§ Order read, for Further Consideration of First Resolution, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £12, 000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1905, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Departments of the Solicitor for the Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury, King's Proctor, and Director of Public Prosecutions, the Cost of Prosecutions, and other Legal Proceedings. "
§ Resolution further considered.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution. "
§ *MR. CRIPPS (Lancashire, Stretford)expressed a desire to call attention to what, to his mind, was a very important consideration involved in the Report of the Committee which investigated the Adolf Beck case. He did not propose to deal with the question of remuneration so far as Adolf Beck was concerned, because there were much wider considerations which affected the administration of the criminal law in this country. The Committee found that there had been a deplorable failure of justice. It was suggested by a late Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Fife, that this deplorable failure of justice ad only arisen under exceptional conditions which were not likely to recur, but which did occur in the case of Adolf Beck. He was not satisfied 1040 with that. Speaking from his experience as a deputy chairman of quarter sessions, he was not satisfied that in all the criminal cases he had tried a just decision had been given. There were cases in our criminal jurisdiction where the conviction was not satisfactory and where the decision of the Judge ought to be reviewed by another Court. Not only was there a deplorable failure of justice in this case but—and he entirely agreed with the Committee, and differed from the right hon. Member for Fife and the present Home Secretary in that respect—there was a deplorable failure on the part of the Home Office to perform what was their duty at the present time under the existing system of the administration of criminal law. He agreed that the Home Office was not a Court for the review of criminal procedure on questions of fact. If questions of fact were to be reconsidered they must be reconsidered before a judicial body, and ought to be so considered and not relegated to a mere administrative body which had no machinery for retrial. He agreed with all that was found in the Report of the Committee—whose recommendations would be carried out in a Bill which was being introduced in another place—that no blame was to be attached either to the police or to the Public Prosecutor, and that the failure arose in the first instance in the proceedings before the Judge, and in the second, in the failure of the Home Office to take the necessary steps when certain information came to their hand to put right, not only what was a deplorable failure of justice, but which ought to have been recognised by them as a great mistake when the papers were put before them.
So far as the trial was concerned, he thought the matter was put right by the recommendations of the Committee. The case was put by them as one of mistaken identity, and if the learned Judge had admitted certain evidence, which he did not admit, the case would have not proceeded further. In his opinion, however, the Report of the Committee did not go far enough. It did go to the 1041 extent that if a similar case arose there would be an opportunity of bringing it before the Court when it sat as a Crown Court to consider points of law in criminal cases. The Judges had assented in recent years more readily than in olden times to state a case on disputed law, in order that there might be authoritative decisions. There could be no greater injustice than that there should be a risk that a man might be convicted owing to a mistake on the part of the presiding Judge. He did not wish to make a personal attack on any one, but it was obvious that there was plenty of room for a mistake to take place, and they ought to take every security that if such a mistake was made the person charged did not suffer from it.
A more important point in the Committee's Report was with regard to the conduct of the Home Office. He had no desire to cast aspersions on permanent officials who could not defend themselves in the House, but he did find fault with the system which allowed such a remarkable failure of justice to take place, when it ought to have been put right in the earlier stages of the proceedings, and the irredeemable wrong which had been done to Adolf Beck prevented. After the trial, evidence came to the Home Office to show that Beck could not be the same person as the criminal Smith, who had been tried and convicted on a former occasion, and the House must remember that both at the, trial and in the conviction in Beck's case much turned on the assumption that Smith and Beck were one and the same person. The Home Office had in their hands what appeared to him to be irrefutable evidence of the non-identity of Smith and Beck. He had seen the two documents which were said to be identical, but, from his point of view, it was really impossible to say that they were identical when once closely examined. That, also, was the view of the Committee. In addition to that, there were the marks of identification which could not be gainsaid; and owing to the nationality of Smith it was utterly impossible that Smith and Beck could be the same person. Therefore, the Home Office had within their own archives irrefutable evidence that a main point on which the conviction was founded did not exist in fact.
