Commons Sitting of 14 February 1905

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.
Message to attend His Majesty,
The House went; and, being returned.
Mr. SPEAKER informed the House, That he had issued Warrants for New Writs during the Recess, for County of Kent (Isle of Thanet Division), in the room of The Right Hon. James Lowther, deceased; County of Monmouth (Western Division), The Right Hon. Sir William George Granville Venables Vernon Harcourt, deceased; County of Sussex (West or Horsham Division), John Heywood Johnstone, esquire, deceased; Borough of Stalybridge, The Hon. Matthew White Ridley, called to the House of Peers; Borough of Tower Hamlets (Mile End Division), Spencer Charrington, esquire, deceased; County of Dorset (Northern Division), John Kenelm Digby Wingfield-Digby, esquire, deceased; County of Kildare (Northern Division), Edmund Leamy, esquire, deceased.

NEW MEMBERS SWORN.
John Frederick Cheetham, esquire, for Borough of Stalybridge; Edward Turnour, esquire, commonly called Viscount Turnour, County of Sussex (North Western or Horsham Division); Thomas Richards, esquire, County of Monmouth (Western Division); Colonel Harry Law-son Webster Lawson, commonly called The Hon. Harry Lawson Webster Law-son; Parliamentary Borough of the Tower Hamlets (Mile End Division); Arthur Walters Wills, esquire, County of Dorset (Northern Division); Harry Hananel Marks, esquire, County of Kent (Isle of Thanet Division).

ELECTIONS.
Ordered, That all Members who are returned for two or more places in any part of the United Kingdom do make their Election for which of the places they will serve, within one week after it shall appear that there is no question upon the Return for that place; and if
66
any thing shall come in question touching the Return or Election of any Member, he is to withdraw during the time the matter is in debate; and that all Members returned upon double Returns do withdraw till their Returns are determined.
Resolved, That no Peer of the Realm, except such Peers of Ireland as shall for the time being be actually elected, and shall not have declined to serve, for any county, city, or borough of Great Britain, hath any right to give his vote in the Election of any Member to serve in Parliament.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it is a high infringement of the liberties and privileges of the Commons of the United Kingdom for any Lord of Parliament or other Peer or Prelate not being a Peer of Ireland at the time elected, and not having declined to serve for any county, city, or borough of Great Britain, to concern himself in the election of Members to serve for the Commons in Parliament, except only any Peer of Ireland, at such Elections in Great Britain respectively where such Peer shall appear as a candidate, or by himself, or any others, be proposed to be elected; or for any Lord-Lieutenant or Governor of any county to avail himself of any authority derived from his Commission, to influence the Election of any Member to serve for the Commons in Parliament."—(Sir A. Acland-Hood.)
SIR WILFRID LAWSON SIR WILFRID LAWSON (Cornwall, Camborne) rose to oppose the Order, saying that in so doing he was following the action of a similar kind taken during many years by the late Mr. James Lowther. Mr. Lowther, he said, opposed the Order as a sham. It was a perfectly innocuous Resolution and there was nothing in it which enabled the "policeman on the beat" to prevent any Peer taking any part in any election. To-day the grounds for opposing the Resolution were stronger than ever. During the recess there was an election in North Dorset, and Lord Alington, who as Mr Sturt had occupied a seat in that House and had actually voted in favour of this Sessional Order, wrote a letter desiring

67
his tenants to vote for the Unionist candidate. Lord Alington had also announced his intention of writing a similar letter at all future elections in Dorset. He therefore wished to ask whether the Government intended to take any notice of the proceedings of this young man. If the right hon. Gentleman would say that he proposed to take any action, then it would not be necessary to put the House to the trouble of a division, but if he proposed to do nothing then it only remained for them to indicate their appreciation of the absurdity of the Order by dividing the House and trying to prevent it making a fool of itself.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): The hon. Baronet has reminded the House that this is not a new question and that it has often been raised by a right hon. friend of mine who is no longer with us. Now I have no other answer to give the hon. Baronet than that I have so often given in this place. I shall not defend or criticise the conduct of Lord Alington, who was very recently a Member of the House of Commons, and who probably has supported the Government in rejecting Motions similar to that of the hon. Baronet. [Sir WILFRID LAWSON: He voted for the Order.] I can only suppose that as soon as any gentleman is translated to another and a higher sphere, a process of rapid deterioration sets in and he forgets the principles which animated him in the House of Commons. As to the practical question whether or not this Order should be abolished, my views are quite unchanged. If the House of Commons in a formal way cares to delete the rule from its Standing Orders, it will be taken, and must be taken, as an intimation
to every Peer that, as far as the House of Commons is concerned, they will welcome his intervention in electoral contests. I do not remember the exact proportion of Unionists to Radical Peers in the House of Lords; but the balance is considerably in our favour. Therefore, from the Ministerial point of view, it would be an advantage to take the step suggested; because, if the intervention of Peers has any effect at all, that Party must gain which can enlist the greater number of Peers on its side. It is, therefore, on purely constitutional grounds, and against the interests of his Party that the hon. Baronet acts; and I will stand between the hon. Baronet and his self-denying procedure. I am sufficiently enamoured of the old constitutional principles of this country to see with reluctance the appearance of noble Lords on our electoral platforms. Such assistance may be extremely useful in relieving the labour thrown on candidates; but I do not believe it would be expedient. I will admit that there is no sanction behind this Order. The House cannot censure a noble Lord; and, if it did, he would probably treat the censure with ridicule. Therefore, the most dignified course is to take no steps to enforce the Rule. But the fact that this Order is retained by the House will prevent the great mass of Peers from taking an active part during the brief period in which an election is going on, and that is to the advantage of the House at large and of the hon. Baronet and his Party. In those circumstances I hope the opposition to the Order will not be pressed.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 345; Noes, 65. (Division List, No. 1.)

AYES.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Blundell Colonel Henry

Allen, Charles P.

Balcarres, Lord

Boland, John

Allhusen, Augustus Henry E.

Balfour, Rt. Hn.A.J. (Manch'r)

Bond, Edward

Allsopp, Hon. George

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds)

Boulnois, Edmund

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christeh.)

Bowles, Lt. Col. H.F.(Middlesex)

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. H. O.

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Brassey, Albert

Arrol, Sir William

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Brigg, John

Asher, Alexander

Barry, Sir F. T. (Windsor)

Bright, Allan Heywood

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert H.

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bell, Richard

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

Bigwood, James

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Black, Alexander William

Brymer, William Ernest

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Leese, SirJoseph F. (Accrington

Caldwell, James

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Cameron, Robert

Galloway, William Johnson

Levy, Maurice

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow)

Gardner, Ernest

Lewis, John Herbert

Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

Garfit, William

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

Lloyd-George, David

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Carlile, William Walter

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)

Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

Causton, Richard Knight

Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'r H'ml'ts

Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.)

Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)

Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Lowe, Francis William

Cawley, Frederick

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

Graham, Henry Robert

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Chamberlain, Rt Hn J. A (Worc.)

Grant, Corrie

Lucas, R. J. (Portsmouth)

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Chapman, Edward

Greene, Sir EW (B'ry S Edm'nds

Macdona, John Cumming

Cheetham, John Frederick

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Grey, Rt, Hn. Sir E. (Berwick)

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Coates, Edward Feetham

Griffith, Ellis J.

M'Crae, George

Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hain, Edward

Majendie, James A. H

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Malcolm, Ian

Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R.

Hambro, Charles Eric

Marks, Harry Hananel

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nd'y)

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Harrington, Timothy

Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.)

Crombie, John William

Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

Milvain, Thomas

Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Dalziel, James Henry

Hayden, John Patrick

Mooney, John J.

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Hayter, Rt, Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

Morrison, James Archibald

Devlin, Charles R. (Galway)

Heaton, John Henniker

Moulton, John Fletcher

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Helder, Augustus

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Dickson, Charles Scott

Helme, Norval Watson

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Murnaghan, George

Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Newnes, Sir George

Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Nicholson, William Graham

Donelan, Captain A.

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Doogan, P. C.

Hobhouse, Rt Hn H (Somers't, E

Norman, Henry

Dorington, Rt, Hn. Sir John E.

Hogg, Lindsay

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Doughty, Sir George

Horner, Frederick William

O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Hoult, Joseph

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Houston, Robert Paterson

Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

parker Sir Gilbert

Duke, Henry Edward

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

parkes, Ebenezer

Duncan, J. Hastings

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Parrott, William

Dunn, Sir William

Hutchinson, Dr Charles Fredk.

partington, Oswald

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Jebb, Sir Richard (Claverhouse

Paulton, James Mellor

Ellice, Capt EC(S. Andrw's Bghs.

Jeffreys, Rt Hon Arthur Fred

Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

Elliot, Hn. A. Ralpn Douglas

Jessel, Capt Herbert Merton

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Emmott, Alfred

Jones, D Brynmor (Swansea)

Pemberton, John S. G.

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh)

Percy, Earl

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.)

Pierpoint, Robert

Fardell, Sir T. George

Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W.

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

Kerr, John

Pirie, Duncan V.

Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r.

Kimber, Sir Henry

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Finch, Rt, Hon. George H.

Kitson, Sir James

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.

Knowles, Sir Lees

Purvis, Robert

Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs

Lambert, George

Pym, C. Guy

Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

Randles, John S.

Fisher, William Hayes

Langley, Batty

Rasch, Sir Frederick Carne

Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Ratelifi, R. F.

Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Redmond, John E. (Waterford

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th)

Reid, James (Greenock)

Flower, Sir Ernest

Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End

Remnant, James Farquharson

Forster, Henry William

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Renwick, George

Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.)

Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)

Rickett, J. Compton

70

71

Ridley, S. Forde

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R. (Northants

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.)

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Stevenson, Francis S.

Weir, James Galloway

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E. (Taunt'n

Rose, Charles Day

Stock, James Henry

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Rothschild, Hn. Lionel Walter

Stone, Sir Benjamin

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Strachey, Sir Edward

Whiteley, H. (Ashton und.Lyne

Runciman, Walter

Stroyan, John

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Rutherford, J. (Lancashire)

Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Univ.

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Samuel, H. L. (Cleveland)

Tennant, Harold John

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Schwann, Charles E.

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

Wills, Arthur Walters, N. Dorset)

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)

Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid.)

Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight

Thornton, Percy M.

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Tollemache, Henry James

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

Shackleton, David James

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Wilson-Tod, Sir W. H.(Yorks.)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Tuff, Charles

Woodhouse,Sir J. T. (Huddersfd

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

Tuke, Sir John Batty

Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

Slack, John Bamford

Turnour, Viscount

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Valentia, Viscount

Wylie, Alexander

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Smith, H. C. (North'mb. Tynesd.

Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

Yoxall, James Henry

Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks

Wallace, Robert

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Alexander Acland-Hood

Spear, John Ward

Wanklyn, James Leslie

and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

Heath, Sir James (Staffords. NW

Price, Robert John

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Higham, John Sharpe

Rea, Russell

Agg-Gardner James Tynte

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Reckitt, Harold James

Ambrose, Robert

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

Atherley-Jones, L.

Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

Richards, Thomas (WMonm'th)

Barlow, John Emmott

Jacoby, James Alfred

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

Labouchere, Henry

Robson, William Snowdon

Blake, Edward

Lough, Thomas

Roche, John

Broadhurst, Henry

Lundon, W.

Russell, T. W.

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford)

Channing, Francis Allston

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Condon, Thomas Joseph

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Sullivan, Donal

Cremer, William Randal

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Toulmin, George

Dalkeith, Earl of

M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

Delany, William

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

White, George (Norfolk)

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.

Morpeth, Viscount

Wilson, Chas. Henry (Hull, W.)

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Dillon, John

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Wood, James

Fenwick, Charles

O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

Field, William

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

Flynn, James Christopher

O'Malley, William

Wilfrid Lawson and Mr.

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

Perks, Robert William

Kearley.

PRIVILEGE.
MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs) rose to draw attention to what he regarded as a question of Privilege, and to move:
"That Lord Alington, a Peer of Parliament, has, by his action in connection with the recent election in North Dorset, been guilty of a breach of the Privileges of this House."
The House had by an overwhelming majority declared its opinion that for a Peer to interfere, in a Parliamentary
72
election was a breach of its Privileges, and he thought that when he produced the evidence on which he based his Motion, it would be obvious that there had been committed a breach of Privilege. During a recent election in North Dorset, Lord Alington, after the issue of the Writ, sent the following letter to his tenants—
"Though I am unable to take any active part in the coming election in North Dorset, I

73
should wish the very good feeling which has always existed between my family and yourself to be further maintained by the support of Sir Randolf Baker, who,"—[he presumed "whom" was meant]—"I hope to see successful."
Now that was not a latter written without due knowledge that it was a breach of Privilege, for subsequently to sending it out, Lord Alington made a speech in which he declared that he had done nothing unconstitutional, nothing to be ashamed of, but something to glory in, and every time an election came he would Issue a similar letter. Clearly the Rule had been broken in this particular case, and if no notice were taken of this proceeding the adoption of the Resolution which the House had just passed would be a sham and a farce. This was a broad question of principle, and Lord Alington, who formerly was one of the, most popular Members of the House of Commons, by his own action in voting for the Sessional Order, showed that he attached importance to it. Now what was the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House going to do in reference to this matter? For him to decide, to do nothing after the decision just come to was to take up an untenable position. Lord Alington had been using his powers as a Peer and as a landlord to induce his tenants to support a certain candidate, and they were bound to take notice of that fact. If they did not they would simply be inviting Peers to come on every platform and take part in every election. They ought emphatically to condemn the action of Lord Alington. He did not suggest that the noble Lord should be, brought to the Bar of the House, although he would like to point out that if some unfortunate journalist had written a paragraph reflecting on the honour of any hon. Member, he would have been promptly summoned to the Bar and threatened with imprisonment in the Clock Tower for having been guilty of a breach of the Privileges of the House. Why should they make a difference in the case of a Peer who openly violated an Order of the House? In view of the fact that there would probably be a general election in the near future—he was glad to see that the Member for West Birmingham nodded his head in favour of that proposition—
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I should like to know what I nodded my head at.
ME. DALZIEL: I understood the right hon. Gentleman to assent to what I was saying—that he was desirous of a general election.
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not admit that I assented to that.
MR. DALZIEL: I am sorry I misinterpreted the right hon. Gentleman. I can only repeat that if we take no notice of Lord Alington's conduct, the Order becomes a sham and a farce, and it is ridiculous for the Leader of the House, session after session, to ask us to pass it.
SIR WILFRID LAWSONseconded.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Lord Alington, a Peer of Parliament, has, by his action in connection with the recent Election in North Dorset, been guilty of a breach of the Privileges of this House."—(Mr. Dalziel.)
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think the House would gain anything by pursuing this matter further. I remember that some years ago Lord Rosebery was attacked, after making a speech when an election was proceeding, and Sir William Harcourt, who was then leading the House, moved the previous Question. That, I think, is the course the House ought now to adopt. If the House adopts the Motion of the hon. Gentleman we can take no further action. We announce publicly that our Privileges have been violated, but we can do nothing more; we call public attention to the evil, but we do nothing to redress the injury which we have publicly advertised. We cannot summon a Member of the other House to attend at the Bar, and we cannot give him into custody. I therefore object to the House passing this Resolution. I regard the Standing Order as being, in practice, merely an indication of the view of the House that Peers ought not to act as commoners in the ordinary political contests of the country. It suggests that they should not so act after a Writ has been issued. But surely the

75
hon. Member opposite does not wish to press the Order to its logical conclusion and to say that no Peer shall have any part at any time in dealing with affairs of the county or electoral division in which he resides, or in which his property is situated? All that is desired is to maintain the contention—it is nothing more than that—that it is desirable overt action shall not be taken by any Peer while an election is actually in progress. It would not be a dignified proceeding for this House to
announce publicly that an injury has been done it, and that it can do nothing to redress it. Under these circumstances, and bearing in mind that the Standing Order does practically attain the object for which it was framed, I beg to move the previous Question.
Question put, "That the Question be not now put."
The House divided:—Ayes 257; Noes, 191. (Division List No. 2.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Aird, Sir John

Craig, Charles C. (Antrim, S.)

Heath, A. Howard (Hanley)

Allhusen, Augustus Henry E.

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Heath, Sir James (Staffords. NW

Allsopp, Hon. George

Dalkeith, Earl of

Heaton, John Henniker

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Helder, Augustus

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Davenport, William Bromley-

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hon. H. O.

Denny, Colonel

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Arrol, Sir William

Dickson, Charles Scott

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

Hobhouse, Rt Hn H. (Somers't E

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn Sir H.

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hogg, Lindsay

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Bright side

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Balcarres, Lord

Doughty, Sir George

Horner, Frederick William

Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Hoult, Joseph

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds)

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Houston, Robert Paterson

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Duke, Henry Edward

Howard, J. (Midd. Tottenham

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Hozier, Hon. James Henry C.

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Hutton, John (Yorks. N. R.)

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Bigwood, James

Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

Bond, Edward

Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs

Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W.

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

Kerr, John

Boulnois, Edmund

Fisher, William Hayes

Keswick, William

Bousfield, William Robert

Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

Kimber, Sir Henry

Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middles'x

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

Flower, Sir Ernest

Knowles Sir Lees

Brassey, Albert

Forster, Henry William

Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.)

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Galloway, William Johnson

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

Gardner, Ernest

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th)

Brymer, William Ernest

Garfit, William

Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End)

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks., N. R.

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J A. (Glasgow)

Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Carlile, William Walter

Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Cautley, Henry Strother

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire)

Graham, Henry Robert

Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

Greene, Sir EW (B'rySEdm'nds)

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Chamberlain, Rt Hn J. A. (Worc.

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

Lowe, Francis William

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Hain, Edward

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Chapman, Edward

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Coates, Edward Feetham

Hambro, Charles Eric

Lucas, R. J. (Portsmouth)

Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nd'y)

Macdona, John Cumming

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R.

Hare, Thomas Leigh

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

M'Iver,Sir Lewis (Edinburgh,W

Majendie, James A. H.

Ratcliff, R. F.

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Malcolm, Ian

Reid, James (Greenock)

Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

Marks, Harry Hananel

Remnant, James Farquharson

Thornton, Percy M.

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Renwick, George

Tollemache, Henry James

Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

Ridley, S. Forde

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Tuff, Charles

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Milvain, Thomas

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Tuke, Sir John Batty

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Turnour, Viscount

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Valentia, Viscount

Moore, William

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Vincent, Col. Sir C. EH (Sheffield)

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Morpeth, Viscount

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Walrond, Rt, Hn. Sir W. H.

Morrison, James Archibald

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.)

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

Nicholson, William Graham

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Palmer, Sir W. (Salisbury)

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Parkes, Ebenezer

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Pease, Herbert P. (Darlington)

Smith, H. C (North'mb.Tynesde

Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)

Pemberton, John, S. G.

Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks)

Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

Percy, Earl

Spear, John Ward.

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Pierpoint, Robert

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

Wylie, Alexander

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Wyndham, Rt, Hon. George

Purvis, Robert

Stock, James Henry

Pym, C. Guy

Stone, Sir Benjamin

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

Randles, John S.

