Commons Sitting of 8 May 1905

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

MR. SPEAKER'S ABSENCE AND THE ABSENCE OF THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS.
The House being met, the Clerk at the Table informed the House of the unavoidable absence of Mr. SPEAKER, owing to continued indisposition, and of the unavoidable absence of the CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS, owing to indisposition.
Whereupon Mr. JEFFREYS, the Deputy-Chairman, proceeded to the Table, and, after Prayers, took the Chair as Deputy-Speaker, pursuant to the Standing Order.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILLS (STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERETO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.:—London County Council (Money) Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERlaid 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, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.—South Eastern and London, Chatham, and Dover Railways Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.

  PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERETO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.:—Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 3) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 4) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time to-morrow.

  PRIVATE BILLS (PETITION FOR ADDITIONAL PROVISION) (STANDING ORDERS NOT COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Reports from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the Petition for additional

  1101
  Provision in the following Bills, the Standing Orders have not been complied with, viz.:—London County Council (General Powers) Bill; London County Council (Tramways) Bill; Wigan Corporation Bill.
  Ordered, That the Reports be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.
  Heckmondwike Improvement Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Marylebone Chapels Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
  South Wales Electrical Power Distribution Company Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Bill. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Edgware and Hampstead Railway Bill. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  West Cumberland Electric Tramways Extension of Time) Bill [Lords]. Considered; to be read the third time.
  Grangemouth Waterworks and Burgh Extension Order Confirmation Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill. Read a second time, and committed.
  Mullingar, Kells, and Drogheda Railway Bill. Order for Second Reading upon Thursday, May 11th, read, and discharged; Bill withdrawn

  PRIVATE BILLS (GROUP H).
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERinformed the House, That the Committee on Group H of Private Bills not being appointed to
  1102
  meet until Thursday next, the parties promoting the Skegness Water Bill, which was set down for consideration on the first day of the meeting of the Committee, had appeared before him and proved that the evidence of Dr. Samuel Rideal, 28, Victoria Street, Westminster, and John Clough Thresh, Chelmsford, was essential to their case, and that their attendance could not be procured without the intervention of the House.
  Ordered, That Samuel Rideal and John Clough Thresh do attend the Committee on Group H of Private Bills on Thursday next, at Twelve of the clock.

  POLICE AND SANITARY COMMITTEE.
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERinformed the House, That the Police and Sanitary Committee being adjourned until tomorrow, the parties opposing the Liverpool Corporation Bill, which was set down for to-morrow, had appeared before him and proved that the evidence of Dr. William Collingridge, Medical Officer of Health for the City of London, Guildhall, E.C., was essential to their case, and that his attendance could not be procured without the intervention of the House.
  Ordered, That Dr. William Collingridge do attend the Police and Sanitary Committee Tomorrow, at half-past Eleven of the clock.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Fearn, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Lesmahagow, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  FRANCHISE AND REMOVAL OF WOMEN'S DISABILITIES BILL.
  Two Petitions from West Bristol, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  JUVENILE SMOKING BILL.
  Petition from Leith, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Kirriemuir, against; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions in favour; from Broughty Ferry; Cockburnspath; Coldstream; Dundee; Eastwood; Edinburgh; Glasgow (two); Govan; Billhead and Kelvinside; Kelso Abbey; Kiloyth (two); Kinning Park; Kirkcaldy; Larbert; Leith; Lesmahagow; Maryhill; Paisley; Portobello; Reston; and Scour; to he upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petition from Margate, against; to lie upon the Table.
  MILK DEPOTS (LONDON) BILL.
  Petition from Lewisham, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  WOMEN'S ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
  Petition from North Manchester, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  LOCAL TAXATION (GRANTS IN AID).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 10th April; Mr. Black]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 153.]
  EVICTIONS (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Return of the number of Evictions in Ireland for the quarter ended 31st March, 1905 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  DISEASES OF ANIMALS ACTS, 1894 TO 1903.
  Copy presented, of the Hull (Channel Islands Animals) Landing Place Order of 1905 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  NAVAL EXPENDITURE (GREAT BRITAIN AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES).
  Return presented, relative thereto-[ordered 4th May; Sir Edgar Vincent];. to lie upon the Table.
  PAPER LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
  Union of Benefices Act (Saint Paul, Covent Garden, with Saint Michael, Burleigh Street). Copy of Scheme under The Union of Benefices Act, 1860, for effecting an Union of the Benefices of Saint. Paul, Covent Garden, with Saint Michael, Burleigh Street [by Act].
  CORPORAL PUNISHMENT.
  Address for "Return of all sentences of Corporal Punishment inflicted under 26 and 27 Vic., c. 44, upon persons convicted of offences under Section 43 of The Larceny Act, 1861, and Section 21 of The Offences Against the Person Act, 1861, in England and Wales, from the 31st day of December, 1903, to the 31st day of December 1904, (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 288, of Session 1904)."—(Mr. Lloyd Morgan.)
  SUGAR AND SUGARED GOODS (IMPORT DUTIES) (FOREIGN COUNTRIES).
  Return ordered, "showing the amount of the Import Duties imposed on Sugar and on confectionery, jams, biscuits, cakes, and other sugared goods in Germany, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Holland, France, and Switzerland; and also a Return of the drawbacks granted on exports in these countries on all these commodities."—(Mr. Lough.)

  SMALLPOX.
  Return ordered, "showing as regards-each Port or other Sanitary District in England and Wales (exclusive of any district wholly or partly in London), in respect of which during the year ended

  1105
  the 25th day of March, 1905, cases of Smallpox have been reported to the Local Government Board; the number of such, cases; and also, where the number reported has exceeded 100, the estimated amount of the expenditure incurred by the Sanitary Authority in consequence of the occurrence of such cases."—(Sir John Tuke.)

  EAST INDIA (FINANCIAL STATEMENT).
  Address for "Copy of the Indian Financial Statement for 1905–6 and of the Proceedings of the Legislative Council of the Governor-General thereon."—(Sir Henry Fowler.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Irish Estates Commissioners—Legal Advice by Law Officers of the Crown.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether the Law Officers of the Crown in Ireland have given any legal advice to the Estates Commissioners in regard to the administration of the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1903.
  (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) No, Sir. The Law Officers of the Crown in Ireland give their legal advice to the Lord-Lieutenant and Chief Secretary on all such questions as may be referred to them, but they do not advise and have not advised the Estates Commissioners.

  Navy—Training of Engineer Officers—Age Regulations.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty at what age the special training of officers of the Navy, who are to form the engineers branch of the profession, will commence.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The hon. Member will find the Answer to his Question at page 5 of the Memorandum presented to Parliament on December 16th,
  1106
  1902, in which it was stated that the age at which the careers of the young officers will begin to diverge will be from nineteen to twenty years. The Admiralty; do not propose to anticipate the more detailed rules which will have to be laid down later in order to give effect to the scheme adopted in 1902.

  New Construction in British and Foreign Navies.
  MR. PARTINGTON: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can give the amount of tonnage and its cost added by new construction to the British, French, German, United States of America, and Russian navies for the five years ending 31st March, 1905.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The figures, which do not include torpedo boats and submarines, are as follows:—

  Tons.

  Cost.

  £

  Great Britain

  601,755

  46,712,123

  France

  178,322

  17,589,215

  Germany

  198,561

  18,830,704

  United States

  154,184

  14,663,817

  Russia

  267,586

  23,836,892

  Irish Board of Agriculture—Local Bodies and Staff Grievances.
  MR. O'KELLY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the names of the local public bodies who have made representations to the Department of Agriculture in connection with the alleged inequality in the treatment of its staff; and what steps, if any, the Department proposes to take to satisfy these bodies of the justice or otherwise of their complaints.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The public bodies which have notified to the Department their adoption of a resolution

  1107
  passed, on the motion of the] Member for the Ossory Division, by King's County Council, are as follows:—

  Dublin County Council.

  Cavan County Council.

  Cork Borough County Council.

  Kerry County Council.

  New Ross Urban Council.

  Middleton Urban Council.

  Newry Urban Council.

  The Department do not propose to discuss questions as to the organisation of their office staff with local bodies which have no functions in the matter.

  Uncertified Deaths in Scotland and Ireland.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord-Advocate if he will state the number of uncertified deaths in Scotland and Ireland respectively for each year since 1900.
  (Answered by Mr. Scott Dickson.) The number of deaths from uncertified causes in Scotland during 1900 were 2,757; during 1901 were 2,392; during 1902 were 2,180. Figures for 1903–4 are not yet available. For information as to the Irish figures the hon. Member will probably apply to the Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant.

  Fines for Illegal Trawling.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord-Advocate if he will state the number of foreign and British trawlers respectively whose masters have been fined for illegal trawling during the present year, the aggregate amount of the fines, and the account into which such fines have been paid.
  (Answered by Mr. Scott Dickson.) The masters of ten foreign and five British trawlers have been fined for illegal trawling during the present year, the aggregate amount of fines is represented by £1,160, and the fines paid have been credited to the account for "Law Charges and Courts of Law, Scotland," under Sub-head U, "Appropriations-in-Aid, Cash Fines, and Forfeitures."

  Elections of Justices of the Peace to the Licensing Court in Scotland.
  MR. BUCHANAN: To ask the Lord-Advocate whether justices of the peace who are licence-holders are entitled to vote for the representatives of the justices on the Licensing Court in Scotland, notwithstanding the fact that they cannot themselves sit on such Court.
  (Answered by Mr. Scott Dickson.) In my opinion they are.

  Poor Law Medical Relief—Recommendations of Departmental Committee.
  MR. MUNRO FERGUSON: To ask the Lord-Advocate whether he proposes to take any further action upon the Report of the Departmental Committee on Poor Law Medical Relief.
  (Answered by Mr. Scott Dickson.) A Bill is in course of preparation which, as at present proposed, will embody certain of the recommendations of the Departmental Committee on Poor Law Medical Relief.

  Learners in Dundee Telegraph Department.
  MR. J. F. HOPE: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that there are fourteen fully qualified learners in the Dundee Telegraph Department with service extending to three years, and that under present conditions there is no prospect of appointment for a considerable period; and whether, in view of the fact that these youths were attracted into the telegraph department by the prospect of permanent employment, he will state what steps he intends taking to provide appointments for learners who have proved themselves efficient.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) There are nine male and five female learners at Dundee, the greatest length of service in the case of the males being two years five months and in the case of the females two years nine months, and of these only

  1109
  four males and three females are fully qualified. The position, therefore, is not so serious as represented by the hon. Member. I regret that owing to the dearth of vacancies it has not been possible as yet to provide appointments for these officers, but I have recently arranged for an advance in the pay of those having more than two years service, and the whole matter is still receiving careful attention.

  West Indian Mail Contract.
  MR. LAWRENCE: To ask the Postmaster-General if he will say at what date he received the tender from Messrs. Elder, Dempster for the West Indian mails; had the terms of the Royal Mail then been made public; and in asking the Royal Mail again to tender were they informed that another tender by Messrs. Elder and Co. was already in his hands.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) A full statement of the course followed in this matter has been embodied in a despatch from the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Governors of the colonies concerned. This despatch has been laid on the Table of the House, and will be in the hands of hon. Members very shortly, and will give the information wished for by the hon. Member in a fuller and more convenient form than can be done by Question and Answer.

  Appeal of Telegraphist Fox, of Portadown.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will state the date upon which he received the appeal of a telegraphist, named Fox, at Portadown, against the infliction of a punishment, and the date upon which the officer was compelled to perform the punishment; and whether it is the rule in the Postal Department that an officer being punished for a breach of regulations, and appealing to the Postmaster-General for a reconsideration, should be compelled by the local officials to perform the punishment before the Postmaster-General's decision is received.
  1110
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The appeal has not yet been submitted to me. I am informed that certain inquiries were necessary before the case could be presented to me in a complete form for my decision. Mr. Fox performed two hours extra duty without pay, the punishment in question, on February 28th, the day on which he appealed. He raised no objection to the carrying out of the punishment before his appeal was considered; and it is evident that if my decision should be in his favour the punishment can be cancelled by the deletion of the record and payment for the extra duty at overtime rate.

  Remuneration of Irish and Scotch Law Officers of the Crown.
  MR. WHITLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury what payments were made in salaries and fees to the Irish and Scotch Law Officers during the financial year ending March 31st, 1905.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The following were the salaries and fees paid for the year 1904–5 to the Scottish I and Irish Law Officers:—

  Scotland.

  Lord-Advocate.

  Solicitor-General

  £

  £

  Salary

  5,000

  2,000

  Fees

  None

  None

  Ireland.

  Attorney-General

  Solicitor-General

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  Salary

  5,000

  0

  0

  2,000

  0

  0

  Fees

  184

  16

  0

  869

  8

  0

  Particulars of Fees of Law Officers of the Crown.
  MR. WHITLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can specify the services for which the sums of £5,993 14s. 4d. and £3,748 17s. 3d. were paid to Mr. Attorney-General and Mr. Solicitor-General respectively where the individual payments amounted to more than £100.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The scale of the fees referred to is settled pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 8 of Treasury Minute of July 5th, 1895 (Parliamentary Paper, 429, of 1895, Law Officers' Salaries, etc.), which lays down that for contentious business the Law Officers shall receive fees according to the ordinary professional scales, but that in cases of exceptional importance or difficulty an increased fee on the brief

  1.

  Salary

  Fees

  Total.

  £

  £

  £

  1895–1896

  7,000

  3,916

  10,916

  1896–1897

  7,000

  6,039

  13,039

  1897–1898

  7,000

  7,563*

  14,563

  1898–1899

  7,000

  10,264*

  17,264

  1899–1900

  7,000

  11,804*

  18,804

  1900–1901

  7,000

  1,416†

  12,918

  4,502‡

  1901–1902

  7,000

  5,477

  12,477

  1902–1903

  7,000

  4,816

  11,816

  1903–1904

  7,000

  12,921§

  19,921

  1904–1905

  7,000

  5,994║

  12,994

  *Including fees in the Venezuela Boundary Arbitration.

  †Sir R. E. Webster (now Lord Alverstone).

  ‡Sir R. B. Finlay.

  §Including fees in the Alaska Boundary Arbitration of £4,900 10s. and British Guiana. Boundary Arbitration of £2,124.

  ║ Including fees in the Venezuela Boundary Arbitration of £1,736 4s. 6d. and Brazil and British Guiana Boundary Arbitration of £714 12s.

  may be allowed as the Chancellor of the Exchequer shall approve. During the year 1904–5 special sanction was obtained on four occasions for payments to a Law Officer, two of which were Foreign Office business.

  Remuneration of Law Officers of the Crown.
  MR. LAMBERT: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can state the amount paid in salaries to the Law Officers of the Crown for each financial year since 1895 separating the salaries and fees of the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General respectively.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Amounts paid (1) to the Attorney-General, (2) to the Solicitor-General in respect of salary and fees:—

  2.

  Salary.

  Fees.

  Total.

  £

  £

  £

  1895–1896

  6,000

  691

  6,691

  1896–1897

  6,000

  3,365

  9,365

  1897–1898

  6,000

  4,946*

  10,946

  1898–1899

  6,000

  5,844*

  11,844

  1899–1900

  6,000

  5,329

  11,329

  1900–1901

  6,000

  693†

  9,341

  2,648‡

  1901–1902

  6,000

  4,355

  10,355

  1902–1903

  6,000

  3,701

  9,701

  1903–1904

  6000

  7,069§

  13,069

  1904–1905

  6,000

  3,749

  9,749

  *Including fees in the Venezuela Boundary Arbitration

  † Sir R. B. Finlay.

  ‡Right Hon. Sir E. H. Carson

  §Including fees in the Alaska Boundary Arbitration of £2,633 3s. 6d. paid by the Canadian Government

  Duties and Sittings of the Railway and Canal Commissioners
  MR. LAMBERT: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury what are the administrative duties connected with the Railway and Canal Commission; and for how many days have the Commissioners sit for the discharge of those duties in each year from 1896 to 1904, inclusive.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The administrative duties referred to are all proceedings in connection with complaints and applications made to the Commissioners under the Railway and Canal Traffic Acts, 1854 to 1904, other than those which take place in open Court. The only time record kept is that of public sittings, as to which I have already furnished the hon. Member with information.

  Removal of Wreath from Statue of Earl of Beaconsfield.
  DR. SHIPMAN: To ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if he will explain why there was removed from the statue of the late Earl of Beaconsfield on the anniversary of his death a shield composed of primroses and forget-me-nots bearing a quotation from one of his speeches.
  (Answered by Lord Balcarres.) This was done because it was felt that references to current controversy were out of place in the decoration of monuments of departed statesmen.

  H.M.S. "Orion" at Malta
  MR. KEARLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is intended to continue at Malta

  1115
  H.M.S. "Orion," at present employed as a Naval Reserve drill ship for Maltese seamen and stokers, or to supplant it with a vessel of more modern type.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) It is not in contemplation to make any alteration in connection with H.M.S. "Orion" at Malta, or the service on which she is employed.

  Motor Speed Limit in the Metropolitan Area
  MR. CATHCART WASON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has made any application to the Local Government Board to limit the speed of motor-cars within the city and county of London; and, if not, in view of the racing that takes place, especially on Sunday, he will take the matter into consideration.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) No, Sir. I have no power to make an application under Section 9 of The Motor-Car Act, 1903, which is, I presume, the section the hon. Member has in mind. The proper authorities to make such an application are the London County Council and the Corporation of the City of London.

  Damage to Roads, etc, in London by Heavy Motor Traffic.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that, by the Order of the Local Government Board, motors weighing up to twelve tons are permitted to travel at the rate of twelve miles an hour; and if he will make inquiry as to the damage that such cars will inflict upon the streets, bridges, sewers, mains, and pipes of London.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The information before me shows that heavy motor-cars weighing up to twelve tons will have the axle weight of one axle in excess
  1116
  of six tons. Under the Order such cars are restricted to a maximum speed of eight miles an hour if fitted with pneumatic or soft or elastic tyres, and of five miles an hour if fitted with other kinds of tyres. I am not at present aware of any need for making the inquiry suggested.

  Appointment of Samuel Bratton as Clerk to Kildare Petty Sessions—Production of Birth Certificate.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Head Constable Samuel Bratton, lately appointed to the position of clerk to the petty sessions of Kildare, produced a certificate of birth on joining the Royal Irish Constabulary; and whether he will give the contents of the same, stating the place and date of birth.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) A certified extract from the parish register of Magheraculmoney, county Fermanagh, was produced, showing that Mr. Bratton was born on July 12th, 1855.

  Report of Irish Estates Commissioners
  MR. DILLON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to paragraphs IV., VI., and VIII. of the Report of the Estates Commissioners, in which they report the total failure of the Act to deal with congested estates, and the improvement of estates and untenanted land; and whether, in view of the promise made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover during the debate on the Act of 1903, the Government will take immediate steps so to amend the Act as to make it possible for the Estates Commissioners to deal with the congested areas in Ireland.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) My attention has been called to the paragraphs mentioned, but I cannot accept the conclusion which the hon. Member draws from them. He does not specify the

  1117
  promises to which he refers or indicate where they may be found. I find reported at pages 1578, 1579, of the Parliamentary Debates, Fourth Series, Vol. 124, the following remarks of my right hon. friend:—"When the State was conferring fresh rights and creating credit facilities it meant to have a say in the conduct of a policy intended to level up the bad part of the country and to cure congestion. His opinion was that the policy would meet with success." If these be the passages referred to they certainly do not support the construction placed upon them in the Question.