1042 Under those circumstances, what was the duty of the Home Office? He did not say for a moment that the Home Office ought to be looked upon as a Court of criminal review. Its duty was, if subsequent evidence came to their notice that a particular conviction had been wrongly brought about, and that the conditions on which that conviction was based did not exist in fact, to see that the criminal was pardoned and released and not left in prison for a long time and under the conditions in which Beck was left. He would go a step further. The Home Office gave it in evidence that they wrote to the presiding Judge, Sir Forrest Fulton, the Recorder of London; but it was quite clear that, in that communication to the Judge, they did not bring to his mind that one of the conditions under which Beck was convicted was false in fact. It was for that reason that the Judge wrote back that he was satisfied that the conviction was right. In exercising the prerogative of pardon the Home Office should bring the true bearings of the facts within their knowledge to the notice of the Judge. The Committee did not go one iota too far in their strictures upon the Home Office. They pointed out that the Home Office had failed, with a knowledge of all the facts, to take such steps as would have allowed immediate reparation to be done to Beck. He would not attempt to trace out where the fault lay; but the facts clearly showed that, as regarded the extremely important duty of the exercise of the prerogative of pardon, the Home Office was not sufficiently well-manned. Full notice and knowledge of the facts were brought to the Home Office, and apparently they went as far as the permanent Undersecretary. He agreed with what was said by a late Home Secretary that in a serious matter of this kind the facts should be brought to the notice of the Secretary of State himself; but in the Beck case nothing of the kind was done. The inference which the Committee drew was that, looking to the very important function which ought to be discharged by the Home Office in exercising the prerogative of pardon, the Home Office was inadequately manned. If that were so in the Beck case, it aroused suspicions in reference to other cases less clear. He had 1043 the strongest view that every criminal convicted under whatever condition had a right to have his case investigate by the Home Office—not as a court of criminal review, but so fully investigate as to give an effective result in order to remedy what the Committee in the Beck case called a "deplorable failure of justice. "Nobody with a knowledge of criminal prosecution would be satisfied that the Home Office had sufficient effective machinery for the investigation of such cases, and it was a duty worthy of this House to provide precautions, so far as was humanly possible, to protect an innocent man from conviction. What was borne in upon him was that, unless the Home Office were sufficiently manned so as to give effective consideration, no only to such extreme cases as Beck's, but to ordinary cases, our whole system of criminal jurisdiction in this country could not be regarded as satisfactory.
He admitted that all questions of criminal appeal were full of difficulty; but the difficulty ought to be faced. He thought they were very much indebted to the labours of the Committee which considered the Beck case. It was no small matter to ask one of the hardest worked Judges in this country to curtail his holidays in order to deal with a complicated question of this kind. Anyone who had read the Report carefully could see that it was not only a masterly analysis of the facts, but that this great Judge brought his experience to bear on the only practical remedy apart from a general revision of the judicial system of the country. He hoped this case would not be forgotten in one respect, He hoped the House would not lose sight of the fact that injustice of this kind could occur; or believe that this was an isolated case. He himself did not believe it was an isolated case; and he hoped the result would be that the Home Office system would be made more effective and that means would be provided by which criminal trials could be reviewed in order to render impossible, as far as human ingenuity could provide, such an act of injustice.
§ MR. HERBERT ROBERTSON (Hackney, S.)said he agreed with his hon. and learned friend that such an act of injustice as had occurred should, if at all 1044 possible, be not allowed to recur. Undoubtedly this was not an isolated case. It, however, appeared to be assumed that Mr. Beck was convicted as Smith, who had been found guilty of similar crimes in 1877; and it was suggested by his hon. and learned friend that when it was discovered that Mr. Beck was not Smith, the Home Office was to blame for not taking action. He did not agree. One of the difficulties of the case was that Smith was kept out of the trial altogether. That was a very important point in our criminal law. It was a rule which existed in England, and which did not exist elsewhere, that it was no reason to suppose because A. B. committed a certain crime previously that therefore he had committed a similar crime now being tried. That was not admitted in English law. It was admitted in foreign countries. In France, for instance, there was always the presumption if A. B. had been convicted of a certain crime and was being tried for a similar crime that he was guilty. The Judge in this case refused to accept any proof as to the crimes committed in 1877. If that were understood, he did not see how the Home Office could have acted otherwise than it did. He, however, could not understand why the Home Office labelled Mr. Beck as Smith, and why they should assume that a man who had been tried without any reference to Smith was the person who had committed similar crimes in 1877. The evidence was erroneous, of course, but undoubtedly strong. There was evidence as regarded handwriting; but in his magisterial experience he never allowed handwriting to be taken into account. It was the most unsatisfactory form of evidence possible. There was, however, other evidence. All the women swore to the identity of this particular man; other witnesses were doubtful, and no evidence was offered that he was not the man. There was no alibi. There was nothing to guide the unfortunate jury—to every member of which he believed the case must have caused much pain and trouble for having convicted this man. He was afraid that they could not prevent things of this kind occurring occasionally; and he did not believe that even a Court of Criminal Appeal would be able to prevent them. The Court of Criminal 1045 Appeal would have had before it the same evidence, and the same verdict which had been returned, and on that evidence he did not sea how any other verdict could be returned. Personally he agreed with the Committee that it was not desirable that there should be a Court of Criminal Appeal. In the first place, there would have to be a limited time during which appeals could be made, and consequently only the same evidence would be available. Secondly; there would always be a difficulty in getting witnesses for the prisoner to come forward, from the fact that he had been previously convicted; and thirdly, as the power to revise sentences must almost necessarily include the power to increase them, there would be the risk of the prisoner's sentence being increased. He doubted whether the power to take cases up to the Court of Crown Cases Reserved would have any material effect in preventing miscarriages of justice. But what he wished to point out was that the original trial was the simple issue of whether Mr. Beck was the person who did certain acts on certain days, and the mere fact that he was not the man who committed other crimes of a similar nature was not such a discovery as necessarily to put everybody upon inquiry as to whether he did commit the crimes for which he was sentenced. For these reasons it appeared to him that there was no special blame to be attached to the Home Office.