Stroyan, John

Alexander Acland-Hood

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

Crombie, John William

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Harrington, Timothy

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

Hayden, John Patrick

Allen, Charles P.

Delany, William

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Ambrose, Robert

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway

Helme, Norval Watson

Asher, Alexander

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

Hemphill, Rt, Hon. Charles H.

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Atherley-Jones, L.

Dillon, John

Higham, John Sharpe

Barlow, John Emmott

Donelan, Captain A.

Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Doogan, P. C.

Holland, Sir William Henry

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Duncan, J. Hastings

Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

Bell, Richard

Dunn, Sir William

Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

Black, Alexander William

Ellice, Capt EC (S Andrw's Bghs

Jacoby, James Alfred

Blake, Edward

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Jones, David B. (Swansea)

Boland, John

Emmott, Alfred

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

Brigg, John

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Kearley, Hudson, E.

Bright, Allan Heywood

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.)

Broadhurst, Henry

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Kilbride, Denis

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Fenwiek, Charles

Kitson, Sir James

Bryce, Rt, Hon. James

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

Labouchere, Henry

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Field, William

Lambert, George

Butcher, John George

Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)

Langley, Batty

Caldwell, James

Flynn, James Christopher

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Cameron, Robert

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Leese, Sir Joseph F (Accrington)

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Levy, Maurice

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Lewis, John Herbert

Causton, Richard Knight

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

Lloyd-George, David

Cawley, Frederick

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Lough, Thomas

Channing, Francis Allston

Grant, Corrie

Lundon, W.

Cheetham, John Frederick

Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir E. (Berwick)

Lyell, Charles Henry

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Griffith, Ellis J.

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Cremer, William Randal

Harcourt, Lewis Vernon

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

78

79

M'Crae, George

Reckitt, Harold James

Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Toulmin, George

M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

Richards, T. (W. Monmouth)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Mooney, John J.

Rickett, J. Compton

Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Wallace, Robert

Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose)

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Moulton, John Fletcher

Robson, William Snowdon

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Murnaghan, George

Roche, John

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Rose, Charles Day

Wason, John C. (Orkney)

Newnes, Sir George

Runciman, Walter

Weir, James Galloway

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

Russell, T. W.

White, George (Norfolk)

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Samuel, H. L. (Cleveland)

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Norman, Henry

Schwann, Charles E.

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Slack, John Bamford

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Wills, Arthur W. (N. Dorset

O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Wilson, Chas. Henry (Hull, W.)

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R. (Northants

Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk, Mid.

O'Dowd, John

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

O'Malley, William

Stevenson, Francis S.

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.)

Parrott, William

Sullivan, Donal

Wood, James

Partington, Oswald

Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf' d)

Paulton, James Mellor

Tennant, Harold John

Yoxall, James Henry

Perks, Robert William

Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)

Price, Duncan V.

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

Price, Robert John

Thomas, D. A. (Merthyr)

Dalziel and Sir Wilfrid Law-

Rea, Russell

Thomas, J. A. (Glamorgan, Gow'r

son.

Motion made, and Question, "That this House do now adjourn"—(Sir A. Acland-Hood)—put, and agreed to.

ELECTIONS.
Resolved, That if it shall appear that any person hath been elected or returned a Member of this House, or endeavoured so to be, by bribery, or any other corrupt practices, this House will proceed with the utmost severity against all such persons as shall have been wilfully concerned in such bribery or other corrupt practices.

WITNESSES.
Resolved, That if it shall appear that any person hath been tampering with any witness, in respect of his evidence to be given to this House, or any Committee thereof, or directly or indirectly hath endeavoured to deter or hinder any person from appearing or giving evidence, the same is declared to be a high crime or misdemeanour; and this House will proceed with the utmost severity against such offender.
Resolved, That if it shall appear that any person hath given false evidence in any case before this House, or any Committee thereof, this House will proceed with the utmost severity against such offender.

METROPOLITAN POLICE.
Ordered, That the Commissioners of the Police of the Metropolis do take care
that, during the session of Parliament, the passages through the streets leading to this House be kept free and open, and that no obstruction be permitted to hinder the passage of Members to and from this House, and that no disorder be allowed in Westminster Hall, or in the passages leading to this House, during the Sitting of Parliament, and that there be no annoyance therein or thereabouts; and that the Serjeant at Arms attending this House do communicate this Order to the Commissioners aforesaid.

VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS.
Ordered, That the Votes and Proceedings of this House be printed, being first perused by Mr. Speaker; and that he do appoint the printing thereof; and that no person but such as he shall appoint do presume to print the same.
Ordered, That a Committee of Privileges be appointed.
OUTLAWRIES BILL.
"For the more effectual preventing Clandestine Outlawries," read the first time; to be read a second time.

JOURNAL.
Ordered, That the Journal of this House, from the end of the last session

81
to the end of the present session, with an Index thereto, be printed.
Ordered, That 500 copies of the said Journal and Index be printed by the appointment and under the direction of Sir Courtenay Peregrine Ilbert, K.S.C.I., C.I.E., the Clerk of this House.
Ordered, That the said Journal and Index be printed by such person as shall be licensed by Mr. Speaker, and that no other person do presume to print the same.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS (RECESS).
The following Papers, presented by His Majesty's Command during the Recess, were delivered to the Librarian of the House of Commons during the Recess, pursuant to the Standing Order of the 14th August, 1896:—

1. Explosions (Newcastle Emlyn).—Copy of Report by Captain J. H. Thomson, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Explosives, to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, on the circumstances attending an Explosion which occurred in an ironmonger's shop at Newcastle Emlyn, Carmarthenshire, on the 25th November, 1904.

2. Beck (Adolf) (Committee of Inquiry).—Copy of Report of the Committee appointed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to inquire into the case of Mr. Adolf Beck, together with Minutes of Evidence, Appendix, and facsimiles of various Documents.

3. Coal Supplies (Royal Commission).—Copy of Final Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the subject of the Coal Resources of the United Kingdom. Parts I. to XIII.

4. Historical Manuscripts (Royal Commission).—Copy of Report on the Manuscripts of the Earl of Egmont, Vol. I.

5. Historical Manuscripts (Royal Commission).—Copy of Report on the Manuscripts of the Marquess of Lothian, preserved at Blickling Hall, Norfolk.

82

6. Historical Manuscripts (Royal Commission).—Copy of Report on the Manuscripts of Lady du Cane.

7. Mines and Quarries.—Copy of General Report and Statistics for the year 1903; Part II., Labour; General Report and Statistics relating to persons employed and Accidents at Mines and Quarries in the United Kingdom, and to the enforcement of the Mines and Quarries Acts.

8. Mines and Quarries.—Copy of General Report and Statistics for the year 1903; Part III., Output; General Report and Statistics relating to the Output and Value of the Minerals raised in the United Kingdom, the amount and value of the metals produced, and the exports and imports of Minerals.

9. (Prisons (England and Wales).—Copy of Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, with Appendices, for the year ended 31st March, 1904.

10. Factories and Workshops.—Copy of Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops for 1903. Part II. Tables.

11. Factory and Workshop (Draft Regulations—Docks, Wharves, and Quays).—Copy of Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by Chester Jones, esquire, on the Draft Regulations for Docks, Wharves, and Quays.

12. Reformatory and Industrial Schools (Great Britain).—Copy of Forty-seventh Report of His Majesty's Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools for 1903. Part II. General Report and Appendices III. to XI.

13. Police (Metropolis).—Copy of Report of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for the year 1903.

14. Inebriates Acts (Inspector's Report).—Copy of Report of the Inspector under the Inebriates Acts, 1879 to 1900, for the year 1903.

15. Workmen's Compensation.—Copy of Statistics of Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Acts, 1897 and 1900, and the Employers' Liability Act, 1880, during the year l903.

16. Workmen's Compensation.—Copy of Report of the Committee appointed

83
by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to inquire into the Law relating to Compensation for Injuries to Workmen. Vol. II, Minutes of Evidence, with Index.

17. Judicial Statistics (England and Wales).—Copy of Judicial Statistics, Part I., relating to Criminal Proceedings, Police, Coroners, Prisons, Reformatory and Industrial Schools, and Criminal Lunatics, for England and Wales for 1903.

18. East India (Trade).—Copy of Review of Trade of India for 1903–4.

19. East India (Statistical Abstract).—Copy of Statistical Abstract relating to British India from 1893–4 to 1902–3. Thirty-eighth Number.

20. East India (Sanitary Measures).—Copy of Report on Sanitary Measures in India in 1902–3 (Vol. XXXVI.).

21. Imperial Institute (Indian Section).—Copy of Annual Report of the Imperial Institute (Indian Section) for the year 1903–4.

22. East India (Tibet).—Copy of Further Papers relating to Tibet (No. III.).

23. East India (Excise).—Copy of Papers relating to the Excise Administration in Assam.

24. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and confirmed by the Board of Trade, authorising the construction of an additional Light Railway, in the county of Gloucester, in the borough of Cheltenham, and the abandonment of the construction of part of another Light Railway already authorised in the same borough (Cheltenham and District Light Railway (Extension No. 3) Order, 1904).

25. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade, authorising the construction of a Light Railway in the county of East Suffolk, from Melton to Bromeswell, Sutton Shottisham, Hollesley, Alderton, and Bawdsey (Woodbridge and Bawdsey Light Railway Order, 1904).

26. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway
84
Commissioners, and confirmed by the Board of Trade, amending The Bracken-hill Light Railway Order, 1901 (Bracken-hill Light Railway (Extension of Time) Order, 1904).

27. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and confirmed by the Board of Trade, amending The Tickhill Light Railway Order, 1901 (Tickhill Light Railway (Extension of Time) Order, 1904).

28. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade, amending The Maidstone and Faversham Junction Light Railway Order, 1901 (Maidstone and Faversham Junction Light Railway (Extension of Time) Order, 1904.

29. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade, authorising the construction of Light Railways in the county of Essex from Southend by way of Rochford, Creeksea, Burnham, Southminster, Asheldham, Dengie, Tillingham, Bradwell-juxta-Mare, and West Mersea, to Colchester (Southend and Colchester Light Railways Order, 1904).

30. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade, amending the Axminster and Lyme Regis Light Railway Order, 1899 (Axminster and Lyme Regis Light Railway (Further Capital Powers) Order, 1904).

31. Light Railways Act, 1896.—Copy of Order made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade, authorising the construction of Light Railways in the parish of Northam and the parish and borough of Bideford, in the county of Devon, in extension of the Bideford, Westward Ho! and Appledore Railway, and the working of that railway as a Light Railway under The Light Railways Act, 1896 (Bideford, Westward Ho! and Appledore Light Railway Order, 1904).

32. Railway Accidents.—Copy of Returns of Accidents and Casualties as reported to the Board of Trade by the several Railway Companies in the United

85
Kingdom during the three months ending 30th June, 1904, together with Reports of the Inspecting Officers of the Railway Department to the Board of Trade upon certain Accidents which were inquired into.

33. Railway Accidents.—Copy of Returns of Accidents and Casualties as reported to the Board of Trade by the several Railway Companies in the United Kingdom during the three months ending 30th September, 1904, together with Reports of the Inspecting Officers of the Railway Department to the Board of Trade upon certain Accidents which were inquired into.

34. Railway Servants (Hours of Labour).—Copy of Return, in pursuance of Section 4 of The Regulation of Railways Act, 1889, of Railway Servants of certain classes who were on one or more occasions during the month of October, 1903, on duty on the railways of the United Kingdom for more than twelve hours at a time; or who, after being on duty more than twelve hours, were allowed to resume work with less than nine hours rest.

35. Foreign Import Duties.—Copy of Statement of the Rates of Import Duties levied in European Countries, in the United States, in Japan, China, and Persia, upon the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom in 1904.

36. British and Foreign Trade and Industry.—Copy of Second Series of Memoranda, Statistical Tables, and Charts, prepared in the Board of Trade, with reference to various matters bearing on British and Foreign Trade and Industrial Conditions.

37. Muscat Region (Trade).—Copy of Report on the condition and prospects of British Trade in Oman, Bahrein, and the Arab Ports in the Persian Gulf by H. W. Maclean, Special Commissioner of the Commercial Intelligence Committee of the Board of Trade.

38. Unemployed in Foreign Countries.—Copy of Report to the Board of Trade on Agencies and Methods for dealing with the Unemployed in certain Foreign Countries by Mr. David F. Schloss.

39. Earnings of Agricultural Labourers.—Copy of Second Report by Mr. Wilson
86
Fox on the Wages, Earnings, and Conditions of Employment of Agricultural Labourers in the United Kingdom, with Statistical Tables and Charts.

40. Irish Land Commission (Proceedings).—Copy of Return of Proceedings during the months of March, April, May, June, July, August, and September, 1904.

41. National Education (Ireland).—Copy of Appendix to the Seventieth Report of the Commissioners, being for the year 1903. Section I.

42. National Education (Ireland).—Copy of Appendix to the Seventieth Report of the Commissioners, being for the year 1903. Section II.

43. National Education (Ireland).—Copy of Appendix to the Seventieth Report of the Commissioners, being for the year 1903. Section III.

44. National Education (Ireland).—Copy of Appendix to the Seventieth Report of the Commissioners, being for the year 1903. Section IV.

45. Agricultural Statistics (Ireland).—Copy of Tables showing the extent in statute acres and the produce of the Crops for the year 1904.

46. Agricultural Statistics (Ireland).—Copy of Abstracts showing the Acreage under Crops and the number of Live Stock in each county and province of Ireland, for the year 1903–4.

47. Agricultural Statistics (Ireland) (Migratory Labourers).—Copy of Report and Tables relating to Irish Migratory Agricultural and other Labourers for the year 1904.

48. Evictions (Ireland).—Copy of Return of Evictions in Ireland for the quarter ended 30th September, 1904.

49. Evictions (Ireland).—Copy of Return of Evictions in Ireland for the quarter ended 31st December, 1904.

50. Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887 (Eviction Notices).—Copy of Return of Eviction Notices filed during the quarter ended 30th September, 1904.

51. Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887 (Eviction Notices).—Copy of Return of Eviction Notices filed during the quarter ended 31st December, 1904.

52. Banking, Railway, and Canal Statistics (Ireland).—Copy of Report

87
on the Banking, Railway, and Canal Statistics of Ireland for the half-year ended 30th June, 1904.

53. Reformatory and Industrial Schools (Ireland).—Copy of Forty-second Report of the Inspector for the year 1903.

54. Lunacy (Ireland).—Copy of Fifty-third Report, with Appendices, of Inspectors of Lunatics (Ireland) for the year 1903.

55. Congested Districts Board (Ireland).—Copy of Thirteenth Report of the Board, being for the year ending 31st March, 1904.

56. Royal University of Ireland.—Copy of Twenty-second Report of the Royal University of Ireland, being for the year 1903.

57. Local Government Board (Ireland).—Copy of Annual Report of the Local Government Board for Ireland, for the year ended 31st March, 1904.

58. Ireland Development Grant Act, 1903.—Copy of Report of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland of all his Proceedings under the Act, for the year ended 31st March, 1904.

59. Fisheries (Ireland) Acts.—Copy of Manual prepared for the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, Ireland, on the Fisheries (Ireland) Acts.

60. Army (Pay, Non-effective Pay, and Allowances).—Copy of List of Exceptions to the Army Regulations as to Pay, Non-effective Pay, and Allowances sanctioned during the year 1903–4.

61. Military Prisons.—Copy of Report on the Discipline and Management of Military Prisons in 1903.

62. Army.—Copy of Amendments in the Rules of Procedure under the Army Act.

63. Army.—Copy of Approximate Estimate of Expenditure under the Military Works Acts of 1897, 1899, and 1901.

64. Army.—Copy of Order in Council defining the duties of the Army Council.

65. Army.—Copy of Order in Council defining the duties of the Inspector-General of the Forces.

66. Army.—Copy of Order in Council defining the duties of the Director of Army Finance.

88

67. Army.—Copy of Report on the trial of the Short Rifle by the Army and Navy.

68. Somaliland (Despatches).—Copy of Despatches, etc., regarding the Military Operations in Somaliland from the 18th January, 1902, to the 31st May, 1904.

69. Board of Education (Special Reports).—Copy of Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 12. Educational Systems of the Chief Crown Colonies and Possessions of the British Empire, including Reports on the Training of Native Races. Part I. West Indies and Central America, St. Helena, Cyprus, and Gibraltar.

70. Board of Education (Special Reports).—Copy of Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 13. Educational Systems of the Chief Crown Colonies and Possessions of the British Empire, including Reports on the Training of Native Races. Part II. West Africa, Basutoland, Southern Rhodesia, East Africa Protectorate, Uganda, Mauritius, Seychelles.

71. Board of Education (Special Reports).—Copy of Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 14. Educational Systems of the Chief Crown Colonies and Possessions of the British Empire, including Reports on the Training of Native Races. Part III Federated Malay States, Hong Kong, Straits Settlements, Fiji, Falkland Islands.

72. Board of Education.—Copy of Regulations relating to the Royal College of Science, the Royal College of Art, and to Museums under the Board of Education from 1st August, 1904, to 31st July, 1905.

73. Board of Education.—Copy of Reports from University Colleges, 1904.

74. Board of Education.—Copy of (1) Grants paid in respect of School Boards under Section 97 of Elementary Education Act, 1870, (2) School Board Accounts, (3) List of Loans, for 1903–4.

75. Board of Education.—Copy of Report on the Victoria and Albert Museum, the Royal College of Science and Art, the Geological Survey and Museum, and on the work of the Solar Physics Committee for the year 1903.

89

76. Board of Education.—Copy of Lists of Secondary Schools, Science and Art Classes, and Evening Schools and Schools of Art, under the administration of the Board of Education, for the school year 1902–3.

77. Board of Education.—Copy of Report of the Board of Education for the year 1903–4.

78. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (Distribution of Grants).—Copy of Annual Report on the Distribution of Grants for Agricultural Education and Research in the year 1903–4, etc.

79. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (Departmental Committee).—Copy of Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to investigate experimentally and to report upon certain questions connected with the Dipping and Treatment of Sheep.

80. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (Departmental Committee).—Copy of Minutes of Evidence taken before the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to investigate experimentally and to report upon certain questions connected with the Dipping and Treatment of Sheep, with Appendices.

81. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (Departmental Committee).—Copy of Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to inquire into and report upon the working in Great Britain of The Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893.

82. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (Departmental Committee).—Copy of Minutes of Evidence taken before the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to inquire into and report upon the working in Great Britain of the Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893, with Appendices and Index.

83. Judicial Statistics (Scotland).—Copy of Report on the Judicial Statistics of Scotland for the year 1903.

84. Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Scotland).—Copy of Forty-eighth Detailed Annual Report of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in Scotland (Abstracts of 1902).

90

85. Sheriff Court Procedure (Scotland) (Departmental Committee).—Copy of Report of a Departmental Committee appointed by the Secretary for Scotland to inquire into Sheriff Court Procedure, with Minutes of Evidence, Appendix, and Index.

