workmen's clubs should be registered, and that bogus clubs should be suppressed, and that thereby the cause of temperance might be promoted and drunkenness checked. But he thought it was only fair that he should point out to his hon. friend who moved the Second Reading of the Bill some defects in its machinery rather than wait until it was discussed in Committee of the House or in Grand Committee. This Bill was a mere reproduction of certain clauses of the Scotch Bill of last year. The framers of this Bill had two precedents before them, the English Act of 1902, and the Scotch Act of 1903. The procedure under the English system was extremely simple. A club was required to register, and if any persons opened or conducted an unregistered club, or sold liquor in an unregistered club, they were liable to a penalty to be recovered before a Court of summary jurisdiction, with, of course, the accessory appeal to a Court of quarter sessions, which a conviction before a Court of summary jurisdiction always gave. His hon. friend had not followed that precedent, and possibly he was right. He had followed the Scotch system, which was entirely different. But in Scotland there was a law officer who did not exist in Ireland, namely, the sheriff-deputy—an officer of the greatest possible importance. The result was that his hon. friend, as he would see, proposed to give in Ireland to a Court of summary jurisdiction the powers which the Scotch Act gave to the sheriff, and which were inapplicable and not suited to a Court of summary jurisdiction in Ireland. He thought his hon. friend would see that this Bill in some respects would be rather ridiculous if that analogy were carried out. Under the Scotch system an appliation must be made by the secretary, and must be signed by a justice of the peace or two county magistrates, who certified in a manner to which he would call attention presently. The application came before a sheriff, who inquired into its merits, and if he approved of the applica-
652
tion he ordered the club to be registered The sheriff was a most important functionary in Scotland. He had all sorts of jurisdictions conferred upon him. He had jurisdiction similar to that of a commissioner in bankruptcy, a County Court Judge, a recorder, a revising barrister, and other judicial officers. He returned writs for elections, he precognosced witnesses, and had other important duties.
If his hon. friend followed him he would see that it would lead to certain confusion in Ireland to give to a Court of summary jurisdiction the powers exercised by a sheriff in Scotland. Let them assume that they started in Dublin to endeavour to carry out this system. The secretary or chairman of a club must come with a certificate, and the certificate must be signed by a divisional magistrate of the Dublin metropolitan district. The application must set out, in accordance with Clause 2, Sub-section 1, the aims and object of the club, and the address of the premises occupied by the club. The magistrate's certificate, as provided for in the first schedule of the Bill, stated that the club was to be conducted as a bonâ fide club. In Dublin, therefore, the certificate would be given by the Judge before whom the application came. In the county district the certificate accompanying the application would have to be signed by two magistrates of the Court before whom the application came. In Scotland the certificate was signed by two ordinary justices, and the application came before another functionary altogether. In the case of an application in Dublin, the divisional magistrate would have to make a preliminary inquiry, and therefore he was hardly suited for the office of reviewing the application when it came before him. It was rather absurd that a certificate should come from the magistrate himself to himself. In reference to the requirement that the application should be published in a paper circulated in the district, he thought probably that in some parts of Ireland it would be impossible. There was another objection in reference to expenses. In the Scotch system which it was proposed to copy, the sheriff was entitled to hear objections from the police authorities end also from the town council of the borough, or from

653

the parish, as the case might be. In Ireland, following the analogy of the Licensing Act, objections might be entertained either from the police or from any parishioner, he had no objection to that. In Scotland there was power to award expenses to the applicant in the case of an unsuccessful objection. That power was struck out of this Bill. He could not see why, if an objection was made against a bonâ fide club, and put that club to a great deal of expense, and was unsuccessful, the club should not be repaid its expenses. There was another provision which required a little consideration. In the Scotch Act it was lawful to sell liquor upon the premises to a member for consumption by himself outside the premises. Under the present Bill a working man, if he so desired, might, under Section 8, get in his club a pint of beer or stout to drink at home. But in the Scotch Act under Section 84 no excisable liquor could be sold for consumption outside the premises of the club except to a member on the premises and for his own consumption, or to a person holding an Excise licence for the sale of such liquor; and every person so doing would be liable to a penalty on summary conviction. Probably his hon. friend was right in omitting any provision permitting the sale of liquor to a person holding an Excise licence; but he thought he should consider whether a bonâ fide working man could not buy liquor at his club for his family.
But the real and serious objection he thought was this. Section 88 of the Scotch Act provided that the decision of the sheriff in dealing with an application for an original certificate, or for the renewal of a certificate, or the cancelling of a certificate, should be final and not subject to review. That, he thought, was a really serious objection which went very much to the foundation of the Bill, and he thought his hon. friend should consider whether he should not either change the tribunal from a Court of summary jurisdiction or give an appeal to the justices in quarter sessions. Now, the Court of summary jurisdiction in Dublin was the first police magistrate; in other parts of Ireland it was the Court of petty sessions. As he had said the appeal was from either of these at present. When they looked
654
back and saw what the sheriff could do, and the consequences which could follow from some of his decisions, he did not think it could be said that the Court of petty sessions or the police magistrate in Dublin should be the final Court, and that there should be no appeal from their decisions. In Section 84 of the Scotch Act provision was made that if liquor was sold to those not authorised to obtain it, every person who paid for such liquor, and every person authorising the sale or supply of such liquor, should be liable to a penalty and be dealt with in a summary manner in the ordinary way. Section 85 of the Scotch Act provided that, if a complaint were made that a club was not properly conducted, the sheriff or magistrate in the burgh might pronounce an order and, on the grounds specified therein, the certificate of registration of the club would be cancelled. Then the decision of the summary Court was by the next section to be reported to the sheriff, who was to make further inquiry, and after such inquiry, having regard to the nature of the offence, he might cancel the certificate. The 86th Section provided that where the finding pronounced by the sheriff was that the club was not entitled to a renewal of its certificate on the ground that the club was not conducted in good faith as a club, or that there was frequent drunkenness on the club premises, or that persons in a state of intoxication were frequently seen to leave the club premises—the result of that provision was that every official of that club, unless he satisfied the Court that the club was so managed or carried on without his knowledge or against his consent, would be liable to a penalty not exceeding for a first offence, £7; for a second offence, whether in connection with the same or another club, £15; and for a third, or subsequent offence, £30. It was quite evident that they could not go behind the decision of the sheriff on these questions, and that all the officials in the club would become liable in those penalties. Therefore, it was most desirable that the tribunal which pronounced conclusively as to the proper mode in which a club should be carried on should be a tribunal other than the petty sessions Court.
MR. JOHN REDMOND: What do you suggest?
MR. ATKINSONsaid he would suggest either of two alternatives. If the petty sessions Court was to be retained as the authority to grant the certificate, then there must be an appeal to the Court of quarter sessions; if, on the contrary, the strict analogy of the Scotch Act was to be followed, the natural thing would be to make the County Court Judge the arbiter or substitute for the sheriff in Scotland to whom application should be made. Some change of that kind was absolutely necessary; as would be seen by a reference to the second Section of Clause 9, which provided that where a report was made on conviction, that report was to be made to the sheriff. That became ridiculous when the order was made to the same Court that originally made it. He did not want, by any means, to force his hon. friend to say which alternative he should select. He had no opposition whatever to offer to the Second Reading of the Bill. On the contrary, the Government were most anxious, by every means, to help the hon. Gentleman; and it was for that reason that he had called his hon. friend's attention, and the attention of the House, to those points now, rather than bring them forward in Committee upstairs for the first time.
MR. JOHN REDMONDsaid the Bill was, as far as he knew, one which everybody was anxious to have carried. It was a Bill which had been arrived at by compromise between various authorities in Ireland. It was supported by the temperance party on the one side and by the liquor trade on the other; and this being so, it would be in very great danger if the Government had any serious changes to propose in Committee. He considered it a pity these objections were not thrashed out before. He understood that a draft of the Bill was sent tot the Government a considerable time ago, and not one objection was taken. It was improper that where a matter of contention had become a subject of negotiation, and when happily all parties had come to an agreement, then, at the last moment, the Government should suggest objections which had never been suggested before and which might possibly have been the subject of further negotiation and compromise; but which
656
might now possibly prevent the Bill passing at all. What was the meaning of the Government—having the draft of the Bill in their possession and knowing both parties were trying to come to a compromise—remaining silent until a compromise was arrived at, and then stepping in to make mischief, cause dissension, and endanger the whole project. It was a most improper course, but it was quite on a par with the stupidity which governed all affairs in connection with Ireland. This inherent stupidity was not confined to this one Government; it belonged to every one. A little spirit of common sense would have avoided any danger whatever of the Bill being wrecked with these objections. With regard to the objections raised as to jurisdiction, be should object very much to making the County Court Judge the authority, though he should not object to appeal, to the County Court Judge he supposed, from petty sessions. He should reserve his final opinion until he saw what changes took place in Committee. In Committee, the sole blame would rest not upon hon. Members on either side, but upon the bungling and stupidity of the Irish Government interfering in a matter of this kind at the wrong time.
MR. WILLIAM MOOREsaid he did not intend to raise any objection such as would come within the category mentioned by the hon. Member for Waterford; because his colleague who moved the Second Reading expressly stated that the Bill was not intended in any way to interfere with the ordinary social privileges of clubs as distinguished from the mischief which they all objected to. The real mischief against which the Bill was aimed was shebeening, which should be put down with the strongest possible hand. He concurred that it would be inadvisable to put workmen's clubs under a ban to which higher class clubs were not subjected. There should be one law for all. In no part of the Bill, however, was a club defined, and the Bill as it stood might apply to a Bar mess, or to a philanthropic or scientific society which only met at stated intervals. He thought it would be undesirable to put such associations to the