  Irish Education—Rule 127 (b)
  MR. DILLON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the date on which a copy of the new Rule 127 (b) was first submitted to the Commissioners at a meeting of the Board of National Education, the number of Commissioners present, the names of the Commissioners so present; the date, or dates, if any, on which the new Rule 127 (b) was submitted to the Commissioners of National Education, or to a Committee of the Board, for the formal and detailed discussion of the rule, with all its serious consequences; the number of Commissioners so present at these meetings of the Board or Committees of the Board and their names; the date on which the new Rule 127 (b) was approved by the Board, the number of Commissioners present, the number who voted for the new rule, the names of the Commissioners so present and voting.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The principle involved in Rule 127(b), viz., that junior boys should be educated by female teachers, had long been recognised and approved by the Commissioners, who were fortified in their judgment by a consensus of opinion on the part of managers, inspectors, and other educationists. The subject was carefully considered by the Commissioners at special meetings held on
  1118
  March 30th, April 13th, and April 27th, 1904, and as a result the formal regulation now embodied in the rule was framed. This regulation was first submitted to the Commissioners at a meeting of the Board held on October 25th, 1904, when it was adopted unanimously by the fourteen Commissioners present. The new Code, including Rule 127 (b), was unanimously approved by the thirteen Commissioners present at a meeting of the Board on December 20th, 1904. The rule was not discussed in detail after its adoption on 25th October, for, in the circumstances mentioned, the necessity for such discussion did not arise. The names of the Commissioners who were present at the meetings of October 25th and December 20th, 1904, are set forth in my reply to the Question of April 17th† last, put by the hon. Member for North Leitrim.

  Disposal of Site of Duke of York's School at Chelsea.
  MR. WHITMORE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any, and, if so, what, decision has been arrived at as to the disposal of the site of the Duke of York's Military School at Chelsea.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) No decision has as yet been reached with regard to the disposal of the site of the Duke of York's School at Chelsea.

  Army Expenditure of Great Britain, India, France, Germany, Russia, and Japan
  SIR EDGAR VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the Army expenditure of this country and of India in the years 1880, 1890, 1901, 1902, 1903, 1904, and the Army expenditure of France, Germany, Russia, and Japan in the same years.
  (Answered, by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The required information is contained in the accompanying Return—

  Return showing the Army Expenditure of Great Britain, India, France, Germany, Russia, and Japan, in the years 1880,
  1880, 1901, 1902, 1903, and 1904.

  Great Britain.

  Financial year

  Expenditure from Imperial Funds.

  Expenditure from Indian Funds.

  Grand total of Army expenditure from Imperial and Indian Funds.

  Expenditure on Estimates.

  Expenditure on loans.

  Total expenditure.

  Apart from war.

  War expenditure.

  Total expenditure.

  Apart from war.

  War expenditure.

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  1880–1881

  17,653,920

  —

  109,182

  17,763,102

  12,490,042

  4,505,776

  16,995,818

  34,758,920

  1890–1891

  20,776,587

  —

  962,128

  21,738,715

  14,913,418

  —

  14,913,418

  36,652,133

  1901–2

  28,528,574

  64,132,300

  1,749,487

  94,410,361

  15,703,482

  —

  15,703,482

  110,113,843

  1902–3

  28,716,627

  40,146,900

  1,662,294

  70,525,821

  17,279,770

  —

  17,279,770

  87,805,591

  1903–4

  31,486,880

  5,241,700

  3,262,900

  39,991,480

  17,792,405

  —

  17,792,405

  57,783,885

  1904–5

  28,830,000*

  550,000†

  3,370,000‡

  32,750,000

  20,443,100§

  —

  20,443,100

  53,193,100

  *Army Estimates, 1904–5.

  ‡ Estimated.

  †Additional Estimate for Somaliland, February 1905.

  §Revised Estimate (Indian Military Budget).

  Year

  France

  Germany║

  Russia

  Japan.║

  Amount voted in Military Budget.**

  Amount voted in Military Budget.**

  Amount voted in Military Budget.

  Financial Year.

  Amount voted in Military Budget.

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  1880

  29,396,364

  18,505,000

  21,074,000

  1882–3¶

  858,811

  1890

  28,416,262

  35,975,000

  25,346,000

  1890–1891

  1,271,316

  1901

  27,774,581

  34,005,129

  36,067,333

  1901–2

  4,955,635

  1902

  28,664,000

  32,686,340

  35,848,726

  1902–3

  4,699,510

  1903

  27,593,478

  31,880,455

  36,647,089

  1903–4

  4,217,196

  1904

  27,053,196

  31,883,000

  40,086,000‡

  1904–5

  4,151,539‡

  ║The German Estimates make no provision for pensions (approximately £5,000,000 a year), which are included in a separate Budget. The Japanese Estimates do not include pensions.

  ¶The earliest figures available.

  **The figures for France and Germany are exclusive of sums voted for troops in the Colonies. These cannot be given.

  ‡The extra expenditure for the Rasso-Japanese War is not known.

  N.B.—It is impossible to give the actual expenditure in all cases, as in some instances it has not been published. Moreover, in some cases the Naval Budgets make provision for certain items, such as coast fortification, which are of a military nature.

  Position of Military Accountants in the Army Pay Department.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has considered the question of the status of officers holding His Majesty's Commission who served in the late Army Pay Department, and are now required to act under the orders of civilian accountants, many years their juniors in age and service; and whether he will consider the possibility of placing military accountants under the orders of senior military accountants exclusively.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) It is a necessary consequence of the decentralisation of Army accounting that the Pay Department and the Accounts Branches of the War Office should be amalgamated into one Department, trained in the whole finance work of the Army, and available for service abroad as well as at home. Paymasters
  1122
  will, under the new arrangement sometimes serve under civilians and civilians under paymasters. In this, as in all other services, rank cannot depend solely on age and length of service; there will be cases, therefore, in which the Pay Department officer or civilian official in charge is younger or has less service than those serving under him. The interests of the officers of the Pay Department have been fully considered and carefully safeguarded, and upon the whole they distinctly benefit under the new arrangements.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Naval Assistance at Irish Evictions.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, having regard to the fact that the giving of aid to Irish

    1123
    sheriffs in the event of evictions does not come within the sphere of the ordinary duty of the officers and men of the Royal Navy, due notice will be given to persons desirous of joining the Royal Navy of their liability to be ordered to assist Irish sheriffs and police in the forcible ejectments from their homes of men, women, and children.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): The duty of the officers and men of the Royal Navy to aid the sheriff in the execution of the King's writ, when called upon by him so to do, is one which falls upon them in common with all other citizens. Their service in the Navy does not impose that duty upon them, nor can it free them from it. The reply is therefore in the negative.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to ascertain the views of the Navy with regard to assisting at Irish evictions?
    MR. PRETYMAN: No, Sir.

    Flogging in the Navy.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty under what Estimate are the expenses included which are incurred in the manufacture of cats-o'-nine-tails, which are kept on every British warship as part of the necessary equipment, and of the specially-prepared birches and canes formed after patterns kept in the dockyards for that purpose, and used in the flogging of boys and youths in the Royal Navy who have enlisted as blue jackets or in the engineering department of that service.
    MR. PRETYMAN: Any such expenses are chargeable to Vote 8, Section 2.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Now that Lord Cawdor is inspecting the Fleet, will he look at the cats-o'-nine-tails and birches and canes? It will improve his mind.

    Cost of Rifle Sights.
    MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the cost of the sights to be
    1124
    affixed to the new rifle and modified Enfield.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,): The estimated cost of sights is as follows:—Backsight of the short rifle, whether on the new or converted arm, or fitted to the long rifle, 7s. 6½d. each. Aperture sight 6d.; dial sight 9¼d.; adjustable barleycorn front-sight 4½d.

    Army Finance—Payment of Troops in Ireland.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: On behalf of the hon. Member for North Wexford, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any fresh arrangements are in contemplation for the payment of the troops in the various centres or depôts throughout Ireland; and, if so, whether such changes will involve the withdrawal of the banking business connected with the payments in question from the various Irish banks which have hitherto transacted it and will concentrate the whole of it in the hands of the Bank of Ireland alone; and, if so, whether, in view of the recently-adopted system of decentralisation, he will inquire into the matter, in view of the effect upon the banks of any arrangement of the character in question.
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Under the new system the Army Accounts for each Command will be kept at the Headquarters of the Command, and the local officers will cease to hold cash. This necessarily involves changes in former banking arrangements. In accordance with the principle of decentralisation the choice of a bank or banks is left to the discretion of the local authorities.

    Judicial Appointments in the Colonies.
    MR. HEMPHILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state in how many instances since the 1st January, 1902, appointments have been made to judicial and other legal offices in the West African and other Colonies and Protectorates under the charge of the Colonial Office; and in how many of those instances have the appointees been

    1125
    members of the English, Scotch, and Irish Bars respectively.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,): Since the 1st January, 1902, twenty-four appointments to judicial and other legal offices in British Colonies and Protectorates have been made by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, of which twenty-three were gentlemen from the English and one from the Irish Bar.

    Powers of the Transvaal Legislative Assembly.
    MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Legislative Assembly of the Transvaal will have any power to amend or reject any amendments made by the Governor in any law, under Article X. of the proposed Constitution, or what course will be open to the Legislative Assembly, in the event of their dissenting from such amendment of a law; and whether any rules or orders in this matter have as yet been framed and will be laid before Parliament.
    MR. LYTTELTON: The amendments made by the Governor are merely for the consideration of the Legislature. A similar provision exists in, e.g., the Constitution Act of the Commonwealth of Australia, Section 58. No rules or orders have been framed.

    Lord Kitchener.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether Lord Kitchener has tendered his resignation of the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Army in India; and, if so, will he say whether that resignation, if accepted, will take effect in July next; and what is the reason of the tender of his resignation of the Indian command by Lord Kitchener.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BRODRICK,): Lord Kitchener authorises me to state that he has not tendered his resignation, and there is therefore no question of accepting or not accepting.

    Lord Curzon's Policy
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has received resolutions passed at public meetings in India, and, in particular, resolutions passed at a mass meeting in Madras on the 22nd March, condemning the policy and administration of Lord Curzon, and urging his recall in the interests of good government in India; and what reply, if any, has he given to the senders of these resolutions.
    MR. BRODRICK: I have seen copies of some of the resolutions in question, but they have not been formally submitted to me. I do not think it necessary to take any steps with regard to them.

    Indian Plague—Cost, Etc., of Scientific Investigation.
    MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India what is the estimated cost of the scientific investigation into plague in India, and what proportion of this expenditure will be borne by the British Treasury; whether he will state what success has attended the work on Dr. Haffkine's system; whether the scientific expedition will have its headquarters at the Pasteur Institute at Kassauli; and whether the present investigation will proceed on the line of bacteriological research.
    MR. BRODRICK: The expenditure is estimated at £5,000 for the current year. No portion will be borne by the British Treasury. Inoculation is a valuable preventive, but it is not popular, and its effects are not regarded as permanent. The question as to the headquarters of the expedition will be settled locally between the Government of India and the head of the expedition, while the line of investigation will be determined by the scientific societies controlling the work. I have no doubt that bacteriological research will be largely resorted to.

    Indian Congested Districts and the Plague.
    MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the congested condition of the towns suffering from plague,

    1127
    he will invite the Government of India to give out building sites in healthy localities on easier terms to the poorer classes, and reduce the fees on timber and other building materials.
    MR. BRODRICK: In Bombay and Calcutta, where the question of congestion is most serious, the Government is actively promoting the provision of additional building accommodation for the poorer classes. Elsewhere such overcrowding as exists is due to the habits and predilections of the people rather than to the absence of building land or dearness of materials. In plague-smitten localities assistance to move is often offered to the inhabitants, but is not infrequently refused.

    Redemption of Annuities.
    MR. MARKS: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state whether he contemplates any action in respect of the redemption of the 2 per cent. Annuities, 1905, created under the powers of the first Section of the National Debt (Conversion of Stock) Act of 1884, which were to be redeemable after the 5th of January, 1905.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): No, Sir. I do not propose to take any action under the powers vested in me.

    General Medical Council
    MR. CALDWELL: On behalf of the hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty, I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will take such steps as may be necessary to secure the representation of laymen on the General Medical Council.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUSLAS,): Perhaps I may be permitted to reply to this Question. Under the Medical Act, 1886, Section 7, the General Council consists of members nominated by the Privy Council and by the Royal Colleges and a number of other learned bodies, and of elected representatives of medical practitioners. There is nothing in the Act to prevent the nominating bodies
    1128
    choosing laymen; but I am informed that no representations have ever reached the Privy Council Office in favour of the course proposed in the Question.

    Aliens Bill—Cost of Administration.
    MR. BRIGHTI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now state what is likely to be the annual cost of administering the Aliens Bill.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: It is obvious that any estimate that can be framed at the present time must be to a great extent conjectural. I have, however, prepared an estimate of the probable cost of administration, confining it to the provisions for preventing the immigration of undesirables, since it is impossible to forecast the expenses of expelling alien criminals, etc. This shows an annual expenditure of £24,000.
    MR. LOUGH: A year.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: Yes.

    Vagrancy Convictions
    MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Alfred Carr, a painter out of work, with no previous convictions against him, who was tried before the magistrate at Marylebone, on April 20th, and sentenced to fourteen days imprisonment with hard labour for begging on the streets; and whether, in view of this sentence, and of the man's previous character, he proposes taking any action in the matter and to prevent its repetition.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I have already made inquiries into this case. It appears to have been one of the numerous instances of following and pestering foot passengers—a practice which has latterly been much on the increase in the district. There were thirteen such charges on the day in question, out of a list of forty prisoners. A fine in such cases is of course inapplicable, and the only punishment that can be given is imprisonment. I do not propose to take any action in the matter, as I

    1129
    have no reason to believe that the London magistrates exercise harshly the discretion which the law entrusts to them in these cases.

    Identification of Motor-Cars at Night.
    MR. CALDWELL: On behalf of the hon. Member for Boss and Cromarty, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for reports from the Metropolitan Police, with a view to ascertain to what extent difficulty is experienced in identifying motorcars at night through the numbers being imperfectly lighted, or wholly or partly obscured.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: Yes. Sir, I have done so.

    The Markyate Motor-Car Accident.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Executive will be able to take any measures to secure the attendance at the Hertford Assizes of the chauffeur who on Saturday last was committed for trial on a charge of having killed a child, and for whom absolutely insufficient bail has been accepted. Will steps be taken to secure that the man shall not abscond from the country?
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: The magistrates in their discretion have accepted bail. I have no power to interfere.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Of course he has not. [Cries of "Order."] Do you wish children to be murdered? Has not the right hon. Gentleman power to exercise surveillance, by way of the police or otherwise, to prevent his escape from justice?
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I have no further power; if I have I will exercise at.

    Inspection of Laundries.
    MR. T. L. CORBETT: I leg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a report made by the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops, in which he states that 144,038
    1130
    women and girls are working in laundries that are not regulated by the Factory Acts; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I have had before me the report to which the hon. Member refers. I may perhaps explain that the Factory and Workshop Act only applies to laundries carried on by way of trade and for purposes of gain, and further, domestic laundries and laundries attached to religious and charitable institutions are expressly excluded from the operation of the Act. To extend the Act to such laundries would need legislation. Such legislation is, I think, desirable, but I fear I cannot undertake to introduce it at present.
    MR. SLOAN: Has the right hon. Gentleman fully satisfied himself that these women and girls are not working in these institutions for the purpose of gain?
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I have not made definite inquiries, but, as I have said, the Act only applies to public laundries conducted for the purpose of gain and fresh legislation would therefore be required to deal with these houses.
    MR. T. L. CORBETT: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire how many of these women and girls are engaged in institutions carried on for the purpose of gain? This is a very important matter
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I will get the inspector to look into the report.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: Did not the right hon Gentleman's predecessor give a pledge some years ago to introduce legislation on this matter?
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I am not aware of it.

    West Indian Mail Service.
    MASTER OF ELIBANK: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will state whether it is the intention of the Government to finally ratify the proposed contract with the Elder, Dempster Line to carry His Majesty's mails between this country and the West Indies and British Guiana.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,): A full statement of the course followed in this matter has been embodied in a despatch from the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Governors of the colonies concerned.This despatch has been laid on the Table of the House, and will be in the hands of hon. Members very shortly, and will give the information wished for by the hon. Member in a fuller and more convenient form than can be done by Question and Answer.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will the noble Lord say what provision has been made for the carrying of the mails in the interval?
    LORD STANLEY: No new contract has been made. The mails will be sent by any steamer that may be available.
    MR. BRIGHT: Will the noble Lord publish the Reports received from the different colonies on this subject?
    LORD STANLEY: That does not come under my Department. If the hon. Member will wait for the statement I have promised he will see the main one is dealt with if not all of them.

    Split Duties in the Post Office.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that in a number of smaller provincial head post offices duties exist that require telegraphists to make three separate attendances spread over fourteen or fifteen hours before completing their ordinary eight hours work per day; and whether he will state what steps are being taken to reduce these divided attendances in accordance with the assurance given by the Department before the Bradford Committee.
    LORD STANLEY: I am aware that such is the case, and I can only repeat the statement made by the official witness before the Bradford Committee, that "every effort is made to arrange the hours of duty as conveniently as possible, but they must necessarily be adapted to the requirements of the work and broken and irregular hours are often unavoidable." It is, however, the rule that the
    1132
    duties should be arranged to admit of nine clear hours off duty.

    Passenger Traffic between Harwich and the Hook of Holland.
    SIR ERNEST FLOWER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he will state the number of passengers between Harwich and the Hook of Holland, and to and from those ports during each of the last five years.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW,): I regret that I am not in a position to give the desired information.
    SIR ERNEST FLOWER: It it the fact that this information is obtainable at every other port?
    MR. BONAR LAW: We have absolutely no power to obtain the evidence. If they do not wish to give it they will not do so, and if they do not object they will give it to my hon. friend.
    SIR. ERNEST FLOWER: Will the hon. Gentleman ask for it?
    MR. BONAR LAW: I have no objection.
    SIR ERNEST FLOWER: Do the Great Eastern alone of all companies refuse the information?
    MR. BONAR LAW: We get a good deal of information from them.
    MR. CLAUDE HAY: These figures appear in the Consular Report for every port except this one-Will the hon. Gentlemen represent to this company that they are the only company which withholds the information?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Taff Vale Railway Accident
    MR. BELL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to an accident which occurred to Thomas Jones, pilot guard, in the employ of the Taff Vale Railway Company, by falling off a truck of coal, upon which he was compelled to

    1133
    ride whilst working: his train over the Roath Branch on April 27th; and if he will cause an early inquiry to be held with a view to prevent further similar accidents.
    MR. BONAR LAW: Yes, Sir. An inquiry will be held into the circumstances attending this accident.

