§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N.R., Thirsk) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 1, line 8, to leave out the word 'five,' and insert the word 'three.'"—(Mr. McKenna.)
§ Question again proposed, "That the word 'five' stand part of the clause."
472§ *MR. BRIGHT, continuing his speech, said the present unsatisfactory state of their national credit was largely due to this system of borrowing money for expenditure which ought to be met out of the revenue of the year. Local loans, which in 1897 stood at 115, were now 100¼. The credit of this country had dropped from 10 to 15 per cent. in regard to all our securities, whilst those of other countries had appreciated. Argentine securities during the same period had appreciated 4½ per cent. and Brazilian securities 17¼ per cent. He protested against a system of backstairs borrowing, which had resulted in the decadence of the credit of the country. Last year £6,000,000 of Exchequer bonds were issued which did not appear in the Unfunded Debt, and he supposed if this Bill passed they would have another issue of Exchequer bonds for which the market would have to provide.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,) Worcestershire, E.said there would be no issue of Exchequer bonds.
§ *MR. BRIGHTsaid he was glad to have that assurance. Sound finance was the keynote of good government, and the proposal in this Bill was not sound finance. By this system of borrowing the Government were setting a bad example to municipal authorities. The principle of this Bill was simply part and parcel of the romantic finance of the Birmingham school of economics, which laid down that things were not what they were, but what they wished them to be.
§ MR. COHEN (Islington, E.)said it the Amendment were carried at this late pariod of the session it would interfere with the Estimates and with the provision for the Navy for the year which Parliament had sanctioned. But he hoped that if the Bill passed the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not conclude that the House was not determined to stop this annual borrowing for annual expenditure. On all sides there had been a unanimous expression of opinion against the system of borrowing for military and naval works. Although the hon. Member for Dundee was the original sinner in regard to this matter his successors had been the principal offenders. Although he did not think these loans were altogether responsible for the low state of the national credit, they had undoubtedly delayed the automatic recovery of securities. In future he thought those persons who sanctioned work of this kind should pay for them, and the Government had no right to leave posterity to pay for works of the kind contained in this Bill.
§ MR. GUEST (Plymouth)said the Amendment emphasised the fact that there was no support to this system of raising money for naval works. It would not affect the programme for the year; it would merely compel the Admiralty next year to put their works programme on the Estimates, and the Government, having surrendered the policy, it was difficult to see why the Amendment should be resisted. In his somewhat perfunctory reply the Civil Lord said the 474 system was required to make up for the past neglect, but, though that might have been said for the first Naval Works Act, it had now become the normal method of meeting the extra expenditure for the upkeep of an increasing Navy. It was not kept in view when large increases were made in the Navy that this involved further expenditure on dockyards, harbours, and coaling stations, There was something which appeared to him not quite straightforward in failing to recognise the incidental obligations which an increase in the Fleet involved, and he regarded this failure with considerable apprehension. It might be a delightful thing to live upon borrowed money, but it was a very bad habit for a country to get into. This system of borrowing had extended to other Departments, and our total liabilities extended to £60,000,000, the growth of recent years.
It was a delusion to consider these naval and military works as of a permanent character. The world was littered with such works that had nothing but a slight archæological interest, and it was unfair to impose upon future generations the cost of works that might be considered useless, just as we considered much of the expenditure of our forefathers useless. Nothing could be more temporary than military or naval works, and it was extremely impolitic and unfair to throw upon a future generation the obligation of paying for defensive or offensive works which would probably in a few years cease to be of any practical value either for military or naval purposes. Their descendants in the near future might come to the conclusion that the whole system of their naval stategy required revision.
THE CHAIRMANIt will not be in order for the hon. Member to enter upon a debate on general naval policy.
§ MR. GUESTsaid all he was trying to do was to illustrate how impossible it was to defend the permanency of any of the works which they were now creating. He thought it was wrong for them to pledge posterity for thirty years. It bad been pointed out how these loans affected national credit and threw an 475 additional burden on the taxpayers. He meant to fight this Bill at every stage, believing that it was wrong in principle, and that if his policy was pursued it would land the country in a more disastrous position than the Civil Lord could well imagine.
His hon. friend who moved the Amendment had made a very reasonable proposition. He had not attempted to destroy the Bill or to curtail any of the works which the Admiralty wished to overtake in the next twelve months. His hon. friend was calling upon the Government to fulfil, if not a pledge, what almost amounted to a pledge, so strong was the expression of opinion on their part as to the desirability of ending this course of borrowing. Let the Admiralty begin at once. They had received every penny they asked for on the Estimates, and he was quite certain that if they put the cost of naval works on the Estimates next year and the year after they would get their money. He appealed to the Civil Lord to reconsider his position even at the eleventh hour and to give an assur-
§ ance that this system of borrowing which all Members of the House joined in condemning would not be continued beyond the next twelve months.
§ *MR. WEIR (Ross and Cromarty)said that Consols not very long ago were at 114 and now they were at 90. He was amazed that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who knew the effect of this system of borrowing on the national finance, did not support the modest Amendment of his hon. friend. Why did not the Government bring forward the measure at an earlier stage of the session so that an opportunity might be given for full discussion? He objected to business being rushed through in this way in the closing hours of the session. There was no opposition to naval expenditure when it was wisely controlled. This money should be raised on the Estimates next year.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 209; Noes, 103. (Division List No. 345.)
479| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Fitzroy,Hon,Edward Algernon |
| Allhusen,Augustus Henry Eden | Chapman, Edward | Flannery, Sir Fortescue |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Clare, Octavius Leigh | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Arkwright, John Stan hope | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Forster, Henry William |
| Arnold-Forster,Rt, Hn.Hugh O | Coddington, Sir William | Gardner, Ernest |
| Arrol, Sir William | Coghill, Douglas Harry | Godson,Sir Augustus Frederick |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Cohen, Benjamin Louis | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon |
| Balcarres, Lord | Colomb, Rt.Hon.Sir John C.R. | Goulding, Edward Alfred |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r | Compton, Lord Alwyne | Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W(Leeds) | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs) |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Cripps, Charles Alfred | Grenfell, William Henry |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gretton, John |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Davenport, William Bromley | Groves, James Grimble |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Davies,Sir Horatio D. (Chatham | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tower Hamlets | Hamilton,Marq.of (L'nd'nderry |
| Bigwood, James | Dickson, Charles Scott | Hardy, Laurence (Kent,Ashford |
| Bill, Charles | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th |
| Bingham, Lord | Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon | Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Dorington,Rt.Hon.Sir John E | Heaton, John Henniker |
| Bond, Edward | Doughty, Sir George | Helder, Sir Augustus |
| Brassey, Albert | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Doxford,Sir William Theodore | Hope, J.F (Sheffield, Brightside |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Duke, Henry Edward | Hornby, Sir William Henry |
| Bull, William James | Dyko,Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart | Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Faber, Edmund B. (Hants,W.) | Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham |
| Butcher, John George | Faber, George Denison (York | Hozier,Hon. James Henry Cecil |
| Campbell,J.H.M(Dublin Univ. | Fellowes,RtHn.AilwynEdward | Hunt, Rowland |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H | Fcrgusson,Rt.Hn.SirJ. (Manc'r | Jeffreys, Rt.Hon. Arthur Fred. |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir John H |
| Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Kenyon,Hon.Geo.T. (Denbigh) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Finlay.Rt HnSirR.B.(Inv'rn'ss | Keswick, William |
| Chamberlain,Rt Hn.J.A(Worc. | Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Kimber, Sir Henry |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Laurie, Lieut.-General | Myers, William Henry | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Nicholson, William Graham | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Lawson,Hn.H.L.W.(Mile End) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker(Lanark* |
| Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham | Poel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhcad) | Percy, Earl | Stanley, Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Pierpoint, Robert | Stanley.Rt.Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Liddell, Henry | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Stone, Sir Benjamin |
| Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Stroyan John |
| Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Long,Rt.Hn. Walter (Bristol,S. | Powell, Sir Francis Sharp | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Pretyman, Ernest George | Talbot. Rt. Hn. J.G (Oxf'd Univ. |
| Lowe, Francis William | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Purvis, Robert | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Pym, C. Guy. | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Randles, John S. | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Rankin, Sir James | Tuff, Charles |
| MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne | Turnmour, Viscount |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) | Vincent,Col.Sir CEH(Sheffield) |
| M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Reid, James (Greenock) | Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter) |
| M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire | Remnant, James Farquharson | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Ridley, S. Forde | Walrond,Rt.Hn.Sir William H. |
| Marks, Harry Hananel | Ritchie,Rt.Hon.Chas. Thomson | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Martin, Richard Biddulph | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Welby,Lt.-Col,A.C.E. (Taunton |
| Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Welby, Sir Charles G.E. (Notts.) |
| Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire | Rolleston, Sir John F. L. | Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyn |
| Middlemore, John Throgmorton | Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Milvain, Thomas | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E.R. (Bath) |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Royds, Clement Molyneux | Wortley, Rt. Hon C. B.Stuart- |
| Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) | Wylie, Alexander |
| Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Morpoth, Viscount | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Morrell, George Herbert | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles | |
| Morrison, James Archibald | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer | Saunderson, Rt. Hon. Col. Edw. J | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Mount, William Arthur | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) | Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.) | M'Crae, George |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Murnaghan, George |
| Bell, Richard | Flynn, James Christopher | Murphy, John |
| Benn, John Williams | Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Nannetti, Joseph P. |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Gladstone,Rt.Hn. HerbertJohn | Nolan.Col.John P.(Galway,N.) |
| Broadhurst, Henry | Grant, Corrie | O'Brien,Kendal (Tipperary Mid |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh | Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill | O'Connor,James (Wicklow,W) |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Hammond, John | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Harrington, Timothy | Parrott, William |
| Buxton,Sydney Charles(Poplar | Harwood, George | Parlington, Oswald |
| Caldwell, James | Hayden, John Patrick | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Cawley, Frederick | Healy, Timothy Michael | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Hemphill, Rt.Hon. Charles H. | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Priestley, Arthur |
| Crean, Eugene | Higham, John Sharp | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Cremer, William Randal | Holland, Sir William Henry | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Crooks, William | Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk. | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) |
| Cullinan, J. | Jacoby, James Alfred | Robson, William Snowdon |
| Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) | Joicey, Sir James | Rose, Charles Day |
| Delany, William | Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea | Runciman, Walter |
| Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah | Seely.Maj.J.E.B (Isle of Wight) |
| Doogan, P. C. | Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath,N. | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Dunn, Sir William | Lawson, Sir Wilfred (Cornwall) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Edwards, Frank | Leese,Sir Joseph F.(Accrington | Slack, John Bamford |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | Lloyd-George, David | Sullivan, Donal |
| Emmott, Alfred | Lundon, W. | Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Thompson,Dr.EC(Monagh'n,N |
| Evans,Sir FrancisH.(Maidstone | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Tully, Jasper |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) |
| Ure, Alexander | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Villiers, Ernest Amherst | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer | M'Kenna and Mr. Leif Jones. |
| Wallace, Robert | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) | |
| Weir, James Galloway | Woodhouse,SirJT.(Huddersf'd |
Question, put, and agreed to.
§ MR. WHITLEYmoved an Amendment for the purpose of providing that the control of the Treasury over the expenditure authorised by the Bill should be more effective than it would be under the clause as drafted. Under the clause as it stood it would be possible for the Admiralty to call for any amount up to the total of £5,835,000. He thought it was very undesirable that this large amount should be taken out of the control of the Treasury. All he asked for was that it should be within the power of the Treasury to issue the various sums of money from time to time as they were required. That was to say that if the Admiralty required money for these works, it should have to prove the case to the Treasury. Treasury control had been a decreasing quantity during recent years. Some very larmist statements had been made on this subject. Even the Secretary of State for War the other day said he thought the Comptroller and Auditor-General was an inquisitive gentleman who ought not to draw attention to certain things in the way he had done during the past few years with such advantage to the public service. If that opinion was spreading in Government offices it was high time that this House took the matter into consideration. The Comptroller and Auditor-General had a right to inquire into anything which he thought it was necessary to inquire into in connection with the expenditure of public money. The acceptance of this Amendment would restore to the Treasury the control they ought never to have parted with, namely, the power in the first place to see before issuing any of these large sums from the Consolidated Fund that the authority of the House to spend the money had been obtained and, secondly, that the amount of money applied for was actually required for works in progress. He begged to move.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 1, line 9, to leave out the words 'required by the Admiralty,' and insert the words 'from time to time approved by them.'"—(Mr. Whitley.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words 'required by the Admiralty' stand part of the clause."
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid the effect of this Amendment, if carried, would be to take away from the Admiralty the power which was vested in it to decide whit expenditure was necessary on works already approved by Parliament. The Amendment was also unnecessary, because in all cases there was a previous conference between the Admiralty and the Treasury in regard, not only to the amount to be raised, but also to the necessity of the works themselves, and the Bill represented the joint decision of both Departments. In all cases the money was only asked for when it became due. Although the House might give authority, no sums were raised until they were actually wanted, and there was no case of sums being borrowed and the money being allowed to remain idle.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid the explanation given by the hon. Gentleman did not cover the ground. One of the items in the schedule was "Chatham Dockyard Extension," and that was now abandoned. Now it was quite conceivable that, if the Chatham extension was abandoned, nevertheless the Admiralty, having taken the power to borrow the whole of the £4,500,000, would use the money for some other works. The Civil Lord shook his head, but they had been told, on the Second Reading of the Bill, that the excess cost of other works had been met out of this Vote. It was perfectly obvious that the Admiralty having got the money in hand would use it for expenditure on other items mentioned in the schedule, and he asked whether it was wise for the Treasury to abandon its control over this money. When a Department had got at its disposal a large amount of borrowed money, running to millions, it would be more than human if it did not spend the money in some direction. Therefore, he thought that the Amendment proposed by his hon. friend, though drastic 481 in form, was necessary, and he did not think that the explanation given by the Civil Lord was satisfactory.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that the Treasury only issued the money which the Admiralty reasonably required for the works embodied in the schedule. If there was any variation necessary, either in the work to be done or the amount of money required, the Admiralty had to go to the Treasury for a special sanction.
