§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1 agreed to.
§ Clause 2:—
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE (Bristol, E.)moved to leave out Sub-section I, which enacted that the "Army Act shall be and remain in force." Nobody knew, he said, what the Army Act was, especially those who were specially affected by it. They had that day passed a Resolution finding the money for the Regular Forces of this country, some 227,000 in number, and he did not think it was too much to say that there were not less than 226,000 out of that number who had not the vaguest notion of what the Army Act under which they were to be governed for the next twelve months was. Anybody who was acquainted with the Army knew perfectly well that no steps were taken by the military authorities to make the provisions of the Act known to the men who were controlled by it. The Army Act contained 200 sections, and consisted of 200 or 300 pages, and it was most difficult for an expert lawyer to find his way through it. How very much more difficult it would bo for the private soldier to do so. No copies of the Act were to be found in any of the barracks so as to be available for the use of the non - commissioned officer or the private soldier. He thought that in every sergeants' mess and in every regimental canteen there should be a copy which should be available for the use of the units who formed the Regular Army. Very few of the men had even the vaguest notion of the penalties to which they rendered themselves liable by taking the King's shilling. There were no less than five parts of this Act, and however much they disapproved of its provisions, they could not, under the present system of presenting an Army (Annual) Bill consisting of two or three clauses, amend the measure. He took one particular thing which they were all interested 762 in. Under the Army Act no man could be enlisted for more than twelve years. That might be a good or it might be a bad provision, but it ought to be possible to bring that fact home to the knowledge of the private soldier and to the officers. They were, however, absolutely powerless to move in this particular. There was another point to which he wished to draw the attention of the Committee, and he was told it was a good legal point, although he was not competent to solve it. Under Section 176 the Army Act was applied to men serving in a force which had been raised outside the limits of the United Kingdom or in India and serving under Regular officers. Did the Act apply to a unit serving outside of India and the United Kingdom if it happened to be commanded by Militia officers? There were many forces, especially in Somaliland, which were commanded by Militia officers. Were those forces covered by the Army Act? Another question which involved a nice point of management but not of law was that this Act was applied to Volunteers when collected together of there happened to be two or three Regular soldiers in camp, but it did not apply to Volunteers gathered together in large numbers and under a certain amount of military control if there did not happen to be one or two Regular soldiers in camp. This raised a question of policy which they were not able to discuss, but he would ask whether, if the Act did not apply to Volunteers when so engaged, it ought not to be made to apply in future.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, line 23, to leave out Sub-section (1)."—(Mr. Charles Hobhouse.)
§ Question:proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out to the second word 'the,' in page 2, line 26, stand part of the clause."
§ *The SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER, Belfast, W.)said the hon. Member was under a misapprehension in saying that the Army Act was inaccessible to soldiers and was not available for their use. It was printed in the Manual of Military Law, and it was distributed to all persons concerned. 763 The Act had been proposed for many years in the same form, and there was no in ention of making any change either in its form or substance.
§ MR. CHURCHILL (Oldham)inquired if the Act did not largely consist of a number of charges formulated in legal and military language, to deal with officers who were guilty of military crimes. He presumed that he was right in assuming that these charges had not in any way been altered from the particular charges which had been before them on every previous year. Therefore he asked the Secretary of State for War this Question: Why was it when they were going through the form of elaborately passing this code in regard to a great number of charges under which Courts-martial could be held, so many officers were dismissed from the Army, not by a regular trial but by a purely arbitrary process of dismissal, which was carried out by the War Office itself. He submitted that it was unnecessarily taking up the time of the Committee for them to be asked to go through the form of passing this elaborate code under this Act, unless when officers were said to have committed offences which were chargeable under the forms of this Act they should be given the opportunity of a trial by Court-martial. He observed that there was one charge set forth in the Act which would cover a very celebrated case which occurred two years ago. The words dealt with any officer guilty of wilfully neglecting his duty and were formally set out in the Act, and yet an officer of the 2nd Life Guards, who was accused of not having taken steps to put down disorder in his regiment, was not brought to trial under this Act but was dismissed by the War Office, without being heard in his own defence, and without having an opportunity of calling witnesses in his own defence. He admitted that the military authorities must have a discretionary power of selection, and if an officer was unsuitable should be able to dismiss him from the Army on the ground that it was not for the advantage of the public service that he should be retained He did not challenge that great power, but it should be very sparingly used, and whenever it was possible to bring an officer to trial by 764 Court-martial, he should be so brought to trial, and whenever the accusation came within the 200 charges of this Army Act the officer should be so brought to trial. South African cases had occurred where officers had been dismissed from the Army, not because they were not qualified but because they had committed some offence in regard to which some charge could be made under this Act, but the War Office, instead of going through the form of Court-martial, chose to exercise its arbitrary power. He was one of those who thought that Courts-martial should be much more frequent in the higher portions of the Army than they now were. It would be much better to have a trial instead of hustling officers out without inquiry in cases in which they were clearly amenable to law. One of the cases referred to an officer in South Africa who raised the white flag—a very disgraceful thing to do, as he was sure the hon. Member for Peckham would agree, as he was the only member of the protectionist party who did not raise the white flag the other night when there was a division on.
§ SIR FREDERICK BANBURY (Camberwell, Peckham)I wish to ask you, Mr. Chairman, whether it is in order to discuss the case of an officer which occurred some time ago under the Army Annual Act.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANA case of that kind would be rather remote, but of course the hon. Gentleman can discuss the original Act.
§ MR. CHURCHILLsaid his desire was to call attention to the growth of the impropriety of dismissing officers without trial when they could be tried in the Army by being court-martialled. He feared that very often men were dismissed through pure personal spite. There was the case against an officer who, if the charge against him was true, committed a disgraceful offence, for which he could have been shot if he had been tried. But nothing of the sort happened. The War Office did not like trying officers by Courts-martial, they would much rather smuggle them out of the Army and not have a scandal. It was this practice 765 which resulted in half of the injustices which existed in the Army. In the Navy, however, officers were frequently tried by Court-martial for dereliction of duty, and he put forward the plea that a similar course should be followed in the Army for the protection of officers. He heard a case the other day, which occurred in South Africa, of a lieutenant-colonel who was accused of having used some insolent language to the officer commanding his district. The language of the Army Act would have covered that, and the War Office could have charged that officer in such a way as would have allowed him to bring evidence forward in his own defence. But what did the War Office do? They did not avail themselves of this Act, they found it much more convenient to tell the wretched officer that he was placed on half pay. He wrote immediately and asked for the protection to which he was entitled, but was told that no further communication would be entertained. He wrote to the King, but that was a mere formality—it would not be respectful to say a mere farce—and the answer was held by the same officials who dealt with the case before, that they had carefully investigated the case and saw no occasion to reopen it. He took advantage of this case to impress upon the Secretary of State for War that while they did not wish to challenge his power of selection or his discretionary power to deal with officers who commanded the War Office units, still he respectfully submitted that no officer should be dismissed from the Army without a trial by Court-martial when he was accused of any action which could be brought fairly and squarely under any charge laid down in this Act. Unless they got some definite evidence that the War Office was returning to the practice which was formerly much more used than it was now, and that the clauses of the Army Act would be actually operative clauses and would give protection to the officers, it was quite certain that they could enjoy no security of tenure and could be dismissed from the Army on trumped up charges which would not be listened to in the case of private soldiers. So long as this policy was continued officers were under a grave disadvantage, and the Members of the 766 House had every reason to complain that they were obliged to go through the elaborate form of passing all these charges in the Army Act when no use was made of them and they did not afford individuals the protection which they desired.
§ MR. MCKENNA (Monmouthshire, N.)said his hon. friend had raised a point of the greatest importance, which he hoped the Secretary of State would reply to. In considering the Army Act, obviously the first question they had to consider was to whom it applied. Under Section 176 it was said that some of the persons to whom the Act applied were non-commissioned officers and men serving in a force raised by order of His Majesty beyond the limits of the United Kingdom or in India, and serving under the command of an officer of the Regular Forces. But supposing that these men were serving under the command of a Militia officer, as had been very frequently the case on the West Coast of Africa, in such an event they would not come under the Army Act, and the point to which he wished to direct the attention of the Secretary of State was whether the men were a penny the worse off for not earning under this Act. If it was not necessary to bring a portion of our military forces under the Army Act, why was it necessary to bring another portion under it? Unless there was some explanation of why the distinction was drawn he could not see why the Army Act should apply to one portion of the Army and not to the other.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)said he understood that there were Militia officers on the West Coast of Africa in charge of Colonial forces, and he should like to know whether they would come under this section. He also wished to make a point upon the Amendment in reference to the importance of giving a man some opportunity of obtaining information as to the Army Act. It was very long and complicated, and it was a matter of great importance to Parliament itself to see that soldiers could procure a copy of the book on Army regulations. This might cost 2s. 6d. or 3s., and they could not expect the ordinary soldier 767 to afford that expenditure. If, however, they had books like this placed where they could have easy access to them there would be no difficulty at all. They were very important to officers, but they were matters of life and death to the ordinary soldier. He thought Ministers ought to be very glad that some portions of the Army Act did not apply to them. To take an offence which was punishable by death—
He who misbehaves or causes others to misbehave in the presence of the enemy in such a manner as to show cowardice shall, on being found guilty, by Court-martial, suffer death.He thought dissolution would be better than that. He did not know how the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham would come out, because another offence with the same penalty applied to a man who "leaves his commanding officer to go in search of plunder." Then, again, the Prime Minister would come very badly out of it, because a man who shamefully abandoned his post was also punished with death. He was afraid that, on the whole, Ministers would come out very badly.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe principle of the Act and the Act itself is referred to in this section, and the hon. Member can refer to it, but he is not in order in discussing the Act.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was not discussing the Act, but was quoting it as an example to Ministers. He was simply congratulating Ministers on being exempt from the Army Act. The private soldier was liable to these penalties, and the least he thought the War Office could do would be to supply copies of this document to the soldiers who were liable to dismissal penalties and death for breaches of regulations of this character. After all, how many people, knew what was in this Act of Parliament? It was a very complicated Act and there were something like 126 pages of it. The common soldier could not make himself master of these things, and he thought that after the Act itself had been supplied there should be a summary furnished—a cheap manual 768 which the soldier could get in his barrackroom.
§ *MR. MCCRAE (Edinburgh, E.)said he did not quite follow the Secretary of State when he said that the Army Act was accessible to the soldier. He knew that when they went into camp with the Regular Forces it was obligatory for the commanding officer to read the Army Act to the soldiers under his command, but he understood that it was the practice in all garrisons that they should have only one copy of the Army Act, and that was placed in the orderly room, which was not accessible to the soldier. He would like the Secretary of State for War to say in his reply how this matter stood and whether some other means should not be taken to spread a knowledge of the provisions of the Act. The penalties were very serious and the Act might be made available in the canteen or in any other room which soldiers frequented. He wished to impress upon the right hon. Gentleman that the Act should be in a place accessible to the soldier who had to be tried under it so that he might know the offences with which he might be charged and the penalties for those offences.
§ MAJOR SEELY (Isle of Wight)said that hon. Members who had made themselves acquainted with the provisions of the Act world have observed that the status of the Militia in regard to the Regular Forces was most carefully defined. It was laid down under what circumstances the Militia came under the provisions of this Act. Under certain circumstances when they were engaged with Regular troops they were under the Army Act, but when they were otherwise engaged they were not. In the case of the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, in order that the Militia should act under the Army Act. those places had to be regarded as colonies. The Isle of Wight was not specifically mentioned in the same category, but he intended to propose that it should be so included. He only mentioned these details in order to point out that in so far as the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman applied to the Militia the Committee were really absolutely in the dark. They had again and again asked for certain 769 details but none had been given. Their natural course therefore was to use every possible Motion to endeavour to extract that information which they had been denied. They somewhat resented having to pass Estimates in regard to which they could not get any information.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERMay I ask if this is in any way relevant?
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member is travelling quite outside the limits of the question. The words of the section refer to the question of the time during which the Army Act shall be in force. The hon. Member is going quite outside that question.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid that he rose to point out that the Militia under this Army Act would be affected in a peculiar manner by any alteration in their status. If he was not in order in so doing he would defer his remarks till a later stage. It was, however, of importance to learn exactly what the proposals of the Government were in regard to the Militia.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNER (Staffordshire, Lichfield)thought that the Committee had a right to discuss this matter further. The Chairman had stated that the Acts of Parliament which were made by means of reference in this Act were outside of the discussion. He thought that that was a new ruling because of the previous statutes passed into law by this Bill, and if they were made law by it he thought they had a right to discuss them. Any Act which was to be enforced by the passing of this Bill, he thought, was a subject which might fairly be discussed under the clause which enacted it. He appealed to the Secretary of State for War to have the same sympathy with regard to Courts-martial that he had before he was in office. He remembered several speeches of the right hon. Gentleman in which he urged that the Army should act in the same way as the Navy and hold Courts-martial instead of carrying out the arbitrary decisions of the War Office without trying the officers. He was sorry to see the right hon. Gentleman shake his head because he supposed they would 770 in consequence get an unsatisfactory answer. He supported the proposals that the provisions of this Act should be made more easily accessible to the soldier than they were now. The Manual of Military Law cost 5s. 6d., and there were in consequence of its price very few soldiers who possessed it. That work was only kept in the orderly room but it should, he urged, be kept within reach of the non-commissioned officers and men.
§ MR. CHURCHILLrose to ask the Secretary of State for War to reply to the Question which he had seriously asked. He wished to draw attention to the peculiar and novel form of Clause 2 of the Bill. It was entirely different to the form which used to prevail in other years. The Bill was made up of three clauses, and this Clause 2 was so arranged as to carry within its scope clauses which were contained in the Army Act. That was done, he supposed, for the purpose of passing the Bill through the House. It said that the Army Act "shall be and remain in force during the period hereinafter mentioned." Therefore he thought it necessary to remind the Committee as to what the Army Act did specifically enact. He found that on March 4th, 1903, the late Mr. Hanbury attacked it very gravely, and usefully examined this measure in all its details, and so exhaustive and careful was the examination of the measure that there were twenty-four divisions demanded by that right hon. Gentleman. He was indeed made right hon. Gentleman in consequence of his prowess. He found that on that occasion hon. Members were empowered to discuss all the clauses in the Army Act which dealt with minor punishments. He thought that a great many too many soldiers were sent to prison under this Act, and that it would be better if they were sent not to short terms of imprisonment but to long terms of confinement to barracks. Twenty-four thousand soldiers suffered imprisonment under this Act last year, and that was a vary serious state of things. It was important that a matter of that kind should not be brought on at that late hour. Under the provisions they were assenting to, the whole land forces of the Crown would be governed, ruled, and punished for the next twelve months. If there were 24,000 soldiers who had been 771 punished, did it not show either that the demand for a character upon a man entering the Army had not been insisted upon, or that the system was petty, capricious, and vexatious? In other words, did it not show that the system of administering justice in the Army was unsympathetic, and was much more capricious and severe than was necessary? He was asking the right hon. Gentleman a Question, and he thought it would be better for him to pay attention to the debate. [Cries of "Order!"] Hon. Members who said "Order, Order" were unacquainted with the rules of the House. He was quite in order in asking that the right hon. Gentleman should give attention to the debate.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERI am paying ample attention to the debate, but I am not compelled to gaze upon the hon. Member all the time.
§ MR. CHURCHILLOh, I do not mind that as long as I am not called upon to reciprocate. What he wanted to know was whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that under this Act no fewer than 24,000 men were convicted and sent to prison each year. Did not the right hon. Gentleman think that the number of these men could be reduced, and that he could reduce the disgraceful number of minor punishments in the Army, and substitute for them punishments which, although detested by the soldiers, involved no permanent reproach. When the Leader of the Opposition was in the position which the right hon. Gentleman held, he did not sit there hoping that this clause would be hurried through. He rose again and again, and endeavoured to give information on all the various points raised. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman two Questions; the first had reference to the enormous number of imprisonments in the Army, and the second to the undue use by the War Office of the form of dismissal from the service of officers without trial.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid that he was rather bewildered to find that all these points were in order because he 772 should have thought they were questions of administration.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)That is a reflection on the Chair.
§ MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERrepeated that they were points of administration. He had always agreed that Courts-martial were very good things indeed, but it was a mere question of administrative detail as to how far the discretion which, of course, must be vested in the War Office should be exercised or not. He agreed that officers accused of a crime should be given an opportunity of having a Court-martial, but he thought that in every case it must be a matter of discretion as to how far the powers conferred upon the War Office should be utilised or not utilised. As to the number of men in prison, the hon. Member was under a misapprehension, because he had taken the number of cases of imprisonment and not the number of men imprisoned. It was no doubt a subject of regret that any man in the Army should be in prison at all, but that matter could not be settled by that House. He did not think there was any reason for altering the form of the clause, and no Amendment could be accepted by the Government with that object.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTON (Tower Hamlets, Poplar)said the point which was made was that practically the soldier had no access to the Army Act, but even if he had access to the book which contained it it would be of very little use to him. What he wanted to emphasise, therefore, was whether it would not be possible to have something in the nature of a text book dealing with points in which the soldier was interested. The points as to punishment, etc., might be given, but not the whole of these 190 clauses which the ordinary soldier could not digest or carry in his mind. It was a question of considerable importance and one to which the right hon. Gentleman might well he thought, give attention. Such a small text book could easily be drawn up, and then there would be a chance of each individual soldier really understanding what were the offences for which he could be punished, 773 and these 24,000 offences would probably in that case be considerably reduced.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIE (Merthyr Tidvil)said he rose to emphasise the suggestion which had just been made about preparing an abstract of the provisions of this Act which should not merely be available for the use of soldiers after they had enlisted, but in order that those who desired to enlist might become acquainted with the conditions of service before they did enlist. It would be easy to follow the example set by the Factory Acts and the Mines Regulation Acts. Those were very elaborate documents, but an abstract of them was made, and it was compulsory upon an employer to have that abstract exhibited in a conspicuous position, where it could be seen and read, not merely by persons employed but by persons applying for employment. He rose for the purpose of asking whether the right hon. Gentleman would not agree to the introduction of a short Amendment, so that the provisions of the law should be made known to every soldier and to those about to become soldiers. This much he knew, that if applicants for enlistment were aware of the conditions under which they were to join, the nature of the offences and the punishments, the enlistments would be much fewer than at present. He did not think the Committee should sanction a system of enlistment under false pretences, and men should clearly understand that by becoming soldiers they were giving up their rights of citizenship. The object of the Act they were now passing was to take these men from the purview of the ordinary law and place them under a law of which they knew nothing. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman, in the interests of the Army and of honesty, would agree to some form of words being inserted which would make it obligatory upon recruiting officers and others to summarise briefly what the duties of recruits were to be, what continued offences, and what were the punishments which attached to those offences. If this were done he felt sure that a better class of man would be obtained and the standing and morale of the Army would be increased.
§ MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)said that when a soldier enlisted he surrendered a large portion of his liberty and for a large number of offences, instead of being tried by the civil law, he was tried by the military law. The punishments, moreover, were far more severe, and many things which were perfectly justifiable on the part of a private citizen were made unjustifiable by military law from the fact that the soldier had been deprived of the ordinary rights of civilians. It was true he acquired a right to be tried by Court-martial for offences which were not applicable to anybody but a soldier, but that right was often taken away. The whole thing was thoroughly and absolutely unjust. No doubt the head of every department had the power to turn out an employee who was inefficient, but he could not punish him. The Secretary of State for War said he must retain his power to turn out people who were inefficient. Let him retain that power, but let him not extend it to cases where the law had laid down what steps were to be taken if a soldier was suspected of an offence and the punishment he was to be subjected to. In those cases Parliament had laid it down that the War Office should not cashier an officer and turn him out of the Army because they were afraid to bring him before a Court-martial, and thus deprive him of the benefits and guarantees given by the Act.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid that Section 176 laid it down that non - commissioned officers and men serving in a force raised by order of His Majesty beyond the limits of the United Kingdom and India, but serving under the command of an officer of the Army, should be subject to military law. There were a great number of units in the Protectorates and Colonies which had been raised outside the United Kingdom and India, and they were principally commanded on active service by officers of the Militia force. Were those men when commanded by an officer of the Militia force, if they did an illegal act, under military law? It was provided that nothing in this Act should affect the law as regarded a colony, but there was a difference between a colony and a protectorate. The Act said that soldiers 775 were subject to a certain law in a colony. Were they subject to the same law in a protectorate? They were entitled to have an interpretation of the Act from the War Office.
§ MR. DISRAELI (Cheshire, Altrincham)inquired as a point of order whether hon. Members could raise every point and every section of the Army Act upon the clause before the House. Could they discuss the time it had been in force and where it had to be enforced?
§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGE,upon the point of order, said that it was a very important one. The clause was practically a reenactment of the Army Act and said—
The Army Act shall be and remain in force during the period hereinafter mentioned.If these words were not passed the Army Act would not be in operation at all. Therefore he submitted that they were entitled to discuss the Act which would be in existence during this period. He contended it would be quite competent for them to move as an Amendment "except Section 130," and so on.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid the preamble of this Act recited that the raising or keeping of a standing Army within the Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in time of peace was against the law. Surely an Act which governed the Army and was renewed from year to year was capable of discussion in the House.
§ MR. CHURCHILLwished to point out that the provisions of the Army Act which was re-enacted by this clause were very numerous. In the year 1893 a most distinguished man—Mr. Jeffreys—dealt with this Act during the discussion of this Bill.
THE DEPUTY - CHAIRMANOn the point of order, I said before that it is not in order to go into the particulars of the Act, nor can the Act be discussed clause by clause, but it is in order to refer to the Act. It is mentioned in this clause and it is in order to refer to it, but I have already expressed my opinion that hon. Members should not go into too great detail.
§ MR. HERBERT SAMUEL (Yorkshire, Cleveland)wished to know whether it was in order to move Amendments to the original Act on this Bill.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid the appending of the Army Act made the matter quite clear, and his hon. friend the Member for Oldham had shown that much detail was gone into in a previous year. There were not any alterations made in the Army Act as it stood in 1901 by the Army (Annual) Acts of 1902, and 1903, but in previous years alterations were made, and if alterations were made in the Army Act by the Army (Annual) Act it must be apparent that these alterations were alterations in detail and must have been made through the discussion of the Act as they were discussing it now.
§ MR. CHURCHILLsaid he understood the Chairman's ruling and should strictly adhere to it.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid he wished to resume the observations he was making when the hon. Member raised a point of order in which he was clearly wrong.
§ MR. DISRAELIagain rose to call attention to a point of order but——
THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANsaid the point of order had been sufficiently raised. He would watch the debate and would call the hon. Member to order if he transgressed.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEagain asked if the sub-section would be applicable to troops serving in protectorates.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERreplied that, where a Regular officer was in command, the Act was applicable, where the commanding officer was not a Regular the local Ordinance was applicable, and he was under the law as it existed in the colony.
§ MR. J. A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden)inquired whether the right hon. Gentleman would answer the reasonable Question which had been put to him. Was it reasonable to suppose that 777 the ordinary soldier would become acquainted with the 190 clauses of the Army Act which to him were nothing less than legal jargon. Its contents should be put into a small leaflet or book and the soldier should know the character of the sentences to which he was subject.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid the Act was circulated in a form in which it was easily accessible to the private soldier. It was in every orderly room, and no complaint had ever been received as to the way in which it was circulated. The War Office could not undertake to adopt the suggestion that they should circulate an abstract, because the terms upon which a soldier entered the Army were perfectly clear. The Army Act was perfectly accessible, and he believed soldiers were acquainted with the general conditions under which they served.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNERthought it was a monstrous statement to say that a book in the orderly room was within the reach of every soldier. The soldier could not go into the orderly room.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERHe can go into the library.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNERinsisted that in spite of what had been said the book was inaccessible to the private soldier.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid he had sat on Courts-martial many times, and it would
§ surprise him if many soldiers had ever heard of this Act. He wished to draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to an extraordinary fact which he made bold to say the right hon. Gentleman never knew of before. If a soldier got into a four-wheeled cab in which there were already four persons, did the right hon. Gentleman know what the penalty was? If this were done by an ordinary man the penalty he would suffer would be of the smallest, and, in the absence of any provision, 6d. would be sufficient. If an officer did it he would be cashiered because he overcrowded a cab, while a private soldier would suffer imprisonment. The penalties were savage. They all knew what imprisonment meant in the case of a soldier, and sentences of 100 days imprisonment were by no means uncommon, and to inflict such a penalty in the case of a soldier, and to cashier and ruin an officer because he got into a cab with four other persons when the cabman said, "I don't wish to take you," was obviously quite unjust. If this provision were brought to the notice of soldiers and officers he was sure they would object.
MR. SECRETARY ARNOLD-FORSTERrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes. 158; Noes, 123. (Division List No. 108.)
781| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Bingham, Lord | Davenport, William Bromley |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Blundell, Colonel Henry | Denny, Colonel |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Bond, Edward | Dickson, Charles Scott |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn. Hugh O. | Brassey, Albert | Doughty, Sir George |
| Arrol, Sir William | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Butcher, John George | Duke, Henry Edward |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt Hn. Sir H. | Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ | Egerton, Hon. A de Tatton |
| Bailey James (Walworth) | Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward |
| Balcarres, Lord | Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Coates, Edward Feetham | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Cochrane, Hon, Thos. H. A. E | Fison, Frederick William |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Forster, Henry William |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W |
| Bigwood, James | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gardner, Ernest |
| Bill, Charles | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick |
| Gordon, Hn J E (Elgin & Nairn | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Macdona, John Cumming | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Gordon, Maj. Evans-(T'rH'mlet | Maconochie, A. W. | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Goschen, Hon. George Joachim | Majendie, James A. H. | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H. E (Wigt'n | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Gretton, John | Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Groves, James Grimble | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Hambro, Charles Eric | Milvain, Thomas | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East) |
| Hamilton, Marq. of (Lnd'nderry | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks |
| Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Spear, John Ward |
| Hay, Hon. Claude George | Moore, William | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Heath, Sir James (Staffords, N W | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Morpeth, Viscount | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Hoult, Joseph | Morrell, George Herbert | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Morrison, James Archibald | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer | Tuff, Charles |
| Hunt, Rowland | Mount, William Arthur | Turnour, Viscount |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Kerr, John | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Keswick, William | Nicholson, William Graham | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Percy, Earl | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und Lyne |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks. N. R. | Pretyman, Ernest George | Wilson, A Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Purvis, Robert | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Long, Col Chas. W. (Evesham) | Randles, John S. | |
| Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S | Reid, James (Greenock) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Renwick, George | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Ridley, S. Forde | Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | M'Crae, George |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Flynn, James Christopher | M'Kenna, Reginald |
| Allen, Charles P. | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Fuller, J. M. F. | Mooney, John J. |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Gilhooly, James | Murphy, John |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J. | Nannetti, Joseph P. |
| Black, Alexander William | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) |
| Boland, John | Griffith, Ellis J. | Norman, Henry |
| Brigg, John | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | Nussey, Thomas Willans |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid. |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Higham, John Sharp | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) |
| Caldwell, James | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Johnson, John | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Cawley, Frederick | Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea) | O'Dowd, John |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Jones, Lief (Appleby) | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | O'Malley, William |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Joyce, Michael | O'Mara, James |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W. | O'Shee, James John |
| Crean, Eugene | Klibride, Denis | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Cremer, William Randal | Labouchere, Henry | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lamont, Norman | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Delany, William | Langley, Batty | Reddy, M. |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th) |
| Doogan, P. C. | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Levy, Maurice | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Duffy, William J. | Lewis, John Herbert | Roche, John |
| Elibank, Master of | Lloyd-George, David | Rose, Charles Day |
| Ellice, Capt E C (S Andrw's Bghs) | Lough, Thomas | Runciman, Walter |
| Emmott, Alfred | Lundon, W. | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.) |
| Fenwick, Charles | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sheehy, David |
| Ffrench, Peter | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) | Wilson, Henry J. (York W. R.) |
| Slack, John Bamford | Warner, Thomas Courtney T. | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Stanhope, Hon. Philip James | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney | |
| Sullivan, Donal | White, George (Norfolk) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES— |
| Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) | Major Seely and Mr. Treve- |
| Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer | lyan. |
| Tomkinson, James | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) | |
| Villiers, Ernest Amherst | Wills, Arthur Walters (N Dorset |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 158; Noes, 120. (Division List No. 109.)
| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fison, Frederick William | Morpeth,Viscount |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Flower, Sir Ernest | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Forster, Henry William | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.) | Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. H. O. | Gardner, Ernest | Mount, William Arthur |
| Arrol, Sir William | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H. | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'r H'mlets | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Percy, Earl |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds) | Green, W. D. (Wednesbury) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Gretton, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Groves, James Grimble | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Hambro, Charles Eric | Purvis, Robert |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Hamilton, Marq of (L'donderry | Randles, John S. |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bigwood, James | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Renwick, George |
| Bill, Charles | Heath, Sir J. (Staffords., N. W.) | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Bingham, Lord | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hoult, Joseph | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Bond, Edward | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F (Middlesex | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Brassey, Albert | Hunt, Rowland | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Butcher, John George | Kerr, John | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Keswick, William | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Knowles, Sir Lees | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Smith, A. B. (Hertford, East) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Smith, Rt. Hn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Spear, John Ward |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Lawson, John G. (Yorks., N. R. | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M |
| Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Tuff, Charles |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Tumour, Viscount |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Denny, Colonel | Macdona, John Cumming | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Maconochie, A. W. | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Majendie, James A. H. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Doughty, Sir George | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Maxwell, Rt. Hn. Sir H. E (Wigtn | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J (Manc'r. | Milvain, Thomas | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs | Moore, William | Alexander Acland - Hood |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | and Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Shee, James John |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Hayden, John Patrick | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Allen, Charles P. | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Higham, John Sharp | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Johnson, John | Reddy, M. |
| Beaumont, Wentworth, C. B. | Jones, David B. (Swansea) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Black, Alexander William | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th) |
| Boland, John | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Brigg, John | Joyce, Michael | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W.) | Roche, John |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Kilbride, Denis | Rose, Charles Day |
| Caldwell, James | Labouchere, Henry | Runciman, Walter |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lamont, Norman | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Cawley, Frederick | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Seely, Maj J. E. B. (Isle of Wight) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.) |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Levy, Maurice | Sheehy, David. |
| Crean, Eugene | Lewis, John Herbert | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lough, Thomas | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lundon, W. | Slack, John Bamford |
| Delany, William | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sullivan, Donal |
| Donelan, Captain A. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Doogan, P. C. | M'Crae, George | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | M'Kenna, Reginald | Tomkinson, James |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Elibank, Master of | Mooney, John J. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Ellice, Capt E C (S. Andrw's Bghs | Murphy, John | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Emmott, Alfred | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Wason, John C. (Orkney) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Norman, Henry | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Ffrench, Peter | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Wills, Arthur W (N. Dorset) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Dowd, John | |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert J. | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Malley, William | Charles Hobhouse and Mr. |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Mara, James | Lyell. |
§ second word 'the,' in page 2, line 26, stand part of the Clause."
783§ Whereupon Mr. SECRETARY ARNOLD-FORSTER moved, "That the Question 'That the Clause stand part of the Bill' be now put."
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTON rose to move to report progress and gave way to the right hon. Gentleman. He understood that the right hon. Gentleman had moved something, but did not catch what it was.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER.I think I was perfectly in order in moving, and I have moved.
§ MR. MCKENNAThe Motion of the right hon. Gentleman was perfectly
§ inaudible. We desire before the Question is put to know what the Motion was.
§ MR. CHURCHILLDo I understand that you accept the Motion, Sir.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 150; Noes, 114. (Division List No.110.)
787| AYES. | ||
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O | Bailey, James (Walworth) |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Arrol, Sir William | Balcarres, Lord |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r.) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds. | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, South | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Gordon, Maj Evans (T'r H'mlets | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Percy, Earl |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Gretton, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bigwood, James | Groves, James Grimble | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bill, Charles | Hambro, Charles Eric | Purvis, Robert |
| Bingham, Lord | Hamilton, Marq of (L'donderry) | Randles, John S. |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Harris, F Leverton (Tynemouth | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bond, Edward | Heath, Sir J. (Stafford., N. W.) | Renwick, George |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middles'x | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Brassey, Albert | Hoult, Joseph | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney |
| Butcher, John George | Hunt, Rowland | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kerr, John | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Keswick, William | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Knowles, Sir Lees | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Smith, A. H. (Hertford, East) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End | Smith, Rt. Hn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lawson, John G. (Yorks., N. R. | Spear, John Ward |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Davenport, W. Bromley | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Denny, Colonel | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Tuff, Charles |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Turnour, Viscount |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Macdona, John Cumming | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Doughty, Sir George | Maconochie, A. W. | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Majendie, James A. H. | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward | Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H. E (Wigt'n | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne |
| Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Milvain, Thomas | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Wilson John (Glasgow) |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Moore, William | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Fison, Frederick William | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Morrell, George Herbert | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Forster, Henry William | Morrison, James Archibald | Alexander Acland - Hood |
| Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.) | Mount, William Arthur | and Viscount Valentia. |
| Gardner, Ernest | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E. | Cullinan, J. | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Delany, William | Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil) |
| Allen, Charles P. | Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Donelan, Captain A. | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Doogan, P. C. | Higham, John Sharp |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) |
| Balck, Alexander William | Duffy, William J. | Johnson, John |
| Boland, John | Ellice,Capt E C (S.Andr'ws Bghs | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Brigg, John | Emmott, Alfred | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Eamonde, Sir Thomas | Joyce, Michael |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Eve, Harry Trelawney | Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.) |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Fenwick, Charles | Kilbride, Denis |
| Caldwell, James | Ffrench, Peter | Lamont, Norman |
| Cawley, Frederick | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | Langley, Batty |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Flynn, James Christopher | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Fuller, J. M. F. | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Gilhooly, James | Levy, Maurice |
| Crean, Eugene | Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Cremer, William Randal | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Lloyd-George, David |
| Lough, Thomas | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Lundon, W. | O'Malley, William | Slack, John Bamford |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | O'Mara, James | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | O'Shee, James John | Sullivan, Donal |
| M'Crae, George | Paulton, James Mellor | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| M'Kenna, Reginald, | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Tomkinson, James |
| M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Power, Patrick Joseph | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Mooney, John J. | Reddy, M. | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Murphy, John | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th) | Wason, John C. (Orkney) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Rickett, J. Compton | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Norman, Henry | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth |
| Nussey, Thomas Willans | Roche, John | Wills, Arthur W. (N. Dorset) |
| O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Rose, Charles Day | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Runciman, Walter | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | |
| O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Sheehy, David | J. H. Whitley and Mr. |
| O'Dowd, John | Shipman, Dr. John G. | Lyell. |
§ Question put accordingly "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
788§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 154; Noes, 117. (Division List No.111)
789| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Macdona, John Cumming |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Maconochie, A. W. |
| Atkwright, John Stanhope | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn Hugh O. | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs) | Martin, Richard Biddulph |
| Arrol, Sir William | Fisher, William Hayes | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Fison, Frederick William | Maxwell, Rt Hn. Sir H. E. (Wigt'n |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Flower, Sir Ernest | Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire |
| Balcarres, Lord | Forster, Henry William | Milvain, Thomas |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn A. J. (Manch'r) | Foster, Philip S. (Warwick S. W. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Gardner, Ernest | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Moore, William |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn | Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Gordon, Maj. Evans (T'rH'mlets | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Bigwood, James | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Mount, William Arthur |
| Bill, Charles | Green,Walford D. (Wednesbury | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Bingham, Lord | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Gretton, John | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Bond, Edward | Groves, James Grimble | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Hambro, Charles Eric | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley |
| Brassey, Albert | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry | Percy, Earl |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Butcher, John George | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Heath, Sir J. (Staffords, N. W.) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Hope, J F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire | Hoult, Joseph | Purvis, Robert |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham) | Randles, John S. |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Hunt, Rowland | Renwick, George |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Kerr, John | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Keswick, William | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Knowles, Sir Lees | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Denny, Colonel | Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks. N. R | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Legge, Col Hon. Heneage | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East) |
| Doughty, Sir George | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Douglas, Rt Hon. A. Akers- | Long, Rt. Hn.Walter (Bristol, S.) | Spear, John Ward |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Stanley, Rt Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Strutt, Hn. Charles Hedley | Warde, Colonel C. E. | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon | |
| Tuff, Charles | Whiteley, H. (Ashton-und-Lyne | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| Turnour,Viscount | Whitmore, Charles Algernon | Sir Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Walker, Col. William Hall | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord | and Viscount Valentia. |
| Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E | Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Mara, James |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Shee, James John |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Higham, John Sharpe | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Black, Alexander William | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Boland, John | Johnson, John | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Brigg, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Reddy, M. |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Joyce, Michael | Richards, Thomas (W Monm'th) |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Caldwell, James | Kilbride, Denis | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Labouchere, Henry | Roche, John |
| Cawley, Frederick | Lamont, Norman | Rose, Charles Day |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Langley, Batty | Runciman, Walter |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Seeley, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight. |
| Crean, Eugene | Levy, Maurice | Sheehy, David |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lewis, John Herbert | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cullinan, J. | Lloyd-George, David | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Delany, William | Lough, Thomas | Slack, John Bamford |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Lundon, W. | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| Donelan, Captain A. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Suliivan, Donal |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Tomkinson, James |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Crae, George | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Ellice, Capt E C (S Andrw's Bghs) | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Mooney, John J. | Warner, Thomas Conrtenay T. |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Murphy, John | Wason, John Oathcart (Orkney) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nannetti, Joseph P. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E) | Norman, Henry | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Wills, Arthur Walters (N. Dorset) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | O'Donnell, T. (Kerrv, W.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Dowd, John | Emmott and Mr. Barran. |
§ Clause 3:—
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that he desired to move that the Chairman report Progress and ask leave to sit again. It was now a quarter to three and they had been sitting there and dealing with the Bill for about two hours and a-half. They had made very substantial progress, but there still remained a clause and a schedule of very considerable importance to be dealt with. They raised a question in which a large number of Members were interested, and they also raised many other matters in respect of this Bill and the Army Act. He thought the 790 Committee ought to have an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon them. He did not think the Prime Minister had been there during the course of the earlier discussions, but he did not think anyone would deny that the discussions which they had had were of a practical character. ["Oh."] He did not know whether hon. Members who said "Oh" were present during the discussion. The Secretary of State made no statement to the effect that their discussion was not practical, and he answered their Questions more or less. After all, the Committee ought to remember that this was an important Bill which affected the 791 whole of our Regular Army, and to a large extent, the Militia and the Volunteers, and they ought to have opportunities to discuss it. They knew that the Government wanted to get rid the Militia and the Volunteers. [Cries of of "Withdraw."] What was there to withdraw?