    Burnley Bank Top Accident
    MR. BELLI beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he is aware of an accident which occurred at Burnley Bark Top, Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, on April 19th last, to the 12.50 a.m. goods train, Colne to Philips Park, and that the train on arrival at Burnley consisted of seventy-two loaded trucks, again attached thirty-nine loaded and two empty wagons more, making a total of 111 loaded and two empty waggons, and a tonnage of 990 tons, requiring two additional engines to assist at the rear of the train, which caused the 80th to the 85th wagons inclusive to be derailed and blocking the lines for several hours; and whether he will cause an inquiry to be made respecting the working of such long trains, and the relative effect upon the safety to the men employed and the travelling public, and report thereon.
    MR. BONAR LAW: An accident of this character has been reported by the railway company as having occurred on the morning of April 20th, and an inquiry into the circumstances will be held by one of the Inspecting Officers of Railways. When the officer's report has been received, the Board of Trade I will consider whether there are grounds for any further inquiry of the nature indicated in the concluding part of the hon. Member's Question.

    Joint Stock Companies and the West Australian Gold-Mining Industry.
    MR. SWIFT MACNETLL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he will invite the attention of the Committee on Joint Stock Companies, now sitting at the Board of Trade, to a speech recently made to the shareholders of the Golden Horse Shoe Estates Company by Sir John Purcell, a former Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, denouncing certain
    1134
    practices which have been, and are still being, carried on in the City of London to the detriment of the gold-mining industry of Western Australia; and whether His Majesty's Government have received any communication from the Agent-General for Western Australia suggesting that some joint action might be expediently taken for the purpose of preventing future gold-mining scandals.
    MR. BONAR LAW: The attention of the Committee which is now sitting shall be directed to Sir John Purcell's speech, though it is very doubtful whether the evils of which he speaks can be cured by any legislation in this country. No communication has been received by the Board of Trade from the Agent-General for Western Australia.

    Illegal Trawling off the Sutherland Coast
    MR. LEVESON-GOWER: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate whether he is aware that Peter Thueson, of Grimsby, was cited to appear for trial at Dornoch Sheriff Court on Tuesday, 2nd inst., for trawling within the three mile limit off Loth, on the east coast of Sutherland on April 12th, and that, on accused appearing for trial, the sheriff, in respect that no evidence was produced in support of the complaint, dismissed the accused; and if he will explain the reason why the evidence for the prosecution was not forthcoming at the trial.
    THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON,): The Answer to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. I am informed that, according to usual practice, the Procurator Fiscal arranged for the attendance of the Crown witnesses at the hour fixed for the trial. These witnesses, who were coming from Cromarty, were advised that they would reach Dornoch earlier if they travelled by the Meikle Ferry instead of going round by the railway. Unfortunately they were detained at the ferry, with the result that they did not arrive in Court until after the Sheriff Substitute had dismissed the complaint.
    MR. CATHCART WASON: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman make a more liberal allowance for

    1135
    these fishermen than in ordinary cases, seeing that they can only give evidence at great cost?
    MR. SCOTT DICKSON: I am afraid I cannot make any exception.

    Antrim Crown Solicitor and Sessional Crown Solicitor of Belfast.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he will state the reasons for the amalgamation of the positions of Crown Solicitor of county Antrim and Sessional Crown Solicitor of Belfast; and what economies will be effected by the new arrangement.
    THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): The Irish Government many years back came to the conclusion that it was most desirable, having regard to the efficiency of the public service as well as to considerations of economy, to unite where possible the offices of Crown Solicitor and Sessional Crown Solicitor. Mr. Bates was originally appointed to the office of Crown Solicitor on the terms that he should accept the minor office if required. In pursuance of that arrangement the offices have now been united. The salary of the combined office has not yet been fixed, and I cannot therefore state the precise amount of the saving.
    MR. SLOAN: Is it not the fact that although the arrangement was in force during the tenure of office of the last Sessional Crown Solicitor it was not carried out?
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: Was not the arrangement made by a former Government in the interests of economy? What Government was it?
    MR. ATKINSON: I am not aware by what Government the Minute was issued originally, but it has been in existence several years.

    Charges against Sergeant-Major Murphy, Connaught Rangers.
    MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that, in the
    1136
    course of a magisterial investigation in Mullingar into certain charges against Sergeant-Major Murphy, of the Connaught Rangers, it was stated by the Crown Solicitor that he had instructions from the Attorney-General to object to the jurisdiction of the magistrates in regard to a charge of a serious character alleged to have occurred outside Westmeath; and whether, if there be no jurisdiction in the Westmeath magistrates, who have returned this man for trial in Westmeath, to enter into the other charge, it is the intention of the authorities to proceed against him in the county where the other and graver offence is alleged to have been committed.
    MR. ATKINSON: One offence was alleged to have been committed in county Westmeath, and another of a similar character at Finner Camp, county Donegal. The Westmeath Justices had no power to deal with the latter case, and the Crown Solicitor, by my directions, so informed them. Both cases depend substantially on the testimony of the same witness. I decline to announce the intended action of the Crown pending the result of the first trial.
    MR. HAYDEN: Am I to imply that the action of the Government will depend on the result of the case now before the Court?
    MR. ATKINSON: No, but until the result is known I must decline to state the intentions of the Government.

    The Dursey Island Eviction.
    MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether H.M.S. "Stormcock" conveyed the agents of the Bantry Estate to Dursey Island on the occasion of the recent eviction.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,): Perhaps I may be permitted to reply to this Question. The Answer is in the affirmative. It was necessary that the landlord's representatives should be present in order both to point out to the sheriff the holding from which the

    1137
    eviction was to be effected, and also to receive possession of the premises after the eviction. The island is inaccessible from the mainland except in very calm weather, and no boa could be obtained locally by the landlord's agents. In these circumstances, and in accordance with precedent, it was considered necessary and proper to afford a passage to the agents.
    MR. GILHOOLY: But on various other occasions when he has visited the island, has the agent found any difficulty in getting a boat? Is it the intention of the Government in future to place His Majesty's ships at the call of the agents?
    MR. WALTER LONG: No.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: Are the naval operations at Dursey Island responsible for the postponement of the naval manoeuvres?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Irish Drainage Authorities.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in many districts in Ireland in which drainage works are urgently required no drainage boards exist; and, if so, whether the Government would consider it advisable to introduce a Bill constituting the county councils respectively the drainage authorities for such districts in order that the authorities so constituted might exercise the powers conferred upon drainage boards by 26 and 27 Vic, c. 88, and the several Acts amending the same or incorporated therewith, with suitable provisions for the creation of joint drainage districts embracing two or more counties.
    MR. WALTER LONG: The question of amending the law on this subject is one which requires, and will receive, careful consideration. The Government are not at present prepared to introduce such legislation.

    Irish Department; of Agriculture—Staff Grievances
    MR. O'KELLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state
    1138
    the names of the local public bodies who have made representations to the Department of Agriculture in connection with the alleged inequality in the treatment of its staff; and what steps, if any, the Department proposes to take to satisfy these bodies of the justice or otherwise of their complaints.
    MR. WALTER LONG: It will be more convenient to furnish with the Votes an Answer to this Question, and, with the hon. Member's permission, I will adopt that course.

    Smallpox at Mullingar and Athlone
    MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that smallpox was recently introduced into Mullingar and Athlone through two men who had been landed at Southampton from the steamship "Nile"; whether he can state the steps taken by the local authorities to prevent the spread of the disease, and to what extent these steps were dependent on the consent of the persons who had come in contact with those affected; and what was the cost of the precautions taken.
    MR. WALTER LONG: Yes, Sir. The steps taken in the matter were: the isolation of patients, and also of "contacts" as far as possible; the disinfection of premises; the disinfection or destruction of infected clothes, etc.; and the vaccination or re-vaccination of contacts. The latter cannot be isolated except with their own consent. The cost at Mullingar was £52 16s. The cost at Athlone has not yet been ascertained.
    MR HAYDEN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of introducing legislation on this subject in view of the danger?
    MR. WALTER LONG: This is a question which affects the whole kingdom. It is one of an extremely difficult and contentious character, but it is of the utmost importance and I will consider it.

    Smallpox and Isolation.
    MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Local

    1139
    Government Board for Ireland recently wrote to the Athlone Board of Guardians that they had no power to detain two persons who had come in contact with persons just arrived in Mullingar from Southampton and who were suffering from smallpox, and that these men voluntarily submitted to isolation in the Union Hospital and there developed the disease; and, if so, in view of the consequences which might be involved to the whole community had these men continued their avocations, he will introduce a Bill to confer the power to isolate such "contacts" upon the proper authorities in Ireland.
    MR. WALTER LONG: The facts are as stated in the first part of the Question. As already pointed out, the isolation of smallpox "contacts" cannot be effected except with the consent of such persons. In ordinary circumstances, it is held to be unnecessary to isolate the inmates of dwellings invaded by smallpox in districts in which the sanitary laws are properly administered and vaccination is efficiently carried out. I see no reason, therefore, for legislation on the subject.

    Irish. Land Purchase Agreements.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to cases in which landlords about to sell their estates have compelled non-judicial tenants to sign agreements for judicial rents with the object of bringing them within the zones and evading inspection for value, and also provisional agreements for purchase, and that pressure for arrears of rent has been applied for this purpose; and, if so, have the Commissioners been instructed to get holdings to which such agreements relate inspected for value and the price fixed without regard to any agreements which the tenants may have signed.
    MR. WALTER LONG: No case has been brought under the notice of the Estates Commissioners in which a purchaser has alleged that he has been compelled to sign a judicial agreement under pressure for arrears of rent. The 10th Section of the Act of 1885 provides a remedy in any such case. That section gives the Land Commission equitable
    1140
    powers, on the principles acted upon by the Court of Chancery, to vary or rescind any agreement which may have been obtained by duress.

    Greencastle Ratepayers and the Belfast Corporation.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a meeting of the ratepayers of Greencastle, held on Monday, May 1st, 1905, to protest against the manner in which the residents in that district had been treated by the Belfast Corporation in regard to the questions of sewerage and tramway extension; whether he is aware that the sanitary condition of the district, owing, to imperfect drainage, constituted a constant danger to the public health; that a drainage scheme had been submitted to the Local Government Board, which had refused to grant borrowing powers until land for a pumping station had been acquired, and which also alleged that the proper formalities for a loan had not been complied with; whether any attempt had been made recently by the Belfast Corporation to comply with the requirements of the. Local Government Board; and, if not, whether he will take steps to compel the corporation to have the matter dealt with without further delay.
    MR. WALTER LONG: The Board. have already held an inquiry into an application for a loan for drainage works in this district, and are prepared to sanction the loan when a site has been acquired and their requirements as to plans have been complied with. The corporation are negotiating for the purchase of a site, and the Board are in correspondence with them on the subject. The Board have no functions as regards, tramway extension.

    Orange Band at Portadown—Visit to the Catholic Quarter.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, on Easter Monday last, an Orange band from Coalisland attempted to go through the Catholic quarter of Portadown; that the police available at the

    1141
    time would have been helpless in the event of a riot; and that, at the time the Orangemen were endeavouring to enter the Catholic quarter, the district inspector was absent, and there was no one in charge of the police; and whether, seeing that year after year crowds of Orangemen assemble in Portadown for the purpose of attacking the Catholics there, and that there are but two alternative routes, viz., by Montague Street and Charles Street, or the walk by which Orange processions and bands could proceed through Portadown without entering the Catholic quarter, and in view of the conduct of these mobs and the rioting to which they almost invariably lead, he will issue an order prohibiting such assemblies from marching through the Catholic quarter of the town; and whether, in view of the fact that a Catholic named Faloon was shot dead in Portadown on Easter Monday, he will issue special instructions with regard to the possession of firearms in the district.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers this Question I should like to draw attention to a sentence in it declaring that year by year Orangemen assemble in Portadown for the purpose of attacking the Catholics there. I submit that the conclusion of that sentence is an abuse of the rules of the House. In the first place it is quite untrue.
    MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The Question had better be answered.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I submit it is an infraction of the rules of the House to make an assertion of that kind, and I ask for your ruling.
    MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: My attention has only recently been drawn to the sentence and I certainly think it is unfortunate that it appears in the Question.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: It is the principal point of my Question.
    MR. WALTER LONG: I can only answer as to the facts. It is obvious that the assertion referred to is based on
    1142
    pure matters of opinion, as to which 11 can have no information. The Coal-island band marched into Portadown by the direct and customary route, which happens to pass through a Catholic locality. A force of thirty police under a head constable was present for the preservation of the peace, but I am glad to say that no disturbance arose. The district inspector was present in the town, in general charge of the police arrangements. The practice of these processions in marching by the route in question is one of long standing, and no change in the practice appears to be necessary. The unfortunate murder of the man Faloon was in no way connected with, any sectarian disturbance. The man charged with the murder is believed to be insane. The incident does not afford sufficient grounds for prohibiting the possession of firearms in the district.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: On what evidence does the right hon. Gentleman say that the man who committed this I base assassination, which I claim was political, was not sane?
    MR. WALTER LONG: I said the man was believed to be insane.
    MR. DILLON: By whom?
    MR. WALTER LONGThat is the information I have received.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: Is it in order to discuss a case which is sub judice?
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: And is it in order for the Chief Secretary to state that a man now awaiting his trial is insane?
    MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: If a case is sub judice it is not in order to discuss it.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: Then it ought not to have appeared in the Question at all.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when this murderer was driven through the streets of Portadown he was cheered by the

    1143
    mob? How can the right hon. Gentleman say it was not a sectarian murder?
    MR. LONSDALE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the accused man is not a member of the Orange order?
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: On what does the right hon. Gentleman base his statement that the man is insane?
    MR. WALTER LONG: I only said he was believed to be insane.
    MR. DILLON: By whom?
    MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKERruled that notice should be given of the Question.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: Why do the Orangemen go into this district if not for the purpose of attacking the Catholics?
    MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKERstopped further Questions by calling on the next one on the Paper.

    Sir Antony MacDonnell.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the recent interview at Athenry between the Under - Secretary and Mr. Thomas Higgins, the chairman of the executive of the North Galway branch of the United Irish League, was arranged by the Under-Secretary; if this was done with the previous knowledge or sanction of the Chief Secretary; if their conversation related to the peace of the district; if any minute or report of this meeting has been furnished by the Under-Secretary; and, if so, does it appear why such an interview was necessary; and, if the Under-Secretary, in fact, acted beyond his authority in this matter, what steps will be taken by the Government.
    MR. WALTER LONG: The Under-Secretary had arranged, at the request of the Congested Districts Board, to visit Galway on the business of the Board before I entered office, and had also agreed with the agent of the Maxwell Estate to endeavour to effect an agreement in regard to the dispute existing there be-
    1144
    tween the landlord and tenants. I expressed my approval of the intended visit, but indicated certain limitations in the Under-Secretary's inquiries which Sir Antony MacDonnell informs me he strictly observed. The Under-Secretary met men of various classes, and on all suitable occasions made it clear that the commission of outrage or acts of intimidation and boycotting would seriously retard the success of the Land Purchase Act, and could not possibly be tolerated by the Executive Government. The Under-Secretary had an interview with Mr. Higgins, who was reported to him from different sources as possessing much influence with the people. He was told that he was Chairman of the District Board, but was not informed that Mr. Higgins was also officially connected with the United Irish League. This fact came to the Under-Secretary's knowledge subsequently from the newspapers.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: Then does the right hon. Gentleman approve the interview?
    MR. WALTER LONG: I have said it was undertaken with my full knowledge and approval.
    MR. WILLIAM MOORE: I understand from the Answer that the Chief Secretary did not know that Mr. Higgins was to be interviewed. I ask him, if he had known, would he have approved of it?
    MR. WALTER LONG: What I did not know was that Mr. Higgins was a prominent official of the United Irish League; and that was not known by the Under-Secretary.
    A NATIONALIST MEMBER: Is it a crime?

    The Chief Secretary and the Belfast Orangemen.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, during his recent visit to Belfast, he had an interview with the leaders of the Orange Association; whether this interview took place with the sanction of the Cabinet; if this conversation related to the peace of Belfast,

    1145
    Portadown, and Lisburn; if any minute or report of this meeting has been furnished by the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister; if so, does it appear why such an interview was necessary; whether the interview was authorised; and what steps the Government propose to take in the matter.
    MR. WALTER LONG: This Question does not appear to me to be seriously meant, and is undeserving, therefore, of a reply. If it be serious, it has no foundation in fact.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that all my Questions are perfectly serious.

    Congested Districts (Scotland) Bill.
    MR. CALDWELL: On behalf of the hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty, I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will state when he proposes to proceed with the Congested Districts (Scotland) Bill.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I am afraid I cannot fix a date at present.

    Punishment for Reckless Motor-Car Driving.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been directed to the number of accidents, the result of the reckless driving of motor-cars, and to the punishment, usually by way of fine, inflicted on the delinquents; and whether, having regard to the danger of motorcar driving to the public, the Government will institute an inquiry into the working of the Motor Act with a view to the reconsideration of the system under which these carriages are used and for the framing of fresh regulations in reference to their use.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I understand that the crime of reckless driving is one which is distinctly recognised by that Act, and that very substantial penalties may be enforced against it. These penalties will no doubt be and ought certainly to be enforced.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that many offenders are let off with a caution? I think that the right hon. Gentleman himself has been an offender.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman know that another child was killed by a motor-car on Saturday?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Ministers and Directorships.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that members of the present Administration hold amongst them upwards of seventy directorships of public companies, he will insist on resignation by the gentleman whom he may appoint to the vacant Junior Lordship of the Treasury, if he be a public company director, of his public company directorships.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Member knows my views on this subject, and I do not accept his facts. But the general opinions which I hold on the question of holding office under the Government and directorships have often been stated to the House.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman in making these appointments will bear in mind that the present Gentlemen connected with the Treasury hold no fewer than ten directorships among them.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No Sir, I do not think that that affects the question.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANasked what business would be taken on Wednesday.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I propose to take the Committee stage of the Agricultural Rating Bill, and I hope to take the Budget on Monday.
MR. CROOKS: When will the Second Reading of the Unemployed Bill be taken? We are anxiously waiting for it.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am anxious to proceed with it, but the hon. Member will understand that there are other measures which must be taken this week and next week.
MR. BELL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Trades Disputes Bill passed through Committee today? Will he give facilities to pass it through the House?
MR. A.J.BALFOUR: No, Sir.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to proceed with the Motion which stands in his name dealing with adjournments at Easter or Whitsuntide, aid when does he propose to take the debate?
MR. A.J.BALFOUR: It is a Motion which in the present condition of public business I see no opportunity of dealing with, except it is passed as an uncontentious proposal after 12 o'clock. It will not be proceeded with today.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will the Tight hon. Gentleman accept my Amendment as being uncontentious?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I will consider that.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: What Supply will be taken on Thursday? I am aware that the Treasury Vote dealing with the Committee of Defence is the first order, but supposing this does not occupy the whole night, what will follow?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My right hon. friend (Sir A. Acland-Hood) will endeavour to make arrangements with the right hon. Gentleman and his friends as to what is most convenient to put down as the second subject on Thursday.
MR. LOUGH: What will be the second order on Wednesday?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If the Government are fortunate enough to get the Committee stage of the Agricultural Eating Bill on Wednesday in reasonable time, there are one or two Admiralty Hills which the Department is anxious to
1148
see passed on general grounds. I think that these Bills will be second.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Not the Naval Prize Bill, I hope. I have an Amendment to that.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
Mr. HALSEYreported from the Committee of Selection: That they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Law and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure: Mr. Morrison; and had appointed in substitution: Sir James Heath.
Report to lie upon the Table.