86. Navy.—Copy of Memorandum relating to the Distribution and Mobilisation of the Fleet.

87. Peterhead Harbour.—Copy of Reports respecting Peterhead Harbour Works.

88. Meteorology.—Copy of Report of the Meteorological Council to the Royal Society for the year ended 31st March, 1904.

89. Colonial Reports (Annual).—Copies of Reports, Nos. 423 (Sierra Leone, Annual Report for 1903), 424 (Gambia, Annual Report for 1903), 425 (Ceylon, Annual Report for 1903), 426 (Gold Coast, Annual Report for 1903), 427 (Lagos, Annual Report for 1903), 428 (Bahamas, Report for 1903–4), 429 (Northern Territories of the Gold Coast, Annual Report for 1903), 430 (Mauritius, Annual Report for 1903), 431 (Seychelles, Annual Report for 1903), 432 (Barbados, Report for 1903–4), 433 (Southern Nigeria, Annual Report for 1903), 434 (Fiji, Annual Report for 1903), 435 (Straits Settlements, Annual Report for 1903), 436 (Grenada, Annual Report for 1903), 437 (Northern Nigeria, Annual Report for 1903), 438 (Jamaica, Report for 1903–4), 439 (Malta, Report for 1903–4), 440 (Bechuanaland Protectorate, Report for 1902–3 and 1903–4), 441 (British Guiana, Report for 1903–4), 442 (Trinidad and Tobago, Report for 1903–4), 443 (St. Lucia, Annual Report for 1903), 444 (Basutoland), Report for 1903–4).

90. Colonial Reports (Miscellaneous).—Copies of Reports, Nos. 28 (Reports on Rubber in the Gold Coast and Sierra Leone), 29 (Ceylon, Reports on the Results of the Mineral Survey in 1903–4 by Professor W. R. Dunstan, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.).

91. Straits Settlements.—Copy of Reports on the Federated Malay States for 1903.

92. Transvaal (British Indians).—Copy of Correspondence relating to the position of British Indians in the Transvaal.

91

93. Cyprus.—Copy of Annual Report on Cyprus for 1903–4.

94. Cancer Research (Colonies).—Copy of Correspondence relating to Cancer Research in the Colonies.

95. Fiji.—Copy of Correspondence relating to Native Taxation and the Communal System in Fiji.

96. Colonies (Preferential Trade).—Copy of Papers relating to Resolutions passed by Colonial Legislatures since 1890 in favour of Preferential Trade Relations with the United Kingdom.

97. West Africa.—Copy of Correspondence relating to the construction oe Railways in Sierra Leone, Lagos, and th f Gold Coast.

98. Crown Agents.—Copy of Accounts of the Crown Agents' Office Funds for the years 1900, 1901, and 1902.

99. British Central Africa.—Copy of Report on the Trade and general condition of the British Central Africa Protectorate for 1903–4.

100. Treaty Series (No. 6, 1904).—Copy of Agreement between the United Kingdom and Germany, providing for the settlement by Arbitration of certain classes of Questions which may arise between the two Governments. Signed at London, 12th July, 1904.

101. Treaty Series (No. 7, 1904).—Copy of Convention between the United Kingdom and China, respecting the employment of Chinese Labour in British Colonies and Protectorates. Signed at London, 13th May, 1904.

102. Treaty Series (No. 8, 1904).—Copy of Convention between the United Kingdom and Sweden and Norway, providing for the settlement by Arbitration of certain classes of questions which may arise between the respective Governments. Signed at London, 11th August, 1904. Ratifications exchanged at London, 9th November, 1904.

103. Treaty Series (No. 9, 1904).—Copy of Agreement between the United Kingdom and Switzerland, providing for the settlement by Arbitration of certain classes of questions which may arise between the two Governments. Signed at London, 16th November, 1904.

92

104. Treaty Series (No.10, 1904).—Copy of Agreement between the United Kingdom and Portugal, providing for the settlement by Arbitration of certain classes of questions which may arise between the two Governments. Signed at Windsor, 16th November, 1904.

105. Treaty Series (No. 11, 1904).—Copy of Accession of Sweden to the International Copyright Convention, 9th September, 1886, and the Declaration of 4th May, 1896. 1st August, 1904.

106. Treaty Series (No. 12, 1904).—Copy of Accession of Cuba to the Industrial Property Convention, 1883, etc., 17th November, 1904.

107. Treaty Series (No. 13, 1904).—Copy of Declaration between the United Kingdom and Russia relating to the Constitution of an International Commission of Inquiry on the subject of the North Sea Incident. Signed at St. Petersburg, 25th (12th) November, 1904.

108. Treaty Series (No. 1, 1905).—Copy of Accession of Cuba to Arrangements respecting False Indications of Origin on Goods, and the International Registration of Trade Marks (Industrial Property Union). 1st January, 1905.

109. Treaty Series (No. 2, 1905).—Copy of Agreement between the United Kingdom and Russia respecting Joint Stock Companies and other Commercial, Industrial, and Financial Associations. Signed at St. Petersburg, 29th (16th) December, 1904.

110. Africa (No. 12, 1904).—Copy of General Report on the Uganda Protectorate for the year ending 31st March, 1904.

111. Africa (No. 13, 1904).—Copy of Report by Mr. A. E. Butter, on the Survey of the Proposed Frontier between British East Africa and Abyssinia, with a map.

112. Africa (No. 14, 1904).—Copy of Correspondence respecting Slavery in the Islands of Zanzibar and Pemba.

113. Africa (No. 15, 1904).—Copy of Report on the East Africa Protectorate for the year 1903–4.

114. Africa (No. 16, 1904).—Copy of Report on the Construction and Working

93
of the Mombasa Victoria (Uganda) Railway and Steamboat Service on Lake Victoria, 1903–4.

115. Africa (No. 1, 1905).—Copy of Further Correspondence respecting the Administration of the Independent State of the Congo.

116. Turkey (No. 3, 1904).—Copy of Correspondence respecting the Asiatic Provinces of Turkey.

117. Turkey (No. 4, 1904).—Copy of Further Correspondence respecting the Affairs of South Eastern Europe.

118. China (No. 5, 1904).—Copy of Report, by Consul General Hosie, on the Province of Ssŭch'uan, with two Maps.

119. Russia (No. 1, 1905).—Copy of Correspondence respecting Contraband of War in connection with Hostilities between Russia and Japan.

120. Russia (No. 2, 1905).—Copy of Correspondence relating to the North Sea Incident.

121. Sugar Convention (Commercial, No. 1, 1905).—Copy of Further Findings of the Permanent Commission established under the Sugar Convention of 5th March, 1902, Report of the British Delegate, and Appeal of His Majesty's Government against certain of those Findings.

122. Detention of the "Captain W. Menzell" (Miscellaneous, No. 2, 1904).—Copy of a Warrant issued by the Secretary of State on 4th December, 1904, authorising the detention of the ship "Captain W. Menzell" at Cardiff.

123. Emission of Smoke (Foreign Regulations) (Miscellaneous, No. 1, 1905).—Copy of Reports on the Laws in Force in certain Foreign Countries in regard to the Emission of Smoke from Chimneys.

124. Trade Reports (Annual Series).—Copies of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3256 to 3323.

125. Trade Reports (Miscellaneous Series).—Copies of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Miscellaneous Series, Nos. 619 to 628.

Ordered, That the said Papers do lie upon the Table,

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PRO CEEDINGS).
  Copy presented, of Return of Proceedings during the months of October, November, and December, 1903 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 7th July, 1904; Mr. Joyce]; to lie upon the Table.
  AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL IN- STRUCTION (IRELAND) ACT, 1899.
  Copy presented, of Fifty-five Minutes by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland sanctioning Forms of Instruction for certain County Boroughs, Counties, and Urban Districts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PHARMACY ACTS (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 2nd November, 1904, approving of a Regulation made by the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  MILITIA ACT, 1882 (DEPUTY LIEU- TENANTS, IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Return of descriptions of qualifications of Deputy Lieutenants lodged during 1904, as furnished to the Chief Secretary for Ireland [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  WINTER ASSIZES (IRELAND).
  Copies presented, of Four Orders in Council, dated 2nd November, 1904, for holding Winter Assizes in Ireland [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Time Table of Examinations for 1905 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Additional rule made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland, making an addition to Rule 9 (a) of the Rules and Programme for 1905 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Rule made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the Examination in Music [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Additional Rule made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland as to the French Course [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Two Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland with respect to the Urban County Districts of Ballymena and Omagh [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PRISONS (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Order closing the Prison at Wexford under The General Prisons (Ireland) Act, 1877 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  LEEWARD ISLANDS.
  Copy presented, of Amended Prison Rule relating to the employment of female prisoners [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POSTAL AGREEMENT (MEXICO).
  Copy presented, of Agreement between the Post Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Post Office of the United States of Mexico for the Exchange of Money Orders, dated 4th February—18th March, 1904 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  POSTAL CONVENTION (NETHERLANDS).
  Copy presented, of Additional Articles relating to increase of maximum to the Money Order Convention of the 7th—14th October, 1871, between the General Post Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the General Post Office of the Netherlands [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS).
  Copy presented, of the Postal Order (Colonial) Regulations, 1904, dated 29th September, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS).
  Copy presented, of the Postal Order (Colonial) Amendment (No. 1) Regulations, 1904, dated 28th December, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACTS (SPECIAL EXCEPTION—OVERTIME).
  Copy presented, of Order, dated 15th November, 1904, made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in pursuance of Section 49 of The Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, extending the special exception under that section to non-textile factories and workshops, or parts thereof, in which the making-up of any article of table linen, bed linen, or other household linen is carried on [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACTS (SPECIAL EXCEPTION—NIGHTWORK.)
  Copy presented, of Order, dated 9th August, 1904, made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department in pursuance of Section 54 (4) of The Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, extending the special exception in that section to male young persons of the age of sixteen years and upwards, employed on the system of three shifts of not more than eight hours each in the processes of pressing and reeling cordite and nitrating and moulding guncotton carried on in non-textile factories [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACTS (DAN- GEROUS AND UNHEALTHY INDUSTRIES).
  Copy presented, of Regulations, dated 24th October, 1904, made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in pursuance of Section 79 of The Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, in respect of the processes of loading, unloading, moving and handling goods in, on, or at any dock, wharf, or quay, and the processes of loading, unloading, or coaling any ship in any dock, harbour, or canal [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  INEBRIATE REFORMATORIES (REGULA- TIONS).
  Copy presented, of Regulations made with the approval of the Secretary of State for the Home Department for the management and discipline of the certified

  97
  Inebriate Reformatory at East Hasling, Norfolk [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  POLLING DISTRICTS (BOROUGH OF SALFORD).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the Borough of Salford, altering certain Polling Districts in the Borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF LAN- CASTER).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of the County of Lancaster altering certain Polling Districts in the Middleton, Stretford, and Widnes Parliamentary Divisions [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF SOUTH- AMPTON).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of Southampton altering certain Polling Districts in the Andover, New Forest, and Fareham Parliamentary Divisions [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF DURHAM).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of the County of Durham altering certain Polling Districts in the county [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF LAN- CASTER).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of Lancaster altering certain Polling Districts in the Ince, Lancaster, and Westhoughton Parliamentary Divisions [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (BOROUGH OF DEVONPORT).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the borough altering certain Polling Districts in the borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF BERKS).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of the County of Berks altering certain Polling Districts for the
  98
  several Parliamentary Divisions of the County [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of Licence granted to Mary Ann Murray, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the East End Refuge, Finchley [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of Licence granted to Ada Hanson, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the East End Refuge, Finchley [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of a Licence to be at large granted to Elizabeth Ann Holden, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the Elizabeth Fry Refuge, Hackney, E. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented of a Licence to be at large granted to Lucy Gould, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the Home of St. John the Baptist, Pimlico, S.W. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of a Licence granted to Kate Ellen Shoesmith, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the Home of Compassion, 63, Sutherland Street, Pimlico, S.W. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of Licence granted to Alice Robinson, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the East End Refuge, Finchley [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Copy presented, of a Licence granted to Sarah Wildman, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting her to be at large on condition that she enter the Elizabeth Fry Refuge, Hackney, E. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  GENERAL LIGHTHOUSE AUTHORITIES, ETC.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 11th August, 1904; Mr. Charles McArthur]; to lie upon the Table.
  LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANIES.
  Copy presented, of Statements of Accounts, and of Life Assurance and Annuity Business and Abstracts of Actuarial Reports, deposited with the Board of Trade during the year ended 31st December, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 1.]
  RAILWAYS (PRIVATE SIDINGS) ACT, 1904 (RULE).
  Copy presented, of Rule made by the Railway and, Canal Commissioners in relation to applications made under Section 3 of The Railways (Private Sidings) Act, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  GENERAL LIGHTHOUSE FUND.
  Account presented, of the General Lighthouse Fund, showing the income and expenditure for the year ended 31st March, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 2.]
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Copy presented, of Regulations to be observed by the Admirals, Masters, and Crews of Fishing Vessels and Carriers forming the fleets belonging to the Port of Kingston-upon-Hull under Section 417 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  WEST HIGHLAND RAILWAY (EXTENSION FROM BANAVIE TO MALLAIG).
  Copy presented, of Third Annual Report by the Board of Trade as to the condition and working of the Banavie and Mallaig Railway, the rates and charges for traffic, and the receipts and expenditure of any Company in working
  100
  the Railway, for the year 1903–4 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 3.]

  EAST INDIA (EXAMINATIONS).
  Copy presented, of Regulations for Examinations for the Civil Service of India [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  EAST INDIA (LOANS RAISED IN INDIA).
  Copy presented, of Return of all Loans raised in India, chargeable on the Revenues of India, outstanding at the commencement of the half-year ending 30th September, 1904, etc. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 4.]
  EAST INDIA (LOANS RAISED IN ENGLAND).
  Copy presented, of Return of all Loans raised in England, chargeable on the Revenues of India, outstanding at the commencement of the half-year ending on the 30th September, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 5.]
  BISHOPRICS OF SOUTHWARK AND BIRMINGHAM ACT, 1904.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th January, 1905, for the foundation of the Bishopric of Birmingham [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  COPYRIGHT ACTS, 1844 TO 1886.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th December, 1904, giving effect to the Accession of Sweden to the International Convention, 1886 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  DOCKYARD PORTS REGULATION ACT, 1865.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 24th October, 1904, amending the Regulations affecting the Dockyard Port of Plymouth [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  EXPLOSIVES ACT, 1875.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th January, 1905, prohibiting, except under certain conditions, certain Fireworks of a dangerous nature [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
  Copy presented, of Statutes made by the Governing Body of Magdalen College, Oxford, on 11th May, 1904, amending the existing Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 6.]
  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
  Copy presented, of Statute made by the Governing Body of New College, Oxford, on 15th June, 1904, amending Statute XV. (Pension Fund) of the Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 7.]
  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
  Copy presented, of Statutes made by the Governing Body of Balliol College, Oxford, on 26th May, 1904, amending (1) Statute III., and (2) Statute IV., and Schedule B. of the College Statutes [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 8.]
  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACTS, 1878 TO 1904.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th January, 1905, specifying New Fees to be taken in respect of the Verification and Stamping by Inspectors of Weights and Measures, of Weights, Measures, and Weighing and Measuring Instruments [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACT, 1878, AND WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM) ACT, 1897.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th December, 1903, approving a New Denomination of Standard Measure of length of Twenty Metres [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Orders in Council of 24th October, 1904, entitled The British Protectorates Neutrality Order in Council, 1904, The Foreign Jurisdiction Neutrality Order in Council, 1904, The China and Corea Order in Council, 1904, The Southern Nigeria Order in Council, 1904,
  102
  and The Cyprus Telegraphs Order, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 10th February, 1905, entitled The East Africa and Uganda (Currency) Order in Council, 1905 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of the 14th November, 1904, entitled the British Protectorates Neutrality (Amendment) Order in Council, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1858.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 12th December, 1904, approving a statement of proposed new and revised appointments and alterations of salaries in the establishment of the Secretary of State for India in Council [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 24th October, 1904, directing that Registries of Sea Fishing Boats be kept at Port Talbot and Methil [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council 10th February, 1905, confirming certain Bye-laws made by the Trinity House of Kingston-upon Hull fixing the Rates of Pilotage between the ports of Hull and Goole [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented, of Minute of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland, dated 30th January, 1905, providing for the establishment of Committees for the Training of Teachers [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY PENSIONS.
  Copy presented, of Return showing the names of all Constabulary Officers now in receipt of Pensions, of all Head Constables, Sergeants, and Constables, and of all Widows and Children to whom

  103
  Pensions have been granted since the Constabulary Estimate for 1904–5 was prepared, with the amount and date of Pension in each case [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  IMPERIAL OTTOMAN GUARANTEED LOAN OF 1855.
  Copy presented, of Account for the year 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  BANK OF ENGLAND.
  Copy presented, of Return of the amount of Notes issued more than forty years which have not been presented for payment, and which have been written off on the 8th December, 1904, from the total amount of Notes issued from the Issue Department of the Bank of England [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  CHELSEA HOSPITAL.
  Account presented, for the year ended 31st March, 1904, with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 9.]
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE.
  Account presented, of Receipts and Expenditure of the Paymaster-General on behalf of the Supreme Court of Judicature in respect of the Funds of Suitors of the Court in the year ended 29th February, 1904, and of Account of the National Debt Commissioners for the same period in respect of Funds held by them on behalf of the Supreme Court of Judicature, with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 10.]
  POST OFFICE TELEGRAPHS.
  Account presented, showing the gross amount received and expended on account of the Telegraph Service during the year ended 31st March, 1904, etc. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 11.]

  DUCHY OF CORNWALL.
  Account presented, of the Receipts and Disbursements of the Duchy of Cornwall for the year ended 31st
  104
  December, 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 12.]