§ MR. WHITLEYsaid that now that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in his place he would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether what he had just said would apply to the items between the first year and the second year to which this schedule related. Did the Treasury control the extra expenditure within the first year covered by the schedule as well as that of the second year?
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINYes.
§ MR. WHITLEYsaid that then all he had to remark was that his Amendment would do no harm and might do a great deal of good.
§ MR. LEIF JONES (Westmoreland, Appleby)said that the Amendment which stood in his name was to leave out from the word 'Act' to the end of the section. The Amendment raised the question of the duration of the annuities by which the money borrowed under this Bill was to be paid off. Under the Act of 1895 the money was to be paid off in thirty years after the passing of the Act. Presumably that was the period for which the contemplated works were expected to endure. In the subsequent Acts of 1896, 1897, 1899 and 1901—which were treated as a continuing series of Acts dealing with the same works—the whole annual expenditure was to be paid off in thirty years from 1895. But in 1903 a new departure was made and for the first time words were inserted in the Act which he now proposed to leave out in the Act of 482 1905. The effect of these words was to make the annuities run for thirty years from the period of borrowing instead of thirty years from the fixed period of 1895. The result was that instead of a definite date being fixed for paying off loans there would be an indefinite period, and in any case the period would be greatly lengthened. He thought that if the Government would not except this Amendment, they ought at least to state some definite period during which the annuities should run, and a date at which all these borrowings in regard to naval works should come to an end.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 1, line 15, to leave out from the word 'Act' to the end of the clause."—(Mr. Leif Jones.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'thirty' in line 17, stand part of the clause."
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he did not attach the special importance which the hon. Gentleman did to having a particular date at which these loans should be paid off. It was the intention of Parliament, when these borrowings were first sanctioned, that there should be a currency of thirty years from the date when the money was borrowed. It was afterwards contemplated that there should be an annual Act in similar form, and instead of the clause being repealed, it was incorporated by reference, with the provision that each annuity should run for a period of thirty years from the date when it was sat up. In his opinion thirty years was a more reasonable and a more sensible proposal than that the currency of the annuities should be from 1895. If all annuities dated from 1895, the system of the Bill would be reduced almost to a nullity, and to vote for the Amendment would be equivalent to voting against the Second Reading of the Bill. He hoped the Committee would affirm the practice in the present case that thirty years was a reasonable time for the annuities to run.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTON (Tower Hamlets, Poplar)said he thought that the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was really in favour of the Amendment instead of against it. It was evidently the intention of Parliament when the first Act was passed that the cost of these particular naval works should be repaid in thirty years; but the Government appeared now to be turning over a new leaf, and desired to alter the system and throw as much as they could on to the current year. That seemed to him to be an overwhelming argument in favour of the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman
§ MR. McCRAEasked whether the thirty years would date from the passing of the Act authorising the expenditure, or from the date when the money was raised.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that the thirty years would be from the date of borrowing.
§ MAJOR SEELY (Isle of Wight)said that the money raised under these Acts—he was not discussing the responsibility of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that regard—was, until four years ago, repayable in twenty-four years; but by the admission of the right hon. Gentleman the present Bill made it repayable in thirty years. In these circumstances he appealed to the right hon. Member for Croydon, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had condemned the system of borrowing so far ahead, to vote for this Amendment, and to show that his plea for economy was not merely lip service. He also appealed to the hon. Member for Islington, who had described these Acts as pernicious to vote for the Amendment. It had bean said that if the Amendment were adopted it would upset the whole arrangement of the naval programme; but this particular Amendment had the peculiar merit that it would not upset any naval programme nor upset any arrangement voted for by the hon. Gentleman for Islington and by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Amendment would make a pernicious practice less pernicious, and would make the money repayable in a shorter period, 484 without a breach in the continuity of the policy.
§ MR. BUCHANAN (Perthshire, E.)said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had told the Committee that anyone who voted for this Amendment would be practically giving a vote against the Second Reading of the Bill. But they had often heard from the bench opposite, as a defence of these Acts, that they were brought forward to carry out certain specific schemes. Now they were informed that the Government were going to abandon the old practice, and that the schemes for naval works were practically at an end. Down to 1901 it was always provided that the annuities were to run from the starting of a scheme and that they would all come to an end in the year 1925; but under the amended words of this Bill the time when the country would get rid of its liability for these works had been indefinitely extended. A good part of the debt would not be extinguished before 1942–3, and they would have the burden of this scheme of loan expenditure for naval works extending over a period not of thirty years but of fifty years. He thought the words his hon. friend desired to omit from the section constituted a grave departure from the original plan of the works. They made the system more lax than before, and they extended the time in which they would get rid of the liability. He should support his hon. friend.
§ *MR. McKENNAsaid that under the Act of 1901 the money was borrowed for a period of thirty years from the Act of 1895, and the sum which was then estimated to be the total cost of the works was £27,500,000. The total amount authorised, with the addition of the £5,000,000 now proposed, made £32,500,000. The proposal in 1901 was for an individual scheme which was to be brought to a conclusion and paid for within thirty years from 1895. They were still dealing with the same scheme and yet they were now asking that the repayment should be spread over a longer period, although no reason had been given why that should be done.
§ MR. WHITLEYsaid there was one argument even stronger than that just addressed to the Committee. It was that in 1901, when they were content to borrow for twenty-four years, they were in the middle of a great war, the national finances were in a serious condition, and the Sinking Fund was suspended. Yet now, when the war had been over for three years, in a time of peace, when taxation had, to a small extent, been reduced, and when the Sinking Fund had been restored, they were asked to go back to a longer period of borrowing and borrow for thirty years, not from the time of the Act, but from the time of borrowing. There had been two alterations made since the original Act. Firstly, there had been the alteration of the period, so as to make it from the passing of the Act, and not from the origination of the policy, and secondly, there was the alteration from the date of the passing of the Act to the date of borrowing. That was an extension of laxity and not an increase of rigidity in the control of finance, and he hoped his hon. friend would obtain large support.
§ MR. RUNCIMAN (Dewsbury)said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had adduced no reason whatever connected with the nature of the works for adhering to the thirty years period from the date of the loan. It was proposed to extend the period of repayment in respect of some of the most important items. For instance, under the Naval Works Act of 1895 a large part of the Keyham scheme was provided for, and it was intended that the scheme should be entirely wiped off in thirty years, but they would probably find that it would take forty years, and if they took Portsmouth and Dover exactly the same thing held good; in fact, in nearly every one of the items which were in the Act of 1895 it was proposed to extend the period of
§ repayment of thirty years to something like forty years. If they looked at the items they would see coaling facilities and fuel stores. Did anybody suppose that they would remain at their full value for forty years. Anybody knew that fifteen years was the limit of life they could grant to properties of that nature. There was, too a large item down for torpedo ranges. Could anyone say that forty years was a reasonable period of life for torpedo ranges? It was perfect nonsense. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer got up and made a death-bed repentance, he thought he might do something to reduce his own vice.
§ MR. McCRAEsaid that in 1903 the House authorised an expenditure of £4,500,000 in the case of Chatham, but in the Loan Bill of that year the amount was a very small one. Did the Chancellor of the Exchequer maintain that that expenditure of £4,500,000, if it had been made, would have been paid off in thirty years from 1903?
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINCertainly not.
§ MR. McCRAEsaid that was the very point, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not met the argument addressed by his hon. friend and himself. This system rather encouraged Departments getting sanction for small expenditure one year and then coming forward the next year, when the House had forgotten the expenditure it had sanctioned, with a new scheme. That was how they were misled, and hence the condition in which they were at present.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 199; Noes, 92. (Division List No. 346.)
489| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Balfour,Rt.Hon.A.J. (Manch'r) | Bingham, Lord |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Balfour,RtHn GeraldW.(Leeds | Blundell, Colonel Henry |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Bond, Edward |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Brassey, Albert |
| Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O | Banner, John S. Harmood- | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John |
| Arrol, Sir William | Bathurst, Hon.Allen Benjamin | Brymer, William Ernest |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Bull, William James |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Bigwood, James | Burdett-Coutts, W. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Bill, Charles | Butcher, John George |
| Campbell,J.H.M(Dublin Univ. | Hope.J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Hornby Sir William Henry | Purvis Robert |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Horner, Frederick William | Pym, C. Guy |
| Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Howard, Jn. (Kent,Faversham | Randles, John S. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Rankin, Sir James |
| Chamberlain,Rt Hn.J.A(Worc. | Hunt, Rowland | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) |
| Chapman, Edward | Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir JohnH. | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T.(Denbigh | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Keswick, William | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Coddington, Sir William | Kimber, Sir Henry | Ritchie Rt.Hon.Chas. Thomson |
| Cohen, Benjamin Louis | Knowles, Sir Lees | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Colomb.Rt.Hon.Sir John C.R. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Rolleston, Sir John F. L. |
| Compton, Lord Alwyne | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lawson.Hn.H.L.W. (Mile End) | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Cripps, Charles Alfred | Lee, Arthur H.(Hants., Fareham | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Davies,Sir Horatio D. (Chatham | Liddell, Henry | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles |
| Dewar, Sir T. R(Tower Hamlets | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Long,Col.Charles W. (Evesham | Saunderson,Rt.Hn.Col. Edw.J. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Long.Rt.Hn.Walter (Bristol,S | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Dixon-Hartland,Sir Fred Dixon | Lowe, Francis William | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Dorington, Rt.HonSir John E. | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Doughty, Sir George | Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Maedona, John Cumming | Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker(Lanarks |
| Duke, Henry Edward | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Dyke.Rt.Hon.SirWilliam Hart | Maconochie, A W. | Stanley,Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.) | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Stanley,Rt.Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Fellowes,RtHn. Ailwyn Edward | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Stone, Sir Benjamin |
| Fergusson,Rt.Hn.Sir J.(Manc'r | Majendie, James A. H. | Stroyan, John |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Marks, Harry Hananel | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Finlay.RtHn SirR.B(Inv'rn'ss) | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F. | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Middlomore, John Throgmorton | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Fitzroy, Hon.Edward Algernon | Milvain, Thomas | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Tuff, Charles |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Turnour, Viscount |
| Forster, Henry William | Morgan, David J(Walthamstow | Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter) |
| Gardner, Ernest | Morpeth, Viscount | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Godson,Sir Augustus Frederick | Morrell, George Herbert | Walrond,Rt.Hn.Sir William H |
| Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Morrison, James Archibald | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon | Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer | Welby.Lt.-ColA.C.E (Taunton |
| Goulding, Edward Alfred | Mount, William Arthur | Welby,Sir Charles G.E.(Notts. |
| Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury) | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne |
| Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Nicholson, William Graham | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Grenfell, William Henry | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Wodehouse,Rt.Hn.E.R (Bath) |
| Gretton, John | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B.Stuart- |
| Groves, James Grimble | Peel.Hn.Wm. Robert Wellesley | Wylie, Alexander |
| Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Percy, Earl | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Pierpoint, Robert | Yerburgh Robert Armstrong |
| Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | |
| Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Heath,SirJames(Staffords.NW | Plumer, Sir Walter R. | Alexander Acland Hood and |
| Helder, Sir Augustus | Powell, Sir Francis Sharp | Viscount Valentia. |
| Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Pretyman, Ernest George | |
| NOES | ||
| Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry | Caldwell, James | Dobbie, Joseph |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Causton, Richard Knight | Doogan, P. C. |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Cawley, Frederick | Edwards, Frank |
| Bell, Richard | Cheetham, John Frederick | Fllis, John Edwards (Notts.) |
| Broadhurst, Henry | Clancy, John Joseph | Emmott, Alfred |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Crean, Eugene | Esmonde, Sir Thomas |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Cremer, William Randal | Evans, Sir Francis H.(Maidstone |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Cullinan, J. | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) | Findlay, Alexander (Lanark,NE |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles(Poplar | Delany, William | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Lloyd-George, David | Rose, Charles Day |
| Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Lundon, W. | Runciman, Walter |
| Gladstone, Rt.Hn. Herbert John | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Seely,Maj.J.E.B(Isle of Wight) |
| Guest, Hon, Ivor Churchill | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Hammond, John | M'Crae, George | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire |
| Harrington, Timothy | M'Kenna, Reginald | Sullivan, Donal |
| Harwood, George | Murnaghan, George | Thomas,David Alfred(Merthyr |
| Hayden, John Patrick | Murphy, John | Thompson,Dr.E C(Monagh'n,N |
| Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Tully, Jasper |
| Healy, Timothy Michael | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Higham, John Sharp | O'Connor,James(Wicklow, W.) | Wallace, Robert |
| Holland, Sir Williom Henry | O'Donncll, T. (Kerry. W.) | Weir, James Galloway |
| Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk. | Paulton, James Mellor | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Jacoby, James Alfred | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Joicey, Sir James | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Power, Patrick Joseph | Woodhouse, Sir JT.(Huddersf'd |
| Jordan, Jeremiah | Priestley, Arthur | |
| Kennedy, P. J.(Westmeath, N. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) | Leif Jones and Mr. Bright. |
| Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington | Robson, William Snowdon |
§ MR. WHITLEYmoved to reduce the period for the redemption of the loans from thirty to twenty-five years. He thought the discussion that had taken place on the last Amendment absolved him from saying more than a very few words in support of this Amendment. His case was practically proved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, who told the Committee that so recently as 1901 money was borrowed for only twenty-four years for the same kind of work as was referred to in the schedule of the Bill. In 1901 when they were in the middle of the South African War the financial position of the country was much more serious than it was at the present time. If twenty-four years was a proper period then something less should be the proper period at the present time. He thought his Amendment an extremely reasonable one. It was only a proposal to revert to the practice which right hon. Gentlemen opposite followed so recently as four years ago. He thought if the Government could be induced to accept this Amendment some of the other Amendments to the clause might be passed over so that the Committee might get to the discussion of the schedule. He begged to move.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 1, line 17, to leave out the word 'thirty,' and insert the word 'twenty-five.'"—(Mr. Whitley.)