§ MR. STUART WORTLEY (Sheffield, Hallam)said it appeared from the remarks of hon. Gentlemen of exceptional experience in these matters that a great many more miscarriages of justice occurred than the public usually supposed. If that were so, the public did not hear either of the cases of mitigation of sentences or reversal of convictions, and that was a singular testimony to the fact that the existing system did admit of ultimate justice being done where mistakes unhappily occurred. In this particular case he did not think there was any reason to indulge in excessive alarm or apprehension as to the likelihood of the repetition of so unfortunate a mistake. There had not been proved any vindictive action on 1046 the part of the police, nor had there been shown that confusion which sometimes existed elsewhere between inquisitorial or executive functions and judicial functions. There had been no looking for promotion or increase of emolument based on the number of convictions obtained. That was one of the dangers which had to be guarded against in all criminal systems, and it was satisfactory that it had not been found in practice to obtain. A defect which had been shown to exist was the absence of a system of interchangeability of knowledge or records. The Prisons Department appeared to have had knowledge which the police had not and possibly both were aware of facts of which the Home Office was ignorant. The Committee had most properly drawn attention to that point, and doubtless some arrangement would be made to remedy the defect in future.
But the most important matter of all was the function of the Home Office in the matter. Here, he thought, was the principal danger they had to guard against. It appeared that a gentleman at the Home Office wrote to the Judge asking whether his mind had been changed by the emergence of particular facts, and when the Judge replied that he could not change his mind on a mere supposition, he did not write back to say it was not a supposition but an actual fact proved by materials in the possession of the Home Office. There was a danger in that indifference. He associated himself with all that was said in the last debate with regard to the Home Office staff. The Home Office was manned by gentlemen of exceptional ability, and in this case there was no bad influence at work except the tendency which existed in all public offices to regard in too high a degree the sanctity of the judiciary. There seemed to be the impression that a Judge must not be troubled. Much as the judiciary of this country was admired, it had to be remembered that they treated the Executive with scant respect when the Executive came under review before them; and that whenever they got the opportunity they treated the legislative body with no respect whatever. Judges existed to be troubled if and when there was 1047 any suspicion that a miscarriage of justice had taken place, and they should be troubled not once or twice, but a dozen times, if necessary. If that had been done in this case the mistake would probably have been rectified.
How were such mistakes to be prevented in future? The Committee suggested that something more in the way of legal knowledge was necessary. Legal knowledge alone was not sufficient; knowledge of the laws of evidence was not sufficient. What was wanted was practical experience in the application of the law in actual cases. He was once told—he did not know whether it was still the case—that candidates for the Indian Civil Service, who, if successful, had to discharge duties partly administrative and partly judicial, had, as part of their examination and qualification, to attend at British Courts of Justice and take notes of a certain number of defended cases, and the notes so taken were given in as part of the test of their efficiency. He thought that in that practice there was the germ of the kind of preparation which might be brought in for some portions of the Civil Service. It was fallacious to suppose that the same tests were equally appropriate to all branches of the service. Whereas in the Treasury men of financial ability were required, in the Home Office those qualities which fitted a man, not only for administrative, but also for judicial duties were necessary. He believed that something of that kind was required. Nobody regretted more than I he did the lamentable miscarriage of justice that took place in this case, but he did not think there was any occasion for panic.
§ THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. COCHRANE,) Ayrshire, N.said he thought that his hon. and learned friend the Member for Stretford had been a little bit harsh in dealing with some of the officials of the Home Office. His hon. and learned friend was of opinion that the discovery that Smith was a Jew, and that Beck was not, should have convinced them, not only that Smith and Beck were different persons, but that Beck was innocent. He had also thrown a great 1048 deal of cold water upon the value of handwriting evidence and the evidence of handwriting experts. It appeared to him that that was the key to the position. The moment it was brought to the attention of the Home Office that there was a probability that Beck and Smith were not the same persons, that Smith was a Jew and that Beck was not, they at once made inquiries and found that that was the fact. It was discovered that Beck and Smith were not the same person; but, of course, they had then to go back upon the handwriting, and the whole case rested upon the similarity of the handwriting. It was said that if the writer of the letter in 1877 was the same as the writer in 1896, and if Beck could not have been in that particular country at that time because he was in Peru, therefore Beck could not have been the person who committed the crime. Therefore, his hon. and learned friend brought them back to the handwriting. The Committee said, "Look at these documents; any man in the street could see that they were in the same handwriting." It was notorious to hon. Members and to his hon. and learned friend that there was nothing more misleading than expert evidence in regard to handwriting. He did not think there was any blame whatever to be attached to those who preferred to accept the direct evidence of ten witnesses—he believed there were more witnesses willing to come forward and give similar evidence—who came into the witness box and said, "That is the man who committed the fraud. "No doubt his hon. and learned friend himself would admit that in ninety-nine cases out of 100 he would prefer the direct identification of ten witnesses to any amount of documentary evidence as to the similarity of handwriting. Perhaps he might be allowed to look back at the history of the case. In 1877 these frauds began. How was Smith convicted? Exactly as Beck was convicted in 1896. He was convicted on the same documents and the same direct evidence and handwriting; and who doubted that Smith was guilty? Smith admitted himself that in 1877 he was guilty, although he did not admit that he was guilty in 1896.