  LAND REGISTRY (NEW BUILDINGS) ACT, 1900.
  Account presented, showing the Money issued from the Consolidated Fund, under the provisions of The Land Registry (New Buildings) Act, 1900, and of the Expenditure; the Money expended and borrowed and the Securities created under the said Act, for the period ended 31st March, 1904, together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 13.]
  PUBLIC OFFICES SITE (DUBLIN) ACT, 1903.
  Account presented, showing the Money issued from the Consolidated Fund under the provisions of The Public Offices Site (Dublin) Act, 1903, and of the Expenditure; the Money expended and borrowed and the Securities created under the said Act for the period ended 31st March, 1904, together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  CONSOLIDATED FUND.
  Abstract Account presented, showing the Issues made from the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom in the financial year ended 31st March, 1904, for the Interest and Management of the Debt, for the Civil List, and for all other Issues in the financial year for services charged directly on the said Fund; with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 14.]
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 28th November, 1904, granting to Tom F. Dickinson, Sorting Clerk and Telegraphist, Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 21st November, 1904, granting to Joseph Livingston, Engineer, 1st Class, Engineer-in-Chiefs Department, Post

  105
  Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 17th January, 1905, granting to Charles F. Williams, Second Division Clerk, Admiralty, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATIONS ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 6th September, 1904, granting to Alfred Webster, Clerk, Derby Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 2nd September, 1904, granting to Robert Henderson, Lineman, Engineer-in-Chief's Department, Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 11th January, 1905, granting to John Still, Inspector, Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 6th September, 1904, granting to Samuel J. Morton, Assistant Superintendent, Boston Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 6th January, 1905, granting to Alfred H. Beaumont, Town Postman, Leeds Post Office, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 17th January, 1905, granting to Henry G. Bartlett, 2nd Division Clerk (Higher Grade), Admiralty, a retiring allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATIONS.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 26th August, 1904, declaring that for the due and efficient discharge of the duties of the office of professor of Zoology in the Royal College of Science, Dublin, professional or other peculiar qualifications not ordinarily to be acquired on the Public Service are required [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1859.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 5th October, 1904, awarding a Special Pension to Sir Augustus W. L. Hemming, G.C.M.G., late Governor of Jamaica [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 3rd September, 1904, declaring that Richard Leamy, Labourer, Royal Laboratory, War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 14th October, 1904, declaring that John W. Ginno, Royal Laboratory, War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 21st October, 1904, declaring that Benjamin Banks, Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield, War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 4th March, 1904, declaring that Frederick George Postans, Postmaster of Newmarket Post Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 29th October, 1904, declaring that William Gregory, Carpenter, Royal Carriage Department, War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 21st October, 1904, declaring that John Foster, Boy Labourer, Royal Laboratory, War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service Certificate through inadvertence on the part of the Head of his Department [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  COUNTY COURTS ACTS, 1888, AND SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (OFFICERS) ACT, 1879.
  Copy of Order made by the Lord Chancellor, dated 25th August, 1904, directing that the Registrar of the County Court of Lancashire, held at Salford, shall not practise as a solicitor, and that Section 20 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Officers) Act, 1879, shall not apply to the office of Registrar of the said County Court [by Act].
  SUPREME COURT (RULES).
  Copy of Rules of the Supreme Court, dated 1st October, 1904 [by Act].
  DEEDS OF ARRANGEMENT ACT, 1887, (RULE).
  Copy of Rule under the Act, dated 1st October, 1904 [by Act].
  LUNACY.
  Copy of Report to the Lord Chancellor of the number of visits made, the number of Patients seen, and the number of miles travelled by the Visitors of Lunatics between 1st April, 1904, and 30th September, 1904 [by Act].
  LUNACY.
  Copy of Return to the Lord Chancellor of the number of visits made and the number of Patients seen by the several Commissioners in Lunacy during the six months ending on the 31st December, 1904 [by Act].
  BANK OF ENGLAND.
  Accounts of Exchequer Bills and other Government Securities purchased, and of the amount of Balances of Sums issued for the Payment of Dividends, etc., for the year ending 5th January, 1905 [by Act]; to be printed. [No. 15.]
  Copy of County Court Rules, 1904 [by Act].
  LUNACY.
  Copy of Return of all sums received by the Visitors of Lunatics for travelling expenses, or upon any other account, from 1st January to 31st December, 1904 [by Act].
  Copy of Accounts of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board for the year ending 1st July, 1904 [by Act].

  POSTMASTER-GENERAL AND NATIONAL TELEPHONE COMPANY.
  Copy ordered, "of Memorandum of the Postmaster-General dated the 14th February, 1905, setting forth an Agreement dated 2nd February, 1905, between the Postmaster-General and the National Telephone Company, Limited."—(Lord Stanley.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  KING'S SPEECH.
  Mr. SPEAKER reported His Majesty's Speech, and read it to the House. (See page 1.)

  KING'S SPEECH (MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS).
  MR. MOUNTin moving
  "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, as followeth:—
  Most Gracious Sovereign,
  "We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Majesty for the gracious Speech which

  109
  Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament;" said he was sure the House would extend to him a full measure of that indulgence which it had never failed to grant to those who, in preceding years, had been privileged to undertake the difficult and delicate task entrusted to him. The House would have listened with satisfaction to the opening sentences of the Speech from the Throne. The announcement that our relations with foreign countries were of a friendly character would be none the less welcome because of late years it had been not unfamiliar; and their earnest prayer was that for many years to come on these occasions a similar statement might be made. No lesson was necessary to convince this country of the advantages of peace, but had an object-lesson been needed in the horrors of war between two powerful nations, equipped with all the armaments which modern military science can devise, one had only to look at the struggle which, unfortunately, was still progressing in the Far East. However much they might admire the courage and gallantry of the soldiers and sailors engaged in that conflict, they could not shut their eyes to the sorrow and suffering which every battle, every skirmish, inevitably brought to many homes far removed from the scene of combat. In the course of that war there must have been many a moment of anxiety to other countries, lest they also should be involved in the contest raging in Manchuria. It was only by the strictest observance of the somewhat ill-defined obligations incumbent upon neutral Powers that such a danger could be averted, and the House must have noted with much satisfaction that His Majesty's Government had done all in their power in that direction. There was much in the Gracious Speech from the Throne which gave reason to hope that for many years to come peaceful and, what was more, friendly relations between this country and foreign Powers would be maintained.
  A considerable portion of the passage dealing with foreign affairs was taken up by a narration of Agreements concluded between this country and other Powers, by which questions of
  110
  possible controversy had been removed, he hoped, from all danger of decision by the dread arbitrament of war to the more peaceful solution by mutual agreement or reference to arbitration. It could hardly be supposed that the time would ever come when nations would be satisfied to submit to the decision of a Court of arbitration on all matters, no matter how important; but any extension of the principle of arbitration would be gladly welcomed by that House, and it would have been noted with satisfaction that His Majesty's Government had lost no opportunity of putting into practice those principles of which, in theory at any rate, all Members expressed so high an admiration. The House would have heard with pleasure the announcement of the ratification by the French Legislature of the convention between France and England. It would be out of place on the present occasion for him to say anything as to the differences for which a solution was found in that convention, or to deal in detail with the convention itself. All would admit that the true value of that convention was not confined to the fact that by it a solution was found of outstanding differences, but that it also lay in the discovery which was made by France and by this country that both nations were mutually anxious to find a solution of those differences mutually satisfactory to both. From that discovery had come a better understanding between the two countries, and the House would welcome the better feeling of friendship which had resulted from that convention and which had already borne valuable fruit. He felt sure the House would receive with scarcely less gratification the further announcement that Agreements with other countries had been made, by which certain matters upon which a dispute might possibly arise in future would be referred to arbitration.
  In regard to the International Commission now sitting at Paris, His Majesty's Government had shown the same anxiety to maintain, wherever possible, amicable relations with all other countries. He would not venture to say a word as to the events the investigation of which had been entrusted to that inquiry, that would be highly improper while the question was still under consideration; but he did not think he would

  111
  be going too far when he said that both the House and the country learnt, with intense relief, of the possibility of a peaceable and honourable solution of an event which had deeply stirred the whole of the British Empire. In regard to all these matters—the International Commission now sitting at Paris, the ratification by France and this country of the Anglo-French Convention, and the conclusion of arbitration Agreements with other nations—they saw the same desire on the part of His Majesty's Government to find an amicable solution upon matters of controversy before they reached an acute stage; and in all of them they found evidence upon which they might base the hope that for many years to come they would maintain friendly relations with all foreign Powers.
  There was one part of Europe which, he regretted to say, still gave cause for anxiety, and from which their attention had been unduly taken by more stirring events happening further afield. The Balkan Peninsula had long been an unfortunate country, torn with racial and religious dissension, and, therefore, it was satisfactory to learn that something had been done to ameliorate the condition of that unfortunate country. Much was being done by the valuable work of the officers of the gendarmerie to which allusion was made, but much still remained to be done, and there was a not unnatural impatience at the slow progress which had been made there. It should, however, be more fully realised what the difficulties were and what the nature of the obstacles were which had to be removed. No reforms in that unfortunate country could be effective unless they had behind them not one or two Powers, but the whole Concert of Europe. However efficient or powerful that Concert might be, when it had determined on the specific reform it desired to initiate, it could not fail from its nature to be slow to sit in motion, and he thought that they might congratulate themselves upon the fact that some improvement had been made and that the Powers were working in harmony in their endeavour to restore order out of chaos in that distracted district.
  Turning from the Continent of Europe to India, he was sure the whole House
  112
  would join in congratulations upon the successful issue of the political Mission to Lhasa. He would not discuss the causes which led to that Mission, they had been the subject of debate in the House, nor would he say anything as to the reasons which, in his opinion, more than amply justified its dispatch. But whatever hon. Members might think as to the inception of that Mission he thought all would join in congratulations upon the admirable way in which it had been carried out, and as to the gallantry and fortitude of the soldiers, whether belonging to the native Army from India or to the British Army, who fought side by side in that campaign. Had they wanted any proof of the manner in which the British soldiers or the soldiers of the native Indian Army were ready and willing to put up with the varying conditions which the service of the British Empire might demand, they could hardly have a better example than the two last expeditions in which they had taken part. Whether upon the burning sands of Somaliland or the snow-clad hills of Tibet, the soldiers had shown themselves ready to endure the greatest hardships in a manner well worthy of the praise and commendation of the House and the country.
  Turning from foreign politics to domestic policy the House had heard, not with much surprise, that His Majesty's Government intended to lay before the House a proposal to remedy the inequalities which existed in the arrangement of the electoral areas in this country. It was more than twenty years since the last Redistribution Bill was passed by the House of Commons, and during that period there must have been many changes in the distribution of the population throughout these islands. Many towns had outgrown the Parliamentary boundaries whilst others had failed to keep pace with the rest of the country, and there were many other inequalities to which he did not need to allude. Whilst these inequalities remained un-remedied he thought the House could hardly feel that it had done all in its power to ensure that equal distribution of representative power in the country which a country with a representative Assembly

  113
  ought to have. To cure these evils would no doubt entail some self-sacrifice on the part of some hon. Members of the House, but he hoped that he should not be considered presumptuous or over-sanguine when he expressed his belief that that self-sacrifice would be willingly made.
  He felt sure the House would desire to associate itself with the regret and sympathy expressed in His Majesty's gracious Speech with the distress and suffering occasioned by lack of employment during the past winter, and they all gladly welcomed the steps taken by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board to meet those evils. It should not, however, be forgotten that the want of employment during the winter, though it was this year abnormal, was an evil which almost invariably recurred, but he was sure that any proposal to put upon a permanent basis those temporary provisions which, even during the short time they had been in operation, had been shown to be of some value to meet the evils which they all deplored would be cordially welcomed by the Members of the House.
  Among the remaining measures mentioned in His Majesty's gracious Speech were two dealing with local taxation, one a proposal to renew the Agricultural Rating Act and the other to amend the law of valuation. As he represented a constituency mainly dependent, directly or indirectly, on agriculture he desired to say a few words upon that question, which was one of much importance to that great industry. The expenditure charged upon local taxation was ever increasing and was such as would be a serious burden even upon a prosperous industry. It could easily be imagined how heavily such burdens pressed upon a declining industry like agriculture. But this was not all, because the incidence of the local rates not only pressed with relatively, greater weight in country districts upon occupiers of land than on other classes of the community, but the proportion of the burden they were called upon to bear was actually heavier. If the national expenditure increased the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able to apportion the taxes in a fair and equitable manner among the various classes of taxpayers,
  114
  but this was not so in regard to local taxation, for however much the expenditure on local rates increased there was no alteration made in the apportionment of the burden, and in country districts the principal portion of that burden was placed upon the shoulders of those who derived their livelihood from the occupation of land. Would any one contend that these were the people best able to bear it? If he were to go into the question of the incidence of local taxation on the agricultural industry he feared that he should trespass unduly upon the time of the House and he would be travelling outside the proposals mentioned in His Majesty's Speech; he would, therefore, not deal with it further. But whatever hon. Members might think as to the form which a reform of local taxation ought to take, he thought they would all agree that any such reform should be accompanied by some simplification and co-ordination of the law of valuation, and that coordination and simplification he ventured to hope would be found in the Bill which would be laid before the House. In conclusion he thanked with all sincerity hon. Members for the patient manner in which they had listened to him and the kind indulgence they had extended to him in the responsible position which he had occupied that afternoon.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTSsaid that, in rising to second the Motion so ably proposed by his hon. friend, he was very conscious of his own inability to do justice to the honour conferred upon him, but he gladly accepted the duty as an honour paid to the great constituency and city which three years ago sent him as one of its representatives to that House. Since he had had the privilege of being a Member he had received nothing but the greatest kindness and consideration from all sides of the House, and he did not think that kindness would be lacking during the few minutes in which he had to discharge his difficult and delicate task. His hon. friend had very ably alluded to their foreign relations, and he did not propose to trouble the House in going over the same ground, but he desired to associate himself with what had fallen from him as to their sense of thankfulness that their

  115
  relations were peaceful with all the world. His hon. friends had alluded to the Arbitration Treaties and the French Agreement, which the Prime Minister described last session as "one of the greatest international transactions which we have to record," concluded by Lord Lansdowne and M. Delcassé, whose continuance in office they all rejoiced to notice. The great statesmen of both political Parties had recognised the great importance of a good understanding with their nearest neighbour. The late Lord Beaconsfield said—
  "A good understanding between England and France is simply this, that so far as the influence of these two great Powers extends, the affairs of the world shall be conducted by their co-operation instead of by their rivalry. But co-operation requires not merely identity of interest, but reciprocal good feeling."
  They must all rejoice that that good feeling had been attained, and trust that it might long endure to the great advantage of both countries and to the peace of Europe.
  He came now to the paragraph dealing with the form of representative government to be given to the Transvaal, which was receiving the earnest attention of the Government and of those administering the colony, and in so doing, he hoped he was not trespassing beyond his province if he ventured with great respect to tender to the Colonial Secretary their hearty congratulations on the manner in which he had discharged the important duties of the office since he was so suddenly called upon to take them up, owing to the resignation of his very eminent predecessor; and though, perhaps, those sitting on the opposite side of the House might not have agreed with all he had done he felt sure they would acknowledge the courtesy and consideration which he had always shown. In accordance with pledges given both in the terms of surrender that representative institutions leading up to self-government would be introduced, and also by the right hon. Gentleman the late Colonial Secretary, His Majesty's Government were prepared to take another step towards granting that full self-government to the Transvaal, which was their ultimate gaol. But the pledges given were that they would proceed gradually as circumstances allowed. Their desire was, while retaining an Executive nominated
  116
  by the Crown, to concede the utmost liberty compatible with safety, and to remember that the inhabitants affected belonged to nations accustomed to freedom.
  He would now venture to refer to one or two measures mentioned in His Majesty's gracious Speech. The first he would mention was rather a delicate one, namely, the difficulty which had arisen in Scotland with regard to ecclesiastical matters. He approached this delicate subject with much fear and doubt. English Members rather liked to leave Scotch matters for their own Members to deal with. A very difficult and unfortunate position had, no doubt, arisen and he thought almost all Parties agreed that some legislation was necessary for the efficient administration of the funds involved, and to promote peace and goodwill among all parties. A Royal Commission was inquiring into all the circumstances, and when their Report was received the House would be in a better position to judge the lines on which legislation should proceed.
  With regard to Scotch education he believed there would not be much difference of opinion.
  He came now to the paragraph in the gracious Speech dealing with the proposals for diminishing the anomalies prevailing in the arrangement of electoral areas consequent upon the growth and movement of population in recent years; and perhaps, as representing a large and increasing city, he could more forcibly voice the opinions of those large centres of industry than his hon. friend. In order to avoid injustice it was evident that from time to time it was necessary to make fresh arrangements, not too frequently, but when the disproportion had become flagrant. At the present time the disproportion was urgent and pressing, especially owing to the large increase of population round London, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, Lancashire, the counties of Durham and Northumberland, Glasgow and surrounding area, Staffordshire, Glamorganshire, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle-on-Tyne, and other cities. As an illustration, he had taken the fifteen largest constituencies, and the fifteen smallest in England and Wales returning one Member. In the fifteen

  117
  largest there were, according to the register in force on 1st January, 1904, 372,426 voters returning fifteen Members; in the smallest fifteen. 47,951 voters returning fifteen Members. If an elector lived in one of the fifteen big, prosperous, and increasing districts his voting power was only one-eighth of that of the man who lived in one of the small and stationary boroughs. That was to say, it took 24,828 to return one Member in the one case, and only 3,197 in the other. He would not trouble the House with any further figures, but it was evident that there was a great injustice, and he could not think that the small boroughs could be so self-seeking as to desire that they should have a continuance of the anomaly.
  The second place in legislative proposals was given to the evils arising from alien immigration, and on account of what happened to the Bill of last session he felt sure he should have the sympathy of the House in dealing with the question. There was nothing new to be said, but the evils continued. Undesirable aliens, mostly from Eastern Europe, were continually admitted into this country without let or hindrance. They brought with them destitution, crime, uncleanness and disease. They drove out the native dweller, and many, being unskilled and in a state of poverty, worked for a rate of wages below a standard upon which a native workman could fairly live. These were real grievances, especially to the native population in the East End of London. The Royal Commission had recommended that the State should regulate this traffic. Other countries and our own Colonies did so, and consequently we, who did not, got the refuse who could not comply with their standards.
  Referring to the paragraph in the gracious Speech as to the establishment of authorities to deal with the unemployed, the hon. Member said we had had this question before us for many years. In all our centres of industry it recurred almost every winter, but until the present movement in London there had been no action taken to deal with it on a systematic basis. The end to be sought was this: to create some machinery by which our honest and hard-working men could be temporarily provided for without having to seek
  118
  relief from the Poor Law, carrying with it disenfranchisement and loss of home. The scheme for London of the President of the Local Government Board had resulted in very admirable work. By it the Poor Law and local authorities had been brought together in joint committees which had been set up to separate applicants for employment into two classes (1) those who were temporarily out of work through no fault of their own, and (2) the ordinary applicants for Poor Law relief, and to endeavour to find work for the first of these classes. There was also a central committee so as to secure uniformity of action, which had done very useful work. The subject was a delicate and difficult one and care must be taken neither to interfere with the proper operation of the Poor Law nor to erect a permanent class of unemployed.
  Another important measure promised was one to amend and extend the Workmen's Compensation Act of 1897. The House would remember that that Act introduced an entirely new principle, and one of very far-reaching importance, into the law regulating compensation for accidents, namely, that mere accident occurring in the course of employment should of itself, irrespective of proof of negligence or of defective machinery or plant, entitle the injured workman, or his dependents in case of death, to receive compensation according to the scale prescribed. The operation of the Act was restricted to certain of the more dangerous occupations. The scheme of the Act was to avoid litigation and that the amount of compensation should be amicably settled between the parties. The working of the Act had proved a great success and, though there had been litigation arising out of the wording of the Act, according to the Report of a Departmental Committee appointed in 1903 to inquire into its operations.
  "The amount of litigation has been very small when compared with the great number of cases settled by agreement."
  The Committee have made a great many suggestions with the view of clearing up doubtful points of construction, and they have also recommended that the benefits of the Act should be further extended (as they were in 1900 to agricultural labourers) to certain other classes,

