Commons Sitting of 18 July 1905

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

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (NO STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—Earl of Stamford's Cheshire Estate Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.
  Whitechapel and Bow Railway Bill. lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  Formby Township Bill [Lords]; Workington Harbour and Dock Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Thames Conservancy Bill. Ordered, That Standing Order 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time. —(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)
  Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed. [New Title.]
  Humber Conservancy Bill [Lords], Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Wigan Corporation Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Local Government Provisional Order (Poor Law) (No. 2) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
  Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [Lords]. Reported, with an Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
  Blackpool Improvement Bill [Lords]; Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill
  1042
  [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bristol Blind Asylum Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Corbett Estate Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  MESSAGE PROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 11) Bill, without Amendment.
  Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6) Bill; Metropolitan Electric Tram ways Bill; Dublin United Tramway Bill; London and North Western Railway Bill; Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Bill; Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill; Edgware; and Hampstead Railway Bill, with Amendments.
  Amendments to—Metropolitan and Great Central Railway Companies Bill [Lords]; Western Valleys (Monmouthshire) Water and Gas Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Edinburgh, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (BIBLE TEACHING IN STATE SCHOOLS).
  Petition from Long Crendon, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  GROSS DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURE.
  Return [presented 17th July] to be printed. [No. 243.]
  LAND LAW (IRELAND) ACT, 1887 (EVICTION NOTICES).
  Copy presented, of Return of Eviction Notices filed during the quarter ended 30th June, 1905 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 29th June; Captain Norton]; to lie upon the Table.
  JOINT STOCK COMPANIES (DUBLIN).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 14th March;Mr. Nannetti]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 244.]
  COMPANIES (WINDING UP).
  Copy presented, of Fourteenth General Annual Report by the Board of Trade [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 245.]
  TRADE REPORTS (MISCELLANEOUS SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Miscellaneous Series, No. 634 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos.; 3440 and 3441 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  CIVIL SERVANTS (RETIREMENT AT THE AGE OF SIXTY-FIVE).
  Copy ordered, "of Treasury Minute, dated the 17th day of July, 1905, stating the circumstances under which certain Civil Servants have been retained in the Service after they have attained the age of Sixty-five; and of the Return therein referred to."—-(Mr. Victor Cavendish.)
  CONGESTED DISTRICTS (SCOTLAND) (RATES).
  Return ordered, "showing the number of parishes within the Congested Districts in Scotland where the combined Rates amount to more than five shillings in the pound, the amount of the Rates in each ease, and also the increase during the last twenty yeais."—(Mr. John Dewar.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH.THE VOTES

  Sale of Obsolete Warships at Portsmouth —Names and Prices Realised.
  MR. J. H. LEWIS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can give the names of the warships sold at Portsmouth on the 11th instant, and the price realised in each case.
  (Answered by Mr. Prayman.) The names of the ships sold, and the prices realised, are as follows—

  £

  Orlando

  10,000

  Iris

  8,000

  The following were subsequently sold by private treaty:—

  £

  Hector

  8,000

  Beagle

  4,500

  Blonde

  3,750

  Post Office Staff.
  MR. CROOKS: To ask the Postmaster-General if he will state the total number of persons on the established staff of the Post Office, male and female; the total number of female staff, established; and the total number of persons, male and female established or unestablished, who are under the age of twenty-one years.
  (Answered, by Lori Stanley.) The total number of persons on the established staff of the Post Office on March 31st last was 84,113, of whom 11,579 were females. In order to give the information asked for in the second part of the hon. Member's Question, it would be necessary to have a Return prepared of the ages of all the staff of the Post Office. This would involve considerable expense which would perhaps scarcely be justified.

  Sheep Scab in Shropshire.
  Mr. BRIGHT: To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that the changes of policy with regard to sheep scab have caused loss and inconvenience to Oswestry; that the loss of trade has been estimated at 1,000 to 1,100 sheep per week, and that it has been proposed to remove the sheep market from Oswestry to Llanrhaiadr; and whether he

  1045
  will take steps to remedy this state of things.
  (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) I have received representations on this subject from the town council of Oswestry, and have been in communication respecting it with the county council of Salop, who are the local authority under the Diseases of Animals Acts. The district from which Oswestry mainly draws its supplies is undoubtedly a dangerous one from the point of view of sheep scab, and the county council consider that under existing conditions the holding of markets there for any undipped sheep brought from that district would be attended with considerable risk of the introduction and spreading of the disease. The arrangements made at the market were, moreover, not altogether of a satisfactory character. In these circumstances the county council have withdrawn the licence issued by them under the Sheep Scab (Regulation of Movement) Order, 1905, and I regret that I do not see my way to interfere with the discretion of the local authority in this respect.

  Bovine Tuberculosis.
  MR. MORRELL: To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the Royal Commission on Tuberculosis has or will shortly report on the effect produced or disease set up by introducing into the body of the bovine animal material containing living tubercla bacilli of human and bovine origin respectively through the alimentary canal as distinct from, effect when introduced by subcutaneous injection, and will urge an early Report on the third clause of the reference, viz., under what conditions, if at all, the transmission of the disease from animals to man takes place, and what are the circumstances favourable or unfavourable to such transmission as affecting food for man.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) As I stated in my reply to the hon. Member for the Eastern Division of Northants on the 9th May † last, I understand that the Royal Commission hope to issue a further Interim Report towards the end of the present year. I am informed that this
  See (4) Debates, exlv., 1342.
  1046
  Report will contain details of the different results obtained by various methods of infecting bovine and other animals with tubercle derived from different sources, but I understand that some considerable time must elapse before the Commission can issue a Report dealing with the third clause of the reference to them.

  Diphtheria Outbreak at Norwood Poor Law Schools.
  SIR WALTER FOSTER: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if, in view of the outbreak of diphtheria at the Norwood Poor Law Schools which has extended to sixty-one children, notwithstanding the care and skill taken for its prevention, he will consider the advisability of breaking up this aggregation of 500 children, in accordance with the recommendations of the Departmental Committee's Report of 1897.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) It appears to be doubtful whether there can properly be said to have been an outbreak of diphtheria at these schools in the sense in which that expression is ordinarily understood. I am informed that only three of the cases presented the ordinary clinical symptoms of tin disease, and that in the renaming cases there had been no disturbance of the children's health, although the bacillus of diphtheria or some other bacillus resembling it had been discovered by bacteriological methods. It does not seem to be necessary to consider the advisability of breaking up the school.

  Law of Treasure Trove in Wales.
  MR. GEORGE KENYON: To ask Mr. Attorney General if his attention has been called to the verdict of the coroner's jury at Carnarvon on the subject of treasure trove; and whether, with a view to making clear the laws affecting treasure trove in the Principality, he will take the necessary steps to enable the police and others to circulate clearer information on the subject in Welsa and English.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) My attention has been called to the verdict of the coroner's jury on an inquiry as to the finding of certain coins at Carnarvon. Circulars were issued in 1886 by the Home Office, on the subject

  1047
  of treasure trove. The question whether any fresh, circular shall be issued will receive the consideration of the Treasury.

  Promotion of Assistant Clerks in the Statistical Office, Custom House.
  MR. JOSEPH HOWARD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury to what positions assistant clerks in the statistical office, Custom House, can be promoted, in view of the fact that the Treasury letter of July 2nd, 1904, stated that the Lords of the Treasury strongly urged that ensuing vacancies for junior clerkships be filled from outside sources.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) I would refer my hon. friend to the reply I gave on March 15th † last to the hon. Member for Galway South, in which I stated that assistant clerks in the Customs are eligible for occasional promotion, on the ground of exceptional merit, to the classes of—(1) Port clerks; (2) Junior clerks in the statistical office.

  British Consulate at Algiers.
  Ma. RUNCIMAN: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs during what hours is the British Consulate at Algiers open for the transaction of ordinary business connected with British shipping, without the payment of any fees beyond those officially tabulated; what extra fees for overtime are charged for business transacted daring non-official hours in connection with British shipping; to what accounts are the ordinary and the extra fees respectively credited; what is the usual custom regarding the issue of bills of health to British steamers; and is it permissible to supply these in blank to shipbrokers to fill up at their discretion.
  (Answered by Earl Percy.) His Majesty's Consul-General at Algiers will be instructed to report what the business hours of the Consulate-General are, and also what is the usual custom regarding the issue of bills of health to British steamers. For the transaction of any business for which a fee is leviable, for each half-hour in the day time, that is to say, between the hours of 6 a.m. and 9 p.m., not during the customary business hours of the place, a fee of 5s. is charged, of which the Consul retains one-half; for
  †See (Debates, cxliii., 9.
  1048
  each half-hour at night, that is to say, between the hours of 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. a fee of 10s. is charged, of which the Consul retains four-fifths. Ordinary fees are credited to His Majesty's Government, as are also the remaining portions of the extra fees.

  Export Bounties on Steel, Iron, and Coal from Rhenish Westphalian Mines.
  SIR THOMAS WRIGHTSON: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the circular issued by the Dortmund Clearing House intimating that it is authorised by the Coal Syndicate, the Dusseldorf and Siegerland Pig Iron Syndicates, and the Steel Syndicate, to grant bounties on iron and steel manufactures for the export market on the following basis for the second quarter: 1s. 6d. per ton on coal or coke, 4s. l0d. per ton on pig-iron. 15s. per ton on semi-finished basic steel, and 20s. per ton on shapes; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Bonar Law.) I am aware that in March last the Clearing House of the Rhenish Westphalian Coal Syndicate and the Pig Iron and Steel Syndicates fixed the amounts of the export bounties to be paid to syndicated firms during the second quarter of the year approximately at the amounts stated in the Question. The system under which the Kartell bounties are granted is not new, and is described in Cd. 1761, of 1903, and Cd. 2337, of 1904. No action in the matter is proposed.

  Monthly Circulation of Return of Passengers for Places out of Europe.
  MR. LEVY (Leicestershire,): To ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he will circulate monthly, together with the Alien Immigration Monthly Return, the new Return of the number and nationalities of the passengers that leave the United Kingdom for places out of Europe; and whether he will include this new Return in the Board of Trade Labour Gazette.
  (Answered by Mr. Bonar Law.) The new Return referred to has already been presented to the House, and the first number has been circulated. Future numbers will be circulated in due course, about the same time as the Alien Immigration

  1049
  Return. A summary of the information given in the Return is already published monthly in the Board of Trade Labour Gazette. (See page 221 of the July number.)

  Revenue Derived in the United Kingdom from Taxation of Food and Drink.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer

  Year ended 31st March.

  Population of the United Kingdom.

  Revenue derived from Duties on Articles of Food and Drink, excluding Spirits, Beer, Tea, and Wine.

  Revenue I per head of Population.

  Customs.

  Excise.

  Total.

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  1886

  36,015,601

  839,182

  2,537

  841,719

  5·6

  1887

  36,313,582

  858,392

  2,061

  860,453

  5·6

  1888

  36,599,143

  882,208

  1,744

  883,952

  5·7

  1889

  36,881,271

  922,643

  1,047

  923,690

  6·0

  1890

  37,178,929

  867,272

  1,509

  868,781

  5·6

  1891

  37,484,764

  675,788

  1,587

  677,375

  4·3

  1892

  37,802,381

  697,215

  1,630

  698,845

  4·4

  1893

  38,133,817

  688,659

  1,754

  690,413

  4·3

  1894

  38,489,806

  693,418

  834

  694,252

  4·3

  1895

  38,858,306

  747,077

  1,523

  748,600

  4·6

  1896

  39,220,114

  746,467

  651

  747,118

  4·5

  1897

  39,597,843

  778,390

  1,502

  779,892

  4·7

  1898

  39,985,831

  806,411

  1,366

  807,777

  4·8

  1899

  40,379,095

  804,507

  1,427

  805,934

  4·7

  1900

  40,772,365

  872,841

  1,133

  873,974

  5·1

  1901

  41,152,471

  840,465

  1,067

  841,532

  4·9

  1902

  41,550,773

  7,271,608

  65,673

  7,337,281

  3

  6·3

  1903

  41,961,199

  7,709,261

  89,694

  7,798,955

  3

  8·6

  1904

  42,371,21(5

  6,799,504

  84,637

  6,884,141

  3

  2·9

  1905

  42,789,552

  7,046,225

  98,690

  7,144,915

  3

  4·0

  The Customs figures represent the duties on chicory and coffee, cocoa and choco-
  1050
  if he will state the total amount of revenue derived in the United Kingdom from the taxation, both by Excise and Customs duties, on all kinds of food and drink, excluding spirits, beer, tea, and wine, dining the last twenty years; and also state what this amount would represent per head of the population.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) late, dried fruits, corn, gram, etc. (from April, 1902, to June 30th, 1903), and

  1051
  sugar, molasses, glucose, and articles containing sugar or other sweetening matter (dutiable since 1901). The Excise figures represent the duties on gluccse, saccharin, and chicory of British manufacture.

  Acquisition of Land in Calcutta by the Indian Government.
  MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the notice of the intention of the Government of India to acquire certain areas in Council Street, Government Place, and Wellesley Place, Calcutta, for public purposes; whether the object of this acquisition is to find room for menial staff, band, and additional stable accommodation for the Viceroy during his residence in Calcutta, which is confined to a period of about four months only in each year; whether he is aware that the acquisition of these areas will displace several European firms which have been there carrying on business for over half a century, and inconvenience the European population of Calcutta by the closing of these places of business, and that there is no land in the immediate vicinity of the business part of Calcutta to which these displaced firms can remove; whether his attention has been drawn to the petition of the Calcutta Trades' Association of March 20th last, protesting against this interference with the business of the capital of India; and whether he will cause an inquiry to be instituted before the intended acquisition is carried into effect.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I have seen the notification of the intention of the Government of India to acquire the areas referred to in the Question. The objects stated in the notification are to provide offices for the Viceroy's private and military secretaries; residential quarters for officers, subordinates, and servants attached to His Excellency's staff, and for the Viceroy's band; a hospital and dispensary for the staff; furniture and camp equipment storerooms; and extension of stabling for Government House. I have seen in the newspapers correspondence on the subject, and I understand that the Calcutta Trades' Association have been
  1052
  informed, in reply to their representation of March 20th last, that the firms mentioned in their petition will be permitted to remain in occupation, until the-expiry of their leases. It is probable-that the improvements now being carried out in Calcutta will eventually provide, eligible sites to which they can remove when their leases expire. It does not appear necessary to institute an inquiry at the present stage.

  Education of Children of Agricultural Labourers in Assam.
  MR. SCHWANN (Manchester, N.): To ask the Secretary of State for India if he proposes to allow the Commissioner of Assam to shelve the question of improved education for the children of labourers in tea gardens and otherwise in Assam for a year; and, if so, will he explain why; and, if this course is to be taken, is he aware that the State of Baroda, affords more opportunities of primary education to its subjects than are offered in British-governed States.
  (Answered by Mr. Secietary Brodrick.) I do not, as at present advised, propose to interfere with the discretion of the Chief Commissioner of Assam. I doubt if in any part of India, whether British territory or Native States, special facilities are accorded for the education of agricultural labourers in excess of those granted to the general population. In primary education generally Assam is not more backward than other provinces.

  Military Camp on Evicted Farm at Clonaslee.
  MR. DELANY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the military at present engaged in manœuvres in Queen's County are encamped on an evicted farm at Clonaslee; and, if so, can he state who is responsible for this fact; and, in view of the fact that the evicted tenant is seeking reinstatement under the Act of 1903, whether he will advise the military authorities to remove the camp and make compensation to the evicted tenant for damage.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The field firing camp at Clon-aslee was hired through the agent to the

  1053
  persons on whose property the camp lies. The responsibility for troops being camped on part of an evicted farm does not rest with the military authorities, and it is not proposed either to remove the camp or to compensate the evicted tenant for damage.

  Manufacture of the New Snort Rifle.
  SIR HENRY SETON-KARR: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can inform the House of the results of the recent trials of the new short rifle; whether its manufacture and issue is being proceeded with; and, if so, to what extent; and whetheR tiny further changes in its length and mechanisms have been decided on; and, if so, what they are.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The trials of the new short rifle are not yet completed. Manufacture is proceeding to complete the number ordered. In reply to the last part of the Question, no change has been decided on.

  Redistribution-Appointment and Terms of Reference of Boundary Commission.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, before Parliament has determined the principles on which Redistribution should proceed, the Government propose to appoint Commissioners to report upon the revision of the boundaries of constituencies; and, if so, upon what rules those Commissioners will be instructed to act.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I trust that the hon. Gentleman will consider that in my Answers in the House this afternoon I dealt adequately with the subject of his Question.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Sale of Obsolete Warships at Portsmouth—Names and Prices Realised,
  MR. J. H. LEWIS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can give the names of the warships sold at Portsmouth
  1054
  on the 11th inst., and the price realised in eash case.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Wood bridge): The names of the ships sold, and the prices realised, are as follows:—

  £

  Orlando

  10,000

  Iris

  8,030

  Magicienne

  6,000

  Fearless

  4,250

  Blanche

  4,000

  Barrosa

  4,250

  Jaseur

  2,075

  Boomerang

  1,900

  Karrakatta

  1,875

  Grasshopper

  1,425

  Pelter

  725

  Fancy

  460

  Pincher

  620

  Enchantress

  2,675

  Lion

  3,100

  Myrtle

  2,300

  Hamadryad

  1,000

  Nautilus

  860

  Liberty

  630

  The following were subsequently sold by private treaty:—

  £

  Hector

  8,000

  Beagle

  4,500

  Blonde

  3,750

  The Admiralty and the Welsh Coalfields.
  SIR LEES KNOWLES: I Deg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can give the House any information with regard to the alleged sale of smokeless steam coal in Wales to a German syndicate.
  MR. PRETYMAN: Of course it is evident that no information on this point that I can give can be final or absolutely certain. But the information I possess leads me to believe that no such purchase has been completed, and it is extremely doubtful if any such purchase is likely.

  The War Stores Inquiry.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government were aware, when framing the War Stores Commission Bill, that an officer cannot

  1055
  be tried or punished for any offence triable by Court-martial committed more than three years before the date at which his trial begins; and how the Government proposes to deal with any officer amenable under the Army Act for any offence arising out of the dealings with the stores in South Africa in 1902.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.): The hon. Gentleman asked me a Question the other day as to why the Government did not, in introducing their Bill on this subject, make provision for the trial of officers by Court-martial. I answered him at the time that that would be wholly outside the provisions of the Bill and quite inconsistent with its general character. I now gather that he wants to know whether there would be any possibility of punishing these officers should the inquiries of the Commission last so long that the three years would have elapsed before the Commission had reached the term of their investigation. If these officers had done anything which would justify their dismissal from the service, they can be dismissed from the service. If it was thought desirable to have a Court-martial I believe a special Ordinance could be passed to that effect. If they had made any infraction of the criminal law of the country they can be brought to trial. There is every provision, it seems to me, which can be desired for punishing the guilty.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSE: Would the special Ordinance over-rule the statutory enactment?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There is no statutory enactment.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEsaid it was statutory, because no officer could be tried by Court-martial for an offence committed three years before the date of the trial.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he did not think it was statutory, but asked that a Question should be put down. He would remind the hon. Member that his criticism of his Answer did not affect the
  1056
  assertion that it would always be possible to dismiss an officer.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEasked how the Government proposed to deal with breaches of military discipline which were not provided for inconsequence of neglect to produce the evidence at the proper time.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If it is proved that an officer has committed acts unworthy of an officer and a gentleman, of course he can be dismissed.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSE: Without trial?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Army Bayonet Contracts.
  MR. J. F. HOPE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it has been the practice in the past, whether formulated or not, to give out to private firms one-half of the bayonets required for the service of the Army; and, if so, will he say why this practice is now being departed from.
  THE SECRETARY or STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER, Belfast, W.): When orders for bayonets have been sufficient to warrant it, they have been divided equally between the trade and the Ordnance Factories. This year the number of bayonets required is so small that it is necessary to confine the larger proportion of the orders to the-Ordnance Factories.
  MR. J. F. HOPE: I shall call attention to this matter when a suitable opportunity offers.

  War Office Land Purchase in the Kyles of Bute.
  MR. DOBBIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any purchase of land for military purposes has recently been made, or is in course of being completed, in the Kyles of Bute, or elsewhere in Argyllshire; and, if so, if he will state the extent of same, the name of seller, and the price paid.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The War Department has agreed to purchase an

  1057
  area of land at Ardhallow, Dunoon, Argyllshire, in connection with purposes of defence. The area consists of 1 acre, 2 roods, 39 poles, and right of way thereto and way leave for cables. The owner is Mr. Campbell Wyndham, and the price agreed is £660, including compensation to tenant.
  MR. DOBBIE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say for what purpose the land is required?
  MR. ARNOLD - FORSTEE: In connection, I believe, with the position-finding station at Ardhallow.

  Army Vaccine Institute.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what quantity of glycerin-ated calf lymph is produced annually in the Army Vaccine Institute; the number of calves operated on; and whether they are sold for human food or utilised in the military kitchens.
  MR.ARNOLD-FORSTER: The annual average amount of glycerinated calf lymph produced at the Army and Navy Vaccine Institute is sufficient to vaccinate 126,280 persons, and the average annual number of calves operated on thirty. The calves are slaughtered and postmortem examinations made in each, case before the carcasses are sold to the public. They are not utilised in military kitchens.
  MR. WEIR: I wanted to get at the number of tubes sent out.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The Question does not ask that.