§ MR. SKEWES-COX (Surrey, KingstonThe allegation that the Government wish to get rid of the Militia and the Volunteers. That is a most inaccurate allegation.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he would that amend it to this extent that he would say that the Secretary of State for War wished to abolish the Militia and the Volunteers. ["No."] Well, the right hon. Gentleman had said so. He wished to get rid of the whole of the Militia and largely of the Volunteers. But that was beside the mark. His point was that this was an important Bill and the Opposition had not taken the advantage which they might have taken of discussing it at length. It was discussed a few years ago when the Liberals were in office, and the Government of the day, seeing that there was a desire to discuss it, gave the opposition an opportunity of doing so. What they objected to was that the Government had not given them proper opportunities of discussing it, and he did think it would be desirable if progress were reported. He would appeal to the Prime Minister that for the sake of the Secretary for War himself the Motion should be acceded to. That right hon. Gentleman had taken part in many heavy discussions during the week and had been in the House all that day. There had, moreover, been prolonged sittings during the week.
§ Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Sydney Buxton.)
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E)congratulated the hon. Member on being in such a fine vein of humour at such an hour in the morning. The hon. Gentleman argued that, because he 792 and his friends had sat up to please themselves on four nights in the week, they now required special relaxation to recover from their self-imposed labours. That was hardly an argument that appealed to the Government. It was said that the last Liberal Government gave greater opportunities for discussion of this Bill. They did. The opportunity lasted from midnight until eight o'clock in the morning. [OPPOSITION cries of "Hear, hear!"] precisely, then why should hon. Members wish to adjourn now? It was the most singular reason that was ever given by an hon. Gentleman sitting on that bench for adjourning a debate when they had reached three o'clock, that when he and his friends were in office the discussion lasted till eight o'clock in the morning.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid the Government which then sat on that bench did not closure as this Government had done.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid that was because it wished for martial law.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid it was not desirable to discuss closure, but whether closure was put on or not the late Government resisted, on the other occasion, Motions for adjournment and they thought that they gave a fitting opportunity to discuss this Bill. Why should he, after that, say that they should not discuss this Bill.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEBecause we are not prepared to discuss the Bill.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid its importance nobody denied, and if it was not passed the whole constitution of the Army would ipso facto fall to pieces. [An HON. MEMBER: It would be as bad as the Government.] But there was no use in prolonging discussions over clauses which were precisely identical down to the very comma with the Bill which the House passed last year. There was nothing new in the Bill before the Committee; it was a constitutional necessity, and he hoped the House would continue to discuss it with a view of passing it into law.
§ *MR. MCCRAEtrusted that the Prime Minister would accede to the request of his hon. friend, and said that one reason why the Bill should be postponed was that as it stood it made a very invidious distinction as regarded the Volunteers. Was the Secretary of State for War aware that the Army Act only applied to those Volunteers who were brigaded along with the Regular Army. It had been the policy of the right hon. Gentleman to bring up the status of the Volunteers as far as possible to that of the Army.
§ *MR. MCCRAEsaid he was not going to discuss the Bill. He was only suggesting a reason to the Prime Minister why he should accept this Motion to report Progress, because there were questions of great importance which it would not be fair to discuss at three o'clock in the morning. He put it to the Prime Minister, on behalf of those who had not had the opportunity of having two nights off in the week, if he had any human sympathy left, to agree to the Motion.
§ MR. JOSEPH WALTONsaid that if the Prime Minister had been present and not absent, and had heard the debate, he did not think he would have told them that this was an Act which they ought to pass year after year without reasonable consideration. At all events, he was convinced that our soldiers in the Army and the people in the country would not consider that the Government and the right hon. Gentleman opposite were rightly safeguarding the interests of our soldiers by thrusting an important measure like this through the House in the early hours of the morning without any discussion whatever. He appealed to the Prime Minister to give them reasonable and proper facilities for the consideration of the measure. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not use his Parliamentary majority in this flagrantly unfair fashion against the interests of the Army.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was sorry the Prime Minister could not see 794 his way to accede to the reasonable request which had been put forward. There was no programme of legislation before the House, and the Government could not therefore use the excuse that they were hard pressed to get important Bills through. If they had that excuse he could understand their discussing this Bill till an early hour in the morning. The right hon. Gentleman had been simply dawdling all these weeks and then the Committee was compelled to sit into the early hours of the morning to pass a Bill of this sort. The Prime Minister said it was irrelevant whether this Bill was closured or not in 1893, but it was not irrevelant for this reason: the Prime Minister himself said there was a difference between discussing a Bill before twelve o'clock and discussing it after twelve.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid it seemed to be perfectly in order for the Prime Minister to make an observation but it seemed to be out of order for him to reply to it.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLOn the point of order, said he had always understood as to the closure that they were not allowed to discuss the particular merits of a particular question of closure, but they were allowed to discuss as to whether the closure was under certain circumstances carried fairly or otherwise. That distinction had been taken over and over again and he could show the Chairman half-a-dozen instances.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was not discussing the conduct of the Chair. He was discussing a remark made by the Prime Minister, and he was sure the Chairman would not have one rule for the Prime Minister and another for a private Member.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI do not think the hon. Member should make that remark. An observation about the closure 795 was made across the floor of the House and I simply answered it. I did not start it.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he did not know who started it, but he thought the circumstances of the hour were sufficient to justify the Motion to report Progress. In the interest of the Prime Minister himself he thought they ought to have an adjournment. From the very close attention he had given to the business of the House that day, he thought I that they, ought to report Progress in his interest. Besides that, there were the poor Whips, who were short-handed at that moment. Then there was the very popular chief Whip of the Party opposite; in his interest he thought they ought to adjourn so as to enable him to get a rest, It was all very well for the Prime Minister to resist Progress, but why did he not have some feeling for this poor sufferer? The chief Whip had been there when the Prime Minister pursued the policy, which he initiated, of running away. He should also think it had been a harassing day for the Prime Minister himself, who ought to give himself the rest which he did not have the night before in consequence of a certain election. He thought also that it was only fair to his supporters that he should adjourn. It must have been a very harassing day also for them, and they showed signs of despondency and despair. He thought they should reconsider their position, but they did not seem to have given themselves any time to do that. For these and other reasons he thought they ought to adjourn the debate. The right hon. Gentleman also seemed to forget that there were people outside the House who took an interest in this matter. He seemed to forget that there was such a place as Brighton, although perhaps the Patronage Secretary had informed him that there had been an interesting discussion going on there, and that the Motion had been carried.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANI do not think that is relevant to the Motion before the House, which is that I report Progress and ask leave to sit again.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid it was because he wanted Progress that he was 796 reminding the Prime Minister that the country wanted progress. There was a very important question which would have to be discussed under Clause 3. They had not been allowed to discuss Clause 2, which dealt with matters of life and death to soldiers, but on Clause 3 they had to deal with the question of billeting and it also dealt with matters of importance to officers, and the pay of officers. They had also new clauses to bring forward with a view of enabling soldiers to have proper access to this Act of Parliament which even the War Minister, with all his lucidity, could not explain to the Committee. Another important subject was the abolition of corporal punishment in the Army. His hon. friend the Member for South Donegal had three or four hours to discuss the question of flogging in the Navy; why should they not have three or four hours to discuss it in the Army? He thought they ought to have an opportunity of discussing these very important matters at a time when the House of Commons could really discuss them with energy and intelligence, and when they could be reported in the public Press. The Prime Minister did not think the country was taking an interest in the discussion of the House of Commons, but he thought he had been disillusioned within the last twenty-four hours.
§ MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN (Kilkenny, N.)was quite sure that the Prime Minister was not aware of the fact that up to the present not a single Irish Member had been allowed to address the House. It was undesirable that the Irish Members should be asked to commence the debate at three o'clock in the morning. They had heard several eloquent speakers from Wales, and several Scottish Members had spoken. He thought Ireland was also entitled to have a voice in this, matter because Irish and Scottish soldiers, practically did all the fighting for England. He thought it was unfair of the Prime Minister, who had not had to listen to some of the speeches to which they had had to listen, to go home at three o'clock in the morning and impose upon the Committee the necessity of continuing. 797 the debate till eight o'clock. He happened to be a constituent of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Belfast and he understood that when he left the War Office he would also leave the representation of West Belfast. The next, clause which would come before them was a very important one—
§ MR. JOSEPH DEVLINsaid he did not propose to discuss the clause, but merely to call attention to the fact that a very important clause was about to be discussed. An hon. friend of his had raised a very important point as to the publication of an abstract of the Army Act, and this next clause was the one upon which it could be raised. In his opinion an abstract of the Act should be supplied to the barracks of Ireland and England.
§ MR. JOSEPH DEVLINsaid he only mentioned it because an important suggestion had been made, therefore, speaking purely unofficially and on his own behalf and as the only Member for Ireland who took an interest in this question, he thought the Prime Minister should withdraw his opposition to the Motion that Progress should be reported. He thought
§ he could show the Prime Minister where one of the clauses of the Army Act was absolutely illegal.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member is speaking to the Motion to report Progress. It is absolutely out of order for him to discuss that matter.
§ MR. JOSEPH DEVLINsaid the Prime Minister was not there when the second clause was passed, and he thought he should point out to him that in the Army Act one of the clauses stated that rates should be struck by the grand jurors in Ireland, whereas as a matter of fact there were no grand jurors in Ireland.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member must not refer to the clauses of the Army Act. He must confine himself to the reasons for reporting Progress.
§ MR. JOSEPH DEVLINsaid he was pointing out how much of the time of the House had been lost already by passing an Act which dealt with grand jurors in Ireland which did not exist.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 150; Noes, 113. (Division List No. 112.)
799| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Brassey, Albert | Duke, Henry Edward |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Butcher, John George | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Cambpell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J.(Manc'r |
| Arnold-Forster,Rt Hn. Hugh O. | Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst |
| Arrol, Sir William | Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Balcarres, Lord | Coates, Edward Feetham | Fison, Frederick William |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r) | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A.E. | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Forster, Henry William |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch. | Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Gardner, Ernest |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin&Nairn) |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M.M. | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Davenport, William Bromley | Gordon, Maj. Evans (T'H'mlets |
| Bill, Charles | Denny, Colonel | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim |
| Bingham, Lord | Dickson, Charles Scott | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury |
| Bond, Edward | Doughty, Sir George | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Gretton, John |
| Groves, James Grimble | Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H. E (Wigt'n) | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Hambro, Charles Eric | Maxwell, WJ. H (Dumfriesshire | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry | Milvain, Thomas | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Hay, Hon. C'laude George | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East |
| Heath, Sir James (Staffords N. W | Moore, William | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks |
| Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | Spear, John Ward |
| Hoult, Joseph | Morpeth, Viscount | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm | Morrell, George Herbert | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Morrison, James Archibald | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Hunt, Rowland | Mount, William Arthur | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Kerr, John | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Tuff, Charles |
| Keswick, William | Nicholson, William Graham | Turnour, Viscount |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley | Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H. |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Percy, Earl | Ward, Colonel C. E. |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N. R | Pretyman, Ernest George | Whiteley, H.(Ashton und. Lyne |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Purvis, Robert | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham) | Randles, John S. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Long, Rt Hn. Walter(Bristol, S. | Reid, James (Greenock) | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Renwick, George | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Ridley, S. Forde | |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | Viscount Valentia. |
| Martin, Richard Biddulph | Round, Rt. Hon. James | |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Mara, James |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Higham, John Sharp | O'Shee, James John |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hobhouse, C.E.H.(Bristol, E. | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Black, Alexander William | Johnson, John | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Boland, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Brigg, John | Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire) | Reddy, M. |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Joyce, Michael | Redmond, John E.(Waterford) |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Kennedy, Vincent P (Cavan, W. | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th) |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Kilbride, Denis | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Caldwell, James | Lamont, Norman | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Langley, Batty | Roche, John |
| Cawley, Frederick | Law, Hugh Alex (Donegal, W. | Rose, Charles Day |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall | Runciman, Walter |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Levy, Maurice | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Lewis, John Herbert | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (IsleofWight |
| Crean, Eugene | Lough, Thomas | Sheehy, David |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lundon, W. | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cullinan, J. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Delany, William | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sullivan, Donal |
| Doogan, P. C. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | M'Crae, George | Tomkinson, James |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Kenna, Reginald | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Ellice, Capt E.C. (S.A'd'w' sBgh) | Mooney, John J. | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Emmott, W Alfred | Murphy, John | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Nannetti Joseph P. | Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Norman, Henry | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Connor, John (Kildare. N.) | |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Keir Hardie and Mr Arthur |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herb. John | O'Dowd, John | Henderson. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."
802§ The committee divided:—Ayes, 112; Noes,150.(Division List No 113.)
803| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E) | Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Shee, James John |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Higham, John Sharp | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Black, Alexander William | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Boland, John | Johnson, John | Reddy, M. |
| Brigg, John | Jones, Lief (Appleby) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh'e) | Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th |
| Barke, R Haviland- | Joyce, Michael | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan, W.) | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Caldwell, James | Kilbride, Denis | Roche, John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lamont, Norman | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cawley, Frederick | Langley, Batty | Runciman, Walter |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Levy, Maurice | Sheehy, David |
| Crean, Eugene | Lewis, John Herbert | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lloyd-George, David | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lundon, W. | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| Delany, William | Lyell, Charles Henry | Sullivan, Donal |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Tomkinson, James |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | M'Crae, George | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Daffy, William, J. | M'Kenna, Reginald | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Ellice, Capt E. C.(S.A'd'w'sBgh) | Mooney, John J. | Warner,Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Emnott,W Alfred | Murphy, John | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Nannetti, Joseph P. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Norman, Henry | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary, Mid | Wilson, John(Durham, Mid.) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O' Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O' Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Herbert Gladstone and |
| Gilhooly, James | O' Donnell, T.(Kerry,W.) | William M'Arthur, |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O' Dowd, John | |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Butcher, John George | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Campell, J.M.H.(Dublin Univ.) | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire | Finlay, Sir R.B.(Inv' rn' ssB' ghs |
| Arrol, Sir William | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Fison, Frederick William |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Coates, Edward Feetham | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Balcarres, Lord | Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E. | Forster, Henry William |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Gardner, Ernest |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds | Colston, Chas, Edw. H. Athole | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch. | Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.) | Gordon, Hn. J. E.(Elgin & Nairn) |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Gordon, Maj. Evans-(T'r H' m' s |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Davenport, William Bromley- | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Denny, Colonel | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) |
| Bill, Charles | Dickson, Charles Scott | Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury |
| Bingham, Lord | Disraeli, Conings by Ralph | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Doughty, Sir George | Groves, James Grimble |
| Bond, Edward | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Gretton, John |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middles'x | Duke, Henry Edward | Hambro, Charles Eric |
| Brassey, Albert | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Hamilton, Marq.of(L' nd' nd' rry) |
| Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Hay, Hon. Claude George | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Heath, Sir James (St'ff'ds.N.W) | Moore, William | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Morgan, David J.(WaIthamst'w | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Hoult, Joseph | Morpeth, Viscount | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Howard, John (Kent, Faversham | Morrell, George Herbert | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks |
| Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Morrison, James Archibald | Spear, John Ward |
| Hunt, Rowland | Mount, William Arthur | Stanley, Hn. Arthur(Ormskirk |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Kerr, John | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Keswick, William | Nicholson, William Graham | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | O' Mara, James | Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M. |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Tuff, Charles |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley | Turnour, Viscount |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Percy, Earl | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H. |
| Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. NR | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Pretyman, Ernest George | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C.E.(T' nt' n |
| Leveson-Gower, Fred'k N. S. | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham | Purvis, Robert | Whitley, H.(Ashton und. Lyne |
| Long, Rt. H. Walter (Bristol, S. | Randles, John S. | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Reid, James (Greenock) | Willough by de Eresby, Lord |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Renwick, George | Wilson, A.Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Ridley, S. Forde | Wilson, John (Glasgow.) |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | |
| Maxwell, Rt. H Sir H.E.(Wig'n | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Milvain, Thomas | Rutherford, John(Lancashire) | and Viscount Valentia. |
§ MR. O'MARA (Kilkenny, S.)wished to explain a personal matter. In the last division he got into the wrong lobby. It occurred in this way——
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member has made his explanation and it will appear in the Papers tomorrow in the ordinary way.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEmoved an Amendment to provide that payment for the refreshments which innkeepers were bound to supply to soldiers billeted upon them should be paid for by "the officers, non- commissioned officers, or other responsible persons in charge of the detachment." He wished to clear up the question of who was the person who was liable to meet these payments to the innkeeper. If these men refused to provide a meal they were subject to all sorts of pains and penalties. They had to find such quantities of "diet" and small beer as might from time to time be fixed by His Majesty's regulations.