657
expense of registration, and the licensing anthority should be empowered to exempt them. Moreover it might be impossible for them to alter their rules in accordance with the requirements of the Bill. He would suggest that such associations should be exempted by the Act itself or that the licensing authority should have power to exempt them. In Committee he would certainly direct attention to that point. Ho did not wish to make any objection to the Bill as a whole, and he was delighted that it had fallen to the lot of his hon. friend to introduce a Bill to assimilate the law in Ireland to that in Scotland.
MR. FLYNNsaid it was a matter for congratulation that they were engaged in discussing a Motion on which they were all generally agreed. It was, however, a pity that the general agreement of the Irish representatives should have been marred by the injudicious speech of the Attorney-General. Certainly it would have been expected that before the Second Reading stage was arrived at the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues would have stated their objections. As regarded the general character of the Bill, he thought that the evils of bogus clubs were exaggerated, that the number of such clubs was overstated, and that the evils they occasioned were not of such a gigantic character as had been stated. He agreed that a club which existed mainly or entirely for the consumption of drink should be suppressed; but in doing that care should be taken not to interfere with properly conducted clubs. There were very stringent provisions in the Bill with reference to club officials. A club might be carried on, as far as the officials and the committee could, in a proper manner, but there might be occasions on which undesirable events might occur without their knowledge. The penalties on officials were very severe and he thought that the Bill carried the doctrine of responsibility too far. He joined with the Irish Members generally in giving cordial support to the Bill, reserving the right, however, to move Amendments in Committee in the direction he had indicated.
COLONEL LOCKWOODsaid that England had in the past suffered a great deal from these bogus clubs; the police had been put to great trouble, and the counties had been put to great expense in order to obtain convictions and to secure the suppression of clubs which were never meant for the purposes of social enjoyment, but for the purpose of obtaining drink in prohibited hours, and thus evading the law. He did not agree with the hon. Member for Cork that they had over-estimated the danger likely to arise from clubs of this kind, and he thought the hon. Membero sn a little further investigation, would come to the conclusion that he himself had formed an erroneous opinion on that subject. He could not see what objection could be made to the proposed rules, and saw no reason why the committee and the club manager should not be responsible, and subject to a fine if the club was not properly conducted, always providing that it was within their knowledge that the club was not properly conducted. He hoped, therefore, that when this Bill got into Committee it would not be greatly interfered with, as drafted, and that the hon. Member who had been successful in introducing the measure would so carry it through the Committee that its efficiency would not in any way De impaired when it became law.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he only intervened because he represented a constituency in the country from whose statute law this Bill was very largely drawn. The responsibility for the shape of this Bill, and almost for its text, rested with the Government, by reason of the fact that the text of this measure was drawn from the Scottish statute, which was a Government measure and a Government measure carried under the best auspices, because it was taken in Committee of the Whole House, which had a large representation of Scottish Members, and the Government finally accepted what was substantially the verdict of the Scottish Members. The backing of this Bill showed that all shades of political opinion in Ireland had united for the purpose of passing this Bill and although he had at first gathered from the comments of the Attorney-General that he was opposing it he was

659
glad to note from the hon. and learned Gentleman's concluding phrases that he had drawn a wrong conclusion from the hon. and learned Gentleman's remarks. All the points which the hon. and learned Gentleman had dealt with were, however, Committee points, though no doubt the Committee would derive great help from the speech he had delivered. As to the way in which the Scottish Bill had worked, he pointed out that in the one year after its passage, they had, in Glasgow, suppressed forty-five bogus clubs, and the disclosures made in the course of the trials of those cases which were contested were deplorable. Drinking clubs were established solely for the sale of liquor, and they were in many cases started by what might be termed disfranchised licensees, who, having lost their legitimate licence to retail liquor, had taken in this matter to shebeening. Convicted betting men also apparently found the carrying on of a club of this kind a most convenient annexe to their ordinary business of book-making. It might, therefore, be fairly assumed that this was an evil which it would be desirable to get rid of, but a knowledge of the extent of that evil in Ireland would only be obtained after this Bill became law. He did not consider the penalties at all too severe. All clubs of this kind which were continued in Ireland after the passage of this Bill would be continued solely for the sordid purpose of selling drink and making money, and the only thing that would stop them being carried on would be a good whacking fine. The curse of these clubs was that they were used by poor creatures insufficiently housed who frequented them for that comfort which they could not find at home. The House had shown by the general assent it had given to the Bill that it was dealing with a much more substantial question than had been suggested by the hon. Member for North Cork. They had, in the first place, a grievance to start with, and that prompted him to say that when they had a grievance, and especially an Irish grievance, the sooner they set about getting rid of it the better. Secondly, they had the experience of a measure actually in effect at the present time. A measure which, it was admitted, had been working splendidly, and, so far as
660
he knew, not one single case of hardship had occurred in its operation. He hoped that they would agree to the Second Reading of the Bill before the House, with a desire to send it to Committee, and to pass it through its remaining stages with as little alteration as possible. The real object of the measure was to get as near as possible to the root and foundation of one of the social curses of life in modern times, and he hoped that the example of Scotland in this matter would be wisely and completely followed by passing this Bill.
THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. JAMES CAMPBELL,)said he thought it was a matter for regret that on the introduction of the Bill, or rather, on the Motion for its Second Reading, a Motion which seemed to meet with approval in all quarters, the hon. and learned Member for the city of Waterford should have thought it necessary to indulge in one of his now somewhat continual attacks upon the Irish legal executive. He was aware that his right hon. friend the Attorney-General for Ireland had become so accustomed to these attacks that he would be almost lonely without them. They did not appear to have much effect upon him, and he could say of his own knowledge that in regard to many matters of alleged mistakes and inaccuracies—for which the hon. and learned Gentleman and other representatives of Irish constituencies sought to fix the responsibility upon the right hon. and learned Gentleman—they were mistaken, for he was no more responsible than the man in the street. Personally, he was, perhaps, a little more sensitive to these attacks, because of his lack of practice and experience of Parliament. He desired to say that, personally, the proposer of this Bill had given him no opportunity whatever of seeing it. Neither had it been laid before him or his opinion asked upon it from any quarter.
MR. O'NEILL: I submitted the Bill to the Chief Secretary, but the hon. and learned Gentleman was not in the room at the time. I have here, however, a letter from the Chief Secretary saying that he agreed to the measure.
MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid that it did not get rid of the point of his observation, which was a personal one, and was to the effect that he himself had had no opportunity of seeing the Bill, and neither had his opinion been asked upon it. Now what was the head and front of the alleged offending of his right hon. and learned colleague? As he understood it, it was this, that the right hon. Gentleman had anticipated a discussion that might more properly have taken place in Committee with reference to one matter, and one matter only, a matter in which the Bill, which in other respects was a reproduction of the Scotch Act of last year, had departed from the principle of that Act.
MR. JOHN REDMOND: That is not my complaint at all. My complaint is that these negotiations were going on between the opposing parties with reference to this Bill. They arrived at an agreement, and they submitted the agreement and a copy of the Bill before they printed it, and the Government assented to it, either by silence or, as it now appears, by a letter from the Chief Secretary. It is only to-day for the first time that we hear an objection taken to one of the clauses in the Bill. My complaint is that that procedure is calculated to endanger the passage of the measure.
MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid he did not quite follow the point, nor did he see the force of the hon. and learned Gentleman's complaint. The action of the Government that day was exactly the same as it was when the communication was received from the hon. Member who had moved the Second Reading of the Bill. The Government were entirely in favour of the principle of the Bill. They desired to see the measure read a second time, and his right hon. friend's intervention was for the express purpose of facilitating the passage of the Bill. He had simply pointed out to these who were interested in it that they should be prepared for some reform or change in Committee on the lines of restoring in their entirety the principles of the Scotch Act. There might be alternative methods suggested as to the Courts upon which the responsibility was to be thrown for carrying out

662
the legal procedure embodied in the Bill. It was quite possible that the negotiations which had resulted in the harmonious arrangement come to might have in some way been interfered with, or delayed, or interrupted, if any other course had been taken, but it seemed to him that what had occurred was more calculated to facilitate the progress of the measure. The Government supported, as he had said, the principle of the Bill, and they considered that it was a good Bill in every shape and form. It had been moulded to a large extent upon an existing Act of Parliament, brought in with the approval of all sections of Members in the House, and which, during the short time it had been in force, had worked most satisfactorily. In only one respect did the Bill depart from the principle of the Scotch Act, and he thought it would probably have been premature and might have led ultimately to the abandonment of the measure, if the Government had, while the negotiations were going on, suggested matters which might have formed a bone of contention between the parties who were seeking to draft the Bill. Be that as it may, he could only repeat that the object of his right hon. friend was to give hon. Members who were interested in the success of the measure notice that there was one point with which they must De prepared to deal when the Bill went before a Committee.
Two alternatives had been suggested. One was that they should follow the Scotch Act in its entirety, and leave the jurisdiction to the County Court Judge as in Scotland it was left to the sheriff. There was a good deal to be said for that, more particularly if they looked at some of the sections which enabled the Court to impose a fine amounting in some cases to as high a sum as £50. He thought it would certainly be impossible to leave such a jurisdiction to Courts of petty sessions in Ireland unless the party aggrieved was granted a right of appeal to a County Court Judge. If they adopted the principle embodied in the Scotch Act by keeping the County Court Judge as the legal authority to enforce the provisions of the measure, all that would be necessary would be to introduce in Committee