  Mr. Van Rensburg.
  MR. TREVELYAN: On behalf of the junior Member for Halifax, I bag to ask the Secretary of Sate for the Colonies if he is aware that at the first meeting, in Heidelberg, of creditors in the insolvent estate of Mr. Van Rensburg, who recently resigned his seat as a nominated member of the Inter-Colonial Council, debts to the amount of £51,000 were proved, and included in the list was a Sum of £20,000 due to the Colonial Treasurer of the Transvaal; and
  1058
  can he say for what purpose this loan was made.
  MR. TREVELYAN: On behalf of the junior Member for Halifax, I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can say on what date the Colonial Treasurer of the Transvaal made the loan of £20,000 to Mr. Van Rensburg; for what consideration the loan was made; whether there is any probability of the money being recovered; and also will he inquire if this is the same Mr. Van Rensburg whose telegram was quoted by the Government in debate in this House on February 17th, 1904, as evidence that the Boers were in favour of Chine e labour.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FoR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON, Warwick and Leamington): The information I have now received is that a loan of £10,000 was made by the South African Republic to Mr. Van Rensburg upon first mortgage bond in 1898. A further loan of £5,000 was made by the present Government in 1903 upon another first mortgage bond; both fully secured on farms in Heidelberg district. Later on the original loan was increased to £15,000 to enable Mr. Van Rensburg to redeem the first bond referred to with arrears of interest on same amounting to £3,000, and to repair damage done during the war. The total of his present capital indebtedness, viz., £20,000, is less than 50 per cent, of the valuation of the farms hypothecated. The Government are therefore fully secured. It is the same Mr. Van Rensburg whose telegram is printed at page 24 of Cd. 1941.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what was the occasion of the grant of this loan, made by the public authorities to a private individual?
  MR. LYTTELTON; I have no information as to what the ground of the loan by the Boer authorities was. The loan by the Government was for the purpose I have just stated.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANBut there was another loan of £5,000—

  1059
  an intermediate loan. And, besides that, can the right hon Gentleman explain why the public authorities of the Transvaal should interfere between this man and his debts?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have no further information than that which I have given, hut if the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question I will endeavour to get him an Answer.
  MR. DALZIELasked whether this was the same Mr. Rensburg whose authority was quoted by the right hon. Gentleman as "a representative and influential Boer."
  MR. LYTTELTON: He was quoted as a member of the Dutch community there, and the fact that he has been a mortgagee does not, I think, incapacitate him from being called in evidence.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUELasked whether it was the practice of the Transvaal Government to lend public money to private in dividuals in this way.
  MR. LYTTELTON: The hon. Gentleman had better put down a Question.

  Punishment of Chinese on the Rand Mines.
  MR. BURT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can give the number of Chinese on the Rand mines who have been sent to prison up to the end of June, and the offences for which they were imprisoned; whether there are any interpreter in the prisons who can communicate between the Chinese prisoners and the prison authorities; and whether he can give the total number of Chinese who have been repatriated, and the reasons for their repatriation.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have not yet received returns for May and June. The returns from June, 1904, up to 30th April, 1905, show that 1,187 Chinese have been ent to prison; of these 243 for fourteen days or less. The offences we e assault, riot, desertion, absence without leave, refusal to work, and theft. I am informed that there are no Chinese inter-
  1060
  preters in the prisons, but that services of such can be obtained when required by application to foreign labour department. The numbers of labourers repatriated under Section 25 of Labour Importation Ordinance for refusing to perform service is one; under Section 26—(a) as permanently incapacitated for work by physical infirmity or disease, 1,183; (b) after conviction of offence and sentenced to imprisonment without option of fire eighteen; total, 1,202.

  Precautions against Riots on the Rand Mines
  MR. LEIF JONES (Westmoreland,): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies wheth: he will furnish the House with copies of corespondence and other Papers relating to the negotiations between the Chamber of Mines at Johannesburg and the Government, as the result of which two troops of constabulary are to be stationed in the East and West Rand to assist the authorities in coping with disturbances among the Chinese; and whether he will take steps to secure that the cost of this arrangement shall be borne by the mine-owners concerned.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have not recived any such correspondence, but I am making inquiry as to the alleged arrangement.

  The Flogging of Chinese Coolies on the Rand Mines.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is satisfied that his assurance to the Chinese Minister, of 15th February, 1904 [Cd. 1945], that corporal punishment would not be legally inflicted upon indentured Chinese coolies by any employer or his servant, is being carried out; and whether, in the cases of flogging of coolies reported to the House on Thursday last, he is satisfied that the law of the colony, which prescribes that no sentence of whipping imposed by a magistrate can be carried out till the record has been sent to and the sentence confirmed by the Judge of the Supreme Court, has been also respected.
  MR. LYTTELTON: My attention has been drawn to a statement made by the late compound manager of the Croesus

  1061
  Mine, from which it would appear that illegal flogging has taken place on that mine, and I have been also informed by the hon. Member for Morpeth, whose fairness of view I freely acknowledge, that he has been satisfied by a trustworthy correspondent that this statement is correct. The practice is one which must, of course, be put down, and I am in communication with Lord Selborne, who is quite alive to the importance of the matter, with a view to further improvements in supervision. I may mention that the Transvaal Government has recently obtained from the Foreign Office the loan of the services of Mr. Jamieson as superintendent, and his intimate knowledge of the Northern Chinese and of their language will be of great value to the Colonial Government. With regard to the latter part of the Question, I have no reason to suppose that the law is not being adhered to.
  DR. MACNAMARA: Do I understand that the Answer to the former part of the Question shows that the Colonial Secretary is not assured that the pledge to the Chinese Minister has been respected?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have answered the Question, and the hon. Gentleman may draw any inference he pleases.
  MR. MARKHAM: Was it not stated at a coroner's inquest recently that the Chinese miners were repeatedly flogged and assaulted, and when complaint was made to the mine manager no notice was taken of it?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have not seen that.

  Disposal of Police Court Fines.
  MR. SCOTT-MONTAGU: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state how fines levied in Courts of summary jurisdiction are disposed of; and what proportion, if any, is paid to county rates or police funds.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS, Kent, St. Augustine's): Fines imposed by Courts of summary jurisdic-
  1062
  tion, unless specially appropriated by the Act under which they are imposed or some amending Act, are paid into local funds, i.e., into county or borough funds as the case may be. In London they are paid into the Metropolitan Police Courts Fond. A table appended to the last issue of the Judicial Statistics shows the amounts paid over under this system. In 1903, £144,258 was paid into county, borough, and Police Court funds; £42,886 to the police; £5,628 to the Exchequer; and £25,703 to other persons.
  MR. SCOTT - MONTAGU: Could not a portion of the fines inflicted on motorcar drivers be devoted to abating the dust nuisance?
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLASreplied in the negative.

  The Postmaster General and the Postal Staff.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he received, on Thursday, 6th July, a protest from the staff of telegraphists then on duty at the Central Telegraph Office respecting his charges made on that day against Post Office employees; whether he sent any reply; and, if so, will he state its terms; and, if he did not send a reply, whether he will take an early opportunity of removing the irritation which has been caused by his statement.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY, Lancashire, Westhoughton): I received on the evening of Thursday the 6th instant an anonymous telegram purporting to convey a request from the staff on duty at the Central Telegraph Office. I am not aware in what way the sender of that telegram was authorised to represent the views of that staff. I did not send a reply. The hon. Gentleman may not have noticed that in replying to a Question of the hon. Member for King's Lynn I expressly stated that my remarks to which he refers did not apply to the whole of the staff, and I have since repeated that statement on a public platform. They applied only to those who by speeches, letters, or circulars, attempt unduly

  1063
  to influence the votes of hon. Members with regard to the questions affecting Post Office wages, and to those who associate themselves with such action. I see nothing to reconsider or to modify further in ray remarks; and I can only suggest that the best way of removing the irritation is for those men to desist from conduct which the House I am sure condemns, and which, I think, entirely justified the epithets I applied to it.
  DR. MACNAMARA: DO I understand that the noble Lord persists in his charge against certain Post Office employees, that they are guilty of blackmail and bloodsucking?
  LORD STANLEY: I have nothing to add to the Answer I have already given.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: Is the noble Lord aware that a bloodsucker is a public curse?
  MR. KEIRHARDIE: May I ask whether, in order to avoid the necessity for issuing such circulars, the noble Lord will consent to receive officials of the union to negotiate disputes on behalf of the men.
  LORD STANLEY: No, Sir.
  MR. FLAVIN: Will the noble Lord try the experiment of working for a guinea a week and keeping a wife and family on it?
  DR. MACNAMARA: Will the noble Lord consent to receive the representatives of the men, and give them an opportunity of repudiating the suggestion?
  LOUD STANLEY: No, Sir.
  MR. NANNETTI: Will the noble Lord either with-draw or modify his language?
  LORD STANLEY: No. I will neither modify nor withdraw anything I have aid.
  MR. DELANY: Does not the noble Lord consider the slander on these men an insult to
  1064
  the Members of Parliament who support their claims? I have voted for them—
  LORD STANLEY: Under pressure?
  MR. DELANY: And I take it as and insult.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: Are not the bloodsuckers the Ministers who, in spite of public opinion being against them, stick to office and draw high salaries?
  [No Answer wasreturned.]

  Post Office Savings Bank Withdrawals.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the new system of withdrawal from the Post Office Savings Bank, under which sums not exceeding £1 are paid at any savings bank post office on the evidence of balance as disclosed in a depositor's book, affords facilities for frauds; and, seeing that it is open to a forger to open accounts at a cost of 1s. each at any of the 15,000 offices in the United Kingdom and obtain payment of £1 at any other office after having manipulated a false entry in the deposit book, will he consider the expediency of introducing, a system of payment on demand by means of withdrawal orders secured from the head office, and not on the mere evidence of balance contained in a deposit book.
  LORD STANLEY: The system of withdrawals on demand of sums not exceeding £1 was introduced after full consideration of all the risks involved. If fraud were attempted, the safeguards provided, would ensure speedy detection. The system of payment by means of withdrawal orders which the hon. Member wishes to see adopted has frequently been brought under the notice of the Post Office; but in addition to the fact I that it would entail considerable expense, it is altogether unsuited to the system of account-keeping in use in the Post Office Savings Bank.
  MR. WEIR: If the noble Lord wilt consult with his colleagues, the Attorney-General and the Home Secretary, and secure me exemption from prosecution, I shall be able to prove to him by actual

  1065
  experiment, that frauds under the new system of withdrawal may be successfully operated on a gigantic scale. The be called safeguard only proves a fraud has been committed, but in no way assists detection of the culprit.

  West Indian Mail Service.
  MR. LAMONT (Buteshire): I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he proposes to make any arrangements for the conveyance of the West Indian Mails; and, if so, whether such mails will be carried as hitherto under contract, or without a subsidy and under postal union rates.
  LORD STANLEY: I propose to forward mails to the West Indies by the most favourable opportunities that offer. I am not at present negotiating for their conveyance under any fresh contract. Payment for correspondence sent by private steamers will be made at the ordinary ship letter rates, and the payment for parcels will vary according to their weights.

  Administrative County of London and District Electric Power Company.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he has noticed the announcement that the promoters of the Administrative County of London and District Electric Power Company have commenced to buy up electrical undertakings throughout London; and whether it is necessary that agreements of sale made with a local authority possessing authorised electrical undertakings should be submitted to the Board of Trade before they are confirmed by the local authority; whether the Board of Trade has seen and approved of the agreements that have been made by the company with the Barking and Bexley Urban District Councils, and what is the nature of these arrangements; whether the agreement with Stepney involves the ultimate acquisition of the electrical undertaking of that council; and whether he is aware of any further negotiations having been concluded with other London boroughs.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW, Glasgow, Blackfriars): I have not noticed the announcement that
  1066
  the company have commenced to buy up electrical undertakings throughout London, nor have I any information as to the particulars of the agreements or negotiations referred to in the Question. I understand that the Bill as at present drawn provides that no agreement for the sale of an undertaking shall be of force until it has received the approval of the Board of Trade, but until the Bill has received Royal Assent no case can be submitted to or considered by the Board of Trade.
  MR. LOUGH: Is there a provision in the Act of 1888 that no undertaking in London shall be bought up without the consent of the Board of Trade, and has such consent been applied for in any case?
  MR. BONARLAW: There is such a provision, but no application has been made under it.

  The Harcourt Memorial.
  SIR W. HART DYKE: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley whether the First Commissioner of Works is prepared to assist in giving facilities for the erection of a statue as a memorial to the late Sir William Harcourt within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster.
  *LORD BALCARRES: A proposal has been made that the memorial shall take the form of a statue to be placed on one of the eight vacant pedestals in the lobby of the House of Commons. The First Commissioner is anxious to do all in his power to meet the views of the Harcourt Memorial Committee, so far as the limited space in the Palace of Westminster permits.

  Big Ben.
  *COLONEL LEGGE St.: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether, for the better guidance of Members, he will cause a red light to be displayed on the port face of the clock corresponding to the green light now exhibited on the starboard face.
  *MR. J. F. HOPEasked whether, instead of adding a red light to the green, the hon. Member would no longer suffer the countenance of the clock to wear the aspect of incipient nausea.
  *LORD BALCARRES: May I be allowed to give the Answer as drafted by the Department? The First Commissioner regrets that he is unable to adopt the suggestion of my hon. and gallant friend. The green light now exhibited has been installed for the purposes of experiment, it being anticipated that a very large saving of current might be effected by its use; there is no reason to suppose the use of a red light would have any similar advantage.
  MR. DISRAELIasked by what authority the First Commissioner of Works touched the clock. The clock tower was the property of the House of Commons.
  *LORD BALCARRES: There is a small apartment in the clock tower which, I believe, is placed under the control of the Serjeant-at-Arms from time to time. The First Commissioner of Works has complete control over the entire fabric, including the clock.
  MR. LOUGH: What is the estimated saving by the use of the green light?
  *MR. SPEAKER: Notice must be given of that Question.

  Liscard Institution, Liverpool.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate if he will state what progress has been made with the scheme for training boys in seamanship at Liscard Institution, Liverpool; how many boys have been admitted; and from what districts do they come.
  THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON, Glasgow, Bridgton): Though the Congested Districts Board sent full information throughout the congested area, the response has been disappointing. Only three applications were made, one from Lewis for a boy over age, one from Embo and one from Brora in Sutherland, which are now before the Liscard authorities.

  Aberdeen Educational Trust Home for Training Girls.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate whether the home for the training of girls in connection with the Aberdeen Educational Trust has yet been opened; if sO, will he state how many girls have been admitted, and from what districts they come; and will he state how many applications for admission have been received up to the present time.
  MR. SCOTT DICKSON: The Aberdeen Committee will be unable to open the home before the beginning of August. Twenty-seven applications have been received. Offers of admittance have been sent to nineteen of them. Seven have accepted, seven have refused, and five have not yet replied. Offers were made to eleven in Lewis, two in mainland of Ross, three in Barra, and three in Sutherland.

  Motor Fishing Boats for Ireland.
  MR. BOLAND: I bag to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Congested Districts Board for Scotland has acquired an experimental motor fishing boat; and whether the Congested Districts Board for Ireland or the fisheries branch of the Department of Agriculture will undertake similar experiments.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG, Bristol, S.): It is understood that motor fishing boats have not, so far, proved satisfactory in Great Britain. The Irish Departments referred to consider it desirable, therefore, to await the result of the experiment now being conducted by the Congested Districts Board for Scotland.

  Dundonald Cemetery.
  MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that at a meeting of the Belfast Corporation, held on 6th July, a charge of altering the terms of a resolution passed by the cemetery committee with reference to the allocation of ground for Catholic burials in Dundonald

  1069
  Cemetery was made by members of the corporation; and that the alteration referred to was intended to have the effect of depriving the Catholic authorities of Belfast of the right of authorising interments in that portion of the cemetery allotted to Catholics; will he say who was responsible for the altering of the resolution, and whether the proceedings at the meeting referred to were null and void; and whether, in view of the importance of the whole question to the Catholics of Belfast, he will order that a special inquiry with power to examine witnesses on oath be held with regard to it.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I have seen a newspaper report of the proceedings of the corporation, which shows that a charge of the nature indicated was made. The Local Government Board have no power to intervene in regard to the charge referred to. The only matter for them to determine is the allotment of the burial ground amongst the various religious denominations.
  MR. SLOAN: Has the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Belfast any authority over graves paid for by private individuals?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I do not see how that has any connection with the Question.
  MR. SLOAN: The connection is this—
  *MB. SPEAKER: Order, order! Notice had better be given of any further Question.

  Clonaslee Evicted Tenant.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a claim for reinstatement has been received by the Estates Commissioners on behalf of the representatives of an evicted tenant named Talbot, on the estate of Dunnes Minors, Clonaslee Queen's County; whether the present occupant of the farm is a brother of the late owner of the estate; and what steps have been taken towards reinstatement in this case.
  MB. WALTER LONG: The application has been received, but, in the absence of any proceedings for the sale of the estate, the Commissioners have taken no action upon it.
  MR. DELANY: Will the Commissioners advise this landlord to give up the farm to the rightful owner—the evicted tenant?
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Commissioners have no power to advise the landlord.

  Wicklow Evicted Tenants.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state how many applications the Estates Commissioners have received from evicted tenants in the county of Wicklow for reinstatement in their farms; if he can give the names and addresses of the applicants; whether any of them have been restored to their former holdings or to other holdings; and, if so. how many.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Fifty-five applications have been received, and reinstatement has taken place in one case, I do not consider it either necessary or desirable to give the names and addresses of the applicants.

  Lord Lansdowne's Evicted Tenants.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a claim for reinstatement has been received by the Estates Commissioners from James Byrne, representative of the late Margaret Byrne Tully, who was evicted from a farm of 189 acres on Lord Lansdowne's estate, Luggacurran, Queen's County, in April, 1887; and will he say what steps, if any, are being taken towards the reinstatement of the evicted tenant's representative in this case.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Mrs. Byrne's former holding, which is occupied by another tenant, is not situated on that portion of the estate which is now being dealt with by the Commissioners, and they; are, therefore, unable at present to entertain the application for reinstatement.
  MR. DELANY: How are the Commissioners prepared to deal with this estate? Will they see that Mr. Byrne gets, at any Tate, the equivalent of the farm?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I cannot say how the Commissioners are prepared to deal with any estate. I can only tell the hon. Member what they have done and what they are doing.
  MR. FLAVIN: How many of the tenants evicted by Lord Lansdowne have been reinstated by him under the policy of conciliation?
  *MR. SPEAKER: Notice must be given of that.

  Administration of the Land Purchase Act.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in view of the fact that the rate of progress at which agreements for sale under the Land Purchase Act, 1903, are being made makes it clear that the anticipation that twenty years would be required to complete the transfer of Irish land was excessive, and having regard to the urgency of the situation and the appeals that have been addressed to the Government by representatives of landlords and tenants, whether he intends, before the session closes, to place sufficient funds at the disposal of the Estates Commissioners, or to take any other steps, such as offering stock at market value to vendors who may be willing to take such in payment, or by any other means to meet the difficulty.
  MR. LONSDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman also tell the House what financial measures are being adopted to remove the block in the Land Judge's Court?
  MR. WALTER LONG: This matter has engaged my anxious consideration, and I have formulated a proposal in alleviation of the present situation which I will explain at length in Committee of Supply on Thursday next.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDasked whether this would involve any legislation.
  MR. WALTER LONGreplied that it might be necessary to secure a small Amendment of the Land Act, which imposed an obligation that the landlord should be paid in one form only. If his plan was adopted it would be necessary to give an option in this matter.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDgave notice that, so long as the new regulations which had been issued by the Government were in force, he should oppose by every means in his power any such proposal.
  MR. LOUGHasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he could give any outline of his plans.
  MR. WALTER LONG: No. Sir. I do not think I can go any further than I have done.

  Blackditches (Wicklow) Evicted Tenant.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners have received from Mrs. Cullen, a tenant evicted years ago from her farm at Blackditches, on the county Wicklow estate of the Marquess of Waterford, an application for reinstatement, or for another farm; and, if I so, what action, if any, have the Commissioners taken in this case.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Commissioners have received Mrs. Cullen's application and have informed her that, they cannot interfere with the present I occupant of her former holding, but that in the event of the estate coming before them her application will be considered.

  Cragg and Ardcrone Farms, Kerry.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to I ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the date of the purchase by the Congested Districts Board of the Cragg and Ardcrone Farms, county Kerry, the purpose for which the lands were acquired, and the use made of the farms by the Board up to the present time.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I answered each of these inquiries in reply to the hon. Member's Question of April 4th † last.
  † See (4) Debates, csliv., 318.
  MR. MURPHY; What use made of the farms at present?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I stated the other day that the Congested Districts Board were using them for migration purposes. They are doing their best to convert uneconomic into economic holdings—though the process may be a slow one.
  MR. FLAVIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the farms are now being merely used for grazing purposes?
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Board can only carry out its policy by degrees, and it surely is not necessary that farms should be derelict all the time the operation is going on.

  Irish Poor Law Commission.
  MR. FLAVIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many counties or portions of counties have yet to be inquired into by the Poor Law Commission; and whether he can state About what time the Poor Law Commission will make their Report.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Commissioners have yet to hold local inquiries at Cork, Bantry, and Mallow. They tope to present their Report towards the close of the present year.

  Boyle Disturbances.
  MR. DISRAELI: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the circumstances of an attack at the house of a Mr. Magennis, near Boyle, county Roscommon; and whether he is aware that volleys of shots were fired at the house by men concealed in the shrubbery, Mr. Magennis and his men replying with revolver and gun shots; and, seeing that the attack lasted between two and three hours, whether he can state how many persons were injured, and whether the police have as yet made any arrests.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I have received police reports as to this occurrence. The police are pursuing their investigation, and until the matter has
  1074
  been thoroughly sifted it would be premature to make any detailed announcement upon it. I may, however, state that none of the inmates of the house were injured, but glass in three windows wag broken. No arrests have been made.
  MR. DISRAELI: Am I to understand that after three hours fighting no arrests were made?
  MR. WALTER LONG; "Fighting" involves the presence of two parties, and in this case the second party has not yet been discovered.
  MR. DELANY: Will the right hon. Gentleman send to the hon. Gentleman who put this Question a copy of his statement that Questions put in this House should not be founded on statements in the "yellow" Press?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Kerry Assizes.
  MR. FLAVIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of criminal cases tried and the sentences passed by. Lord Justice Holmes at the Kerry Assizes during the present month; and also, whether he can state what is the condition of the county of Kerry.
  MR. WALTER LONG: One case, in which a sentence of twenty-four hours imprisonment was passed. The prisoner had been in custody for three months. The county is on the whole in a fairly satisfactory condition, but I regret to say that it is still necessary to afford police protection to twenty-two persons as the result of agrarian disputes. Twelve of these persons are receiving constant protection.