§ MR. O'MARAsaid he very much resented the speech which had been made by his colleague the Member for North Kilkenny, who said that no Irish Member other than himself was interested in the Army. Long before the hon. Member had come into that House 804 he had proved that nobody took a deeper and keener interest in the Army than he did himself. Night after night after twelve, o'clock he had endeavoured to improve the efficiency of the Army. He did resent that the hon. Member should think that military knowledge was confined to himself. He thought, however, that Kilkenny, with two out of its three Members taking an interest in this subject, was well represented. As he was endeavouring to explain to the Chairman, he unfortunately found himself in the wrong lobby. ["Oh."] He was not going to pursue that subject, as he was most careful to obey the rulings of the Chair, but it occurred while he was reading Clause 106, which had reference to this matter. That clause provided that if by reason of any sudden order to march, or otherwise, the officer or soldier was unable to make such payment to the innkeeper he should cause the account to be made out and sign it. If he were the innkeeper upon whom soldiers were billeted he should write off all the accounts as bad, because he should have no chance of recovering the amounts from the Secretary for War. That was a great hardship on these unfortunate innkeepers throughout the country on whom soldiers were quartered. If the suggestion of hon. Members were followed and everybody read the Army Act he hoped they would not find themselves in the 805 same predicament as himself, viz., in the wrong lobby.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member must not refer to that; he must confine himself to the Amendment.
§ MR. O'MARAsaid he would do so, and proceeded to contend that the Amendment was a most proper one. He appealed to the Secretary for War to accept the Amendment, so that the innkeeper should be paid.
§ *COLONEL WELBY (Taunton)said it was some years since he had been marching with troops, but the sum for the billets was always paid before they left the billets, the officer or non-commissioned officer in charge being responsible they were paid, and certifying to it. He did not think there was any difficulty about the innkeeper being paid even when he engaged other billets, but whether the price paid was sufficient was another matter. He had never heard of a case where there was any difficulty about payment for billets.
§ MR. CATHCART WASON (Orkney and Shetland)said he should like to know what the British taxpayer thought of this, and explained that "diet" was an old Scotch phrase, meaning a meal. The Amendment before the Committee was one of very considerable importance and suggested that in addition the clause might be amended by adding that the payment should be at such reasonable prices as might from time to time be fixed
§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid the point was perfectly clear; the Act pro vided that an officer whoso force required billets in accordance with the Act should before he departed pay a just demand.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEthough that the answer given by the Secretary for War was a perfectly reasonable one an said he was prepared to withdraw the Amendment. He should not have move these particular words if he had bee aware of the section which the right hon. Gentleman had quoted.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
806§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGE moved to leave out the words "At prices given in the schedule of this Act," in order to insert "at reasonable prices." In the towns in which soldiers were billeted licensed victuallers were compelled to take them in, and that very often dislocated the whole of their business. They did not object to take the soldiers in, but they objected to the prices of the schedule.
§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGEthought he might move to omit the prices in the schedule and to insert in this clause "at reasonable prices." They could not have a schedule which was applicable to the whole of the country, because the prices were different and the accommodation was different. That was the point taken by Mr. Hanbury in the debate in which the Chairman took so conspicuous a part, and supported Mr. Hanbury's contention. He was perfectly in order. In some parts of the country accommodation could be supplied much more cheaply than in others, and if they had a schedule applicable to the whole country it was very unfair. In some watering places where accommodation was exceedingly scarce, soldiers came during the training season, the innkeepers were bound to take them in, and were obliged to refuse ordinary visitors during the season, and obliged to take such sums as lfrac12;d. and 4d. He thought there ought to be some scale of terms which was perfectly elastic. He had opposed licensed victuallers as much as anybody on that side of the House when he considered they were I exacting unfair terms from the public, but he wanted perfect fairness for them. He asked if it was fair to compel the licensed victuallers to accept 1frac12;. and 4d. for the meals of a soldier. This was not the affair of the soldier at all, but it was a question whether the country should pay reasonably for the accommodation which was afforded to their servants.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 3, line 11, to leave out the words 'the prices specified in the Schedule to this Act,
807
and insert the words 'reasonable prices.' "—(Mr. Lloyd- George).
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ MAJOR SEELYthought the Amendment was an exceedingly reasonable proposition, and although it was now somewhat early in the morning he thought that if they had been taking the Bill under ordinary circumstances they certainly would have raised this point. The hon. and gallant Member for Taunton was good enough to explain to them in the course of the few remarks which he made a short time before, that when he went from place to place with the Scots Greys there was not much objection to the punctuality of the payment made, but he could not be certain there was no objection to the price. From what he knew of the billeting of soldiers, he was aware that, although innkeepers had no objection whatever to billeting them as such, they did object very strongly in some places to the prices which were paid. In his opinion the prices paid were not reasonable, and probably the Committee were not aware how much it was that the keeper of a victualling house was asked to do for soldiers. The keeper of a victualling house was to receive officers or soldiers, and was required to furnish such accommodation, lodging, attendance, and food as
§ was necessary. There was a specia note stating that the officer should pay for his own food, which was inserted later in the Act. The actual prices paid might, perhaps, be more effectively discussed on the schedule, and, therefore, it was only necessary to say here that they were on an extraordinarily low scale. This scale had not been varied for thirteen years, and it included the lodging, attendance, and food of the soldier. These charges did not apply to private houses, as they did in Germany, because here private houses were specifically excepted, and the consequence was that all soldiers had to be billeted at inns. The point he wished to put before the Committee was that the system of billeting was not at all the same as that pursued in any Continental country, and that, therefore, the charges to be paid which were enumerated in the schedule were really wholly inadequate——
§ Mr. Secretary ARNOLD- FOESTEB rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ MAJOR SEELYYou ought to have replied.
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided; Ayes, 146; Noes, 105. (Division List No. 114.)
809| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire) | Fison, Frederick William |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Forster, Henry William |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Coates, Edward Feetham | Gardner, Ernest |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. |
| Arrol, Sir William | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Gordon, Hn. J.E.(Elgin &Nairn |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Gordon, Maj Evans (T'r H'mlets |
| Balfour. Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r.) | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds) | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christen. | Davenport, William Bromley | Green, W. D. (Wednesbury) |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Denny, Colonel | Greene, W. Raymond(Cambs |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Dickson, Charles Scott | Gretton, John |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Groves, James Grimble |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Doughty, Sir George | Hambro, Charles Eric |
| Bingham, Lord | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Hamilton, Marq.of (L'donderry |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Duke, Henry Edward | Harris, F Leverton (Tynemouth |
| Bond, Edward | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Hay, Hon. Claude George |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F (Middlesex | Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward | Heath, Sir J. (Staffords., N. W. |
| Brassey, Albert | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield. Brightside |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Hoult, Joseph |
| Butcher, John Gaorge | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil |
| Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Fisher, William Hayes | Hunt, Rowland |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W. | Morpeth, Viscount | Sinclair, Louis (Romford) |
| Kerr, John | Morrell, George Herbert | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Keswick, William | Morrison, James Archibald | Smith, A. H. (Hertford, East) |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | .Mount, William Arthur | Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks) |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Spear, John Ward |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Nicholson, William Graham | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes. |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Lawson, John G. (Yorks., N. R. | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Percy, Earl | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Tuff, Charles |
| Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Turnour, Viscount |
| Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.) | Pretyman, Ernest George | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Purvis, Robert | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Randles, John S. | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunt'n |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Reid, James (Greenock) | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Renwick, George | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Ridley, S. Forde | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir HE. (Wigt'n) | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.) |
| Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Milvain, Thomas | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Round, Rt. Hon. James | |
| Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Moore, William | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Sharpe, William Edward T. | Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E. | Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Malley, William |
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Mara, James |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Shee, James John |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Hayden, John Patrick | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Black, Alexander William | Higham, John Sharp | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Boland, John | Johnson, John | Reddy, M. |
| Brigg, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Redmond, John E (Waterford) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh. | Richards, Thos.(W.Monmouth) |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Joyce, Michael | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Caldwell, James | Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.) | Roberts, John H. (Deubighs.) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Kilbride, Denis | Roche, John |
| Cawley, Frederick | Lamont, Norman | Rose, Charles Day |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Langley, Batty | Runciman, Walter |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Crean, Eugene | Lewis, John Herbert | Sheehy, David |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lloyd-George, David | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cullinan, J. | Lundon, W. | Sinclair, John(Forfarshire) |
| Delany, William | Lyell, Charles Henry | Sullivan, Donal |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radelifte) |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Tomkinson, James |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Crae, George | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Kenna, Reginald | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Ellice, Capt EC (S.Andrw'sB'ghs | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Wason, John C (Orkney) |
| Emmott, Alfred | Mooney, John J. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Murphy, John | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Ffrench, Peter | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Findlay, Alex (Lanark, N.E.) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Charles Hobhouse and Mr. |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Herbert Samuel. |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Dowd, John | |
| Gladstone, Rt, HI Herb. John | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
812§ The committee divided; Ayes, 145; Noes, 101.(Division List No.115.)
813| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Forster, Henry William | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Gardner, Ernest | Mount, William Arthur |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, Hn J. E. (Elgin &Nairn | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn Hugh O | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Arrol, Sir William | Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Gosehen, Hon. George Joachim | Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Percy, Earl |
| Balfour, Rt Hn A. J. (Manch'r) | Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.) | Gretton, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Groves, James Grimble | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bartley, Sir Georgo C.T. | Hambro, Charles Eric | Purvis, Robert |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry | Randles, John S. |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bingham, Lord | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Renwick, George |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Heath, Sir James(Staffords N W | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Bond, Edward | Hope, J. F.(Sheffield, Brightside | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Bowles, Lt-Col. H. F. (Middlesex) | Hoult, Joseph | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Brassey, Albert | Howard, John (Kent, Favershm | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Butcher, John George | Hunt, Rowland | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt Hn Col. W. | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kerr, John | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Keswick, William | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Knowles, Sir Lees | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Laurie, Lieut-General | Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Spear, John Ward |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lawson, Hn HL W (Mile End) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks NR | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lewson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham | Tun, Charles |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Long, Rt Hn Walter (Bristol, S.) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Denny, Colonel | Lonsdale John Brownlee | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Walrond, Rt Hn Sir William H. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Macdona, John Cumming | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Doughty, Sir George | Maconochie, A. W. | Welby, Lt.-Col. ACE (Taunton) |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Majendie, James A. H. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F. | Whiteley, H (Ashton und. Lyne |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir HE (Wigt'n) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R. |
| Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J.(Manc'r | Milvain, Thomas | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | |
| Finlay, Sir R B (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Moore, William | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Fisher William Hayes | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Fison, Frederick William | Morpcth, Viscount | Viscount Valentia. |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Morrell, George Herbert | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E. | Cautson, Richard Knignt | Duffy, William J. |
| Abraham William (Rhondda) | Cawley, Frederick | Elibank, Master of |
| Allen, Charles P. | Clancy, John Joseph | Ellice, Capt E C (SAndrw'sBghs. |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Condon, Thomas Joseph | Emmott, Alfred |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Crean, Eugene | Esmonde, Sir Thomas |
| Black, Alexander William | Cremer, William Randal | Eve, Harry Trelawney |
| Boland, John | Cullinan, J. | Fenwick, Charles |
| Brigg, John | Delany, William | Ffrench, Peter |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Doogan, P. C. | Flynn, James Christopher |
| Caldwell, James | Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. |
| Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | M'Crae, George | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Griffith, Ellis, J. | M'Kenna, Reginald | Roche, John |
| Hardie, J Keir (MerthyrTydvil) | M'Killop, W. (Sligo. North) | Rose, Charles Day |
| Hayden, John Patrick | Mooney, John J. | Samuel, Herbert L. (CL veland) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Murphy, John | Samuel, S. M. (Whitecharel) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E. | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Sheehy, David |
| Johnson, John | O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Jones, Leif (Appleby) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Joyce, Michael | O'Donneil, John (Mayo, S.) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radelifte) |
| Kennedy, Vincent P(Cavan,W. | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Tomkinson, James |
| Kilbride, Denis | O'Dowd, John | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Lamont, Norman | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Langley, Batty | O'Malley, William | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | O'Mara, James | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney |
| Layland-Barratt, Francis | O'Shee, James John | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Lewis, John Herbert | Paulton, James Mellor | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Lloyd-George, David | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mio.) |
| Lundon, W. | Power, Patrick Joseph | |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Reddy, M. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Redmond, John E.(Waterforo) | Osmond Williams and Mr. |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Richards, Thomas(WMonm'th) | Fuller. |
§ Whereupon Mr. Secretary ABNOLD-FORSTER moved, "That the Question That the clause stand part of the Bill' be now put."
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEOn a point of order, I submit that it is not fair and respectful to the House that a Minister of the Crown should mutter and mumble some Motion of which the Committee does not hear a word.
§ MB. CHARLES HOBHOUSENot a word was heard.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 145; Noes, 100. (Division List No. 116.)
814§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLCannot the right hon. Gentleman speak out in the English language. He had better raise his voice next time.
*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe right hon. Gentleman moved that the Question, "That Clause 3 stand part of the Bill" be now put. The Question is "That the Question that Clause 3 stand part of the Bill be now put."
§ Question put.
815| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Finlay, Sir R.B. (Inv' rn'ssB'ghs) |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire) | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Fison, Frederick William |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Coates, Edward Feetham | Forster, Henry William |
| Arrol, Sir William | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Gardner, Ernest |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) |
| Balfour-Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gordon, Maj. Evans (T'r H'mlets |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Davenport, William Bromley | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Denny, Colonel | Green, W. D. (Wednesbury) |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Dickson, Charles Scott | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Gretton, John |
| Bingham, Lord | Doughty, Sir George | Groves, James Grimble |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Hambro, Charles Eric |
| Bond, Edward | Duke, Henry Edward | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynemouth |
| Brassey, Albert | Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward | Hay, Hon. Claude George |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r. | Heath, Sir J. (Staffords., N.W.) |
| Butcher, John George | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Briahtside |
| Campbell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Hoult, Joseph |
| Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Moore, William | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Hunt, Rowland | Morpeth, Viscount | Smith, A. H (Hertford, East) |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Morrell, George Herbert | Smith, Rt Hn. J Parker(Lanarks |
| Kerr, John | Morrison, James Archibald | Spear, 'John Ward |
| Keswick, William | Mount, William Arthur | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk) |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Nicholson, William Graham | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W.(Mile End) | Peel Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley | Tuff, Charles |
| Lawson, John G. (Yorks., N. R.) | Percy, Earl | Turnour, Viscount |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Pretyman, Ernest George | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Purvis, Robert | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Randles, John S. | Whiteley, H.(Ashton-und-Lyne |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Reid, James (Graenock) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Renwick, George | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Ridley, S. Forde | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H. E. (Wigt'n) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | |
| Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Milvain, Thomas | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | Viscount Valentia. |
| Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E. | Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Mara, James |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Shee, James John |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Higham, John Sharp | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Black, Alexander William | Johnson, John | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden V |
| Boland, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Brigg, John | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Reddy, M. |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Joyce, Michael | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Caldwell, James | Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.) | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Kilbride, Denis | Roberts, John H. (Denbigns.) |
| Cawley, Frederick | Lamont, Norman | Roche, John |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Langley, Batty | Rose, Charles Day |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilrid (Cornwall) | Runciman, Walter |
| Crean, Eugene | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lewis, John Herbert | Samuel S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lloyd-George, David | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Delany, William | Lundon, W. | Sheehy, David |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sullivan, Donal |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Taylor Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Crae, George | Tomkinson, James |
| Ellice,Capt EC (S.Andrw'sB'ghs | M'Kenna, Reginald | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Killop, W.(Sligo, North) | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Mooney, Jonn J. | Walton. Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Murphy, John | Wason, John C. (Orkney |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nannetti, Joseph P. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.) | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Conner, John (Kildare, N.) | |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Charles Hobhouse and Mr. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Dowd, John | Fuller. |
| Griffith, Ellis, J. | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
816§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 145; Noes, 101. (Division List, No.117.)
819| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Anson, Sir William Reynell | Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Arkwright, John Stanhope | Arrol, Sir William |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Balcarres Lord | Gordon,Maj Evans-(T r'H'mlets | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r) | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W (Leeds) | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. Christch. | Greene, Walford D (Wednesbury | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Percy, Earl |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Groves, James Grimble | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Hambro, Charles Eric | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bingham, Lord | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th | Purvis, Robert |
| Bond, Edward | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Randles, John S. |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F (Midell'sex | Heath, SirJames (Staffords.NW | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Brassey, Albert | Hope, J. F.(Sheffield, Brightside | Renwick, George |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hoult, Joseph | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Butcher, John George | Howard, John (Kent, Faversham | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.) | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Hunt, Rowland | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire) | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt, Hn. Col. W. | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Kerr, John | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Keswick, William | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Knowles, Sir Lees | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Smith, RtHn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Lawson. Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End | Spear, John Ward |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Denny, Colonel | Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham) | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lon, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Tuff, Charles |
| Doughty, Sir George | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Turnour, Viscount |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Macdona, John Cumming | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Maconochie, A. W. | Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir William H. |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Majendie, James A. H. | Warde, Colonel C.E. |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Welby. Lt. Col. A. C. E (Taunton) |
| Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Maxwell, Rt, Hn. Sir HE. (Wigt'n, | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Maxwell, W. J. H. Dumfries'hire | Whiteley H.(Ashton und. Lyne |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Milvain, Thomas | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Wilson, A Stanley (York, E.R.), |
| Fisher William Hayes | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fison, Frederick William | Moore, William | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— Sir |
| Forster, Henry William | Morpeth, Viscount | Alexander Acland Hood and |
| Gardner, Ernest | Morrell, George Herbert | Viscount Valentia. |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick) | Morrison, James Archibald | |
| Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin&Nairn | Mount, William Arthur | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William(Cork, N. E.) | Duffy, William J. | Johnson, John |
| Allen, Charles P. | Elibank, Master of | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Ellice, Capt. EC (SAndrw's Bghs | Jones, William (Carnarvons.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Emmott, Alfred | Joyce, Michael |
| Black, Alexander William | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.) |
| Boland, John | Eve, Harry Trelawney | Kilbride, Denis |
| Brigg, John | Fenwick, Charles | Lamont, Norman |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Ffrench, Peter | Langley, Batty |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Findlay, Alexander (Lanark, NE | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall.) |
| Caldwell, James | Flynn, James Christopher | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Cawley, Frederick | Fuller, J. M. F. | Lloyd-George, David |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Gilhooly, James | Lundon, W. |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Crean, Eugene | Goddard, Daniel Ford | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift |
| Cremer, William Randal | Griffith, Ellis J. | Mac Veagh, Jeremiah |
| Cullinan, J. | Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) |
| Delany, William | Hayden, John Patrick | M'Crae, George |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | M'Kenna, Reginald |
| Doogan, P. C. | Higham, John Sharp | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Hobhouse,C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | Mooney, John J. |
| Murphy, John | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Power, Patrick Joseph | Taylor, Theodore O. (Radeliffe) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Reddy, M. | Tomkinson, James |
| O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Trevelyan, Charles philips |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Rickett, J. Compton | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| O'Connor, John (Kildare,N. | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Roche, John | White, George (Norfolk) |
| O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Rose, Charles Day | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| O'Dowd, John | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mia.) |
| O'Malley, William | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight) | |
| O'Mara, James | Sheehy, David | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| O'Shee, James John | Shipman, Dr. John G. | Catheart Wason and Mr. Runciman. |
| Paulton, James Mellor | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
§ MR. KEIR HARD1E moved a new clause, which read as follows:—"An abstract of the Army Act, principally of those sections referring to Judges,offences, and punishments, shall be prepared and exhibited in every recruiting station, and shall be read to each applicant for service in the Army before he is permitted to enlist. "Under the Coal Mines Regulation Act an abstract of the Act and a copy of the rules in force in a colliery had to be prepared and posted up in legible characters in some conspicuous place at, or near, the mine, where they might be read by persons employed or those about to be employed. The Act also provided that a copy of this abstract and rules should be supplied to every collier working in the mine. Under the Act of 1887 it was laid down in effect that, if colliers were to be expected to obey the law, steps should be taken to let them know what the law was, and surely what was held to be necessary in the case of colliers should not be less necessary in the case of soldiers. The Army Act which they were discussing consisted of 190 clauses, and it was impossible to believe that even an experienced soldier could know a tithe of the clauses which he was expected to obey. Young men were induced to enter a sphere which was altogether new to them, and where their duties were altogether new. There was nothing to which they had been accustomed in their former state of life, and yet they were expected to obey all the provisions of this Act subject to very serious penalties. It was, for instance, laid down that, if a young soldier saw soldiers on the other side whom he thought he could take prisoners, and in his zeal rushed out to secure these men without having first obtained permission from his superior officer, he by that very act 820 was rendering himself liable to pena servitude. He asked that these things should be put in such handy form that the soldier should know what was expected of him. There were other things in this Act with which a person seeking enlistment should be made acquainted. There were all sorts of restrictions and limitations imposed upon the soldier. He saw the glowing advertisements posted outside the post offices, churches and prisons, and read the glowing accounts of deeds of heroism on the field of battle, but he was not made acquainted with the regulations and conditions under which he was expected to serve when he enlisted. Even if it were desirable to parade the glories of the Army in order to induce a man to enlist, the other side also should be revealed to him, so that the man might not enlist in ignorance of what he was doing. One reason why men of decent stamina were refusing to enter the Army at all was because they heard that the conditions of service were unduly hard and severe. These facts got spread abroad and made men chary about enlisting. Thousands were of his opinion that if good meu could be obtained they would make up for the weaklings. The more honour and honesty there was in regard to enlisting in the Army the better would be the class of men likely to be drawn into it.
§ *MR. ARTHUR HENDERSON (Durham, Barnard Castle)seconded, and said he thought they were fully justified in pressing this new clause. They had appealed to the Secretary of State for War that something in the nature of an abstract should be published for the benefit of the soldier. Those appeals, however, were evidently not considered and there 821 fore they were compelled to take the only course open to them, and that was to bring forward a new clause and propose that it be added to the Bill. This was no new principle they were asking the Committee to accept. The mover of the Resolution had pointed to the Coal Mines Regulation;Act, which provided for an abstract so far as miners were concerned. There was a much more recent example to be found in the Truck Act of 1898, passed by a Conservative Government. Under that Act the employer was to summarise the main features and post them in a place so that those employed should know the conditions which would apply to them. One hon. Member had suggested that the case of the soldier and of the ordinary workman were entirely different, but he failed to see where the difference existed. Surely if it were right for Governments to enforce conditions upon employers it must also be right that Governments, who were employers, should be prepared to accept similar conditions for the servants they employed. It was, moreover, right that the Committee should stand up for the soldier. They had had a general desire expressed since the publication of the Report of an inquiry into the condition of the Army, for a higher degree of efficiency, and efficiency could not be built up on ignorance. If they were going to withhold from the soldier, or from the individual who desired to enlist, the actual conditions under which his services should take place, surely it was not tending to the promotion of a higher state of efficiency. He ventured to suggest that the more knowledge they could give to the individual unit in the various sections of the Army the better it would be. We might have a smaller Army as the result, but it would be better to have a smaller but informed Army, and that the men should enter the service fully informed as to the conditions under which the were to serve.
A New Clause (Exhibition of abstract in recruiting stations),—(Mr. Keir Hardie),—brought up, and read the first time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That tin Clause be read a second time."
822§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid he could not accept the clause as he thought it was quite unnecessary. He did not see why such a provision was more necessary for the Army than it was for the Navy. No exception was taken on the part of the men in regard to their present state of information, and it had not been contended that what was called the "Small Book" which they were entitled toapply for and possess and which most men did possess, was insufficient. The sections of the Army Act which deal with discipline were read out constantly to the troops, and every soldier could see the Act itself and what was known as the summary of the Act contained in the "Small Book."
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEAre those read out also to the recruits joining?
§ MR. J. A. PEASEsaid that some of them were ignorant of what the contents of this "Small Book" might be, but what they desired was that both those who proposed to become recruits as well as those who joined the Army should really understand what the penalties were to which they subjected themselves when they joined the Army, and what the offences were in respect of which those penalties were imposed. Many hon. Members thought that the State should be a model employer, and the House had compelled employers to place certain rules before their workmen It was now proposed that they should lay down rules very similar for themselves to those they had laid down for others. Was, he asked, the "Small Book" a fair abstract of the 190 clauses, of the Army Act?
§ MR. JOSEPH WALTONsaid it was indeed surprising that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War who expressed a most extreme-anxiety for the reorganisation and reform of the Army in order to make it more efficient for the defence of the Empire, should have a moment's hesitation in conceding what had been asked for in the new clause proposed. It was absolutely reasonable that those who were asked to join the Army should be informed before they were recruited 823 what were the terms and conditions, the regulation, and discipline to which they were to be subjected. He represented a district of Yorkshire from which came a very large number of recruits during the war, and a very large number of Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteers also came from there and offered to go to South Africa to fight the battles of their country. But their experience was that the discipline of the Army was needlessly harsh in many respects, and the system sent back nine out of ten of these men absolately disgusted with the Army and military operations, and when the time came again when this country needed every son to fight her battles they would not get the same response as on the last occasion. If the right hon. Gentleman wished to defend the British Empire he would remove unjust and senseless restrictions and the petty conditions which were contained in the Army Act. If was high time that the Army Act was raconsidered by the House to a much
§ fuller degree than it had been in late years. For the Prime Minister to tell them that the Army Act had been passed year after year was no excuse for his proceeding to endeavour not to allow them a fair opportunity of discussing it. The Secretary for War owed it to the Committee that he should not meet proposals of this sort in a carping spirit, but that he should welcome them and remove everything which was an impediment to the best men entering the Army. He regretted deeply the manifestation of this want of sympathy both on the part of the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for War.
§ Mr. Secretary ARNOLD- FORSTER rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 141; Noes, 96. (Division List No. 118.)
825| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Keswick, William |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Knowles, Sir Lees |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Duke, Henry Edward | Laurie, Lieut.-General |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) |
| Arrol, Sir William | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J.(Mauc'r. | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Lawson, John G.(Yorks., N. R. |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage |
| Balcarres, Lord | Finlay, Sir R. B.(Tnv' rn' ssB' ghs | Leveson-Gower Frederick N. S. |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A.J.(Manch'r) | Fisher, William Hayes | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds) | Fison, Frederick William | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch. | Flower, Sir Ernest | Lonsdale, John Brownlee. |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Forster, Henry William | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Gardner, Ernest | Macdona, John Cumming |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Maconochie, A. W. |
| Bingham, Lord | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Gordon, J.(Londonderry, South | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F |
| Bowles, Lt,-Col. H. F.(Middlesex | Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'r.H' mlets | Maxwell, Rt. Hn. Sir H. E. (Wigtn |
| Brassey-Albert | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Milvain, Thomas |
| Butcher, John George | Green, W. Alford D (Wednesbury | Molesworth, Sir Lewis |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Gretton, John | Moore, William |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Groves, James Grimble | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Hambro, Charles Eric | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Mount, William Arthur |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Heath, Sir J (Staffords. N. W.) | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Hoult, Joseph | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Percy, Earl |
| Davenport, W. Bromley- | Hunt, Rowland | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Denny, Colonel | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W. | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Kerr, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Smith, A. H. (Hertford, East) | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Purvis, Robert | Smith, Rt. Hn J. Parker (Lauarks | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Randles, John S. | Spear, John Ward | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne |
| Reid, James (Greenock) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ornskirk | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Renwick, George | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Ridley, S. Forde | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Talbot, Lord E. (Chiehester) | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. | |
| Round, Rt. Hon. James | Tuff, Charles | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | Turnour, Viscount | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander | Walker, Col. William Hall | Viscount Valentia. |
| Sharpe, William Edward T. | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. | |
| Skewes-Cox, Thomas | Warde, Colonel C. E. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Griffith, Ellis J. | O' Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Allen, Charles P. | Haydeu, John Patrick | O' Malley, William |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Higham, John Sharp | O' Mara, James |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | O' Shee, James John |
| Black, Alexander William | Johnson, John | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Boland, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Brigg, John | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Caldwell, James | Kilbride, Denis | Rickett, J.Compton |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lamont, Norman | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Langley, Batty | Roche, John |
| Crean, Eugene | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lewis, John Herbert | Runciman, Walter |
| Cullinan, J. | Lloyd-George, David | Samuel, Herbert D. (Cleveland) |
| Delany, William | Lundon, W. | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Sheehy, David |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Duffy, William J. | M' Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Crae, George | Sullivan, Donal |
| Ellice, Capt EC (S. Andrw'sBghs | M' Kenna, Reginald | Tomkinson, James |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Mooney, John J. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Murphy, John | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Wason, John C. (Orkney) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.) | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Whitley, J. H.(Halifax) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O' Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O' Connor, John (Kildarc, N) | |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | O' Donnell, T.(Kerry, W.) | Arthur Henderson and Mr. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O' Dowd, John | Keir Hardie. |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the clause be read a second time."
826§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 94 Noes, 141. (Division List No.119.)
827| AYES. | ||
| Abraham William (Cork N. E. | Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Goddard, Daniel Ford |
| Allen, Charles P. | Doogan, P. C. | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Duffy, William J. | Higham, John Sharpe |
| Black, Alexander William | Elibank, Master of | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) |
| Boland, John | Ellice, Capt EC (S. Andrw's Bghs | Johnson, John |
| Brigg, John | Emmott, Alfred | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Eve, Harry Trelawney | Joyce, Michael |
| Caldwell, James | Fenwick, Charles | Kennedy, Vincent P. Cavan, W. |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Ffrench, Peter | Kilbride, Denis |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Findlay, Alexander (Lanark NE | Lamont, Norman |
| Crean, Eugene | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Langley, Batty |
| Cremer, William Randal | Fuller, J. M. F. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) |
| Cullinan, J. | Gilhooly, James | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Delany, William | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | Lundon, W. |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | O' Malley, William | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | O'Mara, James | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | O'Shee, James John | Sullivan, Donal |
| M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Paulton, James Mellor | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| M'Crae, George | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Tomkinson, James |
| M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Power, Patrick Joseph | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Mooney, John J. | Reddy, M. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Murphy, John | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Rickett, J. Compton | Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Roberts, John H. (Denhighs) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid | Roche, John | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Rose, Charles Day | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Runciman, Walter | |
| O'Donnell, John (Mayo,S.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) | Mr. Keir Hardie and Mr. |
| O'Dowd, John | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight | Arthur Henderson. |
| O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Sheehy, David | |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Gardner, Ernest | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Mount, William Arthur |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn) | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, South | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn Hugh O. | Gordon, Maj. Evans (T'r H' ml' ts | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Arrol, Sir William | Goschen, Hon, George Joachim | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury). |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Percy, Earl |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Green, Walford D (Wednesbury | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balearres, Lord | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Gretton, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds | Groves, James Grimble | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Hambro, Charles Eric | Purvis, Robert |
| Banner, John S, Harmood- | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Randles, John S. |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Renwick, George |
| Bingham, Lord | Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords, N.W | Ridley, S Forde |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hope, J.F.(SheffieId, Brightside | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Bowles, Lt-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Hoult, Joseph | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Brassey, Albert | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Butcher, John George | Hunt, Rowland | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Campbell. J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Carson, Rt. Hon, Sir Edw. H. | Kerr, John | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Keswick, William | Smith Abel H.(Hertlord, East) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Knowles, Sir Lees | Smith Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks) |
| Clive, Captain Percv A. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Spear, John Ward |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Ceilings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W.(Mile End) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Lawson, John Grant(Yorks. NR | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Toralinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Tuff, Charles |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham | Turnour, Viscount |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Long, Rt. Hn Walter(Bristol, S.) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Denny, Colonel | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Macdona, John Cumming | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Maconochie, A. W. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Majendie, James A. H. | Whiteley, H.(Ashton und. Lyne |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Willough by de Eresby, Lord |
| Fellowes, Hon, Ailwyn Edward | Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir HE(Wigt'n | Wilson, A. Stanley (York. E. R.) |
| Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J (Manc'r. | Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Milvain, Thomas | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | |
| Finlay, Sir RB (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | TILLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Moore, William | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Fison, Frederick William | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | Viscount Valentia. |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Morpeth,Viscount | |
| Forster, Henry William | Morrell, George Herbert |
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he rose to move to report Progress, and submitted that the time had arrived when the Prime Minister should allow them to do so. They had made considerable progress and there was Progress to report. They had practically got through the whole of the Bill and had come to deal with new clauses. There were four or five of the new clauses to be proposed which were very important. ["Oh."] Did hon. Members mean to suggest that the question of corporal punishment in the Army was not an important question.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLIt has not. Whoever told you that told you wrong.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was moving to report Progress on the Bill, and he appealed to the Prime Minister to allow them to report Progress as the measure must necessarily take some time. There was a very important Bill coming on at noon. Could it be that the object of the Government was not to forward their own business, but to delay other business? Did they want the Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sisters Bill not to come on?
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Lloyd- George.)
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Motion was not one that he could be expected to accede to. He was not aware of any occasion on which, the Army Bill, upon which they were now engaged, introduced without changes to the House had taken more time than this Bill had taken. There was nothing in the circumstances this year which should make them depart from their ordinary course. He hoped the hon. Member would allow them to continue the discussion.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid he understood that it was not necessary that the Act 830 should be passed until the 30th of April. They had four days next week and three the week after before the holidays began. Any night on Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday next week would be fully ample time to discuss the matter in Committee; and as it was quite certain that the Government did not mean to accept any Amendment it meant that once that stage of the Bill was over, the only remaining stage, would be the Third Reading. That would mean under the system of closure, which apparently was regularly to be applied, half an hour on Monday or Tuesday next. Under those circumstances why should not the Prime Minister allow them to report Progress now at a reasonable hour. If he did not, what was the alternative? This Bill required an enormous amount of amendment. The Prime Minister had to set the brute force of his majority against the ingenuity on the Opposition side. The brute force was that of a weakened majority. Once before the right hon. Gentleman, attempted this plan, but he failed to carry it out. The Opposition could protract the proceedings till twelve that day, or till midnight. [Cries of "Go on."] He very well remembered last session that cries of "Go on; go on" were raised at five or six o'clock in the morning, but between eleven and twelve and one and two there was abject silence on those benches. Hon. Members opposite ought to recognise, if they did not, that there was a quite sufficient body of Gentlemen on that side of the House who were ready to sit as long as they were. They ought to recognise that every single clause of this Army Act was the subject of Amendment by new clauses inserted in the Army (Annual) Bill, and the closure had to come into operation on each new clause under the present system. It was therefore possible for them to have at least 190 new clauses. Would it not be infinitely better for the right hon. Gentleman to allow his dejected followers to go home quietly to bed, and he would in the long run get his Bill through with far less expenditure of labour than if he persisted in going on now. The next Motion of Progress might be moved at ten o'clock, but the three or four hours which intervened had better be spent in bed.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid that this was the second evening this week that this Bill had been put down for discussion. It was put down on an earlier evening as the second order, and then the House come down to discuss it at a reasonable length, thinking that they should have another opportunity. But for some mysterious reason there was nobody on that bench to move the Committee stage of the Bill on Tuesday evening last, and the result was that the discussion instead of taking two evenings had been confined to one evening. They on that side, however, were not responsible for he action of the Government on Tuesday last. They regretted their absence and would have been perfectly prepared to discuss this Bill then. They were, however, driven to discuss this Bill in one evening when it ought to have taken two. Ever since they had been discussing these matters there had been great
§ consultations between the Financial Secretary and the Attoraey-General in order, he had no doubt, to arrive at a fuller comprehension of this Act than the Financial Secretary had before this discussion took place. They were not, however, only going to discuss clauses with which the Attorney-General was familiar, but new clauses with which he was unacquainted. He thought it was better that they should adjorn till Monday next when the two hon. Gentlemen could come to an agreement on the points.