663
a clause of four lines conferring a right of appeal to the County Court Judge on the party aggrieved by any decision of the Court of summary jurisdiction. He thought that the representatives of Irish constituencies might congratulate themselves that there was a substantial agreement in this matter in all quarters of the House. The Bill was one which would undoubtedly affect the social and industrial welfare of their country. It would give facilities for the establishment and promotion of bona fide clubs intended for the social and intellectual culture of their members; and, on the other hand, it would place obstacles in the way of the growth and continuance of clubs, the whole or principal motive of which was the consumption of drink at irregular hours and in irregular ways. He had only risen for the purpose of vindicating his right hon. and learned colleague against the charge of having intervened for no other purpose than to hamper the progress of the Bill. As he had said, he thought that the right hon. Gentleman's intervention was more calculated to facilitate its being placed on the Statute-book of the Realm, because they would approach the Committee stage with a fuller knowledge of what was required in order to ensure the passing of the measure.
MR. HUGH LAWsaid he did not intend to follow on the points raised by the Solicitor-General for Ireland, who seemed to have entirely misapprehended the objections raised by the hon. and learned Member for Waterford, whose complaint was not that the Attorney-General had intervened too early, but that he had not raised the point on an earlier occasion. He hoped it would be possible to arrive at a satisfactory arrangement. There was every sign that that would be done, but if such an arrangement were not made it would be necessary for some of those whose names were on the Bill to reconsider their position. It might be interesting to the House to know the opinion of English working men with regard to the portion of the Licensing Act which dealt with the registration of clubs. A natural fear had been expressed lest the provisions of the measure should act to the detriment of bona fide working men's clubs. Upon
664
that point he would quote from the draft report of the Club Union, which represented 1,000 working-men's clubs in England, with a membership of over 400,000—
"On the whole, the first year of the working of the Act evokes little dissent from the statement of last year's report that the Act is one which causes no injury to well-managed clubs.… Fifty-five clubs have been struck off the register by the decisions of magistrates under the Act whilst a still larger number, especially in London, closed their doors for fear of the Act's operation. Almost without exception, therefore, the object of the legislation has been achieved. Few clubs, if any, have been punished which did not deserve punishment.… In all, twelve union clubs have been penalised. In the face of much contra-tradictory evidence, in three or four cases, it is fair to assume that the magistrates gave their verdict after a careful and judicial consideration of the facts. In the other cases the penalty seems to have been clearly deserved: and such clubs are entitled to no sympathy."
Such an expression of opinion on the part of a great body of working men would be a satisfaction to the House, and there was every reason to hope that a similar measure would work without injustice in Ireland, and fulfil the object, for which it had been brought forward.
MR. GORDONsaid the Bill had been promoted for the purpose of removing a great evil with which magistrates found considerable difficulty in dealing. The object was to simplify the whole business and to put clubs in such a position that it should be at once known that they were on the register, what their rules were, and what the consequences of any infringement of these rules would be. He gathered from the remarks of the Solicitor-General that the only matter that the Government proposed to deal with in Committee was the question of appeal. The magistrates appeared to be the proper tribunal to give the certificates and to deal with objections. As to penalties there would probably be little difficulty in securing the assent of the promoters to a right of appeal being granted—possibly to the County Court Judge. Section 10 had been complained of, but he failed to see what more reasonable provision could be put into an Act of Parliament. The offences defined in the section were those for which the officials would Irresponsible, and there could be no hardship inflicted

665
by the penalties being imposed upon the persons responsible rather than on the club members generally. As to the question of the right of members to purchase drink at the club and carry it off the premises for consumption, he was not certain whether the Attorney-General would consider that a suitable matter for treatment in Committee. He hoped he would not. Bogus clubs did not exist to any large extent in the country districts of Ireland, but they did in the cities, and such a provision would lead to an immense amount of mischief. He heartily joined with previous speakers in asking that the Bill should be altered as little as possible in Committee, and that nothing would be done to unduly retard its progress or to prevent its becoming law this session.
MR. JORDANthought the bench of magistrates was the proper tribunal before which proceedings in relation the registration of clubs should be initiated, and he agreed that there should be an appeal to the County Court Judge. He wholly disagreed, however, with the statement of the Attorney-General that the clubs ought to have the power to sell drink to be consumed off the premises.
MR. ATKINSONsaid he had not suggested that. He had merely called attention to the fact that, although the Bill purported to follow the Scotch Act, it had omitted that provision which was in force in Scotland.
MR. JORDANexpressed his satisfaction at the statement of the right hon. Gentleman. He was wholly opposed to clubs, which were for social and intellectual purposes, being turned into public-houses. If the Bill went to a Grand Committee, of which he was a member, he should do his best to secure its passage.
SIR WILLIAM TOMLINSONsaid he wished to make an observation or two with reference to the position in which the House stood. There was no doubt, as was shown in evidence on an inquiry by a Select Committee of which he was a member, that the regulation of clubs was quite as much required in Ireland as in the other parts of the United Kingdom. For
666
England and Scotland the regulation of clubs had been provided for as part of Government measures. For Ireland a Bill had been introduced by private Members, which was in principle supported with practical unanimity, but though it was principally a machinery Bill to adapt the provisions of those Acts to Ireland, it was obvious that there was some difference of opinion on details. They had arrived at a period of the session in which there were great difficulties in the way of private Members passing Bills through their later stages, and he thought that it was almost a matter of justice that the Government, having carried through Acts for the same object as the present Bill for England and Scotland, should give whatever assistance was necessary to pass this Bill into law during the present session.
MR. NANNETTIin supporting the measure, said he agreed with the Solicitor-General and the Attorney-General when they stated that the magistrates had had much difficulty in dealing with the bogus clubs. As one hon. Member had already said, they were often got up by publicans who had lost 'their licences and betting men in Scotland, and they had had the same experience in Ireland. There ought to be some provision to prevent men staying in clubs all night drinking, and that was the kind of clubs they desired to get at. He believed that this Bill was an honest attempt to reduce the drunkenness which unhappily prevailed in Ireland and in the city of Dublin in consequence of these bogus clubs, and there were far too many temptations to this kind of thing. As a working man, he welcomed this attempt to regulate clubs in Ireland. Any clubs in Ireland that were properly conducted had nothing to fear under this Act. They wanted to get at the bogus clubs and he thought this Act would have that beneficial effect. He wished to say a word with reference to the point raised by the hon. Member for Fermanagh in regard to the prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors off the premises. In this Bill there was a provision to provide against any such thing, and he appealed to the members of the Grand Committee, if this Bill was sent to that Committee, not to reject this provision. These clubs were intended for

667
social and intellectual recreation. In the club he belonged to they had a cricket club, reading room, and a library, and lectures were given by some of the leading men in Dublin. They did not want clubs to provide drink for the home. It had been said that the necessity for these clubs in Ireland was greater because the housing accommodation of the people was so bad that the men had no other places to go into in order to read their newspapers and have quiet and social conversation with one another. Working men wanted a place where they could go and have a quiet read, and a smoke, and a drink if they wanted it. He agreed, however, that clubs should be compelled to close at a reasonable hour, so as to enable a man to go home and take his necessary rest. He would also support a provision being inserted in regard to these clubs supplying refreshments of a temperance nature. Working men had as much right to the privilege of a club as people in a higher sphere of life. He would only ask that no harassing conditions should be applied to bona fide clubs. If that request were complied with they would have no reason to fear the operation of the Bill.
MR. MOONEYexpressed the hope that the Attorney-General would reconsider his decision in regard to Clause 8, to which he seemed to be rather averse. That clause specified the penalties for supplying exciseable liquor for consumption outside of a registered club. If the right hon. Gentleman inquired into the matter he would find that a great defect of the Scotch Act was that it had not a clause of that kind. Anybody who knew the big cities of England and Scotland could tell hon. Members that if people carried liquor away from a house and consumed it afterwards they got into a worse condition than they would otherwise do. It was not often that Irish representives on both sides of the House were agreed, but to-day they had the pleasure of finding themselves in accord in regard to this measure, and even the hon. Baronet, the Member for Preston was anxious that the Government should give every possible facility for the passing of the Bill. Some years ago Dublin suffered very much indeed from bogus clubs, but owing to the
668
stringent action which had been taken they had diminished very greatly. He had several objections to the Bill which could be dealt with in Committee. In regard to the penalties, he would be in favour of making them even heavier, believing that any man on whom they should be inflicted would deserve all the punishment he got.
MR. SLOANsaid he was very pleased to find himself in accord with all that had been said by hon. Members opposite, and on his side, with regard to this Bill. He endorsed every word that the hon. and learned Member for Waterford had said. It was a most unfortunate thing that an arrangement could not be arrived at between the Government and the promoters of the Bill such as had been arrived at between hon. Members, and that there should be a bone of contention. He did not take anything which was said by hon. Members opposite as an attack upon the Attorney-General. All that had been said he took as a matter of policy to show that the promoters of the Bill were anxious to get the co-operation of the Government. The promoters wished that the Government should point out anything they considered wrong with the Bill so that when it came into the House it might be got through without any serious difficulty. The compromise arrived at between those who were not strictly temperance advocates and those who were temperance advocates was a very agreeable one. Last year he had the honour of introducing a Bill, which passed its Second Reading stage, for the early Saturday closing of public-houses in Ireland. Hon. Members opposite then made a promise that if an effort were made to deal with the question of clubs it would have their entire support, and they had been true to their promise. He agreed that it would be a disastrous thing for members of clubs to be permitted to take drink outside. Permission to do that would not have his support nor should it have the support of those who desired that working men should have the same liberty as men of better social position. The Solicitor-General for Ireland had said that he had not seen the Bill before it was introduced, but the hon. Member