§ MR. MARKHAM (Nottinghamshire, Mansfield)Does the hon. Gentleman know that the closure falls at ten o'clock, and that not a word has been said on this side of the House?
§ MR. COCHRANEsaid he had no desire to stand in the way of hon. Members opposite, but he wished to point out that the Judge, in his letter, said that it did not matter whether Beck and Smith were the same person or different persons, and that he was satisfied on the evidence that came before him that Beck was the guilty person. In the circumstances he thought that less than justice had been done to the officials of the Home Office. It was extremely hard to pass censure upon a board of officials who had not had an opportunity of being heard. Let him add that he did not think there existed a more zealous, painstaking—
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLOh, yes. Agreed, agreed.
§ MR. COCHRANEsaid he thought the hon. Member for South Donegal was a little ungracious in his interruptions. These officials had no opportunity of being heard before the Committee, and it was very hard on them that they should be so severely censured. To censure these officials in such a harsh manner was a very serious matter indeed. He felt that extremely keenly, and the generous speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Fife was of quite a different tone to the interruptions of hon. Gentlemen opposite. He would not stand any longer in the way of hon. Members opposite. What they all desired was that similar cases should not be liable to occur in future. All who heard the statement made the other night by the Secretary of State for the Home Department knew that he was prepared to meet every one of the points raised by the Committee, and the result of that must be that such cases would not be likely to occur in future.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLsaid that in the case of Mr. Beck there had been an awful and scandalous miscarriage of justice, and he wished the hon. Member for the Hallam Division 1050 had abstained from lecturing the House in the manner he had done as to the way in which business was conducted at the Home Office. The documents were never brought to the knowledge of the late Viscount Ridley, the then Home Secretary. Everything was discussed and dealt with by the subordinate officials, who ought to have brought the case to the knowledge of the responsible Minister. The hon. Member for the Hallam Division was Under-Secretary when Viscount Llandaff was Home Secretary, and their tenure of office was characterised by a great miscarriage of justice in the case of Mrs. Maybrick. She ought to have been hanged or let go free. It had been stated again and again that the Beck case was unparalleled, but he was not at all satisfied that there were not cases of a similar nature from time to time. The late Sir William Harcourt, in 1883, when Home Secretary, brought forward a Bill with the object of establishing a Criminal Appeal Court. Lord James of Hereford stated that it was within his knowledge that a man had been twice convicted of offences of which he was innocent. Cases where innocent persons were convicted were of frequent occurrence. He could not help contrasting the generosity with which Mr. Beck had been treated in the matter of compensation with the small and utterly inadequate payments made to people in Ireland who had been convicted on the evidence of perjurers connected with the police and sentenced to long terms of imprisonment. The grievance of those who had suffered wrongful imprisonment in Ireland was aggravated in some cases by the fact that the perjurers who had brought about the miscarriage of justice received what were called compassionate payments in order that the police force might be relieved of them
§ MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)said that this discussion afforded a deplorable illustration of the effect of the closure. It was a great pity that instead of walking through the division lobbies they could not go on a little longer with the discussion of this matter. His complaint was that the Home Secretary had not made the slightest attempt to satisfy 1051 public opinion in regard to this gross miscarriage of justice. In the two debates which had taken place on the subject compliments had been paid to the police and the Home Office, as though, in the conduct of these Departments, everything was for the best in the best of all possible worlds. The Report of the Committee of Inquiry contained the following—
And though it is possibly beyond out province to suggest it, may not the time have come for abolishing the anomaly of pardoning a man who never ought to have been convicted, and a simpler remedy adopted of quashing the conviction on motion by the Attorney -General and entering an acquittal as of Record?Why did not the right hon. Gentleman do something to carry out that recommendation?
§ The system of identification, as illustrated by what occurred in this case, showed that changes were required in order to guard against the danger of injustice being done to innocent persons when arrested on suspicion. The representatives of the Home Office had not given the slightest assurance that such a grave miscarriage of justice would be avoided in future.
§ And, it being Ten of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 16th March, put that Question.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 239; Noes, 195. (Division List No. 83.)