§ Mr. A. J. BALFOUR rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 141; Noes, 96. (Division List No. 120.)
833| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J.(Mane'r | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Long, Rt. Hon. Walter (Bristol, S |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Lonsdale, John Brownlee |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Finlay, Sir R.B.(Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred |
| Arrol, Sir William | Fisher, William Hayes | Macdona, John Cumming |
| Atkinson, Rt Hon. John | Fison, Frederick William | Maconochie, A. W. |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Flower, Sir Ernest | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Forster, Henry William | Massey-Main waring, Hn. W. F. |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r. | Gardner, Ernest | Maxwell, Rt Hn. Sir H. E(Wigt'n |
| Balfour, Rt Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Maxwell, W.J.H (Dumfriesshire |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch. | Gordon, Hn.J.E.(Elgin & Nairn) | Milvain, Thomas |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Molesworth, Sir Lewis |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Gordon, Maj Evans(T'r H' mlets | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Gosehen, Hon. George Joachim | Moore, William |
| Bingham, Lord | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Bowles, Lieut.-Col H F (Middle'x | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Brassey, Albert | Gretton, John | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Groves, James Grimble | Mount, William Arthur |
| Butcher, John George | Hambro Charles Eric | Murray, Charles J.(Coventry) |
| Campbell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Hamilton, Marq of(L'donderry) | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Heath, Sir James (Staffords N W | Percy Earl |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Hope, J. F(Sheffield, Brightside) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Hoult, Joseph | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Colston, Charles Ed w. H. Athole | Hunt, Rowland | Purvis, Robert |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col W. | Randles, John S. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Kerr, John | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Keswick, William | Renwick, George |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Knowles, Sir Lees | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Denny, Colonel | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W (Mile End) | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Duke, Henry Edward. | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N.R | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Egerton, Hon. A. do Tatton | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Skewes-Cox, Thomas | Tuff, Charles | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R. |
| Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East | Turnour, Viscount | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks | Walker, Col. William Hall | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Spear, John Ward | Walrond, Rt. Hon Sir William H | |
| Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk | Warde, Colonel C. E. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton) | Alexander Aoland-Hood and Viscount Valentia. |
| Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon | |
| Talbot, Lord E. (Chiehester) | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne) | |
| Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. | Willoughby do Eresby, Lord | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | O'Mara, James |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Shee James John |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Higham, John Sharpe | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Black, Alexander William | Johnson, John | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Boland, John | Jones, Lief (Appleby) | Reddy, M. |
| Brigg, John | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Joyce, Michael | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W. | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Caldwell, James | Kilbride, Denis | Roche, John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lamont, Norman | Rose, Charles Day |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Langley, Batty | Runciman, Walter |
| Crean, Eugene | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lewis, John Herbert | Samuel, S. M. (White chapel) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lloyd-George, David | Seely, Maj. J. E. B (Isle of Wight) |
| Delany William | Lundon, W. | Sheehy, David |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Mac Veagh, Jeremiah | Sullivan, Donal |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Crae, George | Tomkinson, James |
| Ellice, Capt E. C (S Andrw'sB'ghs | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Emmott, Alfred | Mooney, John J. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Murphy, John | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Ffrench, Peter | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary, Mid | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Findlay, Alexander (Laiiark, NE | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | O'Connor, John (Kildare N.) | |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | M'Kenna and Mr. Charles |
| Gladstone, Rt. Kn. Herbert John | O'Dowd, John | Hobhouse. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Malley, William |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and leave to sit again."
835| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E. | Doogan, P. C. | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil |
| Allen, Charles P. | Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark) | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Duffy, William J. | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Elibank, Master of | Higham, John Sharp |
| Black, Alexander William | Ellice, Capt E.C (SAndrw'sB'ghs | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) |
| Boland, John | Emmott, Alfred | Johnson, John |
| Brigg, John | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Eve, Harry Trelawney | Jones,William (Carnarvonshire |
| Burke E. Haviland | Fenwick, Charles | Joyce, Michael |
| Caldwell, James | Ffrench, Peter | Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan, W. |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E. | Kilbride, Denis |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Lament, Norman |
| Crean, Eugene | Fuller, J. M. F. | Langley, Batty |
| Cremer, William Randal | Gilhooly, James | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) |
| Cullinan, J. | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | Lloyd-George, David |
| Delany, William | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Lundon, W. |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Griffith, Ellis J. | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | O'Malley, William | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Mac Veagh, Jeremiah | O'Mara, James | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | O'Shee, James John | Sullivan, Donal |
| M'Crae, George | Paulton, James Mellor | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| M'Kenna, Reginald | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Tomkinson, James |
| M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Power, Patrick Joseph | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Mooney, John J. | Reddy, M. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Murphy, John | Redmond, John E. (Waterford | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Rickett, J. Compton | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary, Mid | Roche, John | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Rose, Charles Day | |
| O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Runciman, Walter | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland) | Herbert Lewis and Mr. Cath- |
| O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) | cart Wason. |
| O'Dowd, John | Seely, Maj J. E. B. (Isle of Wight | |
| O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Sheehy, David |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Gardner, Ernest | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Mount, William Arthur |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Gordon, Hn. J E. (Elgin & Nairn | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Murray, Col. Wyndhara (Bath) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. H. O. | Gordon, Maj Evans (TrH'mlets | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Arrol, Sir William | Goschen Hon. George Joachim | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Percy, Earl |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balcarres, Lord | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs). | Plummer, Sir Waller R. |
| Balfour, Rt Hon. A. J. (Manch'r | Gretton, John | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds | Groves, James Grimble | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.) | Hambro, Charles Eric | Purvis, Robert |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry | Randles, John S. |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Renwick, George |
| Bingham, Lord | Heath Sir James (Staffords. NW | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Bright side | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Hoult, Joseph | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Brassey, Albert | Howard, John (Kent Faversham | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Butcher, John George | Hunt, Rowland | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt Hon. Col. W. | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kerr, John | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Keswick, William | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Knowles, Sir Lees | Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks.) |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Laurie, Lieutenant-General | Spear, John Ward |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawrence, Wm. E. (Liverpool) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N.R. | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Craig Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Tuff, Charles |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham | Turnour, Viscount |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S. | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Denny, Colonel | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Macdona, John Gumming | Welby, Lt.-Col A.C.E. (Taunton |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Maconochie, A. W. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Majendie, James A. H. | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und Lyne |
| Kgerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Massey-Mainwaring, Hon. W. F. | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Maxwell, Rt Hn. Sir H. E. (Wigt' n | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, W. R. |
| Fergusson, R. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Milvain, Thomas | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Moore, William | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Fison, Frederick William | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | Viscount Valentia. |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Morpeth, Viscount | |
| Forster, Henry William | Morrell, George Herbert |
*THE DEPUTY- CHAIRMANasked the hon. Member for Oswestry to explain his new clause which provided that notwithstanding anything in the Act it should not be lawful to inflict corporal punishment upon soldiers for insubordination and other offences. How did he bring that in as a new clause, seeing that the Act had already been altered and flogging abolished?
§ *MR. BRIGHT (Shropshire, Oswestry)said that Section 133 of the Army Act proved that the new clause was in order. Section 133 provided that power should be vested in the Secretary of State, and in India in the Governor-General, from time to time to make, alter, and repeal rules for the management of military prisons and the maintenance of discipline in them and for the punishment of prisoners by the infliction of twenty-five lashes for offences committed by such prisoners. That was to say, that there was the power of inflicting twenty-five lashes in military prisons for offences of military insubordination or otherwise, and he thought it was an exceedingly shocking state of things. They had believed that some time ago all corporal punishment had been abolished from the Army, and he thought it was something rather contrary to our present degree of civilisation to find that simply for offences in discipline in prisons there was still power to inflict such an extreme penalty as twenty-five lashes under the support and authority of the Secretary of State. He did not know whether this was likely to commend itself to the House, and he thought there ought to be some reconsideration of this matter. He thought this was an instance of savagery. He did not know whether this provision was acted upon, but what had struck him about the Act was that it wanted a thorough overhauling, and if the result of that night's debate was to get these twenty-five lashes done away with something would have resulted from it. He begged to move.
§ MR. TOMKINSON (Cheshire, Crewe)seconded the new clause and said this was a subject in which he felt very deeply interested. They looked with 838 great interest each year to the Report of His Majesty's Inspector of Military Prisons, and he thought they had ground to complain that they did not receive it much earlier. The latest Report they now had in their hands was that for 1903. He had turned to that, and saw that on seven different occasions in our home prisons, excluding those in Egypt and India, corporal punishment with the, cat-o'-nine tails was inflicted, although the inspector did not give any details as to the number of lashes.
§ MR. TOMKINSONsaid he was alluding to military prisons. A great improvement had taken place, and that great improvement was due to the very earnest lady who wrote a very thrilling book called "Scarlet and Steel." It was said to be sensational and exaggerated, but he had looked into the matter and had ascertained the sources of her information, and found it was founded on fact and on truth. What was the state of the case? The soldier now was supposed to be let off absolutely from the disgraceful and degrading punishment of flogging. He was sent to a military prison only for a military offence, and he continued a soldier. If he committed a civil crime he was tried before a civil Court and went to a civil prison, and that did not come under their cognisance. As he had said if a soldier sent for a military offence to a military prison was still a soldier and ought not to be subjected to this disgraceful and odious punishment of flogging which was now inflicted upon him. He contended strongly that the supposed necessity for flogging in military prisons was only a proof of the incompetence of the authorities, namely, of the governors and warders, to keep order there. Previously to recant reforms there were in this country two classes of military prisons, one at the head of which were officers who were gentlemen, and at the head of the other were retired sergeant-majors or retired police officers. In these different prisons were practically the same number of prisoners, and yet there were practically twice as many corporal punishments 839 inflicted in the prisons presided over by the ex-sergeant-majors or the police officers as there were in the prisons presided over by the officers and gentlemen. That proved that one class of men had thought it necessary to inflict this sort of punishment twice as often as had the other class. Corporal punishment had been done away with in Irish prisons and had not been inflicted for years, and yet in our military prisons it had been inflicted on several occasions, although the Irish authorities had found themselves able to dispense with it, and to keep perfect order without it. He thought that the soldier in the British Army ought to be absolutely free from any liability to such a punishment, whether free or detained in a military prison. It was a cruel and brutalising punishment—the punishment of a slave.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLYes, of a Chinese slave.
§ MR. TOMKINSONsaid it was torture. People asked what twenty-five lashes meant. The lash had nine tails, and was a method of inflicting the severest punishment without actually endangering life.
§ New Clause (Prohibition of corporal punishment,)—(Mr. Bright,)—brought up, and read the first time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the clause be read a second time."
§ *THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT, Cheshire, Macclesfield)thought the hon. Member for Oswestry had chosen an unfortunate method of drawing attention to this subject, because he had drawn up a new clause by which it was suggested that the practice of flogging continued in the Army. He was sure the hon. Member did not intend to suggest that, but that undoubtedly was the suggestion made by his clause. In his speech, however, he pointed out that he was referring to military prisons.
§ *MR. BRIGHTI am willing to alter the clause so as to make it refer to military prisons only.
§ *MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTthought the Committee quite understood what the hon. Member desired. It was quite true that in military prisons they retained this power for enforcing discipline, which was found to be necessary for the protection of warders placed over civil prisoners. It was not for him to say whether it was necessary or not. He objected to this form of punishment as much as any hon. Members could, but the proper method of raising this very important question was not upon a side issue on the Army Annual Bill, but as a direct issue upon the larger question of whether it was or was not necessary to retain the power in prisons generally, on the Civil Service Estimates. He was quite sure that the Secretary of State for War would follow the example of abolishing this punishment if it were set by the civil authorities.
§ MR. J. H. LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)said it was not their fault that they were raising the question now. The right hon. Gentleman had admitted the enormous importance of it, and his Government had forced on the discussion of this question till twenty minutes past six in the morning. There were a large number of military offences under the Act which were punishable by flogging. Taking the fourth clause, there were in that seven classes of offences, and any prisoner who was subject to military law and who committed one of those offences would be liable to suffer death or any such punishment as was mentioned in the Act, and flogging was mentioned in the Act.
§ *MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTNo, the hon. Member is mistaken.
§ MR. J. H. LEWISsaid the hon. Gentleman the Member for Oswestry had read the clause in which that punishment was laid down. In the next clause there were six different classes of offences for which the offender was liable to suffer penal servitude or such other punishment as was mentioned in the Act. In other clauses there were other offences for which the offender was liable on conviction to suffer death or such other punishment as was mentioned in the Act. He thought that his hon. friend 841 had made out a case for the new clause. They had had an admission from the Government that the question was of a most important character, and they had had a statement that flogging did not now prevail. But they found that it did now prevail, and now was the time for the House of Commons to discuss and vote upon the subject.
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL(Sir ROBERT FINLAY,) Inverness Burghssaid that if the hon. Gentleman would look at the Army Act he would see that he was mistaken in supposing that flogging in the Army for any of the offences he referred to existed as a punishment. Flogging in the Army had been abolished, but a soldier was subject in civil prisons to the same punishment as other persons.
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid precisely so, but if it was found necessary in civil prisons to have recourse to flogging, for what reason could the hon. Member suggest that it was not suitable in military prisons? Civil and military prisoners were on the same footing. If the whole subject was to be considered, he very much doubted if it would be possible to secure safety for the warders if flogging was abolished. He confessed that he had serious doubts upon the subject, and it would be obviously absurd to make this distinction now between civil and military prisons, and that was the only question with which the Committee was concerned.
§ MR. JOSEPH WALTONIs it not abolished in Ireland?
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYI am not aware of that.
§ MR. JOSEPH WALTONsaid the Parliamentary Secretary to the War Office had told them that this was not a suitable opportunity on which to raise this most, important question, but he might point out to the hon. Gentleman that when the opportunity arose on the Vote for Prisons they were closured, and, therefore, His Majesty's Government had 842 not on that occasion given them an opportunity to raise it. His Majesty's Government had led the country to believe, and the country did believe, that flogging had been abolished absolutely and utterly in the British Army. [Cries of "So it has been."] It had not, because they now found that it prevailed in military prisons. Therefore, as the occupants of military prisons were soldiers, flogging was not abolished in connection with the Army. He would challenge any Member on the Government side of the House who voted against this new clause to go down to his constituents and see if he could get a vote of confidence; which showed that flogging in any shape or form, whether it was inside or outside military prisons, should not be permitted. It was a degrading form of punishment which ought to be abolished for ever. If nothing else had been done by their sitting up all night than the raising of this question of common humanity and justice to our soldiers the night would have been well spent. They sought to have in the Army men of good character, morale, and physique, but when a man possessing those qualities knew that when he entered the Army, by some mischance, he was liable to be sent to a military prison and flogged there, he would not enter the Army. Flogging was not popular in connection with the British Army, and it was generally believed to have been abolished for ever. The question had been raised of flogging in civil prisons, but they on that side objected to that as much as to flogging in military prisons. They could not discuss civil prisons that evening, but they were entitled to say that they abhorred the practice and that flogging was calculated to discourage the best class of men from entering the Army and was responsible largely for the ineffective condition of the Army.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid the Financial Secretary to the War Office, although he admitted the importance of this matter, rather evaded the point of his right hon. friend's clause. He said that there was flogging in civil prisons, and that the Government were only applying the same rule to military prisons, but the Financial Secretary had overlooked this fact, that the civil prisons 843 received prisoners who had done something which involved a moral taint. Many of the offences under the Army Act, however, for which a soldier would be sent to a military prison were mere acts of indiscretion.
§ *MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTIt has not been suggested that they are flogged for such offences as that.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that there again the hon. Gentleman had overlooked the difference between the two classes of prisoners. A man might be imprisoned in a military prison not because he was guilty of any moral turpitude, but simply on account of an indiscretion. They had 24,000 cases of imprisonment in a year in the Army, and these were not cases of crime. They were not offences in the sense in which they were in civil prisons. What happened? The moment the prisoners were in the military prisons they were liable to be flogged by the order of a couple of subalterns sitting as a Court-martial. [Cries of "No, no !"] He said that two subalterns, sitting as a Court-martial, at the present time could order a flogging. [Several HON. MEMBERS: The hon. Member is quite wrong.] His authority was obtained from those who had investigated the matter for themselves.
§ LIEUTENANT MORRISON (Wiltshire, Wilton)pointed out that two subalterns could not constitute a Court-martial as the law required three subalterns to constitute one.
§ MR. J. A. PEASEsaid he thought what the hon. Member for Carnarvon had said was rather due to something that he had told him a few moments ago. He thought it was only fair that if the hon. Gentleman had made a mistake on his direction he, at any rate, should take the responsibility. In 1897 he went very fully into this matter. He got a gentleman at the Bar to go into all the statutes under which prisoners could be flogged in prison for various offences. He had to go through a large number of cases, and in one of those cases he distinctly remembered that two subalterns were responsible for the flogging of one 844 of these prisoners in a military prison. He was quite sure of the fact.