  Land Purchase Agreements.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the decision of Mr. Justice Meredith in the case of King-Harman, landlord, Hayes, tenant, under Section 5 of the Land Act, 1903, to the effect that the Estates Commissioners had no power to inspect the holding to inquire into the equity of the price as between landlord and tenant,

  1075
  and of the fact that in the case mentioned the Commissioners reported that the lands were only value for £460 but that the agreed price was £571, he will take steps to enable the Commissioners to inquire as to the value of holdings sold in order to prevent prices being paid beyond the value of the holding.
  MR. WALTER LONG: From the report of the case in the Irish Law Times, the effect of the judgment would appear to be that when an agreement has been entered into between a landlord and tenant for the sale of a holding at a certain price, both parties desiring that the sale shall be carried out, and the security to the State being adequate, the Estates Commissioners have no power under Section 5 to treat the two parties as incapable of entering into a valid contract and to refuse to approve of the agreement, except in eases in which a Court of Equity would interfere. The Government have no power to direct the Commissioners to put a particular construction on any provision of the statute, or to act in violation of its declared meaning.
  MR. MURPHY: Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to prevent land being sold at excessively high rates?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I have every confidence that the Estates Commissioners will look after this matter.

  Dublin Probate Court—The Clerk of the Seat.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that in the Probate Court, Dublin, there is a functionary known as the "clerk of the seat," whose annual salary is £439 4s.; whether he can give the name of this employee; whether he can state what his duties are; how many days in the year, and for how many hours each day he is engaged in the discharge of his duties; and whether he is entitled to a pension.
  *THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH, Derbyshire, W.): There is no longer any such office in the Principal Probate Registry. The corresponding place is now filled by Mr. Marrable, a
  1076
  first-class clerk. His salary, like that of other-first class clerks, is £350—£15— £450, and he has reached his maximum salaryof £450. His duties are concerned with the grants of Probate and Letters of Administration. He is engaged on his duties during the whole year with the exception of the vacation of two months which is allowed to the clerks-under the Act 22–23 Vic. cap. 31, sec. 31,. and the public holidays as set forth in Order 63 (4) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Ireland, 1905. He is entitled to a pension. The office hours are 11 to 4 ordinarily and 11 to 2 during the long; vacation.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: In whose gift is this appointment?
  *MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH: I must ask for notice of that Question.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: What is the meaning of "clerk of the seat?"
  MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH: That has been explained in my Answer.

  Signatures in Irish on Postal Orders.
  MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is a were that the postal officials in Castlerea refused, on June 26th, to cash a postal order presented by Mr. Tomas O'Heidhin because he signed his name in Irish and in Irish characters; that they also refused, on the same date, to issue a money order for £5 to him, because he refused to sign the application form otherwise than Tomas O'Heidhin; whether his attention has been drawn to the matter already; and whether, in view of the fac that Mr. O'Heidhin haft been for the past eight months teacher of Irish in the parish and is well known to the postal officials, he will issue instructions to this post office to cash the postal order when next presented by Mr. O'Heidhin.
  LORD STANLEY: I am investigating the case referred to by the hon. Member, and will communicate the result to him.

  Supply of Electricity Bill.
  MR. LOUGH: Having regard to the fact that the Supply of Electricity Bill is

  1077
  urgently needed, may I ask if the Government intend to take it up?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he understood this measure was not uncontroversial, and, if so, there was little hope of its passing this session.
  MR. LOUGH: There is no Amendment down to it.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That is not a sure index of the absence of opposition. I cannot say more than I have done.

  Redistribution—Government Method of Procedure.
  *SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDER: I beg to ask whether, in view of the withdrawal of the Redistribution Resolutions, the Prime Minister intends to defer the appointment of the Boundary Commission until the Bill is introduced and the principle accepted by the House of Commons next session.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If my hon. friend's Question means, as I suppose it does, whether I hall defer the investigation by a Committee or Commission, as the case may be, until we meet again next session, my Answer must be quite distinctly in the negative.
  SIR. J. DICKSON-PONDER: Will the instruction the right hon. Gentleman will give to the Boundary Commission be baaed on the proposals which have been withdrawn from the House.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think I can give an Answer to the hon. Gentleman, and I certainly should not bedisposed to limit the labours of the Committee or Commission if I thought that by extending their scope information useful to the House when we introduce the Bill would be obtained.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Is there any precedent for a Boundary Commission, or anything in the nature of a Boundary Commission, being appointed except under the authority of Parliament, except in a case where there is an agreement in the House of Commons on the subject?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am not aware, though I may be wrong, of any precedent to the contrary. I do not I remember any case where the contrary course, of having a Parliamentary mandate to appoint a, Commission, was followed.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN; Commissioners are named in the Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think the right hon. Gentleman quite apprehends my meaning. In the case, for example, of the first Reform Bill of 1831, Lord Russell, or the Government of the day, did put the names of the Commissioners in that Bill, and so far asked for Parliamentary powers. But the Bill was thrown out in the Lords, and Lord Russell, I think very properly, proceeded to appoint the Commissioners without the authority of Parliament.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: He had the authority of the House of Commons.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: They asked the authority of Parliament, but they did nut get it. As far as I can remember, Mr. Gladstone's investigations in 1866, under Lord Russell's Government, were carried on without Parliamentary authority. As far as I remember, in 1867 Mr. Diraeli brought in Resolutions which did ask for House of Commons' authority, but he withdrew his Resolutions, and I believe that such investigations as he desired to carry out were carried out without the mandate of Parliament. In 1884 Mr. Gladstone, before the concordat—though I do not see what constitutional effect a concordat has or could have—appointed what he called a Committee to look into these questions of Redistribution. There was then a concordat, and then Parliament was summoned together, and then he announced to Parliaments introducing his Redistribution Act of 1884, which ultimately became law, that the Commission had been some time at work and had made, if I remember aright, important advances in their labours.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKE: The statement of the right hon. Gentleman is hardly correct.

  1079
  The Commission was not actually appointed until after the agreement had been come to between the two Parties.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir. The Commission was not appointed, but the Committee was. If my memory serves me right, the Committee consisted of three members, to whom two were added, and they formed the Commission.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: What we are anxious to get at is this. Of course we should all agree that the right hon. Gentleman may make any inquiry or investigation he likes if he is proposing this course merely for the purpose of obtaining a tittle more information upon this subject than he appears at present to enjoy. But such a Committee is a different thing from as authoritative body giving an authoritative Report which is to be used as a weapon—if I may employ the phrase— to compel the House of Commons to agree to a certain course in the session when the Bill is introduced.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There is no such thing as an authoritative weapon; nor is this House to be intimidated, I take it, by the Report of any Commission, however constituted or by whom appointed. When a Bill is introduced dealing with Redistribution, it would be very desirable that the House should have all the information at the disposal of the Government; but that the House would be coerced by that information to carry oat the recommendations of the Commission is wholly inconsistent with our tradition; and is a chimerical fear which no man need entertain.
  SIR H. CAMPBBLL-BANNERMAN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is his intention that the Bill of next session should be substantially on the same lines as the Resolution with which we have just parted, and whether the limit of 18,500 is to be maintained?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That will, of course, in part depend upon the information we derive between this and the introduction of the Bill next session.
  MR. LAMBERT (Devonshire,): Which of the precedents the Prime Minister has quoted does he intend to follow?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: One of the precedents I propose to follow is Mr. Gladstone's precedent, in which he said nothing whatever to the House of Commons on the subject.
  MR. DALZIEL: Why with these precedents before him did the right hon. Gentleman bring forward the Redistribution Resolution at all?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It would have been extremely inconvenient both to the House and the country if the general lines on which the Government based their policy had not been made public and the subject of general criticism.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN: Then these, mutatis mutandis, are generally the lines upon which the right hon. Gentleman will proceed?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am not quite sure that I know what mutatis mutandis means in this connection. I certainly propose that any Committee which we may appoint shall start with a general knowledge of the views by which the Government have reached the proposals which they have submitted to the House. Whether those views will suffer any change in the course of the investigation by the Committee is a thing which it is impossible to foresee at the present moment.
  MR. BRYCE: Is the House to understand that the Committee or the Commission which the Government propose to appoint is to be appointed without the instructions to them being made public.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Mr. Gladstone made no public announcement. I do not know that I am bound to follow Mr. Gladstone's precedent, but there is a great deal to be said for it.

  Irish Representation in the British Parliament.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury

  1081
  whether, before assenting to the Redistribution Resolutions, it had been brought to his knowledge that Mr. Pitt, when asked what guarantee the Irish people had that the British Parliament would not violate its pledges, replied publicly that Ireland had the guarantee of the honour of England; and whether, now that this declaration has been brought to his knowledge, he can say whether it is intended to persevere with the proposal to reduce the Irish representation below the figure fixed by the Act of Union.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's view with regard to the character of the obligations imposed by the Treaty of Union; but it would really be quite impossible to argue the subject across the floor of the House at Question time.
  MR. MACVEAGHasked whether, before the right hon. Gentleman drafted his Redistribution Resolutions, Mr. Pitt's reply was brought to his attention.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELLasked whether the Prime Minister agreed with Mr. Pitt.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I agree with Mr. Pitt that nothing this House is likely to do will interfere with the honour of England.

  Redistribution Anomalies.
  MR. MOONKY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he is aware that under his proposed scheme seven British county constituencies, i.e., Bute 18,641, Rutland 19,719, Radnor 23,821, Sutherland 21,239, Peebles and Selkirk 19,106, Berwick 30,793, and Flint 21,559, making a total population of 154,868, will return Seven Members of Parliament, whereas the county of Dublin, with a population of over 2,000 more than the above total, is only given two Members; and whether, in view of the disparity in the population of these Parliamentary constituencies, he will revise the proposed distribution of seats in accordance with more equitable principles.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Gentleman has pointed out that under the Bill of the Government there would be disparities, and there would always be disparities in any measure not based upon equal electoral areas. That proposition does not require proving, I accept it, it is undoubtedly true; but I do not think it a conclusive argument against the proposals of the Government.
  MR. MOONEY: But will not the Bill create further electoral disparities?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, the hon. Gentleman has not proved that it would create electoral disparities. It would leave some electoral disparities untouched.

  Kincardineshire and Redistribution.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that at present the population of Kincardineshire is 39,846, and the average population of the two seats in the neighbouring borough of Aberdeen is 71,864; and that under the Redistribution scheme it is proposed to take away nearly one fourth part of the population of Kincardineshire and throw it into the borough of Aberdeen, and that the disparity between Kincardineshire and the borough of Aberdeen will thus be increased 50 per cent.; and whether, as the ostensible purpose of the scheme is to reduce the present disparity in the population of Parliamentary constituencies, he will undertake to alter the Resolution accordingly.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not deny that this Bill does not produce equal electoral areas; it does not produce them because it was not destined to produce them.
  MR. CROMBIEs asked whether this was not a case not only of leaving inequalities which existed, but of magnifying them.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not agree with that inference, nor do I think we can argue the question across the floor of the House; but if the hon. Gentleman asks me for an assurance that cases like this will be considered, my reply is that they will be considered.

  South Down and Redistribution.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the the fac that, under the Redistribution proposals, South Down will have only one Member for a population of 58,000, whilst three British counties, Buteshire, Rutlandshire, and Sutherlandshire, will have three Members for a similar population; and whether, in view of the fact that the Redistribution proposals are introduced with the object of removing electoral disparities, he proposes to so amend them as to give to South Down a representation proportionate to that proposed to be given to Buteshire, to Rutlandshire, o to Sutherlandshire.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think I can add anything to the Answer I have already given.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. JOHN REDMONDasked whether, in view of the change in the programme of Government business, the right hon. Gentleman could give the House any further information as to the course of business and the duration of the session.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My hopes about the session are unchanged. I hope it will be possible to bring it to a conclusion at the end of the second week in August. The removal out of the Parliamentary path of the Redistribution Resolution may, I hope, facili a e the passage of legislation which otherwise would have been greatly imperilled. More than that I have nothing to say.
MR. DALZIEL: When will the right hon. Gentleman be able to make a general statement as to the course of business?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I had better follow precedent and defer that until the time comes for suspending the 12 o'clock rule, when I shall make the usual statement about public business.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Is it quite settled we are not to have three extra days for Supply?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not see any interstices in the period now remaining to us.
SIR HENRY FOWLER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that out of 146 Votes to be submitted to the House only sixteen have as yet been passed; and under these circumstances is the Government going for the first time since the new rules were passed to reduce the time allotted to Supply?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think that the passage of a Vote affords the smallest indication in modern practice of the time devoted to the discussion of Supply. I think we have devoted quite an. enormous amount of time to the discussion of Supply this year.

NAVAL WORKS [CONSOLIDATED FUND].
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House will, To-morrow, resolve itself into a Committee to consider of making further provision for the construction of works in the United Kingdom and elsewhere for the purposes of the Royal Navy, and of authorising the payment, out of the Consolidated Fund, of such sums as may be necessary for those purposes (King's Recommendation signified)."— (Mr. Pretyman.)
MR. J. H. LEWIS 3thought that, as this was the preliminary stage to the introduction of another Naval Works Bill, the House ought to have some statement on the subject from the Secretary to the Admiralty.
*MR. SPEAKER: Under the Standing Orders no statement could be made at this stage.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: In what position will it be on the Orders to-morrow?
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.)said he did not think the Bill was a very controversial measure, but he should be glad to come to some arrangment With the other side as to the stage most convenient for a discussion of its policy.
MR. DALZ1ELasked if it were not the case that the Bill could not possibly be circulated before Friday. Under those circumstances was
it intended to take the Second Reading that day.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsuggested it would be quite as well to take the debate on the Committee stag.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 222; Noes, 143. (Division List No. 292.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Denny, Colonel

Kenyon, Hn.Geo.T.(Denbigh)

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Dickson, Charles Scott

Kimber, Sir Henry

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Knowles, Sir Lees

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Dorington,Rt.Hn. Sir John E.

Laurie, Lieut.-General

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

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Arrol, Sir William

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

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

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Duke, Henry Edward

Lawson, John Grant(Yorks. NR

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn.SirH.

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Lee, Arthur H(Hants. Fareham)

Bagot, Capt. Joseeline FitzRoy

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Lees, Sir Elliot (Birkenhead)

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Baird, John George Alexander

Faber, George Denison (York)

Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

Balcarres, Lord

Fardell, Sir T. George

Liddell, Henry

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

Fellowes,RtHn AilwynEdward

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

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

Long, ColCharles W. (Evesham)

Balfour, RtHnGerald W(Leeds

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

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

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Londsdale, John Brownlee

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Finlay, Rt Hn Sir R.B.(Invrn'ss

Lowe, Francis William

Banner, John S. Harmood-

Fison, Frederick William

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Bathurst, Hn. Allen Benjamin

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Benn, John Williams

Flower, Sir Ernest

Lucas, Reginald J(Portsmouth

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Forster, Henry William

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Bigwood, James

Foster, Philip S.(Warwick, S.W.

Macdona, John Cumming

Bill, Charles

Gardner, Ernest

Maconochie, A. W.

Bingham, Lord

Garfit, William

M'lver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh-W

Black, Alexander William

Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Marks, Harry Hananel

Bond, Edward

Graham, Henry Robert

Maxwell, Rt.Hn SirH.E(Wigt'n

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

Green WalfordD. (Wednesbury

Maxwell,W.J.H(Dumfriessh.)

Bowles, T. Gibson (King'sLynn

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Brassey, Albert

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Grenfell, William Henry

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Middlemore, J. Throgmorton

Brymer, William Ernest

Hall, Edward Marshall

Milvain, Thomas

Bull, William James

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh,N.

Campbell, Rt. Hn.JA.(Glasgow

Hamilton,Marq.of(L'nd'nderry

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Hardy,Laurence(Kent,Aahford

Morgan, DavidJ(Walthamstow

Cautley, Henry Strother

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Morrell, George Herbert

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

Morrison, James Archibald

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Heath SirJames(Staffords.NW

Mount, William Arthur

Chamberlain, Rt HnJ. A. (Wore.

Heaton, John Henniker

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Chapman, Edward

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

Hogg, Lindsay

Myers, William Henry

Coddington, Sir William

Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

Nicholson, William Graham

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hoult, Joseph

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Howard'John(Kent Faversham

Pease, HerbertPike (Darlingt'n

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Howard, J. (Midd. Tottenham)

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Pemberton, John S. G.

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Hunt, Rowland

Percy, Earl

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Hutton, John (Yorks. N.R.)

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Dalkeith, Earl of

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. ArthurFred.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Davenport, William Bromley

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Kennaway, Rt.Hn. Sir JohnH.

Purvis, Robert

Pym, C. Guy

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Walrond, Rt.Hn. Sir Wm. H.

Randies, John S.

Shaw-Stewart, Sir H.(Renfrew)

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Rankin, Sir James

Simeon, Sir Barrington

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

Ratcliff, R. F.

Sloan, Thomas Henry

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

Reid, James (Greenock)

Smith, HC(North'mb.Tyneside

Wharton, Rt. Hn. John Lloyd.

Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

Smith, RtHnJParker(Lanarks)

Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund Lyne

Renwick, George

Smith, Hon. W.F. D. (Strand)

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Ridley, S. Forde

Spear, John Ward

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Stanley, Ed. Jas. (Somerset)

Wilson, A. Stanley(York,E.R.)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.)

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

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

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R(Bath

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Stroyan, John

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Round, Rt. Hn. James

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Thornton, Percy M.

Alexander Acland-Hood and

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Viscount Valentia.

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Tutf, Charles

Saunderson, Rt.Hn.ColEdw. J.

Turnour, Viscount

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

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

Parrott, William

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Paulton, James Mellor

Allen, Charles P.

Haldane, Rt, Hon. Richard B.

Peate, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry

Harcourt, Lewis

Perks, Robert William

Atherley-Jones, L.

Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil

Power, Patrick Joseph

Baker, Joseph Allen

Harwood, George

Price, Robert John

Barlow, John Emmott

Hayden, John Patrick

Reckitt, Harold James

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Helme, Norval Watson

Reddy, M.

Bell, Richard

Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

Redmond, John E. (Waterford

Boland, John

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Reid, Sir R.Threshie(Dumfries

Brigg, John

Higham, John Sharp

Richards, Thomas

Bright, Allan Heywood

Hope, JohnDeans (Fife, West)

Rickett, J. Compton

Bryce, Rt. Hn. James

Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Joicey, Sir James

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Burke, E. Haviland

Jones, David B. (Swansea)

Roe, Sir Thomas

Burt, Thomas

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

Russell, T. W.

Buxton, N.E(YorkNR, Whitby

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh

Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland)

Buxton, Sydney Chas.(Poplar)

Jordan, Jeremiah

Schwann, Charles E.

Caldwell, James

Joyce, Michael

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

Cameron, Robert

Kennedy, VincentP.(Cavan,W.

Shackleton, David James

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Lambert, George

Sheehy, David

Cawley, Frederick

Lamont, Norman

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Channing, Francis Allston

Langley, Batty

Slack, John Bamford

Cheetham, John Frederick

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Spencer, Rt.HnC.R(Northants

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Levy, Maurice

Strachey, Sir Edward

Crombie, John William

Lewis, John Herbert

Sullivan, Donal

Cullinan, J.

Lloyd-George, David

Tennant, Harold John

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway

Lundon, W.

Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

Mac Veagh, Jeremiah

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

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

M'Crae, George

Tomkinson, James

Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

M'Kenna, Reginald

Toulmin, George

Donelan, Captain A.

M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

Trevelyan, Charles Phillips

Doogan, P. C.

Markham, Arthur Basil

Ure, Alexander

Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

Mooney, John J.

Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

Duncan, J.Hastings

Morley, Rt.Hn. John(Montrose)

Wallace, Robert

Ellice, CaptEC(StAndrw'sBghs

Muldoon, John

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Ellis, John Edward (Notts)

Murnaghan, George

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

Evans, Sir Francis H(Maidstone)

Murphy, John

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Fenwick, Charles

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.

Field, William

Nolan, Col.John P. (Galway, N

Wilson, FredW. (Norfolk, Mid.)

Findlay, Alex (Lanark, N.E.)

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.

Flavin, Michael Joseph

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Flynn, James Christopher

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

Woodhouse, SirJT(Huddersf'd

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Young, Samuel

Fowler, Rt. Hn. Sir Henry

O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

TELLERS TOR THE NOES.—Mr.

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

O'Dowd, John

Lough and Mr. Palziel.