TRADES UNIONS AND TRADE DISPUTES BILL.
Reported, with Amendments, from the Standing Committee on Law, etc.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 154.]
Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standings Committee to be printed [No. 154]
Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration tomorrow, and to be printed. [Bill 205.]

EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order for Second Beading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSONrose to move as an instruction, "That this House is of opinion that the provision of food for destitute and underfed children is essential to the effective administration of the education system, and desires to assure itself before assenting to the Bill that clauses

1149
will be inserted whereby the education authority shall ensure that every child under compulsory attendance at its schools shall receive proper nourishment before being subjected to mental or physical instruction."
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The Motion of the hon. Member is out of order, for the reason that it anticipates Amendments embodying the same principle which may be submitted in Committee on the Bill.
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSON: Can we have a guarantee that the Amendments proposed will be accepted in Committee or that they will be in order?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I cannot say that.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: But does that ruling mean that they will be in order on the Committee stage?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I have so far only ruled that the Motion is not in order now.
MR. CROOKS: Perhaps it would be best to discuss the general principle on the debate on the Second Reading.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: That can be done on the Motion which I have put that the Bill be now read a second time.
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSONsaid he desired to point out what he considered to be an important defect in the measure now before the House. Before doing so he would like to offer his congratulations to the Government on the immense step forward which they had taken so far as this particular question of the feeding of children was concerned. The evidence of this forward move on the part of the Government was to be found in the Orders which were issued two or three days ago by the Local Government Board and by the Board of Education. But while he offered the Government his congratulations for having taken a step forward,
1150
it must not be assumed that he personally and those who were acting with him in this matter were in full approval of the policy outlined in those Orders. They did agree, however, that it was a matter for great satisfaction that the Government had at last admitted that so far as the underfeeding of children was concerned there was an existent serious evil, and that, in the second place, there was a public obligation to find a remedy for that serious defect in our national and social life. He welcomed that change of attitude on the part of the Government, and he would be glad if, in discussing that Bill, they could receive assurances from the right hon. and learned Gentleman who had charge of it that when the Committee stage was reached the Government would be prepared to show their consistency by giving encouragement to those who were anxious to amend the Bill in the direction of making provision for underfed children.
The question arose as to whether they who were introducing this important question, were justified in asking the Government to provide a remedy in that Bill, and to give facilities for dealing with that most important question. He thought they were justified, and that the need for immediate action had been clearly and definitely demonstrated. They had only to turn to the Report which had been issued by the Royal Commission on Physical Deterioration and also to the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Training (Scotland) to find most important evidence in support of the step they were taking. They noted in connection with the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Deterioration the following statement—
"It was, nevertheless, acknowledged that the evils arising from underfeeding were so widespread, and in certain localities so pressing, that some authoritative intervention was called for at the earliest possible moment to secure that the education of the children who are obliged to attend school shall not be hampered and retarded by the physical condition thereby engendered."
That was a most important statement, made not by those who had engaged in this agitation in the country, but by a Royal Commission appointed by the present Government.
The Question might very properly be put how far the evil obtained in Scotland, for,

1151
after all, the Bill before the House dealt with Scotland and Scotland only. He thought, however, that they could clearly demonstrate that so far as Scotland was concerned the evil did prevail to a very considerable extent, and that the present was the most opportune moment for them to deal with the subject. To-day they were engaged in readjusting the machinery for education in Scotland, and the probabilities were that that Bill when it passed into law would control the whole machinery of education in Scotland, and would remain unaltered for some years to come. That being so, if there were such a defect in connection with the machinery as he had hinted at, surely this was the right time when it should be remedied. He would have to trouble the House with one or two other particulars so far as Scotland was concerned. He found that Dr. Mackenzie, the medical officer of the Local Government Board for Scotland, said that in the slums of Edinburgh a large proportion of the children were half-starved, and he agreed that to subject the half-starved child to the routine of a school would be the height of cruelty, and that the educational result would be poor. That was an authoritative statement of a medical officer of the Local Government Board for Scotland. Then a recent report, so far as Dundee was concerned, showed that a deplorable condition of things obtained in that city. They had further evidence in the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland. This was what that Commission said on the subject—
"We consider that the question of the proper and sufficient feeding of children is one which has the closest possible connection with any scheme which may be adopted for their physical equally with their mental work. It is evident that among the causes which affect the physical welfare of the population the lack of proper nourishment is one of the most serious. The subject demands special notice not only as regards the existing state of affairs, but still more in view of any increase of physical training through the State-aided schools which may commend itself."
They further said—
"A large number of important witnesses—members of the medical profession, inspectors of schools, representatives of school boards, teachers, and others—were questioned on the subject, and they were unanimously of opinion that it was most desirable that increased
1152
attention should be paid to the feeding of children attending State-aided schools."
The Report of the Commission continued—
"We entirely endorse that opinion."
It then went on to draw a contrast between the condition of children as seen in the poorest schools and the condition of children of parents who had altogether failed in their duty. Those latter children had, as a consequence of the default of their parents, had been sent to the training ship at Moss Bank and to similar institutions, where sufficient food and physical training were given to them, and the contrast between them and the children in the poorest schools was both marked and painful. Thus it was clearly demonstrated that where the parents had absolutely failed to do their duty their children were in a better condition, inasmuch as by State-aid they had received that nourishment which was essential to their physical well-being, while the condition of the other poor children was not only marked but painful. This proved conclusively that so far as Scotland was concerned the evil existed to as great an extent as it did in either England or Wales.
In the debate the other day a great deal was said about the causes which had brought about this deplorable social evil, and no doubt there was a considerable difference of opinion in the House as to the real causes. He would venture to classify the children in the following order. First, they had destitute children whose parents were in extreme poverty for reasons that were really preventable. Secondly, there were those whose parents were in temporary poverty caused by enforced idleness; and thirdly, there were those, and he thought this was the most important section demanding the consideration of the House—those whose fathers' economic condition when they were in work was such as to preclude the possibility of their doing exactly as they would like to do in making provision for the nourishment of their children. A most important question the House had to consider was whether (whatever the cause of these children being exposed to the danger of their physical condition being completely undermined) it was in the

1153
public interest that this evil should be allowed any longer to go on unchecked. If they only remembered how deplorable the results were they would agree with him that it would be the worst policy possible to pursue to allow the evil to go on unchecked, in view of the danger to the race. The Report from which he had already quoted made some most emphatic observations on the matter of their responsibility. It proved, in the first place, that voluntary effort by itself had failed to cope with the extension of the evil. Then the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland came to the conclusion—
"It should be one of the duties of school boards and school managers to inquire into oases of apparently insufficient feeding, and they should provide facilities for the provision of suitable food by voluntary agency without cost to the public funds, and should co-operate with those agencies in the organisation of this work."
Then, in another portion of the Report they demonstrated emphatically how inadequate voluntary effort had proved, and they added—
"We think that power should be given to provide meals, and to demand from the parents payment to meet the cost."
He would trouble the House with only one more quotation, and it was an important one. Seeing that the Government insisted upon appointing Royal Commissions, it was desirable that they should appear to give some consideration to the findings of those Commissions unless, of course, they were going to accept the theory that the appointment of a Royal Commission was an easy way to provide a huge grave in which the Government might bury difficult problems. He found in the Report words to the effect that there was a general consensus of opinion that the time had come when the State should realise the necessity of ensuring adequate nourishment for children in attendance at schools. It was said to be the height of cruelty to subject half-starved children to the process of education, besides being a short-sighted policy, inasmuch as the progress of such children was inadequate and disappointing. If the House and the Government recognised the existence of such an evil—and they had strong and conclusive evidence that the Government had at last recognised it, because only a few days ago they
1154
issued an Order affecting England and Wales, whereas up to the present moment they had done absolutely nothing so far as Scotland was concerned—if, he contended, they recognised the evil, surely they ought on an occasion like that, when they were building up new machinery for educational purposes, to be prepared to make some arrangement and to incorporate some provision dealing with the evil.
The Government, if they liked, might adopt the plan which had been suggested in the Bill already before the House. The promoters of that Bill suggested that power should be given to the local education authority, when they found a number of children in their schools who were insufficiently or badly fed, to take the matter in hand, and to arrange for giving them certain meals daily. They also went so far as to suggest that power should be given to the education authority to recover the cost of the meals from the parents or guardians, where it could be clearly proved that such parents or guardians had the means to provide proper nourishment but had wilfully and culpably neglected their obligation to their children. He considered that if the Government would accept an Amendment of that nature in their new Scottish Education Bill in Committee, giving these limited, although probably sufficient, powers, they would be taking a step in the right direction. It should be noted that this proposal left the manner and the means of relief entirely in the discretion of the local education authority. There were other reasons why they considered that to be the best method of dealing with this evil. In the first place, it was most in harmony with the recommendations of the two Commissions to which he had already referred. They made that recommendation because they fully thought that where voluntary effort had been tried it had not proved in itself sufficient. They did not suggest that voluntary effort should be abandoned entirely, but that it might be made part of an arrangement with the local education authority. What they did want was that, without leaving out entirely all voluntary effort which had not proved sufficient, full responsibility for seeing that something was

1155
really done should be imposed on the local education authorities. That would be the best way of dealing with the evil from a practical, economic, and humane standpoint. The Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration agreed with the opinion of the Royal Commission on Physical Training that the preparation and cooking of meals for children habitually underfed should be regarded as one of the charges incidental to school management, and the Commission also expressed the sanguine belief that a few prosecutions would have a most salutary and stimulating effect in compelling neglectful parents to take a full share of their responsibilities.
He thought he had stated strong grounds on which to base an appeal to the Government to give some encouragement to those who desired to deal with that defect in their measure. In his opinion the Government had made a great mistake in bringing in this Bill without recognising the strong and emphatic evidence of their own Royal Commissions' Reports, for it might he that for a number of years to come they would be face to face with this evil in great centres like Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Dundee, and would not have given any legislative powers to the local authorities to deal with what was an admitted evil. He would conclude by again expressing his earnest hope that when they reached the Committee stage they would have the support of the Government in their endeavour to remove this great defect from the Bill.
SIR HUGH SHAW-STEWARTasked the House to allow him to say a few words on the question raised by the last speaker, as he was one of the members of the Royal Commission on Physical Training, from whose Report several quotations had been made. He did not propose to say anything on the general lines of the Bill, except to thank the Government for having introduced it, and to assure them that most of the Members representing Scottish constituencies would do all that they could to expedite its progress through the House. But there were one or two omissions from the Bill on which he would like to speak for a moment. One was the omission in
1156
reference to any scheme for dealing with underfed children. He was one of those who held very strongly the view that if provision was to be made for feeding the children the cost should be recovered from the parents, and he believed that the hon. Member for Camberwell was entirely of that opinion. But there was one difficulty connected with that suggestion which had to be faced, and that was the difficulty of dealing with parents who would not pay the fees. The Hon. Member had said that he would scarify those parents.
DR. MACNAMARA: No. I said I would scarify those who could, but would not pay, but I did not say I would not scarify those who were too poor to pay.
SIR HUGH SHAW-STEWARTsaid he fully accepted that interpretation of the hon. Member's words, but he did not see how he proposed to scarify those parents. He did not think that a resolution passed by the school board would be sufficient to produce that result, and he did not know of any other way in which they could be got at. He was going to say that no resolution would scarify anybody. But he did recollect one occasion in that House when certain colonial statesmen were brought to the Bar because they had broken some constitutional rule, and they were brought up to be admonished by Mr. Speaker. Certainly those who were acquainted with the authority which surrounded Mr. Speaker's office, when they heard and saw those colonial statesmen admonished, came to the conclusion that they were scarified. But they were not going to scarify the public by means of resolutions passed by school boards, and he believed the only way in which they could deal with parents who would not pay the feeding fees for their children was to make paupers of them—to recover the money through the Poor Law. That was the gist of the recommendations of the Commission, and he wished to emphasise the conclusion they arrived at that no expense whatever should be thrown on school boards in respect of the provision of food. He was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman had not been able to incorporate any suggestions of that kind in his Bill. No doubt

1157
he had good reasons for abstaining from doing so, and he trusted he would explain them to the House later on.
There was one other omission, and that was in regard to the question of medical inspection. The Royal Commission went very fully into that question, and he would like to remind them that one of the members of the Royal Commission was at that time head of the Education Department for Scotland. He could assure the House they had very weighty evidence from the most skilled and influential witnesses in the country, and upon it they arrived at certain conclusions. They suggested that medical officers should act as consulting officers to school boards and should work with the local medical officers. They suggested further that medical officers of counties and burghs should give their services for a retaining fee, not exceeding £100 a year, which might fairly be provided from Imperial funds. Another paragraph of their Report suggested that the district medical officers should visit and report to the senior medical officer regarding the health of the children. He was quite aware that that provision would entail very considerable expense, and possibly that was the reason why the Government had not seen its way to embark on the enterprise. He would like further to draw attention to paragraph 160 of the Report, in which they suggested that sub-inspectors, male and female, should be appointed and should make occasional visits to the school and assist the teachers in testifying as to the health and cleanliness of the children. He was not sure that that was not the most important of all the suggestions they made. At any rate it was a practical one and it had the advantage of cheapness; it would not involve any large expenditure of money, and he was certain the hon. Member for Camberwell would bear him out in saying that the teachers would welcome the appointment of a few selected persons to assist them in these matters of cleanliness and sanitary habits, matters which were quite as important for young children to learn as lessons in geography and history. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman in the course of the debate would give some reason why the recommendations of
1158
the Royal Commission, arrived at after full and careful investigation and consideration, were not given effect to in the Bill.
MR. CHARLES DOUGLASwished to associate himself with what had been said as to the importance of including in that Bill some provision for the feeding of necessitous children. He did not say that at all in the sense that he thought the Bill was an unwelcome one, because he believed it would do a great deal of good in Scotland, even if those provisions were not included. But he did sincerely hope that the Lord-Advocate and the Government would seriously and with an open mind consider this question and try to give some satisfaction to those who had been urging it on their attention. It was a matter of vital importance and it was one capable of being dealt with without any revolutionary proceedings. It was a matter to which in Scotland very special attention had been called, not only by the Royal Commission on Physical Training, but more recently by a very interesting and tragic document issued in Dundee under the auspices of the Social Union. It was a report drawn up by medical men, and it showed the enormous wastage of human life which was going on. He would not say more about that now, but he hoped that when they reached the Committee stage it would be found that the Government were willing to entertain these proposals.
He wished to say how cordially he welcomed, for his part, the reintroduction of this Bill, and how sincerely he trusted the Government intended to pass it into law. The main principle of the Bill, on which really its usefulness rested, was the enlargement of the local government areas for education purposes. He did not think it necessary to recapitulate the arguments by which they had justified that enlargement in the past. It was a reform which was calculated greatly to simplify and improve the position of teachers, and that, in itself, he thought, was the very important argument in its favour. It would increase the importance and the authority of the local education bodies—the school boards—and, in his opinion,

1159
make them much less amenable to anything that might be regarded as undue interference on the part of the Education Department, and it would enable them to really co-ordinate the different stages of education, and give a greater stimulus to the secondary education of the country. After a good deal of discussion and debate in that House in the previous year they had arrived at a very excellent solution of the difficult, practical question of the extension of the areas. That was a question which had been dealt with in different ways according to the merits of each particular case, and it was wise, he thought, to leave it as they now proposed to do to the decision of the authorities concerned. It was now intended to be incorporated in the clause of the Bill dealing with that matter, and he hoped that clause would really make it perfectly clear that the local authorities themselves, no less than the Secretary for Scotland, were to be real parties to any combination that might be effected; that that combination was not to take place behind their backs, but with their consent and concurrence. He hoped also that another arrangement which was made in the previous year, with regard to the management of schools, would be persisted in. It was then left in the hands of the school board to appoint managers, and it was very important in school administration to secure that management and control should go together. Nothing could be more unfortunate than that the actual management should be in different hands to those by whom the school was controlled. It was unfortunate for the managers themselves, because it was impossible to obtain from them the same kind of work as would be obtained if they had greater authority, and it was still more unfortunate for those who controlled the school, and who were not in daily contact with its administration, and so able to meet the problems with which school boards had to deal.
If there was any doubt before as to the necessity of provincial councils, or national councils, or some advisory body in Scotland with whom the board might officially deal that doubt might easily be set at rest by the events of the last year. The great argument against them had always been that there was a complete and adequate control over education in
1160
Scotland. It was two years since there had been an opportunity to discuss upon the Estimates educational affairs in Scotland, and no one who took an interest in Scottish education would think that once in two years was too often to bring the acts of the Scottish Education Department under review. The Government had made some difference in this Bill to their proposals of last year. They had steadily refused to create any national council with power to sub-divide itself into committees for local purposes. That would have been the simplest and most satisfactory course that they could have taken, but they had refused to take it. It was not a matter of principle, because whether there was one council with power to form itself into four local committees or whether there were four councils which had power to combine it was practically the same thing. He believed a sub-committee of a national council would be a far more efficient body in its way than any provincial council. He would like to see the functions of the provincial council further denned. A provincial or national council would fall very far short of their view of what it ought to be if it were merely a collection of estimable gentlemen nominated by the Education Department from what were called "educational experts." It was of vital importance that these councils should contain not only an element but a majority of other members who were delegated representatives of the school board within the area or province with which that council was to deal. That should not be left in the discretion of the Secretary for Scotland but should be dealt with in the Bill itself. He would also like to see more power given to the provincial councils; not that their functions should be altered; they should still remain an advisory body, but he would like to see a wide extension of the subjects upon which the opinion of the councils should be sought if these bodies were really to be consulted as to the essential parts of the administrative work of the Department.
As to the necessity for this Bill dealing with the treatment of those schools which were not under the charge of the school boards, the voluntary schools, there was a very general agreement. Many people