669
who moved the Second Reading produced an acknowledgment of the receipt of the Bill from the Chief Secretary. It was not, therefore, for the Solicitor-General to say that he did not see it. If the Chief Secretary did not perform his duty in submitting it to his colleagues it was his hon. friend's fault, and not that of Irish Members. He thought the Irish Members had a grievance in this matter. It was, however, a matter of great satisfaction that Irish Members on both sides should find themselves in the unique position of agreeing with regard to the expediency of passing this Bill.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read a second time, and committed to the Standing Committee on Trade, Etc.

AGED PENSIONERS BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. GOULDINGsaid that in moving the Second Reading of the Aged Pensioners Bill in the unavoidable absence of his hon. friend the Member for Holborn, he might remind the House that a similar Bill had in 1902, and again in 1903, received a Second Reading without a division. Last year he and those who supported the measure were successful in getting it referred to a Select Committee. The Report of that Committee had been presented, and he had amended this Bill, as far as he had been able, on the lines of the Committee's recommendations. In other respects the Bill remained unaltered. A person who had maintained himself as a good citizen during what might be called the working years of his life, on reaching the age of sixty-five, if in need, as defined in the Bill, would be entitled to a pension, not merely as a charity, but as a right, of not less than 5s. or more than 7s. per week, subject to certain disqualifications as to receipt of Poor Law relief and imprisonment. The receipt of this pension would not be treated as a badge of failure or inferiority, and so would not disqualify the recipient from exercising the franchise and participating in the privileges of a free citizen. The qualifications for a
670
pension were good citizenship, as defined in the Bill. No special form of thrift was singled out for reward. A large proportion of the wage-earning community were totally unable to provide by financial contributions for old age. They found it as much as they could do to meet their daily wants, and to provide for sickness and burial expenses. The officials who were to administer the Act, were the Poor Law officials—a most deserving body of men—so that a new army of State employees would not be created, but the money granted for pensions for the aged poor would, in fact, be spent upon them. The Bill retained the clauses which made it necessary for a would-be pensioner to prove his title to a pension. As a man who sought a situation produced testimonials of good character so also in regard to pensions. As this was not a Bill for universal pensions, it would be absolutely necessary, if they were to distinguish between the deserving and the thriftless poor, that the applicant for a pension must be prepared to prove his right to it. It was said last session in the debate on the Bill that if a man was to prove his title that would necessitate inquisitorial proceedings into the past of the individual which would prove extremely hard on the applicant; but in those colonies and States where old-age pensions were in force they were given after public inquiry, and no complaints were heard as to any indignity or hardship. Ono of the chief witnesses before the Select Committee, the Agent-General for New Zealand, stated that no case had occurred in that colony in which any individual applicant had stated as a grievance that he had had to prove his title. Those seeking pensions were proud of their credentials, and in New Zealand and Victoria the inquiry was made in open Court, and in Denmark it was looked on as a friendly chat. As this was a Bill to distinguish between the deserving and the non-deserving poor, and not a Bill for universal pensions, it was absolutely necessary that some inquiry should be made into the past of the applicants.
Administration and control would be centred in the localities where the people were most likely to be acquainted with the applicants and able

671
to bring proper safeguards against imposition and fraud. It was pointed out before the Committee that as it was proposed that the Treasury should contribute one half of the cost they should be empowered to nominate one-half of the pensions committee, in the same way that Income-tax Commissioners were appointed at the present time, and gave their services for no remuneration. The alternative would be, as was done abroad, the appointment of a stipendary magistrate or special Commissioner; but the appointment of these ad hoc Commissioners would entail considerable expense and the consequent diverting of the money granted for pensions. The remainder of the pensions committee would be appointed by the Poor Law guardians of the district, who would be required to select two-thirds from their own body, and co-opt the other third from persons in the locality who were specially qualified, as members of friendly societies and thrift organisations, to discharge the duty. There was a recommendation in the Report of the Select Committee that in dealing with the question of old-age pensions, it was most desirable to go step by step. That Resolution was carried in the Committee by the casting vote of the Chairman. He maintained that the present proposals were a minimum. If they were to have a satisfactory old-age pension system as a matter of right, the applicant, when he had proved his case, should be able to claim his pension at once. If they were to allow applicants to qualify and then to limit the number of pensioners in a locality, it would bring in the hateful system of selection, and open the flood-gates of private influence and favouritism. The Bill was based on the broad and bold lines that, once a man or woman proved the necessary qualification, he or she was, ipso facto, entitled to a pension. Another recommendation of the Select Committee, that regarding aliens, he had adopted to the best of his ability. He had also put in a clause safeguarding rich children from divesting themselves of responsibility for their parents. Power was given in the Bill to recover from the children such sums as the pensions committee had expended in pensions on the parents.
672
He did not think it was necessary for him to argue here and now as to whether in principle a pension for deserving poor was desirable or not. He ventured to think that when this Parliament had, on two occasions, passed the Second Reading of an Old-Age Pensions Bill without a division, they had declared that such a measure was necessary. The members of the Government by accepting the Second Reading, bound themselves down to the principle of old-age pensions; and those who had followed recent by-elections must have noticed that every candidate had pledged themselves to support it. The principle had been accepted long ago, and they had now to find some means whereby the principle could be carried out in practice. No one would deny that our present Poor Law system provided for the destitute poor, and was not intended to help the deserving poor, but those who had exercised thrift should receive some recognition in old age to enable them to retain their position of independence and self respect. He was convinced that a small and certain endowment in old age would do much to keep alive hope, be a great inducement to thrift, and encourage the poor to put by when possible, while it would remove the terror that haunted the declining years of many of our industrial poor. It would also relieve the great friendly societies of the incubus which now hung over them, and caused them often, under the guise of sick pay, to give old-age pay to their members, as the friendly societies had not the heart to strike them off and drive their old members on to the Poor Law. He did not think the House was aware with what ease the State granted old-age pensions to its own officials. Every session there was a Bill to grant superannuation allowances and pensions to civil servants, police, municipal officers, soldiers, and sailors. In the year ending 31st March last, the amount spent on superannuation allowances to civil servants was £2,613,471, on naval pensions £1,970,000, and on military pensions £3,306,000. On these three services alone the expenditure last year was £7,889,000, so that the State had already implicated itself in the question of pensions to a very large amount.

673
He knew that on this question hon. Members were desirous that some solution could be found which would be economic, but these hon. Members when they pledged themselves to old-age pensions must have been convinced that these would cost money. He believed that the country could and should afford the necessary expense of old-age pensions. The taxable capacity of the country had increased three-fold during the last fifty years, while the amount spent on Poor Law had only increased 50 per cent., despite more humane and expensive administration of the Poor Law system. The question of cost was considered by Sir Edward Hamilton's Committee, but that Report did not give very much guidance as to the possible expense. That Committee had taken no account of the funds in the hands of the Charity Commissioners, amounting to no less than£1,000,000 a year, at present spent on old-age pensions; nor had they taken into consideration the pensions paid to the military and naval services, and by the friendly societies. Nor was any account taken of what a saving would be made if aged couples were to be able to live together. There were cases where they could get some guidance, if not absolute light, as to what the cost of an old-age pension system would be. There were three countries—Denmark, New Zealand, and Victoria—in which old-age pensions were in force and from which could be deduced an estimate as to the probable number of pensioners and the possible cost. In Denmark, in 1900, with a population of 2,600,000, there were, roughly speaking, 42,000 pensioners, and the cost was £285,000 a year. Applying the same principle, although the amount of the pensions in Denmark was considerably less than proposed in the Bill for England and Wales, but doubling the cost as the amount of the individual pension would be considerably greater, the expense would be £8,000,000, allowing for no saving on the existing cost of the Poor Law, as the new administration would deal with the aged deserving poor. In New Zealand a man whose income was below £52 a year was eligible for a pension. The number in receipt of old-age pensions was 1,200, or one in seventy of the population. In Victoria, where an old-age pension scheme was also
674
in operation, 16,000 were in receipt of pensions, or about one in seventy-five of the population. From these figures he calculated that in this country about 500,000 of people, excluding State pensioners—soldiers, sailors, and civil servants—and also municipal employees, would be in receipt of old-age pensions under the Bill; and that the cost at £14 per pensioner would amount to £7,000,000 for England, Ireland and Wales. In none of these calculations the consequent saving in the administration of the Poor Law was credited. Therefore the cost of the scheme to the State would be something like £4,000,000, or, bringing in Scotland, £4,500,000 sterling. He maintained that they had in Denmark, New Zealand, and Victoria, data which did not lead them to expect the appalling figures set forth by Sir Edward Hamilton, but much more reasonable figures.
Hon. Members who had interested themselves in the question of old-age pensions had done their best to keep it alive in this House; but their powers as private Members wore exhausted; and if anything were to be done it would have to be done by the responsible Government of the day. They had put aside Party politics altogether. On the back of the Bill were the names of Radicals, Nationalists, Liberal Unionists, and Conservatives. This great question could only be solved by both Parties determining to blot out Party politics, and let the State as a State, and the people as a nation, come forward and endeavour to grapple with it. The Government of the day was now responsible. Ministers might bless an old-age pension Bill; but if they believed in the question it was their duty to endeavour to solve it. Knowing as he did how keen an interest his right hon. friend the President of the Local Government Board took in the question of Poor Law reform, and the extraordinary advance which had been made in the direction of reform during the period of office of his right hon. friend, he begged of him to bring in some measure to solve the problem of old-age pensions, and not let it be said by the people that the House of Commons did not represent the workers of the country, that it was out of touch with what really affected the wants of the