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John

O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

Goddard, Daniel Ford

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

CHURCHES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order for Committee read.
MR. DALZIELsaid that in the unavoidable absence of his hon. friend the Member for Halifax he desired in a very few words to move the instruction which stood on the Paper. He thought, if ever there was a case in which an instruction of this kind ought to be moved, it was in regard to this Bill. It dealt with two separate and distinct questions, and the point raised by the instruction was whether or not the Government had been justified in dealing with these two separate propositions at the present time and under the present circumstances. The first object of the Bill was to deal with a state of affairs that prevailed throughout Scotland and to which no Government could turn a deaf ear, and he thought there was a feeling of gratitude throughout the whole of Scotland that the Government had dealt with that unfortunate state of affairs with the least possible delay. The Bill was solely due to the decision of the House of Lords in the dispute between the Free Church and the United Free Church, and that part of the case for the Bill was, he thought, unanswerable. It was backed up by the unanimous opinion of the whole of Scotland, and the Government in the action they had taken were, he ventured to say, supported almost unanimously by both political Parties for Scotland.
The instruction dealt not so much with the merits of the Established Church as with the policy of introducing it at the present time, and he ventured to say that without this crisis with regard to the Free Church and the United Free Church the Government would never have brought the fifth Clause forward. There was no mandate for it and it had no driving force of public opinion behind it. If there had been any urgent demand for it, the Government would have found time necessary to carry a Bill, and, if they were convinced of the urgency for it, he had no doubt they would be able to find the necessary time next session to pass it. He would especially press the point that this instruction did not raise the merits of the fifth Clause. There might be many hon. Members on both sides of the House opposed to Establish-
1090
ment in Scotland who would hesitate some time before they would deny full freedom with regard to the administration of that Church. That point was not raised at the present time. The only point raised was whether the Government was wise or not, in dealing with a serious state of affairs in Scotland affecting two particular Churches, to take advantage of the crisis to introduce an altogether outside proposal. He hoped, therefore, the Government at this late hour would seriously consider whether they ought not to give the Committee the power he asked. He believed their action in doing so would be received with satisfaction by the great body of public opinion in Scotland and would tend to secure the passage of the Bill.
MR. EUGENE WASONseconded.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it be an instruction to the Committee that they have power to divide the Bill into two parts, separating the provision relating to the Established Church of Scotland from those relating to the Free and the United. Free Church."—(Mr. Dalziel.
*THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON, Glasgow, Bridgton)said he could not, as the House was perfectly aware, agree to the Motion, and he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press it. He had lately stated the views he held on the matter. In dealing with this question they must deal with it as a whole, and to his mind Clause 5 was an essential part of the Bill for the settlement of the question. He would remind the hon. Member who had moved that the Leader of the Opposition, speaking of this very instruction, which was in the name of the hon. Member for Halifax, said, on the Second Reading of the Bill, that it was a matter which could be dealt with in Committee. He thought that was quite true.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN. Not this instruction.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the hon. Member for Halifax had an instruction to

1091
divide the Bill into two Bills, and the Leader of the Opposition said that, whether the form in which he had framed the instruction was right or wrong, the hon. Member was perfectly right in moving, because the two things were totally distinct. That, however, was not the point. The conclusion of the matter, according to the right hon. Gentleman's opinion, was that it could be dealt with in Committee.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: That is the second barrel of the gun.
*MR. SCOTT-DICKSONsaid that undoubtedly, if the hon. Gentleman's point were a sound one, it could be dealt with in Committee by moving that Clause o should be omitted.
MR. DALZIELsaid the instruction raised a question purely of policy, but, when they came to the fifth Clause, the division would be taken on that clause. The instruction simply dealt with the action of the Government and the policy of putting two propositions into one Bill.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he thought every Member—he was quite sure he might say every Scotch Member—wanted to get to the business of the Bill. The instruction was one which he could not accept, and he accordingly trusted that, without spending time on what he might be permitted to term technicalities, they would get to the Bill on its merits and see whether they could not secure such a measure as he had already said more than once, both on the introduction of the Bill and on its Second Reading, was one which concerned all the Presbyterian Churches, and had not only as regarded the first but also as regarded the fifth Clause an important effect as to the prospect of the future union of all the Presbyterian Churches. He was satisfied there was a large body of public opinion in Scotland in favour of Clause 5 as well as of the rest of the Bill; and on these grounds, therefore, he submitted that the instruction was not one which the House should assent to and that they should get to the Bill.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid the right hon. Gentleman on
1092
a previous occasion urged, and he had now repeated the opinion, that the Bill should be dealt with as a whole. It was precisely because it was not a whole that the instruction was moved. There was no real substantial connection between Clause 5 and the rest of the Bill. He did not propose at that particular stage to discuss the merits of Clause 5, but he did not think it could be denied that it was a totally foreign element introduced into a matter which ought to be kept single, which ought to be treated as urgent, and which, he believed, was now practically in course of being settled to the satisfaction of most of those concerned, thanks to the concessions that the Government had made. But this fifth Clause was a foreign body altogether, and he, therefore, thought it was not unreasonable that his hon. friend should move the instruction, which he should support. The right hon. Gentleman had quoted some words that he had used. He merely expressed the opinion that this particular way of dealing with the matter might not be the usual form. He had in his recollection several occasions when the Chair had decided that an instruction was not in order for some reason or other, and that was the sense in which he said that it might not be in the proper form. He was in entire agreement with the idea of the instruction, and he thought his hon. friend was certainly entitled to bring the question forward as he had done.
MR. LLOYD - GEORGEsaid it was with some trepidation that be intervened in a Scotch matter, and he only did so because it established a serious precedent for England and Wales. If this clause were to be inserted in a Scotch Bill dealing with the Scotch Establishment, there was no reason why a similar one should not be inserted in an English Bill dealing with the English Establishment. They knew perfectly well that a claim had been put forward by a section of the clergy from which they had much to fear, certainly from the Protestant point of view, and that was the reason why the Protestant section of the Church itself had already taken steps to protest against this particular clause. He thought they had

1093
been wise, because it really established a serious precedent. For the first time it gave absolute powers of self-government; it created not merely an autonomy but an independent authority. Here was a Church with national endowments, and the control of those endowments was to be absolutely given to that Church without reference to Parliament. It was undoubtedly a precedent of a very serious character. He was not going to discuss the merits of the clause; he only referred to it by way of establishing his proposition. Power was given to the General Assembly, on the voice of the majority of the Presbyteries, to alter the formularies of the Church, and that meant practically altering the doctrines of the Church.
He was afraid the right hon. Gentleman had taken the same view of the Church formularies as he did of politics— that it really did not matter, that the particular formula of subscription was no indication of one's private opinion. When one said "retaliation" and "protection," it did not matter; it amounted to the samer thing. Surely when one signed a formula saying he believed in a certain Confession of Faith, it meant, amongst honourable men, that one really did believe in that Confession of Faith; and if they altered that formula in any way it meant that people who did not believe in that Confession of Faith need not necessarily be excluded from the Church. He was not complaining of that. He was in favour of giving the greatest breadth in Churches. He thought it was the only possible way in which they could develop an intelligent religion in any country; but if the Established Church wanted this freedom it ought to pay the price like any other Church. This power was given to the Scotch Church under conditions which were not given to the United Free Church of Scotland. Freedom was given to the United Free Church, but it had to pay a heavy price. Why should they make an exception in the case of the National Church, which was endeavouring to secure freedom without paying a price for it? It might not be a serious matter in Scotland where they were all more or less Presbyterians, but in England it was a very serious matter indeed.
1094
There was no doubt a very powerful section of the Church whose motives were creating a good deal of uneasiness and anxiety amongst the Protestant community of this country. Supposing they had the same clause inserted in an English Bill, what would it mean? For the General Assembly they would substitute Convocation, and they would say that Convocation, with the consent of the majority of the rural diocesan conferences, could alter the formularies of the Church of England, and anyone who knew the condition of things in the Church of England knew what a serious thing that would be. It would mean that Convocation might convert, by a mere vote of the diocesan conferences, the Church into a Catholic Church. He did not think the House of Commons ought to create a precedent for that, and that it ought not to allow the alteration of the formularies of subscription without reference to Parliament itself. Parliament was likely to be Protestant for some time to come, but he could quite see where this had come from. It had come from Canterbury. He was perfectly certain of it. It was a suggestion from Canterbury with a view to eventualities. Probably it could not be done in the course of the present Parliament, though no one knew what might not be done, for the Government was capable of anything; but at any rate it might be done in some future Parliament. He had heard of a claim put forward by very powerful supporters of the Government. It was, for instance, exactly what the hon. Member for Greenwich had been claiming for the Church of England, and he might in the future quote this as a precedent in support of his case. It was simply a great flanking movement. It was represented as a march on Edinburgh, but its real objective was Canterbury.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.): May I ask, on a point of order, whether it is proper to discuss the merits of Clause 5, or whether we are not confined to the question of whether Clause 5 should not be converted into a separate Bill? Your ruling will have some effect upon the course of debate.
MR. DALZIEL: May I further submit to you whether it would not be in order to refer to the merits of Clause 5, in so far as they are reasons for making the clause a separate Bill?
*MR. SPEAKER: The instruction cannot very well be discussed without referring to Clause 5 and the general principle it contains, but obviously it would not be right to discuss the merits of it at length. I was thinking of rising towards the conclusion of the speech of the hon. Member for Carnarvon, but as he began by saying he did not intend to discuss the merits of the clause, I concluded he was not going to do so.
MR. CALDWELLsaid the Bill arose entirely out of a private dispute between the majority and minority of the original Free Church, and Parliament was dealing with a purely private question of property which had nothing, whatever to do with the religious views of either one side or the other. Parliament was dealing with a, matter in the same way as if an educational endowment had become inoperative and it had been appealed to, and the case was the same as if they were dealing with a private Bill upstairs. Parliament was simply dealing with a question of civil property as between two bodies of a Church. What on earth had their formularies or their views on religious questions to do with that? It was merely an accident that the property belonged to a Church. Clause 5 was therefore altogether ultro, vires. It was said that the people of Scotland would be willing to give the Established Church freedom. That might be so, but it would not tend to the dignity of the Established Church to say that they found a Church in distress in regard to its funds, and took advantage of that to put into a Bill a clause giving them certain powers in order to carry out ecclesiastical views of their own. It would always rankle in the minds of the people of Scotland. The relative position of, the Church of Scoltand was in no way affected by the mere circumstance of; any division of property which would take place under the Bill. It would; have been much better for the
1096
Government to agree to the proposed instruction. They had already got a Second Reading of the clause which was a substantial matter, and while Clause 5 was being considered as a separate Bill the remainder of the measure, for which so much urgency existed, could be dealt with in the other House. The acceptance of the instruction would greatly facilitate the passage of the Bill and save the irritation which every part of the community would otherwise feel at advantage I being taken of another's distress to secure an ecclesiastical benefit to the Established Church.
SIR MARK STEWARTsaid that unless more rapid progress was made there would be little prospect of passing the Bill, and that, he thought, was sufficient justification for opposing the instruction. He believed that a great number of the United Presbyterians approved of the insertion, of this clause, and that the same view was held by s large number of Members of that House. It was unanimously recommended by the Gentral Assembly after full discussion, and, therefore, it could hardly be said to have come from Canterbury or any other similar quarter. He hoped the Motion would not be pressed, and that the House would be unanimous in endeavouring to pass the Bill as soon as possible. With the exception of this debateable clause the Bill was framed to secure, not convenience, but justice and equity, and, that being so, he hoped that no time would be lost in passing the measure into law.
MR. BRYCEpointed out that the only impediment to the rapid progress of the Bill lay in Clause 5. With that exception the measure had. become practically uneontroversial—by which he did not mean that there were not points in regard to which the Bill could be improved, and upon which the Government would be pressed to make further concessions, but broadly speaking the Bill was not controversial as between the two sides of the House except in regard to Clause 5. The prospects of the Bill were seriously injured by the introduction of that clause, as it raised questions which ought to be considered altogether

1097
apart from the differences between the two branches of the old Free Church, and involved large issues in which England and Wales were directly interested. Those matters should be dealt with separately, in order that they might be considered on their merits. They could not be so considered under the present arrangement, and, therefore, he regretted the decision to which the Lord-Advocate had come.
MR. GUESTsaid, that as an Englishman who did not pretend to be an expert on Scotch ecclesiastical matters' he failed to see how Clause 5 could be an integral part of the Bill, and he did not believe that the Government would drop the measure if they failed to carry that clause. It raised points on which many Members felt very strongly, and it would be an act of courtesy to allow the House to pronounce an opinion on the merits of the remainder of the Bill, leaving this clause to be discussed subsequently if the Government thought it necessary. It was probably not the intention of the Government, but this clause might accidentally develop into a precedent for dealing with troubles in the English Church. All Establishment involved uniformity, and uniformity must be subject to that House, and in so far as the control of formulas was handed over to a Church, so far that Church ceased to be established. That was the view which he in common with many others held, and he mentioned it to show how large were the questions raised by this clause, and to urge the Prime Minister to meet the genuine desire of Member son that side of the House, so that they might assist in the carrying out of that part of the Bill with which all agreed, without having to deal with the matters involved in Clause 5.
MR. AUSTIN TAYLORthought the Prime Minister must see that the inclusion of Clause 5 was not going to facilitate the passage of the Bill. He would not attempt to lift the veil which hung over the origin of the clause, but if it were over reached he hoped to move an Amendment raising all the issues referred to by the hon. Member for Carnarvon. The point
1098
which appealed to him in favour of the instruction was the fact that owing to its being included in this Bill it was impossible to get the unbiassed Scotch opinion on the clause. He did not wish to be offensive, but Scotch Free Church Members collectively were rather in the position of the proverbial donkey who saw a bunch of carrots in front of him which he was determined to get; their minds were thereby obscured and rendered incapable of giving an impartial judgment on this clause. English Members had a right to protest against anything that prevented the obtaining of the clear and unbiassed judgment of the Scotch intellect, which was so much valued, especially upon Church matters, and for that reason he should support the Amendment.
*MR. J. A. CAMPBELLwas surprised that hon. Members should say there was a want of connection between this clause and the rest of the Bill. Those who held that view must have forgotten how much the subject of creed subscription entered into the judgment of the House of Lords. The clause related to the relaxation, under certain limitations, of the formula of subscription for ministers of the Church of Scotland. The subject of creed subscription was not left by the decision of the House of Lords as it had been before. There was no denying that expressions used, notably by the Lord Chancellor, gave a much more rigid interpretation to creed subscription than was generally understood and practised. All along they had had to contend against the over-scrupulousness of some persons who shrank from signing the Confession because they thought their signature bound them down to every expression in it. He could not say that he had met with many of these over-scrupulous poisons among his own friends. He himself, with others, had signed the Westminster Confession of Faith without hesitation. He had signed it in a broad and liberal sense, and he found that others had done the same. But still there were people who were disposed to put a more rigid interpretation upon creed subscription, and their views in this matter seemed to receive some support from the decision

1099
of the House of Lords. So that now when Parliament was dealing with a Bill the object of which was to remedy a very unhappy state of things in Scotland which had resulted from that decision, it seemed not unfitting to remove at the same time a grievance which the Church of Scotland complained of, and which had been aggravated by opinions expressed in reaching that decision.
Upon these grounds he saw a natural connection between this clause and the rest of the Bill, and he hoped the Government would stand firm and uphold the Bill as a whole.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 103: Noes, 203, (Division List No. 293.)

AYES.

Alien, Charles P.

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Price, Robert John

Atherley-Jones, L.

Helme, Korval Watson

Reid, Sir R. Threshic (Dumfries

Barlow, John Emmott

Hemyphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

Richards, Thomas

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Rickett, T. Compton

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Higham, John Sharp

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Brigg, John

Holland, Sir William Henry

Roe, Sir Thomas

Bright, Allan Heywood

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Russell, T. W.

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Horniman, Frederick John

Schwann, Charles B.

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Shackleton, David James

Burt, Thomas

Joicey, Sir James

Shipman, Dr, John G.

Buxton, Sydney Chas. (Poplar)

Jones, David B. (Swansea)

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Caldwell, James

Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonsh,)

Slack, John Bamford

Cameron, Robert

Kearley, Hudson E.

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Kitton, Sir James

Spencer, Rt. Hn. CR(Northants

Cawley, Frederick

Lambert, George

Stanhope, Hn. Philip James

Changing, Francis Allston

Langley, Batty

Stevenson, Francis S.

Cheetham, John Frederick

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall),

Strachey, Sir Edward

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Taylor,'Austin (East Toxteth)

Cremer, William Randal

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Tennant, Harold John

Davies, M. Vaughan(Cardigan)

Levy, Maurice

Thomas, DavidAlfred(Merthyr

Duncan, J, Hastings

Lewis, John Herbert

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

Dunn, Sir William

Lloyd-George, David

Toulmin, George

Edwards, Frank

Lough, Thomas

Ure, Alexander

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

M'Kenna, Reginald

Wallace, Robert

Fenwick, Charles

M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

White, George (Norfolk)

Foster, Sir Waiter (Derby Co.)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Mitchell, Edw.(Fermanagh, N.

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Moulton, John Fletcher

Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid.

Fuller, J. M. F.

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

Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

Parrott, William

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Paulton, James Mellor

Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir B (Berwick)

Pease, J.A. (Saffron Walden)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Perks, Robert William

Dalziel and Mr. Eugene

Harcourt, Lewis

Philipps, John Wynford

Wason.

Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil

Pirie, Duncan V.

NOES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Banner, John S, Harmood

Chamberlain, RtHnJA (Worc.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bathurst Hon. Allen Benjamin

Chapman, Edward

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H.A.F.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Coddington, Sir William

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bigwood, James

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Arrol, Sir William

Bingham, Lord

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Atkinson, Rt. Bon. John

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H

Bond, Edward

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

Baird, John George Alexander

Brown, Sir Alex. H, (Shropsh

Dalkeith, Earl of

Balcarres, Lord

Brymer, William Ernest

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Baldwin, Alfred

Buxton, N.E(YorkN'RWhitby

Davenport, William Bromley

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

Campbell, Rt. HnJ.A(Glasgow

Denny, Colonel

Balfour, Capt. C.B. (Hornsey)

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Dickson, Charles Scott

Balfour, Rt. HnGerald W(Leeds

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbys

Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir J, C.

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred D.

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Doughty, Sir George

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Leveson-Gower, FrederickN.S.

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

Liddell, Henry

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney

Doxford, Sir Win. Theodore

Llewellyn, Even Henry

Robinson, Brooke

Duke, Henry Edward

Long, Col. Chas. W.(Evesham

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Egerton, Hn. A. de Tatton

Long, RtHnWalter (Bristol, S

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Elibank, Master of

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Round, Rt. Hn. James

Ellice, Capt.EC(SAndrw'sBghs

Lowe, Francis William.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Faber, George Denison (York)

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Fardell, Sir T. George

Lucas, Col. Francis(Lowestoft)

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Ed.

Lucas, ReginaldJ(Portsmouth

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Fergusson, RtHn.Sir J(Manc'r

Lyttelton, Re. Hon. Alfred

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Macdona, John Cumming

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Finch, Rt.Hn. George H.

Maconochie, A. W.

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Finlay, Rt Hn SirRB(Inv'rn'ss

M'Iver, Sir Lewis(EdinburghW

Shaw-Stewart, Sir H(Renfrew

Fisher, William Hayes

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

Smith, RtHnJParker(Lanarks

Fison, Frederick William

Malcolm, Ian

Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

Flaunery, Sir Fortescue

Manners, Lord Cecil

Spear, John Ward

Flower, Sir Ernest

Marks, Harry Hananel

Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

Forster, Henry William

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Stanley. Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes)

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

Maxwell,Rt HnSirHE(Wigt'n)

Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

Gardner, Ernest

Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Graham, Henry Robert

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Greene, W. Raytmond(Cambs)

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Stroyan, John

Grenfell, William Henry

Milner, RtHn. Sir FrederickG.

Strutt, Hn. Chas. Hedley

Hall, Edward Marshall

Milvain, Thomas

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Halsey, Rt. Hn. Thomas F.

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Thornton, Percy M.

Hamilton, Marq.of(L'nd'nde'ry

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Morrell, George Herbert

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

Morrison, James Archibald

Tuff, Charles

Heath, Arthur HowardHanley

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Turnour, Viscount

Heath, SirJas. (Staffords.N.W.

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

Heaton, John Henniker

Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Myers, William Henry

Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Nicholson, William Graham

Welby, Lt.-ColA-C.E(Taunton)

Hoare, Sir Samuel

O'Neill, Hn. Robert Torrens

Wharton, Rt.Hon. John Lloyd

Hogg, Lindsay

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Whiteley, H. (AshtonundLyne

Hoult, Joseph

Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)

whitmore, Charles Algernon

Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert W.

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Hutton, John (Yorks, NT.R.)

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Wilson. John (Glasgow)

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Pretyman, Ernest George

Wilson-Todd, SirW.H.(Yorks)

Kennaway, Rt.Hn. Sir John H

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T (Denbigh

Purvis, Robert

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Kimber, Sir Henry

Pym, C. Guy

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Knowles, Sir Lees

Ranales, John S.

Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

Lamont, Norman

Rankin, Sir James

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Ratcliff, R. F.

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Reid, James (Greenock)

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

Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

TELLERS FOE THE NOES—Sir

Lee, ArthurH. (Hants, Fareham

Renwick, George

Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage:

Ritchie, Re. Hn. Chas Thomson

Question put, and agreed to.

Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N.R., Thirsk) in the Chair.]
Clause 1:—
MR. BUCHANANmoved an Amendment having the object of leaving the whole question of the allocation of property to the Commissioners without any reservation or special instructions. If this Amendment
1102
were accepted it would, he said, very. much facilitate the passing of the Bill Why should they introduce reservations and restrictions on the discretion of the Commissioners? Why should this House endeavour to instruct them in regard to what would be, perhaps, the most difficult part of the task they had to undertake? The House knew from the general terms of the Bill that it would be the duty of the Commissioners to make an equitable division of property between the Free Church and the United. Free Church, and the general line on which they were to make that equitable

1103
division was indicated in the second paragraph of the preamble as follows —
"And whereas a Commission appointed to inquire into the matter have reported that the Free Church are unable adequately to carry out all trusts of the property, and that it is desirable to provide for the allocation thereof, provision being made for the equipment of the Free Church—"
He thought the House might fairly trust the Commissioners to make a fair and equitable division of the property. All Scotch Members would allow that the Government had selected a fair body of men to discharge the duties of Executive Commissioners under the Act. They had added to the Elgin Commissioners two gentlemen who were well known to many Members of the House—gentlemen of sound judgment, well acquainted with Scotch affairs, and admittedly impartial. He thought everyone must acknowledge the caution, wisdom, and impartiality with which Lord Elgin and his colleagues discharged the difficult task which was set to them. This Bill was based on the Report which that Commission presented to the House, and it was owing to that Report that things had gone on in Scotland without a much greater outburst of public feeling than there had been. On these general grounds he strongly urged the Government to consider whether it would not be better to leave the whole matter of the division and allocation of property to the discretion of the Commissioners.
He urged this course also on the ground that Scotch Members in the House of Commons were in a small minority, and all of them could not pretend to have complete and detailed knowledge of this question. The vast body of English Members could make no claim to a knowledge of the question. In Sub-sections 2 and 3 they were proposing to give instructions to the Elgin Commissioners, who were already possessed of considerable light, and in the course of their inquiries they would have full light on the subject. If the House indicated to them the general lines on which they were to go, they might safely trust that the Commissioners would not go beyond those lines, and that they would make an equitable settlement on those lines. Sub-sections 2 and 3 had
1104
assumed various forms since the Bill was drafted. He did not blame the Lord-Advocate for that. It showed his wisdom in endeavouring to accommodate himself to the views of those who were most acquainted with the subject, but he did say that it also showed the great difficulty there was in laying down specific instructions on this most intricate part of the work which the Commission would have to do. The Commissioners would have full knowledge of the various proposals which had been made by the Government and the suggestions made by other Members, and it was certainly to be expected that in their allocation of the property they would endeavour to meet what they had reason to believe was the general sense and opinion of the House of Commons and the Government upon this intricate question. He believed that opinion in Scotland was generally in favour of the Commissioners being entrusted with the allocation of the property, having regard to the views contained in the Report of the Elgin Commission. He thought a great deal of grievance would be avoided if Sub-sections 2 and 3 were left out, and if they left the whole matter to the discretion of the Commissioners. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 1, line 25, to leave out Sub-section (2)."—[Mr. Buchanan.)
Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.)said there was no doubt much that was tempting in the suggestion of the hon. Member, but it practically transferred any responsibility which this House might take upon itself to the rather heavily-burdened shoulders of the five gentlemen whom the Government had appointed to carry out the Act. He would further re mind the hon. Member that, tempting as the suggestion was, he did not think this House ought to thrust so heavy a reponsibility upon the Commissioners. No doubt the Commissioners would consider it a very sore burden to be borne

1105
but he was influenced by other considerations than merely their convenience, for he did not think this House ought to set an example in this Bill of dealing with vast sums of money and property by handing them over to the absolutely uncontrolled action of these Commissioners without either laying down conditions beforehand, which must be fulfilled, or asking to see afterwards what had been the action Taken for the purpose of approval. The last course everybody would feel to be impossible, for it would indefinitely postpone the settlement of the question, of which a rapid settlement was the very essence, and he thought they were driven to the other alternative, and that was to lay down certain principles, not too narrow, or too detailed, but principles which might enable the Commissioners to understand what was the mind of Parliament on the subject. He noticed that the hon. Gentleman himself in the course of his speech seemed conscious that the mind of Parliament ought to be considered by the Commissioners. His suggestion as to the method by which this was to be attained WAS that the Commissioners should read the debates and consider the speeches and suggestions made by the members of the Government and also by independent Members of the House, and so to form a sort of general idea of the trend, of opinion within this House and within the walls of the House of Lords. He did not deny that anybody accustomed to read between the lines of Parliamentary debates could in that way very, often derive a fairly sound conclusion of what the House intended without consulting the actual propositions which had been formed in the division lobby and which were recorded on the Statute-book, but he did not think it would be right to require any body of men whom they appointed to carry out this definite function to collect their evidence by the painful process of excogitation and criticism of the rather heavy pages of Hansard. He thought it would be simpler to lay down the lines to be followed—not in elaborate rules—as they were laid down in this Bill. He did not think that course could do otherwise than give satisfaction to the United Free Church. He thought that the legal Free Church would feel extremely bitterly if there were no pro-
1106
positions laid down which would in their opinion safeguard their interests as well as the interests of the other party to what he might call the suit. This consideration he would press with the more confidence because he did not think the legal Free Church had in the House a single person, who felt that their interests were specially in his charge. He hoped they were all animated by a sense of justice and by a desire to see fair play, but it would not be denied that the great bulk of the House, to whichever Party they belonged, were in no sense representatives of the legal Free Church, and it, therefore, behoved them, to do their best to frame the Bill in such a manner as would not give that Church any undue cause of complaint. If Parliament were to give money in bulk to the Commissioners, and leave the whole responsibility on their shoulders, he thought that would be unfair to the Commissioners and would arouse great suspicion and great misgiving in one party to the suit. He would, therefore, suggest that the hon. Member should not further press the suggestion he had made.
MR. WALLACEsaid he should like to ask the Prime Minister whether the body who had already heard the evidence on the question of the allocation of the property, and who would have further opportunities of examining the facts, were not better qualified to determine the principles on which the allocation should be made than the House of Commons, the great bulk of whose Members were absolutely ignorant of the entire matter. It was on that ground they urged the Prime Minister to accept the Amendment. The only fear he had was that they might draw the line so strictly in regard to the principles that were to guide the Commissioners that they would find themselves compelled to do what they might think an injustice owing to the strictness of the lines laid down by the House. He would urge the Government to consider whether something could not be done in order to give a wider latitude to the Commissioners.
*MR. AINSWORTH (Argyllshire)said he wished to support what had falien from his hon. friend. He had voted with

1107
the Government in the division on the last Amendment, and in this case he also wanted as much freedom as possible. He thought it would be most desirable that the Commissioners should be able to take into consideration all local circumstances, especially in the Highlands. He could suppose a case in which the majority of the congregation were on one side, while the greater part of the church work was being done by the minority. He believed that if the Lord-Advocate allowed the Commissioners as much freedom as possible with as large powers as possible, this would do much to secure peace and harmony on all sides.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he desired, if he might presume to do so, to ask his hon friend the Member for East Perthshire to withdraw the Amendment. His general view was that if the clause in the Bill had stood as it was originally framed, he should certainly have preferred that the Commission should be left a free hand. But he thought that the Government, on this matter—and he desired at once to make the acknowledgement—had behaved with considerateness since the Bill was printed. The negotiations prior to that date might have put the Bill into a different form, but looking to the body of the Amendment under which the Commissioners were to be appointed the Lord-Advocate seemed to believe that their position was to be absolutely trusted, and that they would have a statutory standard of conduct to guide them in dealing with a property so large. He did not conceal from the House that the whole proposal of the Bill was, from a Parliamentary point of view, a somewhat strong order. The appointment of an Executive Commission he had recognised from the first to be a very strong order only defensible on the ground that the complexities of the case were such that Parliamentary time would be consumed in what really were matters for a Commission. Now that they had the Elgin Commission; now that they had a desire on both sides of the House; and now that they had concessions made by the Government with regard to the line of action in relation to that Commission he would ask
1108
his hon. friend to withdraw the Amendment, on the ground that it would upset the entire body of negotiations which, had, so far, made satisfactory lines for the conduct of the Commission. If he put himself in the place of one of the Commissioners he would ask himself whether, in view of the delicate situations which might arise, he would not feel more fortified in making awards under the Bill after Parliament had laid down the various lines for the Executive Commission than if there were no suck statutory powers. While largely sharing the feeling of those who supported it, he appealed to his hon. friend to consent to withdraw his Amendment.
MR. BUCHANANsaid he thought that he had pointed out a more excellent way; but if the Government and some of his friends on his side of the House would, not support him the responsibility would be theirs. Recognising that he should be in a minority he asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
*THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON, Glasgow, Bridgton)said that the Amendment he wished to move was "In Clause 1, page 1, line 25, after the words 'Commission,' to insert the words 'in making their allocation of property under this Act.'" If the Committee would kindly direct their attention to lines 5, 6, and 7 of page 2 of the Bill they would see the following words:—viz., that the Commission had power—
"To make special arrangements where several Church building* are situated in the same neighbourhood, and in any other eases which appear to them to require exceptional treatment."
In the course of the negotiations, to which the hon. and learned Member for the Border Burghs had referred, it was suggested that these words, as the Bill originally stood, would apply only to the case of allocation to the Free Church, and not to cases of allocation to the United Free Church. He could not agree to that view; but the words he now proposed to insert, "in making their allocation of property under this Act," being general words were intended

1109
to, and, he believed, would successfully prevent that reading of the concluding part of Sub-section 2 to which he had referred. It was on that ground that he begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 1, line 25, after the word Commission,' to insert the words ' in making their allocation of property under this Act.' "— (The Lord-Advocate.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
SIR ROBERT REIDasked whether the Lord-Advocate was satisfied that the word "allocation" comprised both churches.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that that was undoubtedly his view. The point had been very carefully considered.
MR. BLACKsaid that, in view of the Amendment put down by the Lord Advocate immediately after his, he would not move the Amendment standing in his name.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that the next Amendment standing in his name dealt with the negotiations which had been referred to by the hon. and learned Member for the Border Burghs. The effect of it was that instead of leaving the ascertainment of the members and adherents as they existed when the Elgin Commission came to make their inquiry, to one-third, the Amendment deleted that and went back to 1900, and required that one-third of the survivors of those who were members and adherents in 1900 should be taken instead of the original proposal in the Bill. Of course there were considerations on both sides as to whether that was the proper view to take. He quite understood that that was suggested by the hon. Member for Banffshire as what commended itself to both sides. On the whole the Government had come to the conclusion that the proposal he now made would meet the case.
1110
Amendment proposed—
"In page 1, line 26, to leave out from the word 'that,' to the word 'with,' in page 2, line 4, and insert the words 'out of those who in the opinion of the Commission were members or adherents of the congregation on the thirtieth day of October, nineteen hundred, and are at the commencement of this Act both resident in the district, and members or adherents of the Free Church or United Free Church congregation, at least one-third are members or adherents of the Free Church congregation.' "—(The Lord Advocate.)
Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid that the Amendment of the Lord-Advocate represented, in his opinion, a large improvement or amendment of the Bill in two particulars. In the first place it went back to the firm ground of the year 1900; and in doing so it would enable the Commissioners at once to extinguish, if necessary, all those scandalous cases of the seizure of churches not only since 1900 but since the decision of the House of Lords. That was a vast improvement. The other improvement did not appear so satisfactory on comparing the Amendment with the Bill as it originally stood. But they could not forget that the earliest Amendment proposed was for one-fourth, which was felt to be totally inadequate to meet the situation. One-third was a considerable improvement, and he understood it would include upwards of a score of cases of great hardship which would not otherwise have been included. He might say that he was not at all convinced that one-third was adequate to the situation. He thought, however, that it was an instalment of justice much larger than had hitherto been offered.
Question put, and negatived. Words inserted.
MR. PARKER SMITHsaid the object of the Amendment he now moved was to give the Commissioners power to grant money compensation, and to raise money by bond not only on the general property, but also on the congregational property, if such an arrangement should be found convenient. Where churches were going

1111
over to the minority the Commissioners had a discretion under certain provisions of the Act. There was one kind of special arrangement which it seemed to him might be convenient, and which would prevent the feeling that otherwise might arise—that was to allow the Commissioners to arrange that a sum of money should be paid to the poorer congregations so that they might be enabled to build up a new and separate church. He did not feel sure whether under the general wording of the section the Commissioners had the power to make an arrangement of that kind. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, tine 5, after the word 'however,' to insert the words 'to give money compensation in any such case or.'"—(Mr. Parker Smith.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that unless they specified the fund from which the Commissioners were to draw money they would get into difficulties. He thought the only plan would be for his hon. friend not to press the Amendment.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid the allocations in respect of which the hon. Member proposed to give money payments were allocations of congregational property. From the point of view of the United Free Church the position was an extremely hard one. Although they had two-thirds of the membership of congregation that two-thirds was to go out in its entirety, and the one-third was to retain the whole of the property, and no compensation was to be given to the two-thirds. From the pecuniary point of view he thought that was an injustice to which strong objection could be taken either from one side or the other. Where were they to obtain these funds from. The funds for compensation could only be contained in the congregational property, which was in the possession of the minority of one-third. What would happen would be that they would introduce a state of matters in which they would be launching into a separate existence one-third of the membership
1112
of a certain congregation with this burden of debt round its neck. There must be suffering on one side or the other, but at all events in starting separate congregations let them start them unshackled and untrammelled by debt.
MR. WALLACEsuggested that in the Bill as it stood there was power to give money compensation, the Commissioners having authority to deal with exceptional cases.
COLONEL DENNYsaid that unless certain words were struck out of the second Sub-section of Clause 2 such a thing could not be done.
MR. PAEKEE SMITHsaid he thought the hon. Member for the Border Burghs had rather misconceived the effect of the Amendment. He was content with having raised the point; and knowing that the matter would lie in the hands of the Commissioners he would not press the Amendment.
SIR ROBERT REIDsuggested that between the Committee and the Report stages the Lord-Advocate should give some little thought to this matter.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. BLACKsaid the Amendment he now proposed was to provide that all congregational property not allocated to the Free Church should be allocated to the United Free Church.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 7, after the word 'treat" ment,' to insert the words ' all congregational property not allocated to the Free Church shall be allocated to the United Free Church."—(Mr. Mack.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid according to his reading of Clause 1, Subsection 1, that was the effect because the Commissioners were directed to allocate between the Free and the United Free Churches the whole property. If they

1113
gave so much to the one they must give the rest to the other.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. CORBETTsaid that the Bill stated that "adequate provision" should be made for a number of persons. He feared that the word "adequate" might lie in the hands of the Commissioners. It might take the form of an endowment which was unfamiliar to the experience of the Church. He would be ready to modify the Amendment by directing that "liberal" provision should be made. That would allow the Commissioners to have a free hand in carrying out their intentions as to what amount of endowment should be given for these purposes. There was another point in the Amendment, which was that all sources of income of the Free Church should also be taken into consideration. If the subscriptions given for congregational purposes were to be taken into consideration there was no reason why, for example, the fees from students should not also be taken into consideration or the existing endowments of the churches in calculating how much money was to be made up beyond these sources for making adequate provision for the church. The Lord-Advocate was understood to have given an as surance that the educational trusts of the church would be retained entirely for educational purposes but under the provisions of the Bill as it stood it would be possible to put a mortgage on the college buildings to be used for the general purposes of the Free Church. That seemed to many of them an objectionable form of pooling the trusts. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 8, leave out Sub-section (3) and insert the words (3) 'The Commisson, with due regard to the carrying out of the purposes for which the funds and property were respectively given, shall make such provision as they shall consider in all the circumstances to be reasonable for supplementing congregational contributions and other income of the Free Church for—(a) the theological education of the students for the ministry of that Church; (6) the support of aged and infirm ministers and of widows and orphans of ministers of that Church; (e) the support of the ministers of Free Church congregations to which the congregational property has been
1114
allocated under this Act;(d) provision for itinerant preachers; and(e) the general administrative purposes of that Church.'"—(Mr. Corbett.)
Question proposed, ';That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
MR. BLACK, in supporting the Amendment, ventured to hope that the Lord-Advocate would meet them in this ease as he had in others. Under the clause as it stood ministers of the legal Free I Church were to be endowed out of the accumulations of the old Free Church without apparently continuing to contribute the insurance premium which by Act of Parliament they were called upon to contribute. It should be made plain that if the ministers of the legal Free Church were to participate in the widows' and orphans' fund they should continue to contribute the £7,000 which had hitherto been contributed by the Free Church. In considering, moreover, how much the United Free Church funds should be drawn upon, the Commissioners should first of all take into consideration all the sources of income open to the Old Free Church—the Sustentation Fund, legacies expected in the future, and the endowments which some of the congregations possessed. When all these sources of income were known, only then should the funds of the United Free Church be drawn upon by way of supplement.
MR. BRYCEagreed with the object of the Amendment. Common equity suggested that the other sources of income possessed by the legal Free Church should be regarded. If a congregation's contributions were to be included there was no reason why the other sources of income should not be included also. The words of the Amendment were far safer and more elastic than the words in the Bill. What they wanted was that the Commissioners should have great latitude in this matter, and he thought the word "reasonable" in the Amendment was a sufficient direction to them. It was hardly possible to consider this Amendment without referring to the Amendment of the Lord-Advocate in the schedule which would have to be considered later. That

1115
Amendment was unobjectionable from the point of view which the Government had taken all through and which was perhaps the only principle on which they could proceed; namely, that a provision was to be made in the future for the Free Church out of what might be called the Parliamentary funds, the rest of which would belong to the United Free Church, and that so much of the property of the undivided Church as was appropriated to a particular object or trust should supply the amount necessary for enabling the legal Free Church to discharge the part of that ecclesiastical work it had to do. It was not improper in equity that the college property and funds which belonged to the old Free Church were now to be charged in the hands of the United Free Church for the benefit of the legal Free Church. That, he understood, was the Lord-Advocate's view, and to that they did not object. But the Lord Advocate went further, because he proposed to come for the second time on the college property for supplementing congregational funds. It had always been objected to that the same property should be taxed twice over, and he submitted that in this case it would be not only unfair in itself but it would be at variance with the principles which the Commission had laid down, and with the principles which the Lord-Advocate himself laid down in his speech on the Second Reading of the Bill, that college property after having been made to contribute to the legal Free Church students should be resorted to a second time for congregational and general purposes.
SIR ROBERT REIDsaid he regarded the matter as so important that he would join in an appeal to the Lord-Advocate to accept the Amendment. The very essence of everything that had been done from the beginning to the end of this controversy was to attempt rigidly to carry out the trusts. It would be a strange thing if this Bill, which was intended to do that, should take the form of alienating trusts from their original purposes. He was not sure that there was any substantial difference between the intention of the clause and that of the Amendment. What was meant when they spoke
1116
of "adequate provision" was that they should make such provision as was necessary and fair after taking into consideration the other resources of the Church and the powers of the congregation to supply their own wants. But the way in which the clause was drafted left out of consideration the ability of the Church to help itself. He thought the words of the clause "adequate provision" were unfortunate and that they might lead to serious consequences. That obviously was not what was intended. What was intended was much better expressed by the Amendment, the phrasing of which, he thought, was a great improvement on the wording of the clause.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONdid not think it desirable that the Amendment should be accepted. He submitted that Clause 3, as it would stand if the two Amendments which he proposed to make were agreed to, really carried out substantially the points upon which they all seemed agreed. If they inserted the words of the Amendment, "with due regard to the carrying out of the purposes for which the funds and property were respectively given," they would imply that it was the duty of the Commissioners to ask what were the purposes for which the funds and property were respectively given, and it seemed to him that they would at once embark upon the task of discovering what the donors' intentions were. That, he thought, would be a most unfortunate result. The scheme of the clause as he proposed to amend it was not to leave that open. The scheme as he would make it would be that by a process of specification they should ensure that there would be no diversion of trusts, and the Committee would see that the schedules proposed by himself and his hon. friend respectively were practically agreed in that respect, with the exception of the last section of each. The next point in his hon. friend's Amendment was that the Commissioners "shall make such provision as they shall consider in all the circumstances to be reasonable," and he had stated that he would be prepared to make it "such liberal provision." He might remind the Committee that the recommendation of the Elgin

1117
Commission on this point used the words—
"That no such transfer should take place except upon equitable conditions, and especially that, the due performance of the trust being secured, liberal provision should be made for the equipment of the Free Church."
Unfortunately, there was no one in the House to represent the particular views of the smaller body, although no doubt they all intended to represent them as well as they could. It seemed to him that "adequate" was a much more restricted word than "liberal," although he agreed that in "adequate," as in "reasonable," they introduced the idea of opinion. But the Government considered that "adequate" was a better term and one more suited to an Act of Parliament than the word "liberal," which would be interpreted to mean that they should be given all they were entitled to and something in addition. He, therefore, submitted that Sub-section 3 really gave effect to what they all desired, viz., to provide suitably and sufficiently for the Free Church in this matter. In regard to the suggestion that in dealing with the education of the students of the Free Church fees should be taken into account, he believed that these would come to an infinitesimal figure, but again he should think that the Commissioners would to a certain extent take them into account. In the same way, in reference to the support of aged and infirm ministers, it would certainly occur to him that the Commissioners would take into account that those who were to be beneficiaries should certainly continue the contributions they had heretofore made.
SIR ROBERT REIDpointed out that in two cases adequate provision was to be made, and only in one case were the Commissioners directed to take into consideration the supplementary contributions.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that if it was thought that the Commissioners would not necessarily take that into account he would have no objection at a later stage to provide that that should be done. As to supplementing congregational contributions towards the support of ministers, he should say that congregational contributions would in-
1118
clude all sources of income, even endowments, and if it was not sufficiently expressed he should be quite willing to make it clear. The remaining questions could be more properly discussed on the schedules. He had indicated the points upon which he would be prepared to make concessions. If those interested, and especially his learned friends, considered that any particular expression was required to give effect to them he would endeavour to meet them. He hoped his hon. friend would not press his Amendment to a division, but be content with the explanation he had given
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he thought the Lord-Advocate had met the Committee very fairly. The phrase as to adequately providing suggested most clearly a distinction between "supplementing" in certain cases and "adequately providing" in others. The I result of the proposal in the Bill, unless it were materially modified, would be to have a system of permanent endowments set up which he was sure was not the intention of the Government itself or of any Party in the House. They were all agreed that to set up a system of permanent endowments for either of the Churches, or for any of their schemes, apart from the voluntary annual efforts of the Churches themselves, would be to perpetuate a system which might in course of years exhibit a result most disastrous to the development of the ecclesiastical life of Scotland. The question of supplementing the congregational contributions was quite well dealt with in Clauses 11 and 12, but there was some defect in the language, because in many of these Free Church congregations there were not inconsiderable endowments given for the support of the ministry in these churches, and in order to be complete, the phrase would require to be "for supplementing congregational contributions towards the support of the ministers of the church and all other resources or income for a like object." He hoped that on these points the right hon. Gentleman, with the spirit he had already shown, would go a step further in the direction he had indicated.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. BRYCEsaid he wished at this stage to ask the Lord-Advocate to consent to leave out the word "adequate" in line 8, and leave the provision as it stood in the Bill. The provision already made was quite sufficient to meet the case in hand. These poor churches of the legal Free Church for which provision was to be made had been mainly supported out of the Sustentation Fund assisted by liberal contributions from other churches. The circumstances had now entirely changed, and these churches would belong to the United Free Church, and they would lose the funds which they had hitherto had. Therefore they would in the future want all the funds they could get for themselves, and it would be impossible for them to continue their contributions to the other smaller churches. It might be that in future they would only be able to make very small contributions. The word "adequate" was very difficult to construe and he urged that it should be left out. The Bill as it stood would create a number of little weak churches with small endowments all over the North of Scotland, with their adherents and members falling oft and nothing to keep up the church except the fact that there was an endowment. If the Lord-Advocate could not see his way to leave out the word "adequate" he hoped he would promise to consider the matter fully on Report.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2 line 8, to leave out the word 'adequate.' "—(Mr. Bryce.)
Question proposed, "That the word 'adequate' stand part of the clause."
COLONEL DENNYthought that the dangers which had been predicted by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen were by no means unlikely to arise, and the very last thing they desired was inadequate provision for these churches. It seemed to him that as they were dealing with the Commissioners, three of whom had already laid down their own opinion that liberal provision should be made, they might safely leave the matter in their hands.
SIR ROBERT REIDthought the Lord-Advocate had met them extremely fairly in regard to this matter. He was, however, of opinion that the word "adequate" Was somewhat ambiguous, and he thought some other word might be used. He suggested the word "suitable."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONpromised to consider the point on the Report stage.
*MR. AINSWORTHthought they would have to be careful to see that these funds could be used for immediate wants in cases of hardship.
THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order. I do not think that that is quite in order now.
MR. BRYCEsaid he would accept the Lord-Advocate's assurance that he would reconsider the matter in all its aspects, and he as ked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. BLACKsaid the Amendment he desired to move was merely a drafting Amendment designed to restrict the provision made for students for the ministry of the Free Church.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 9, after the word 'students,' to insert the words 'for the ministry.' "—(Mr. Black.)
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the Government were willing to accept the Amendment.
Amendment pioposed—
"In page 2, line 12, to leave out the words 'that Church,' and insert the words 'Free Church congregations to which congregational property has been allocated under this Act.' "— (The Lord-Advocate.)
Amendment agreed to.
MR. BLACKsaid that had it not been for the Lord-Advocate's addition to this