1161
believed that the duty of the State ought to be limited to supplying secular education, and that the teaching of theology formed no part of the business. That was not the state of affairs in Scotland, nor was it the state of affairs set up by the Bill, which persisted in giving to Scotland denominational education in the schools. So long as that was done it was essential that they should recognise the conscientious objections of the minority. No good cause ever prospered which was leagued with hardship and injustice. He was prepared to accept and welcome the proposals in the Bill to deal more equally with the minority in this matter. As to the manner in which it was to be done there were differences of opinion. The proposal of the Bill was to leave it to the local authority to give aid from the rates. It was certain that any aid must come from the rates if the matter was to be dealt with as a whole, but there was an opinion in Scotland that it could be dealt with by Parliamentary action. That was not the view of all, but, at the same time, if the money was to be given by Parliament to the schools it must be taken out of the Scottish Education Fund and from that part of it which otherwise would go in relief of rates, and there would be so much the less to go to the country as a whole in relief of rates. There were two ways by which that deduction might be made. It might be spread over the country as a whole, but that would be obviously unjust because those districts in which there were no voluntary schools would be made to contribute to those in which there were voluntary schools. The other way was to make the deduction in detail, and in proportion, in those parts of the country where voluntary schools existed. After all, what did it mean? It meant that they were giving the Education Department power to impose rates, because when they gave this power to withdraw some of this fund, they gave power to withdraw money which would otherwise go to the relief of rates in many districts. One of the greatest defects of the English educational system was that the local authorities had been deprived of the liberty they ought to have and desired to exercise. Many of the difficulties of the English Act were traceable to that single fault,
1162
and he would greatly deplore anything of that sort being introduced into the Bill for Scotland. They ought to jealously guard the right of each locality to the disposal of its own rates. Each case ought to be dealt with on its merits as it came before those whose knowledge of the circumstances enabled them to form an opinion upon it.
In conclusion, he ventured to express the same hope with reference to the Bill as a whole as he had expressed at the commencement of his speech. It was a very serious matter to hold a Bill of this sort over the heads of those carrying on the educational work of Scotland. The responsibility for the present state of things rested on the Government. They had introduced this Bill, which was a responsibility they ought not to take unless they intended to persevere with it and pass it into law. He therefore hoped that it would be eventually carried.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid the House was indebted to the hon. Gentlemen who had already spoken for calling attention to the serious defect in this Bill in not making any effort to deal with the question of hungry children. Neither the Government in general nor the Scottish Department in particular could leave this matter alone. The Scottish Department had had before them for a considerable time two very important Reports. They had had before them the Report of their own Royal Commission on the physical Training of Children in Scotland, and they had had the Report of the Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration. Nor could they say the Scottish view was not adequately represented on both bodies, because on the Royal Commission on the Physical Training of Children in Scotland was Sir Henry Craik, the then head of the Scottish Department, and on the Committee on Physical Deterioration was that gentleman's successor in that office. Both those gentlemen joined in the Reports of that Commission and Committee, which declared that the physical condition of the children in the schools was such that it required immediate attention on the part of the Government. Not a single step had the Scottish Office taken upon the Reports

1163
of these two important bodies, and in the Bill now before the House they had omitted the question altogether. It had been ignored by them. They were like the Pharisee in the story of the good Samaritan. They had looked on these poor children and had passed by on the other side.
He desired to point out how the thing stood as regarded English children, because the President of the Local Government Board had stated clearly both in the House and the country, that in England a distressed child in a public elementary school had a legal right to be visited by a representative of the public authority and to be relieved and fed. Not only had the President of the Local Government Board admitted it, hat he had taken the step of providing machinery, somewhat clumsy machinery it was true, but the best that could be provided without legislation, to secure that those children's rights should not remain in abeyance, but that they should be vindicated. In the schools, now, it was the duty of the teachers and managers to inquire into the condition of any child who was distressed, and to report, and it was the duty of the guardians to at once send their officer and relieve the child, and then afterwards take steps to recover the cost from the parents, and, if they were not able to pay, to make the relief out of the poor relief fund. What was the position with regard to Scotland? Because what had been done in this respect did not apply to either Scotland or Ireland, and he presumed that the children of both those countries had the same rights as children in England. He would like to know whether that was not a fact? Here, then, they had a right on the part of the child to live, and no step was taken either by Scotland or Ireland to put their children in the same position as English children. The Government could not leave this matter where it was. Before this Bill went further they must declare first what were the rights of Scotch children, and then what steps they proposed to take in order that those rights should be safeguarded.
On the face of the Bill there were many imperfections. For instance there was a provision that the school boards could
1164
spend school rates in medical inspection, but were they going to stop there? Had there not been medical inspection in many of the schools in Scotland and England every year? Excellent medical inspections had been made in Scotland and in England, in the Johanna Street Schools, but what was the result of the inspections of those schools in poor districts? It was that a great number of children in those poor schools were suffering from lack of food. That would be the result of the medical inspections in Scotland. What were they going to do? Were they going to stop there? The local authorities under this Bill had now power to spend the ratepayers' money on the provision of food, and the point he wished to put to the Lord-Advocate was that he should tell the House clearly, first, what were the rights of the children, and secondly, what were the steps which the Scotch Office were going to take analagous to those taken by the Local Government Board in England for enforcing those rights. What was the use of giving power to the new Scotch authorities to inspect the children if they did not give them power to mitigate the evils from which they suffered. He hoped this Bill would be carried through as everybody desired to see it passed. His only desire in rising was to raise, in the case of Scotland, this question which had been dealt with to some extent in the case of England, and which must in the future be dealt with in the case of both Scotland and Ireland;
MR. EDWARDSsaid, as was well known, they had had in Wales a great deal of trouble owing to the Education Act which was passed by the Government in 1902. He could not help thinking that much of that trouble might not have occurred if the Government had accepted the offer made by the hon. Member for the Carnarvon Boroughs, who was willing to take such a Bill as this for the solution of the difficulty. As the hon. and learned Member for Lanark very properly remarked, each locality should be allowed to control the expenditure of its own rates. Under Clause 3 of this Bill there was set up a system of school boards all through the country. That

1165
would have been a very proper way of dealing with education in Wales as well as in Scotland. Clause 17 of the Scotch Bill provided that—
"It shall be lawful for the school board in any of the enumerated districts from time to time to commit the management of any school or schools under their charge, and, subject to the provisions of the Act, to delegate such of their powers as they may see fit in connection with the management of such school or schools, to managers appointed by them."
He wished that were the law in Wales, but he did not grudge it to Scotland. In Wales it was the parsons who appointed the managers of the schools, and not the public bodies like the county councils who were at the same time called upon to find the money for running the schools. There was a wide difference between the Bill now before the House and the Act of 1902. The Bill before the House sought to carry out the wishes of the people of Scotland, but the Act of 1902 did nothing of the kind in regard to the people of England and Wales. The Welsh laity would fully approve of the public control given by this Bill, but unfortunately there were other powers at work to induce the Government to pass the Act of 1902, and roughly speaking the clergy got their way. Why was it that they got their way? Was it for the benefit of education? The Government had shown by introducing this kind of measure for Scotland that they believed that a system of education which was controlled by school boards was better than a system which left education to voluntary agencies. One great merit of the Bill was that it did not arouse religious disputes as the Act of 1902 had done in both England and Wales. Why was it that the clergymen in England and Wales took up the position they did? They insisted that only the rudiments of knowledge should be taught in the elementary schools? Secular education was to be elementary, but apparently religious instruction was to be advanced. If it was right that only the rudiments of secular instruction should be taught it would appear equally right that only the rudiments of religious instruction should be given. The merit of this Bill as compared with the English Bill was that it allowed the majority to have its own way with regard to religious instruction. He felt sure that if
1166
the same rule were applied to Wales they would get rid of a good many of the difficulties now felt in that country. He could not understand why the Government which granted for Scotland the wishes of its people should refuse them in the case of Wales. The Government was supposed to be impartial, but it had not been so in regard to his own country. The majority in most of the parishes of Wales were Nonconformists, and if the principle underlying this Bill was given to the people of Wales it would often happen that in Welsh parishes, where there was only one school, not only the maintenance but the control of the staffing of that school would be given to the people of the parish. He protested against the treatment meted out to Wales in 1902. He approved of the principle of this Bill, but he held that it was equally applicable to Wales as to Scotland.
SIR ANDREW AGNEWsaid that with regard to the supplying of meals to underfed children he fully sympathised with the view which had been expressed, and he hoped that in Committee the Lord-Advocate would be able to insert a provision dealing with the matter. As to the Bill itself, he had only two criticisms to make. He greatly regretted that the counties instead of the county districts had not been made the education areas. In many cases the county district would be much too small for a complete system of primary, secondary, and technical education. The county would in most cases provide a far more suitable area, and he could not understand why it had not been taken. That objection had doubtless been met to some extent by the power given to unite two or more county districts, but it would have been simpler to have taken the county and, in the rare cases where it was too large, divide it. It was always easier to divide a district than to get two or more authorities, each entitled to a separate existence, to agree to be united. Personally he would have liked to see the county the education district, and the county council the education authority. If that had been the proposal it would have rendered unnecessary the creation of an

1167
entirely new body for educational purposes, and saved one local election, of which there were already too many. The more local elections there were the less interest people took in them. Fully recognising the difficulties in the way of that proposal, he was quite prepared to accept the scheme of the Government, which he believed would work well and be generally acceptable to the people of Scotland.
His second criticism had reference to the financial arrangements of the Bill. Probably everyone would approve of the proposal that the various grants for education should be pooled, but he doubted whether all would be in favour of the inclusion of the residue grant of 1890 and a large portion of the equivalent grant of 1892. There was justification for the arrangement so far as the residue grant was concerned, because while the grant was given either for the relief of local rates or for technical education, it had been almost universally devoted to technical education. In fact, taking the whole of Scotland, three-fourths of the grant had been used for that purpose. But there was not the same reason for claiming the equivalent grant or any portion of it for inclusion in the education fund; it was given expressly for the relief of local rates and, with the exception of a very small part—about £500—had been so used. The proposal was that £100,000 should be devoted to the relief of rates, and that the balance—about £63,000, according to last year's figures—should go to the education fund. That meant that an additional burden of £63,000 would be laid upon the county and burgh rates. It might be said that it did not much matter, if the money had to be found, whether it was raised by the police, the school, or any other rate. That, however, was not the way the local authorities looked at the matter. It would have been much better to have let the present arrangement remain undisturbed, leaving the education authority to raise the money they required by an addition to the education rate. Moreover, it was not dealing fairly with the local authorities in Scotland as compared with those in England, inasmuch as under the Act of 1902 the equiva-
1168
lent grant was not touched, and consequently the amount for the relief of local rates in England remained undiminished. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would take this matter into consideration, and see if he could not leave the whole of the equivalent grant undisturbed. With that alteration he hoped the Bill would be carried through. It had met with a very friendly reception on both sides, and there was in Scotland a general desire for its speedy passage. He hoped, therefore, that after the Second Reading the Lord-Advocate would press forward the remaining stages as rapidly as possible, and that the Bill would be carried into law this session.
MR. CROMBIEsaid the question of the feeding of the children was of the greatest importance, and although the matter was one of considerable difficulty, he hoped that in Committee the Government would be prepared to submit a plan. In regard to its main principles he welcomed the Bill of last year, and in its present form he thought he had still more reason to welcome it. But why was not the Bill of last year passed? He had never known a Bill to be received in a more reasonable spirit, but it was wilfully thrown aside by the Government in order that other measures might be forced through. He hoped that that would not be the case this year. The best answer to any possible charge of obstruction was the present Bill, it being a considerable improvement upon the Bill of last year, a result wholly due to the discussion which then took place. The Bill was not a controversial measure in the Party sense, but it was one of enormous importance to the Scottish people, inasmuch as it would probably form the basis of their education for a generation to come. That being so, it would be nothing short of a scandal if Scottish Members consented to such a Bill being thrown at their heads without giving it full discussion.
The main point of the Bill was the question of the area, and upon that there was a considerable amount of controversy. Many people held that the parish was the best area, believing that in the parish alone could there be the closest touch between the people

1169
and the management of education. On the other hand, many believed that the county was the best area. In this dilemma the Government had had to make a compromise, and they had taken the district. He did not say that that was necessarily the best. As the Bill was introduced it had all the evils of a compromise. If they stuck rigidly to the district it would have many of the faults of both the parish and the county with none of their virtues. What they demanded was elasticity, and that had been provided for, and to that extent the Bill was better. He thought, however, that there was room for more elasticity. In Committee last year this matter was discussed, and it was felt that whatever scheme was adopted it would be found necessary to have a wider area for secondary than for elementary education. A proposal of that kind could be embodied without injuring the Bill. The late Lord-Advocate promised to embody a clause giving effect to some arrangement of that sort, and he hoped that in Committee the Government would consider some scheme whereby districts could unite for secondary education, whilst retaining the authority for elementary education. One of the changes proposed in the Bill was exceedingly complicated. A distinction was made between primary and secondary schools, and in order to accomplish this no less than three different areas had been taken—in some cases the parish, in others a group of parishes, and in some the district. Only one-quarter of the districts had secondary schools, and the remaining three-quarters had higher-grade schools which served large districts. The simplest way was to make an arrangement that would make no difference between those schools. He welcomed the Bill, and hoped it would be passed. He had no fear but that the Lord-Advocate would do his best, for he had won golden opinions for his courtesy, and if the Government gave him facilities he had no doubt that he would make them a good Bill.
SIR LEWIS McIVERsaid the subject of the financial proposals of the Bill had been so well covered by the hon. Member for South Edinburgh that it was unnecessary for him to do
1170
more than join in the appeal which had been made, urging upon the Government the importance of giving due weight to the strong feeling which existed amongst local authorities as to the proposed diversion of the equivalent grant from its present purposes. The ground on which objection was taken to this diversion was that money was given to England and Scotland for practically the same purposes, and it was now proposed to take it away from such purposes in Scotland. The proposed arrangement was in no way essential to the principal purposes of the Bill, and if the money was to be raised it could be most properly raised by an education rate. This was a question which was considerably discussed last year. Owing to the system of rating in Scotland, -a certain differentiation between owners and occupiers existed, which had no parallel in England. Under this Bill the money which had hitherto been applied to the relief of occupiers' rates would be replaced by a rate which would fall equally upon the owner and occupier. And the present proposal would, therefore, interfere with incidence of taxation as deliberately accepted by the Scottish burghs, quite apart from the resentment felt by them on the subject of the equivalent grant. He did not think the. Government would be wise if they assumed that the burghs acquiesced in the absorption of the residue grant. The whole of this movement had seriously alarmed the burgh authorities, because they did not know where this sort of thing was going to stop-They were not satisfied at the present time with other grants, and consequently they were unwilling to surrender what they had already got, in exchange for something about which they, at the present time, had no information. When the Lord-Advocate summed up he hoped that he would recognise the very strong feeling which existed on this matter throughout the burghs and in some of the counties to the effect that this differentiation of treatment was unjust to Scotland, and was unnecessary for the purposes of education.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid he should like the House to be informed how the details of this Bill

1171
were going to be considered. Many speakers had stated that they were not concerned with details at the present moment, but there was a rumour that this Bill was to be sent to the Committee on Trade or something of that kind-He hoped that was not true. If this Bill was not to be considered by the whole of the Scottish Members in Committee, then a much closer attention to details would be required on the Second Reading and on the Report stage. He was not a keen opponent of this Bill, for it had his support last year, but he maintained that every Scottish Member was bound to assist in the moulding of this measure, and it would be something approaching a scandal if this Bill was sent to a Committee which would prevent fifty of the Scottish Members having a voice in regard to its details. There was a view very widely held that Bills relating to Scotland could not be taken up unless Scotland was unanimous and the Scottish Members were mum, and unless they could be passed without discussion. He thought it would be wrong, however good this measure was, if it was not subject to the fullest discussion by the whole of the Scottish Members, who ought to have some opportunity of assisting in moulding it.
There were one or two other points he wished to refer to. So far as the Bill itself was concerned he had very little to say against it, just as he had not much to say against the Bill of last year. There were some questions which were certainly controversial. In regard to the question of finance some of the burghs held strong opinions. Then there was the question of the areas, and although the discussion up to the present had gone somewhat in favour of the areas prescribed under the Bill, many opinions were held in a contrary direction. There was a controversial question affecting the enumerated districts, and he knew that in Committee upon the Bill the school board of the burgh of Leith would insist upon representations being made upon the point of its amalgamation with Edinburgh. Those were fair subjects for full discussion. The Government owed it to the House and to Scotland to use every effort in their power to pass the Bill this year. This
1172
was all the more urgent because the Second Reading had been put off until May 8th and because the Bill was many years overdue. There was no particular reason why it should not have been passed last year. He thought his hon. friend the Member for West Renfrew was the most obvious cause of the Bill of last year not passing by moving his rating Amendment.
SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid he did not move the rating Amendment and he had always been opposed to it.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid he understood that the views of the hon. Member opposite were adopted by the Government. There was really no reason why the Bill of last year should not have been passed, and it was a great disappointment to every educationist in Scotland, because without some coordination of education much effort was lost, and they had fallen very much in arrears of the true position which Scotland ought to hold in this matter. Consequently, there was a feeling of insecurity as regarded the present Bill, and there had been gloomy forebodings on the part of competent persons as to the chances of the Bill passing through during the present session. A Bill conceived upon broad national lines was worthy of a national effort.
He was glad that the Government had held to the main lines of the Bill of last year. His main objection to the Bill was in regard to the excessive autocracy of the Department. The power of the secretary of the Department was practically uncontrolled. He thought the tendency of the Bill was to gather power into one hand. Too many Scottish boards were cumbrous and in very much the same condition as they had been since the days of the Stuarts, and this was a good time to make a change. There had been a change in the headship of the Department. Although they did not all agree with Sir Henry Craik they recognised his capacity, and they recognised the great services he had performed for Scotland. As to the personal element, Sir Henry was a man that nobody could help liking. The Bill

1173
should certainly have created a National Council of Education for Scotland. That would have involved, of course, the transfer of the Education Department to Edinburgh. The hon. Baronet the Member for West Edinburgh, in discussing the question of districts, said that it was much easier to divide one body into two or three than to get two or three to agree. If that argument was true he would ask the hon. Baronet to apply it to the provincial councils, and to build up a national council out of them. The provincial councils were, he believed, a valuable feature of the Bill. He should like to see a fifth provincial council. He thought the Highlands naturally lent themselves to be treated separately. There should be a fifth council at Inverness, or the council of St. Andrews might go to Inverness. He was not indifferent to the advantage of Fife as a centre, but at the same time he thought the Highland area could never be properly organised from Aberdeen. He desired to express his satisfaction that powers were to be given to combine the provincial councils for certain purposes. He thought they should have much wider powers, and that real powers should be given to them.
So far as the present Bill went it was an improvement on that of last year, and he thought it would be valuable. Did the hon. Member opposite propose to abolish the School Board of Edinburgh? If he proposed to give the control of educational affairs to the Town Council of Edinburgh he would be setting up a dual system of control. He thought that would be a serious danger of the proposal which should be cleared away before the change was made. Was it better to have educational bodies all over Scotland, or to use the local bodies all over Scotland? He did not think a dual system would be an advantage. There was a good deal to be said for the parish councils. The main argument for them—and there was something in it—was that there was a feeling that a parish board was an easy body to attend—that a working man after his tea could attend a parish board. He believed that if travelling expenses were paid they would get a larger proportion, to attend the district boards.
1174
He thought a provision should be added to the Bill that the travelling expenses of the members of school boards should be paid in order that the working class should have no obstacle to their full representation upon them. The district area, he believed, offered the possibility of giving the best authority. It was very convenient for working purposes. Most of the work of the county councils had passed now into the hands of the district committees of the councils. He believed the area was a good one, that it would work economically, and enable them to have co-ordination of education, because they would never be able to have co-ordination unless there was opportunity for education to be controlled by the same authority. They could do that with a district authority, but they could not do it with a parish authority. The hon. Member for Kincardineshire referred to the possibility of greater elasticity in the arrangements. He himself was in favour of the greatest elasticity possible. One of the great advantages of the district system was that two or more districts which required a similar kind of higher and technical education could have it better under a district system than under a county system. There were many counties which did not require the same kind of higher and technical education over the whole area, whereas by grouping the districts one would be able to arrange the educational system much better.
As to the physical training and the feeding of school children, he believed that with such areas the difficulties could be met and grappled with. The small boards had not undertaken the work of providing for the requirements of physical training nearly enough. As to feeding, he believed that was in Scotland really a very simple matter. It had been tried, and wherever tried, so far as he knew, it had been a success. What was required was a kitchen, and a committee to see that the children were fed, and to obtain in some cases voluntary contributions for the feeding of children whose parents could not afford to pay for the food. In some cases he knew that the children were fed at very small expense. The