675
poorest section of the community, and that until there was a larger Labour representation in the House the question of old-age pensions would not be solved. He appealed to the Government to accept responsibility in the matter and to take it up.
MR. JOHN HUTTONsaid he desired to second the Motion. He would appeal to the House whether the Poor Law at the present time was not ripe for amendment. It was notorious that the name of the workhouse to people in the country was one of fear and dread. He thought there was some reason for that. It was different in workhouses in the great towns, which were administered with very great care, and in which it was possible to make provision for classification which removed many of the grievances under which the aged poor suffered in the smaller workhouses. The President of the Local Government Board and his predecessor had done a very great deal with regard to the amelioration of the condition of the aged poor in the large workhouses; but it was impossible under existing circumstances to continue the same classification of the aged poor in the small workhouses in country districts. Many only contained thirty, forty, or fifty occupants, so that it was impossible to separate those who were deserving from the undeserving. In the small rural workhouses the state of things was sometimes so horrible that he did not wonder that the poor dreaded having to go to them in their old age. They dreaded country workhouses, especially in the North of England. In most of the country workhouses, imbeciles and persons of unsound mind, who were oftentimes extremely mischievous, were allowed to roam about the wards. He had known workhouses in which the imbeciles had been so troublesome that they had pulled the clothes off the old people's beds at night. They interfered with the other inmates, and also suffered themselves, because of the way they were treated. He had known cases of such bad characters in workhouses that he did not wonder that the respectable poor hesitated to enter them. He saw a woman in a workhouse who was more or less an im-
676
becile. She had a daughter in the same workhouse who was also an imbecile, and a grandchild. That woman went out year after year, and invariably returned for the purpose of using the workhouse as a lying-in hospital. Surely, to have to meet such a class of people was a horror to the respectable poor. He had known an old woman of ninety who was left in the workhouse infirmary without anyone to tend or take care of her. He had known another woman of such disgusting habits that she was unfitted for the company of the other inmates. He had known a workhouse in which two murderers associated with the other inmates. He had known a workhouse with a drunken master, who made the house a perfect Hades to the inmates. With such records as these, which were well known to the local poor, was it to be wondered that the poor dreaded the very thought of having to end their days within such buildings? There was also the question of discipline. Men and women who had been free to come and go all their lives did not care to submit to having to go to bed and get up at certain hours and to be summoned to their meals by the sound of a bell, after having been so long accustomed to the freedom of their own homes.
He hoped the House would understand he was not exaggerating the state of affairs. Several Committees had sat to consider the state of the Poor Law, and the Cottage Homes Hill Committee of 1899 reported in favour of the classification of inmates, the provision of suitable accommodation in separate buildings for the proper treatment of all pauper imbeciles and epileptics, and the provision of cottage homes. The Committee of last year also favoured an extension of the cottage home system. He cared not, however, how the amelioration of the condition of the poor was carried out, it remained true that they had a great grievance, and he joined in the earnest appeal to the President of the Local Government Board to take steps before the end of the present Parliament to bring in a measure to alleviate their condition. The Report of the Parliamentary Committee which sat in 1899 showed that the condition of most of the rural workhouses was a disgrace to the country. He had long felt that in this matter the

677
aged and deserving poor had a cruel grievance. It was often impossible for them to make any provision for their old age; and when they reached that age they were compelled to enter workhouses and associate with the failures of society. Surely it was the duty of the State to endeavour to alleviate the sad condition of the unfortunate poor in their old age. The case of men and women who endeavoured to provide for their aged parents until late in life should be appreciated by hon. Members, and such persons should not be consigned to the misery of the workhouse in their old age. This was not a party question. It was one which every hon. Member would, he was certain, support, and if his right hon. friend the President of the Local Government Board wished to descend to posterity with a great name he could secure it by making proper and adequate provision for the aged deserving poor.
MR. BRIGGsaid that on the Opposition side of the House there existed a disposition equally strong in favour of those in distressed circumstances as that which had been displayed by Ministerialists. He doubted whether there was a single Member present who had not at some time framed a pension scheme, and those who had had generally come to the ground on the subject of the difficulty of finding the money. That was the difficulty. In Germany it was met by a system under which every man subscribed a small sum annually to an insurance fund, which was administered by the State. Regarding the responsibility of the boards of guardians for finding a share of the money, he was very much afraid, from what he knew of boards of guardians, that they would not find new money for that purpose, but would contrive that the money which would otherwise have been paid very likely to the same people would now be paid to the pensioners. Again, in any attempt to deal with the matter, the position which the friendly societies held in reference to the better class of working people must be taken into account. The clause empowering the guardians to strike out from the applicants' list the names of the improvident was a sweeping provision, which would relieve the guardians from any danger of abuse. He welcomed the Bill and hoped that the Government
678
would at some future time devise a scheme to encourage providence and provide for the poor in their old age.
MR. CRIPPSsaid he agreed that the principle of this Bill had been accepted by the House on former occasions, but, after all, it had only been accepted in the same academic spirit that many other principles were on the occasion of similar discussions, on which occasions, although the principle was accepted, the House did not identify itself with the proposals of any particular scheme. He did not wish to go into what had been called the general question, because his opinions were identical with those expressed by the late Mr. Lecky, who, in the Minority Report of the Committee of 1899, of which both were members, set out the difficulties of an old-age pension scheme. The real question was, what was the attitude the Government were going to take? Did they intend to make a workable scheme out of the Bill, or was their attitude simply one of benevolent sympathy, which meant nothing at all in a scheme of this kind and was much to be deprecated? In discussing a question of this kind, they had to thrash out if they could what was best for all classes—the poorer classes if they pleased—and when a proposal was brought forward those who criticised it were not to be stigmatised as the opponents to the true reformers. He himself in Lancashire was asked this very question, and he refused to identify himself with any old-age pension scheme which had been brought forward. The hon. Member for Devizes went too far in assuming that this matter had been thrashed out in the electorate in a concrete form. The competitive form of old-age pensions, relying on an extension of the Poor Law system, bristled with difficulties. Whatever improvements might be necessary in the Poor Law, they must entirely differentiate that side of the problem. In old-age pensions there were two matters to be considered from different standpoints. If it was maintained that a pension was a thing to which a man was entitled by right, it ought to be given to him by mere machinery, and there ought not to be any inquisitorial examination as to whether he was entitled to the privilege