§ Question proposed, "That the word 'thirty' stand part of the clause."
490§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid the Bill of this year followed exactly the model of the Bill of 1903. The term was that which, for reasons he then stated, the House sanctioned in 1903. He must ask the Committee to adhere to the proposal in the Bill.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given an extraordinary reply. If this Amendment were accepted they would regard it as a concession and they would be enabled to go on to the discussion of the schedule. While the Government were asking them to be more profligate in their methods of expenditure than in 1895, the only answer which the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave was that the model of the 1903 Bill was being followed. The Committee wanted to know what reason the Government had in 1905 for what seemed to them a most extraordinary financial operation. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that he would hear more of this subject if the only reply he could make to their arguments was that this kind of thing had been done before. He protested against a Bill of this kind being brought in at this late period of the session without any arguments whatever in support of it.
§ MR. GUESTsaid that the reply of the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not be said to have contributed to the deliberative character of the Assembly. What was there sacrosanct, he asked, about 491 the period of thirty years? He appealed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to treat the House in a considerate manner. They did not want to keep the House sitting all night, but they would be obliged to do so if they were not met in a more conciliatory spirit. They meant to fight
§ on until some concession was made to their arguments.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 185; Noes, 88. (Division List No. 347.)
493| AYES | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Finlay,Rt HnSirR.B.(Inv'rn'ss | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Allhusen,Augustus Henry Eden | Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Morgan, David J(Walthamstow |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fisher, William Hayes | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.HughO. | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Arrol, Sir William | Flower, Sir Ernest | Mount, William Arthur |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Forster, Henry William | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Gardner, Ernest | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Balcarres, Lord | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens |
| Balfour,Rt.Hon.A. J. (Manc'r | Gordon,J.(Londonderry, South | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Balfour,RtHn Gerald W.(Leeds | Goulding, Edward Alfred | Peel,Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch | Greene,Henry D.(Shrewsbury) | Percy, Earl |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.) | Pierpoint, Robert |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Grenfell, William Henry | Pilkington, Colonel Richard |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Groves, James Grimble | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Bigwood, James | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bill, Charles | Hamilton,Marq of(L'donderry) | Pryce-Jones,Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bingham, Lord | Hardy,Laurence (Kent, Ashford | Purvis, Robert |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th | Pym, C. Guy |
| Bond, Edward | Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW | Randles, John S. |
| Brassey, Albert | Helder, Sir Augustus | Rankin; Sir James |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Hope,J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) |
| Bull, William James | Hornby, Sir William Henry | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Howard,Jn. (Kent, Faversham | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Butcher, John George | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Campbell.J.H.M (Dublin Univ. | Hunt, Rowland | Ritchie,Rt.Hon.Chas. Thomson |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred. | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir John H. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Kenyon,Hon.Geo. T. (Denbigh | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Keswick, William | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Chamberlain,RtHn J.A.(Worc. | Kimber, Sir Henry | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Knowles, Sir Lees | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford |
| Chapman, Edward | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles |
| Cochrane, Hon, Thos. H. A. E. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
| Coddington, Sir William | Lawson,Hn.H.L.W (Mile End) | Saunderson,Rt.Hn.Col.Edw J. |
| Cohen, Benjamin Louis | Lee, Arthur H.(Hants., Fareham | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lees, Sir Elliot (Birkenhead) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Colomb,Rt.Hon.Sir John C.B. | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Corbett, T. L. (Dawn, North) | Liddell, Henry | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Davenport, W. Bromley- | Long,Col.CharlesW. (Evesham | Smith, Rt. Hn.J.Parker(Lanark |
| Davies,Sir HoratioD(Chatham) | Long.Rt.Hn.Walter (Bristol,S. | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Dewar,Sir T.R.(Tower Hamlets | Lowe, Francis William | Stanley,Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Stroyan, Lord |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Lucas,Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Dorington, Rt.Hon.Sir John E. | Macdona, John Cumming | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Doughty, Sir George | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Maconochie, A. W. | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Doxford, Sr William Theodore | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Duke, Henry Edward | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Tuff, Charles |
| Dyke.Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart | Majendie, James A. H. | Turnour, Viscount |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.) | Marks, Harry Hananel | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Fellowes, Rt Hn Ailwyn Edward | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Walrond,Rt.Hon.SirWilliam H |
| Fergusson,Rt.Hn.Sir J.(Manc'r | Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfriesshire | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Milvain, Thomas | Welby,Lt.-Col.A.C.E (Taunton |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | |
| Welby, Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.) | Wortley, Rt. Hon.C. B. Stuart- | TELLERS FOE THE AYES—Sir |
| Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne) | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Wodehouse.Rt. Hn. E.R. (Bath) | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong | Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Asquith.Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry | Hammond, John | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Harrington, Timothy | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Harwood, George | O'Connor, James (Wicklow,W. |
| Bell, Richard | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Hayter, Rt. Hon, Sir Arthur D. | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Healy, Timothy Michael | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Higham, John Sharp | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Holland, Sir William Henry | Priestley, Arthur |
| Buxton,Sydney Charles(Poplar | Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk. | Redmond, John E.(Waterford) |
| Caldwell, James | Jacoby, James Alfred | Robson, William Snowdon |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Joicey, Sir James | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cawley, Frederick | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Runciman, Walter |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah | Seely.Maj.J.E.B (Isle of Wight) |
| Crean, Eugene | Kennedy.P.J. (Westmeath.N.) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cullinan, J. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Delany, William | Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lloyd-George, David | Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lundon, W. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Edwards, Frank | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Wallace, Robert |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall | Weir, James Galloway |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Crae, George | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Evans,Sir FrancisH.(Maidstone | M'Fadden, Edward | Wilson,Henry J.(York,W.R.) |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Woodhouse,Sir J.T(Hudd'rf'd) |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | M'Kenna, Reginald | |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Murnaghan, George | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Murphy, John | J. H. Whitley and Mr. |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John | Nannotti, Joseph P. | Guest. |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, Kendal (Kilkenny Mid |
§ Question proposed, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
§ *MR. LEIF JONES (Westmoreland, Appleby)moved the rejection of the clause, as a protest against the system of borrowing, and paying for naval works out of capital account, which had been increasing so much of late years. He claimed to do so with some authority, for he was one of the new Members of the House who had been returned very largely on account of the strong feeling there was in the country against the recurring extravagance on the part of the Government. He claimed that he was within his right in expressing the feeling of his constituents in regard to this increasing expenditure.
He ventured to say that the history of these successive Naval Work's Acts contained a warning which ought not to be disregarded by anyone who cared for the financial soundness of the country. The total expenditure contemplated by the first Act in 494 1895 was only £8,000,000; in 1896 it was £14,000,000; in 1897, £17,250,000; in 1899, £23,500,000; in 1901, £27,500,000; in 1903, £31,750,000, and that was the year when the Secretary to the Admiralty told them that they had already reached the final stage in the items which were to be included and paid for in this way. The increase, which was steady and continuous, had come about in two ways. It was partly due to the fact that the items first included had constantly grown greater and greater. In 1895 they were told that the works at Gibraltar would cost £1,500,000, but the cost amounted to £5,000,000. In the case of Dover they were told that the cost would be £2,000,000, and now it was £3,500,000. Other items were nearly all swollen in the same way. Another cause of the increase was that new items had been put in from time to time. There were, for example, Chatham and Rosyth. In respect of all these items the Estimate was now £32,250,000. But that was not the end. Anyone who looked at the schedule could see that 495 there were many items which would be increased. For instance, the cost of Rosyth was put down at £200,000, but that was for preliminary expenses only. In 1903 the Secretary to the Admiralty had told them that Rosyth was "to be on the largest scale, provided with all possible known requirements." Who could tell what all this would cost? The Secretary had talked of finality in 1903. That word "finality" was a favourite word with this Government, as with the spendthrift who went to a moneylender. It reminded him of Lord John Russell, who spoke of the Reform Act of 1832 as being a final Act of franchise reform, and who was long after known us "Finality John." He dared say that they would often think of the present Secretary to the Admiralty by the same title.
Another objection he had to the present system of these loans for naval works was that it withdrew the control over expenditure from that House. He submitted that no Government had the right to withdraw from the purview of that House the expenditure of public money. He did not know whether the Government expected to be in power two years hence. They, on that side of the House, hoped to get rid of them long before two years were over; and for that reason alone he objected to this Bill. Another objection was that the country was being continually deceived in regard to this expenditure. The Chancellor of the Exchequer made a considerable parade of virtue because he had put aside a million more than last year for the service of the debt, but when accounts were cast up it was found that, instead of paying off debt the liabilities of the country would be greater at the end of this year than at the beginning. Then, this system of loans injured the credit of the country; and struck thereby a blow at the national strength. He had another objection to the whole system which the Government were carrying on. Their extravagance—
THE CHAIRMANsaid that the hon. Member must confine himself to the question before the Committee. He was discussing the points that might be raised on the Second Reading of the Bill.
§ *MR. LEIF JONESsaid that he objected to the expenditure on this class because it led to their losing sight of what was of more importance than this expenditure. It led to inefficiency. The first mark of inefficiency was a neglect of economy and care in administration, and he observed that there was a growing tendency to—
THE CHAIRMANsaid that the hon. Member was continuing the line of remark which had already been ruled out of order.
§ *MR. LEIF JONESsaid he regretted very much that he had transgressed the ruling of the Chairman. He only wanted to show that expenditure was not the measure of efficiency. Last year the Russians had spent five times as much as the Japanese on their navy, and it was not an exaggeration to say that the Japanese had proved themselves five times as efficient as the Russians. The point he wanted to put was that we were not gaining in efficiency by this expenditure, and that that was the reason why he was opposing both this extravagant expenditure and the methods by which the money was raised.
§ MR. LLOYD - GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)said that he wanted to oppose the principle of this Bill. He knew that the Government had realised that the principle embodied in this clause was a bad one, and therefore they had promised that they would not repeat their offence. The hon. Gentleman knew that the Government would not be responsible for what was done in the course of the next two years. He hoped that hon. Members would oppose the renewal of the system which had divided the expenditure on naval works under two heads. The result was that by putting on capital what was really annual expenditure they were not apparently adding to the Debt though really doing so. They were rendering the Sinking Fund absolutely nugatory by adding to the Debt by means of these naval and military proposals. He thought it was a bad system because it undoubtedly impaired the credit of the country, and it was bound to do so. The City some time 497 ago warned the Government that if these proposals were put into the Bill the credit of the country could not be restored, but in spite of that warning and of the fact that Consols were exceedingly low, the Government went on with these proposals, and in addition to that this clause was very much worse than preceding clauses. In 1901 there was a proposal to repay in the course of twenty-four and a-half years, but now there was a proposal to repay in the course of thirty years. They were not merely increasing their expenditure, but they were extending the period of repayment of liabilities incurred years ago. He did not know where this process was going to end. The result would be a very serious financial crisis some day.
He thought it was about time the House of Commons really took au interest in these things. These Bills were generally introduced at the end of the session, when everybody wanted to get away and when there was no real thought given to them. Any discussion was resented. The result was that these Bills were being piled up, and the debt of the country was increasing and its credit was being impaired. It did not seem to be the interest of anyone to check the expenditure, and the tyranny of the Party system was so strong upon the House of Commons that it had really ceased to exercise its preliminary function because, after all, its greatest function was to vote Supply, to see that those supplies were properly expended, and to see that grievances were redressed before those supplies were given. There was really no scrutiny of Supply at all. They had had no criticism whatever from the other side except from the hon. Member for Islington, and he had supported the Government upon every Amendment, so that his criticism was necessarily futile. The Member for Croydon was a great financial authority, and he should have thought he would have given them some guidance on this Bill. Then there was the right hon. Member for West Bristol. He remembered him perfectly well complaining of the way in which these proposals were piled up year after year and the expenditure of the country increased, and he more or less suggested that that was a subject for his resignation; but he was not present now to criticise the same proposals which had caused him so much uneasiness and 498 which he evidently brought before the Cabinet.
The Bill was originally a Bill of £8,500,000, purely temporary, and he recollected perfectly well how they were assured that it was simply to meet an emergency and that it would not occur again. It was because of certain arrears which had arisen. It was admitted at the time that all the expenditure really ought to have been placed upon the Estimates, but that it had been neglected for years, and it was thought unfair to put it all on that year. That was the excuse then, but the result was that the Bill had grown until now, with this clause for another £6,000,000, it had reached practically £32,000,O00. That was also occurring in nearly every Continental country, leading to growing expenditure and decreasing credit. It was a serious thing for this country, because there was no country which depended more upon its credit. It had fought very largely upon its credit. It fought Napoleon on its credit. The strength of this country rested more on its credit than that of almost any country in the world, and yet they were frittering it away in this reckless manner.