§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGEhoped the hon. Member was satisfied now. [Cries of "No."] All he could say was that he was prepared to accept the authority of his hon. friend. Supposing they had 24,000 military offences in the course of a year for which offenders were imprisoned. In all those cases they could be flogged, and he did not think it was fair to treat members of the Army in the same way as they treated criminals. Did the hon. Member think it was fair and calculate I to raise the character of the Army, that the soldier, for a breach of discipline, should be liable to the same class of punishment as the burglar or housebreaker in Wandsworth Gaol.
§ LIEUTENANT MORRISONsaid that as he was challenged by the hon. Member, he might say that the discussion that night was not calculated to clear the matter up. What he had wanted was the hon. Gentleman's authority for his statement.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he had asked the hon. Member a specific Question and one which really went to the root of the matter. That Question was whether the hon. Member considered it right that a soldier who was in prison for a small breach of discipline should be treated in the same way as a prisoner in Wandsworth Gaol, who was there for house-breaking or stealing, and the hon. Gentleman very discreetly refrained from answering his Question. The defence of the War Office was that because this was done with the criminal and civil prisoners the same treatment ought to be meted out to the soldiers in military prisons. But what was the use of abolishing flogging in the Army when, by the simple excuse of putting a man in prison for drunkenness—and that was what very often happened—he could be flogged for a military offence. That was the Answer which was given by the Financial Secretary.
§ *MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTsaid that what he wished to convey was that they held that what was necessary for the protection of civil warders in the one 845 case, was necessary for the protection of soldier warders in the other case.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he quite understood that the hon. Gentleman's proposition was that the soldier was on the same level as the criminal. [Cries of "No."] But that was the proposition, and, according to the hon. Gentleman, he was to be treated on the same level as a criminal, and yet the hon. Gentleman was one of those who ranted more than anyone else against anyone who was said to attack our soldiers in the South African War. Now, however, the hon. Gentleman was engaged in attempting to rush through a Bill at seven o'clock in the morning in which he placed the soldier on the same level as the criminal. The First Lord of the Treasury had put them on the same level as the Chinese coolie, but the hon. Gentleman had gone further and put them on the same level as the criminal. Gentlemen on the other side said that they had abolished corporal punishment in the Army, but now they had to admit its existence. [Cries of "No."] They would deny anything. Their only answer was the closure. Here they had in this Act a provision for twenty-five lashes being given, applying to every man in a military prison for offences not of a civil character but of a military character. He was glad to have extracted from the hon. Member that admission.
§ *COLONEL WELBYwished to explain how totally wrong the hon. Member was as to the treatment of men in military prisons. No Court-martial in peace time could inflict the punishment of flogging, and the only way in which a soldier could suffer flogging in prison was for an offence against prison discipline. And then this punishment was only given in cases where there had been personal violence towards the warders. He had only known one case of its being inflicted, and, as far as he could recollect, in that case the punishment was a warded by the Garrison Board of Visitors. He had been a member of that board, and, after they had awarded that punishment, it
§ had to be confirmed by the general officer commanding, and one of the board had to see it carried out. He was the officer who was detailed to be present, and all he could say was that, although he did not wish to see the man flogged, the only man who seemed to be suffering from it was the doctor, whose nerves gave way. The punishment was so light that the man himself suffered so little that he laughed. Then, again, there was a difference between the lash used in prisons and that used in the old days when there was flogging in the Army. The lash in the old days had not only nine lashes but nine knots on every lash. The "cat" which was used now had nine lashes, but there was only one knot on each lash, while the handle, which used to be springy, was now stiff, making the strokes far less severe. He thought it was very wrong for the hon. Member for Carnarvon to try and make out to the world that soldiers were treated in the same way as burglars. He said it was not true.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid that his hon. friend was perfectly justified in every word which he had just uttered. The defence put forward by the Financial Secretary was that corporal punishment was never inflicted upon soldiers except upon exactly the same terms as it was inflicted upon civilians, and his argument was that if they objected to corporal punishment they should raise the question on the Vote for Civil Prisons. But the cases were not parallel, for the law which governed civil prisons was not the same as the law which governed military prisons. Military prisons were subject to the Prisons Act of 1877, and the Act which governed civil prisons was the Prison Act of 1898. Until the hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary could prove that military prisons were governed under the Act of 1898 he could not prove that the punishment was inflicted upon soldiers upon the same terms as civilians.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 89; Noes, 136. (Division List No. 122.)
| Brigg, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | O'Mara, James |
| Caldwell, James | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | O'Shee, James John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Joyce, Michael | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Crean, Eugene | Kilbride, Denis | Reddy, M. |
| Cullinan, J. | Langley, Batty | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Delany, William | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.) | Lewis, John Herbert | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lloyd-George, David | Roche, John |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Lundon, W. | Rose, Charles Day |
| Duffy, William J. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Elibank, Master of | Mac Neill, John Gordon Swift | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Emmott, Alfred | Mac Veagh, Jeremiah | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Sheehy, David |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | M'Crae, George | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Fenwick, Charles | M'Kenna, Reginald | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Ffrench, Peter | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Mooney, John J. | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | Murphy, John | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Gilhooly, James | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid) | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Morthyr Tydvil) | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | |
| Higham, John Sharp | O'Dowd, John | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Bright and Mr. Tomkinson. |
| Johnson, John | O'Malley, William |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Fergusson, Ht. Hn. Sir J.(Manc'r | Long, Col. Charles W. (Kvesham |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S. |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Lonsdale, John Brownlee |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred |
| Arrol, Sir William | Fisher, William Hayes | Macdona, John Cumming |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Fison, Frederick William | Maconochie, A. W. |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Flower, Sic Krnest | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Forster, Henry William | Massey-Mainwaring, Hon. W. F. |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J (Manch'r | Gardner, Ernest | Maxwell, Rt Hn. Sir H. E. (Wigt' n |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire |
| Balfour, Kenneth R (Christch. | Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin & Nairn) | Milvain, Thomas |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Molesworfh, Sir Lewis |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets | Moon, Edward Robert Paey |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim | Moore, William |
| Bingham, Lord | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Bowles, Lt-Col. H. F. (Middlesex | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Brassey, Albert | Gretton, John | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Groves, James Grimble | Mount, William Arthur |
| Butcher, John George | Hambro, Charles Eric | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry | Murray (Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Heath, Sir James (Staffords. NW | Percy, Earl |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Hoult, Joseph | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Hunt, Rowland | Purvis, Robert |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. | Randles, John S. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Kerr, John | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Keswick, William | Renwick, George |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Knowles, Sir Lees | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Denny, Colonel | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. NR | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Egerton, Hon. A. do Tatton | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks. | Walker, Col. William Hall | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Spear, John Ward | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Stanley, John Arthur (Ormskirk | Wards, Colonel C. E. | |
| Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.(Taunton | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon- | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. | Whiteley, H.(Ashton-und-Lyne | Viscount Valentia. |
| Tuff, Charles | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid it appeared that military prisoners were not treated the same as civil prisoners.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANDo I understand that the hon. Member wants to alter the Civil Prisons Act? Of course he cannot do that.
MAJOR SEEsaid he wished to propose a new clause as follows—
On and after the passing of this Act the Prisons Act of 1898 shall be substituted for the prisons Acts of 1865 and 1877 under Section 133, Sub-section 2, of the Army Act.The effect of that would be that for the first time military prisoners would, in point of fact, be treated in the same way as civil prisoners. At present they were not so treated, because he thought the Committee would realise that their prison procedure was gradually getting less and less severe, so that the present Act of 1898 was less severe than the previous Act of 1877, and still less severe than the Act of 1865. Therefore they had discovered that military prisoners had a real and genuine grievance, inasmuch as they were liable to be punished under the Acts of 1877 and 1865 while civil prisoners were punished under the Act of 1898. In the Army, however, a man might find himself in prison for absurdly small offences. Not only might he find himself in prison for overloading a chartered vehicle, but he might find himself in prison because he forgot to pay the driver of the cab which he had hired. Then, having got into prison for a trivial offence for which a civilian would not get into prison at all, if he became obstreperous he did not find himself punishable under the less severe Act of 1898, but under the Acts of 1865 and 1877.
§ New Clause (Prisons Act, 1898)—(Major Seely)—brought up, and read the first time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be road a second time."
850§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he certainly did not think it would be wise to read this clause a second time. It was quite clear that the hon. Member was dealing with this matter a good deal in the dark. If he would look at the Act of 1898 he would find that the Secretary of State could make rules as to the manner in which corporal punishment should be inflicted on civil prisoners. He did not wish to dogmatise, but he believed that it would be found that offences for which military prisoners were exposed to corporal punishment were substantially the same as those for which civil prisoners were exposed to that punishment. The acts were aggravated breaches of prison discipline, and in by far the vast majority of cases they were assaults, mostly of an aggravated character, upon warders. The Secretary of State for War authorised him to say that he would have the whole matter looked into with a desire to assimilate the system under which corporal punishment was administered in civil and military prisons, if they were not assimilated at present. If they were found to be dissimilar, steps would be taken to assimilate them.
§ MR. McKENNAthought they had reached a point at which the Government might reconsider their determination not to close these proceedings. At a quarter to seven o'clock the Financial Secretary to the War Office assured them, in the most positive manner, that the position of the two classes of prisoners, military and civil, was identical, and at ten minutes past seven the Attorney-General got up, and, with much more prudence, said that he believed that there was substantial similarity between the two.
§ *MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTI never used the word "identical."
§ MR. McKENNAasked how the hon. Gentleman could dare say that when he had cheered a passage which he had read and which seemed to imply identity. Of course he meant it. This came of sitting 851 so late in the morning. The hon. Gentleman, who in ordinary cases was the soul of honour, was seduced at ten minutes past seven into using language which was almost, if not quite, the language of prevarication, [Cries of ''Oh" and "Withdraw."]
§ MR. MCKENNAWell, I withdraw it. I attribute my use of it to the time—ten minutes past seven. The hon. Member proceeded to say that he hoped that the Attorney-General and the Secretary of State for War would recognise that this was one of the questions which might fairly be raised on the Army Act. He should certainly support the new clause of his hon. friend.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthought that the debate which had taken place on this Amendment was a complete justification for what had happened before. It was said that prisoners in military prisons were treated in exactly the same way as prisoners in civil prisons. Now, however, it turned out that they were treated under a much more severe set of Acts of Parliament. He appealed to the Government to accept the clause, and he ventured to say it would facilitate the progress of the measure very considerably at this stage if they would make this concession. If, however, they did not think the form of words in which it had been drawn were quite adapted to the occasion, would they undertake to deal with the matter. The application of the Act of 1898 to military prisons was only prevented by a technicality, and if the Government agreed to the principle of the extension of the Act of 1898 to military prisons would they agree to bring up a clause on Report. [Mr. CALDWELL: There will be no Report.] Well, if there was not a Report stage, the Government could move to recommit the Bill on this particular, and he thought that his hon. friends and himself could undertake that if the Bill wore recommitted it would not be made the opportunity for discussion. Of course it would be very much better if they would now accept the form of words; 852 and as they had already in principle accepted it, why should it not be incorporated with the Act. It would facilitate matters, however, if they would introduce the words now.
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he thought the hon. Member would find it was unnecessary to make this alteration, and was sure he would be satisfied with what he had already stated. If the hon. Member would look at the Manual of Military Law, he would find that under Section 133, which gave power to make rules with regard to corporal punishment in military prisons, there was a note which he thought completely bore out what he said a few minutes before. The Prisons Act of 1898 restricted the offences punishable by corporal punishment first to mutiny and incitement to mutiny, and secondly to gross personal violence to an officer or servant. Paragraph 152 of the rules for military prisons restricted corporal punishment in prison to the same offences. The Act of 1898 provided that corporal punishment should only be inflicted upon the order of three visitors after inquiry upon oath, and after approval by the general or other officer commanding the district. He hoped the hon. Member would be satisfied with that explanation.
§ MAJOR SEELYdid not think the considerations urged by the Attorney-General afforded a sufficient ground for not accepting this Amendment, but on the other hand afforded a reason for accepting it. He thought he was correct in saying that the note which the Attorney-General had read was not made under the binding force of law.
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYNo, it states what the effect of the rules is.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid it might state the effect of the rules, but how was it to be interpreted. If he accepted his Amendment the hon. and learned Gentleman would be in a better position than he would be by being dependent upon the officer commanding or upon the note. It would be better to put the provisions of the Act of 1898 in at once, and why should they not do it?
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that the power was given to the proper authorities to make rules for military prisons, and on that, form of rules they prescribed the same form of punishment for military prisoners as was prescribed for civil prisoners under Act of 1898. Surely the hon. Member had got what he wanted by that. What was the use of pressing for something so anomalous as that rules should be made by the Homo Secretary for military prisons.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid that if he was right the punishment could be inflicted in pursuance of the Prisons Acts of 1865 and 1877. It was not that they were asking the Home Office to lay down regulations for military prisons, but they wanted to substitute the Prisons Act of 1898 for the other Acts. He thought it would be a great deal better to have the provision set out in the Act instead of its being set out in a foot-note.
§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGEcould not help thinking that the Government were unnecessarily stubborn. They accepted a clause in principle, but they seemed to say that they could deal with the matter by general regulations. The same remark would apply to the Act of 1898.
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYBut this Amendment would put military prisons under the Home Secretary.
§ MR. LLOYD- GEORGE,with every respect for the Attorney-General, thought that he was making a pedantic objection. It was not past the ingenuity of the hon. and learned Gentleman to frame words. ["Oh" and "Withdraw."] If the Attorney-General thought he ought to withdraw he would, but he did not think he had been offensive.
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYI thought I was treating the Committee fairly.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that, taking the Act of 1865 alone, they had a dozen offences for which a man could be flogged, including that of profane language.
SIR ROBERT FTNLAYsaid a soldier could not be flogged for using profane 854 language under that Act, and there was no power to inflict the punishment in the dozen cases mentioned.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that nobody said it did, but why, he asked, should not the soldier have the same protection as the criminal. The Financial Secretary to the War Office thought they were being treated on level terms with the criminal. All they asked was that they should have equal rights with a burglar and equal statutory status with a housebreaker when he got into prison. They asked that he should be given this not as a privilege but as a right, and it ought to be granted not on the grace of the Secretary of State, but by Act of Parliament. Once he was in prison the soldier ought not to be put on the same footing as an ordinary criminal. The Government would save time by assenting, and they appeared to be resisting simply from stupid stubbornness. They seemed determined to go on blundering.
§ MR. J. H. LEWISsaid that if the Government would make the concession which was asked for, probably the Bill would then pass with very little trouble.
§ MR. WHITLEY (Halifax)thought there was a good deal to be said in regard to the proposal of his hon. friend. If the Attorney-General put this proposal on Monday in the form of a new clause the matter might be disposed of in three-quarters of an hour. The matter could be put right by putting the soldier on the same basis as any other part of the population.
§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid he did I not think it was necessary to amend the law, but he would consider if anything could be done in a subsequent year. If he found that there was any difference between the two sets of prisoners he should be prepared to amend, but if, however, he found that there was no difference between the two sets he should not be prepared to amend.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid a soldier was often seat to prison for not obeying his captain, and also because he was found guilty of repeated irreverence at chapel. He had committed offences in regard to 855 which, under the Act of 1865, there was no statutory protection against flogging. In this class of cases the soldier should have the same statutory protection as the criminal and should not depend upon mere rules and regulations for his security from excessive punishment. They asked that the soldier should have
| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Dowd, John |
| Allen, Charles P. | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Higham, John Sharp | O'Malley, William |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.) | O'Mara, James |
| Black, Alexander William | Johnson, John | O'Shee, James John |
| Roland, John | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Brigg, John | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Caldwell, James | Kilbride, Denis | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Langley, Batty | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Roche, John |
| Crean, Eugene | Lewis, John Herbert | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cullinan, J. | Lloyd-George, David | Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland) |
| Delany, William | Lundon, W. | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny N.) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Sheehy, David |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Mac Veagh, Jeremiah | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Crae, George | Taylor, Theodore C (Radeliffe) |
| Ellice, Capt. EC (S. Andrw'sBghs | M'Kenna, Reginald | Tomkinson, James |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North) | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Mooney, John J. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Murphy, John | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Ffrench, Peter | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Joseph Walton and Major |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N) | Seely. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.) | |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Coates, Edward Feetham | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Gordon, Maj Evans (T'r H'mlets |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Gray, Frnest (West Ham) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury |
| Arrol, Sir William | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Davenport, William Bromley | Gretton, John |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Denny, Colonel | Groves, James Grimble |
| Balcarres, Lord | Dickson, Charles Scott | Hambro, Charles Eric |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Hamillon, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W.(Leeds | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynemth |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Duke, Henry Edward | Hay, Hon. Claude George |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Heaton, Sir James (Staffords NW |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Helder, Augustus |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Man'cr | Hope. J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside |
| Bingham, Lord | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Hoult, Joseph |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Finch, Rt. Hn. George H. | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham |
| Brassey, Albert | Finlay, Sir R. B.(Inv'ru'ss B'ghs | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John | Fisher, William Hayes | Hunt, Rowland |
| Butcher, John George | Fison, Frederick William | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col.W. |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Flower, Sir Ernest | Kerr, John- |
| Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Forster, Henry William | Keswick, William |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Gardner, Ernest | Knowles, Sir Lees |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Laurie, Lieut.-General |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) |
§ the same statutory protection given him which under the Act of 1898 had been given to the burglar.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 87; Noes, 138. (Division List No. 123.)
| Lawrence, Win. F. (Liverpool) | Morrison, James Archibald | Spear, John Ward |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L. W.(Mile End) | Mount, William Arthur | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. NR | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S. | Nicholson, William Graham | Talbot, Lord K. (Chichester) |
| Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Bristol, S. | Percy, Earl | Tuff, Charles |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Turnour, Viscount |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Pretyman, Ernest George | Walroud, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Purvis, Robert | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.(Taunton |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Randles, John S. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Reid, James (Greenock) | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und Lyne) |
| Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H.E. (Wigt'n | Renwick, George | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Ridley, S. Forde | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Milvain, Thomas | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | |
| Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Round, Rt. Hon. James | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Moore, William | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander | Viscount Valentia. |
| Morpeth, Viscount | Skewes-Cox, Thomas | |
| Morrell, George Herbert | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks |
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid he had handed in a new clause which, perhaps, the Secretary of State for War would be able to accept. It came in after Clause 2 and was to the effect that the persons subject to military law as soldiers should include all non- commissioned officers and men raised beyond the limits of the United Kingdom and India while serving under an officer of the Militia.