1055| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R. | Gray, Ernest (West Ham) |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole | Greene, Henry D (Shrewsbury) |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas | Gretton, John |
| Allsopp, Hon. George | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Greville, Hon. Ronald |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Groves, James Grimble |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Cripps, Charles Alfred | Halsey. Rt. Hn. Thomas F. |
| Arrol, Sir William | Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile | Hambro, Charles Eric |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Cubitt, Hon. Henry | Hamilton, Marq. of(L'nd'nderry |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H | Cust, Henry John C. | Hare, Thomas Le gh |
| Bagot, Capt Josceline FitzRoy | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th |
| Bain, Colonel James Robert | Davenport, William Bromley | Haslam, Sir Alfred S. |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham) | Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley |
| Balcarres, Lord | Denny, Colonel | Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords. N. W.) |
| Balfour, RtHn. A. J. (Manch'r) | Dickson, Charles Scott | Heaton, John Henniker |
| Balfour, RtHn. Gerald W. (Leeds | Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred. Dixon | Helder, Augustus |
| Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch. | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers | Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Doxford, Sir William Theodore | Hickman, Sir Alfred |
| Banner, John S. Harmood | Duke, Henry Edward | Hogg, Lindsay |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Dyke, Rt Hn Sir Wm. Hart | Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside) |
| Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks | Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton | Hornby, Sir William Henry |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W. | Hoult, Joseph |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Faber, George Denison (York) | Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham) |
| Bigwood, James | Fardell, Sir T. George | Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham) |
| Bill, Charles | Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward | Hozier, Hn. Jas. Henry Cecil |
| Bingham, Lord | Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Mancr) | Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst | Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse |
| Bond, Edward | Finch, Rt. Hn. George H. | Jessel, Captain Herb. Merton |
| Boscawen, Arthur Griffith | Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs) | Kennaway, Rt Hn Sir John H |
| Bowles, Lt-Col. H. F. (Middles'x) | Fisher, William Hayes | Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh) |
| Brassey, Albert | Fison, Frederick William | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W. |
| Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John | FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose | Kerr, John |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon | Keswick, William |
| Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.) | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Kimber, Sir Henry |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Flower, Sir Ernest | King, Sir Henry Seymour |
| Butcher, John George | Forster, Henry William | Knowles, Sir Lees |
| Carson, Rt. Hon Sir Edw. H. | Galloway, William Johnson | Laurie, Lieut. -General |
| Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire | Gardner, Ernest | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Garfit, William | Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H. | Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End |
| Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton) | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Lawson, JohnGrant(Yorks, NR |
| Chapman, Edward | Gordon, Hn. J. E(Elgin&Nairn | Lee, Arthur H. (Hants Fareham |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'r H'mlets | Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) |
| Coates, Edward Feetham | Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon | Legge, Col. Hn. Heneage |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R. |
| Cohen, Benjamin Louis | Goulding, Edward Alfred | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine |
| Callings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Graham, Henry Robert | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) |
| Long, RtHn. Walter (Bristol, S) | Pierpoint, Robert | Stanley, Rt Hn. Lord (Lanes.) |
| Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart |
| Lowe, Francis William | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Stock, James Henry |
| Lowther, C. (Climb., Eskdale) | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley |
| Lyttelton, Rt. Hon Alfred | Pretyman, Ernest George | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Macdona, John Cumming | Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward | Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G(Oxf'd Univ.) |
| MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Purvis, Robert | Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth) |
| Maconochie, A. W. | Pym, C. Guy | Thornton, Percy M. |
| M'Calmont, Colonel James | Quilter, Sir Cuthbert | Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M |
| M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh W.) | Randles, John S. | Tritton, Charles Ernest |
| Majendie, James A. H. | Rankin, Sir James | Tuff, Charles |
| Manners, Lord Cecil | Rasch, Sir Frederic Came | Turnour, Viscount |
| Martin, Richard Biddulph | Ratcliff, R. F. | Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter) |
| Massey-Main waring, Hn. W. F. | Reid, James (Greenock) | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Maxwell, RtHn Sir H. E(Wigton) | Remnant, James Farquharson | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H. |
| Maxwell, W. JH. (Dumfriesshire) | Renshaw, Sir Charle Bine | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) | Webb, Colonel William George |
| Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G. | Robertson, Herbert (Hackney) | Welby, Lt.-Col. A. CE(Taunton) |
| Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Rolleston, Sir John F. L. | Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts. |
| Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants. | Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye | Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne) |
| Morpeth, Viscount | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Morrell, George Herbert | Round, Rt. Hon. James | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Morrison, James Archibald | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Mount, William Arthur | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford | Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.) |
| Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C. | Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse) | Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson |
| Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) | Sandys, Lieut. -Col. Thos. Myles | Wortley, Rt. Hn C. B. Stuart |
| Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Seely, Charles Hilton(Lincoln) | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Myers, William Henry | Seton-Karr, Sir Henry | Wylie, Alexander |
| Nicholson, William Graham | Sloan, Thomas Henry | Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H. |
| Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.) | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Parkes, Ebenezer | Smith, HC(North'm b. Tyneside) | |
| Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington) | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES. —Sir |
| Pemberton. John S. G. | Spear, John Ward | Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Percy, Earl | Stanley, Hon, A. (Ormskirk) | and Viscount Valentia. |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) | Harmsworth, R. Leicester |
| Allen, Charles P. | Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan) | Harrington, Timothy |
| Ambrose, Robert | Delany, William | Harwood, George |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway | Hayden, John Patrick |
| Barlow, John Emmott | Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Herme, Norval Watson |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Dobbie, Joseph | Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H. |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Donelan, Captain A. | Higham, John Sharpe |
| Bell, Richard | Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) | Hope, John Deans (Fife, West) |
| Benn, John Williams | Duffy, William J. | Horniman, Frederick John |
| Blake, Edward | Duncan, J. Hastings | Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley) |
| Boland, John | Dunn, Sir William | Jacoby, James Alfred |
| Bolton, Thomas Dolling | Ellice, CaptEC. (S Andrw'sBghs) | Johnson, John |
| Brigg, John | Emmott, Alfred | Joicey, Sir James |
| Bright, Allan Heywood | Esmonde, Sir Thomas | Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea |
| Broadhurst, Henry | Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone) | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | Jones Wm. (Carnarvonshire) |
| Burke, E. Haviland | Eve, Harry Trelawney | Jordan, Jeremiah |
| Burns, John | Fenwick, Charles | Kearley, Hudson E. |
| Burt, Thomas | Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith) | Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W) |
| Buxton, Sydney Charles | Field, William | Kilbride, Denis |
| Caldwell, James | Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | Kitson, Sir James |
| Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Labouchere, Henry |
| Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | Flynn, James Christopher | Lambert, George |
| Causton, Richard Knight | Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Langley, Batty |
| Cawley, Frederick | Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) |
| Channing, Francis Allston | Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Gilhooly, James | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Gladstone, RtHn. Herbert John | Leese, Sir J. F. (Aeecrington) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Levy, Maurice |
| Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) | Griffith, Ellis J. | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Cremer, William Randal | Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton | Lloyd-George, David |
| Crombie, John William | Haldane, Rt. Hn. Richard B. | Lundon, W, |
| Crooks, William | Hammond, John | Lyell, Charles Henry |
| Dalziel, James Henry | Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift |
| MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Power, Patrick Joseph | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) |
| M'Crae, George | Price, Robert John | Thomas, David A. (Merthyr) |
| M'Kean, John | Priestley, Arthur | Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.) |
| M'Kenna, Reginald | Rea, Russell | Tomkinson, James |
| M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin | Reckitt, Harold James | Toulmin, George |
| Mitchell, Ed. (Fermanagh, N.) | Reddy, M. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Mooney, John J. | Redmond, John E. (Waterford | Ure, Alexander |
| Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen) | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th | Wallace, Robert |
| Moss, Samuel | Rickett, J. Compton | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Moulton, John Fletcher | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Murphy, John | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) |
| Nannetti, Joseph P. | Roche, John | Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney) |
| Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Roe, Sir Thomas | Weir, James Galloway |
| Norman, Henry | Runeiman, Walter | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Norton, Capt. Cecil William | Russell, T. W. | White, Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Nussey, Thomas Willans | Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland) | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.) | Seely, Maj. J. E. B. (Isle of Wight) | Whiteley, George (York, W. R.) |
| O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Shackleton, David James | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.) | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.) | Sheehy, David | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Shipman, Dr. John G. | Wills, Arthur Walters(N Dorset |
| O'Dowd, John | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) | Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid. |
| O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Slack, John Bamford | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N. | Smith, Samuel (Flint) | Wilson, John (Falkirk) |
| O'Malley, William | Soames, Arthur Wellesley | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.) |
| O'Mara, James | Soares, Ernest J. | Wood, James |
| O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | Spencer, RtHn. C. R. (Northants) | Woodhouse, Sir JT(Huddersf'd) |
| Partington, Oswald | Stevenson, Francis S. | Young, Samuel |
| Paulton, James Mellor | Strachey, Sir Edward | Yoxall, James Henry |
| pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Sullivan, Donal | |
| perks, Robert William | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) | TELLERS FOR TNE NOES. —Mr. Lough and Mr. Markham. |
| Pirie, Duncan V. | Tennant, Harold John |
§ Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order o the House of the 16th March, then put forthwith the Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in all the remaining Resolutions reported
1056§ in respect of the Civil Service Supplementary Estimates. "
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 251; Noes, 198. (Division List No. 84.)