  119
  including seamen (by Amendment of Merchant Shipping Act), carriers, workers in workshops where five or more were employed, with power to the Secretary of State to extend an inquiry to other kinds of employment. He believed that the Bill to be introduced would be found to largely carry out the recommendations of the Committee and trusted it would receive the generous support of the House.
  The promise in the gracious Speech for legislation for remodelling the Board of Trade under a Minister of Commerce would be welcomed by the commercial world and by the chambers of commerce, who had for some time urged the necessity of having a Minister more directly in touch with the trade of the country, and with the Consular service. He had now only to thank the House very warmly for the kind way in which they had listened to him. They were told that this session was to be a tumultuous and bitter one. He hoped that the prophecy might prove to be untrue. They heard of wars and rumours of wars, and warfare was an essential element in their Party system; but during the short period he had had the honour of a seat in that Assembly he had noticed that it was not the speech spoken with venom and personal attack that carried weight and conviction, but that spoken with moderation and reasoned argument. Might he humbly, and with great deference and respect, plead that their deliberations might be more and more marked by patience and forbearance, and that they might all endeavour to put into practice the prayer which Mr. Speaker's chaplain so beautifully said at the commencement of each of their sittings, that in all their dealings with one another they might be influenced by the law of Christian charity.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, as followeth:—
  "Most Gracious Sovereign,
  "We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Majesty for the gracious Speech
  120
  which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament."—(Mr. Mount.)
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Mr. Speaker, my first and most pleasing duty is to congratulate the mover and seconder of the Address on the manner in which they have executed the task entrusted to them. We have always been accustomed to speak of that task as one of unusual difficulty and delicacy. They are required with that very imperfect knowledge of the policy of the Government which private Members must have, to defend it, partly by direct assertion and chiefly by respectful anticipation and suggestion. I cannot imagine any occasion upon which that task could have been rendered more difficult than it was to-day. But I think that the time has come when, perhaps, we ought to modify the terms in which we tender the deserved guerdon of praise to the mover and seconder, and for this reason: we are no longer surprised to find among unobtrusive and, for the most part, silent Members of the House a great power of addressing the House, as we have seen to-day, with force and clearness. For it is, I think, one of the most noticeable Parliamentary facts of our day that, from practice in their constituencies, or some other reason, there are a largely-increased number of Members who have acquired that enviable art of which both the hon. Members have certainly shown themselves possessed; and I think that the House will agree with me that they deserve our approbation and our thanks.
  I wish to interpose one word before I turn to make some comments upon the difficult situation we are now approaching. Since last we met we have lost from, among us one I should not be wrong in calling of the most conspicuous and most illustrious of our number. Sir William Harcourt was a devoted Member of Parliament. He loved the House of Commons. He coveted nothing so much as to stand well with the House of Commons. He lived and died in its service, and in turn he commanded the admiration and respect and affection of nearly all its Members. Our debates will be the poorer by the

  121
  absence, not only of a skilful orator and a learned constitutional authority, but of a fine sample—the last, I fear, that lingered in it—of the grand old type of statesmen.
  Well, in opening the interrogatories with which the sitting of this day must necessarily be commenced. I would first invite the right hon. Gentleman to explain why Parliament is summoned so late? Now, I may be told that Easter is late; but what has that to do with it? If Easter is late it would only have given us the more time to discharge some of our most necessary duties. We have to examine the financial position of the country, which never more required careful examination. We have to master the Estimates which were passed, many of them in much confusion last year; and if there were any time over from this purpose, then there would have been a convenient opportunity of giving consideration to those legislative measures which we are led to believe that the Government reluctantly, and at great sacrifice to themselves, are maintaining themselves in office in order to pursue. Why, then, take a fortnight off our time? What was the urgent reason compelling that delay, and forcing the Government to deprive the House of Commons of a large part of its opportunity for discharging its most essential duties? The right hon. Gentleman will, of course, explain what the urgent reasons were for calling Parliament together later than usual.
  In one respect we stand very much as we did this time last year; in this respect, at least, that the fiscal question still overshadows everything else; and it is not a little astonishing and significant that the two hon. Members to whom we have just been listening, have not said one word from beginning to end on the only question that the country is truly anxious and concerned about. I have no doubt that instructions were communicated to them to that effect, because no politician, left to himself, could make a speech at this time of day without touching incidentally, if not systematically, on the fiscal question. The country is still waiting—only, as events show, with increased impatience—
  122
  for an opportunity of expressing its judgment on that issue. The country is still groping in the dark for the policy of the right hon. Gentleman; still wondering what may be the real bearing of those aspirations and desires so compactly expressed by the right hon. Gentleman, and which he, with a simple faith which nothing can quench, insists in regarding as a policy. Last session, as hon. Members will remember, we were put off with the plea that all this is outside the competence of the present Parliament, and we witnessed a series of lobby evolutions which were of no avail to the Government in the country, but which did much to damage the reputation and standing of the House of Commons. I hope that when we press—as we must, from the outset press—for a candid declaration of the meaning and intention of the Prime Minister, we shall not be put off by a reference to the aspirations and the desires expressed at this place and the other place, and that we shall not be met by any of those extraordinary Ministerial Resolutions to which we were accustomed last year, expressing the most unbounded confidence in every utterance of the Prime Minister, however inconsistent, on these matters, and at the same time our unflinching belief in the legislative capacity of His Majesty's Ministers. I say we shall press for more information in this House. We shall do more: we shall take the earliest opportunity of inviting the House to express its opinion that, in the interests of the trade and the prosperity of the country, the country should be relieved as early as possible from the confusion which metaphysical sophistications have caused, and that should be had to the country in order that this matter should be decided in the public interest. You cannot go on with your formulas and Resolutions for ever. You cannot go on feeding the country on these Dead Sea apples, to offer which to the country is almost an insult. Sir, a situation so unthinkable as that of the Government at the present moment is unknown in our Parliamentary history. The feeling of the country has been demonstrated beyond all doubt or dispute, but the Prime Minister apparently holds that he need take no heed of it, and that he can go on in the

  123
  feebleness and uncertainty which his position involves as long as his followers in this House do not mutiny against him. A Parliamentary majority is, no doubt, a great instrument and a necessary instrument for the Executive Government, but it is not everything. There is something behind any Parliament or any majority in any Parliament from which both Parliament and the majority derive thier authority. I remember two lines from an old writer, in somewhat archaic language, which were once quoted with great effect by John Bright—
  "There is on earth a more auguster thing, Veiled though it be, than Parliament or King."
  That "auguster thing" is the public conscience. The public conscience is greater than any constitutional machinery, and no man san say in this case that the public conscience is vague. But the line taken by the right hon. Gentleman is ill-advised in the interests of the Government Themselves—it is as ill-advised as it is unconstitutional. That is disputed by some hon. Gentlemen, but I have a very good authority. Here is a statesman who says—
  "I have never observed in the history of this country that any Party or any Government have gained credit from hanging on to office, in the vulgar sense without power and with only the insignia of office, from hanging on to their places when they were deprived of all real influence on the course of events and when the general trend of public opinion was against them. Under such circumstances the Government may possibly do good administrative work"—possibly—"it may possibly continue to hold its tenure of office for one month, two months, six months, or even a year or more, but you will never find in the history of this country that this had the result of increasing the credit of a Government with those on whose favour their fortunes ultimately rest."
  That was the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman only ten years ago almost to the day, on 11th February, 1895.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. PALFOUR,): 1895? What was your majority in 1895?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: We never tried to stick to office. [An HON. MEMBER: You could not.] What did we do? How did we show that we tried to stick to office? We did not attempt to stick to office when the
  124
  feeling of the country was going against us. I say the Government, having put themselves in a false position, have no right to involve the House and the country with themselves; and in the observations I shall make I shall found myself upon the proposition that the political situation to-day is of such ingrained falsity, that it is so fraught with danger to the public interest, that to prolong it is a betrayal and usurpation of power. I do not say, Sir, that the fiscal controversy is alone responsible for the present state of things. I do not forget that behind it we have the fact that the Government have stretched their general commission from the country to the breaking point. What was the assurance given by the right hon. Gentleman to the constituencies in 1900? These are his words—that the electors had nothing to consider except the paramount interest which events in South Africa had necessarily excited. I could quote bushels of observations to the same effect, but these words are quite enough for me. This is no question of a mandate. I have never stood upon a mandate. A Government, of course any Government, has a general authority for ordinary purposes besides the particular purpose which is paramount at the time of the election. No doubt of it; but what was this case? It was a case of votes sought, and in good faith given, exclusively for one purpose—[HON. MEMBERS: Oh!]—exclusively for one purpose—and then faith broken and the majority used for stealing a settlement of most strongly contested questions. I pass by the inquiry what the value, what the efficacy, what the life of a settlement so obtained is likely to be; I will not enlarge upon that now, except to contrast the scanty attention which, after all, has been paid since then to the question of South Africa with the efforts made to extort from Parliament measures of the most momentous kind which were never hinted at in 1900. Can we wonder that a Ministry with such a career should be demoralised? The Prime Minister, indeed, is so satisfied with himself, and so satisfied that he is personally indispensable to the safety of the Empire that it would be a waste of time to dispute the fact with him; but the country is not so satisfied; and it is not satisfied especially

  125
  when it sees him devoting as much zeal and conviction to pulling down his own schemes as to setting them up, creating Army Corps one day to destroy them the next, equally happy and equally claiming credit when building ships or when removing them from the effective list.
  How completely the Ministry is out of hand is evidenced by a most—in his presence I have no hestitation in saying it—a most improper speech made by a subordinate member of the Board of Admiralty. He was apparently tired of his obscurity, and resolved to make a name for himself, and he has succeeded. Thousands of people who never heard of him now know of his existence. He became at once a European celebrity, and that was something gained, although it my have been at the cost of the damage that he did to the interests, and to the pockets, of the taxpayers of this country, and of other countries as well. Or take their relations with their fellow-countrymen. Now I come to the Secretary of State for War. We had the Secretary of State for War the other day passing judgment upon the by-elections. He attached no importance to them. [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] Quite so. With himself and his colleagues, or some of his colleagues perhaps, to be more correct, or with himself in office—we need not mind colleagues—what do the, country want more? He said they had been overborne by classes of voters who were not friendly to England. Those who vote against the War Minister are enemies of England. L'Etat, c'est moi. But I would not attach more importance to this dictum of his than it deserves; and I wish to reassure my hon. friends, rebels and disloyalists, who have taken their seats to-day that there is no chance of the War Minister endeavouring to dominate the polling stations with his artillery, when he gets it or his new shortened rifle. But it is significant that a Minister, a Secretary of State, makes a speech like that. It is significant of the state of mind of a Government which has gone on month after month against the opinion of the country. It is an admission, although an involuntary one, that this Ministry of destiny, graced with all the talents and enjoying a monopoly of patriotism—I am endeavouring to put in colourless language what I observe in
  126
  their own speeches—that it has ceased to be a British Ministry in the sense in which we have known the term hitherto.
  This is not an occasion on which to go far in the discussion of the fiscal question; but there is one new element in the fiscal entanglement which has been imported into it since the House rose last summer. In the month of August the right hon. Gentleman refused the request of the Member for Birmingham for a specially summoned Colonial Conference, on the ground that the machinery of periodical Conferences would suffice for the discussion of any outstanding questions between this country and the Colonies—a most sensible view to take. But in the month of October, only two months later, he suddenly announced that the calling of such a Conference, in which India was to be included, was to form a large part of the question which would be submitted to the country at the next election. So the right hon. Gentleman not only changed his views, but elevated his new view to a cardinal principle, in two months. I never knew a more thorough or rapid conversion, and it must have been effected under some overpowering influence. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will explain what led him to change his mind. Another critical incident has been the publication of a letter from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham to a friend of his, Mr Dooley, in which he said—
  "I do not myself recognise any difference between Mr. Balfour and myself. If we do differ at all, it is only a question of methods and tactics, but Mr. Balfour has advocated the great objects which I have in view as strongly as any tariff reformer could desire."
  That is a very plain, expressive, comprehensive, and vitally important statement. What we complain of is, that the Prime Minister resorts to methods and tactics calculated to obscure this alliance, to disguise his real aims, to baffle this House—not to speak of the Opposition Members only—and delude the country, and that in his zeal for clever tactics he has so little consideration for the peace and welfare of the country, that he does not hesitate to prolong by his mystery and comparative silence on this point an agitation that is injurious. Let me say that if the question of tactics is introduced—as if the word "tactics" constituted

  127
  an excuse—I am not sure it does not make the matter a great deal worse. Military tactics may be a very fine art, but to the ordinary man the word "tactics" suggests the art of deceiving those who are hostile to you. Such being the case, I do not think an appeal to tactics, as an excuse for a certain course of action, is likely to be successful. Now and here, in the presence of the House of Commons, let us have a considered answer from the right hon. Gentleman. If the policy of the Prime Minister is identical with that of the Member for Birmingham, as that right hon. Gentleman asserts—
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: No.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAINThe quotation is not perfectly correct. Though I do not know that it makes any difference, I will give it to the right hon. Gentleman in its verbal form. What I said was that I could see no difference in principle between my right hon. friend and myself. The word "principle" was omitted in the right hon. Gentleman's reading of the passage.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN; I do not know that that improves the matter very much. If the Prime Minister is agreed with the right hon. Gentleman in principle, the principle will include the general aims of the right hon. Gentleman. If the two policies are identical in principle why does the Prime Minister suffer it to be believed that men who reject the policy of the Member for Birmingham—not his methods or his immediate means of attaining his object, but his general policy—have only to go to the Prime Minister to find something which differs from it in kind? The right hon. Gentleman cannot have it both ways. If there is no difference in principle that is a tiling we can all understand. Identity and difference existing simultaneously no man can understand. I observed a letter from the noble Lord the Member for Ealing, who can both speak and write
  128
  in a very forcible and clear way which we all admire, regarding this same point—
  "There are," he said, "two sections of the Unionist Party, who hold irreconcilably opposed views on tariff questions—namely, the fiscal reformers, headed by Mr. Chamberlain, and the free-traders, headed by the Duke of Devonshire. Neither are stupid nor malevolent. Each of these two Parties, after a perusal of Mr. Balfour's speech at Edinburgh, contend that the opinions therein expressed are in accordance with the views they hold. One of the two sections clearly is wrong. Which is it?"
  Well, which is it? That is a simple question, an answer to which would stop the whole of this controversy, so far as it concerns the immediate attitude of the right hon. Gentleman. Which is it of these two sections? I do not find that they follow quite the same lines. One section beseeches him to give an explanation, but the other section appears quite content that this preposterous spectacle should continue. We can gather from that circumstance which section gains by the transaction. Then what does the Prime Minister do? He falls back upon himself. He has no light or guidance or leadership to offer; his followers must take him as they find him and make what they can of him. He says, "You may examine everything I have said and written and you will find one consistent train of thought running through it, perfectly clear, perfectly intelligible, perfectly self-contained." Will the right hon Gentleman pardon me if I tell him there is no question of vindicating his consistency? What we want to know is what his opinions are. If a general gave an order which was followed by the two wings of his army attacking each other until the stronger one, headed by his most doughty warrior, was very near annihilating the weaker section, he would be a remarkable commander if he excused himself from giving any instructions that would terminate the mischief on the ground that it was only due to a misconception, as his orders from the first had been perfectly clear, perfectly intelligible, and perfectly consistent. We are entitled to press this aspect of the question from this side of the House. Is that doughty warrior to whom I have referred the effective, the authorised interpreter of the leader's will, or is it the noble Lord

  129
  the Member for Ealing, or the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich? After all, the fighting will not all be done on one side, and the country as well as the House ought to know whom they have to meet. Until we get some definite light from the Prime Minister—and now is his opportunity for giving it—we shall conclude that the policy we have to fight is that announced by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Birmingham, and discerned by him in the announcement of the Prime Minister.
  Are we to be told that none of these arguments and questions are relevant, and that the fiscal question is not before Parliament at all? I altogether challenge this view, and it appears to have gone pretty well out of sight. Even if it were technically true, this House is the grand inquest of the nation still, and it would be its duty to endeavour to prevent the wanton and protracted injury in which the Government's attack on free trade is involving the nation. What is the Government here for at all? What is its policy? Why was this Government reconstructed? It was to discredit and undermine the old fiscal system. Is not that, a subject on which we are entitled to interrogate the Government and expect a straightforward declaration of their intentions? It is a wide question as well as a deep one. Do they contend that the prodigious rate of expenditure has nothing to do with this fiscal question? Here is a Government so hungry for revenue, owing to their own policy in other matters, that it has exhausted well nigh every source of taxation upon which it can lay its hands, short of protective duties. Is it to lead us up to the very brink of the precipice and then to escape criticism because it has not pushed us over? Are the protectionists on that Bench and behind it unaware of the origin of high tariffs in other countries? High tariffs were not brought about by heroic methods or arguments. Did anybody in any of these countries deliberately set himself to reverse, annul, and delete the maxim that taxes should be levied for revenue purposes only? Not at all. All that was required was to spend public money so fast that more and more revenue had to be raised somehow, and little by little revenue tariffs
  130
  changed into protectionist tariffs. Nothing could be simpler. It is the universal story, and it could not be better put than it was put—I am afraid hon. Members will not think much of the place—at a dinner of the Cobden Club. The chairman said—
  "On the Continent of Europe Governments committed to an excessive military expenditure have naturally enough lent their aid to tariffs which conceal while they increase the burden of taxation.''
  It is not only on the Continent that this is taking place. The speaker went on to say—
  "But the arguments against this system by which the few are enabled to enrich themselves at the expense of the many remain absolutely unshaken, and I do not doubt that in the long run truth and reason will prevail."
  That is to say that in protective countries the people, will come to sec what folly protection is. This chairman of the Cobden Club was the right hon. Member for West Birmingham. Poor Mr. Cobden's memory has been discredited, because his prophecies did not turn out true. But here is a Saul also among the prophets, and equally wrong. It is not only this fiscal agitation which has turned the world upside down that demands attention, it is the actual operation of the Government; and hero I invite the attention of the Prime Minister to a consideration which seems to have completely escaped him when as Minister of the Crown he seeks to wash his hands of all effective complicity in the campaign against free trade. The policy which at long intervals he recites to his audiences outside the House is not only a matter of aspirations and desires and of half-sheets of notepaper and addresses for a general election. It is a living fact. It is a policy. It is in operation; it has been put into operation by the right hon. Member for West Birmingham. It is a brilliant success. It has wholly stopped the dumping of cheap sugar. Judging from their public utterances, neither of these right hon. Gentlemen appears to be particularly delighted with this chicken of theirs. If it be disputed that this is the effect of their policy, I fall back upon another authority, who is the leading retaliator, the right hon. Member for West Bristol. He is even more strenuous as a retaliator than the