1175
parents paid for the tickets. The fault was not so much in the system under which the children were being fed as in the fact that the system itself had only been partially developed. There were some parts that had never attempted it, and he thought that had been the fault of the Scotch Education Department. By the very nature of its constitution it had no power of initiative to take up questions of that kind. That was pre-eminently the kind of question that would come before the new councils if the power of initiative were given to them. There should be in every parish or district a committee appointed, probably by the school board, to see that the children were properly fed. This Bill should give the school authorities powers to make the necessary equipment for the cooking of dinners. He gave notice of an Amendment of that kind to the Bill of last year. The great trouble which had been experienced had been in getting the school kitchen itself, the boards having no power to make one or to provide the necessary accommodation. With a little initiative by the Department, and a slight amendment of the Bill, there was no child in Scotland who need not be thoroughly well fed. He congratulated the Government on having seized this great opportunity of providing for the training of teachers. He trusted they would seize with equal vigour the opportunity of passing the Bill, because the passing of it would be almost a justification for the prolongation of the present Parliament.
SIR MARK STEWARTsaid he wished to follow the example of his hon. friend the Member for the Leith Burghs in congratulating the Government on bringing forward of this measure. In regard to the feeding of children, he thought there should be no difficulty whatever. He had had some experience in connection with the establishment of soup kitchens. In only one case the board had to ask assistance to build a soup kitchen. A small house with a galvanised iron roof was provided at a cost of £15 or £20. In other cases the needful appliances for cooking were provided in places adjoining the schoolhouses, and the board
1176
considered that they were justified in applying the rates to that purpose. In regard to provisions there had never been any difficulty. A concert once a year in winter was generally sufficient to provide the funds. The farmers had been very kind in providing vegetables, and small payments were made by the children for the meals supplied. The board thought it was better to take a small payment for a basin of soup than to give it voluntarily, but every consideration was given in the cases of children whose parents could not afford to pay even a halfpenny. Tickets were sold in lots on a more liberal scale if considered necessary. He agreed that it might be advisable to introduce words in Section 7 of the 23rd Clause of the Bill which would permit schools boards to incur the very trifling expense of providing for the feeding of children in necessary cases. He would not discuss the question of rating at length at the present moment. He could only tell the Government that it would be a great disappointment if part of the equivalent grant were taken from them. It would entail in many districts from 1d. to 1½d. in the £ of additional taxation. In Scotland they had a good system of education, but he believed that by this Bill they would get a better system. If only the area was enlarged they would be able to deal with a freer hand with secondary education. He concurred with the remark of the hon. Member for Kincardineshire that they could not have secondary education to any real extent without a large area—except, perhaps, in very thickly populated districts; and he hoped that the Lord-Advocate would take that into consideration. He was at one with the hon. Member for Leith in hoping that the Bill would be thoroughly discussed in the House instead of being sent to a Grand Committee. It would be a great saving of time, for the Bill could be got through Committee in half the time a Grand Committee would occupy. He did not imagine that there would be any obstruction, but many details had to be considered.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid he was strongly in favour of the Bill being considered in Committee of the Whole House, and especially that it

1177
should not be sent to the Grand Committee on Law or Trade. But he had always thought that a Scotch Bill should be sent to a Grand Committee consisting of all the Scotch Members.
SIR MARK STEWARTsaid he was quite certain that that would never be attained.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid he himself had made the proposal of a Grand Committee with all the Scotch Members and other Members in addition.
SIR MARK STEWARTsaid he did not think it was ever carried.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSON: Oh, yes; it was done once.
SIR MARK STEWART: Well, it could not have been often done. A Scotch Education Bill might interest some English Members and even some Welsh Members; and he therefore hoped it would be discussed in Committee of the Whole House. He was sure that a much better Bill would be produced than if it was considered in Grand Committee. He trusted the Lord-Advocate would use all his efforts with the Government to begin upon the Committee stage as soon as possible, so that it might be finished and the Bill read a third time before Whitsuntide.
MR. HALDANEsaid he was anxious to see the discussion kept as close as possible to the actual proposals in the Bill. There was one thing he was very glad of, namely, that the hon. Baronet who had just sat down had endorsed very strongly the appeal made by his hon. friend the Member for Leith to the Government to afford the House some light as to what they were going to do with the Bill in Committee. Speaking for himself, he thought it would be a great misfortune to send it to an ordinary Committee; let it be discussed in Committee of the Whole House. There was a special reason for that. This Bill contained a collection of Second Reading questions. It touched questions of principle affecting not only Scotland as a whole, but numerous districts of the country—questions
1178
of rating, of Highland areas, of policy in regard to secondary education, of existing institutions, of denominational education, and of the whole subject of large and small areas in regard to general education. He contended that a Bill of that kind was no Bill to be sent to a Grand Committee, but should be kept in the House where all the Scotch Members, with the assistance of English Members who were interested in the general question of education, might deal with it, He hoped that the Lord-Advocate would get authority from the Prime Minister to allay the misgiving that they almost all felt that it would be a mistake to send this Bill to a place where it could not be properly dealt with.
He came to the point dealt with by the two hon. Members who represented West and South Edinburgh. He had the greatest possible respect for both of those hon. Members, but he found himself in intense dissent both from the substance and the manner of their action. The hon. Baronet the Member for South Edinburgh in his discussion of the county as the alternative area and the rating question concerned, seemed to have lost sight of the fact that in Scotland the improvement of the national system of education was a matter which had sunk deep into the mind of the people, and that the last thing required was that the education rate should be made by farmers and factors. He had the greatest respect for the county councils and he should be glad to see a simplification of the election and a unification of the education authority, and that they might be able to do in Scotland as in England. But in England, in the first place, there was no alternative if they wanted a large area; and, in the second place, there had been a certain development of interest on the part of some of the county councils—mainly shown in regard to technical education, which was not shown at present in such a marked degree in Scotland. He was not talking of Lanarkshire, where a remarkable interest was taken in technical education, but of some other counties which he knew. It must be taken into account, in discussing the educational standard for Scotland, that it would be a sheer misfortune if they turned over the handling of the subject of education

1179
to the county councils as they were constituted at the present time. In Wales there was a much keener interest in educational work than in England—in education for itself, and not merely for denominational controversies. The result was that there had grown up a class of experts in each locality, providing a sufficient number of people from whom they could get a sufficiently strong education board to deal with large areas. Therefore, he wanted to see in Scotland educational experts, honourably representing educational opinion, who would handle the whole system of education. He would consequently deplore if the suggestion of the hon. Member for South Edinburgh were adopted.
He came to the other alternative—the question of small areas. He could understand how people in Scotland would part with reluctance from the area of the parish, which had worked so well under the existing Education Act. But they had reached a stage when education had assumed a larger scope than in past times. Many people forgot the changes that had taken place in regard to the scope of education, the larger duties that were imposed on the teachers, and the larger knowledge expected from those who guided them. Therefore, larger areas were required than the parish. He knew parishes where they had a much higher standard of ideas in regard to education than in others, and where the parish school board was very efficient. But he also knew others where the present educational system was being scandalously handled. What was wanted was something short of the area of the county, and something greater than the parish, where there could be got a larger scope, a larger basis, and a larger mind. The Government had adopted a compromise which might not be an ideal one. They had divided the county into local government districts and given large powers of grouping and splitting up the counties for the purpose of making the necessary education districts. That might or might not be the only way of doing what he thought would allay the public apprehension on one point. He meant how those who were elected were to get to the place where the new central body was to sit.
1180
He did not see why the travelling expenses of the persons to sit on those bodies—if the choice of the best men were to be encouraged—should not be paid. He was sure it could be done without any chance of jobbing. It was a difficulty which would have to be dealt with.
The next feature of the Bill was the way it sought to organise secondary education in Scotland. That was in a highly chaotic condition, and would have to be handled in a thorough-going fashion if a good secondary educational system was to be obtained. They must handle primary and secondary education as one system; if they did not, both would suffer. The separation had been very bad for the teaching profession in Scotland. Under the old system the teaching profession achieved wonderful results, but when the teachers were confined to elementary education they often found themselves at the mercy of men, as managers, who were not so well educated as themselves. He knew that there were some who said that the teachers had taken too large a part in this discussion of policy, but he did not think so. He did not of course want to put the matter or the preponderating influence in regard to it into the hands of the teachers, but he thought they should have something to say in the matter. It was to the teacher they had to look for the efficiency and education of the country, and there was nothing more striking than the increasing difficulty of getting good teachers for the schools. The profession was not as popular as it had formerly been, and he put that down to the fact that the status of the teachers had not been satisfactory. If this Bill promoted one thing more than another it promoted an improved status for the teachers and the breaking down of that hard-and fast line which had shut off the elementary teacher from the rest of his profession. He trusted that one good result of this Bill might be that the difficulty in regard to the supply of teachers, which had been getting more and more formidable from year to year, would show signs of diminution.
Another point of an important kind in connection with this Bill was that with regard to provincial councils. Strongly in favour as he was of these councils,

1181
there was one thing in this Bill as compared with last year's Bill in which this Bill had gone back. In one of the clauses of last year's Bill one of the provincial councils was to meet at Inverness to deal with the Highland districts. This year the proposed council at Inverness had been struck out, and there was no representation, therefore, for the Highlands. He was satisfied that the organisation of education in the Highlands had features of its own which required to be dealt with in common, and could not be dealt with unless they had some kind of body representative of Highland educational opinion. Whether it would be the best course for the Government to add a fifth provincial council, not connected with the Universities but sitting in Inverness, and looking after those things which peculiarly affected the Highlands and which had to be considered as a whole, he did not know, but he did not think the Bill would be satisfactory unless some clause was put in for dealing with the case of the Highland counties. For the rest he could not dissociate in his mind the four provincial centres from something which was only just mentioned but which had been the subject of a Departmental Minute—he meant the training of teachers. He hoped that the Bill marked—and it depended upon the Department whether it did or did not mark—a new departure in the training of teachers in Scotland. They had outgrown the stage when they could leave this to denominations. The time had come when the training of teachers should be a national business in form as it was in substance, rather than be left to the tender mercies of the Church, which, Heaven knew, had enough to do of its own without taking this question over. If a beginning was being made with the national training of teachers then he thought that for that alone the Bill would be worth passing. He was not sure that the Government would not have to stiffen up the powers of the provincial councils if they were to be effective, and he should like to see a clearer definition of the representation of the school boards on those councils. He was not at all sure that they ought not to be in a majority, and the Government would find it desirable to have some-
1182
thing like a second storey to their building—a building in which they would have the picked representatives of the school boards meeting together and shaping educational policy with expert advisers. In the discretion of the Department, some were to be picked representatives of the school boards and some of the Universities, and they were to meet together and give advice which might or might not be followed. If, however, the Government took the other way they would get a more living force in the upper storey of their building and their building would possess an importance which it would not if they left these provincial councils constituted as they were. Nevertheless one was glad to see the provincial councils recognised, and it was of great importance to the scheme that that element should be recognised.
Something had been said about denominational teaching in Scotland, but he was glad to say that very little had been said about it. They did not want that system of teaching. He was far from saying that their system was perfect, and he agreed that the business of the State would never be satisfactorily done, as far as the State was concerned, until they confined the intervention of the State to secular teaching, giving the opportunity to those outside—Churches and parents—to provide the rest, and encouraging it in every way; letting national schools do something in the nature of teaching of that kind but not charging masses of electors, who were perfectly unfit to deal with matters of this kind, with that duty. In Scotland they had not taken the latter course. There had grown up with them an interlacing of two tendencies. The first was to start with the recognition of the State in regard to the teaching and the second an equally resolute feeling on the part of the people that there should be no nonsense about the action of the State. The consequence was that they were wholly free from the kind of thing which gave such trouble in the South. On the whole he thought the Government had done rightly to leave the status quo alone and not to attempt to idealise it. In the main he was content with the Bill as it stood; it was the best way of getting out of a

1183
difficult situation, and he thought right would be done. But, as he said before, the very enumeration of the topics to be dealt with, the very difficulties which had been emphasised, necessitated the taking of the Committee stage of the Bill in the House. They could not deal with matters of that kind in a Committee upstairs. If it were sent to a Committee upstairs all they would get would be a paltry and inadequate treatment of this Bill taken as a whole. Of all the Bills which he remembered in the House, he hardly remembered one which was less fitted to be sent to a Grand Committee, and he was sure that the Lord-Advocate would convey to the Prime Minister the obvious sense of the House that the Bill could only be adequately dealt with elsewhere than in a Grand Committee upstairs.
SIR J. STIRLING—MAXWELLsaid that while he agreed with the Bill as a whole there was one important point in it which seemed to him so faulty, and which so gravely attacked the interests of those he represented in that House, that he felt bound to call attention to it at the first possible moment. It was the plan for collaring part of the equivalent grant to which allusion had already been made. It was perfectly true that it would be inappropriate to remove this money from its present purposes if there was any meaning in the word "equivalent." It must also be remembered that this money had been devoted to its present purposes by a solemn Act of Parliament, and it seemed to him that, reading the Act of 1892 fairly, the rating authority and the ratepayers had every right to build upon this income as one upon which they could depend. For that reason he thought it would be a great mistake to modify it. Then there was the question of the incidence of taxation in the cities of Scotland, which made it impossible to say that this was merely a question of robbing Peter to pay Paul, because the money would not be raised out of the same pockets. As those who would have to make up the deficiency if the money was taken were different in Glasgow, though it might not affect Edinburgh so much, the withdrawal of the money from its present purpose would be
1184
a very serious inconvenience. The amount which Glasgow would lose under the proposals of the Bill would amount to as much as £11,000. That was to say, that if this money was taken off the resources for police purposes last year the rate would have to be raised. He very much objected to the rating authorities in Glasgow being in a position to claim that they must raise their rate on account of their resources having been docked by the Government. If there was to be an increase of that rate, he would rather that the increase should be judged upon its own merits. On these grounds he hoped the Government would earnestly reconsider this matter. With that exception the Bill seemed to be a good one, and he hoped it would pass into law.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he had listened to the debate with great interest. There were, however, one or two points of detail which he hoped he might be excused from referring. In the first place, he desired to say with regard to the matter which was so well raised by his hon. friend the Member for Barnard Castle that he was entirely in sympathy with the proposal made. He thought a reform in the direction which he indicated, and which had been advocated on both sides of the House so forcibly that evening, could be very fitly dovetailed into one of the sections of the present Bill. His right hon. friend opposite, the Member for the University of Cambridge, indicated two points in the Bill which, standing as they did would leave the Bill in a grotesque situation. The Bill provided for powers being given to the board to attend to the physical training of the children and the same sub-section also provided for the medical inspection of the children. Supposing the latter power were exercised by the board and it was found upon examination that a not inconsiderable portion of the children were medically unfit to attend school? To subject those children to the ordinary processes of physical training would be absurd. That was a matter which the board under the present Bill had no power to deal with. That would be an absurd situation, and he put it to the Lord-Advocate that all that was required could be accomplished by embodying

1185
something in the direction of the recommendations of the English Committee on this subject. That seemed a small matter, but he held that it was a matter which went to the foundations of a large portion of the education of the country. He hoped that whether in this House or in Committee the Scottish Members would stand together and insist that the Government should make an addendum to the effect that the children found unfit through malnutrition or insufficient feeding should be attended to in the interest of the State, and that the State should not attempt to give mental training to children unless there was that physical substratum which would render it effective.
That was one point of detail; the other was what was to be the fate of this Bill in the future? Were they going to a Committee on Trade with it? That would be absurd; still, it had been mentioned. Were they going with it to a Committee on Law? That also would be absurd; still again, it had been mentioned. In the measure there were a good many Second Reading questions, and he might add that in; addition to those questions there were others affecting individual localities in Scotland, which had separate interests and were separately represented in the House. Therefore, to exclude the representatives of those districts by some arrangement from the Grand Committee in which they could not appear would simply be not to facilitate the passing of the measure but to provoke the House, on the consideration of the Report, to inquire into the whole of the proceedings in Committee and prolong the opposition to the measure.
The third matter of detail had reference to the provincial councils. He told the House frankly that he was not in favour of these councils. It seemed to him that they were very shadowy, unsubstantial, not representative, and merely advisory bodies. He supposed when they came into existence they would have a philosophical air; they would give philosophical advice, and here and there, when it pleased the Department, that philosophical advice would be attended to. On the whole, he thought very little of them as they were at
1186
present constituted. How were they to improve them? He agreed with his right hon. friend behind him that they must add to their number. There were two particular reasons why the Highlands of Scotland should have a separate provincial council if such bodies should be brought into existence. Only a provincial council sitting at Inverness would be able to overhaul the variety of arrangements which at present existed in the High-lands, and in the next place the Highlands were the recipients under the Department of special sums, and these special sums required not a little anxiety and care in the handling and in the investigations as to the needs of the districts and the funds necessary to meet those needs. He thought that with regard to the exclusion of Inverness, which was included last year, they should have some explanation.
As to the main part of the Bill, he supposed they were all grateful for it in a kind of way. They were grateful for it, but he suspected their gratitude was not alone for benefits received by the Bill, but rather on account of the mischiefs which the Bill had avoided. They had maintained the ad hoc principle in the Bill, and that was a tremendous gain. It was the gain of a thing which was contemplated as out of the question by the Prime Minister in former years, and the right hon. Gentleman had denounced the ad hoc principle in unmeasured terms and apparently in terms of universal application. As to the Bill itself, for the purposes of a Second Reading he must confess to the House very plainly that ho had grave doubts on some points. Enlargement of the area was no doubt a very good thing for some purposes, but for some alone. For secondary education the enlargement of the area was a good thing, because it would encourage combination, with the result that at the top of the superstructure of the parochial arrangement there would be an arrangement for secondary education.
Further than that, he had the greatest doubt as to the extinction of the present school boards in Scotland. He thought the House failed to recognise what the school boards of Scotland had done in the history of the country. The school boards had not only educated the people in regard to primary education very well,