679
which Parliament had given him. He ventured to lay down two propositions. There must be no local authority equivalent to the Poor Law authority to consider the qualifications of the applicant. Conditions must be laid down by the State, and just as anyone entitled to a pension could get it by filling up a form before a magistrate or some other responsible person, without any inquisitorial examination, so must it be in the case of old-age pensions.
The Bill before the House was founded on another basis. This Bill was a kind of Poor Law measure competing with the existing Poor Law administration. There was to be the same system of local inquisitorial committees, who were to take into consideration not only administrative principles and tests, but whether the person who applied was on moral grounds entitled to a pension or not, and when its proposer said it was an advantage in this matter not to go step by step because of a fear that there would be selection, he had overlooked the fact that he had left the same bad principle in his Bill. He always had objected and always should object to a Bill of this kind being based on Poor Law principles, instead of on the true principles of pensions, if they were to have pensions at all. What did the proposer mean when he said that our soldiers and sailors and our civil servants had pensions to the extent of £8,000,000 a year? It must be remembered that those pensions were largely in the nature of deferred pay. They had already earned that money, but it was withheld and given in the form of a pension in order that the old servants of the State should not find their way into the workhouse. That was a fair thing. But because a pensioner was receiving something in the nature of deferred pay which was not sufficient to maintain him was he not entitled like anybody else to an old-age pension under this Bill. The difficulty arising from this Bill was the not keeping from it the inquisitorial Poor Law system and the not admitting, if it was admitted at all, that a pension was a question of right. When they came to the question of a man being entitled as a right to an old-age pension, then it would be necessary to lay down the principle under which he was so entitled.
680
As to the question of expense, if the principles advocated by some hon. Gentlemen were to prevail the charges on local rates would be twice as heavy as they were. The fatal blot on this scheme was the charging of these so-called pensions upon local funds. He absolutely protested against that. There was no claim for putting a charge of this kind on the ratepayers, and if the charge was to be undertaken at all that House must take the responsibility of putting it on the Imperial Exchequer and providing the necessary Imperial funds. He would like to know what the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be regarding the raising of the £8,000,000 which would be required. The reason why he said any Bill was unsound which proposed to charge the local rates was that as regards local taxation about two-thirds of the taxable property escaped taxation altogether. Whereas 1d. on the income-tax produced about £2,500,000, 1d.for local taxation produced rather less than £800,000. Assuming for the purposes of argument that for the social good of the poorer classes of this country it was decided that we ought to have an old-age pension scheme, where were the funds to come from? It was not a local matter it was an Imperial matter. To place the charge on the rates would involve an addition of 7d, in the £ in many of the poorest districts in the country. Why should the people who mainly employed working men, the rich employers of labour, escape their fair share of the heavy burden which old-age pensions involved? He did not believe that the President of the Local Government Board, whom this matter would largely concern, could justify any such proposal as throwing the cost of old-age pensions on the rates. The persons primarily responsible for old-age pensions were the employers, and the problem ought to be approached from that point of view, and the funds provided from the employers and employed in certain proportions, and the rest ought to come from the State. They must, however, wait till the matter was taken up by the Government, and no private Member ought to have the right to propose this form of taxation until the Government told them what the charge would be and on what back it was to be borne.
MR. CHANNING (Northamptonshire, E.)said he congratulated the hon. and learned Gentleman upon having made a real contribution to the debate. He had demonstrated in a most lucid manner how faulty a method it was to attempt to carry out on Poor Law lines an object which was not a Poor Law object. He himself had again and again expressed his warm sympathy with the hon. Member for Wiltshire and his friends in their desire to press forward their proposals for providing old-age pensions, but he had also, over and over again, in his own way, urged the same objections to those proposals which had been so forcibly urged by his hon. and learned friend. It was entirely impossible to apply effectively the tests in the Bill, and to work a really fair system of discrimination without a greatly increased cost, which would really be a waste of the money, which had better go directly to alleviating the condition of the aged poor. His hon. and learned friend had done right to appeal to the House not to treat this matter as mere palaver, but that they should face the realities of this problem and recognise that it could not be dealt with otherwise than by a responsible Government dealing boldly and unreservedly with the whole question in all its aspects. It was entirely a matter of cost, and they had to face a tremendous outlay in dealing with this question if it was to be dealt with on the broad and generous lines which alone would be practical. One objection he had to this Bill was that it dealt with such a limited number of the cases which needed relief, and which really commanded sympathy, and there was no escape from that without having to face an enormous expense. He gave every credit to those who had put or-ward these proposals. He himself had a still more ambitious proposal on the Table of the House at the present time, and he was relieved of his embarrassment by the knowledge that the proposal could not come before the House, because it seemed to him that the position in which they were placed in this matter was so absurdly academic as to almost border on unreality. Ho did not wish to raise controversial topics, nor to deal with the question from a Party point of view, but the present position was plain.
682
They had a Government which was not in a position to assist them; a Government which had even in this second year of peace largely increased the national expenditure, and instead of lightening their burdens had imposed new taxation, both direct and indirect, and could any hon. Member under those circumstances and in the face of our present expenditure and taxation seriously come before the House and hope to carry a scheme involving £4,500,000, £12,000,000. £20,000.000, or more likely, if a real scheme covering the whole ground were attempted, £26,000,000? It was hopeless to suppose this question could be approached satisfactorily until a Government was in power which was prepared to face the financial responsibility of this great social reform which was only to be defended by showing that it was vitally essential as a social reform for the benefit of the whole nation. At the present time it would be impossible to place any greater burden on the local rates. And, as for taxes, it was almost impossible to increase them in their present form. Any Government attempting to deal with this question seriously must be prepared to make sweeping reductions in our expenditure on the Army and Navy and be prepared to find new sources of taxation, such as the taxation of land values in towns, mining royalties, and to largely increase the death duties and the other taxes which fall on accumulated wealth. He did not know whether any supporters of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham were there and would suggest further indirect taxation, but to attempt to meet the expense of this great proposal from indirect taxation, however obtained, would be very cruel and entirely wrong to the working classes of this country.
SIR CARNE RASCHprotested, as an agricultural Member, against the scheme. It would be worse for the agricultural interest than even the Education Act, and that was saying a good deal. Agriculturists simply could not afford to have any extra taxation brought on agricultural land. He was afraid Members did not really understand the state of things in the Eastern counties brought

683
about by low prices, high taxes, and heavy rates. Largely owing to the incidence of rates, great tracts of land in Essex had gone out of cultivation, and the agricultural labour had gone out with it. They had, in fact to eke out their existence with rabbits. When wheat was selling for 60s. per quarter and rates were low farmers were encouraged to cultivate corn, but now it cost 40s. per. acre to grow wheat, and the crop only fetched 25s. or 26s. per quarter, so that the industry was no longer a paying one. One cause of that was the incidence of rates—a burden which would be enormously increased if this Bill wore passed. The landlords were doing as badly as any one else, for whereas a few years ago there were twenty men running after a Vacant farm, there were now twenty farms running after each tenant. The farmers might be divided into two categories—those who were ruined, and those who were going to be. Those whom it was proposed to benefit by this Bill were between the upper and the nether millstone. Lord Beaconsfield and Lord Salisbury—men supposed to possess a certain amount of intuition and common sense—declared when Sir Robert peel and Mr. Cobden took away the protection which agriculture had enjoyed some sixty years, that at the same time they ought to take off the land rates which the protective duties helped to pay. Now he noted that the people who were to become pensioners under the Bill were to retain their right to vote, but he failed to understand why a pensioner on the bounty of the country, doing nothing for the country, should be granted the right. Hon. Members were mistaken in thinking they were going to bring about a millennium in the agricultural districts by the Bills. He feared, indeed, that the position of the agricultural labourer in consequence of the heavier rates on the land would be a good deal worsened. They could not have an ideal agricultural existence in which every man walked about with a salary paid out of somebody else's pocket, and he therefore intended to vote against the Bill, because he did not want his agricultural friends or himself to be compelled to retire to the workhouse. He could only say in conclusion that since he had represented Essex Divisions in
684
that House he had come to the conclusion that they contained the very epitome and incarnation of agricultural distress.
MR. CROOKSrejoiced that the House was enabled to enjoy a little relaxation. He looked upon this debate as a mere Friday afternoon pastime. They were not seriously dealing with the question of old-age pensions. They were discussing the condition of administration before they had got the money. It was no use talking about cooking the hare before they had caught it. How rejoiced the public would be, and especially the working-class majority of it, when they read about the debate in the morning. It would be so filling to them. The question had been under consideration for 130 years, but they seemed as far off a settlement as ever. Sympathy was the cheapest commodity in the world now-a-days. Some of the speeches made that afternoon led him to think hon. Members making them were not up to date in regard to Poor Law administration. He could not believe all the stories which had been told about workhouse classification and the condition of certain workhouses.
MR. JOHN HUTTON: I can assure the hon. Member the condition of things described does exist in certain workhouses in the North of England.
MR. CROOKS: Well, I think I know a great deal more about workhouses than the hon. Member.
MR. JOHN HUTTON: I have visited thirty-two.
MR. CROOKS: And I have visited something like 132. The hon. Member, continuing, said he had made it his business to go into the workhouses in any town he happened to be in and discover how the people were treated. Invariably any inquiry as to old-age pensions was met by the proposal to make the workhouses a little more comfortable. That was no solution of the difficulty. When he went into a workhouse he put certain questions to