  131
  Prime Minister, because he wants to put the system in force without waiting for an election and with no nonsense whatever about additional powers. Speaking on the Address last year, he said—
  "The principle of the Prime Minister's policy was tried in the Sugar Convention, and I venture to say that it has been assented to in that convention by this House and by the country."
  There are a good many Members on both sides who are thanking their stars that they did not give their consent. The right hon. Gentleman goes on—
  "I do not quite see why we should wait for a general election to try it in another instance."
  I know nothing more creditable to the Prime Minister in the whole of this business than the fact that he resisted that most alluring invitation. He did not try it in another instance, and how thankful he must be now that he did not. But it is not a question of opinion; it is a question of fact. Under the convention what do you find? You find the canon that taxes should be raised for revenue only reversed, annulled, deleted; it does not bring one farthing into the Exchequer. Then you find retaliation adopted—
  "against the importation of those foreign goods which, because they are bounty-fed or tariff protected abroad, are sold below cost price here."
  I quote those words from the sacred document itself, and they are an exact description of the material dealt with by the Sugar Convention. You find in a little protected backwater a shelter snugly provided for sugar refiners. Finally, the grand Imperial idea of the Member for West Birmingham comes in and you have the West India planter for whose benefit this fiscal curiosity was brought into existence. What more do you want? It is a microcosm; it is an express image of the policies of both right hon. Gentlemen. Of course, we admit that other things have entered into this matter that were not foreseen. It turned out that sugar was a food—a most unfortunate discovery for a Government which shrinks from putting a question of food taxation before the people of this country on the ground that they are not likely to accept it. But then it turned out also that sugar is a raw material. That is a still more unfortunate circumstance, because all fiscal reformers unite in a perfect chorus of disclaimers
  132
  if any one suggests that they have their eye on raw material. Then, again, it sent prices up in consequence of limiting the sources of supply, which they have not foreseen—a not unusual consequence. They have said over and over again that prices would not go up. They tried to look as if they were unconcerned with that little fact. I have heard of a chemistry professor who, in a lecture to his class, invited their special attention to an interesting experiment. He had some sort of fluid in one glass and another fluid in another, and he said—
  "You will observe if I pour this into that the contents will become a vivid red."
  He performed the experiment, and the result was a dark green, but he was equal to the occasion. He said—
  "Ah, gentlemen, a dark green, that is still more remarkable."
  For our consideration the Prime Minister has written once more on the document which we are to carry bound about our hearts, misunderstanding at our peril,
  "I do not desire to raise prices for the purpose of aiding home productions."
  I cannot quite accurately say he has done that in this case, because he has ruined a good many home productions. The Prime Minister's motives are beyond question, and the fact that prices have gone up contrary to his express wishes only shows what a slender safeguard the best of men's motives and aspirations are against the operations of natural laws and economic forces. On a famous occasion on the sea shore the courtiers desired that the tide should not rise, but the powers of nature went on notwithstanding. When we look at the Sugar Convention we understand why it is that the case for retaliation is kept so entirely in the abstract and kept in the future also. I desire to ask some questions as to the operation of the Sugar Convention. This may be very unpleasant, but I am afraid I cannot help it. Is all going smoothly with the Sugar Convention? The Permanent Commission in Brussels determines the countries to be met by countervailing duties—that is in our case total prohibition. Russia, Denmark, Argentina, and San Domingo have been placed under this ban. But now I understand that our ports are to be opened to sugar from San Domingo. Is this a change in mind

  133
  on the part of the Brussels Commission? If this process is to be inverted we had better select some country from which we I get a considerable quantity—Russia, for instance. I believe Russia has requested that she should be relieved from it. Is that course supported by the Government? Again, there are seventeen countries which the Commission has decided to put under restriction, and in accordance with our legislation their exports ought to have been prohibited. But the Papers laid on the Table, show that we have appealed against that decision, and the matter is hung up until April. Surely the Government are not running away from their own masterpiece. I have endeavoured to show why the House is directly and immediately concerned, and the Government directly and immediately implicated in this great question which they have assured us is not to be touched or prejudiced or threatened by His Majesty's present advisers. But above the House and the Government and Parliament, and free from all technicalities and conventional relations and procedure stands the country insisting, with no doubtful voice, that an end shall be put to an unreal and mystifying controversy which is full of mischief from end to end. I apologise to the House for speaking upon a subject which was not referred to by the hon. mover and seconder, but I have already explained that it is the most important subject of the moment and that is why I have dwelt so long upon it.
  Turning our eyes abroad, the absorbing event has been the deplorable war in the East. While admiring the courage and endurance of the combatants on both sides, the world has been shocked by the murderous nature of the conflict. I feel sure that both his duty and his disposition will lead the Foreign Minister to embrace the earliest available opportunity of throwing the influence of this country on the side of peace, and in the meantime to adhere to the strictest neutrality. I have nothing but commendation for the attitude of Lord Lansdowne in the Dogger Bank incident, in the arrangement of which matter we owe much to the friendly offices of France, and I trust that the submission of the ground of possible quarrel to a tribunal may be a fresh step up the staircase leading to a general system of international arbitration. In the Nearer
  134
  East also, while there is no actual state of war, the condition of things is far from reassuring. The Mürzsteg programme hangs fire and works slowly, and the question is whether we and the other Western Powers ought not to endeavour to press some more drastic remedy for the flagrant misgovernment of Macedonia.
  But we have not been without a little war of our own, which was a tragic comedy from beginning to end. The King's Speech makes allusion naturally to the question of the Tibet Expedition. We are all glad that the expedition has returned in safety, and we all recognise with a full meed of admiration the conduct of the officers and men engaged, but what we say is that it ought never to have been despatched. The more we learn of the circumstances of the case and of the inception of the transaction, and of the way in which the Government of India set themselves to use it, contrary to the instructions and solemn pledges of this country, for effecting a permanent interference in Tibet, the clearer we are on that score. I give the Secretary for India full credit for refusing to ratify the arrangement made at Lhasa, but it would have been better still if the Government had put down their foot earlier. Knowing the objective of the Indian authorities, and being strongly opposed to it, they yet suffered themselves to be goaded into proceedings which brought damage to the prestige of the country and involved the massacre of unarmed men. The officer in civil charge of the enterprise has been rebuked. But why rebuke the agent? Why was not your censure carried higher to the principal? Colonel Younghusband was well aware of the reasons of the enterprise, and evidently regarded the permanent occupation of the Chumbi Valley as the minimum to be obtained. Can we wonder then that he failed to understand at the eleventh hour that the countermanding of this plan was seriously intended. He is perfectly frank. "To limit the period of occupation to the Chumbi Valley," he says. "is a very serious sacrifice of the interests of the Government of India. The Chumbi Valley is the key to Tibet itself, and also the most difficult part of the road to Lhasa. With the Chumbi in our possession we have a clear run into Tibet." He evidently had this fixed idea in his

  135
  mind, and knew it was also in the minds of the Indian authorities. But the House will remember when we discussed the matter last summer we heard nothing of that as an object of the expedition. We heard of one or two shepherds carried off, of one or two boundary pillars pulled down, of these naughty and recalcitrant Tibetans not being willing enough to come into our markets to trade. These were the reasons for the expedition given to us, and not that which evidently was from the first the main object. I do not think that is treating the House or the country fairly. But it is not Colonel Younghusband's fault.
  Regarding Afghanistan I should like to know more about the precise objects of these two mutually complementary Missions. What are the main subjects for discussion? This is the more interesting because the Prime Minister has been making inflammatory and alarming speeches as to our dangers in that quarter—speeches not characterised by any special diplomatic graces; speeches of the "I could tell if I dare" order. Let him dare. We wish he would. There are cases in which plain words are less dangerous than cloudy hints.
  I turn to South Africa, and I am glad to see the Colonial Secretary, because I have a long catechism to put to him. First of all, as to this new representative Constitution. Why is the Orange River Colony not to have the same treatment as the Transvaal? I have no opinion on the merits of this Transvaal scheme, for the reason that we do not know it; but surely it is advisable to avoid drawing distinctions between the two States. The Treaty of Vereeniging said as soon as circumstances permitted a representative system tending towards autonomy should be introduced. Of course, these words are applicable to both the Colonies. Why do we hear always of a mysterious system which is to be introduced into the Transvaal and nothing of the other, which formerly enjoyed complete self-government of a representative kind, and was an entremely well-governed country? Information is wanted also regarding the constitutional change in the Transvaal. The House should have an opportunity of discussing this new Constitution before it takes place. I hope the right hon.
  136
  Gentleman will undertake that the House, shall have a full opportunity of discussing this new Constitution before any step has been taken on the spot which precludes any alteration at the will of the House afterwards.
  With regard to Chinese labour I would ask, Has any limit of numbers been fixed for the importation, and, if not, have the Government any intention of fixing a limit? Are they satisfied with the effect of the importation on the general peace, security, and morality of the country? The Colonial Secretary wrote a letter the other day in I which he said there were only two Chinese women brought over from China. He was. nevertheless, pleased with the reports, which showed no ground for anxiety as to the spread of vice. But private accounts give a different complexion to the matter. I shall be glad if he will tell us all he knows of the matter. Assuming the Government are well pleased with the result of their policy, are they so well satisfied as to regard. Chinese labour as a permanent institution in South Africa? Permanent, that is, so long as gold lasts. Is that the view of the Government, and, if not, when is the temporary experiment to come to an end?
  On another subject, I would ask the Colonial Secretary, When does he anticipate that the claims for compensation will be adjusted and the free grants apportioned, and how are matters proceeding with regard to the refunding to persons on the spot of what they had to sacrifice for the convenience of the troops? Where notes had been given by British officers and others of the number of cattle, horses, and other property received—how far has he got in settling these questions? The last question I would put is this. Is there any information as to the first instalment of £10,000,000 of the Transvaal war contribution now a year overdue?
  Now I venture to come, and I am glad to come very near home, in more senses than one. I come to the Scottish paragraph. That paragraph expresses substantially a course which I have no reason to disapprove of. I think the general idea is good, but I must say

  137
  it is slovenly. It may seem to be a small point, but it is one of importance. The Speech says—
  "A situation has arisen connected with the administration of the property belonging to certain ecclesiastical bodies in Scotland which requires legislative intervention."
  Why should you speak of ecclesiastical bodies? In Scotland we call them churches. It is a shorter and, I think, a nicer word. A man likes to think himself a member of a church and not of an ecclesiastical body. He is not so proud of being a member of an ecclesiastical body. Is this an intimation that the State Church is the only institution which deserves that name? Then at the end of the paragraph it says—
  "The King trusts the proposals will tend to the efficient administration of ecclesiastical funds and the promotion of peace and goodwill.''
  Why, it treats Scotland as though it were the Balkan Peninsula, where you get everything in confusion. The Scottish people are more concerned about something else than the distribution, however much they may be interested in that of ecclesiastical funds. They care a great deal about the interests of religion. And unless the word "religion" is as improper to attribute to the Church as the word "church" itself, I do not see why it should have been put on so low a ground as this. While the purpose of the clause seems to be good, the language ill-conceals a supercilious feeling which is greatly to be condemned.
  Under the head of Estimates and expenditure we come to the great question of the administration of the two great spending Departments. In regard to the Navy, we shall expect full explanation of the sweeping attack and disqualification pronounced against a large part of the Fleet. The Government since 1885 down to the present day have built many vessels which, are now to be discarded. This may be good policy, but we await the professional statement of opinion. The country was not a little surprised to find that costly ships built and launched amidst their own plaudits by the present Government are pronounced by the Prime Minister to exist merely to embarrass British admirals and discredit the Navy. If that is so, there must be some discredit somewhere else than among the admirals. And as to the Army, we are
  138
  entitled surely to assume that the Government, and especially the Secretary of State for War, are now prepared to lay before us their scheme of reorganisation, fully and absolutely approved by the Government. They will also endeavour to prove and vindicate the efficiency of the recast War Office. On this point most disquieting reports reach us; and these most important questions ought to be amply discussed, for they have excited an interest in the country which has passed through the stage of alarm and is rapidly approaching that of despair.
  Of the other legislative references in the Speech, I notice that sometimes we are told there is to be a Bill, and sometimes a proposal. Is there any subtle difference between the two? Or is it merely for the sake of variety that one word is used in one clause and a different word in another? I would only single out one Bill for observation—namely, that on the subject of the unemployed. We all warmly share the sympathy which His Majesty expresses with those who have suffered from want of work so severely, and I can assure the President of the Local Government Board that it is our earnest desire to assist him in his efforts to make some permanent provision for meeting this great difficulty. Now, we have the unemployed at one end, and you are going to make alterations in the functions of Ministers at the other end; but I am astonished that in midway you have left out from your programme anything referring to the status of trade unions, and the whole of a question which so greatly interests the mind of the great mass of the regular working classes of the country. The rest of the programme is plainly intended for show rather than for work. Everything done in this session, save when done by consent, will lack complete authority, and the burden of our demand is that a state of things so prejudicial to the public interest shall as speedily as possible come to an end.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid he rose to call attention to an omission on the part of the Leader of the Opposition in his speech. The right hon. Gentleman had not said one word

  139
  upon the proposal of the Government to deal with the great evils of alien immigration. It was quite certain that that paragraph in the King's Speech had attracted the sympathy of every single Member on the Government side of the House, and of every supporter of the Unionist Party in the country. They had heard not one word of excuse from the Leader of the Opposition for the attitude of his followers towards the Bill introduced by the Government last session. Had it not been for that attitude, they would have had already on the Statute-book effective legislation to deal with this great evil which affected the working classes of this country. It not only affected the East End of London, it was a question which required a rapid settlement in Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, and other great towns. It was a subject in which the working classes had a legitimate and justifiable interest. He was aware that the matter had long been before Parliament; and he had never hesitated to state that it was greatly to be regretted that the Government had not dealt with it before. Happily, it had been mentioned three or four times in Speeches from the Throne; and they also had the declaration of a Secretary of State that he proposed to introduce a Bill on the subject. He expressed the earnest wish, which was not only that of himself and his constituents, but of the great proportion of his hon. friends, that that Bill should be introduced as soon as possible, and that it should be pressed forward day by day until it was passed. If the Opposition renewed their tactics of last session, he hoped the Government would not hesitate for a single moment to appeal to the country on this issue. If they did, he knew perfectly well what the answer would be to the tactics of the Opposition in endeavouring to frustrate a measure of this character.
  The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition referred to the paragraph in the Speech from the Throne with reference to the abnormal distress caused by want of employment during the present winter. The Government, however, had announced that arrangements of a temporary character had been made to meet the difficulty, and also to provide machinery of a more permanent character.
  140
  That was the situation, and he was glad to hear that the Government would have the support of the Opposition. At the opening of Parliament in 1893, when the Opposition were responsible for the administration of the country, he moved an Amendment to the Address on this subject; but right hon. Gentlemen and hon. Gentlemen who were then in the House voted against it. It was not only expedient to provide machinery of a permanent character to deal with this evil; they were also bound to inquire how it was that large masses of the people were unemployed last winter. Last year was an exceedingly bad year in his own constituency, 40,000 to 50,000 persons having to be supported by charitable relief funds organised by the Lord Mayor. Not only that, but in other parts of Yorkshire the distress was terrible. The people did not want charity; what they wanted was permanent employment. It was lamentable to read of the number of people in the country who were dependent on indoor and outdoor relief; and he rejoiced that the President of the Board of Trade had taken an intelligent interest in this deplorable condition of affairs. The policy of his right hon. friend was the policy which he had advocated in that House for many years. It was a policy they were entitled to ask the Government to pursue; and one on which he had not the slightest fear as to what the opinion of the country would be. It might be that in some constituencies it might not be successful at once; but in other constituencies which had studied the question for years, and which had felt the actual distress resulting from it, they would not have anything to fear.
  He rejoiced that the Government proposed to give effect to the repeated declarations of the chambers of commerce on this subject.
  He regretted there was nothing with reference to the Army in the Speech from the Throne, especially with reference to the Militia and Volunteers. The Secretary of State for War stated at Liverpool last year that only a little common sense was necessary in order to realise the great services which the Volunteers had rendered to the country. He frankly said that the right hon.

  141
  Gentleman was not fair to the Militia and Volunteers. The responsibility was not with the Royal Commission but with the War Office; and he appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to put an end to the present suspense, which was operating so seriously on the efficiency of the Militia and the Volunteer Forces. They did not want the sympathy of words; they wanted the sympathy of acts.
  And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the debate stood
  adjourned till this Evening's Sitting.

EVENING SITTING.

  KING'S SPEECH (MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS).
  Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [14th February], "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, as followeth—
  "Most Gracious Sovereign,
  "We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Majesty for the Gracious Speech which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament."—(Mr. Mount.)
  Question again proposed.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he desired to occupy some little of the time that must necessarily elapse before the Prime Minister replied on the debate, in calling attention to a subject of immense national importance; a subject which was not in any way alluded to in the Speech from the Throne, and which had not been alluded to by the Leader of the Opposition when he addressed the House. He referred to the physical condition of the people of this country. Just before the House rose last year a Report was laid upon the Table, together with a large body of evidence, dealing with this matter. It was the Report of a Committee which had been sitting for about twelve months before that date, to consider the question of the physical
  142
  deterioration of the people of this country. The Committee took an immense amount of valuable evidence and reported unanimously, making many excellent practical recommendations, some of which might be carried out by administrative methods, but some of which required legislation by this House. He could not at the present moment go at great length into the Report of the Committee, though he hoped he would have an opportunity of doing so this session; but if he did not speak now, he might never have a chance of doing so.
  The conclusion to which the Committee came was, that there were causes, most of them preventable and all of them capable of treatment, which resulted in an enormous amount of physical degeneration. The medical evidence given before the Committee showed that children were almost all of them born healthy, notwithstanding the privations which their mothers might have had to suffer, but that the moment the child was born into the world the deterioration began. The first thing modern society did was to separate the child from the mother. The exigencies of modern industry necessitated the mother going to work, and she was therefore unable to perform those duties to her child which it was necessary to perform if the child was to grow up into a healthy man or woman. Although this country joined in the Congress at Berlin it was far behind the other countries who had joined in that Congress in the measures taken to prevent physical degeneration. In this country we had nothing beyond the law, seldom put into force, which required a woman to abstain from labouring in a factory or a workshop for one month after her confinement. Apart from the fact that a mother was taken away from her child by the exigencies of modern industry, it was a remarkable fact that those who were the mothers of the present day had mostly been educated in our public elementary schools, and yet hardly any one of them knew how to manage a child. He could not help thinking that a little less grammar and geography and a little more attention given to this subject would greatly benefit the country.