The Bill had been discussed in languid Houses, and the only eagerness shown was to rush through it as soon as possible. Hon. Members were much more concerned as to the hour they should adjourn than as to whether they should add this £6,000,000 or not. He was not complaining of it; it was the result of constantly supporting such a Government as the present. It blunted the individual conscience. He was perfectly certain, if they could get hon. Members to apply the same scrutiny to these proposals as they would to any proposals made in connection with some business concern they were interested in, they would not look at them for a moment. Supposing the head of their business brought before them a proposal which approximated to Clause 1 in the Bill, they would dismiss him at once as one who did not understand the very elements of sound finance. Hon. Members had no right to support proposals dealing with the affairs of the nation which they would not support in their own businesses. A good many hon. Members 499 were interested in municipalities, but he was sure they would not in connection with them support proposals of the same character, and he was sure the Local Government Board would not. He was perfectly certain if a municipal authority attempted such proposals as were in Clause 1, the Local Government Board would institute an inquiry. It would say the thing was absurd, and it would ask how many of the works would last thirty years. They ought to apply the same principles to the Government and not to impose upon municipalities restrictions and regulations which they were not prepared to adopt with regard to their own business. When they were dealing with municipalities, they first of all asked how long the works would last, and even then they allowed a margin of five or ten years. They never extended the period of borrowing over the whole length of time the works might last. Houses might last sixty or seventy years, but they never gave sixty or seventy years in which to repay the money. But what did they say here? They said that these works, hospitals, or barracks, might last thirty years, and they would give the full period for which they might possibly be useful. Everybody, however, knew that new ideas were constantly springing up, ideas on fortification and all those things; and in another twenty or thirty years the works would have to be altered, and they would have to incur fresh expenditure before they had paid off the whole of the, old. That was not sound business, and the House of Commons ought not to sanction it. It was a gross dereliction of duty on their part to do so. Whatever might be their anxiety to terminate the session, he did not think they were acting conscientiously in neglecting the business of the nation; and he sincerely trusted that even now they would have the intervention of Members like the hon. Member for Islington, who had a sound financial conscience, which was a very rare thing in these days. He had not seen it on the Treasury Bench for over ten years, but he hoped soon to see a recurrence of it in that quarter.
The hon. Member in charge was naturally not concerned about the finance of the 500 matter; he left that to the Treasury. It was his business to get as much out of it as he could. But the watch-dog was there slumbering, meanwhile the hon. and gallant Member walked off with the money. What they wanted was a resurrection of the Treasury; they wanted fortified, strengthened control by the Treasury. There was no real control. He knew that earlier in the evening there was an Amendment as to the control of the Treasury discussed and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer got up and said the control of the Treasury was perfect. All he could say was that there had been no outward and visible sign of it during the last five or ten years. The Estimates were being exceeded, and the increase now was £5,835,000.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEENo, the total increase in this Bill is £500,000.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEWhat is the £5,000,000?
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEThat is the instalment for two years of the total estimates already sanctioned by Parliament.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid it did not all represent new work, but it was an increase in the estimate as originally formed. What he complained of was that in 1895 they got an estimate for some works or other and they were told that that was all they would require, and then they found in another two years the estimate had increased. How came it to be increased? It showed there was no careful scrutiny, and he would like to know whether the Treasury ever looked into the items. Did it ever carefully examine them, and exercise real control over them as the Treasury ought to do? It was not their business merely to deal out money. Parliament expected them to represent what ought to be the attitude of Parliament itself, an attitude of careful scrutiny of all fuller expenditure. For six months of the year Parliament was not sitting, and it was no one's business to do that except the Treasury, and they did not do it. The credit of the country used to be the greatest in the world, but it was so no 501 longer. It used to be a source of pride to us. It was our legitimate boast that our credit was the best in the world, it was the source of great prestige and power, but they had thrown it away in a careless, indifferent fashion. It was about time the House of Commons woke up, and, if the House of Commons would not do so, he hoped the country would.
§ MR. McCRAEsaid the Civil Lord had made a very significant interruption. They understood from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that they had called a halt with regard to the system of borrowing, but the Civil Lord now said that that was not so, and that they were going to have other Naval Works Loan Bills.
§ MR. McCRAEasked what the sense of the interruption was. What was the meaning of the note with regard to Rosyth which said that future expenditure would be borne by Vote? Surely that meant that they were going to put a stop to this method of borrowing? Was that so or not?
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid there was really no difference between what his hon. friend had said and what he had said. The policy of the Government was not to include any new works in the Naval Works Loan Bill, and in cases where preliminary work had only been done, as in the case of Rosyth, they proposed to treat it at once as new work to be approved by Parliament, and the contract would not be entered into until Parliament had approved of it. They proposed to make proposals with that object in the Estimates next year; the other works he specially referred to were the coastguard buildings and dredging, They proposed to finish the coastguard works now in course of construction, and in the case of dredging they took just enough money to do the work this year, and they proposed that all new work should appear in the Votes. Coaling facilities were treated in the same way. He had made the same statement upon the Second Reading of the Bill, and he 502 did not wish to repeat that statement now. They did not propose to add any new works.
§ MR. McCRAEsaid he had carefully studied the right hon. Gentleman's speech of last week, and his complaint was that the interruption of the Civil Lord was contradictory of what the right hon. Gentleman had laid down. He understood now that there would be no further borrowings for naval works for new expenditure. That, after all, did not mean much, because the task of providing the money under this Bill would be imposed upon the successors of the present Government. Perhaps the Civil Lord would inform the Committee how the expenditure of £8,000,000 under the Act of 1903 was made up.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINIt is all given in the schedule.
§ MR. McCRAEsaid that this system of borrowing encouraged extravagant expenditure. This death-bed repentance did not mean much, because the Government had got all the benefit they could out of this vicious system. He hoped the House would refuse to pass this clause.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)pointed out that of the £32,250,000 dealt with in this Bill only about £75,000 was spent in Ireland. This was the kind of treatment they got from a Government which, through the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had refused to give them some paltry little Returns because they would be too expensive. Irish Members were now asked to vote £32,000,000 of which Ireland would probably contribute as its share about £2,000,000, and they were expected to be happy and contented and allow their representation to be cut down while the Government were shovelling out £32,000,000 all over the Kingdom and the Colonies and Ireland would only get a beggarly sum of £75,000. Could any country in the world stand that kind of thing? They had been refused even a jetty in Ireland, and the Government had declined to grant them Returns showing how they were robbed. This Rosyth job almost took his breath away, for it was a place he had never heard of before. 503 Because some Lord was to be paid for this site at Rosyth—and he was informed that he was a member of the Government—it was considered to be a most desirable spot at which to have a naval base. He could not imagine how the Chancellor of the Exchequer could expect contentment and loyalty to this Empire when they did nothing for Ireland but drain it dry. He hoped the British public when they talked about cutting down Irish representation would also consider the advisability of cutting down Ireland's contribution towards the national expenditure. The only thing the Government desired to cut down was the voice of criticism.
With regard to this Bill what did they see all round their coast? All the hulks and defences they put up fifty or sixty years ago were now staring them in the face and were absolutely useless. No doubt a good many years hence people would be pointing to the useless works created under this Bill at Rosyth, and they would probably say, "These were the ideas of young Mr. Chamberlain." A sum of £75,000 for Ireland and £32,000,000 for England! That was the treatment meted out by a great Imperial race which expected loyalty and enthusiasm for the Empire and for the Army, Navy, and Volunteers in Ireland. How could they expect Ireland to be loyal at the price? Loyalty meant contentment, but he could not imagine how any system of government could justify such treatment. He was in the habit of reading all the speeches about war. He read the other day the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury in which he said this country was impregnable. Ireland was more impregnable still, because nobody there was allowed to carry even a popgun. He understood that this country was considered impregnable by reason of the Navy. If there was any part of the Kingdom which was not impregnable it was Ireland, which was said to be always ready to open its harbours to the enemies of England. Under these circumstances one, would have thought that they would have erected all these naval bases in Ireland to prevent the enemy landing in that country.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid it was generally agreed that this system of borrowing had led to great extravagance and that it had seriously affected our national credit. What he could not understand, however, was the position of the Government in regard to this matter. He should certainly vote for the omission of this clause, which he considered was a test of the sincerity of the Government in this matter. He could not gather that the Government had made any beginning at all in this matter of raising some of this money in the Estimates instead of by loan, and that was the reason why he should vote for this Amendment. Last year the Government transferred from Vote 10 a considerable sum to this very loan, and that was actually the year in which they intended to turn over a new leaf. He wished to point out the position in which the Exchequer and the country stood this year. The Government admitted that they ought not to raise such expenditure as this by loan any more. During the current year they had remitted £2,000,000 and at the same time they were raising £4,000,000 by loan. This appeared to him to be a form of vicarious economic virtue which the successors of the Government would find it most difficult to carry out. Many of the items in this Bill were new and small matters which certainly ought to have been placed upon the Estimates. He was sorry the Government had not the courage to carry out the policy they had laid down this year of placing these charges upon the ordinary Estimates.
§ MR. RUNCIMANsaid the successors of the Government would have to bear the burden of this Bill for years to come, whilst the Chancellor of the Exchequer was now claiming praise for having done a very courageous thing. As a matter of fact the Chancellor of the Exchequer had laid down a rule for the future which he was not prepared to apply to his present policy. The principle which had been applied to these loans was one which would not be tolerated for a moment in any other Government Department. The repayment of money on land even was limited to sixty years. The right hon. Gentleman was always ready to lecture local authorities in regard to 505 their unsound finance, but his own finance in this Bill was much more unsound. He thought it would be generally agreed that a large amount of the expenditure on the Navy might in the near future become out of date owing to alterations in naval strategy. The strength of their naval bases depended very much upon the development of the next few years. It would be well worth our while spending money in other directions which were less subject to the attacks of torpedo boats and submarines, but expenditure in that direction ought to be made with the greatest caution. The hon. Gentleman in making his proposals this year had evidently nothing of the kind in his mind. Portsmouth and Plymouth were dealt with as though they were to be permanently of great value and as though no works in other parts of the Kingdom or the world could ever be substituted for them. He trusted that the Admiralty would keep in mind the important fact that strategical centres altered and that we must be prepared to embark on expenditure in other parts of the Kingdom. We could not expect that the present naval ports would always have the im-
§ mense value they had now. The justification given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the thirty years period was the thinnest he had ever heard in that House. It was perfectly absurd to defend the proposal on the ground that that was the period laid down in the Act of 1903.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINI beg to move that the Question be now put.
*THE CHAIRMANI am reluctant to accept the closure, but this is a matter which has been discussed on two stages of the Money Resolution, discussed on the Second Reading, and discussed again in Committee. I think, therefore, it is not encroaching on the rights of the minority, which I desire to protect, if I accept the Motion.
§ Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 180; Noes, 83. (Division List No. 348.)
507| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Gordon, J. (Londonderry,South |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Chapman, Edward | Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury) |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Clare, Octavius Leigh | Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs. |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Grenfell, William Henry |
| Arnold-Forster, Bt.Hn.Hngh O | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Gretton, John |
| Arrol, Sir William | Colomb, Rt. Hon.Sir JohnC.R. | Groves, James Grimble |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Hamilton, Marq.of(L'donderry |
| Balcarres, Lord | Davenport, William Bromley- | Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford |
| Balfour, Rt.Hon. A. J.(Manch'r | Davies, SirHoratioD.(Chatham | Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th) |
| Balfour, RtHnGeraldW.(Leeds | Dewar, SirT.R.(Tower Hamlets | Heath, Sir James(Staffords,NW |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Dickson, Charles Scott | Helder, Sir Augustus |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Hermon-Hodge. Sir Robert T. |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Dorington, Rt.Hon. Sir John E. | Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Doughty, Sir George | Howard, John (Kent Faversham |
| Bigwood, James | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil |
| Bill, Charles | Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Hunt, Rowland |
| Bingham, Lord | Duke, Henry Edward | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur F |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Dyke, Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart | Kennaway, Rt.Hon. Sir John |
| Bond, Edward | Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.) | Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh |
| Brassey, Albert | Fellowes, Rt.Hon.Ailwyn Edw. | Keswick, William |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Fielden, Edward Brockle hurst | Kimber, Sir Henry |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Knowles, Sir Lees |
| Bull, William James | Finlay, RtHnSirR.B.(Inv'rn'ss | Laurie, Lieut-General |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Law, Andrew Bouar (Glasgow |
| Butcher, John George | Fisher, William Hayes | Lawrence. Wm. F. (Liverpool) |
| Campbell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon | Lawson, Hn.H.L.W.(Mile End |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Lee, Arthur H.(Hants, Fareham |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Flower, Sir Ernest | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh. | Forster, Henry William | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Gardner, Ernest | Liddell, Henry |
| Chamberlain, RtHnJ.A.(Worc. | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Llewellyn, Evan Henry |
| Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham) | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Smith.RtHnJ. Parker(Lanarks |
| Long, Rt.Hn.Walter(Bristol,S.) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Lowe, Francis William | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Stanley,Hon. Arthur(Ormskirk |
| Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Pretyman, Ernest George | Stanley,Rt.Hon.Lord(Lancs.) |
| Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth) | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Stroyan, John |
| Lyttelton Rt. Hon. Alfred | Purvis, Robert | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Pym, C. Guy | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Randles, John S. | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Rankin, Sir James | Thompson,Dr.EC(Monagh'n,N |
| M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne | Thornton, Percy M. |
| M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire | Reed, Sir Edw. James(Cardiff) | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Reid, James (Greenock) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Marks, Harry Hananel | Remnant, James Farquharson | Tuff, Charles |
| Martin, Richard Biddulph | Ridley, S. Forde | Turnour Viscount |
| Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriessh.) | Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson | Walker.Col. Wm. Hall |
| Milvain, Thomas | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Walrond, Bt. Hn. Sir Wm. H. |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Warde, Col. C. E. |
| Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Welbv,Lt.-Col.A.C.E.(Taunton |
| Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow | Royds, Clement Molyneux | Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts.) |
| Morpeth, Viscount | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) | Whiteley,H.(Ashton und Lyne) |
| Morrell, George Herbert | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- | Wodehouse,Rt,Hon.E.R.(Bath |
| Morrison, James Archibald | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. | Wortley,Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart- |
| Mount, William Arthur | Sandys, Lieut.-Col.Thos.Myles | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Nicholson, William Graham | Saunderson,Rt.Hn. Col.Edw.J. | |
| O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Sharpe, William Edward T. | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Peel, Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas | Viscount Valentia. |
| Percy, Earl | Sloan, Thomas Henry | |
| Pierpoint, Robert | Smith, Abel, H.(Hertford,East) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Asquith,Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Hammond, John | O'Connor,James (Wicklow,W.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Harrington, Timothy | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Hayden, John Patrick | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Healy, Timothy Michael | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Higham, John Sharp | Priestley, Arthur |
| Buxton,Syndey Charles (Poplar | Holland, Sir William Henry | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Caldwell, James | Hutchinson Dr. Charles Fredk. | Robson, William Snowdon |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Jacoby, James Alfred | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cawley, Frederick | Joicey, Sir James | Runciman, Walter |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah | Seely,Maj.J.E.B (Isle of Wight) |
| Crean, Eugene | Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath,N. | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cullinan, J. | Lawson, Sir Wilfred (Cornwall) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Delany, William | Leese, Sir JosephF.(Accrington) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lloyd-George, David | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lundon, W. | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Edwards, Frank | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Wallace, Robert |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Weir, James Galloway |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Crae, George | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Evans,SirFrancis H.(Maidstone | M'Fadden, Edward | Wilson, Henry J.(York, W.R.) |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | Murnaghan, George | Woodhouse,Sir J.T.(Hudd'rsf'd |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Murphy, John | |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Nannetti, Joseph P. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Gladstone,Rt.Hn. Herbert John | O'Brien,Kendal (Tipperary Mid | McKenna and Mr. Leif Jones |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
§ Question put accordingly, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
508§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 180; Noes, 83. (Division List No. 349.)
511| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Arkwright, John Stanhope | Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O. | Baird, John George Alexander |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Arrol, Sir William | Balcarres, Lord |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn.A.J.(Manch'r. | Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour,Rt.HnGeraldW.(Leeds | Groves, James Grimble | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hamilton,Marq.of (Lond'derry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford | Purvis, Robert |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Harris, F.Leverton(Tynem'th | Pym, C. Guy |
| Bigwood, James | Heath,SirJames(Staffords,N.W | Randles, John S. |
| Bill, Charles | Helder, Sir Augustus | Rankin, Sir James |
| Bingham, Lord | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hope,J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside) | Reed, Sir Edw.James (Cardiff) |
| Bond, Edward | Howard,John (Kent,Faversh'm | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Brassey, Albert | Hozier,Hon. James Henry Cecil | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hunt, Rowland | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Jeffreys, Rt.Hon.Arthur Fred. | Ritchie,Rt.Hon.Chas.Thomson |
| Bull, William James | Kennaway,Rt. Hon.Sir John H. | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Kenyon, Hon.Geo.T. (Denbigh) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Butcher, John George | Keswick, William | Round, Rt. Hon. Sir James |
| Campbell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Kimber, Sir Henry | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Knowles, Sir Lees | Rutherford W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sackville, Col. G. S. Stopford |
| Cavendish. V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lawrence, Win. F. (Liverpool) | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hn.JA.(Worc. | Lawson.Hn.H.L.W.(Mile End) | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Lee, ArthurH.(Hants, Fareham) | Saunderson, Rt.Hn.Col.Edw.J. |
| Chapman, Edward | Lees, SirA.Elliot (Birkenhead) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Clare Octavius Leigh | Legge, Co.l Hon. Heneage | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Liddell, Henty | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Colomb, Rt.Hon.Sir John C.R. | Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham) | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Long,Rt.Hn.Walter(Bristol,S.) | Smith, RtHnJ.Parker (Lanark) |
| Crossley Rt. Hon. Sir Savile, | Lowe, Francis William | Smith, Hon.W, F. D. (Strand) |
| Davenport, W. Bromley | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Stanley,Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk) |
| Davies, SirHoratioD. (Chatham | Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs. |
| Dewar, SirT.R.(Tower Hamlets | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Stroyan, John |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Macdona, John Cumming | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Dorington, Rt.Hon.Sir John E. | Maconochie, A. W | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Doughty, Sir George | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool. | Thompson,Dr. EC.(Monaghan, N |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Majendie, James A. H. | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Marks, Harry Hananel | Tomlinson, Sir W. Edw. M. |
| Dyke.Rt.Hon. Sir William Hart | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Tuff, Charles |
| Faber, Edward B. (Hants, W.) | Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfriesshire) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Fellowes, Rt. Hn Ailwyn Edward | Milvain, Thomas | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Walrond,Rt,Hon.SirWilliamH |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Finlay,RtHnSirR.B.(Iriv'rn'ss | Morgan,DavidJ.(Walthamstow | Welby, Lt.-Col.ACE.(Taunton |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Morpeth, Viscount | Welby,Sir Charles G.E. (Notts. |
| Fisher William, Hayes | Morrell, George Herbert | Whiteley, H.(Ashton und Lyne |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon | Morrison, James Archibald | Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E.R.(Bath |
| Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Mount, William Arthur | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B.Stuart |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Murray Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Wyndham-Quin, Col, W, H. |
| Forster, Henry William | Nicholson, William Graham | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Gardner, Ernest | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir |
| Gordon, J.(Londonderry, South) | Peel.Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury) | Percy, Earl | Viscount Valentia. |
| Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs. | Pierpoint, Robert | |
| Grenfell, William Henry | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | |
| NOES. | ||
| Asquith.Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry | Causton, Richard, Knight | Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Cawley, Frederick | Emmott, Alfred |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Cheetham, John Frederick | Esmonde, Sir Thomas |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Clancy, John Joseph | EvansSirFrancisN.(Maidstone) |
| Brown, George M.(Edinburgh) | Crean, Eugene | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Cullinan, J. | Flavin, Michael Joseph |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Delany, William | Flynn, James Christopher |
| Burke, E, Haviland | Dobbie, Joseph | Gladstone,Rt,Hn.Herbert John |
| Buxton,SidneyCharles(Poplar) | Doogan, P. C. | Griffith, Ellis J. |
| Caldwell, James | Edwards, Frank | Guest, Hon, Ivor Churchill |
| Hammond, John | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Rose, Charles Day |
| Harrington, Timothy | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Runciman, Walter |
| Hayden, John Patrick | M'Fadden, Edward | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | M'Kenna, Reginald | Seely,Maj. J.E.B (Isle of Wight) |
| Healy, Timothy Michael | Murnaghan, George | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Murphy, John. | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Higham, John Sharp | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Holland, Sir William Henry | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Hutchinson, Dr.Charles Fredk. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Jacoby, James Alfred | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Wallace, Robert |
| Joicey, Sir James | O'Connor,James (Wicklow,W.) | Weir, James Galloway |
| Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | O'Donnell. T. (Kerry, W.) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Jordan, Jeremiah | Paulton, James Mellor | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Kennedy, P.J. (Westmeath,N.) | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. | Wilson, Henry J. (York,W.R.) |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Woodhouse, Sir T. J(Hudd'rsfi'd |
| Leese,Sir JosephF.(Accrington | Power, Partick Joseph | |
| Lloyd-George, David | Priestley, Arthur | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. |
| Lundon, W. | Redmond, John E.(Waterford) | M'Crae and Mr. Leif Jones. |
| MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Robson, William Snowdon |
§ Clause 2 agreed to.
§ Schedule:—
§ MR. GUESTsaid that no attention had been called to a number of items in the schedule and no explanation or justification for them had been offered by the Government.
*THE CHAIRMANI understand the hon. Member is going to move an Amendment to leave out lines 14 and 15; of course, general observations on the whole of the schedule would not be in order.
§ MR. GUESTsaid his object was to draw attention to those and other items in the schedule, but he would confine himself to that particular one when he said that some of the money had not received any justification or explanation. On the other items, as far as he knew, no explanation had been offered in recent times. It might be that in 1895, or in one of the subsequent years, the Government had explained how the money was to be spent and the objects for which they were asking the House to sanction the loan, but to those who had not been in the House so long as that there was no source of general information with regard to those items. Not only was that the general position with regard to Gibraltar, but Gibraltar itself was the subject of considerable controversy. It was stated, and those who had had the opportunity of going there had been told on the spot, that the modern range of artillery was such as to render the position of Gibraltar wholly different to that which 512 it was believed it would hold when the works were first undertaken. He did not think they ought to be asked to go on spending money on the work if it was a fact that the defences could be enfiladed from the Spanish coast. The harbour and port of Gibraltar where those very extensive works were to be constructed were only distant from the mainland of Spain an average of about 6,000 or 7,000 yards. He believed the minimum distance was something over 5,000 yards and the maximum distance was not more than 10,000 yards. He was afraid they had not yet entirely assimilated one of the lessons of the Boer War, and that was that it was possible for large guns to fire projectiles with great accuracy from at least 10,000 yards without remaining in a stationary position. It was obvious to anybody that that would increase the difficulty of locating guns. Therefore, not only was the range greater since the works were first contemplated, but they also had to consider the mobility of the guns. He thought they ought to know what the view of the Admiralty was upon that serious point because, if, as was asserted, the works were open to this fire, much of the money was being spent to very doubtful purpose.
There was not only that practical consideration which required some explanation, but there was also the whole question of what justification they had for saddling posterity with the defence and maintenance of Gibraltar. The question arose as to whether the Mediterranean Sea was likely to retain in the future the same pre-eminent importance in the eyes 513 of naval men as it occupied at present. The Mediterranean was in the nature of an old-world policy, a policy which was well enough in days when they merely had to consider the European situation. Gibraltar had even been held to be the key to the Mediterranean or the place where the key was kept. He did not deny that a good case might be made out for Gibraltar as having Atlantic importance, but the question was whether other centres would not serve the Atlantic batter, centres which were not so exposed to attack and which did not excite such hostility and envy on the part of other nations, and whether in some other portion of the Atlantic they could not find some far more convenient station. The main importance of Gibraltar was its Mediterranean position, and the question arose as to whether the Mediterranean would in the future occupy the same important position in the eyes of naval stretagists as it did at the present day. One was almost tempted to think that, if we had not been in the possession of Egypt, the Mediterranean would have sunk to secondary importance as a station for the Fleet. Naval history showed that there was nothing more liable to variation than the views of naval strategists, and therefore the question arose as to how far they were justified in saddling posterity with the obligation to maintain the Gibraltar works which were primarily of Mediterranean importance. He suggested that it was very probable in future that the Mediterranean might occupy a relatively different position in the eyes of strategists, and he would like to have something more in detail as Co the views of the Admiralty.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, to leave out lines 14 and 15"—(Mr. Guest.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the schedule."
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid he thought the hon. Member who had just moved the Amendment was under some misapprehension. He seemed to imagine that great expenditure was foreshadowed at Gibraltar with reference to those two items.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEThe hon. Gentleman's Amendment applies to Gibraltar only.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid that, however valid the hon. Gentleman's objections might be to Gibraltar, the expenditure had already been incurred and had also been practically completed.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid he presumed they would be able to raise the question on the further amount of £500,000.
§ MR. GUESTsaid he raised the question with the object of discussing the whole of the Gibraltar policy. There were three items amounting to £573,000; including the works contemplated at Malta, they amounted to £717,000.