1187
but they had produced bodies which were familiar with the complexity of the Minutes issued by the Scottish Education Department which required an education in itself. They had had in Scotland for a generation the training of local authoritiesgoing on in this matter, and now at one stroke they were to lose 95 per cent, of all that educational product, and county districts were to be created and turned into areas for educational purposes. Where there was a geographical definition of an area he could understand the necessity of the proposal, but where there were enormous areas like the county of Sutherlandshire, and if the Secretary for Scotland on the top of that was going to have power to add that county to some other county, he could not see the necessity for it. On both sides of the House Scottish Members were the last to deny the value of education, but its effectiveness consisted in the close intimacy which there was between the parent and those who represented the parent on the one hand, and those who controlled the education of the child on the other. In the districts which the Government were setting up there would be a great absence of that element which had been the secret of educational success. He knew the teaching profession did not very much care about these small boards, and he did no think much of them. He thought there should be the power to combine them where they were too small, and that the power to combine them should be a compulsory one at the instance of the Education Department, but the theory of fixing anything hard and fast by way of a county area or district area in Scotland was out of the question, because both the county and the districts were areas formed totally irrespective of the modern requirements of education. What was wanted was selected centres, which would be centres of secondary educational life, and it might be that from those centres linking up all the burghs in the area, and having regard to railway and steamer facilities, an effective unit could be made in view of the requirements of education and transport. He had these doubts with regard to the disappearance of the old school boards, and felt that he had preached in the wilderness upon this subject in former years.
1188
He noticed, however, that counties and burghs in Scotland were beginning to take this matter in hand. He had before him the report of a conference of the school boards of Forfarshire which was held the other day. It was a very important body and contained representatives of thirty school boards. He found that they had taken the view which he had ventured to express more than once in that House, and they even went the length of suggesting that the Bill should not be read a second time unless provision was made for its alteration to the effect that for the purpose of elementary education the existing school board districts should not be disturbed. They then said—
"That there should be a board in each of these districts with powers equal—so far as elementary education is concerned—to those vested in the present school boards."
And that the district boards should be composed of representatives or delegates appointed by burgh and parish school boards. The idea of a compromise was mooted, it being felt that if the areas were made too large, the contact of the parents would be so far removed that education in Scotland would be damaged and not improved. It was not in Forfarshire alone that those views were spreading. The same ideas were taking root in the county of Perth. The observations of Dr. Henderson, the chairman at a recent meeting of the school board of the parish of Crieff, were well worthy of attention. He stated—
"A still more serious objection is that by the scheme proposed in the Bill the parents of children attending the elementary schools throughout a district will not be represented on the board."
That was emphatically the case, and Scottish Members should take notice of the fact that the people would to a large extent be educationally disfranchised unless care was taken that the areas were not made too large, and means provided by which it was made possible for men of humble means to sit on those boards. Dr. Henderson further stated—
"Each meeting (of such a board) will mean a whole day's work. The time and travelling involved in attending such meetings can be afforded only by the leisured classes, and, of these, by only the least occupied."
That was the system it was propose to substitute for the one now in existence,

1189
but he thought the present system was much the better one. If it meant educational disfranchisement of a large body of the artisan population of Scotland, so far as their own children were concerned, the Government would not do much of a national service by the Bill. One other observation made at the Crieff meeting was well worth being remembered—
"The whole drift of legislation embodied in the Bill is to take the elementary education out of the hands of the parents of the children and lodge it in central boards, which can only be constituted of members of the leisured classes."
That was his fear, and the two protections against it were the constitution of the management committee and the provision for the payment of the expenses of the attending member. He hoped that on that point there would be no wavering on either side. Steps must be taken to ensure that in the matter of the education of their own children the population had the right to send whom they would to those boards, the area of choice being sufficiently widened for that purpose.
The Bill proposed to saddle the Department with very heavy responsibilities. Seeing that the fiat of the Department could not be easily revised in the House, he hardly envied the Department and the Secretary for Scotland their task of giving form and effect to many of the provisions in the Bill. The Department was empowered either to combine or to split up counties or districts, and in so far as that bureaucratic power was not exercised in the direction of bringing the people of the locality in direct relation with the education of their limited area, to that extent the action of the Department would fail. He had no reason to doubt that the staff at Dover House would use their educational powers wisely and well, but it was right to call attention to the delegation by the House of such large and important powers to a Department of the State. He wished also to refer to the enormous power of the Department in regard to the distribution of grants. The Department was really in a position to dictate here, there, and almost everywhere, and was able to interfere in the question of school fees. He totally dissented from the provision in the Bill for splitting up areas by
1190
assessing particular small parishes for old and new capital expenditure, and thus differentiating these small parishes—some of which might have small valuations but large populations—and making their lot and burden heavier than that of the rest of the district with which they were educationally associated. It would be far better to adopt the scheme suggested by the hon. Member for Kincardineshire. In setting up a district composed of a combination of various parishes attention should be given to the unit of the district, the whole district being made equally responsible for all the capital expenditure. Many places, such as Biggar and Dunfermline, had hitherto heavily assessed themselves by providing schools which had been used far outside the particular parishes, and the Biggar School Board were of opinion that the better plan would be to pool all expenses for both provision and maintenance of schools within the new area, and they added—
"The inclusion of this clause will continue a heavy and unfair burden of taxation on localities which have erected schools, providing higher education, not only for the pupils of their own district but for the pupils of: other and outlying parishes. Existing school boards in county districts have found it necessary, and have been encouraged by county councils and secondary education committees, to erect such schools. With the exception in most cases of a little aid from county authorities, the burden has been borne entirely by the parish or burgh in which the school is situated. Now when the present Bill affords an opportunity of distributing this burden over the area which derives the benefit, Biggar Parish School Board finds, with regret, that the injustice will be continued and aggravated."
He was in favour of suggested Amendments in the direction of making the unit of the district such that in matters of finance there would be none of those calculations of the highest technical character, which were most confusing both to the authority and to the ratepayers, and would divide the financial interest of one portion of the parish from that of another, and keep up that division of responsibility which it ought to be the object of the Bill to cause to disappear.
Viewing as he did with sincere regret the disappearance of so many of those highly useful organisations—the parish school boards of Scotland—

1191
he had thought it right to give his views in some detail. He detested the reference in the Bill to fees. Years ago the Government proposed a fee grant to wipe out the obligation to pay fees in all primary schools in Scotland. But there had grown up a system of charging fees quite antagonistic to the principle upon which the fee grant was founded, and now this Bill contained an extraordinary provision under which not only would the exaction of fees be permitted by implication in certain parishes, but would be charged to a say, Roxburgh who sent to a school at Galashiels instead of to a school which, although in his own county, was further away in the matter of railway accommodation, such as Jedburgh, or the like. Schools such as those at Galashiels could not be localised as belonging to a county or district, and to enact that people who went to the most convenient centre should be penalised by an extra fee was to introduce a system altogether antagonistic to the whole principle upon which Scottish education was conducted. The Bill had gone on the old lines. He respected it because it adhered to the ad hoc principle; it left school boards of some kind, but he wished there had been a little more idea of advancement in it, and that it had declared solidly for the reform which was bound to come—he hoped it would come in their time—when there would be no fees of any kind charged for secondary or technical education in Scotland. He held that the system of attempting to balance the Imperial grants by charging parents fees for the education of their most promising children in the higher departments of education must come to an end. Until it did they would never be right in Scotland. They had free primary and free University education; why should this condition apply to the middle stage? This matter would have to be dealt with strongly and firmly, and he was convinced that the whole feeling of Scotland would be in favour of reform.
MR. PARKER SMITHsaid there was nothing like attacking any institution to have all its merits brought out both by hon. Gentlemen opposite and hon. Members on the
1192
Ministerial side. He had a great deal of sympathy with the old parish school boards and he was sorry to hear that they had to go, but if they intended to consider education as a whole, the necessity of having larger areas and a more consolidated system entirely overwhelmed any regard which he felt for the institutions which were now going to cease to exist. In regard to areas he sympathised a great deal with what his hon. friend who had just sat down had said about the necessity of not going upon any hard-and-fast line for all parts of Scotland There were very considerable powers in this Bill for varying the areas according to local requirements, and he thought those powers ought to be made as wide as possible. The reasons for making educational divisions were very different to the reasons for divisions for local government purposes.
There was another point which his hon. friend thought was only a detail, but to him it seemed to be a very large point in this discussion—he alluded to the question of the undertaking by the education authorities of the feeding of children who were underfed. That was a subject upon which they all felt the greatest sympathy. He thought, however, that there were much larger difficulties in the way than those which had been put forward. He knew that those difficulties were felt very strongly by the great educational authorities of Scotland. He had received a telegram from the chairman of the Edinburgh School Board objecting very strongly to this proposal. There were other great school boards which had by no means made up their minds that the feeding of the children was a duty that it would be to the advantage of the community for them to adopt. Why was this considered to be an educational duty? The children who were destitute, like anybody else who was destitute, had a right to be fed and kept alive. That was a right which existed in Scotland just as much as in any other part of the country, and that right did not depend upon education. He thought that it was much more essential for the health of the child in after life that it should be properly fed before it was five years old than in the years which followed during school time.

1193
This was a very large responsibility which they were seeking to put upon educational bodies. Hon. Members opposite had pointed to clauses in the Bill dealing with medical supervision and with crippled and epileptic children, and they had asked why should they not also have the power to feed the children. This question, to him, seemed to stand upon a very different footing. They did not adopt the democratic principle of spending an equal amount of money upon every child, but the principle they adopted was to spend upon the education and training of each child what its special and individual circumstances required. Where they had children in need of special medical supervision, where their eyes stood in need of special attention, and where the children required surgical appliances, then it was more and more the tendency of all advanced school boards to give special attention to those children. He thought, however, that they were going a very long step when they undertook not merely to give this special care, but also to undertake the feeding of the average ordinary child who was in no different position to hundreds and thousands of other children.
The hon. Member for Leith mentioned a practical way of dealing with this question in the course of his speech, and he showed that, without the danger of putting this duty on the school board, an enormous deal could be done and was being done by a very small expenditure of money, accompanied by a good deal of voluntary effort and discretion. For years he had been trying to preach that the physical development of children was infinitely more important for their future well-being than the amount of knowledge they could put into their minds during the time they were at school. He welcomed the advance made in this Bill in regard to the powers that were to be given to school boards. He thought there were various points upon which those powers could be still further developed. More powers were required in regard to dealing with cripples and defective children. The power of allowing medical inspection and giving glasses to the children with defective sight, where this was necessary, was a power which, in many cases, could be used by the
1194
education authorities without the dangers which would be involved if school boards at their own expense, or at the expense of the poor rate, commenced to supply food to ordinary children every day of their lives. With all sympathy with the spirit in which this proposal had been made, he thought a great deal more consideration ought to be given to it before any wide proposals dealing with this subject could be pressed upon the country with any hope of that general acceptance which was necessary for its success.
He was very glad to be able to testify to the amount of work which had been done in this direction in some great centres such as Glasgow and Govan. He would not put any details before the House, but the investigations which had been made strongly confirmed him as to the great importance of the efficient medical superintendence of the children and the excellent results which had followed. The mere fact of pointing out to parents what their children needed was a great advantage. Hon. Members had asked what was the use of such a medical examination. He wished to point out that in a very large number of cases parents had never known of those defects until the child had been examined at school, and until it had been pointed out to them that their children required glasses or other assistance, and that in many cases had been sufficient to induce the parents to provide them. These examinations had been carried out in the schools in Glasgow and Govan, and the result was that in the eye infirmary there were hundreds of children coming in to have their eyes seen to and who were being supplied with glasses.
Compared with the Bill of last year, a great advance had been made in this Bill in regard to the question of the training of teachers. Here he felt that they had one of the most central points of the whole problem of education. It was not the slightest use pouring out money and building gorgeous schools and keeping the children at them many years if they did not provide an adequate and efficient staff of teachers. In the past they had been in the habit of leaving the question of the teachers to itself, but he thought the present Bill went a long way to recognise

1195
the duty of the State in regard to this question. The Circular which was issued some time ago established committees in different parts of Scotland, and this worked admirably with the scheme of provincial councils, and he hoped the result would be the establishment of a satisfactory system of training teachers.
Then, there was the question of the boundaries of some of the enumerated districts. He noticed that several of the largest school boards in Scotland were to be swallowed up under this Bill by other districts, and amongst them was the School Board of Leith. He thought Leith would have a great deal to say for itself upon this point. He would not press the case of Leith, because the place which more directly concerned him was the School Board of Govan which it was proposed to make part of the district of Glasgow. The School Board of Govan was the largest in Scotland and embraced something over 200,000 of population. The two school boards of Glasgow and Govan worked side by side without any clashing and without injury to each other. The School Board of Govan included Partick and Govan. The burghs of Govan and Partick desired to stand separately, and they desired to do this upon educational grounds and not upon financial grounds. The argument was used last year that Govan wished to shirk its fair share of the burden, but that was not the case. The school rate of Glasgow was almost identical with that of Govan, and the produce per child of a penny in the £ was a good deal lower in Govan than in Glasgow. Therefore, it was not a question of the richer wishing to stand out from the duties of a great city. It was a question of local feeling and local independence to a great extent. It was a question that ought to be argued on educational grounds. They must decide whether it was best for the children that Glasgow and Govan should be under the control of one large board, or whether, by having separate boards, counterbalancing advantages could be obtained through the members having greater personal knowledge of the schools which would be for the benefit of the population concerned.
1196
The hon. and learned Member for the Border Burghs had raised the question of rating power and the allocation of the debt. Very elaborate provisions were made in the 23rd Clause both in regard to the existing debt and the debt which would in future be incurred, so that the parishes which were concerned might get their fair share and not have too much. These precautions might be necessary in county districts. They probably were necessary where town and county districts were both concerned, but there was one point to which consideration had hardly been given in the framing of the Bill and to which he asked the attention of the Lord-Advocate. The Bill had not sufficiently considered the circumstances of cities as distinguished from country districts. In regard to the question of the allocation of the debt the scheme of the Bill might be the fairest possible in the country districts which were composed of small towns and rural neighbourhoods. But did it apply in a great city? Take the case of Glasgow. It would be out of the question that there should be a dozen different rates in different parts of the city for education. In regard to every other question the city was a whole, and they did not consider whether the expenditure was more for the benefit of one portion of the city than another. They took the expenditure of the city as a whole. He would like to put it to the Lord-Advocate that in the framing of the clause sufficient consideration had not been given to the case of the cities. It ought to be limited to applying to the un-enumerated districts, and the whole rate in the enumerated districts should be a single rate without any of the divisions which were stated in the Bill.
Another special point had been raised by several hon. Members, and that was in regard to the education fund. That fund he regarded as still something too large. Last year's Bill began by laying hold of all the funds and putting them in one big pool. After discussion last year, the Secretary for Scotland gave up £100,000 out of the equivalent grant. What remained now in the fund was the residue grant, and the balance of the equivalent grant, £69,000 of the one and

1197
£63,000 of the other. In regard to the balance of the equivalent grant he thought the local authorities had the very strongest claims upon it. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would consider the matter, and that he might be willing to allow those claims, and to let the whole of the equivalent grant remain where it was. It was on an entirely different footing from the residue grant. The greater part of the residue grant already went to education, and he knew it would be accepted by many of the most important rating authorities that the residue grant ought to go altogether into the education fund, provided it was understood that the equivalent grant should be left standing as at present and the other sums also. A claim had been made that the £69,000 should also be taken from the fund. He could not see that there was any strength in that claim. The £69,000 was in the first place obtained for education, and he thought no proposal should be made to take it away from that purpose. Upon this point corporations did feel very strongly, and, it appeared to him, reasonably. He trusted the Government might be able to meet them in that matter. The Government were to be highly congratulated on the reception which had been given to this Bill. Last year's Bill got a very favourable reception, but nearly every speaker had pointed out directions in which the present measure was a considerable improvement on it. He hoped that in the discussion; on the Bill they night not discover serious points of divergence.
Questions had been raised as to the body to which the Bill should go for discussion. He wished to see it sent to a Grand Committee. It seemed to him that it mattered extremely little which of the two Grand Committees it was sent to, for there were on both a fair representation of the Scotch Members. By the rules of the House, as hon. Members knew, it was competent in connection, with any special Bill to add fifteen Members to a Grand Committee. Naturally in this case Scotch Members would be added, and it was perfectly possible by arrangement with a friend for anyone else to get himself put for the time on the Grand Committee in order that he might be present at the
1198
discussion of the Bill. He should have thought that hon. Members opposite would have felt more strongly than they seemed to do that there was a great advantage in having questions decided by those who had heard the discussion, instead of having Gentlemen coming in to vote as directed when the bell rang, although they had, not heard the discussion. Of course the advantage of a Grand Committee in shortening procedure depended upon its decisions being fairly accepted by the House. It was perfectly us less to send a Bill upstairs if none of the decisions were to be accepted when it came down. Every hon. Member who had spoken had expressed a desire that the Bill should be passed into law. He should hope that if the Bill were sent to a Grand Committee the effect would be to win-now out a great number of the questions, leaving comparatively few to be settled when it came before the House on the Report stage. He entirely sympathised with the hope expressed by several hon. Menders that the Bill, now that it had been brought forward for the second time, would be passed that session, and that great advantage might result to Scotch education.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he ought to apologise for intervening in the debate, but perhaps he might be allowed to regard himself as a Scotch Member ad hoc. He had been five years in the House, and, therefore, his capacity for amazement was long since exhausted. He must say that it was the Bill of last year, when he lead it with care, which put the finishing touch to that exhaustion, because he considered it absolutely inconceivable that the persons who drafted and prepared that Bill were the same persons who drafted and prepared the English and Welsh Education Bill of 1902. The two things were in every respect and in all vital particulars the converse the one of the other. What did the present Bill do? This admirable Bill, for so he called it, set up ninety-four great school boards over all Scotland to administer in suitable areas public education of all grades, and commissioned on their own terms to give rate-aid to denominational schools.