685
the inmates. They were almost stero-typed in his mind and the usual course of the conversation was this—
"How are you treated here?"—"Very well indeed"
"Are the master and matron kind?"—"Exceedingly kind."
"And the nurses?"—"Oh yes."
"Do you get a fair amount of liberty?" —"Yes."
"Is the food good?" —"Very good."
"And the bedding and clothes?"—"Yes, exceedingly good."
"And generally you have nothing to complain of?"—"No, no. Every body is exceedingly kind, from the master to the guardians, but it is not home."
Could the House realise the meaning of these five words—"But it is not home." That was the end of an industrial, arduous life. Was the only remedy to make the workhouses more comfortable? Then there was the proposal to establish cottage homes, in which two old men, strangers to each other, were put in one room. Was that the ideal for which they lived and worked? He could take hon. Members to a union which had the reputation of being the Mecca of Poor Law administration. There they had provided cottage homes. In that workhouse the system of classification obtained. There were four different classes. Class A lived in cottage homes. Under the conditions, they must have lived in the district for twenty years, their poverty must have arisen from no fault of their own, and they must have no blemish upon their character. Could any Member of that House pass successfully an ordeal of that description? Who was to decide as to the blemish? It seamed to him that when a man or woman reached sixty-five years of age it ill became any one to talk about blemishes on their character. They had been foolish enough to get old, but not artful enough to get rich; but for Heaven's sake let them not talk about blemishes on their character. It was painful enough that they should be sixty-five years of age or more and in that posi-
686
tion. The old man without a blemish upon his character was not always a good-tempered man. Old age did not improve temper, but it was not their fault; they could not help it. Just fancy two old men living in one room by themselves. He had visited these homes and he would tell the House what his experience was in one particular case. He saw one man in the room, and this conversation occurred—
"You are very comfortable here?" —"Think so."
"Nice place this?" —"Middling."
"That other chap who lives here; is he a decent old fellow?" —"Ah! you have got to live with people before you know them."
He then went into the garden and saw the other old man, who was doing a little bit of gardening. He said to him—
"You are living in Class A?" —"Yes, I'm Class A."
"That's seems to be a decent old chap with you?" —"Oh!"
"Decent old man that." —"Glad you think so"
And then Class A went on with his hoeing. Could hon. Members imagine these two old men sitting down together. Say they were at tea this might occur—
"Hand over the milk, will you?" —"Want it all?"
What a delightful existence as a reward for patient plodding industry! What these old people who had made England supreme in the commercial world, wanted and deserved was not a room in a cottage home with a companion who might not be very good-tempered, but a place at the fireside of their own relatives. They were entitled to have their own fireside in company with their sons and daughters, who were not sufficiently well off to support them, but could give them what money could not buy—love and sympathy. They laughed at sentiment in that House, and they sometimes talked maudlin sentiment, but the comradeship of life made life worth living, and it was as important to these people as it was

687
to any hon. Member of that House. It had been suggested that the big employers should contribute to the old-age provision of their workpeople. What would the limited liability companies and the trusts say to that? It was an old saying that companies had neither bodies to be kicked nor souls to be damned. They did not care a straw what became of the men who worked for them. Besides, the need was greatest among men who never did more than casual labour. What employer was going to contribute to the old-age pensions of these men?
MR. CRIPPSsaid large firms and large railway companies had admirable systems to provide for their men in their old age.
MR.CROOKSremarked that that did not cover the case of the casual labourer, the men who were engaged in Essex at certain seasons with such regularity that it was a commonplace to say of a man, "He is in and out regularly." The money for old age pensions had to be found by the Exchequer. He would not quarrel as to who was to take the pension, but let them make a beginning somewhere and some how. These veterans of labour had done as much to make the country s wealth as the soldiers and sailors had done to protect it; and to give them the hope of a pension would be to encourage and not to discourage thrift, because 5s. a week was in itself insufficient for decent comfort. But at present the man who tried to make provision for his old age was little better off than the man who did not try. People frequently dropped out of friendly societies because some change of fashion or improvement in machinery deprived them of their employment, and they could not keep up their contributions, and their experience discouraged
688
others from joining. But with a certainty of 5s. a week from the State, young men, and young women for that matter, would join friendly societies in larger numbers than ever before and endeavour to keep up their subscriptions. Some of the best men and women that ever lived were people who, through no fault of their own, had been compelled to go to the Poor Law for relief. He had a case of that in his mind. He remembered a very fine old woman applying for relief. She was asked, "What do you want?" And the answer was, "I want some relief?" Then the conversation continued—
"Where is your husband?" "At home."
"What age are you?" "Seventy-one."
"And your husband's age?" "Seventy-three."
"How have you been living during the last twelve months?" "We have had six months full pay from our friendly society and six months half pay, now it has ceased and we will get no more."
"Have you any friends or relatives?" "No, we have outlived all our friends and relations and are alone in the world."
"Is there no one who will pay your rent so as to enable us to give you outdoor relief?" "No, no one."
"Then the law says you must go into the workhouse, we cannot make any allowance in payment of rent."
Let the House realise that. There they had a fine specimen of English woman-hood, answering all questions perfectly clearly and frankly, and appealing to the guardians, "Oh, do not send us into the workhouse. I am able to look after my husband. We have a little home. Surely some one will do something to help us keep it." But the law said "no." He thought the nation might incur a little expenditure in increasing the comfort of these old people and giving them what they had earned, comfort and a decent

689
subsistence in old age. But it was of small matter whether this Bill were read a second time or even a third time, because there was no money available for the scheme. Let them remember that by helping these veterans of labour they would be removing from the path of younger men with many responsibilities a source of competition, because in too many cases old men were employed solely because they were cheap.
SIR FORTESCUE FLANNERYthought it useful that Unionists should be reminded of their past history in connection with this question, and of their duty in view of the absolute pledges they had given in the matter. During the election of 1895 the late Lord Salisbury coined the phrase "social amelioration," and there was no item in that programme of social amelioration which played so conspicuous a part in securing the victory of the Unionist Party on that occassion as that of old-age pensions. What had happened since then? Select Committees had considered various aspects of the question, and reported in favour of the establishment of a system of pensions, but nothing had been done. Year after year Bills had been introduced by private Members, and these had had the effect, at any rate, of showing that if the matter had been forgotton by the Government it had not been forgotton by their followers. Whether the present Bill were accepted or not, the perseverance of its promoters must have the effect of advancing the progress of this great and necessary reform, which was simply a measure of common justice to the workers who had outlived their strength. The great defect of the Bill was that it brought the recipient of a pension into
690
more or less direct contact with the stigma of pauperism. The objection of the poor was not merely as regarded indoor relief as distinguished from outdoor relief; it was the sense of humiliation experienced by them at receiving anything from the hands of the Poor Law authorities. There were many other local authorities now established in the country to whom he believed the administration of a pension system might be entrusted, and by whom it could be carried out with success. In Denmark a system of pensions almost identical with that proposed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham was in vogue. There were two classes of pensioners, viz., those persons who received their State pension from the local authority, and those who received outdoor relief, to which the badge of pauperism attached, under the ordinary Poor Law administration; and several years experience of that system had gone to show that the Poor Law expenditure had been substantially reduced by the separation of the respectable and deserving from the thriftless pauper class. He submitted that a similar result might be achieved in this country, and that the saving effected would go far towards recouping the pensions expenditure. In France and Belgium there were systems of old-age pensions confined to members of friendly societies, but there again the great point was that the badge of pauperism was avoided, and the recipients felt no more degradation than attached to the ordinary civil servant who drew his retiring allowance after years of service to the State. New Zealand, also, had a very complete system. Germany enjoyed a system under which the necessary funds were provided by contributions from the workers, the employers,

691
and the State; the money passed through the Post Office, and he believed the scheme worked satisfactorily. The first essential of any such plan was that it should distinguish between the old respectable worker and the tramp or casual who had never done an honest day's work in his life. He would have no hesitation whatever in supporting the present Bill, and he hoped it would receive the sympathetic encouragement of the Government. In taking this course he did not delude himself with the hope that the measure would pass this session, but he believed it to be necessary that these discussions should be continued until the enthusiasm of the people and Parliament was aroused and the pledges which had been given were carried into effect.
COLONEL LOCKWOODsaid he had never given any pledge whatever in favour of State pensions. However much he might approve of them in the abstract, when it came to dealing with them in a concrete form he believed they were very far distant; how far distant he was not prepared to say. Everybody was agreed as to the sentimental aspect of the question. There was no division of opinion as to the individual hardships which pressed upon the poor who were brought to poverty through no fault of their own, and from that point of view he agreed that the present debate would do good in showing that the House of Commons was alive to the sufferings endured by these unfortunate people. Workhouses might he made more cheerful and more comfortable, but nobody who had been brought into contact with the feeling of horror entertained by the poor to those institutions could believe that by such
692
means the workhouse would be popularised. What the old people wanted was simply to be left in the cottages in which they had lived all their lives. But when they passed from the sentimental to the practical aspect of the question, they were confronted with enormous difficulties. As a representative of a rural district, he was convinced that the necessary funds could not be raised by the imposition of any further burden on the local rates; while, as to making it an Imperial charge, that was so vast a question that he could not express any definite opinion upon it. He yielded to no man in his earnest desire to ameliorate the lot of those amongst whom he had passed the best part of his life, but he felt it to be impossible to support this Bill when he remembered that the funds would probably have to come out of the local rates.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,)said it was not necessary for him to state the views of the Government on this Bill, because it had been made perfectly clear that the majority of the hon. Members who had spoken had made up their minds that there was no prospect of this Bill receiving more than the sentimental, friendly, and useful consideration that it had met with during that debate. If the Bill were to rest upon its merits, judged by the speeches they had heard, it ought not to pass, because its main proposal of a provision for pensioners had been condemned by almost everybody who had spoken. There was no disagreement as to the principle of finding some system of pensions, but there was great practical difficulty in applying