  143
  But even if the mothers knew how to manage a child they were unable to get a good substitute for human milk. The best substitute for mother's milk was pure cow's milk, but it was almost impossible in many places for the poor of the towns to obtain pure cow's milk, notwithstanding the fact that there were powers vested in the Local Government Board which could compel a supply of pure cow's milk to the poor in towns. As a rule, however, those powers were not put into force, and the result was that children from their birth grew up imperfectly and improperly fed; subject to all diseases, notably rickets, and suffering all kinds of ailments brought about entirely by want of sufficient and proper food.
  When these children were three years old they were invited, and when five, were compelled, to come into the elementary schools, and the public authorities became cognisant of their condition. But they did not take the trouble to have a medical examination of these children when they came to school, and the result was that they came to school suffering from all sorts of complaints which rendered them physically unfit to take advantage of the instruction they received. In his opinion there ought to be a power, vested in the Central Education Authority, enabling them to withhold the payment of a grant until it was proved that the child was fit to take advantage of, and profit by, the instruction given. When Minister of Education he had frequently to tell the House that the greater part of the money devoted to education would be thrown away because the greater part of the children were not fit to receive the instruction for which the House voted millions of money every year. He was, however, never listened to, but, in the evidence given, there was a concrete case brought before the Committee which could not be overlooked. There was a school in Lambeth, ten minutes walk from that House, every child in which had been medically examined for the purpose of that Committee, and the evidence given of that examination was that 90 per cent. of the children attending that school were unfit to receive instruction. That might be a very bad case, but in various centres in the northern
  144
  counties, medical examinations of the children had resulted in the finding of 50 per cent. of them being unfit to receive instruction. The most deplorable and melancholy fact about the whole subject was that while the child was still young and growing the mischief was done. If they could only ensure that at the time it was at school a child had its body well cared for, they could bring up a perfectly strong and healthy generation.
  The remedy was so simple and so easy that they had only to adopt it, and in the existing generation they would have on the whole a greatly improved standard of young men and young women growing up. A great many admitted that it would be a most admirable thing, but said that they must not interfere with the liberty of the parents in this matter. His point was that as the law stood at present, although the parents were bound to maintain their children, no attempt was made to protect the child against its parents. The only society which was at present interested in these matters was a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, a very excellent society in its way, but the existence of which was a reproach to the State, which ought to be the society to protect the children. No new right for the children was asked for; they had now the right to be maintained by their parents in the first instance, and failing that they ought to be maintained by the State. All he asked was that this right should be made more effective, and that the State should perform its duties to the children as against the parents. When the children were under the control of the educational authorities, there was no difficulty in bringing pressure to bear on parents.
  Upon the question of food the evidence before the Committee was that all the causes operating to produce degeneration in children paled before the one great cause of insufficient and improper food, and that it was of no use to remove other causes if this was not removed. There was no difficulty in ensuring that children attending school should be properly fed. It was not suggested that all the children in the country should be fed, but only those whose parents, after pressure, had been found to be unable to provide properly for them. He did not

  145
  believe that the percentage of such parents was very large, because he observed that, as a fact, the Jews, the poorest community in this country, never sent a child to school underfed or improperly fed. The fact was, it was part of the Jewish religion to take care of the children. The Jewish mother suckled her child, and the Jewish father, instead of drinking his wages, would rather go without food himself than see his child do so. If the Jews could do that, he thought with a little pressure Christians could do the same. If parents could not feed their children, it seemed to him only reasonable that the local education authority should have the power to spend some of its money in feeding the children preparatory to teaching them, because it was the greatest cruelty to make a child pass through this training unless it was properly fed. That was the part upon which legislation was necessary. It was recommended by this Committee that power should be given to the local authority, if it saw fit, to spend some of its own money, some of the school funds in feeding those children who the local authority were satisfied could be fed in no other way. He thought it was a question of great importance to the community—quite as important a question as that of the adulteration of butter. He should have thought that the Government might have arrived at the conclusion that a short and simple Act giving this power to the, local authorities would be beneficial to the Empire. How could they carry on this great Empire, if they allowed causes of this kind which affected the physical condition of the people to continue to operate, and thus prevent their having soldiers and sailors fit to serve for the protection of the Empire? He hoped some step would be, taken this session to carry out the recommendations of the Committee, and put an end to this thing which was a scandal to the race.
  COLONEL PILKINGTONwas of opinion that the parents were not altogether to blame in this question of underfeeding. The defect was mainly noticeable in half-a-dozen centres of population. No doubt the majority of parents in the United Kingdom did feed their children properly, and
  146
  in the case of the minority who were either too selfish or from some other cause did not provide their children with proper nourishment before sending them to school, the remedy, he thought, might be found in giving the children food and charging their parents with the cost. Wherever the race was found to be deteriorating, it was certainly the clear duty of the Government to take steps to stop the evil.
  He congratulated the Government on their foreign policy, which had led to such friendly relations with the brave and plucky Japanese. It was a matter for congratulation that the foreign policy of the Government, in this respect at any rate, had been crowned with complete success; not that he liked to see a great nation humbled, but it was satisfactory that when attacked by an overwhelming and aggressive force our plucky ally had come out successful. Amongst the other matters referred to in the gracious Speech from the Throne he would like to point to the position in which we stood with regard to France. France was our nearest neighbour and he wished that in addition she were our warmest friend. It was difficult to see why she should not be. With so much in common, with institutions resembling each other so much, he looked forward to seeing the two countries bound together in bonds of closest unity.
  He congratulated the Government on having at last recognised that the present arrangement of electoral areas required attention, and he trusted there would be such a Redistribution of Seats Bill as would deal justly with each part of the United Kingdom. It was not fair that in one district one man should represent 40,000 voters and that in another part of the kingdom another man should represent only 2,000. He trusted the Government would find time to deal effectually with this question. He rejoiced to find that the Aliens Bill was again to come before the House. It was of vital importance for the welfare of this country to exclude the inefficient, the immoral, and the diseased foreigner. This Bill, he trusted, would be dealt with in the House and not sent to a Grand Committee, where there was no machinery for dealing with obstruction. It was

  147
  gratifying to see that it was proposed to extend the benefits conferred by the Workmen's Compensation Act. The Bill of 1896, introduced by Mr. Chamberlain, had proved an excellent measure. Its provisions, however, were confined to certain trades, and he hoped to see these extended. The proposal to establish a Ministry of Commerce met with his warmest support. It was one of the best ideas brought forward for a long time. Whatever was said about the fiscal policy, one thing was clear, viz., the necessity for watching over our industries in foreign countries. The Prime Minister was to be congratulated on the measure he had indicated his intention of introducing, and he (the speaker) trusted there would be no obstruction. If all would put their shoulders to the wheel and try to carry through the programme placed before them he believed the country would be the better and the happier in the end.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: said that, judging from the King's Speech, a younger, a more hopeful, and a more enthusiastic Government had never existed in this country. The session had been shortened by a fortnight, and, in view of the multifarious character of the work the House were expected to do and the number of Bills it was hoped they would pass, either the Government must be very full of hope as to the work to be done, or peradventure were looking forward to a dissolution and desired to place the country in possession of their programme for the future. His hon. friend who had just spoken had referred with delight to the prospect of a Redistribution Bill. But no such thing was promised in the Speech, nor did he believe there was the slightest prospect of such a measure being introduced this session—first of all, because the Government must be well aware of the difficulties of passing it, and, secondly, because there had been none of the precedent inquiries necessary. As one of the certain victims of any scheme which had been suggested, he would have to raise his voice in kindly but strenuous criticism, and perhaps less kindly and more strenuous opposition would come from the Nationalist Benches. If the proposal survived the opposition of the
  148
  representatives of those small constituencies which in former times had sent most illustrious Members to this House, it would be fortunate indeed. The Government, doubtless, intended to propose certain Resolutions, not to introduce a Bill; those Resolutions would have to-receive the most kindly and candid consideration, and he hoped they would get nothing more.
  The inevitable allusion to the war between Russia and Japan prompted him to say that of the many lessons taught by the war—such as that the use of the sword and the bayonet was not at an end, that troops might still carry their colours into battle with advantage, and so forth—the greatest was that to-day, as of old, the sea was mistress of the land. It was to the acquisition and the retention of seapower the success of Japan was due; it was because Russia had lost the sea, although she retained the power of transport by land, that the course of the war had been such as it had, and, as he believed, would be to the end. He recognised that the Government had "been careful to observe in the strictest manner the obligations incumbent upon a neutral Power," but many of His Majesty's subjects, disregarding the strict injunction of His Majesty's Proclamation, had entered upon a trade in contraband of war which was the less creditable to this country, because engaged in for the advantage of the country not allied to our own. In August last he referred to the shocking and flagrant case of outrage on the British flag—the sinking of the "Knight Commander," without examination or trial, upon the mere fiat of the commander of the cruiser that stopped her, on July 24th. Cases long subsequent to that had been tried and decided in the Prize Courts, but of the case of the "Knight Commander" nothing had yet been heard. The Government undertook that proper reparation should be immediately demanded, and there was no matter more urgently demanding explanation. As to the North Sea incident, although at first very doubtful as to the effectual nature of the representations made by the country, he in the end was convinced and still believed that the arrangement arrived at by Lord Lansdwne was

  149
  a sufficient and proper one, that the tribunal to which the matter was referred was an admirable one for the purpose, and that we could await with confidence its decision to do justice between the parties.
  With regard to Tibet, a certain disagreement had arisen. The Government had sought to abide by their undertaking that there was no idea of appointing a permanent Resident or annexing any territory, but Colonel Younghusband had departed from it, and had been censured for that. He still feared that it would be found impossible to continue a policy of abstention after warlike acts.
  His belief was that when they went into a country like Tibet and destroyed the moral authority, the physical power of the Government of that country, and in fact the Government itself, they incurred a responsibility which in the end would force them to take further steps, and eventually to send a Resident and occupy territory. He did not wonder that a disagreement had arisen between the Secretary of State for India and, not Colonel Younghusband, but Lord Curzon. Lord Curzon was a very ambitious Viceroy, who, when he saw all the world annexing territory, said—"I will go one better; I will annex not territory, but the incarnate Buddha; I will have a divinity in my service. That is what I will do for my country." There was no doubt that it was with Lord Curzon's knowledge and acquiescence that this "defiance" of the authority of the Home Government by Colonel Younghusband had been carried on, and the attempt made to force down their throats a treaty, convention, or arrangement known to be contrary to their policy; and he thought that the hard words "defiance," "disobedience," and "disregard of authority," might more properly have been applied to the Viceroy than to the able and gallant officer who conducted the expedition.
  According to the Speech, the Estimates had been framed "with the utmost economy which the circumstances of the present time admit." If that was so it would mean a saving of many millions. The finances of the country had got into such a state that if the expenditure went
  150
  on during the next ten years at the same rate as during the last we should be face to face with national bankruptcy. He had put down an Amendment dealing with this matter, and no one would be more pleased than he if assurances were forthcoming that an entire change of our financial system was to be entered upon, and some better provision made for our monstrous Debt, funded and unfunded.
  One paragraph in the Speech troubled him much. The improvement of the status of a public department simply meant an increase in the Estimates for that department—an increase in the Minister's salary and an increase of expense. A brand new Minister of Commerce was also promised—he supposed with a seat in the Cabinet. One objection to that proposal would be that it would increase the already too large Cabinet. But what in the name of wonder was a Minister of Commerce going to do for commerce? Commerce had flourished in the past not because of Ministers, but in spite of them. The shipping trade had managed to drag out its existence, not because of the action of the President of the Board of Trade, but because that Minister sometimes forgot there was a shipping trade. There was nothing a Minister of Commerce could do for commerce that commerce could not do better for itself.
  There were two matters not mentioned in the Speech in which his constituents took a great interest. One was the Undersized Fish Bill. He hoped its omission meant that the Government had given that subject up. The other matter was the question of whether we were to go on with free trade or to have imposed upon us a system of protection whereby £21,000,000 of extra Customs duties was to be levied, £6,000,000 remitted, and the remainder left as a charge, which it was fondly believed would fall on the foreigner. Personally, he thought the position had been considerably cleared. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham could see no difference in principle between the Prime Minister and himself. But there was all this difference in principle, that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham was for protection, while

  151
  the Prime Minister was against it. There had been too much ambiguity and uncertainty too long over this matter, but the Prime Minister's declaration at Edinburgh was plain and unambiguous that he was against protection and that he would never be the leader of a Party bound to protection. He (the hon. Member) congratulated himself upon that, because certainly if the Prime Minister were to become the leader of a Party by which protection was countenanced he (the hon. Member) would not have the advantage of being among his followers. But he took note of the Prime Minister's declaration and accepted it, as all were bound, to do. He would not now argue the merits of the questions but he would read a most interesting account of a personal experience—not an expression of opinion—related by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham. In November, 1885, the right hon. Gentleman said—
  "I will tell you something that I do not think I ever have told in public before—a very curious incident in my commercial experience. The Americans had a duty of about 100 per cent. upon screws to protect that poor industry, to keep it in the country for the benefit of the working classes. In spite of the duty of 100 per cent. we were able to send screws there, and we did send very large quantities. What happened? The American manufacturers came over here and they said, 'We are making 100 per cent. upon our capital. If you continue to send screws to America we should, of course, be obliged to reduce our prices. That will shut you out, but will reduce our profits. That will not be good for either of us. Now let us make a bargain. We will pay you so much a year to sit still and not send a screw to America.' Well, they did it, and my firm received a handsome income for years. From the American manufacturers, protected as they were by the folly and stupidity of this protectionist legislation, we received a very considerable income to sit still with folded hands and send no screws to America. But after a little while these American manufacturers went to Congress, and they said, 'Here is a native manufacture deserving protection, employing a lot of the working people, in danger of being ruined by competition from abroad. You must raise the duties.' And they did raise the duties to about 120 or 150 per cent., and then, of course, our income ceased and we Were shut out. But now I want you to see who are the losers in this thing. Not the American manufacturers, who were able to make 100 per cent. upon their capital and to pay a handsome subsidy, and not the foreign manufacturers who received the handsome subsidy. The only people who suffered were the working classes of the United States,
  152
  who had to pay more for every screw that they used, and every manufacture in which they were engaged. Hampered and trammelled by the additional cost that was put upon their materials, they, and they alone, bore the burden of this tax upon their industry and their labour. Well, if other people chose to cut off their tails, are you going to be so foolish? I tell you that any proposal to tax commerce [I think that word should be "corn"] is a proposal to put rent in the pockets of landlords, and any proposal to tax manufactures is a proposal to put profits in the pockets of particularly-favoured manufacturers. I do not think that you will be led away by these absurdities."
  The House would observe that that was not a question of individual opinion but a statement of fact in regard to certain things that occurred, and certain inevitable inferences to be drawn from them. Whatever the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman might be, unless he could explain away this story of the screws, it would remain as an object-lesson of the utmost importance in this question which was now before the country. Meantime, to this new religion of preference and protection and of duties which no one was to pay unless it was the foreigner, certain sacrifices were to be offered up. He was one of them. The noble Lord the Member for Greenwich was another, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University was a third. If they were sacrificed, no doubt others would be found, far more competent, to take their places, and do that work which they had tried to do. Yes, Sir, but they were not going without a struggle. Whatever might be the temptation to accept other seats, they could not abandon the people in their constituencies who had stood true to them. It would not be honourable to do so, and they did not mean to do so. They would not die without a struggle, and he was not quite sure that, as time went on, and the dissolution came about, their prospects might not change and the probabilities entirely alter. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham knew that his plan was rejected, not only by the people, but by the First Lord of the Treasury, in the most explicit terms, and it was because the First Lord had rejected it that he should continue to give his right hon. friend that support which he had hitherto given to him.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I was not able to hear the whole of my hon. friend's speech. Had I done so, no doubt I should have seen that he was gradually leading up to that promise of support with which he concluded his observations. The few phrases I heard before that did not seem to me to be enthusiastically in favour of the present Government, but I daresay—
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: You are wrong.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I agree that it is not fair to judge a speech from a few sentences, and I abstain from inferential criticism. I content myself with thanking him for the promise of support, his accustomed support, which I gratefully receive. I am sorry that, through exigencies of time, which the House fully understands, I was not able to rise immediately after the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition and do my best to reply to the very numerous questions he put to me in his speech, but I do not know that any serious inconvenience has occurred to the right hon. Gentleman or the House through my observations being delayed. I am sorry I was not able, as it were, to give at once that meed of applause to the two speeches of my hon. friends who moved and seconded the Address, and that I am reduced to paying them a somewhat belated, but most well-deserved, compliment on the admirable manner in which they fulfilled their responsible duties. And, Sir, before I come to the necessarily controversial portions of my speech I should like to associate myself with the right hon. Gentleman in expressing on behalf of my hon. friends on this side of the House as well as on my own our regret on account of the departure from among us of one of the greatest Parliamentary figures that we have known in our experience. This is not the time to attempt any appreciation of the great Parliamentary abilities of Sir William Harcourt; but this I may say, with the assurance that it will receive the sympathetic support of every man in every quarter of the House, he was a vigorous controversialist; but in the utmost height of Party controversy, when feeling was running strongly, when he himself perhaps was taking, as was his
  154
  wont, a leading place in the fighting line, he never allowed Party differences to mar the perfection of personal friendship, and no dialectical display, no strength of Party attack, made him forget for one moment that native, and ineradicable kindliness which characterised the man. I am proud to say that he honoured me with his friendship for many years, and never was that friendship clouded even when our political differences were in their most acute stage. My experience is the experience of many men in this House; and the result is that I believe he is as much regretted by Gentlemen who sit upon this side of the House, and who throughout their whole political lives have differed from him in matters of public policy as he can be by those with whom he was politically associated.
  Mr. Speaker, a very large number of questions were put to me by the right hon. Gentleman relating to many subjects, and touching upon many different parts of the world. He asked me about Tibet, and he seemed to indicate that in his view the Government at home should have passed a vote of censure upon the Government of India. I see no ground for that suggestion. The Government of India recognised, as I am sure they always will recognise, that the Government at home in these matters must be supreme, and they never for one instant departed from a correct attitude in regard to the policy to be pursued. On that, I think, I need say no more. With regard to Afghanistan, negotiations are now proceeding with the Ameer, and we hope that they will have a successful termination. The right hon. Gentleman indicated that in his view the Government were pursuing a provocative policy or something in the nature of a provocative policy in regard to Afghanistan. If that is, or was, his view, I can assure him that he is profoundly mistaken. It is a cardinal element, in my judgment, in any sound policy for the Indian Government that they should be on good terms with their neighbour on the North-West Frontier. That neighbour lies between them and a more powerful military empire. The friendship of the Ameer may do much for us; we can do still more for the Ameer. There is every motive, therefore, for a friendly relation