1059| AYES. | ||
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Brassey, Albert | Davenport, William Bromley |
| Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel | Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John | Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham) |
| Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden | Brotherton, Edward Allen | Denny, Colonel |
| Allsopp, Hon. George | Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh. | Dickson, Charles Scott |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Bull, William James | Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Burdett-Coutts, W. | Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon |
| Arrol, Sir William | Butcher, John George | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon John | Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H. | Doxford, Sir William Theodore |
| Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. SirH. | Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh. | Duke, Henry Edward |
| Bagot, Capt. JoscelineFitzRoy | Cayzer, Sir Charles William | Dyke. Rt Hn. Sir Wm. Hart |
| Bailey, James (Walworth) | Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Egerton, Hn. A. de Tatton |
| Bain, Colonel James Robert | Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.) |
| Baird. John George Alexander | Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton) | Faber, George Denison (York) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Chapman, Edward | Fardell, Sir T. George |
| Balfour, Rt Hn A. J. (Manch'r) | Clive, Captain Percy A. | Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward |
| Balfour, RtHn Gerald W(Leeds) | Coates, Edward Feetham | Fergusson. Rt. Hn Sir J(Manc'r |
| Balfour, Kenneth R (Christch. | Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Cohen, Benjamin Louis | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Finlay, SirR. B. (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs |
| Bartley, Sir George C. T. | Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R | Fisher, William Hayes |
| Beach, RtHnSir Michael Hicks | Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole | Fison, Frederick William |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Compton, Lord Alwyne | FitzGerald. Sir Robert Penrose- |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas | Fitzroy, Hn. Edward. Algernon |
| Bigwood, James | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Flannery, Sir Fortescue |
| Bill, Charles | Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S. | Flower, Sir Ernest |
| Bingham, Lord | Cripps, Charles Alfred | Forster, Henry William |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile | Galloway, William Johnson |
| Bond, Edward | Cubitt, Hon. Henry | Gardner, Ernest |
| Boscawen, Arthur Griffith | Cust, Henry John C. | Garfit, William |
| Bowles, Lt-Col H. F. (Middlesex) | Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H. |
| Godson, Sir Augustus Fred. | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin&Nairn) | Long, Col Chas. W. (Evesham | Robertson, Herb. (Hackney) |
| Gordon, Maj Evans(T'rH'mlets | Long, RtHn Walter (Bristol, S.) | Rolleston, Sir John F. L. |
| Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye |
| Goschen, Hn. George Joachim | Lowe, Francis William | Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert |
| Goulding, Edward Alfred | Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale) | Round, Rt. Hon. James |
| Graham, Henry Robert | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Gray, Ernest (West Ham) | Macdona, John Cumming | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury) | MacIver, David (Liverpool) | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Gretton, John | M'Calmont, Colonel James | Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse) |
| Greville, Hn. Ronald | M'Iver, SirLewis(Edinburgh W) | Sandys, Lieut-Col. T. Myles |
| Groves, James Grimble | Majendie, James A. H. | Seely, Chas. Hilton (Lincoln) |
| Halsey, Rt. Hn. Thomas F. | Manners, Lord Cecil | Seton-Karr, Sir Henry |
| Hambro, Charles Eric | Martin, Richard Biddulph | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Hamilton, Marq. of(L'nd'nderry | Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W F | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East) |
| Hare, Thomas Leigh | Maxwell, RtHnSirH. E(Wigt'n | Smith, HC(North'mbTyneside |
| Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th) | Maxwell, W. J. H(Dunfriesshire) | Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Haslam, Sir Alfred S. | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Spear, John Ward |
| Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley) | Molesworth, Sir Lewis | Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk |
| Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords, N. W | Montagu, Hon. J. Scott(Hants) | Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs) |
| Heaton, John Henniker | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy | Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart |
| Helder, Augustus | Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow) | Stock, James Henry |
| Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T. | Morpeth, Viscount | Strutt, Hon. Chas. Hedley |
| Hickman, Sir Alfred | Morrell, George Herbert | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Hogg, Lindsay | Morrison, James Archibald | Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G(Oxf'd Univ) |
| Hope, J. F(Sheffield, Brightside) | Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer | Thornton, Percy M. |
| Hornby, Sir Wm. Henry | Mount, William Arthur | Tomlinson, Sir Win. Ed. M. |
| Hoult, Joseph | Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C. | Tritton, Charles Ernest |
| Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham | Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry) | Tuff, Charles |
| Howard, J(Midd., Tottenham) | Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath) | Turnour, Viscount |
| Hozier, Hn. James HenryCecil | Myers, William Henry | Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter) |
| Hunt, Rowland | Nicholson, William Graham | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Hutton, John (Yorks. N. R.) | Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury) | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H. |
| Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse | Parkes, Ebenezer | Warde, Colonel C. E. |
| Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred | Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington) | Webb, Colonel William George |
| Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton | Peel, Hn. Wm. R. Wellesley | Welby, Lt. ColA. C. E (Taunton |
| Kennaway, RtHn. Sir John H. | Pemberton, John S. G. | Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts |
| Kenyon, Hn. G. T. (Denbigh) | Percy, Earl | Whiteley, H. (Ashton undLyne) |
| Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col W | Pierpoint, Robert | Whitmore, Chas. Algernon |
| Kerr, John | Pilkington, Colonel Richard | Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset) |
| Keswick, William | Platt-Higgins, Frederick | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Kimber, Sir Henry | Plummer, Sir Walter R. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York. E. R) |