693
the principle of old-age pensions throughout the country. If they made up their minds to adopt an old-age pension scheme however much hedged round with conditions of all kinds, they would be driven from one safeguard after another until they would be forced to adopt a general and unlimited system. If that were so, what was the good of talking of £10,000,000? It would not be a question of £10,000,000 if they had a general system of pensions. In order to carry out the proposal suggested by the hon. Member for Woolwich they must have either a system in which every one would contribute by his subscription to the pension which he would ultimately draw, or else a wholesale grant by the State of pensions to everybody, without any limitation or conditions. He could not conceive it possible that the House of Commons would sanction the second alternative, at all events for many Parliaments to come.
The debate had been rendered more than usually interesting by a speech from the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire. How far the hon. Member was entitled to speak with authority or to disclose the plans of right hon. Gentlemen opposite he did not know. It was a matter of common knowledge that early in the session hon. Gentlemen opposite had made up their minds that there was soon to be a change in the constitution of this House, and it was generally asserted that they had gone so far as to allocate to various Members the different offices in the Government. The hon. Member for East Northamptonshire had made an interesting contribution to the debate, and if his view was shared by his Party then a most difficult task was before the next Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer. Without limit or condition the hon. Member would have
694
£26,000,000 taken from Imperial taxation. Then the hon. Member proceeded to tell them how the money could be raised, and he hoped that notice would be taken of the manner in which he suggested these extra funds could be provided. The method he suggested was a wholesale diminution of expenditure both upon the Navy and the Army and a new system of taxation which would give all the benefits to one class and lay all the burdens on a particular kind of property. That was not a proposal to which the Party at present in power would be likely to lend its assistance.
The speeches of the hon. Member for Woolwich on social questions were specially useful, for he spoke with knowledge of the poor and of Poor Law administration and without exaggeration. The hon. Member for Woolwich made a touching appeal to them to do something for these poor men and women whom he was sure they were all anxious to assist, and for whom a good deal had already been done. He thought the hon. Member would admit that a great deal had been done to enable outdoor relief to be freely administered so long as it was surrounded by safeguards which would prevent its abuse, instead of its being a real relief of destitution. They must not forget that outdoor relief was once a curse to this country, for it not only raised the rates ruinously, but it also pauperised the working classes. That state of things led to a reform, and since that time the Poor Law had been administered with a much firmer hand, and for a time it was administered, perhaps, with undue severity. He was glad that they had now reached a different state of things. He knew that much had been done to enable outdoor relief to be given with

695
safeguards against abuse. Out of experience had grown reforms providing a more humane system of administration of relief without entrance into the workhouse. The terrible dread of the workhouse had no longer the reality which it had some years ago. In certain cases where poverty arose through no fault of their own, and where the poor had been industrious and well-conducted, the guardians could, and did, give outdoor relief, instead of offering them admission to the workhouse. He thought that was a great improvement.
Hon. Gentlemen who discussed this question were apt to talk as if by the creation of old-age pensions they would get rid of the poor and of the maintenance of the poor. The figures on this point were very interesting. The latest Returns showed that the total number of paupers, inclusive of vagrants and lunatics, on the 1st of September last year were 499,513, while the number of indoor paupers considered by the medical officers to be unable to take care of themselves was 58,000. But in addition to that 58,000 there was a very large proportion of those paupers over sixty who, although the medical officers were not prepared to certify them as unable to take care of themselves, would be hopelessly lost if the provision was to give them simply a few shillings per week without some other provision. By the creation of old-age pensions Poor Law maintenance would not be got rid of. A large proportion of the inmates of workhouses would be helpless unless some other provision were made for them. Cottage homes would meet the necessities of some; but there were difficulties and distinctions in the position of paupers in
696
towns and in rural districts; and whether the poor were to be treated by old-age pensions or by classification in the workhouse or outside no general rules could be laid down declaring this or that was not possible or capable of application. Discussions such as they had had would help the working out of the problem, and neither Party could claim a monopoly of interest in the subject. By all means let them do all they could to improve the conditions under which the poor lived, but, as practical men, they ought not to ignore the fact that, during the last fifty years a great deal had been done in this direction, enormous strides had been made, and constantly small changes of a practical character were being effected in the system of Poor Law relief which tended to the comfort of the poor without degrading or pauperising them in any way whatever. Any system of old-age pensions must be kept altogether distinct from Poor Law administration, the funds must be provided and administered under a totally different system, any attempt to provide them from the rates would be strenuously resisted. If the funds came out of Imperial taxation, localities could not distribute them, and there must be a system of distribution of a central character. The Government had not forgotten all that, had been said about old-age pensions though they had not taken action in the matter. If the Party opposite had forgotten the programmes they had not carried out, nine-tenths of their political faith would be gone. Because the Government had not been able to find from £10,000,000 to £25,000,000 for old-age pensions it should not be assumed they had forgotten all they had said on the subject or ceased to take interest in it. This was not a question

697
of providing machinery. It was a question of finding out of the taxation of the country the millions that must be found if a scheme of this kind was to be adopted. Until a Government was in a position to find the millions that were required it was idle to suppose that such a proposal could be carried into effect. The present Government was not in a position to do so; and though hon. Gentlemen opposite might declare themselves in favour of the scheme, he would be very much surprised if when they changed their seats they did not also change their views.
SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid that although it was quite true that the whole of the Newcastle Programme had not been carried out the right hon. Gentleman should not forget that the Liberal Party had only been in office two and a half years out of the last fifteen years, while the Unionist Party had been in power the whole of the remaining period. Consequently, the comparison of the right hon. Gentleman was not a fair one. Although a scheme had been brought forward which contained the nucleus of a practical measure, no hope had been held out of any scheme of old-age pensions coming into force. This had, after all, been a barren and academical discussion, and the practical difficulty which the right hon. Gentleman opposite had put before the country was that there was no money to carry out such a scheme. It did seem to him that the right hon. Gentleman ought to have declared what was the policy of the Government with reference to this Bill, He presumed that hon. Members opposite were to be allowed to vote as they liked, and that it was not going to be made a Government question. He did not think such an attitude as that towards a
698
measure of this kind was very creditable to the right hon. Gentleman, who ought to have made up his mind, and should have given the House a definite statement in regard to the policy of the Government. This Bill was one which he did not altogether like, and no scheme would ever be acceptable to the poor which contained an element of the Poor Law administration in it. Therefore the right hon. Gentleman ought to have told the House what his attitude was. He did not regard the Bill as being by any means a perfect measure. He did not like the principle of discrimination and selection, in regard to those who were to receive pensions, by the Poor Law guardians. Old-age pensions in order to be popular must be administered by a department entirely different from that which administered the Poor Law, and he felt that on that point particularly they ought to have had a more distinct statement from the Government. A pensioners' scheme administered by a separate authority, with little to do besides see to the qualifications of the applicants, and which would pay its pensions through the Post Office, would take away from the Poor Law a large number of people who were now recipients of relief. Under such a scheme the Poor Law administration would be relieved of a burden which no system of classification would ever remove, and then the Poor Law administrators would be able to carry out those improvements to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded. During the last few years a great deal had been done to make the administration of the Poor Law more humane and tender, and there must always be in the workhouses a large number of aged persons who could not live outside even with old-age

699
pensions. They were now pleading for veterans of industry who had earned by long years of toil the right to a decent and honourable maintenance, in their old age, entirely unstained by a trace of pauperism, and it was in regard to that class of people that he thought they ought to have a more distinct statement from the Government as to their intentions with reference to this Bill.
SIR J. FERGUSSON (Manchester, N. E.)said he believed that universal pensions would be an impossibility, but he thought something might be done for that margin which overflowed the limit of Poor Law relief by preserving the aged poor from pauperism on the one hand and from semi-starvation on the other. If the Bill went to a Second Reading he should vote for it, because he believed that it was not impossible to make something of it, and because he thought it was not creditable to the House that the matter should be discussed year after year and nothing come of it.
SIR M. HICKS BEACHwas surprised at the speech of his right hon. friend who had just sat down. He evidently did not believe that this was a workable measure, yet he proposed to vote for the Second Reading on the ground of sentiment. Ho thought the House ought to be honest. Did any of them really believe that it was possible for an old-age pension scheme to become law? There was much which would dispose many of them to vote in favour of the principle of old-age pensions on the ground of sentiment; but the more the subject had been examined the more impossible, to his mind, it had become to carry out any scheme consistently with any possible charge that could be put either on the ratepayers or the tax-
700
payers. If that were so, he thought they owed it to the people of this country that they should have the courage of their convictions. If they believed the scheme was impossible they ought to vote against the Second Reading of this Bill.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have passed a Bill, entitled, "An Act to amend the Law in relation to the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors to Children." [Sale of Intoxicants to Children Bill [Lords].
NEW BILL.
  OUTDOOR RELIEF (FRIENDLY SOCIETIES) (No. 3) BILL.
  Bill to amend the Outdoor Relief (Friendly Societies) Act, 1894, ordered to be brought in by Sir Edward Strachey, Sir Albert Rollit, Sir Harry Samuel, Sir William Holland, and Mr. Rigg.
  OUTDOOR RELIEF (FRIENDLY SOCIETIES) (No. 3) BILL.
  "To amend the Outdoor Relief (Friendly Societies) Act, 1894," presented accordingly, and lead the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 188.]
  OLD AGE PENSIONS (No. 3) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged; Bill withdrawn.

  RE-VACCINATION BILL.
  Order for Second Reading upon Monday, 16th May, read, and discharged; Bill withdrawn.
  Adjourned at twenty-four minutes before Six o'clock till Monday next.