1121
clause one would certainly not have supposed that provision for itinerant preachers was not included in "general purposes." This suggested the necessity for further definition. There was no very great difference of opinion between the Lord-Advocate and some of them as to what he meant. In order to see if the Lord-Advocate could suggest any more suitable definition he begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 13, to leave out the words 'for the general purposes," and insert the words 'for the due management and conduct of the business and financial affiairs."—)
Question proposed, 'That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that what was now proposed was covered by his next Amendment. He did not think the Commissioners would have any difficulty in ascertaining what the general purposes of the church were. He did not know that the words which he proposed differed substantially from those of the hon. Member. They were sufficiently clear, and he did not think any difficulty would arise in the minds of the Commissioners as to their meaning.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid there was more substance in this than appeared at first sight. The expression "general purposes" would be much too vague. He suggested that the words "administrative purposes" should be used instead. I the words proposed by the Government were retained the Commissioners would be confronted with enormous claims for general purposes. He and his friends wanted to avoid that, and to give statutory instructions to the Commissioners which would enable them to say that this meant administrative purposes.
SIR ROBERT REIDsuggested the addition of the words "of administration and management" after the words "general purposes."
*MR. MACONOCHIEthought the expression "general
1122
purposes" was too wide, and hoped the Lord-Advocate would see his way to adopt the sugestion of the hon. and learned Member for Dumfries Burghs.
MR. ASQUITHsaid there was no difference between the two sides of the Committee as to intention, and he thought the Lord-Advocate might favourably consider the suggestion of his hon. and learned friend the Member for Dumfries Burghs.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONaccepted the addition of the words suggested.
MR. BLACKasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 13, after the word 'purposes' to insert the words, 'of administration and management.'"—(Sir Robert Reid.)
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 13, to leave oat from the word ' Church' to the end of the Sub-section, and insert the words 'including expenses of administration and provision for itinerant preachers. The funds and property out of which provision may be made for each of the above mentioned objects shall be those set out in the second column of the first schedule to this Act, opposite the description of the object in the first column of that schedule.'"—(The Lord-Advocate.)
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 2:—
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONmoved to leave out the words "including interim orders having temporary effect," in order to insert, after the word "fund," the words "and may also, before that allocation is made, make interim orders having temporary effect as respects the property in question as defined by this Act." He said the object of the Amendment was to meet cases in which there might require to be interim orders before an allocation was made as to the use of the

1123
property. The Amendment would enlarge the scope of the Commissioners in this respect.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, lines 16 and 17, to leave out the words ' including interim orders having temporary effect.'"—(The Lord-Advocate.)
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 20, after the word 'Fund' to insert the words 'and may also, before that allocation is made, make interim orders having temporary effect as respects the property in question as denned by this Act.'"—(The Lord-Advocate.)
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 21., at end, to insert the words 'and may be recorded in the usual manner in the Register of Sasines and other appropriate register, and such registration shall have the effect of vesting the property in the persons specified in the order.'"—(Colonel Denny.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he did not think the addition of these words was necessary, for the section with which they were now dealing provided that any order which the Commissioners might make should take effect as if enacted in this Act.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid that this was a very important matter; and his first impression was that something was necessary to enable a congregation to take action in future years. What was wanted was that the order should not only be clear on the statute, but should be registered in such a convenient form that it would be easily recognised.
MR. CALDWELLsaid that what was wanted was that the title should be placed on the register, because it was only to that register that a would-be purchaser or mortgagor could go to discover who was the real owner of the property. This Amendment had been drawn by practical men who knew what should be in the title.
MR. WALLACEsaid he quite agreed that the words should be considered on Report.
COLONEL DENNYbegged leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 22, at the beginning to insert the words 'Subject to the provisions of this Act.'"—(The Lord-Advocate.)
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 25, after the word 'Church' to insert the words 'or in favour of third parties who may advance money for the purposes of such bond or charge.'"—(Mr. Black.)
Amendment agreed to.
MR. BLACKsaid that his next Amendment was designed to make provision for possible cases of congregational property and endowments becoming derelict. This was not an imaginary case in Scotland. He believed he was I within the margin when he stated that I there were at present about 160 endowments in Scotland that were, for all practical purposes, derelict, and which were kept up simply for the sake of the minister who enjoyed the endowments and for no real purpose affecting the necessities of the people of the district. It would be a genuine misfortune for Scotland if this was to be perpetuated. His proposal was not absolute; it only put power in the hands of the Commission to consider any particular case; and he had no doubt the Commission would consult all the parties before actually making an order.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 25, at the end to add the words 'and may provide for the disposal of any property in the event of any congregation interested in such property falling below a certain specified number of members and adherents.'"— (Mr. Black.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that the proposal was not desirable for two reasons. The one was that the Commission should set to work as rapidly as possible, and get through their work as rapidly as possible. To give them the power suggested to keep a congregation in a state of suspended animation would not be good for anybody.
MR. BLACKsaid that that was not his proposal.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he thought that was how it would work out. The Commission could not take into consideration what might happen five, ten, or fifteen years afterwards. The Commission had to take into consideration the facts as they found them at that time. The result of the proposal would be that their determination would not be final, and there would be a great state of uncertainty, which, he thought, would be most unsatisfactory.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he was not at all sure that the right hon. Gentleman correctly interpreted the Amendment, which did not contemplate the continuation of the Commission. There might be certain circumstances where a proviso of this kind might be necessary, where, for instance, the population had declined, and that state of matters might result in the complete disappearance of the endowments. He also pointed out that this proviso was not compulsory, and he hoped his right hon. and learned friend would accept the Amendment.
SIB ROBERT REIDthought that the Amendment might be slightly altered to this effect that the ultimate disposal of the property should be dependent not upon a certain specified number of members and adherents, but upon the event of the trust failing or falling through. He could not help thinking that it would be rather an extraordinary thing if a ministry was to be kept up when there was no congregation, while there was a considerable want of money for a congregation in the same parish. To transfer the money, without the power now proposed, would require a new Act of Parliament for each particular case. He would rather see the Commission provide
1126
for the dedication of the money in any direction than see it wasted.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he would remind his hon. and learned friend that the Elgin Commission in several clauses of their Report suggested that it would only be fair to provide for the future development of the Free Church. Now, if they provided for the reverse process they would be able to advance the very strong argument that if they made provision against things getting worse, they ought also to leave a way open for their getting better.
MR. CALDWBLLsaid that the object of the Amendment was to provide for the carrying on of the trust, and it was not a question of giving money to one Church or the other. It would be altogether contrary to the spirit of the Bill if that trust failed altogether.
MR. CATHCART WASONsaid that it should be made clear in the clause that in the event of the trust failing the property should revert to the United Free Church.
MR. HALDANEsaid that it seemed to him they wanted the Commission to settle once and for all between the United Free Church and the Free Church, and that being so he was prepared to give way to expediency in the matter, and in order to get peace and settlement he should be inclined to suggest that it was worth letting this matter go.
MR. WALLACEsaid he ventured to join in that opinion, but he thought there was a great deal in the view of the Lord-Advocate that they might have to consider the case of a church which had grown in numbers as well as that of a church which, had diminished in numbers.
MR. BRYCEsaid he was afraid they might be leaving out what might hereafter cause trouble. He thought they were assuming too easily that they would not have some future legislation for extending the powers of the Commission.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 25, at the end to insert the words, 'Any congregational property allocated to either Church shall be subject to any bonds or burdens thereon, or in respect thereof, and the Commissioners may charge upon the particular congregational property concerned any money expended since 31st October, 1900, on improvements of property, or in paying off debt incurred in respect of property."'-(Colonel Denny.)
Amendment agreed to.
MR. PABKEE SMITHmoved to insert at end of Clause 2, page 2, line 28, "as at the date of allocation." He said the Amendment raised a large question. By means of the Bill the Free Church was making a very great and far-reaching change in its constitution. Hitherto its constitution, so far as it concerned any of its property, had been limited by a model trust deed, and the result of that deed, as they all knew, was the recent action in the House of Lords and the whole of this question. Now the United Free Church was altering its constitution so as to free itself from all the bonds of the model trust deed and to enable it to hold property for such trusts as the majority of the General Assembly might from time to time determine. That was a most important and far-reaching change in the whole position of the Free Church. They were quite entitled to ask for it; but he I wanted it to be clear that it would be a clear and final change, and that when they got the property it would be allocated to them according to the new conditions, so that no question could arise in the future and no suggestion could be made that any property held by the United Free Church would be subject to the limitation which the United Free Church was now seeking to get rid of. It was most important that that should be clear, and with a view to that he moved the Amendment.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 2, line 28, at the end, to insert the words 'as at the date of allocation.'"—(Mr. Parker Smith.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he could hardly conceive anything more upsetting 1128
to the concord of the Assembly than to press an Amendment of this kind. The suggestion was that they should stereo type the constitution, and he could not I imagine anything more fruitful of litigation than the point as to what was the exact scope and dimensions of the constitution of the various Churches at the date of allocation. They wanted to I leave the Churches to develop according, to modern ideas, seeking the light as they found it, and that they should at all evens have the powers of self-government. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Member would not press the Amendment.
MR. PARKEB SMITHsaid the constitution of the Free Church as at the date of allocation did contain that power.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid that was absolutely correct as regarded one of the Churches, but it was not correct with regard to the other. Were they going to-allocate property to Churches and bind them never in the future to have the power of altering or modifying their own constitution. He should not be a party to that at all.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he hoped the hon. Member would not press his Amendment.
MR. PARKER SMITHasked permission to withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 3, after the word 'rights' to insert the words 'duties and liabilities" (Mr. Corbett.)
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 3 agreed to.
Clause 4:—
MR. PARKER SMITHsaid the Amendment he now moved was to cover the case of the Ferguson bequests and to make sure that the same position should obtain in the future as in the past. Both the United Free Church and the

1129
Free Church should get a benefit under the Ferguson bequests, and no question should arise in the future in regard to such a trust as that. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed —
"In page 3. line 38, after the word "Church" to insert the words "or any congregation thereof. '—(Mr. Parker Smith.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONaccepted the Amendment.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the purpose of the next Amendment was to bring a certain class of legacies within the power of the Commissioners—legacies under testamentary writings, which the Commissioners were of opinion were made before the Union, the makers of which testamentary writings having survived until after the Union. It was, in the general opinion, a proper thing to do. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 4, line 14, at the end, to insert the words, "(3) Any legacies under testamentary writings made before the thirtieth day of October, 1900, by testators who died thereafter and before the commencement of the Act in dispute between the Free Church and the United Free Church, shall be allocated to or apportioned between the Churches in such manner as the Commission deem fair and equitable, having regard to what seems to them to have been the intention of the testator, and the capacity of the Churches respectively to carry out any special trusts annexed to the legacy; and all proceedings in any Court as regards any disputes between the two Churches in respect of such legacies shall be sisted or stayed."—(The Lord-Advocate.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. HALDANEsaid that the Amendment was a most wise and statesmanlike settlement of a most awkward question. He only rose to ask whether the words covered all the Lord-Advocate intended to cover. He noticed the words were confined to legacies in dispute between the United Free and the Free Church.
1130
Would the Amendment cover the case of a legacy likely to be in dispute but not in dispute at the present time? In England no question of dispute could arise until the legacy became payable. Had the matte been made clear? If it had not he would suggest that the words "or which might he eaft r be in dispute" should be inserted so as to cover the whole ground.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONthought the addition of those words was unnecessary. In Scotland there was no difficulty in raising the question of who would be entitled to a legacy when it was payable. He might here also say, in reply to the Amendment which was down on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Mid-Lanarkshire, that he had considered very carefully the proposal in that Amendment and had come to the conclusion tha he word "legacies" was wide enough, and that it was not necessary to add after legacies "or dispositions of property." He was quite ready, however, to consider before the Report stage the question of dispositions of property mortis causa.
MR. CALDWELLsaid the Amendment was only put down to make sure that the views of the right hon. Gentleman were carried out. He had put down those words because money could be left to the Church in so many ways, and only one had been covered by the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman. "Legacies under testamentary writings" did not cover the case of a person who had parted with money during his lifetime, with he proviso that after the death of the tenant for life it should go to the Church.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid they were all agreed as to what was meant by the clause, but the clause was very important. No less than a third of £1,000,000 was covered by this clause, and the word "legacies" seemed rather inadequate to the position, because there might be specific grants of property to which the word 'legacy' could not apply. This clause had a bearing on the other clauses in the Bill to this effect, that here was a fund which ought to be taken into account when the question

1131
of provision was dealt with. That matter had been discussed, and he referred to it only to say that adequate provision was to be made, not as if there was nothing else coming to the Church, but that the resources of the Church were to be taken into account, including such resources as might be dealt with under this clause.
MR. CALDWELLmoved to insert after "legacies" the words "or dispositions of property."
Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
"In line 1, after the word 'legacies' to insert the words 'or dispositions of property.'" —(Mr. Caldwell.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONthought the Amendment unnecessary, as the words -of the Amendment were sufficiently wide.
MR. HALDANEsuggested that the recognised legal term was dispositions of property mortis causa.
ME. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he would consider that.
Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. CALDWELLmoved to add at the end of the proposed Amendment—
"And with regard to any legacies or dispositions of property under testamentary or other I writings made before the thirtieth day of October, nineteen hundred, by testators who may die after the commencement of this Act, the Commission shall make provision for allocating the same to either or to both of the said Churches as the Commissioners may think proper."
He said there was no doubt about such cases as those referred to in his proposed Amendment arising. He instanced the case of a man who left property to the Church contingently on the life of another person. The property would not vest in the Free Church while I that person was alive, but, the first residuary legatee having died, the money might be vested after
1132
the Act came into operation. Another case would be that of a man who had made a will, and was not now in a condition to alter it. There was no provision in the Bill for dealing with the property in cases of that kind. Were the Commissioners to remain in office until every conceivable case had been dealt with? He suggested that the better plan would he for the Commissioners to make provision for clearing the whole matter off. Having made "adequate provision" for the legal Free Church some of the Commissioners might think that any such legacies should naturally revert to the other body, but there was nothing in the clause to bind them; the Commissioners were given full power to deal with money of that kind. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
"In line 9, at the end, to add the words 'and with regard to any legacies or dispositions of property under testamentary or other writings made before the thirtieth day of October, nineteen hundred, by testators who may die after the commencement of this Act, the Commission shall make provision for allocating the same to either or to both of the said Churches as the Commissioners may think proper.'"—(Mr. Caldwell.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there added to the proposed Amendment,"
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the Amendment would seem to require the constitution of a standing Commission until all the testators who existed in 1900 had been killed off.
MR. CALDWELLsaid the words were specially put in to prevent the like of the case alluded to by the Lord-Advocate.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he hoped the hon. Member would not press his Amendment. The word "legacies" was quite wide enough to cover the cases raised by the hon. Member.
MR. CALDWELLsaid that the Billmade no provision for money which might come to the Church from persons who died after the commencement of the Act, and in such a case the question would have to be decided by litigation. He would, however, ask leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 5:—
MR. WALLACEmoved the postponement of Clause 5 in order that the House might first proceed to the consideration of the schedule.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That consideration of the clause be postponed."—(Mr. Wallace.)

Schedules.

First Schedule,

Object.

Funds and Property.

1.Education of students of the Free Church.

1. College endowments and bursary Funds; college buildings.

2. Support of aged and infirm ministers of the Free Church.

2. Aged and Infirm Ministers Fund.

3. Support of widows and orphans of ministers of the Free Church.

3. Widows and Orphans Fund.

4. (a) Supplementing congregational contributions towards the support of ministers of Free Church congregations to which congregational property has been allocated under this Act. (b) General purposes of the Church, including expenses of administration and provision for itinerant preachers.

4. Sustentation Fund; Home Missions Fund; Highlands and Islands Fund; any moneys which the Commission regard as applicable for general Church purposes. So far as those Funds or moneys are not sufficient, any further amount required for this object shall be provided by such bond or charge as the Commission may direct to be imposed on any land or buildings in Scotland allocated to the United Free Church other than congregational property, training colleges for teachers, schools, and any land or buildings bequeathed for special purposes.

Second Schedule."

—(The Lord Advocate.)

MR. BLACKproposed an Amendment to the proposed Amendment.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he could not accept the Amendment. Heading 4 (a) of the schedule corresponded exactly with the words which they had passed in Clause 1, Sub-section 3, of the Bill, and he thought they must adhere to the language they had already passed. The hon. Member's Amendment with regard to the funds available was hardly
MR. A. J. BALFOURagreed to this proposal.
Clause 6:—
Drafting Amendments agreed to.
Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.
Schedule.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 5, line 1, to leave out the Schedule," and insert the word,
in accordance with the negotiations which had taken place, because all parties were agreed that in addition to the Sustentation Fund, Home Mission Fund, and the Highlands and Islands Fund, there were other funds which would fall properly under the short designation of funds applicable for Church purposes or free funds. There were a number of small legacies and trust funds which would fall under the designation of being applicable for general Church.

1135
purposes. The schedule was entirely in accordance with the negotiations which had taken place that the three funds which were set out in both schedules should be liable to be supplemented by such other moneys as the Commissioners should hold to be free funds.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he was far from being satisfied with the statement which the Lord-Advocate had just made. He objected altogether to the phrase "free funds." He should like to know from the Government what they meant by free funds. The proposal was to specify all the various funds which were to be impounded for this particular object in the earlier portions of the schedule. What was proposed under the two sub-heads (a) and (b) of the fourth head in the schedule was to provide for—
"Supplementing congregational contributions towards the support of ministers of Free Church congregations to which congregational property has been allocated under this Act."
And for
"General purposes of the Church, including expenses of administration and provision for itinerant preachers."
The Government proposal was that after the Sustentation Fund, the Home Mission Fund, and the Highlands and Islands Fund were exhausted, the Commissioners should have power to put their hand into the general pocket of the Church and lay a mortgage on the funds of the Church in so far as a fund specifically allocated should be found insufficient. That appeared to him to be a breach of trust. It had never been anticipated by anyone who contributed to these funds that a mortgage would be laid upon them in order to supplement congregational contributions towards the support of ministers of the Free Church in the Highlands or Islands. The moment they went beyond the three specific purposes set out us the Sustentation Fund, the Home Mission Fund, and the Highlands and Islands Fund, they got completely into the region of breach of trust, and, therefore, this schedule seemed to him a schedule for facilitating the diversion of moneys specifically provided for one object in order to give them to another. He hoped the House would not permit such a diversion of funds as was here proposed.
MR. BLACKsaid he could not help feeling that the Lord-Advocate had not quite grasped the original proposal he had put before the House, which was not only that the miscellaneous funds which might form the subject of some differences of opinion should be appropriated for the Sustentation Fund, but also that it might be possible for the Commissioners to put a mortgage on mission buildings in India.
*MR.SCOTT DICKSON: It is confined to Scotland.
MR. BLACKsaid that might be so, but with regard to the generality of the funds he was correct in saying that the proposal was not confined to the miscellaneous funds mentioned. Under this proposal it would be possible to bond the college buildings in Aberdeen, Edinburgh, or Glasgow for the purpose of providing sustentation for ministers in the Highlands and Islands. He hoped that the Lord-Advocate would make a further concession on this point.
MR. BRYCEhoped they would hear something further from the Lord-Advocate on this matter. He understood the right hon. Gentleman's previous reply to be confined to the earlier part of the schedule He did not understand him to be endeavouring to justify the proposal that a charge should be put on the college buildings.
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he did not know that the Amendment went so far. It certainly was understood by those with whom he had had communication that there would be no objection to the bonding of the Assembly buildings on the Mound in Edinburgh by way of supplement to the other Church funds. The college property was an integral part of the Church property, and its possession had been made a question of decision in the House of Lords. The United Free Church had no right to this property, and the legal Free Church were now in possession of it; and this being the position of affairs he could not see how the conferring of this power on the Commissioners could be described as a breach of trust.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid that in regard to the General Assembly Hall which had been adjudged to belong to one of the Churches, it was said that it would be strong order to grant a bond over that hall for the purposes of the other Church. There was no objection to a bond over the Mound property in Edinburgh, provided that the purpose to which the money was to be devoted was for analogous purposes in the Free Church. It would be perfectly equitable and proper that a bond or mortgage should be put over the General Assembly Hall for the purpose of erecting a new small hall for the Free Church, but it would be entirely out of the question that they should consent to a mortgage being placed on the general buildings of the Church in order to set up congregations in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. He might point out that these buildings had been erected, not only out of the general funds of the Free Church, but by special bequests to provide additional buildings, and for the adornment of the hall. The proposal made in the schedul was to divert these funds which donors had given for general administrative purposes to purposes entirely alien to general dminis ration. He hoped that the Government would consider the point he had put".
*MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that, in the light of the lion, and learned Member's criticisms, he would consider the subject with the view of arriving at a settlement on the Report stage.
Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule agreed to.
Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

EVENING SITTING.