THE CHAIRMANsaid Sub-section (a) of the schedule covered all of the works, and he suggested that the discussion desired could be obtained by moving its rejection.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid he was anxious to give the fullest information. He thought, however, it was really not much good arguing these points because no action which they could undertake could unmake those works. He admitted that there were differences of opinion at the time, but the works were now almost completed. The hon. Member who moved this Amendment expressed doubt as to whether Gibraltar was still of any value as a base for the Mediterranean Fleet. It was not now the base for the Mediterranean Fleet, but the base for the Atlantic Fleet. Gibraltar was not only a strategic but a repairing base, and in the opinion of the Admiralty, fortified by the unanimous opinion of its naval advisers, Gibraltar was admirably suited for that purpose. It had a most commanding position, and it had been largely developed with the view of increasing its 515 importance and value as a strategic base. It had now been developed into a naval base of the first magnitude. As to the vulnerability of Gibraltar that question had been discussed in the House almost ad nauseam. They would all remember the speeches of the hon. Member for King's Lynn upon this subject, and all he had to say was that there had been no change whatever in the view expressed by the Admiralty in the previous discussions. The view of the Admiralty was that the harbour and naval base at Gibraltar had been established in the best position for the requirements of the Fleet. It would have been almost impracticable and far more costly to have attempted to establish a harbour and base on the East side of Gibraltar. It was true that in certain contingencies the present harbour would be exposed to a certain amount of fire, but the Admiralty nevertheless considered that the dockyard had been afforded all reasonable protection, and as much protection as could possibly be given in view of the peculiarities of the site. He did not think there were any valid grounds for the criticisms which had been made by the hon. Member.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid he desired to acknowledge the courteous reply which had been given by the Civil Lord, but he appeared to have lost sight of the fact that they were protesting against putting down to loans expenditure upon matters which ought to be put upon the Estimates of the year. Naval bases were always of a changeable nature, and even Gibraltar had its advantages and its disadvantages. This was the first time the Committee had had to consider a Naval Works Act in face of the fact that they had recently abandoned no less than four important naval stations. He put it to the Committee that it might be considered necessary in the near future to abandon other naval bases, including Gibraltar. With regard to the danger of fire from the Spanish coast, since the plans for Gibraltar had been decided upon new facts had arisen. Not only had guns increased in power, but the most important discovery had been the great force of plunging fire. The Russian fleet within Port Arthur was almost wholly destroyed by plunging fire from a 516 greater distance than the Spanish coast was from the spot where our Fleet would lie in the harbour of Gibraltar. He was sorry that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman for Yarmouth was not present to give the Committee his views upon this matter. Before the Committee was asked to vote money for Gibraltar they ought to be placed in possession of the views of the Admiralty in regard to the new situation which had been created by their experience of the war in the Far East. If the Government chose to bring in a Bill of this character at this late hour they were not absolved from the necessity of laying their reasons before the House. He trusted the Secretary to the Admiralty would give them some assurances as to the position in which Gibraltar stood in view of the important discovery he had alluded to.
§ *SIR JOHN COLOMBsaid he had a strong desire to make some observations upon matters of general policy dealt with in this Bill. A debate upon these matters was always attractive to him, but after listening to the present debate upon this measure for over seven hours he was bound to say that he had never heard a greater waste of time before in the House of Commons. This Bill, he admitted, raised very great questions of policy, but he refused to join hon. Gentlemen opposite who were dealing with this subject like children in the nursery and with political toy spades making Party dirt pies.
§ MAJOR SEELYOn a point of order, I wish to ask if the right hon. Gentleman is in order in saying that he will not join in making dirt pies.
THE CHAIRMANsaid he did not think the right hon. Gentleman had said anything which was out of order.
§ *SIR JOHN COLOMBsaid he had stated what he thought of the character and tone of the debate. He would take another opportunity of stating his views on this Bill, and mean while he would sit silently and patiently and vote in favour of this Bill, which had no doubt been framed after due consideration, but which nevertheless exhibited a certain 517 vacillation of policy upon which he should like to say a few words.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYsaid he wished to make an appeal to the Committee to think Imperially upon this matter. Here was another instance where an enormous sum of money was put down as expenditure, and Ireland in this case did not get a single farthing of it. Out of the sum of £6,000,000 there was not a single sixpence to be spent in Ireland. When he heard the question of Gibraltar raised and the range of gun-fire from the Spanish coast alluded to, it seemed to have been forgotten that the King of Spain had recently honoured them with a visit, and they had an entente cordiale with him. If this complete understanding with Spain existed was it fair to talk about plunging fire? Was it fair to ask Ireland to contribute nearly £2,500,000 towards keeping off this plunging fire? If they were such friends with the King of Spain was it not a farce to come to that House and ask for all this money to fortify Gibraltar against a plunging fire from the Spanish coast? He asked the Government to give a reason for all this expenditure. He wanted some Englishman on the Treasury Bench to get up and give an explanation on the question of policy. Irishmen would not get a sixpence out of all this expenditure the Committee were asked to vote. What was the ground
§ of apprehension? The triumph of their pacific policy was stated in every newspaper printed in English, and he was at a loss to understand this demand for money. There used to be a peace Party in England, but it seemed to have completely disappeared. He had never considered himself as belonging to any peace Party whatever. They could not tell the world that they were on terms of amity with France, Spain, and all other nations, and then throw in their faces a Bill for £32,000,000 for war expenditure. It was an incredible position. It was worthy of "Alice in Wonderland." No doubt there was something secret locked up in the breast of the Government. He did think that even at that hour (2.45) they ought to hear an explanation of the mystery.
§ *MR. WEIRasked why the hon. Gentleman did not give an explanation. The question raised by his hon. friend as to the danger on the West side of the rock of Gibraltar was of the utmost importance, but the hon. Gentleman in his reply made no reference to it. He thought they were entitled to a statement as to the views of the Admiralty.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 167; Noes, 79. (Division List No. 350.)
519| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Bull, William James | Duke, Henry Edward |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry E. | Burdett-Coutts, W. | Dyke,Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Butcher, John George | Faber, Edmund B.(Hants, W.) |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Campbell,J.H.M.(Dublin Univ.) | Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw. |
| Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O. | Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst |
| Arrol, Sir William | Cautley, Henry Strother | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. |
| Atkinson, Bt. Hon. John | Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Finlay,RtHnSirR.B (Inv'rn'ss) |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas |
| Balcarres, Lord | Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Worc. | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Balfour,Rt.Hn.A.J. (Manch'r.) | Chapman, Edward | Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds | Clare, Octavius Leigh | Flannery, Sir Fortescue |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Forster, Henry William |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R. | Gardner, Ernest |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. |
| Bigwood, James | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, South |
| Bill, Charles | Davenport, W. Bromley- | Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury) |
| Bingham, Lord | Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham) | Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs. |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Dickson, Charles Scott | Grenfell, William Henry |
| Bond, Edward | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Gretton, John |
| Brassey, Albert | Doughty, Sir George | Groves, James Grimble |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Hamilton,Marq.of(L'donderry) |
| Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th) | Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Milvain, Thomas | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford |
| Hope,J.F.(SheffieId, Brightside | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Howard. J. (Kent, Faversham) | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Sandys, Lieut.-Col.Thos.Myles |
| Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Hunt, Rowland | Morpeth, Viscount | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred. | Morrell, George Herbert | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H. | Morrison, James Archibald | Smith, Abel H.) Hertford, East) |
| Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh) | Mount, William Arthur | Smith,RtHnJ.Parker (Lanarks |
| Keswick, William | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Nicholson, William Graham | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Laurie, Lieut-General | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury | Stroyan, John |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Lawson,Hn.H.L.W.(Mile End) | Percy, Earl | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham) | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Liddell, Henry | Pretyman, Ernest George | Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M. |
| Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Tuff, Charles |
| Long, Col. Chas W. (Evesham) | Purvis, Robert | Turnour, Viscount |
| Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Pym, C. Guy | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Lowe, Francis William | Randles, John S. | Walrond,Rt.Hn.Sir William H. |
| Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Rankin, Sir James | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Lucas, Reg. J. (Portsmouth) | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne | Welby,Lt.-Col.A.C.E (Taunton. |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) | Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts.) |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Reid, James (Greenock) | Whiteley,H.(Ashton uud. Lyne |
| MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Remnant, James Farquharson | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B.Stuart- |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Ridley, S. Forde | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Ritchie, Rt.Hn.Chas.Thomson | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| M'Killop. James (Stirlingshire | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Marks, Harry Hananel | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Alexander Acland - Hood |
| Martin, Richard Biddulph | Royds, Clement Molyneux | and Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Healy, Timothy Michael | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Higham, John Sharp | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Holland, Sir William Henry | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Caldwell, James | Joicey, Sir James | Priestley, Arthur |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Redmond, John E.(Waterford) |
| Cawley, Frederick | Junes, Wm. (Carnarvonshire) | Robson, William Snowdon |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Jordan, Jeremiah | Rose, Charles Day |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath, N | Runciman, Walter |
| Crean, Eugene | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Cullinan, J. | Leese,SirJosephF. (Accrington) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Delany, William | Lloyd-George, David | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lundon, W. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Doogan, P. C. | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Edwards, Frank | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Wallace, Robert |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Crae, George | Weir, James Galloway |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Fadden, Edward | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone) | M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Kenna, Reginald | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Murnaghan, George | Woodhouse,Sir J.T(Huddersf'd |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Murphy, John | |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbt.John | Nannetti, Joseph P. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) | Guest and Major Seely. |
| Hammond, John | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | |
| Harrington, Timothy | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) |
§ MR. RUNCIMANsaid he wished to ask what was the reason, for the great increase that had taken place in the 520 item for dredging since the first scheme for dredging had been inaugurated by the Board of Admiralty. The amount 521 first contemplated was about £1,000,000; now it was £1,360,000, and no explanation had been made why such an increase had taken place. He could imagine no expenditure for dredging which should be charged to capital account. The major portion of the expenditure had been on dredging in soft grounds such as the entrance to Portsmouth, the deepening of the Medway to Chatham, and so on, and all of that was expenditure which must occur again and again. It was perfectly absurd to say that thirty years was a reasonable period in that case; everyone with any experience whatever knew that within a period of ten years a channel would silt up and lessen its draught by four or five or even ten feet. There was no work coming within the limits of the Bill that could be more varied in its nature owing to causes over which even civil engineers had little or no control.
A great amount of money devoted to dredging was said to be largely owing to the increased size of vessels. That might be perfectly true, but there was no doubt that the expenditure, so far from lasting over the long period described in the Bill, would have to be increased from time to time as ordinary annual expenditure in order that the ports might be kept open for the very vessels they were now building. Dredging was largely a question of locality. At Keyham he believed a large amount of rock had been cut away, but even then a large amount of silt had to be taken out every year, and they would find that in a great many cases the expenditure was not put into a Bill of this kind, but was dealt with in the Estimates. He had taken out a number of items from the Votes for the the last two or three years. At Chatham in 1902–3 £1,000 was spent on dredging, and something like £8,000 was spent in the previous year. Was there any dredging at Chatham included in the present Bill? If so, why should some of the expenditure go to capital and some be put on the Estimates? In the case of Keyham a new dredger was provided. Was there any provision made for Keyham in the present Bill? In the case of Malta something like £9,000 was spent in 1902–3 and £10,000 the previous year. At Bermuda £15,000 was provided for 522 out of the Estimates. Were any of these ports included in this capital account? It certainly ought to be explained whether out of this item of £1,360,000 any money was being spent in those ports, and, if so, why there should be a distinction between one class of mud and another class of mud, why one should be paid for out of capital expenditure and another paid for out of revenue.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, to leave out lines 21 and 22."—(Mr. Bunciman.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the schedule."
§ MR. PRETYMANsaid there was a clear line of distinction drawn. Dredging for the maintenance of a channe at a required depth was done out of Votes, but dredging to create a deep channel was obviously a new service and was included in the Bill. It was perfectly correct that, generally speaking, where dredging was carried out silting took place, but the new dredging necessary to maintain the required depth was met out of Votes. With regard to Devonport, when once the original mud had been removed the depth would be maintained out of Votes. In smaller matters such as Wei-hai-Wei and other small dredging, a certain amount of new dredging was done out of Votes; the only money spent out of loan was for the removal of large quantities of mud where there was no deep water before. The cost of dredging by contract at Devonport in order to obtain access to the new works had been £500,000, and the estimated cost of providing their own plant was £126,000.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid they understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that when they dredged out a new depth it was placed on capital expenditure and was provided for by loan, but when once they had obtained the required depth they provided for the necessary dredging on the Estimates. He thought, if the right hon. Gentleman looked a little further down the page, he would see that what he defended as a reasonable proposal was shown to be 523 most unreasonable. There was a note which said that expenditure subsequent to March 31st, 1906, was to be charged to Navy Vote 10. What they contended was that all such works should undoubtedly be charged to current account and should be put upon the Estimates. The right hon. Gentleman's reply was somewhat inadequate, because he tried to make the House suppose that it was a reasonable proposal that the maintenance of depths should be put on the Votes.
§ MR. PRETYMANsaid that what he said was that what had been done by the authority of the House was done under the Naval Works Loans Act. It had already been stated that it was now proposed to take all such expenditure on dredging of all kinds and dredging plant, whether new dredging or dredging to maintain existing depths, and put it back on the Votes.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid he thought they were justified in all the protests they had made. They had protested that the Bill violated all the true canons of financial purity. It charged to capital account and to loans what ought to be charged to current account and put upon the Estimates. They were met by evasion after evasion by hon. Gentlemen opposite, and they were now assured by the Secretary to the Admiralty that every contention was true and that after April 1st all dredging would be placed on the Navy Estimates. Why did they not do that before, and why did they try to crush through an unwilling House at that hour of the morning a Bill which violated all the canons of financial purity and which was admitted by the Secretary to the Admiralty himself to be absolutely indefensible?
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that if they dredged, no matter what they dredged and where they dredged, so long as they dredged in the financial year 1905–6 it was proper to charge the cost to capital account, but if they dredged the same matter in the same place after March 31st, 1906, then it was proper to charge the cost to revenue account. Were hon. Gentlemen opposite satisfied that that was a reasonable way of conducting the financial business of the country? If they really believed that that was the way to conduct the business of the country and that it was proper to distinguish between dredging, not in the matter they dredged nor in the difficulty of dredging, but in the time they dredged, he could only say he did not agree with them.