| King, Sir H. Seymour | Pretyman, Ernest George | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Knowles, Sir Lees | Pryce-Jones, Lt. Col Edward | Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H(Yorks.) |
| Laurie, Lieut. -General | Purvis, Robert | Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson |
| Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Pym, C. Guy | Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart |
| Lawrence, SirJoseph(Monm'th | Quilter, Sir Cuthbert | Wrightson, Sir Thomas |
| Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) | Randies, John S. | Wylie, Alexander |
| Lawson, Hn. H. L W(MileEnd) | Rankin, Sir James | Wyndham-Quin, Col W. H. |
| Lawson, JohnGrant(YorksN. R | Rasch, Sir Frederic Came | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Lee, A. H. (Hants, Fareham) | Ratcliff, R. F. | |
| Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) | Reid, James (Greenock) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir. |
| Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Remnant, Jas. Farquharson | Alexander Acland-Hood |
| Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S | Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine | and Viscount Valentia |
| Lockwood, Lieut. -Col. A. R. | Ridley, S. Forde | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.) | Bolton, Thomas Dolling | Clancy, John Joseph |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Brigg, John | Condon, Thomas Joseph |
| Allen, Charles P. | Bright, Allan Heywood | Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark) |
| Ambrose, Robert | Broadhurst, Henry | Cremer, William Randal |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Crombie, John William |
| Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry | Burke, E. Haviland | Crooks, William |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Burt, Thomas | Davies, Alfred (Carmartnen) |
| Barlow, John Emmott | Buxton, Sydney Charles | Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan) |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Caldwell, James | Delany, William |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) | Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway) |
| Bell, Richard | Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles |
| Benn, John Williams | Cawley, Frederick | Dobbie, Joseph |
| Blake, Edward | Channing, Francis Allston | Donelan, Captain A. |
| Boland, John | Cheetham, John Frederick | Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark) |
| Duffy, William J. | Lough, Thomas | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Duncan, J. Hastings | Lundon, W. | Schmann, Charles E. |
| Dunn, Sir William | Lyell, Charles Henry | Seely, Maj. J. E. B (Isleof Wight) |
| Ellice, CaptE. C (S Andrw's Bghs) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Shackleton, David James |
| Emmott, Alfred | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas | M'Crae, George | Sheehy, David |
| Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone) | M'Kean, John | Shipman, D. John G. |
| Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan) | M'Kenna, Reginald | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Eve, Harry Trelawney | M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin | Slack, John Bamford |
| Fenwick, Charles | Markham, Arthur Basil | Smith, Samuel (Flint) |
| Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith) | Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N) | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Field, William | Mooney, John J. | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.) | Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen) | Spencer, Rt. HnC. R(Northants |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Moss, Samuel | Stanhope, Hon. Philip James |
| Flynn, James Christopher | Moulton, John Fletcher | Stevenson, Francis S. |
| Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Murphy, John | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Fowler. Rt. Hn. Sir Henry | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Freeman-Thomas, Captain F. | Newnes, Sir George | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Fuller, J. M. F. | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Tennant, Harold John |
| Gilhooly, James | Norman, Henry | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E) |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | Norton, Capt, Cecil William | Thomas, DavidAlfred(Merthyr) |
| Griffiths, Ellis J. | Nussey, Thomas Willans | Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.) |
| Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton | O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid) | Tomkinson, James |
| Haldane, Rt, Hon. Richard B. | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Toulmin, George |
| Hammond, John | O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.) | Ure, Alexander |
| Harmsworth, R. Leicester | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Wallace, Robert |
| Harrington, Timothy | O'Dowd, John | Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Harwood, George | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Hayden, John Patrick | O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon. N.) | Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) |
| Helme, Norval Watson | O'Malley, William | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Hemphill, Rt, Hn. Chas. H. | O'Mara, James | Weir, James Galloway |
| Higham, John Sharpe | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Hope, John Deans(Fife, West) | Partington, Oswald | White, Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Horniman, Frederick John | Paulton, James Mellor | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley) | Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden) | Whiteley, George (York, W. R.) |
| Jacoby, James Alfred | Perks, Robert William | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
| Johnson, John | Pirie, Duncan, V. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
| Joicey, Sir James | Power, Patrick Joseph | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea | Price, Robert John | Wills, Arthur Walters(NDorset |
| Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Priestley, Arthur | Wilson, Fred W (Norfolk, Mid.) |
| Jones, William(Carnarvonshire) | Rea, Russell | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Jordan, Jeremiah | Reckitt, Harold James | Wilson, john (Falkirk) |
| Kearley, Hudson E. | Reddy, M. | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestershire, N |
| Kennedy, VincentP. (Cavan, W) | Redmond, John E (Waterford) | Wood James |
| Kilbride, Denis | Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th) | Woodhouse, SirJT(Hudd rsfi'd) |
| Kitson, Sir James | Rickett, J. Compton | Young, Samuel |
| Lambert, George | Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) | Yoxall, James Henry |
| Langley, Batty | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | |
| Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall) | Robson, William Snowdon | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Layland-Barratt, Francis | Roche, John | Herbert Gladstone and Mr. |
| Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington) | Roe, Sir Thomas | Causton. |
| Levy, Maurice | Runciman, Walter | |
| Lewis, John Herbert | Russell, T. W. |