  ALIENS BILL.
  Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment proposed [17th July] on Consideration of the Bill, as amended.
  Which Amendment was—
  "To leave pit Clause 2."—(Mr. Dalziel.)
  Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid he had listened with great attention to the speeches made on the previous night with reference to Clause 2, and he had heard the Answers given by the right hon. Gentleman who had charge of the Bill, and who had conducted it with such marked ability, who had fully met the objections that had been taken to this part of the Bill. There was, however, one matter of great importance to those unfortunate people who might try to find a home in this country, and that was that the appeal should be heard as promptly as possible. He himself had given much attention to this matter in New York, and had often been present at the sittings of the ourt at Ellis Island, where the Court was in constant session to deal with doubtful cases. It was of course impossible with the limited funds at the disposal of the Home Secretary and the larger number of ports in this country to have Courts in constant session, but at the same time he had no doubt that provision would be made for the assembling of a competent board as rapidly as possible to deal with these cases. The clause was framed in such a way as to ensure that the board should be composed of men accustomed to deal with matters of this character and who would be able to cross-examine the alien and ascertain if he were a desirable person to admit into this country. He therefore did not think that the word "business" should be altered in any way. It was not necessary o labour this point, because he was convinced that hon. Gentlemen opposite must be perfectly satisfied as to the fairness with which this Bill would be carried out. He had implicit confidence in the Home Office at all times, but especially when it was administered by his right hon. friend.
  MR. DALZIELrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but Mr. Speaker withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
  *MR. RENWICKsaid it was within the recollection of the House that during the debates on this Bill it was argued that the immigration board to be established should have the confidence of all those concerned. Yet members of the Opposition proposed to leave this important clause out altogether. The clause provided that the members of the board should consist of three persons appointed in accordance with rules laid down by the Home Secretary, out of a list approved by him, of fit and proper persons having magisterial or administrative experience. If it was absolutely necessary for shipowners, it was equally necessary for the immigrant that his case should be promptly settled. There was in existence a body called the port sanitary authority in many ports from which such a board could be formed, and one in which not only the shipowner but the captains of vessels, and the authorities generally, would have confidence. The port sanitary authority for the Tyne consisted of several magistrates, two or three shipowners, and others who were accustomed to deal with matters such as these and able to deal with them quickly. Yet Members opposite, without giving one thought to this question, asked the House, composed as it was largely of business men and accustomed to such matters, to leave the clause out. The clause also provided that notice should be given to masters and immigrants informing them of the right of appeal. Were hon. Members opposite ware that if this clause were left out there would be no one to whom these unfortunate immigrants, who might be our own countrymen coming back from America in order to take part in the prosperity of the cotton trade of Lancashire, could appeal? When he and other Members rose to point that out they were jeered at by the Opposition. The clause also laid it down that, notice having been given, the master and the immigrant were to be informed of the grounds on which leave to land was refused. That was an important matter which had not received sufficient discussion, and he was well within his rights in drawing attention to it. But one of the most important points in connection with the Bill was the board which was to be formed to deal with the immigrants as they came in. There was
  1140
  no better body from which such a board could be formed than that of our port sanitary authorities. He had received a request from the port sanitary authority of Newcastle on-Tyne asking him to point out to the Home Secretary that these bodies were in existence, and he trusted that when the right hon. Gentleman, framed these rules he would remember their existence. If he did, and appointed the immigration boards from them, he would find he had appointed most, efficient bodies.
  MR. PURVISsaid that notwithstanding the somewhat surprising, and unusual desire of hon. Members opposite to go to a division, he felt constrained for a short time to intervene in. this debate. They had heard at great length day after day elaborate arguments from hon. Gentlemen opposite, and hitherto he had only been a listener but as the Bill was of universal interest to the country, and as this clause was of such peculiar interest to those who had any knowledge of the administration of the laws of the country, he was quite sure the most impatient Member of the House would bear with him for a few moments. As a lawyer he could conscientiously say that he was convinced that it would be better for the immigrants themselves that they should have the right to appeal to a board rather than a Court of Appeal. They had heard a good deal of prosecution and persecution, and anybody who carefully considered this matter must come to the conclusion that to relegate these unfortunate people to the law's delays by sending them to a Court of Appeal would be not only to persecute, but to ruin in many cases the unfortunate appellant. Their great object should be to create a good businesslike board which should be able, owing to its composition, to deal with the cases which from time to time were brought before it. He had been much struck by the suggestion that the word "industrial" should be substituted for the word "business." Such a change would exclude entirely from the board men having knowledge of administration—such men as magistrates, solicitors, barristers, and others acquainted with the administration of the laws, and having a knowledge of the

  1141
  rules of evidence. Could anyone conceive anything more unfortunate than that the poor immigrant, about whom be much sympathy had been expressed, should be brought before a board which was absolutely destitute of the knowledge of the simplest rules of evidence. There must be a quorum, and the clerk must be able to choose from a panel which would do justice to the immigrant. Then it would be impossible to have such a large number in the smaller ports as in London, and that was another reason for greater variety being secured in the panel. Those qualities must be secured in order to ensure fair play to the unfortunate foreign immigrant. The only way to secure freedom and liberty was to have a board composed of different qualities. The board of appeal would degenerate into a board of persecution without the qualification provided by the second part of the clause.
  Mr. J. A. PEASErose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but Mr. Speaker withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
  MR. FORDE RIDLEYsaid he could not understand the intention of the hon. Member who had moved the Amendment, nor the anxiety
  of hon. Gentlemen opposite to conclude the debate.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: There are eight more clauses to discuss.
  MR. FORDE RIDLEYsaid he would remind the hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs that if he had remembered that in the earlier stages of the Bill they might now have had a good deal more time in which to discuss the remaining clauses. After all the arguments that had been used about the injustice, the hardship, and the cruelty going to be done to the poor immigrants, it was, he must say, the strangest of all anomalies that hon. Gentleman opposite, who had been palpably opposed alt through to the Bill, root and branch, should rise and propose that the very clause which was for the protection of the immigrant should be left out.
  Mr. J. F. HOPErose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
  Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 173; Noes, 132. (Division List No. 294.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Bowles, Lt-ColHF.(Middlesex)

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Brassey, Albert

  Denny, Colonel

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St.

  Dickinson, Robert Edmoud

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Brymer, Wliliam Ernest

  Dickson, Charles Scott

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

  Bull, William James

  Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers

  Arrol, Sir William

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Carson, Rt. Hn.Sir Edw. H.

  Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. Hart

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn.Sir H.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbysh.

  Fellowes, Rt. HnAilwyn Edw-

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

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

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

  Chamberlain, RtHnJ.A(Wore.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Balfour, RtHnGeraldW(Leeds)

  Chapman, Edward

  Finlay, Rt Hn SirR.B(Inv'rn'ss

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Bigwood, James

  Collings, Rt. Hn. Jesse

  Forster, Henry William

  Bill, Charles

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Gardner, Ernest

  Bingham, Lord

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Gordon, Maj. Evans(T rH'ml'ts

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby

  Bond, Edward

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Loyd, Archie kirkman

  Robertson, Herb. (Hackney)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Lucas, ReginaldJ.(Portsmouth

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hn. Alfred

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Groves, James Grimble

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Hamilton, Marq.of(L'nd'nderry

  Macanochie, A. W.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Hay, Hn. Claude George

  M'Killop, James (Stirlinghsire)

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Malcolm, Ian

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Maxwell, RtHnSirH.E(Wigt'n

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Maxwell, W.JH(Dumfriesshire

  Smith, HC(North'mb,Tyneside

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Middlemore, J. Throgmorton

  Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Milvain, Thomas

  Spear, John Ward

  Hoult, Joseph

  Morgan, D J. (Walthamstow)

  Stanley, Rt.Hn. Lord (Lanes.)

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry C.

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Hunt, Rowland

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Talbot, Lord E (Chichester)

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Neill, Hn. Robert Torrens

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Jeffreys, Rt, Hn. Arthur Fred

  Peate, Herb. Pike (Darlington

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Tuff, Charles

  Kenyon, Hn. Gea. T. (Denbigh

  Percy, Earl

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Kerr, John

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Vincent, Col SirCEH(Sheffield)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Walrond, Rt. HnSirWm. H.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Pryce-Jones, Lt. Col. Edward

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Purvis, Robert

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton undLyne

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Pym, C. Guy

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Lee, ArthurH (Hants, Fareham

  Randles, John S.

  Wilson-Todd, Sir W.H. (Yorks

  Legge, Col. Hn. Heneage

  Rankin, Sir James

  Wodehouse, Rt.HnE.R.(Bath

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Liddell, Henry

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  TELLERS FOK THE AYES—Sir

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Renwick, George

  Viscount Valentia.

  Long, Rt Hn Waiter(Bristol, S)

  Ridley, S. Forde

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

  Evans, Samuel T.(Glamorgan)

  Langley, Batty

  Allen, Charles P.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Fenwick, Charles

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Field, William

  Levy, Maurice

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

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

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bell, Richard

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Lloyd-George, David

  Benn, John Williams

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lundon, W.

  Boland, John

  Flynn, James Christopher

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Brigg, John

  Gilhooly, James

  M'Crae, George

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Kean, John

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Guest, Hn. Ivor Churchill

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Burns, John

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Burt, Thomas

  Hammond, John

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Caldwell, James

  Hardie, J. Keir (MerthyrTydvil

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Camarthen)

  Cameron, Robert

  Harwood, George

  Muldoon, John

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Murnaghan, George

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Murphy, John

  Cremer, William Randal

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Nann tti, Joseph P.

  Crombic, John William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Newnes, Sir George

  Crooks, William

  Higham, John Sharp

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Cullinan, J.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Norman, Henry

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)

  Delany, William

  Horniman, Frederick John

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Devlin, Chas. Ramsay I Galway

  Jacoby, James Alfred

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

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Joicey, Sir James

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Dewar, John A-(Inverness-sh.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  O'Dowd, John

  Doogan, P. C.

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Kennedy, Vincent P(Cavan,W

  O'Malley, William

  Ellice, CaptEC(SAndrw'sBghs)

  Lambert, George

  O'Mara, James

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Parrott, William

  Shackleton, David James

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Shaw, Chas. Edw. (Stafford)

  Wilson, Chas. Henry (Hull, W.)

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Sheehy, David

  Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Slack, John Bamford

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Price, Robert John

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Woodhouse, SirJT(Huddersf'd

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Spencer, Rt Hn C.R(Northants

  Young, Samuel

  Reddy, M.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  TELLERS son THE NOES.—Mr.

  Richards, Thomas

  Ure, Alexander

  Dalziel and Mr. Trevelyan.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Question, "That the Question be now put," put, and agreed to.

  *MR. CREMERmoved to add at the end of Clause 2 a sub-section providing that one member of the immigration board should be a member of some bona fide organisation of workmen. He said that the qualifications for members of the boards were by no means of a satisfactory character. It was proposed that one member should have magisterial experience, another business experience, and the third administrative experience. These were very ambiguous descriptions, especially the second. He believed the really practical man would be found among the working class organisations. At the time he placed the Amendment on the Paper he did not know that the members of the board would be paid for their services; he had expected that they would do the work gratuitously in the same way as Members of Parliament; therefore it was not with any intention of rinding snug well-paid berths for working men that he made this proposal. But they were constantly told that the working classes would be immediately affected by the Bill, and, if that were so, what objection could there be to putting a member of a working class organisation on these boards? Men of the right type could easily be found; there were trades councils in every one of the eleven ports where immigration boards were to be set up, and representatives from these bodies would bring to bear on the work of the boards just that practical experience which was necessary. Such members by a few direct and technical questions would immediately ascertain whether immigrants were what they professed to be, would very quickly detect impostors, and he was convinced they would prove to be exceedingly valuable members of the boards. He expressly inserted the words "bona fide organisation," in order to prevent bounty-fed
  1146
  agitators connected with associations that were not financially supported by working men and which did not represent the working classes, from being placed on these boards. In the hope that the Home Secretary would see not only the advantage, but the absolute necessity of the class of appointment which he advocated, he begged to move.
  MR. JOHN WILSON, in seconding, said he thought an Amendment of this kind was necessary for the proper working of the measure. They had upon a previous occasion tried to introduce a clause to protect British labour, and they had been chided with claiming to be in favour of this Bill whilst they had been opposing it all through. However bad a Bill might be it was part of the duty of wise men to try their best to minimise the evils in it. They had tried to introduce an Amendment to keep out alien contract labour during strikes, but they had failed. He thought his hon. friend who had moved this Amendment had put the case fairly and clearly before the House, and if the Home Secretary could not accept this Amendment he hoped he would be able to frame some rulo which would carry out this idea. The Home Secretary had laid down certain conditions which were necessary as qualifications for those who would be appointed to serve on the immigration boards, and he submitted to the right hon. Gentleman that there were connected with the great trades organisations in every port a number of men who possessed at least two of the qualifications out of the three required for the formation of these boards. The Home Secretary laid down as one qualification that they must be magisterial. He was aware that there were not many working men who were magistrates,

  1147
  and there ought to be more. The work done by the great trades organisations of this country had specially fitted men for serving on these boards. One of the qualifications laid down was that they must be business men. If a trades union leader fulfilled his position properly he was bound to have manifested before his appointment strong business capabilities. The class of people to be dealt with by these boards would be the very poor people, and he might mention that there was hardly a boards of guardians in any part of the country upon which some working men had not made themselves thoroughly acquainted with the working of the Poor Law. For these reasons he thought the members of trade organisations were specially qualified for taking at least one of the positions on these boards. He thought that a working man was the best judge as to whether any of these immigrants were undesirables or not.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 20, at the end, to insert the words, '(3) Notwithstanding anything herein before contained one member of the immigration board shall be a member of some bona fide organisation of workmen."—(Mr. Cremer)—
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MAJOR EVANS GORDONsaid he found himself very largely in agreement with the proposer and seconder of the Amendment in what they had said as to the desirability of having a representative of the working classes at all events on the panel. There were a great many matters which would come before the board on which the opinion and advice of men acquainted with the industrial conditions of the locality would be of great value, and he hoped the Home Secretary would see his way to having the names of such men upon the panel, feeling sure that it would give confidence both to the immigrants and to the working classes.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS, Kent, St. Augustine's)said he had a great deal of sympathy with the material part of the Amendment, but he could not accept it in the form in
  1148
  which it was moved. He was perfectly prepared to put persons accustomed to industrial matters on the panel, and he dared say that one of them would thus serve on the board in many instances, but that was a different thing to putting them on the panel and compelling the summoning officer always to summon one. He thought he showed his intention, to the House the previous night; and he considered the word "business" would cover not only proprietors of businesses and manufacturers, but also those who had industrial experience. Certainly that was the sense in which he should construe the word when he administered the Act. The hon. Member for Manchester had handed in an Amendment to insert the word "industrial." He should have been perfectly prepared to accept that, and he thought it would to a large extent have met the views of hon. Gentlemen opposite; but the Amendment moved, went very much further than that, and he could not accept it in its present form. The hon. Member, however, might take it that he did not differ from him in the desire to secure on the panel the experience of those dealing with the industrial classes, and who undoubtedly possessed a great deal of that information, which they desired to get. He could not accept the Amendment as it was, and he did not think it was necessary, because he could assure the hon. Member that the representatives of the class which he desired would be put upon the panel, for they could undoubtedly do the immigration board a great deal of service. He had gone some way to meet the hon. Member; but, although he accepted the spirit of the Amendment, he could not accept the actual words.
  MR. FENWICKsaid he thought a moments consideration would show that the concession made by the Home Secretary was not worth very much. It was no satisfaction to know that a representative of labour was to be put on the panel when perhaps he would never be called. There was no guarantee that the men whose names were upon the panel would be selected in rotation. They distinctly laid down the principle that there should be on the board a magistrate or man with magisterial experience; a man of

  1149
  business capacity; and a man of administrative skill; and they might have on the panel from now till Doomsday a representative of labour who would never be called to attend a single meeting of the board. He submitted that that was no satisfaction to them or those they represented. This was a question which more directly came home to the working classes than to any other class of the community. They were more interested in this question than either the magistrate, the business man, or the man of administrative capacity. The people to be dealt with by the boards were of their own class, and all their associations, sympathies, and aspirations were such as were born of men of their own class in this country. If, therefore, they wanted the Act to be smoothly administered they would do well to accept the Amendment. Although they appreciated the step the Home Secretary had taken in advance in the matter, practically it amounted to no concession at all.
  ME. SPEARaid he recognised the spirit which the Home Secretary had shown in the matter, but he thought it would be more gracious and only just if he acceded entirely to the principle of the Amendment. By doing so he would be promoting and facilitating the successful working of the Bill. While it was most important that they should have on these boards men versed in legal technicalities and of strong and far-reaching capabilities, he submitted it was equally important that they should also have a working man, experienced in the difficulties of living, of providing food, and earning wages. With the experience so gained, a man would contribute valuable assistance to a righteous and just decision on the intricate questions which would come from time to time before the immigration board. It might be said that a working man might be here and there tempted to take action that would unduly keep out an immigrant who came here to compete with British labour. He believed, however, that the working man was as just and generous as members of other classes. But even if such cases did arise, his colleagues on the immigration board would certainly keep him right and see that justice was done all
  1150
  round. He earnestly hoped that the Government would be able to make this concession. It would be a gracious act, and at the same time one that would be only just, and that would greatly increase the confidence of the people of this country in the operation of this measure. It was a measure chiefly promoted in the interests of the lower classes, and the Amendment would increase the confidence of these classes.
  MR. CROOKSappealed to the Home Secretary to accept the Amendment. The Answer of the right hon. Gentleman was very sympathetic, but it showed how little he knew of the treatment of working men under certain circumstances. Even in this House, when they had been talking of labour-representation, the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had said that he was a labour representative. The words proposed by the Home Secretary might be stretched to include the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs as a representative of labour. He maintained that the knowledge which working men possessed in regard to people of their own class would be of great service when the boards were endeavouring to decide on questions whether the immigrants who came to this country were or were not desirable. Had the Home Secretary or the Lord Chancellor ever head any complaint of the discrimination or judicial capacity of the working-men magistrates throughout the length and breadth of the land? Was not the satisfactory manner in which they discharged their duties conclusive proof that they had the faculty for this kind of work? He was against the Bill, but, if it was to be passed, he desired to have it amended in such a manner as would make it less objectionable than it otherwise would be.
  *MR. RENWICKsaid that during the discussions on this Bill shipowners had been endeavouring to devise means by which immigrants could be landed immediately. In some instances it might be necessary to land them on condition of their being examined ashore by the immigration board. He wished to point out the inconvenience and delay which

  1151
  might arise in dealing with cases if working men were put on the boards. Ships arrived at all hours of the day and night, and it would be impossible to get working men to attend the sittings of the board at the times when their presence might be most desirable. Shipowners wanted men who were on the spot and who could be called immediately to settle important questions as to debarkation. While he had nothing to say against working men representatives generally, he thought that in this case it would be a mistake to appoint them members of these boards. He sincerely trusted that the Home Secretary would not accept the Amendment.
  SIR JAMES JOICEYsaid he could assure the House that working men could attend. He spoke as one who had had very great experience of bona fide working men in connection with their organisations. In the county of Durham a system prevailed under which employers were brought into almost daily contact with the workmen's unions, and he could state that the training these men got in dealing with business matters was such as would enable them to deal with the questions which would come before them on the immigration boards. The present chairman of the County Council of Durham was the Member for Mid-Durham. There were many men of his type in the county of Northumberland. There was not a member of that council, from the Duke of Northumberland down-wards, socially, who would not agree with him in saying that among the working men were some of the very best representatives they had. He was sorry the Home Secretary could not see his way to ensure there should be always a working man on the board. He had come into contact with working men who were certainly fitted to repre-
  sent any district upon these boards' In the county of Durham many working men were chairmen of district councils, and consequently were magistrates, and he had never heard a complaint against them of not being able to properly discharge their duties.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he was in favour of the Amendment. He understood that the basis on which the Bill was introduced was that aliens who were economically undesirable should be prevented from coming into the country. If that was the basis on which it had been brought forward, he thought the Home Secretary would agree that the best man to decide whether an alien was desirable or not was a working man. He hoped the Home Secretary would reconsider his decision.
  MR. HARWOODasked how the working man would be chosen out of the panel when ships arrived. Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether they would be taken in rotation or picked out arbitrarily by some particular official?
  MR. CHURCHILLsaid it seemed to him that the request made in this Amendment was a reasonable one. After all, the great bulk of immigrants belonged to those classes who in foreign countries were called the working classes. It did not seem extravagant to request that one of the members of the board should be one of their own class in this country who would most readily appreciate the conditions which had induced those foreigners to seek refuge on our shores.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 168; Noes. 217. (Division List No. 295.)

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Jones, David B. (Swansea)

  Rea, Russell

  Crombie, John William

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Crooks, William

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Reddy, M.

  Cullinan, J.

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Joyce, Michael

  Richards, Thomas

  Delany, William

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W

  Rickett, J Compton

  Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway

  Lambert, George

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Langley, Batty

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

  Russell, T. W.

  Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Levy, Maurice

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lewis, John Herbert

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

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Lundon, W.

  Shackleton, David James

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Mac Veagh, Jeremiah

  Shaw Chas. Edw.(Stafford)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Crae, George

  Sheehy, David

  Ellice, Capt.EC(S.Andrw'sBghs

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Slack, John Bamford

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Field, William

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Spencer, Rt. Hn.CR(Northants

  Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.Ed

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Sullivan, Donal

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Muldoon, John

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murnaghan, George

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

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murphy, John

  Tomkinson, James

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Toulmin, George

  Gilhooly, James

  Newnes, Sir George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Gladstone, RtHn Herbert John

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Ure, Alexander

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Norman, Henry

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Guest, Hn. Ivor Churchill

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Hammond, John

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Harcourt, Lewis

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W

  White, Patrick (Meath, North;

  Hardie, J.Keir (MerthyrTydvil

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.-

  Harrington, Timothy

  O'Dowd, John

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Harwood, George

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mavo, N.

  Wilson, Chas. Henry(Hull, W.

  Helme, Noryal Watson

  O'Malley, William

  Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  O'Mara, James

  Wilson, Henry J. (York. W.R.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Woodhouse, SirJT(Huddersf'd

  Higham, John Sharp

  Parrott, William

  Young, Samuel

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Partington, Oswald

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Waldon)

  TELLERS FOR THK AYES—Mr.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Cremer and Mr. John

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wilson (Durham)

  Issacs, Rufus Daniel

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Price, Robert John

  Joicey. Sir James

  Priestley, Arthur

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James 'Tynte

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bigwood, James

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bill, Charles

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Arnold-Forster, RtHnHaghO.