  155
  between the two countries; and that friendly relation it is the earnest desire of His Majesty's Government to maintain and, if possible, to increase.
  Hurrying hastily through the list of points the right hon. Gentleman made I find that he asked me a great many questions about South Africa. He asked me, to begin with, why we had delayed giving constitutional government to the Orange Free State while we were giving representative, not responsible, government to the Transvaal. Well, I will venture to point out that it is a case of one thing at a time. It is no small matter to frame a new Constitution, a wholly new Constitution, for a new colony. The task has weighted—I had almost said over-weighted—the capacities of Lord Milner and his assistants; and it is premature, I think, even to suggest that we should deal with the Orange Free State until we have dealt thoroughly and satisfactorily with the more important and higher problem presented by the Transvaal. Then, Sir, the right hon. Gentleman asked me whether there would be an opportunity of discussing the Constitution which it is proposed to give to the Transvaal before any final step is taken. I do not intend to give any final answer on that point at present. My right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary informs me that, so far as he knows, there is no precedent for such a course; and in these circumstances I certainly should not bind myself by any premature and unnecessary pledge. Then the right hon. Gentleman asked whether any limit had been placed to the number of Chinese employed in indentured labour. No, Sir, no limit has been placed upon it; but the experiment of using Chinese labour is being most carefully watched by the responsible authorities on the spot, and if it should be found that the immigration of these labourers from any point of view was on the whole producing a balance of ill, the right hon. Gentleman may rest assured that we without hesitation should prevent any augmentation of their numbers. I may say—it is an interesting point—that the introduction of Chinese labour so far has been accompanied not only by an increase of white labour in the mines but by an increase of Kaffir labour.
  SIR JOHN BRUNNER: Will the right hon. Gentleman say "in the mines?"
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: In the industries connected with the mines. The right hon. Gentleman further asked me whether we had heard any reports that the introduction of these Chinese labourers had produced any effects on the morality of the colony, or had indeed been associated with any manifestations of immorality. No such reports have reached us at all. He then asked me whether this was a permanent arrangement. Certainly I am not going to place a limit of time beyond which Chinese labourers should not be allowed to enter the country. But representative government is about to be given to the colony, and they will be able to give us most valuable advice upon the continuing need of these immigrant labourers. Then the right hon. Gentleman asked me whether the claims for compensation had been adequately dealt with. I am given to understand that the Commission which is dealing with these claims has nearly reached the term of its labours; but more precise information, I am sorry to say, I am not in a position to give him.
  Then the right hon. Gentleman asked me one or two questions about the Sugar Convention. He asked me whether sugar from San Domingo is prohibited from entering the United Kingdom. It is not prohibited, because San Domingo has ceased to give a bounty. The second question he asked me was whether Russia had asked to be relieved from the penalty attaching to bounties under the Convention, and, if so, has this country supported that application. No application, so far as we know, has been made by Russia during the course of the last year, and there is no doubt whatever, according to our information, that Russia does give a bounty upon the export of sugar. I think the right hon. Gentlemen asked me about Brazil and some other countries. We have appealed against the decision because we do not think that these countries give too big a bounty. At any rate, we do not think it has been proved, and it ought to be clearly proved before

  157
  the sugar from those sources is prohibited in this country. These are the questions which the right hon. Gentleman asked me in the course of his speech.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I should like to have an answer to the first question I asked the right hon. Gentleman—namely, why have we met so late?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I remember the question, but I was not aware that the right hon. Gentleman attached importance to it. There is nothing abnormal in the date on which we have met. There are plenty of precedents for a date of this kind. If a vote were taken by ballot as to whether we should meet on the 14th or the 7th or the 1st of February, I believe that the majority in favour of meeting on the 14th would be overwhelming, and I further believe that, if the secrecy of the ballot could have been broken, it would have been found that the right hon. Gentleman voted in the majority. As the right hon. Gentleman truly observed, the question which he has so good-naturedly interjected is not precisely germane to sugar. Let me go back to the Sugar Convention. It is a question which I think hon. Gentlemen opposite dwell upon with great pleasure. They think that this is a matter in which, to use the vulgar phrase, they have got the Government into a hole.
  AN HON. MEMBER: The Government have got themselves into a hole.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think that is a more accurate way to put it. They think the Government, by endeavouring to abolish bounties, have got themselves into a hole; and they rejoice in seeing their opponents in that agreeable position. I take an entirely different view of the Convention, and if I wanted to show the absolute incompetence of hon. Gentlemen opposite to deal with an economic question, I should select the treatment of this question by the right hon. Gentleman and his friends, because I do not on this occasion dissociate them. The right hon. Gentleman evidently thinks that a policy intended to abolish foreign bounties for
  158
  imports into this country is contrary to sound national policy and sound political economy. I venture to say he has against him every authority worth considering, past and present, whether they be politicians or whether they be economists, whether they be men looking at this problem with the Impartiality of science; or men looking at it as a practical problem. Hon. Gentlemen opposite have against them the whole body of authority, and they have against them the authority of the right hon. Gentleman himself. I remember that the right hon. Gentleman made a speech in this House in which he told us that bounties were as bad as protective duties.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: To the country in which they are applied.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That is not the view of the right hon. Gentleman. He said—
  "These bounties appear to me to be bad; to dislocate trade, and so forth; above all, to punish the very nations who employ them."
  The nations who suffer most, of course, are the nations who impose the bounties. But they are not the only sufferers, and they are not the only sufferers according to the right hon. Gentleman, and according to every economist who knows his trade.
  MR. LOUGH: The right hon. Gentleman did not deny that foreign bounties had the effect of cheapening sugar here.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Who ever denied it? But is the hon. Gentleman so ignorant both of what great men in whom he believes, like Mr. Gladstone, have said upon this subject, and of the elementary economic aspects of the case, as not to know that the temporary benefit which the consumer may derive from the bounties is held by favour of the country which gives them, and that the bounty has the effect of restricting the area of production? Is it not in the power of nations who have put on bounties to take them off, in which case the British consumer loses all the benefit he derived from the bounty and all the benefit he might have derived from the

  159
  increased area of production which would have existed if the bounty had not been imposed? I do not know, individually, that I rate the economic authority of Lord Farrer very high. He was, however, an able man, and he said what I have told you we all agree with, that these bounties are a shameful thing, and that they ought to be abolished, even though they raise the price of sugar I do not know that I should say that if the rise in the price of sugar was to be a permanent rise, I would not allow other nations to give us sugar permanently cheaper. But the argument turns on the word permanently. It is surely the poorest, kind of statesmanship which looks at the price of sugar in a given month or two months or three months, and does not look at the total production of the commodity, throughout the world, and does not encourage free trade in that commodity for the benefit of the consumers in this country; and those Gentlemen opposite—who are ready to encourage what the right hon. Gentleman describes as a fiscal expedient as bad as protection, who are anxious to see this kind of expedient adopted by foreign countries so that we may obtain for a few months or years benefit from it—call themselves free-traders! They do not know what free trade is. There is not an economist, from Adam Smith downwards, who would not repudiate with contempt and indignation, the doctrines I have heard put forth and cheered to-night from that side of the House.
  Now I come to what is perhaps an even more important subject than the attack upon the Sugar Convention. It is more important because it touches upon what is or is not the sound constitutional practice of this country. The right hon. Gentleman has repeated in this House the accusations which he and his friends have gone about the country repeating almost ad nauseam through the whole recess. And what is the nature of the charge they make against us in respect of constitutional usage? It comes under three heads. In the first place, the right hon. Gentleman says that this Government is so feeble and discredited that it cannot carry out any effective policy. But how is that to be reconciled with the other
  160
  charges made against us—that we are always carrying out very effectively measures to which the strongest objection is taken by the other side? I quite agree that a Government which exists only by the sufferance of an Opposition, which dare not produce a measure which the Opposition does not approve of down to the last comma, can hardly be called a Party Government at all; and certainly I should never consent to be a member of a Government who depended, not upon the loyal support of their friends, but upon the grudging and contemptuous, assistance occasionally tossed to them by their opponents. But that is not the condition of this Government at present. It certainly was not its condition last session, in which, according to another portion of the diatribes of the hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite, we were constantly and tyrannically trampling upon the Opposition. That may show great wickedness, but it does not show great weakness. I therefore venture respectfully to submit that the charge of feebleness—immorality if you like—may be dismissed for the present. Then the second charge against us is that we are carrying on the Government while tin by-elections are going against us. I believe the by-elections have been going against us, and there is not the least doubt that we are carrying on the Government; so that the two propositions are quite accurate. But the question is, Are we in so carrying on the Government violating either the spirit or the letter or the practice of the Constitution? I do not think anybody who has considered the question can doubt what the answer should be. I will not discuss the Conservative Administrations. I will take my illustration from Radical Administrations. When Mr. Gladstone came into office in 1869 he disestablished a Church, he passed an Education Bill, he revolutionised the Army, and he did other things. I am not for the moment criticising or complaining of any of these measures. But in the years during which he performed these legislative and administrative feats he lost on the balance of elections no less than twenty-four seats. We have lost sixteen. Did Mr. Gladstone resign because he was losing by-elections? He

  161
  not only did not resign because he was losing by-elections, but he said that would be a most improper reason for resigning. We will skip over the next Tory Administration and go to Mr. Gladstone's next Government. [An HON. MEMBER: All wrong.] Well, I admit I have not checked these figures myself but I have no doubt that they are correct. But I go on to Mr. Gladstone's Government of 1880, which came to an end in 1885.
  MR. JOHN MORLEY: I only wish to be allowed to say that the loss of by-elections was given to the Queen as a reason for advising dissolution.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think that gets over the letter Mr. Gladstone wrote to Lord Granville, in which he said it was not a sufficient reason, and that it would be a bad precedent for a Government to go out simply because by-elections had gone against it without considering other motives. Now I come to Mr. Gladstone's Government of 1880, the last considerable stretch of power he enjoyed. That Government passed a Coercion Act, a Land Act, made the Kilmainham treaty, bombarded Alexandria, abandoned Gordon ["Oh, oh!"]—I am not attacking Mr. Gladstone. After all, why should I? I am narrating incidents which made that Government, for good or for evil—we need not quarrel over which it is—very remarkable in the history of the country. In the course of the tenure of office by that Government Mr. Gladstone lost on the balance nineteen seats at by-elections, and we have lost, as I have said, only sixteen. [An HON. MEMBER: But how many have come over?] Of course hon. Members may have changed their opinions though constituents have not. Some Gentlemen who have sat on this side now sit on that, and in Mr. Gladstone's time there were times when similar events, regrettable or not, occurred. But that is totally irrelevant to the constitutional question, Is a Government at liberty to go on while the balance of by-elections is against it? I say all precedent, all law, all common sense shows that it is for the House of Commons, and for the
  162
  House of Commons alone, to determine, whether a Government shall receive that measure of support which will enable it to carry out the duties entrusted to it by the Sovereign and expected from it by the country.
  There is one further argument which has been used. We have been told we have no mandate; and by a mandate I understand is meant that some kind of bargain was made by the then Government that they would do nothing in the way of legislation—["Cries of No, no"]—then what is meant by it?—nothing in the way of legislation—and that they would only finish the war in South Africa, and as far as they could carry out a settlement there. We have been told that we went to the country on a single issue, and that we have no right to go beyond it. [An HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!]. That is exactly what I say. Now really this argument transcends both common sense and history. In the first place, the election was in 1900, and I do not believe that you will find an instance of that argument being used until hon. Gentlemen came to express their dislike of the Education Act of 1902, and then they furbished up this strange weapon of political warfare. I have already said on another occasion that if this apocryphal bargain ever had been made between the Government and the country in 1900, the time to call attention to it was when, after the Speech from the Throne, business began; but, as I have already pointed out, the chief or only complaint was not that the legislative programme was too full, but that it was too meagre. Then I come to 1902, and refer to the right hon. Gentleman's speech in the discussion on the Address. He said of the Education Bill that it would lead to a great deal of controversy, but there was not a word about its being ultra vires, not a suggestion that we had no right to bring it forward. That you cannot bring forward an Education Bill without a great deal of controversy is quite true; but there is a total absence of any thought of this argument, which was not invented until some months later. But that is not all. The National Liberal Federation passed a resolution at the end of 1901, or early in 1902, complaining of the abortive Education Bill

  163
  of 1901, and saying there ought to be a big Bill passed. Really it is absurd in the face of facts like these to try to make out that there was a pledge between the Government and the constituencies. What did the right hon. Gentleman say in his election address? He said the question now before the electors in this Kingdom is not the narrow question which concerns the war, or the South African question; it is the question of the spirit in which the legislative affairs of the country should be carried on.
  SIR, H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The important thing there is not what I said, but what you said.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not wish to say who is the more important person. At all events, the right hon. Gentleman's words are worthy of some consideration—even he will admit that. I cannot hope that this absurd constitutional mare's-nest has been completely destroyed; no doubt it will appear in Liberal leaflets and Radical placards all over the country; but I think that any man who knows the constitutional history of the country for the last thirty or forty years will see that no more hollow pretence was ever made than this, that for the sake of the emoluments of office we are violating constitutional precedent and practice.
  Then I come to what I suppose the right hon. Gentleman thought the main portion of his speech, that which dealt with the fiscal controversy. He fell foul of my two hon. friends the mover and the seconder of the Address because they did not anticipate his bad example, and drag quite irrelevantly into a debate on the King's Speech of 1905 what can, as a practical matter, only concern
  Parliaments to which that Speech is not addressed. If they had gone outside the four corners of the King's Speech and if they had anticipated the example of the right hon. Gentleman, and plunged into this subject, in my opinion they would have transgressed the practice and precedent of the House, and would have gone very far beyond what I think is relevant to our debates. I have protested more than once against this practice of dragging the fiscal question
  164
  into the discussions of a Parliament which is not going to deal with it, because quite obviously it is as utterly irrelevant as a debate, let us say, on Home Rule. Indeed, it is more irrelevant and for this reason. The right hon. Gentleman tells us, indeed it is the whole basis of his speech, that we do not in any sense represent the country, and that when the election comes he and his friends will come into office. Therefore, if we are to discuss any policy which is not to be dealt with by this Parliament, the policy we ought to discuss is not our policy but his policy. And while the right hon. Gentleman professed himself very much befogged as to what is our policy on the fiscal question, I truly and sincerely from my heart and conscience assure him he cannot be nearly so befogged as I am as to what policy of Home Rule is held by hon. Gentlemen opposite. I do not in the least know how that argument is to be answered. Perhaps the right hon. Member for East Fife will give me an answer. Why is it more relevant to the debate on the King's Speech in 1905 to discuss differences or supposed differences on the fiscal question on this side of the House than on the same Speech and at the same time to discuss Home Rule and the differences, real or supposed, that prevail among hon. Gentlemen opposite? There is absolutely no distinction of theory or practice between the two, and if one may be discussed so may the other. However, I propose to say a few words in answer to the right hon. Gentleman's observations on this question, though I think it necessary to put in this caveat as to their relevancy. They are not relevant, but I will deal with them. The right hon. Gentleman, I notice, does not say that he is unable to understand the policy which I have recommended to the country. He leaves that depth of ignorance to be professed by the right hon. Member for Montrose, whom I have never been able to enlighten, great as have been the efforts which I have devoted to the task. The Leader of the Opposition does understand, but he says my policy is a policy of aspirations. That is a very old criticism. Every policy is, I presume, a policy of aspirations until it is carried into effect. His policy as regards Home Rule is a policy

  165
  of aspirations. He does not agree with the Member for Fife that Home Rule is an academic question. He thinks it a vital and important question. Yes, but it is a question of aspirations, the aspirations, in fact, of the Irish Party and those whom they represent. What criticism of a policy is it to say that it is a policy of aspirations?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I never said so.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Excuse me. The right hon. Gentleman may not have intended to say so, but I can assure him that he did say so. It is the only thing in the nature of criticism of my policy that I can find in his speech.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will allow me to repeat the question, which I call a plain question, that I asked. Is it according to his idea of what is right that when an hon. Member or anyone else—when anyone who differs entirely from the principle of fiscal policy recommended by the Member for Birmingham comes to the right hon. Gentleman and imagines that he has found at his hands a policy of another kind altogether, does he think it right that he should allow him to understand that that is so, while practically and substantially the principle of his policy and that of the right hon. Member for Birmingham are identical?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I confess I should like to have that on half a sheet of notepaper. Can anything reasonably be asked of the Leader of a Party more than that he should, to the very best of his ability, explain, in the clearest language he can command, his own position? You may say that my language is obscure and that I indulge in metaphysics, but I do my best. Is it not extraordinarily inconsistent—when the gravamen of your charge against me is that I cannot explain my own position—to ask me to explain somebody else's? If my poor powers of expression are totally inadequate to the first task
  166
  how can you throw upon me the burden of the second? I really do not think that anybody, except the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose, has failed to understand what it is I recommended to the country. [OPPOSITION cries of "Oh, oh!"] At all events, having devoted much time to it, I am, from the lack of the necessary gifts, or the necessary education, or the necessary practice, incapable of putting it either more briefly, or clearly, or more precisely. I believe any man, with an impartial mind, can understand it without the smallest doubt.
  AN HON. MEMBER: What is it?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have given it you on half a sheet of notepaper. I cannot imagine any way of bringing it home to hon. and right hon. Gentlemen if the ways I have used are ineffective. If I had had time I would have put it in words of one syllable.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: "Yes" or "No" would do.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: "Yes" or "No" is not an answer to that question; and, failing that method, I entirely decline to attempt—although I admit it is my duty to explain my policy to the best of my ability, I do not admit that it is my business to explain anybody else's policy. Who are these gentleman who, in view of what is going to happen after the next election, are putting us through this course of cross-examination, and subjecting us to these inquiries? Why is the process not to be reversed? I have, at all events, honestly tried to explain my policy. Have you tried honestly to explain your policy? There was one happy period of about eight hours in which a rejoicing country thought they had the utterance of a Liberal Leader on this question. But the timid bathers withdrew their reluctant feet from the cold water and before the day was out there was a storm and flood of denial with regard to it from which we learned that that which everybody—including the right hon. Gentleman's best friends—had

  167
  blessed as an authoritative statement of Liberal policy was really no more than notes of undelivered speeches by a gentleman of position. If Lord Spencer's statements are repudiated as an authoritative statement of Liberal policy. [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] No? I thought they were—who was the man to whom it was addressed?—let somebody else with greater authority step into Lord Spencer's shoes and tell us what it is that the country, which they say is clamouring for their advent to power, wishes them to do. There are plenty of questions about which we are in doubt. You have not told us what you are going to do with the Education Act. You do not know, or at least you have not told us, what are your plans for dealing with the Licensing Act. I am sure you have made no plan as to what you mean to do in respect of Chinese labour. We have not the smallest conception whether you still think you ought to disestablish the Welsh Church which you tried to do before. You have not told us whether you still desire local veto, which you tried to pass. You have not told us whether you mean to pass Home Rule, with which you have wasted two Parliaments in trying to deal. This is a degree of ignorance which surely requires some illumination from some person, if there be such a person. I have put a few questions we should like answered. I believe half a sheet of note-paper would do it, properly applied. For my part, I entirely reject the idea that we stand here to be cross-examined as to what is to be done in the next Parliament, while hon. Gentlemen opposite are to sit there merely in the position of cross-examiners, and not in the position either of witnesses or criminals in the dock.
  168
  I have now, I think, adequately dealt with every part of the right hon. Gentleman's speech, except one, and that was, as I thought, a most unnecessary and gratuitous attack upon my hon. friend the Member for Hampshire. My hon. friend has not been very long in an official position, but he has been long enough to show how valuable his great abilities and industries are and can be, to this country; and why the right hon. Gentleman, who has plenty of people to attack on this side—there is always my right hon. friend the Member for Birmingham—should have singled out my hon. friend for this most ungenerous animadversion I am unable understand. As I came into the House a friend of mine gave me a quotation from the late Mr. Bright which seems to me to be absolutely relevant to this issue, and with which I shall conclude my observations to-night. It runs as follows. He is dealing with an Opposition anxious to get into office and of whom the Leaders made an attack on one of the junior members of the Government. Mr. Bright said—
  "If I were the hungriest of the hungry I would scorn to get into office over the prostrate body of the youngest member of the Administration."
  Motion made, and Question, "That the debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Asquith)—put, and agreed to.
  Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

  ADJOURNMENT.
  Adjourned at ten minutes after Eleven o'clock.