§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid the point raided by the hon. Member was already mot by the Act. The question of men going on expeditions was dealt with by Clause 9, Sub-section 6, which said that all persons engaged on active service were included under the Act, and were subject to military law.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *MR. MCCRAE moved a new clause providing that Volunteers who went into camp without being brigaded with Regular Forces should be subject to military law. He thought that this provision must have been omitted from the Army Act which, apparently, did not take into consideration the changed circumstances which now existed in regard to Volunteers. Before the Volunteers were brigaded with the Regular Forces this Army Act did not apply to them, but now that they were so brigaded they came under the Army Act. But, if they went into camp alone, then that Act did not apply to them. 858 He thought that it would be desirable that they should not make any distinction between the Army and the Volunteers, and they certainly should not make any distinction between Volunteers and Volunteers. Commanding officers of Volunteers who went into camp would, if this clause were agreed to, feel their hands strengthened. Troops very often were under the impression that they were under the Army Act, and, of course, commanding officers did not take steps to enlighten them. But he did not think that position ought to continue, and, therefore, he hoped that the Secretary of State for War would agree to his clause. He had himself seen instances where very peculiar questions had arisen as to regiments which were in camp regimentally, and he did think that the commanding officers of regiments which had to go into camp without being brigaded should be put into the same position as those in camp brigaded with the Regular Force.
§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid he had some sympathy with the view of the hon. Member, but before any such Amendment was passed it would be necessary to give notice to the Volunteers. He thought it would be unwise without giving special notice to introduce this fresh provision.
§ Mr. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid the Amendment touched an existing grievance of commanding officers. He knew of a 859 case where there was considerable question in a Volunteer camp which arose owing to the presence of one or two men of the Regular Forces or of the Militia. It was impossible to take any steps to restore the men to a state of discipline. When the Secretary of State for War made such a statement as he had just done it was not recorded in the Journals of the House, and when a new Secretary of State for War succeeded he looked to the Journals of the House and finding no such statement said quite fairly that he saw no record of the promise having been given, and that the whole matter was quite new to him, and so the question fell through. What they wanted was that some record should be left so that the question should be dealt with at an early date, and that a matter to which they attached so much importance should not be buried in the unfathomable recesses of Hansard.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. HIGHAM (Yorkshire, W. R., Sowerby) moved a new clause with a view of amending Section 4 of the Act of 1881. It was to the effect that, every person accused of an offence under the Army Act shall be entitled to demand to be tried by Court-martial. There had been many cases of injustice in which men would have liked to have been tried by Court-martial, but were disgraced for life without a trial. The section of the Army Act of 1881 contained seven offences which he need not take up the time of the House by reading. They were military offences, but the men had not the option of demanding a Court-martial, and they were at the mercy of some one above them in that respect.
§ New Clause (Amendments of Section 4 of Army Act, 1881)—(Mr. Higham)—brought up, and read the first time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be read a second time."
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERreferred to an Answer that he gave to a Question two or three days before, and said the hon. Member was under a misapprehension. 860 Every private soldier had a right to a Court-martial where he was punished by deprivation of pay, but the right did not extend to an officer. It was not possible that the War Office should give up the power they had of dispensing with the services of an officer without his conduct being brought before a Court-martial. He thought Court-martial was a very desirable method of ascertaining whether an offence had been committed, but sometimes in the interests of the officer concerned and of the Army the other course was adopted, and he did not think it right to dispense with the power to take it.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEinquired whether there was not a power with every officer of the Navy to demand a Court-martial. Was he right in supposing that, every officer of the Navy if he ran his ship ashore, or if he committed a breach of discipline, or of the rules, could demand a Court-martial? What had been the result of that practice in the Navy?
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Wood- bridge)said there was some confusion about this question. He thought the hon. Member was confusing the case of the accidents to vessels which were followed by a Court-martial with supposed personal offences. In the latter case he believed he was right in saying that the officer had no right.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid there was no such right; no person in the employment of the Crown had a positive right of that character.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid there was reason in the refusal of the Secretary of State to make a distinction between the officers of the Army and the Navy. There did, however, exist in the minds of officers who had, perhaps, unfortunately been wrongfully dismissed from the service, a sense of wrong that their cases had never, so far as they knew, been brought forward fully and carefully for trial. It ought not, however, to be beyond the power of the Secretary of State for the time being to devise a process by which these cases could be tried by some competent tribunal, by which 861 tribunal every case would be reviewed as criminal cases were reviewed by the Home Office. That would not abrogate the power of the Crown to dispense with the services of officers where it was necessary. It would also give an opportunity for redressing grievances that might exist and that might be but too well founded. He asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office to make a note of the fact, and to bring it up next year with some proposal for a method more satisfactory than that at present existing.
§ MAJOR SEELYappealed to the Financial Secretary to the War Office to carry out, now that he was in office, the eloquent words he used when he sat below the gangway. The hon. Member would remember that, on the case of a distinguished officer who was dismissed, he himself brought the matter before the House and in very eloquent language pleaded again and again that officers should have a right to demand a Court-martial. He was sure that anyone who heard the hon. Member then would be quite certain that when they appealed to him to fulfil, when he was in office, what he said when he was out of office, they should plead not in vain. This officer was removed from his
| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E. | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Mara, James |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Shee, James John |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Black, Alexander William | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Boland, John | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Brigg, John | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Kilbride, Denis | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Langley, Batty | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Caldwell, James | Lewis, John Herbert | Roche, John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lundon, W. | Rose, Charles Day |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lyell, Charles Henry | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland |
| Crean, Eugene | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Cullinan, J. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sheehy, David |
| Delany, William | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Doogan, P. C. | M'Crae, George | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Mooney, John J. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Duffy, William J. | Murphy, John | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Elibank, Master of | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Tomkinson, James |
| Ellice, Capt EC (St Andrw's Bghs | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Emmott, Alfred | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.) | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Fenwick, Charles | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N. | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.) |
| Ffrench, Peter | O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S. | |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W. | TELLEKS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John | O'Dowd, John | Higham and Mr. Cathcart |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N. | Wason. |
§ position and frequently asked for a Court-martial but could not get one. He would ask the Financial Secretary whether he would not on that occasion say something of the same kind as he said two short years ago, when he vehemently upheld the view which they were now bringing before the Committee.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLsaid he had been very much impressed with the case in question, and he thought that the then Secretary for War behaved with extreme harshness. If the Financial Secretary had changed his mind would he read his own speech in the Kinloch case. He thought that any officer who was under an accusation should have the opportunity of meeting his opponents face to face. There ought to be proper inquiry in these matters and a Court-martial should be held in every case affecting an officer's character. Because there were not trials or Courts-martial in many cases in South Africa he believed a number of gentlemen were under a cloud who did not deserve any imputation.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 77; Noes, 133. (Division List No. 124.)
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn) | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Mount, William Arthur |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, Maj. Evans (T'rH'mlets | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Arroll, Sir William | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Atkinson. Rt. Hon. John | Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Percy, Earl |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r | Hambro, Charles Eric | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds | Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Purvis, Robert |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Heath, Sir James (Staffords. NW | Randles, John S. |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Helder, Augustus | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bingham, Lord | Hope, J. F.(Sheffield, Brightside | Renwick, George |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hoult, Joseph | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Brassey, Albert | Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hozien, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Butcher, John George | Hunt, Rowland | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H. | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kerr, John | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Knowles, Sir Lees | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Laurie, Lieut-General | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Spear, John Ward |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S. | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.N.R | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham | Tuff, Charles |
| Denny, Colonel | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Walrond, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. H. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Maclver, David (Liverpool) | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Egorton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Maconochie, A. W. | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E(Taunton |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Majendie, James A. H. | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J (Manc'r | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und Lyne |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H. E.(Wigt'n | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R. |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs | Milvain, Thomas | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | |
| Fison, Frederick William | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Moore, William | Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount, Valentia. |
| Forster, Henry William | Morgan, David J (Walthamstow | |
| Gardner, Ernest | Morpeth, Viscount |
§ MR. JAMES O'CONNOR (Wicklow, W.) moved a new clause as follows, "Anything to the contrary notwithstanding contained in the Array Act all officers, non-commissioned officers, and men shall be equally liable to the punishment provided respectively for the several offences contained therein." The hon. Member said he did not propose the Amendment in any spirit of hostility whatever to the officers of His Majesty's Army, for whom he had a very great respect. He had always found them most honourable and high-minded men, but he thought that no invidious distinctions should be made between them and the men whom they commanded in 864 regard to the punishments to which they should be subjected. He would ask the Attorney General whether, if he were called upon to prosecute any Member of the House, he would deal with the Gentleman any more lightly because he was a Member of that House. He ventured to say that he would press for punishment in a greater degree because he was his fellow Member, if he were guilty of any crime whatever. He would also say that if the hon. and learned Member had to prosecute any member of the profession, of the etiquette of which he was the guardian, for an offence against the moral law he would press for punishment in a greater degree because he 865 was a member of his own profession. In the Army Act the punishments of officers and men were differentiated. In Part 1, Section 6, Sub-section 10, for the offence of leaving his post as sentinel before he was regularly relieved an officer was liable to be cashiered, but a soldier was liable to imprisonment. Under Section 9, Sub-section 2, it was provided that if an officer disobeyed any Lawful command given by his superior officer on active service he should be liable to be cashiered while the soldier was liable to inprisonment. There were several other cases in which the same penalties were imposed, such as drunkenness. He submitted that no army could be well governed or well conducted unless the officers of that army set a proper and good example to the men beneath them, and he did not think it could be expected that the individual members of the Army should have any respect for the laws of the Army unless the officers were subject to the same punishment as their men. The present distinction was an invidious one.
Another New Clause (Punishment)—(Mr. John O'Connor)— brought up, and read the first time.
| AYES | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E). | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Malley, William |
| Allen, Charles P. | Higham, John Sharp | O'Mara, James |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Hobhouse, C. K. H. (Bristol, E.) | O'Shee, James John |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Black, Alexander William | Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Boland, John | Joyce, Michael | Reddy, M. |
| Brigg, John | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W. | Redmond (John K. (Waterford) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Kilbride, Denis | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Langley, Batty | Roberts, John H. Denbighs.) |
| Caldwell, James | Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington) | Roche, John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Lewis, John Herbert | Rose, Charles Day |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lloyd-George, David | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Crean, Eugene | Lundon, W. | Samuel, S. M (Whitechapel) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Sheehy, David |
| Delany, William | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Duffy, William J. | M'Crae, George | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Kenna, Reginald | Tomkinson, James |
| Ellice, Capt E C (S. Andr'wsB"ghs | Mooney, John J. | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Emmott, Alfred | Murphy, John | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | Nannetti, Joseph P. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Ffrench, Peter | 0'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid) | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.) |
| Gilhooly, James | O'Connor, John (Kildare. N.) | |
| Gladstone. Rt. Hn. Herbert John | O'Donnell, John (Mayo. S.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Thomas Esmonde and Mr. Patrick O'Brien. |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | O'Dowd, John | |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the clause be read a second time."
§ SIR ROBERT FINLAYthought he might congratulate the hon. Member upon the interest and vigour of the speech which he had just delivered after an all-night sitting. They both belonged to the same profession, and he was glad that the hon. Member had enlivened the debate as he had done. He thought the hon. Gentleman, however, did not realise what a terrible punishment being cashiered was. It was a punishment worse than death, and he did not believe that there was any officer who would not rather have a sentence of imprisonment than be cashiered. If imprisonment were substituted for cashiering it really would mitigate the penalty. It was realised that a more severe punishment was justified in the case of an officer than in the case of a soldier, and for that reason the officer was cashiered. He hoped the hon. Member would not persevere with this clause.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 82; Noes, 135. (Division List No. 125.)
| NOES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Gardner, Ernest | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Aguew, Sir Andrew Noel | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin — Nairn) | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Mount, William Arthur |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn. Hugh O. | Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets | Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) |
| Arrol, Sir William | Goschen, Hon. George Joachim | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Green, Walford D. (Wednosbury | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury |
| Balcarres, Lord | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Percy, Earl |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r) | Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds) | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.) | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Pryoe-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. | Heath, Sir James (Staffords. N. W | Purvis, Robert |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Helder, Augustus | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bingham, Lord | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Renwick, George |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hornby, Sir William Henry | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Bowles, T. Gibson (King'sLynn) | Hoult, Joseph | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Butcher, John George | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ. | Hunt, Rowland | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kennaway, Rt. Hn, Sir John H. | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire) | Knowles, Sir Lees | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A (Worc. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Smith, Rt Hn. J. Parker (Lanarks |
| Chapman, Edward | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Spear, John Ward |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End) | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. N. R | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S. | Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M. |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham) | Tuff, Charles |
| Davenport, William Bromley | Long. Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S,) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Denny, Colonel | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lucas, Roginald J. (Portsmouth) | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers- | Macdona, John Cumming | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunton |
| Duke, Henry Edward | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon |
| Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Maconochie, A. W. | Whiteley, H. (Ashton-und-Lyne |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward | Majendie, James A. H. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Maxwell, Rt Hn. Sir H. E. (Wigt'n | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire | |
| Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs | Milvain, Thomas | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia. |
| Fison, Frederick William | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Moore, William | |
| Forster, Henry William | Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow |
§ Schedule:—
§ MR. J. H. LEWIS moved an Amendment to the schedule in order to omit the words specifying of what the soldiers' breakfast should consist. The allowance was half-a-pound of bread and a cup of tea. It did not include any butter or dripping or margarine, and the men had to be content with a cup of tea without sugar and milk. Some years ago the late Mr. Hanbury made a forcible protest against this treatment of soldiers, and attributed it to the fact that the private soldier had no vote. They ought, as a nation, to be ashamed to treat 868 the private soldier so. What became of all the money which had been poured out so freely during the last few years? Thousands had been spent upon sectarian schools; but the private soldier was treated to breakfast at the rate of three halfpence.
§ *MR. ARNOLD- FORSTERsaid the schedule was already part of the Act, because the breakfast as specified in the schedule had already been passed. Therefore the Government could not accept this Amendment. The schedule ran that breakfast was to be as specified 869 in Part I. of the second schedule of the Army Act. The second schedule of the Army Act gave particulars of the breakfasts, and having passed the Army Act they could not go back.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEinquired if the second schedule of the Act had yet been passed; and if not, would he be in order in moving an Amendment.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE,on the point of order, said that all that had been proposed was the omission of these words. It was very well known that they could not move increases in Committee, and the only way in which to call attention to the subject was to move a reduction.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANI think that the schedule is covered by the last line of Clause 3 in this Bill It does not refer to the Army Act but to the schedule of this Act.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEsupported the Amendment. The soldier who read the account of the debate would, he said, be no doubt enamoured at the treatment he received from a grateful country. They were told that they were dependent upon the soldier for sleeping safely in their beds at night. This was a maximum grant in regard to breakfast, and it amounted in cost to three halfpence, when it had been found that to breakfast a child in school cost more than a penny. It would be seen from that the miserable way in which the soldier was treated. The total allowance for a horse was 1s. 9d. per day.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANI am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, 870 but he is now talking about another line in the schedule, and must confine himself to the Amendment.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEsaid he was not going to move anything. He simply wanted to indicate a point. It was that 1s. 9d. was the rate for the food of a horse and the total amount for the food and lodging of a soldier was 1s. 7d. Breakfast cost three half-pence, and the allowances were an insult to a soldier in his most vital part which no Englishman could stand.
§ MR. JOSEPH WALTONinquired if the schedule would not have to be put as a whole to the House, and therefore whether they could not move to amend any part of it.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)said be believed he was the only one in the House of the original band of three patentees of all-night sittings on the Army (Annual) Bill. That band consisted of Mr. Bartley, Mr. Hanbury, and himself. There was this essential difference between the discussion in 1893 and the present, because in 1893 the Government of the day altered the Bill and introduced it in an entirely different form from that adopted in previous years. They were opposed by a mechanical majority, but nevertheless their action was justified, because some of the Amendments they had proposed to the Bill were introduced by the Government themselves in the House of Lords.
§ MR. McKENNABut you were dealing with an intelligent Government.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid that on the former occasion they objected to the three half-pence for breakfast on the ground that the licensed victualler, out of the kindness of his heart and his generosity and devotion to the service, gave the soldier an excellent breakfast for three half-pence. Their objection was not that the men did not get enough to eat but that the licensed victualler was not paid enough. His knowledge was that the soldier did get a good breakfast, and if there was any injury at all it was to the man from whom it was purchased. He did not see the reasonableness of omitting the provision as to the payment of the three half-pence, because it would leave the licensed victualler with no payment at all.
§ *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid the hon. Member who last spoke was quite correct. The effect of this Amendment would be to deprive the licensed victualler of all payment. It was, as a matter of fact, arranged that the private soldier should have an uncommonly good breakfast, and this three half-pence only furnished him with a small part of it.
§ MR. J. H. LEWISsaid, if his Amendment were carried, its only effect would be to turn out the Government 872 and replace them by other people who would do justice to the common soldier.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEsaid that not only was three half-pence provided for breakfast, but it was specified what the soldier should receive for it.
§ MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid he was one of the mechanical majority who divided against the hon. Member some years ago. He then rather sympathised with the hon. Member's argument, and he thought the case that was now made was stronger, because they had in the interval come to voting an additional £15,000,000, and out of that sum something should be found to increase this three half-pence. They wanted to prevent the licensed victualler losing, but the only way they could do that was to move what was practically a reduction.
§ Amendment negatived without a division.
§ Schedule agreed to.
§ Preamble agreed to.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time upon Monday next.
§ And, it being after One of the clock, Mr. SPEAKKR adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned at a quarter after Nine o'clock a.m.