  Bingham Lord

  Chamberlain, RtHnJA (Wore.

  Arrol, Sir William

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Chamberlayne, T.(S'thampton

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bond, Edward

  Chapman, Edward

  Aubrey-Fetcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Bowles, Lt.-Col.HF(Middlesex

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Brassey, Albert

  Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Balfour, RtHnA.J (Manch'r

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.

  Coston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Balfour, RtHnGeraldW(Leeds

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Balfour, Kenneth R, (Christch.

  Bull, William James

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)-

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Butcher, John George

  Crossley, Rt, Hn. Sir Savile

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

  Carlile, William Walter

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Carson RtHn. Sir Edw. H.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 3, line 30, after the word 'fine, to insert the words 'or of an offence under paragraph twenty - two or twenty - three of section three hundred and eighty-one of The Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, or of an offence as a prostitute under Section seventy-two of The Towns Improvement (Ireland) Act, 1854, or paragraph eleven of ection fifty-four of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839.'"—(Mr. Secretary Akers- Douglas.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. LEIF JONES (Westmoreland,)moved as an Amendment to strike out Sub-section 2 of Clause 4 on the ground that to make the master of a ship responsible for six months for the good behaviour of aliens which he had brought to this country was unfair. How on earth was a ship's captain to know the character of a passenger on his ship, and how could he be made responsible for the conduct of such a passenger six months after that at passenger had

  1157
  left his ship? The scheme was unfair in principle, and would be unworkable in practice.
  MR. EMMOTTseconded the Amendment.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 4, line 20, to leave out Sub-section (2) of Clause 4."—(Mr. Leif Jones.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
  THE ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY, Inverness Burghs)said that, the sub-section was argued at considerable length in Committee, and he hoped the Amendment would not be pressed. The sub-section would tend to make the ship-owner more careful.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 244; Noes, 177. (Division List No. 296.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Black, Alexander William

  Caldwell, James

  Allen, Charles P.

  Boland, John

  Cameron, Robert

  Asquith, Rt Hn. Herb. Henry

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Brigg, John

  Cawley, Frederick

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. R

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Bell, Richard

  Burt, Thomas

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Benn, John Williams

  Buxton, Sydney Chas.(Poplar)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph.

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Jones, David B. (Swansea)

  Rea, Russell

  Crombie, John William

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Crooks, William

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Reddy, M.

  Cullinan, J.

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Joyce, Michael

  Richards, Thomas

  Delany, William

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W

  Rickett, J Compton

  Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway

  Lambert, George

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Langley, Batty

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

  Russell, T. W.

  Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Levy, Maurice

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lewis, John Herbert

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

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Lundon, W.

  Shackleton, David James

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Mac Veagh, Jeremiah

  Shaw Chas. Edw.(Stafford)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Crae, George

  Sheehy, David

  Ellice, Capt.EC(S.Andrw'sBghs

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Slack, John Bamford

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Field, William

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Spencer, Rt. Hn.CR(Northants

  Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.Ed

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Sullivan, Donal

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Muldoon, John

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murnaghan, George

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

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murphy, John

  Tomkinson, James

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Toulmin, George

  Gilhooly, James

  Newnes, Sir George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Gladstone, RtHn Herbert John

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Ure, Alexander

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Norman, Henry

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Guest, Hn. Ivor Churchill

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Hammond, John

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Harcourt, Lewis

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W

  White, Patrick (Meath, North;

  Hardie, J.Keir (MerthyrTydvil

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.-

  Harrington, Timothy

  O'Dowd, John

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Harwood, George

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mavo, N.

  Wilson, Chas. Henry(Hull, W.

  Helme, Noryal Watson

  O'Malley, William

  Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  O'Mara, James

  Wilson, Henry J. (York. W.R.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Woodhouse, SirJT(Huddersf'd

  Higham, John Sharp

  Parrott, William

  Young, Samuel

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Partington, Oswald

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Waldon)

  TELLERS FOR THK AYES—Mr.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Cremer and Mr. John

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wilson (Durham)

  Issacs, Rufus Daniel

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Price, Robert John

  Joicey. Sir James

  Priestley, Arthur

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James 'Tynte

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bigwood, James

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bill, Charles

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Arnold-Forster, RtHnHaghO.

  Bingham Lord

  Chamberlain, RtHnJA (Wore.

  Arrol, Sir William

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Chamberlayne, T.(S'thampton

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bond, Edward

  Chapman, Edward

  Aubrey-Fetcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Bowles, Lt.-Col.HF(Middlesex

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Brassey, Albert

  Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Balfour, RtHnA.J (Manch'r

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.

  Coston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Balfour, RtHnGeraldW(Leeds

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Balfour, Kenneth R, (Christch.

  Bull, William James

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)-

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Butcher, John George

  Crossley, Rt, Hn. Sir Savile

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

  Carlile, William Walter

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Carson RtHn. Sir Edw. H.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col Edward

  Denny, Colonel

  Kenyon Hn. Geo. T (Denbigh)

  Purvis, Robert

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Kerr, John

  Randles, John S.

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Keswick, William

  Rankin, Sir James

  Doughty, Sir George

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers-

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Dyke, RtHn. Sir William Hart

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Remnant, Jas. Farquharson

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lee, A. H. (Hants, Fareham)

  Renwick, George

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Ridley, S. Forde

  Faber, George Denison (York

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Liddell, Henry

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Fellowes, Rt Hn Ailwyn Edw.

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

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

  Lock wood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Long, Col. Chap. W. (Evesham

  Ropner, Colonol Sir Robert

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Long, RtHnWalter (Bristol.S.)

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Finlay, RtHnSirR. R(Inv'm'ss)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Fison, Frederick William

  Lucas, Col Francis (Lowestoft)

  Rutherford, W.W.(Liverpool)

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsm'th

  Sackville, Col. S.G. Stopford

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Macdona, John Cutnming

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Forster, Henry William

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.

  Galloway, William Johnson J

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Gardner, Ernest

  M'Arthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

  Smith, H.C(North'mb, Tyneside

  Gibbs, Hon. A.G. H.

  M'Iver, SirLewis(Edinburgh, W

  Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.

  Gordon, Maj. Evans(T'rH'mlets

  Malcolm, Ian

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Stroyan, John

  Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Strutt, Hn. Charles Hedley

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Maxwell, Rt KnSirH.E(Wigt'n

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Maxwell, W.JH (Dumfriesshire

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs)

  Middlemore, J. Throgmorton

  Tuff, Charles

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Milner, Rt. Hn, Sir Frederick G.

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Groves, James Grimble

  Milvain, Thomas

  Turnonr, Viscount

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Vincent, Col. SirC.EH(Sheffield

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Walrond, Rt. Hn.Sir WilliamH

  Hamilton, Marq. Of(L'nd'nderry

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Welby, LtColAC. E.(Taunton)

  Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E(Notts)

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Mount, William Arthur

  Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund Lyne

  Heath, SirJas. (Staffords, N.W.

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Myers, William Henry

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Wilson-Todd, SirW.H(Yorks)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  O'Neill, Hn. Robert Torrens

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

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Wolff. Gustav Wilhelm

  Hoult, Joseph

  Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

  Wortle'y, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Pemberton, John S.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

  Hunt, Rowland

  Percy, Earl

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Viscount Valentia.

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Hermon-Hodge Sir Robert T.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

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

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Hoult, Joseph

  Arroll, Sir William

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn.SirH.

  Denny, Colonel

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Bagot, Capt Josceline FitzRoy

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Hunt, Rowland

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Balcarres, Lord

  Doughty, Sir George

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

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

  Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Jessel, Captain Herb. Merton

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald(Leeds

  Duke Henry Edward

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Dyke, Rt.Hn.Sir William Hart

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  Banbury, Sir Fredrk. George

  Egerton, Hn. A. de Tatton

  Kerr, John

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Keswick, William

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Fellowes, Rt Hn Ailwyn Edward

  Lambton, Hn. Fredk. Win.

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

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

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Bigwood, James

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Bill, Charles

  Finch, Kt. Hn. George H.

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

  Bingham, Lord

  Finlay, Rt.Hn.SirR. B(Inv'ru'ss

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Fison, Frederick William

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage.

  Bowles, Lt.-Col.H.F.(Middlesox

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Brassey, Albert

  Flannery, Sir Forteseue

  Liddell, Henry

  Brodrick, Rt, Hon. St. John

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Forster, Henry William

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Brymer, William Eruese:

  Gardner, Ernest

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

  Bull, William James

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Lousdale, John Brownlee

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Lowe, Francis William

  Butcher, John George

  Gordon, Maj Evans(TrHamlets

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Carlile, William Walter

  Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby

  Lucas, Col. Francis(Lowestoft)

  Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.

  Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hn. Alfred

  Cavendish, V. C. W.(Derbysh.)

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Gronfell, William Henry

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich

  Groves, James Grimble

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.J. (Birm.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

  Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.JA(Wore.

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Halsey, Rt. Hn. Thomas F.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Chapman, Edward

  Hambro, Charles Erie

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Clive, Captain Perey A.

  Hamilton Manq. of(L'nd'nderry

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Hardy L. (Kent, Ashford)

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Maxwell, Rt.Hn SirHE(Wigt'n)

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Hay,Hn. Claude George

  Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfriesshire

  Callings, Rt. Hn. Jesse

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords, N. W

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

  Middlemore, J. Throgmorton

  Milner, Rt. Hn.Sir Frederick G.

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Talbot, Lord E, (Chichester)

  Milvain, Thomas

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Mitchell, Ed. (Fermanagh. N.)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Renwick, George

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Ridley, S. Forde

  Tuff, Charles

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Robertson, Herbert(Hackney)

  Turnour Viscount

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Vincent, Col Sir C EH(Sheffield)

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Walrond, Rt.Hn.Sir William H

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Warde, Colonel C.E.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Round, Rt. Hn. James

  Welby, Lt.-CoIA C E (Taunton)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

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

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon

  Myers, William Henry

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Whiteley, H. (AshtonundLyne)

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Sackville, Col. S. G. (Stopford)

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  O'Neill, Hn. Robert Torrens

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Wilson. John (Glasgow)

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Wilson Todd, Sir W.H(Yorks.)

  Percy, Earl

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

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

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Smith, H.C(North'mb,Tyneside

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Smith, RtHnJParker(Lanarks

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry W.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Spear, John Ward

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.)

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Steward, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

  TELLERS TOR THE AYES.—Sir

  Purvis, Robert

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Alexander Acland-Hood

  Randles, John S.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  and Viscount Valontia.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Stroyan, Jobn

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Strutt, Hn. Charles Hedley

  NOES.

  Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N.K.)

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny- N)

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Allen, Charles P.

  Dewar, John A (Inverness-sh.)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry

  Dilke, Ht. Hn. Sir Charles

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Joicey, Sir James

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Jones, David B. (Swansea)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh-)

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Bell, Richard

  Edwards, Frank

  Joyce, Michael

  Benn, John Williams

  Elibank, Master of

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

  Black, Alexander William

  Ellice, Capt E C (SAndrw'sBghs

  Lambert, George

  Boland, John

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Langley, Batty

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Law, Hugh Alex(Donegal, W.)

  Bond, Edward

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Brigs, John

  Field, William

  Lay land-Barratt, Francis

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Findlay, Alexander(Lanark NE

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Levy, Maurice

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bryce, Rt. Hn. James

  Flynn. James Christopber

  Lough, Thomas

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Lundon, W.

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Burl, Thomas

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John

  M'Arthur Wm. (Cornwall)

  Buxton, N.E.(York, NRWhitby

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Crae, George

  Caldwell, James

  Guest, Hn. Ivor Churchill

  M'Kean, John

  Cameron, Robert

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Haldane, Rt. Hn. Richard B.

  M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin

  Cawley, Frederick

  Hammond, John

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Harcourt, Lewis

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Hardie, J.Keir{MerthyrTydvil

  Morgan, J. Lloyd(Carmarthen)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Harwood, George

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Muldoon, John

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Murnaghan, George

  Cremer, William Randal

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Murphy, John

  Crombie, John William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Crooks, William

  Higham, John Sharp

  Newnes, Sir George

  Cullinan, J.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Norman, Henry

  Delaey, William

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Devlin, Chas.Ramsay(Galway)

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Tomkinson, James

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

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Toulmin. (George

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow, W.)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N)

  Russell, T. W.

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  O'Dowd, John

  Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  0'Melly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  O'Malley, William

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Wason, J. Catheart (Orkney)

  O'Mara, James

  Seely, Maj JEB (Isle of Wight)

  Weir, James Galloway

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Shackleton, David James

  White, George (Norfolk

  Parrott, William

  Shaw, Chas. Edw. (Stafford)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Partington, Oswald

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Whiteley, George(York, W.R.)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Sheehy, David

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Wilson, Chas Henry (Hull, W.)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Wilson. Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Slack, John Bamford

  Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.

  Price, Robert John

  Smith Samuel (Flint)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Spencer. Rt Hn_C R(Northants)

  Woodhouse, Sir J T(Huddersf'd

  Rea, Russell

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Young, Samuel

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Sullivan, Donal

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Ruddy, M.

  Tennant, Harold John

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Leif Jones and Mr. Emmott

  Richards, Thomas

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

  Bill read the third time, and passed.

  And, it being after Eleven of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER proceeded, in pursuance of the Order of the House of July 5th, to put forthwith the Question on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 7, line 29, after the word 'Act,' to insert the words 'on an appeal to an immigration board.'"—(Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglatt.)
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 7, line 33, after the word 'character,' to insert the words 'or whether a crime is an extradition crime.'"—(Mr. Secretary Akern-Douglas.)
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 7, line 34, to leave out the words from the first 'State,' to the end of line 35, and insert the words 'in accordance with rules made under this Act, and the Board shall aut in accordance with his decision.'"—(Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.)
  Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow, and to be printed. [Bill 277.]

  EAST INDIA LOANS [RAILWAYS].
  Resolution reported—
  "That it is expedient to authorise the Secretary of State in Council of India to raise in the United Kingdom on the security of the Revenues of India, by the creation and issue of capital stock, bonds, debentures, or bills, a sum, not exceeding £20,000,000, for the following purposes:—

  (a) The construction, extension, and equipment of Railways in India by State Agency or through the Agency of Companies.

  (b) The repayment of the principal of any bonds or debentures issued by any such company under the guarantee of the Secretary of State.

  (c)The discharge of any obligations incurred by the Secretary of State by reason of the purchase of any railway or the determination of any contract from or with such company."

  MR. CALDWELLasked the Secretary of State for India to give some explanation with regard to the £20,000,000 which it was proposed to borrow under this Resolution. If he did so the progress of the Bill might be promoted. He noticed that the Resolution authorised the raising of £20,000,000 in the United Kingdom upon the security of the revenues of India. He supposed that the ordinary rule would be followed

  1163
  and half the money would be raised in India. He assumed that it would not be necessary to have a Resolution of this House in order to raise part of this loan in India. If half the money was raised in India it would be raised at 3½ per cent., whilst if raised in be is country the interest would be 3 per cent. In the year 1903–4 the Government got more money in this country at 3 per cent, than they got in India at 3½ per cent. They might affect a saving to India by getting the whole amount at 3 per cent, in this country, and he therefore wished to have an explanation from the Secretary for India upon this point. If the security was the same, India should not be burdened with 3½per cent, unless there was some special purpose to be served. Some of this money was for the purpose of taking over the Bombay - Baroda line. He understood that the policy of the Government was to extend the railway system in India, and that was a policy which was approved of upon both sides of the House. He hoped that upon the Second Reading the right hon. Gentleman would give then a full statement of the purposes for which this loan was required and more particulars about the extensions. As this country had practically the management of the affairs of India, it was necessary to show that when matters came before this House affecting India they received some attention instead of being passed without anything being said about them.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BUODIUCK, Surrey, Guildford)said the money was to be applied to railway purchase and railway construction in India; and spread over the whole of the railways in India it gave a capital invested at the rate of neatly 5 per cent. That was a position to which he thought no other country in the world could afford a parallel. It was true that a rupee loan in India could only be raised at 3½ per cent.; but the Government had adopted the principle that money should be borrowed as largely as possible in the country where it was to be expended. That was the justification for paying a higher rate of interest in India than was paid in Great Britain. It was imperative that they should have this additional borrowing power at the
  1164
  earliest possible date, because the greatest object to be attained at present was the development of the resources of India. He hoped the House would confirm the decision of the Committee.
  MR. SAMUEL SMITHapproved of the policy of borrowing a portion of the money in India.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by the Chairman of Ways and Means and Mr. Secretary Brodrick.

  EAST INDIA LOANS (RAILWAYS) BILL.
  "To empower the Secretary of State in Council of India to raise money in the United Kingdom for the construction, extension, and equipment of Railways in India by State agency or through the agency of companies; and for other purposes," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 278.]
  LUNACY HILL.
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged. Bill withdrawn.
  PRIZE COURTS BILL [LORDS].
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged. Bill withdrawn.

  MEDICAL ACT (1880) AMENDMENT BILL. [THIRD READING.]
  Order for Third Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a third time".
  GENERAL LAURIEexplained that the Bill was intended to carry out the principle of reciprocity between the mother country and Canada in the matter of medical education. A special reason for the introduction of the Bill was that during the war in South Africa a number of medical men volunteered to serve with the Army, but the War Office said it was contrary to our law for them to attend a British soldier or to hold any official appointment. This Bill would enable these doctors to enter the service of this country as if they had been born here, and would also give an opportunity to any medical man going from this country to take up his profession in Canada. He trusted that the House would agree to the Third Reading.
  MR. CALDWELLsaid he did not rise to object to this Bill. He had a difficulty in regard to this measure, and he thought it was only right that he should inform the House what it was. Already they had reciprocity between this country and their Colonies, and so far so good. In the case of Canada the reciprocity could only be through the central Government in Canada. It also happened that there was Home Rule in Canada. They had local Governments there, and some of them might refuse to give reciprocity to medical men in this country. Under this Bill those provincial councils would come in to reap the benefit.
  GENERAL LAURIE: No.
  MR. CALDWELLsaid he did not think that our medical men could go to those provincial localities and practice, whereas anyone could come from Canada to this country and practice. He would not press his objection now, but he thought that it was only right that he should state his reasons for objecting. These questions were always carefully considered by him, and whenever they came up he could always give a substantial reason why he objected to any Bill.

  TOWN TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL.
  As amended (by the Standing Committee), considered.
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURYmoved the omission of Clause 1, which confers on a tenant to which the Bill applies the right to compensation for1 improvements. There was nothing in the' clause to limit the proposal in the Bill, to tenants in towns. The first few lines said—" "Subject to the provisions of this Act, a tenant of a holding to which this Act applies may, on quitting his holding, be entitled to claim, in the prescribed manner, compensation to be paid by the lantzzrd in respect of all improvements on his holding made by him or his predecessors in title, which have added to the letting value of the holding."
  He had always understood a holding to be a farm in the country and not a house in a town. It was most important in all Acts of Parliament that there should be no loophole on which an action could be founded and law expenses incurred. That was the reason why the clause should be left out in order, perhaps, that one more clear might be inserted; He objected to the clause also because it was retrospective. He argued that it was contrary to all sound principles of contract to enact that where an agreement had been freely entered into between two parties the bargain should be altered solely to the advantage of one of the parties. That seemed to him to be an infringement of all justice and an act which on his side of the House they would do their best to prevent. Another part of the clause said that the Court, in awarding compensation to the tenant in respect of improvements—
  "May, in reduction of the tenant's claim, take into consideration the rent at which suoh holding bad been held, and any benefits which the tenant may have received from his landlord in consideration expressly or impliedly of the improvements made."
  He did not understand the clause, and he was not sure that anybody else did. It seemed to have been drafted for the purpose of making work for lawyers and for adding to the expenses of the tenants and the equally unfortunate landlords. He begged to move.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSON, in seconding the Amendment, said this Bill seemed to him to be one of the most pernicious that could be directed against the interests of the owners of town holdings in Ireland. As showing the unfair way in which the Bill would work, he instanced the case of a tenant who had built a billiard room at the back of his house. Supposing a man wished to buy a house to which a billiard room had been added, according to the scheme of this Bill, not only would he have to pay for the actual cost of the billiard room, but something in addition—the increased value of the house caused by the building of the billiard room.
  MR. CLANCYrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put"; but Mr. Speaker withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
  MR. FLAVIN: Will the hon. Member kindly go home?
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONsaid that what he wanted was to get the important principle contained in this clause settled once for all. [Interruption from the IRISH Benches.] Hon. Members did not seem to appreciate the point.
  AN HON. MEMBER ON THE IRISH BENCHES; We do not appreciate your conduct.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONsaid that if hon. Gentlemen were anxious to Gome to a division he was perfectly willing foi them to do so. He therefore seconded the Amendment to leave out Clause?.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 5, to leave out Clause 1."— (Sir Frederick Banbury.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'Subject to the provisions of this Act a tenant' stand part of the Bill."
  MR. CLANCYsaid that the Bill had been carried on the Second Reading by a large majority and it had been thoroughly threshed out in the Standing Committee. Without further remark he invited the House to reject the Amendment.
  LORD HUGH CECILsaid that this clause furnished a remarkable illustration of the value of a principle which was often derided, but which had a very real foundation in fact, the principle of resisting what was called the thin edge of the wedge. In 1870 Mr. Gladstone passed a Bill to give compensation to agricultural tenants in Ireland for improvements.
  MR.T. W. RUSSELLsaid that the Irish tenants were not in the same position as English tenants.
  LORD HUGH CECILadmitted that the Irish agricultural tenants were in a very special position, and that was why Parliament was asked to intervene on their behalf; but that was no reason why the precedent should be followed and compensation be given to a wholly different class of tenants.
  And, it being Midnight, the debate stood adjourned.
  Debate to be resumed to-morrow.

  TRADE MARKS (RECOMMITTED) BILL
  Considered in Committee, and reported; as amended; to be considered to-morrow.
  Adjourned at seven minutes after Twelve o'clock.