§ SIR JAMES JOICEY (Durham Chesterle Street)said they had always been accustomed in all their Departments to make all their charges to revenue, and he failed to see why this particular item had been selected for special treatment. He did not know anything, except the electric light work, which ought to be more regularly paid for each year than dredging, and it was very idle of the Government to set up a plea that it was right to charge it to capital account. If they were going to have a capital account in connection with all their affairs, he could understand it, but his impression was that it was just an effort on the part of the Government not to pay their proper share of the expenditure.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 166; Noes, 75. (Division List No. 351)
527| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.) | Brymer, William Ernest |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry E. | Banner, John S. Harmood- | Bull, William James |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Burdett-Coutts, W. |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Butcher, John George |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O. | Bigwood, James | Campbell,J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. |
| Arrol, Sir William | Bill, Charles | Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. |
| Atkinson, Bt. Hon. John | Bingham, Lord | Cautley, Henry Strother |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Blundell, Colonel Henry | Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire |
| Balcarres, Lord | Bond, Edward | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) |
| Balfour,Rt.Hn. A.J. (Manch'r.) | Brassey, Albert | Chamberlain,RtHn J.A.(Worc. |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W.(Leeds.) | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Chapman, Edward |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Knowles, Sir Lees | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John G. R. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lawson,Hn. H.L.W. (Mile End | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham) | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Davenport, W. Bromley- | Lees, Sir Elliot (Birkenhead) | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham) | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Liddell, Henry | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Doughty, Sir George | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Lowe, Francis William | Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Dyke, Rt. Hn Sir William Hart | Lucas, Reg. J. (Portsmouth) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants. W.) | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw. | Macdona, John Cumming | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Smith, A. H. (Hertford, East) |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Maconochie, A. W. | Smith,RtHnJ Parker(Lanarks) |
| Finlay,RtHnSirR.B (Inv'rn'ss) | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Majendie, James A. H. | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Fitzroy, Hn. Edw. Algernon | Marks, Harry Hananel | Stroyan, John |
| Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Forster, Henry William | Milvain, Thomas | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Gardner, Ernest | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Thompson,Dr.E.C(Monagh'n,N |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Gordon,J.(Londonderry, South | Morpeth, Viscount | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Greene,Henry D. (Shrewsbury) | Morrell, George Herbert | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs. | Morrison, James Archibald | Tuff, Charles |
| Grenfell, William Henry | Mount, William Arthur | Turnour, Viscount |
| Gretton, John | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Groves, James Grimble | Nicholson, William Graham | Walrond.Rt.Hn.SirWilliam H. |
| Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Hamilton,Marq of(L'donderry) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Welby.Lt.-Col.A.C.E (Taunton |
| Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford) | Percy, Earl | Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts.) |
| Heath, Sir J. (Staffords., N.W.) | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Whiteley,H. (Ashton und.Lyne |
| Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Wortley, Rt. Hn. C.B. Stuart- |
| Hope,J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) | Pretyman, Ernest George | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | |
| Hunt, Rowland | Purvis, Robert | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred. | Pym, C. Guy | Alexander Acland - Hood |
| Kennaway, Rt. Hn.Sir John H. | Randles, John S. | and Viscount Valentia. |
| Keswick, William | Rankin, Sir James | |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | MacVeagh, Jeremiah |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Flynn, James Christopher | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) |
| Brown, G. M. (Edinburgh) | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John | M'Crae, George |
| Bryce, Rt. Hon. James | Griffith, Ellis J. | M'Fadden, Edward |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Hammond, John | Murnaghan, George |
| Caldwell, James | Harrington, Timothy | Murphy, John |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Hayden, John Patrick | Nannetti, Joseph P. |
| Cawley, Frederick | Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D. | O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.) |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Healy, Timothy Michael | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) |
| Crean, Eugene | Higham, John Sharp | O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W. |
| Cullinan, J. | Joicey, Sir James | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Delany, William | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.) | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Doogan, P. C. | Jordan, Jeremiah | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Edwards, Frank | Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath, N | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Priestley, Arthur |
| Emmott, Alfred | Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington) | Redmond, J. E. (Waterford) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Lloyd-George, David | Rose, Charles Day |
| Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone) | Lundon, W. | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Seely,Maj.J.E.B.(Isle of Wight | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Shipman, Dr. John G. | Wallace, Robert | Woodhouse,SirJ.T (Huddersf'd |
| Sinclair, John (Forfarshire | Weir, James Galloway | |
| Sullivan, Donal | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Villiers, Ernest Amherst | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer | Runciman and Mr. M'Kenna. |
§ SIR A. HAYTER (Walsall)called attention to the fact that certain works at the Pembroke Jetty had exceeded the original estimate. The estimated cost up to March 31st, 1904, was £92,530, but the total estimated cost was now £133,500. He wished to know how this enormous sum had been expended.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid that in this particular case the contractor had failed to carry out his obligations, and the Admiralty had had to take the contract from him and complete the work themselves. Under the contract this contractor was liable for the additional cost which the Admiralty had been put to in the matter, but as the case was still sub judice he would not go further into details.
§ MAJOR SEELYsaid he wished to move as an Amendment to leave out line 33 in the schedule which referred to Bermuda. They were now being asked to vote £600,000 for this place, notwithstanding the fact that a large number of the troops forming the garrison had been removed. They had been told that it was impossible for them to feel safe at Bermuda unless the garrison there was maintained at its full strength. Nothing had changed there in regard to the strategic possibilities, and yet the garrison had been reduced whilst their responsibilities had increased there. He understood that Bermuda was to be retained as a naval and military station. St. Lucia and Barbadoes had been abandoned as naval 528 stations, and although they had been promised further information about Jamaica he understood that that place also was going to be abandoned. These were extraordinary proposals for the Admiralty to make without a single word of explanation. The excuse made for retaining Bermuda was that it offered special advantages for the protection of our commerce and our food supply in time of war. After all, what was the chief value of a naval base? It was of value for all the purposes which they so often heard described when they were discussing the Naval Estimates, but it was also of value on account of what could be obtained there in the ordinary course of trade. Had they decided to maintain a naval base at St. Lucia they would have been maintaining a place which, from the nature of its situation, contained all the trading and coaling facilities which were of such great value at a naval station. This was a matter of some importance, and he ventured to think that if anyone had ventured to tell Lord Nelson that they would eventually abandon St. Lucia he would have replied that they were telling him an idle dream; and he would have been still more amazed and disgusted had he been told that the only opportunity afforded to them in the House of Commons of protesting against this policy was at 3.45 in the morning. The expenditure of public money in this extravagant way was a gross act of folly. Nothing that had been said on behalf of Government seemed to justify this gross act of folly, or this most 529 extraordinary policy. Hon. Members opposite boasted that they belonged to the great Imperial Party, and they complained bitterly when any British territory was given up. He wished to point out that all they now retained of the West Indian stations was Bermuda, which he was informed was far less suited for a naval base than the other stations which had been given up. He begged to move.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, to leave out line 33."—(Major Seely.)
§ Question proposed "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the schedule."
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.said the hon. Gentleman had travelled very far from the schedule. His speech was directed to what he called the abandonment of the West Indies. The hon. and gallant Member confused the abandonment of islands with the abandonment of fortifications of islands or the refusal to fortify them. They had not abandoned the islands, but they did not fortify them.
§ MAJOR SEELY"Abandon" was the word used by the Secretary of the Department.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he hoped the islands would always remain part of
§ the British possessions. The question whether Bermuda ought to remain a naval base was, he thought, a question which was not relevant to this schedule, and he ventured respectfully to say that this was not a proper occasion on which to discuss it. There was no question of abandoning anything in the nature of British territory.
§ *MR. RUNCIMANsaid this was a case which illustrated the loss which resulted from changes in policy. We threw away thousands of pounds in one direction and then started work on other naval bases. There were many who thought that the expenditure of money in Bermuda was not good expenditure. It was said that the expenditure of money there did not, in fact, add greatly to our naval strength, and that St. Lucia would have been better for the British Fleet. He thought they ought to protest against expenditure being made at this station.
§ MR. WHITLEYsaid what was here proposed illustrated the faulty policy of these Bills. The money spent this year might be declared useless next year, although for twenty-nine years our successors would have to go on paying interest and sinking fund on the amount.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 163; Noes, 74. (Division List No. 352.)
533| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O. | Balcarres, Lord |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Arrol, Sir William | Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Balfour.Rt.Hn. Gerald W(Leeds |
| Ark wright, John Stanhope | Baird, John George Alexander | Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christen. |
| Banner, John S. (Harmood- | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thos. F. | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Hamilton,Marq.of(L'ndonderry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col.Edward |
| Bigwood, James | Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashford | Purvis, Robert |
| Bingham, Lord | Heath, SirJames(Staffords.NW | Pym, C. Guy |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Randles, John S. |
| Bond, Edward | Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside | Rankin, Sir James |
| Brassey, Albert | Howard, John (Kent, Faversham | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Hunt, Rowland | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bull, William James | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred. | Remnnant, James Farquharson |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Kennaway, Rt.Hon.SirJohnH. | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Butcher, John George | Keswick, William | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Campbell, J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Knowles, Sir Lees | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire) | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lawson, Hn.H.L.W. (Mile End | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Chamberlain, RtHnJ.A.(Worc. | Lee. Arthur H.(Hants,Fareham | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Chapman, Edward | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) | Sandys, Lieut.-Col.Thos.Myles |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Liddell, Henry | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Colomb, Rt.Hon. Sir John C. R. | Long, Col.CharlesW.(Evesham | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Long, Rt.Hn.Walter(Bristol,S. | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Crossley, Et. Hon. Sir Savile | Lowe, Francis William | Smith.Rt.Hn J.Parker(Lanarks |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Davies, SirHoratio D.(Chatham | Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Stanley, Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs. |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | Macdona, John Cumming | Stroyan, John |
| Doughty, Sir George | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Maconochie, A. W. | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Duke, Henry Edward | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Dyke.Rt.Hon. Sir William Hart | Majendie, James A. H. | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W. | Marks, Harry Hananel | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Fellowes, RtHn.Ailwyn Edward | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Tuff, Charles |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Maxwell, W. J. H.(Dumfriessh. | Turnour, Viscount |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Milvain, Thomas | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Finlay, Rt Hn SirRB.(Inv'rn'ss | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Walrond, Rt.Hon.SirWillianiH |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Morgan, David J.(Walthamstow | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Morpeth, Viscount | Welby, Lt.Col.A.C.E.(Taunton) |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon | Morrell, George Herbert | Welby, SirCharlesG.E.(Notts.) |
| Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Morrison, James Archibald | Whiteley, H.(Ashtonund.Lyne) |
| Flower, Sir Ernest | Mount, William Arthur | Wortley, Rt.Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Forster, Henry William | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Gardner, Ernest | Nicholson, William Graham | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | |
| Gordon, J.(Londonderry,South | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Percy, Earl | Sir Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Grenfell, William Henry | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | and Viscount Valentia. |
| Gretton, John | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | |
| Groves, James Grimble | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Doogan, P. C. | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Edwards, Frank | Healy, Timothy Michael |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh | Emmott, Alfred | Higham, John Sharp |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Joicey, Sir James |
| Caldwell, James | Evans,Sir FrancisH. (Maidstone | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire |
| Cawley, Frederick | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Flynn, James Christopher | Kennedy, P. J.(Westmeath,N.) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Gladstone, Rt. Hon. HerbertJn | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) |
| Crean, Eugene | Griffith, Ellis J. | Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington) |
| Cullinan, J. | Hammond, John | Lloyd-George, David |
| Delany, William | Harrington, Timothy | Lundon, W. |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Hayden, John Patrick | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Paulton, James Mellor | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| M'Crae, George | Pearson, Sir Weetman, D. | Wallace, Robert |
| M'Fadden, Edward | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Weir, James Galloway |
| M'Kenna, Reginald | Power, Patrick Joseph | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Murnaghan, Goerge | Priestly, Arthur | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Murphy, John | Redmond, John E. (Waterford | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R) |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Rose, Charles Day | Woodhouse, Sir JT(Hudd'rsfi'ld |
| O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid | Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland) | |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Shipman, Dr. John G. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES— |
| O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) | Major Seely and Mr. Runci- |
| O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W. | Sullivan, Donal | man. |
§ MR. WHITLEYsaid that the next Amendment standing in his name was a very important one, viz., the item dealing with coaling facilities and fuel storage. That was quite out of the run of naval works, and there could be no justification for paying that expenditure out of loan. He appealed to hon. Members who were business men whether in their own business they would be justified in putting down the cost of handling coal to capital expenditure to be repaid over a period of thirty years. Besides, the machinery for manipulating coal did not last long, and was being continually replaced by newer inventions. He strongly protested against this item, which was one of the largest in the schedule. He begged to move.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 2, to leave out line 35."—(Mr. Whitley.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the schedule,"
§ *MR. RUNCIMANsaid this grant was by no means of the same nature as that for other works provided for under the Bill. He understood that a small portion would be devoted to the erection of coal stores, and it was quite possible that works at Gibraltar would be included in the amount. He asked what amount had 534 been expended on Temperley transporters, which were practically new inventions, and of great utility. If any portion was devoted to that, he ventured to say that thirty years was a very much longer period than was justified. Nothing was more likely than that the great change made by this invention would lead to other considerable improvements. Secondly, there was no more reason why a Temperley transporter should be put down as a permanent capital charge than ropes and blocks on the ships. He understood that a large amount of coaling was now done by what were known as grabs, and he asked what amount was to be used for the purchase of grabs. There was no portion of the coaling facilities given under the heading with the exception of sites which could be treated as permanent expenditure.
§ *MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid he thought the hon. Member rather underestimated the permanent or semi-permanent character of the works. A very large portion of the expenditure had gone on sites which had to be purchased, and upon those sites coal storage had to be erected which would last, in all reasonable probability, a good deal longer than the period of the loan. The rest of the expenditure, which was a very small proportion, being £120,000 only out of £1,280,000, had been expended on what 535 was known as "fixed machinery," which had always been included in loans, and was a proper charge to be met by capital expenditure.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 162:, Noes, 73. (Division List No. 353.)
537| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Flower, Sir Ernest | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Forster, Henry William | Percy, Earl |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Gardner, Ernest | Pilkington, Colonel Richard |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O. | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Arrol, Sir William | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Grenfell, William Henry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Gretton, John | Purvis, Robert |
| Balcarres, Lord | Groves, James Grimble | Pym, C. Guy |
| Balfour, Rt.Hn.A.J.(Manch'r | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Randles, John S. |
| Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'derry | Rankin, Sir James |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.) | Hardy,Laurence(Kent,Ashford | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW | Reed, Sir Edw.James (Cardiff) |
| Bathurst, Hon.Allen Benjamin | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bigwood, James | Howard, John (Kent, Fav'sh'm | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Bingham, Lord | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hunt, Rowland | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Bond, Edward | Jeffreys,Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred. | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Brassey, Albert | Kennaway,Rt. Hon.Sir John H. | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Brodrick, Rt, Hon. St. John | Keswick, William | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Knowles, Sir Lees | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Bull, William James | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles |
| Butcher, John (George | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Campbell,J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Lawson, Hn. H.L.W.(Mile End | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Lee, Arthur H.(Hants., Fareham | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Lees, Sir Elliot (Birkenhead) | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Liddell, Henry | Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks |
| Chamberlain, RtHn.J.A.(Worc | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Chapman, Edmard | Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham | Stanley,Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Long, Rt. Hon. Walter(Bristol, S. | Stanley, Rt.Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lowe, Francis William | Stroyan, John |
| Callings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Colomb, Rt. Hon.Sir John C.R. | Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Macdona, John Cumming | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Tomlinson, Sir Win, Edw. M. |
| Davies, Sir Horatio D(Chatham | Maconochie, A. W. | Tuff, Charles |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Doughty, Sir George | Majendie, James A. H. | Walrond,Rt.Hn.SirWilliamH. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Marks, Henry Hananel | Warde, Colonel C.E. |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Welby,Lt.-Col.A.C.E.(Taunton |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfriesshire | Welby, Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.) |
| Dyke.Rt.Hon.SirWilliam Hart | Milvain, Thomas | Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B.Stuart |
| Fellowes,RtHnAilwyn Edward | Morgan,David J.(Walth'mst'w | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Morpeth, Viscount | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Morrell, George Herbert | |
| Finlay, RtHnSir R.B.(Invern'ss | Morrison, James Archibald | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Mount, William Arthur | Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Viscount Valentia. |
| Fitzroy,Hon.Edward Algernon | Nicholson, William Graham | |
| Flannery, Sir Fortescue | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hayter.Rt.Hon. Sir Arthur D. | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Brown, George M.(Edinburgh) | Healy, Timothy Michael | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Caldwell, James | Higham, John Sharp | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Joicey, Sir James | Priestley, Arthur |
| Cawley, Frederick | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Redmond,John E. (Waterford) |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Rose, Charles Day |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah | Runciman, Walter |
| Crean, Eugene | Kennedy, P.J.(Westmeath,N.) | Samuel Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Cullinan, J. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Seely,Maj.J.E.B.(Isleof Wight |
| Delany, William | Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lloyd-George, David | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lundon, W. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Edwards, Frank | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Emmott, Alfred | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Wallace Robert |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Crae, George | Weir, James Galloway |
| Evans,SirFrances H.(Maidstone | M'Fadden, Edward | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Kenna, Reginald | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Murnaghan, George | Woodhouse,SirJ.T(Huddersfi'd |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Murphy, John | |
| Gladstone,Rt.Hn.HerbertJohn | Nannetti, Joseph P. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary, Mid | J. H. Whitley and Mr. |
| Hammond, John | O'Brien. P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Bright. |
| Harrington, Timothy | O'Connor,James (Wicklow W.) |
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI beg to move that the schedule of this Bill be now put.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that before that was put he would like to ask, on a point of order, whether under Standing Order 25 it was open to a Minister or anyone to make such a Motion. In that Standing Order the only reference was to a clause; there was no reference to a schedule. He was perfectly aware that on one occasion the closure was given upon a schedule, but on that occasion no objection was taken that the Motion was contrary to the Standing Order. He submitted that the Motion was one which could only be made on the express authority of a Standing Order. There was no practice of the House dealing with the closure. The Chairman was therefore directly bound by the words of the Standing Order, and, the matter 538 having now been brought to his notice, he submitted that he was not competent to accept the Motion.
THE CHAIRMANsaid he quite appreciated the point of order. He had, in fact, anticipated it, and he had referred to Mr. Speaker and had looked up precedents upon it. The hon. Gentleman was mistaken in supposing that there was only one precedent; both his immediate predecessors had allowed a similar Motion on a schedule.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that on both those occasions objection was not taken. The attention of the Chairman at that time was not drawn to the fact that the Standing Order only related to a clause, and did not include a schedule. He submitted that the point having been brought to the Chairman's attention the Standing Order was binding.
§ Question put, 'That the Question "That this be the schedule to the Bill' be now put."
540§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 161; Noes, 72. (Division List No. 354.)
541| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Nicholson, William Graham |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Flower, Sir Ernest | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Forster, Henry William | Percy, Earl |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Gardner, Ernest | Pilkington, Colonel Richard |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn.Hugh O. | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Arrol, Sir William | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Grenfell, William Henry | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gretton, John | Purvis, Robert |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn.A.J.(Manch'r.) | Groves, James Grimble | Pym, C. Guy |
| Balfour.RtHn Gerald W.(Leeds | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Randles, John S. |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Rankin, Sir James |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfor. | Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne |
| Bathurst,Hon. Allen Benjamin | Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW | Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff) |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bigwood, James | Hope,J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bingham, Lord | Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham | Ridley, S. Forde |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Bond, Edward | Hunt, Rowland | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) |
| Brassey, Albert | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred. | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir John H. | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Keswick, William | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Bull, William James | Knowles, Sir Lees | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. |
| Butcher, John George | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles |
| Campbell,J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Lawson.Hn.H.L.W. (Mile End) | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Lee, Arthur H. (Hants.,Fareham | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas |
| Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Smith,Abel H.(Hertford,East |
| Chamberlain,Rt Hn.J.A(Worc. | Liddell, Henry | Smith,Rt.HnJ.Parker(Lanarks |
| Chapman, Edward | Llewellyn, Evan Henry | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Long,Col.Charles W.(Evesham | Stanley,Hon. Arthur(Ormskirk) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Long,Rt.Hn.Walter (Bristol,S) | Stanley,Rt.Hon. Lord (Lancs.) |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lowe, Francis William | Stroyan, John |
| Colomb,Rt.Hon.Sir John C.R. | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lucas,Reginald J.(Portsmouth | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | Macdona, John Cumming | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Dickson, Charles Scott | Maconochie, A. W. | Tuff, Charles |
| Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Doughty, Sir George | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Majendie, James A. H. | Walrond,Rt.Hn.Sir William H. |
| Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Marks, Harry Hananel | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Welby.Lt.-Col.A.C.E (Taunton |
| Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart | Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfriesshire | Welby,SirCharles G.E.(Notts.) |
| Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.) | Milvain, Thomas | Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne |
| Fellowes,RtHn.Ailwyn Edward | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Morgan,David J(Walthamstow | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Morpeth, Viscount | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Finlay,Rt,Hn.SirR. B(Inv'rn'ss | Morrell, George Herbert | |
| Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Morrison, James Archibald | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Mount, William Arthur | Alexander Acland Hood and |
| Fitzroy,Hon. Edward Algernon | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Bright, Allan Heywood | Burke, E. Haviland |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Caldwell, James |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Paulton, James Mellor |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Higham, John Sharp | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Joicey, Sir James | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Crean, Eugene | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Cullinan, J. | Jordan, Jeremiah | Priestley, Arthur |
| Delany, William | Kennedy, P.J. (Westmeath,N.) | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lamont, Norman | Rose, Charles Day |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Runciman, Walter |
| Edwards, Frank | Leese,Sir Joseph F. (Accrington) | Seely, Maj.J.E.B.(Isleof Wight |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | Lloyd-George, David | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Emmott, Alfred | Lundon, W. | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Sullivan, Donal |
| Evans,Sir FrancisH.(Maidstone | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | M'Crae, George | Wallace, Robert |
| Flynn, James Christopher | M'Fadden, Edward | Weir, James Galloway |
| Gladstone, Rt.Hn.Herbert John | Murnaghan, George | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | Murphy, John | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Hammond, John | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Harrington, Timothy | O'Brien,Kendal (Tipperary Mid | Woodhouse,Sir J.T(Huddersf'd |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary.N.) | |
| Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | O'Connor,James (Wicklow,W.) | TELLEES FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Healy, Timothy Michael | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) | McKenna and Mr. Lief Jones |
§ Question put, accordingly, "That this be the schedule to the Bill."
542§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 158; Noes, 69. (Division List No. 355.)
543| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Davenport, William Bromley- | Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred. |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Davies,SirHoratioD.(Chatham) | Kennaway, Rt.Hon.SirJohnH. |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Dickson, Charles Scott | Keswick, William |
| Arkwright John Stanhope | Disraeli, Conings by Ralph | Knowles, Sir Lees |
| Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.HughO | Doughty, Sir George | Laurie, Lieut.-General |
| Arrol, Sir William | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Duke, Henry Edward | Lawson, Hn.H.L.W.(Mile End) |
| Balfour, Rt.Hon.A.J.(Manch'r | Dyke, Rt.Hon.SirWilliamHart | Lee,ArthurH.(Hants,Fareham) |
| Balfour,RtHnGeraldW.(Leeds) | Faber, Edmund B.(Hants, W.) | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Fellowes,Rt.Hn Ailwyn Edward | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Liddell, Henry |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Llewellyn, Evan Henry |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Finlay,RtHnSir RB.(Inv'rn'ss) | Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham) |
| Bigwood, James | Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas | Long,Rt.Hn. Walter(Bristol,S.) |
| Bingham, Lord | Fisher, William Hayes | Lowe, Francis William |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon | Loyd, Archie Kirkman |
| Bond, Edward | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Lucas,Reginald J.(Portsmouth) |
| Brassey, Albert | Flower, Sir Ernest | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Forster, Henry William | Macdona, John Cumming |
| Brymer, William Ernest | Gardner, Ernest | MacIver, David (Liverpool) |
| Bull, William James | Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick | Maconochie, A. W. |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) |
| Butcher, John George | Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs. | M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) |
| Campbell,J.H.M.(Dublin Univ. | Grenfell, William Henry | Majendie, James A. H. |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Gretton, John | Marks, Harry Hananel |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Groves, James Grimble | Martin, Richard Biddulph |
| Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire) | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Maxwell, W. J. H.(Dumfriessh. |
| Chamberlain,Rt.HnJ.A.(Worc. | Hamilton.Marq. of (L'nd'nderry | Milvain, Thomas |
| Chapman, Edward | Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Clare, Octavius Leigh | Heath,SirJames(Staffords,N.W | Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Hope,J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside) | Morrell, George Herbert |
| Colomb, Rt.Hon.Sir John C.R. | Howard, John(Kent,Faversham | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil | Mount, William Arthur |
| Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Hunt, Rowland | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) |
| Nicholson, William Graham | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Percy, Earl | Royds, Clement Molyneux | Tollemache, Henry James |
| Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- | Tuff, Charles |
| Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex. | Turnour, Viscount |
| Pretyman, Ernest George | Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos,Myles | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.) | Walrond, Rt.Hn.Sir William H. |
| Purvis, Robert | Sharpe, William Edward T. | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Pym, C. Guy | Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas | Welby, Lt.Col.A.C.E.(Taunton |
| Randles, John S. | Sloan, Thomas Henry | Welby, Sir Charles G. E.(Notts. |
| Rankin, Sir James | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford,East) | Whiteley,H.(Ashton und Lyne) |
| Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne | Smith.Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks | Wortley, Rt.Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Reed, Sir Edw, James (Cardiff) | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Reid, James (Greenock) | Stanley,Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk) | |
| Remnant, James Farquharson | Stanley, Rt.Hon. Lord(Lancs.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| Ridley, S. Forde | Stroyan, John | Sir Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley | and Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Healy, Timothy Michael | O'Connor. James(Wicklow,W.) |
| Brown, George M. (Edinburgh) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Higham, John Sharp | Pearson, Sir Weetman D. |
| Caldwell, James | Joicey, Sir James | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire | Priestley, Arthur |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jordan, Jeremiah | Redmond, John E.(Waterford) |
| Crean, Eugene | Kennedy, P. J.(Westmeath, N. | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cullinan, J. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Runciman, Walter |
| Delany, William | Leese, SirJosephF.(Accrington) | Seely,Maj. J.E.B.(Isle of Wight) |
| Dobbie, Joseph | Lloyd-George, David | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Doogan, P. C. | Lundon, W. | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Edwards, Frank | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Sullivan, Donal |
| Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) | Waldron, Laurence Ambrose |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Crae, George | Weir, James Galloway |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | M'Fadden, Edward | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Flynn, James Christopher | M'Kenna, Reginald | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Gladstone, Rt.Hn. Herbert John | Murnaghan, George | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| Griffith, Ellis J. | Murphy, John | Woodhouse,SirJ.T.(Huddersf'd |
| Hammond, John | Nannetti, Joseph P. | |
| Harrington, Timothy | O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES— |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Mr. Bright and Mr. Lamont. |
§ Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time To-morrow.