1199
Those were three first-class principles. Night after night when the Education Bill of 1902 was before the House he and his friends begged and implored the Government to put precisely the same principles into it, and when they were answered at all, which was not very often, they were rebuffed in the most uncompromising way. They asked for directly-elected ad hoc education authorities. They were scornfully refused. He was astonished that the Government had committed itself to the principle of an ad hoc authority for education in this Bill. He could not understand why it was that the Government had brought itself to agree that an ad hoc authority was the right one. The Government two years ago was hopelessly and entirely opposed to the ad hoc principle not only for England and Wales, but for all time and all places. He thought then, and he still thought, that the ad hoc principle was the right one, and here it was the central feature "of this Bill. When it was put to the Prime Minister he replied—
"I am clearly of opinion that it is a most retrograde policy to go in for this principle of ad-hoc election to deal with particular subjects authoritatively, and with power to draw on the rates."
He asked his Scotch friends to contemplate that they were now being committed to a most retrograde policy in the setting up of the local education authorities. The late President of the Local Government Board, now the Irish Secretary, was equally precise. He said that, whether for good or evil, the Government had decided that it could no longer support the ad hoc principle, and here they were supporting it that day. The hon. Member confessed that got beyond him, and he gave it up. The Irish Secretary had said that the arguments against—
"that principle do not rest only on the view that it is undesirable to add to the number of your elections, and add to the obligations of those who have to elect, but they rest on the more solid grounds that education is, and ought to form, one of the most important features of local government, and ought to form part of the duty of those who are entrusted with the general administration of the local affairs of their own area."
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education was equally decided
1200
as to the utter impropriety of direct election. He said—
"I think that direct election does lead to some unfortunate characteristics in an educational body,"
He commended this to the Scotch Members—
"The first of these is that if such a body is worth anything it is bound to be an extravagant body."
The hon. Gentleman's predecessor at the Board of Education was also specifically against direct election. He said—
"The Government think that the ad hoc authority is an anachronism; they think that to propose to advert to an ad hoc authority is reactionary."
Here they were committing Scotland to a reactionary scheme! Then his right hon. friend, who was then speaking in behalf of the Government went on—
"The only way you can have effective local self-government in this or any other country "
—even if Wales or Scotland wanted something different—
"is for the local electors to choose somebody who shall have control of the whole finance and be responsible for all the expenditure of the ratepayers' money. If you have several bodies independent of each other exercising independent rating powers, how is it conceivable or possible that there can be efficient control of local finance, and therefore how can there be proper efficient local self-government?"
Now, he asked how those statements could be made compatible with this Bill? Here was a Bill which was to-commit Scotland to what was an anachronism, a retrograde policy, and which was bound to be extravagant; and he asked himself: "Why did the Government in 1902–3 so ruthlessly destroy what they now set up as the ideal of local self-government?" He thought the explanation was perfectly simple. The Government thought that they could with impunity destroy the English and Welsh school boards. As regarded Waves they reckoned without their host, but they were right in counting upon the happy-go-lucky, indifferent temper of the English people. If they did not dare to touch the school boards of Scotland it was not because they loved them, but because they feared the zeal and activity which they knew the Scottish people would show on their behalf. He had something of contempt for some

1201
Scotch Members who cheerfully destroyed the English school boards, and now took care that the Scotch bodies should not be touched.
The next striking contrast between the policy of today and that of two years ago was the power given in this Bill—he made no complaint whatever—to the school board over the denominational schools—
"It shall be lawful for a school board, if they think fit…to incur expenditure, and to defray the same out of the school fund…in granting pecuniary or other aid upon such condition as they may from time to time prescribe to schools and institutions not under their charge, where such schools or institutions are recognised by the Department as supplying efficient education."
i.e., to denominational schools. They should do that if they thought fit; but the English education authorities were compelled, without any qualification except the discretion of the Board of Education, to give such assistance. He wished the right hon. Member for West, Birmingham were there; he would ask the right hon. Gentleman to go in for his policy of equal rights to all white men in this matter.
The third acute difference was in the treatment of the religious question, which, however, he did not intend to raise. This Bill gave to this democratic authority, wholly elected—no co-opted members—elected ad hoc—power to frame the religious instruction with the prescriptions already inexistence. The longer he contemplated the question the more he believed that the settlement proposed in this Bill was the only settlement, viz., to set up a democratic local authority—not half co-opted—and say to it "fight it out for yourselves and settle the form of religious instruction to be given in your locality." The Scotch were too shrewd to let that difficulty stand in the way of education. He confessed he should like to see it tried as an experiment in Wales to begin with, and then applied to England. This Bill happily provided the key to the problem of the religious difficulty in education.
Finally, he wished to call attention to Clause 26. He thought that clause was by far the most idealistic epitome of the whole duty of the State towards the
1202
working-class children that had ever come under his notice. What was the school board empowered to do? First of all the school board might provide any form of education or instruction out of the money at their disposal; provide for physical training and for medical inspection. He hoped before the Bill passed into law that it would meet the case of hungry children by making suitable provision for feeding them. They might provide the children with school books, writing materials, stationery, and other articles of a similar nature; they were to pay salaries to visiting teachers, or superintendents and organisers; they could grant pecuniary aid to schools not under their charge; they could establish bursaries with their money to send pupils of part to schools of higher instruction and also to the Universities. For him to contemplate a school board in England being permitted to send children to the University would induce him, if he were musically disposed, to start a nunc dimittis. Then they were to make a special provision for the education, and. where required, for the conveyance to are from school, of epileptic or crippled children; to provide opportunities for education in outlying parts by means of conveyance, or paying travelling expenses for teacher and pupils, or defraying the cost of lodging pupils in convenient proximity to the school. And in addition to the Government s-home of superannuation they could cut of the local fund grant additional retiring allowances to teachers. He congratulated the Government on having drafted this Bill. He understood that it was drafted at the same time as the Bill of 1902; and he could not understand the difference between the two.
There were two blots on the Bill, however. If a school board did not come to an agreement with the denominational manager regarding rate-aid, the later could go to Dover House and obtain an additional subvention from the Scottish Fund over the head of the board. That might lead to financing wholly defective institutions. He thought such money should be paid through the school board, and that the board should have some power of interference in respect of the fabric of the

1203
school particularly, for all additional moneys, whether derived from local rates or the Scottish Fund. He also considered that the Bill gave too much power to the Scottish Education Department. He would like to see the powers of the Scottish Education Department materially circumscribed—the powers were here very greatly increased from what they were at the present time—even under such a very commanding man as Sir Henry Craik. On the whole, however, he regarded the Bill as an admirable one, and he wished it could be extended to England and Wales. When passed it would be a beacon light to the storm-tossed English educationalist. Eternal vigilance was the price of liberty; and the Scotch people had retained their school boards by their zeal and constant watching and had thus saved themselves and their country from a scheme of educational reaction.
SIR WALTER THORBURNhoped now that the Bill had been launched it would be carried through with the greatest possible speed. The Bill was better than that of last year, because it did not contain the pooling arrangement. Reference had been made to Biggar. He was not surprised Biggar was in favour of the pooling arrangement because it had a very considerable debt which he would no doubt like to have shared by others. He knew a parish near Biggar which had little or no debt, and if pooling had been adopted that parish would have had to bear a portion of Biggar's debt. The same thing occurred in the count} of Selkirk. The pooling arrangement would have been most unjust, because while the population of the two older burghs was 19,000, the population of the county was only 3,300. The debt in the burghs was very considerable, while in the county it was infinitesimal. The hon. Member for Barnard Castle dealt with a question of very great importance—the physical training and the feeding of children. He was quite in favour of some arrangement for the feeding of children who were not properly provided for otherwise, but what was done in that respect would have to be done cautiously so as not to pauperise the people. In his opinion some little charge should be made if food was supplied. In his own
1204
constituency he knew of a schoolmaster who gave children from a distance a cup of cocoa and a roll for a penny although it was bound to cost more. Well that kind of thing should be done by the board and not by individual teachers.
He was strongly in favour of the Committee stage of the Bill being taken in the House, as he believed it would shorten the proceedings and ensure the progress of the Bill. He felt a considerable amount of sympathy with the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Shaw) in his reference to the abolition of the parish school board and he felt certain a number of his constituents would share those views, as school boards with extended areas would not be so economical as those of more restricted area, but he feared they could not hope to retain the parish school board. Referring to the case of Selkirkshire, he had already mentioned that Galashiels and Selkirk had a population of over 19,000, while the landward part of the county had only 3,300. Rates in the burghs were very much higher than in the county, so that the effect of this Bill would be to considerably increase the rural rate. The rural part of the county consisted of two long valleys, the Yarrow and the Ettrick partly pastoral and partly agricultural. The distances children in those parts would have to come to get the advantage of secondary schools was prohibitory. A like difficulty occurred in Sutherlandshire, where perhaps it was even more pronounced than in Selkirk. In Selkirk some of the children desiring the advantage of secondary education would have to come distances of from ten to twenty miles, so that while they could get no benefit from secondary education, their parents, as lunits in the county educational area, would have to contribute to the rate.
In connection with the proposal as to the equivalent grant he referred to the case of Innerleithen, which had adopted the Free Libraries Act, and with the consent of Lord Balfour of Burleigh, then Secretary for Scotland, the corporation arranging that the money coming from the equivalent grant should go towards assisting the maintenance of this free library. If this money was taken away he did not know what would become of the free library. The whole would cease

1205
to exist, unless there was an Act passed to enable the corporation to assess more on the rates. In the town of Peebles a very large amount of improvement had been done by means of the grant, and certainly no more useful way could have been found for expending this money. But if they had borrowed money on the security of obtaining the equivalent grant, its being taken away would cause great inconvenience and would inevitably lead to a large increase on the rates. Therefore, he hoped the Government would change their view with regard to the equivalent grant, the withdrawal of which would create a grave injustice to the towns in the constituency he represented. He would like to see the powers of the education authority increased and a clause introduced into the Bill authorising them to supplement the teachers' pensions from the rates in the case of teachers who were compulsorily retired at the age of sixty-five. The pension now given was £40 or thereby, which was very small, particularly if a man had a family to keep, and there was at the present time no power to increase it. He hoped, however, that these matters would be dealt with in Committee on the Bill.
MR. BRYCEcommented on the difference between an English and Scottish education debate in the House. The reason was obvious. In the case of England they were discussing fundamental principles with great heat and passion, and in the case of Scotland the principles had been long ago settled, and they were discussing details with so much patience that the debates at times seemed almost in danger of becoming dull. The real reason why their discussions on Scottish Education Bills were so pacific was that education in Scotland was not under the control either of any clerical party or of any ecclesiastically-minded laymen. They had had their religious differences, and even religious wars, in Scotland centuries ago, but now they were practically agreed that religious questions in regard to education ought to be determined, not by any section, but by the will of the people.
The present Bill did not attempt anything revolutionary; it proposed to abolish
1206
the cumulative vote for school boards and to organise secondary education, bringing the funds voted therefore by Parliament under a simpler mode of administration. He congratulated the Lord-Advocate on a number of useful minor provisions which the Bill contained. There were some matters of controversy, though not of first-rate importance. There was nothing in the Bill with regard to the feeding of school children, yet it was clear that the Government would have to deal with this subject, the importance of which they had already admitted in the case of England. Something would have to be done, either in this Bill or in some other way. The question of the area was perhaps the most important. There were three areas which might be selected for educational administration in Scotland, viz., the parish, which had been the area ever since the Reformation; the county, which had certain indirect advantages, and which had been selected as the area in England; and the district, which had been chosen in the Bill. In Scotland there was a good deal to be said both for the parish and the county as education areas. The parish was clearly the natural area for elementary education, for it was possible for everyone who lived in a parish to give vigilant personal attention to the affairs of the parish school, and the parents who resided there were for the most part interested in elementary education. On the other hand, the county was the proper area for secondary education, for no smaller area could deal efficiently with the various grades of secondary education required. Moreover, both parish and county were divisions which had historical associations. The district, however, was a purely artificial area having none of the historical associations of either the parish or the county. The Government in their hesitation as to which of these areas they should select had made a most unsatisfactory compromise between the two, for the district area was too small for secondary and too large for elementary education. He agreed as to the need for a better system of secondary education in Scotland, but he thought it would have been possible to secure that without sacrificing what had been the characteristic merit of Scottish elementary education, viz., the direct oversight of and the immediate touch with the people. At

1207
present the parent, the working man, the small farmer, and even the labourer, could sit on the school board, but if elementary education were taken from the parish and given to the district all those sections of the population would be cut off from all possibility of serving on the board. Simply to pay the travelling expenses would not meet the case, because, if the district was a large one, it would mean the loss of a day's work to get to and from the place of meeting. He had received a letter from a gentleman of large educational experience, whose authority, if he could mention his name, would be unquestioned, and the writer said—
"Long experience as a member of the secondary education committee of my county has convinced me of the impossibility of any board over a large area having any real control at all. The member for each parish will be the oily source of information the board has, and the only person with authority in the educational matters of the parish."
So that the parish would not be the authority for its own elementary education, but only the one member which it sent to the district board. The writer went on to say—
"I greatly fear that the whole control being lodged in boards with large areas will mean that the control passes into the hands of officials, and that official control will stand in the place of the control of the parents of the children."
He was afraid that that was what would happen. In England some of the large counties had found themselves unable properly to control elementary education, and had been forced to create district committees, which were better able to do the work because they came into closer touch with the schools, and had upon them a larger number of members acquainted with the actual condition of affairs. He believed that what was really wanted in England was the creation of bodies larger than the small parishes and in Scotland the retention of elementary education in the hands of the parish with power to unite small parishes. The parishes in Scotland were much larger than in England, and more nearly corresponded to a combination of three, four, or five English parishes. He held, therefore, that all the Government needed to do for elementary education in Scotland was to give a liberal power of uniting small parishes, the parish being the normal unit for elementary education.
1208
He thought the county would be a better area for secondary education. He favoured a county committee either directly-elected by the school boards or by a separate election. To have a body consisting of representatives of the school boards would probably be the simpler way, or they might have a body elected ad hoc for the whole county. He thought the former method would be the simplest and it would enable the school boards to work better together. Since the Bill of last year was before the House he thought there had been a considerable change in Scotch opinion and it had been in the direction of a desire to retain the parish as the area.
He wished to say a few words upon the question of grants. Two hon. Members for Edinburgh had already brought before the notice of the House the dissatisfaction which existed in the large burghs with the proposals which the Government had made to lay hands upon the residue grant and the equivalent grant. As regarded the latter grant the case was stronger than for the residue grant because the equivalent grant was expressly given to relieve the rates of the occupiers, and by taking it away a very severe burden would be imposed upon the occupiers who alone bore the rates which were relieved by the equivalent grant. In regard to the other grant the rates relieved were borne by owners and occupiers. It was necessary to warn the Government that, in the great burghs particularly, there was a good deal of feeling on the subject, and that they would find much resistance to the proposals they were making. The Bill proposed to give very large powers to the Scottish Education. Department, and the burghs felt that there was no security in its provisions that the Department would have the regard it ought to have to the claims of the burghs to receive in grants for their schools the money which they as taxpayers contributed. The Department were also to receive somewhat dangerous powers to make grants to sectarian schools of the secondary order. Hitherto the Scotch sectarian schools which had received these grants had been elementary schools, and he thought the Government must be prepared for strenuous opposition to the present proposal, which was

1209
altogether a new departure, and one which public opinion in Scotland did not approve.
With regard to the provincial councils, he did not quarrel with the Government for giving them limited powers at first. He thought it was not too late to suggest that the simpler form would be to have one council, which would attract a greater number of first-class men and focus Scottish educational opinion much more effectively, and to allow that council to divide itself into committees for the different areas. He associated himself with whit had been said as to the necessity of having a separate council for the Highlands, though he thought the whole subject of provincial councils required much further consideration thin the Bill seemed to give it. He did not regard St. Andrews, from its local position, the proper centre from which to administer education in the Highlands. He thought the whole question of the provincial councils required more consideration than the Bill gave it, and he commended the matter to the consideration of the House and the Government.
He desired to call attention to a matter which seemed to him to be of considerable importance. It was either the School Board or the Town Council of Edinburgh which had made the suggestion that Parliament should take this opportunity of consolidating all the Education Acts of Scotland. They were numerous and complicated, and it would be a very great convenience for those who had to administer education if this opportunity were taken to pass a consolidating Bill, which could be incorporated with the present Bill, if passed. He credited the Lord-Advocate with a serious intention to pass the Bill, although the seriousness of the Government was doubted.
As to the future stages of the Bill, hon. Members who had spoken had, with the exception of the hon. Member for the Partick Division, expressed the opinion that it should be discussed in Committee of the Whole House. The reason why this Bill should be dealt with in the Whole House would be obvious to every Scotch Member. It was not only a Bill which involved a great many Second Reading questions, but also a great many local
1210
questions. It touched local interests in almost every clause, and, therefore, it was a Bill on which every Scotch Member was entitled to have his say in Committee. The question of areas was the most important in the Bill. It affected different counties and -burghs very differently. Sutherlandshire under the Bill was one district, and would have one school board, and clearly, therefore, the Member for that county must be on any body that discussed the Bill. The Members for all the Highland counties must be on the Committee, because the measure touched the interests of the Highland districts. The Members for every county where districts were proposed to be united ought to be on the Committee. The Members for burghs should be on the Committee, because they were entitled to say how the proposal to bring burghs into counties would affect the burghs. Clauses 41, 42, and 43, dealing with educational endowments, were very important. Educational endowments in no two burghs were exactly the same, and every burgh was entitled to have its say. There never was a greater case for allowing every Member of the House to have his voice in saying how the Bill would affect his particular constituency, and that could only be done, either by having the Bill referred to Committee of the Whole House, or to a Grand Committee on which every Scotch Member would have a place. The hon. Member for Peebles and Selkirk gave an interesting geographical sketch of these counties, and showed how the Bill would affect them. Clearly the hon. Member must be a member of the Committee which had to discuss the Bill. He was sorry the Prime Minister was not there, because this was a matter in which his voice would be decisive. He put it to the Lord-Advocate that it would only be fair to Scotland that every Member should have an opportunity of expressing his opinion. That would be the best way to facilitate the progress of the Bill. If every Member was not given the opportunity of expressing his opinion in Committee he would have to express it on Report, and no time would be saved. He saw no reason to expect that there would be any protracted discussion in Committee of the Whole House. A measure which must

1211
affect materially the future of one of the greatest interests of Scotland deserved to have the knowledge and judgment which every Scotch Member could bring to its consideration. He trusted the Lord-Advocate would give an assurance on behalf of the Government that they would agree to the general wish of the House that the Bill should be discussed in Committee of the Whole House.
THE EARL OF DALKEITHsaid he wished to join other Members on his side of the House in pressing the Government to consider the desirability of referring the Bill to Committee of the Whole House. It was not only reasonable that this should be done, but he thought they might claim to have full and adequate time for the discussion of the Bill. They had not had too much time given to Scottish affairs. The right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had alluded to the provincial councils. Probably that was the only part of the Bill which would be withdrawn at a later stage to please the opposition to it. There was a point on which almost every Member had touched, and on which the Government did not seem inclined to give way. He meant the question of the equivalent grant. He must say, for himself, that he considered it would be a gross injustice if the equivalent grant were withdrawn. The Government had been kind enough to give Scotland £100,000; but probably they anticipated that that balance would grow larger as the years went on; and he thought it would be a pity to stereotype this £100,000. There was every reason to expect that the whole of this sum might still be devoted to the purpose to which it had mainly been applied in the past; and if they required a larger sum for their education fund they would claim rather more justice for Scotland from the Treasury. On many occasions, as for instance, in the case of the Agricultural Rating Act, they knew that Scotland had not been fairly dealt with by the Treasury; and now there was an opportunity when the Treasury could do their country justice.
The other chief point of interest and importance—perhaps the most
1212
important of the whole lot—was the question of areas. He agreed with several speakers that the district was not at all a desirable area. It would be very inconvenient; he felt confident that it would not be popular; and he considered it would be most inefficient. In the past the parish area, on the whole, answered well, especially in large parishes; and, therefore, he believed that for elementary education the parish should be the area. He trusted the Government would yet see their way to alter their mind, and to adopt the parish as the unit for elementary education; and the country, or some larger area, as the authority for secondary education. Another point which would be greatly in favour in most places in the country would be that the cost of education should be borne by the districts which at present provided for it. There was a general feeling that it would be most unjust that some districts should De made to pay a very large rate, compared with what they did now, for elementary education to be given in other districts. As regarded technical education they were quite prepared to bear their share; but it would press most hardly on some of the thinly-populated agricultural districts; and if the Government passed an Act to give assistance to those who paid agricultural rates, it seemed rather absurd that, on this particular occasion, they should try and thrust a greater Burden upon them. He knew that the people in those districts would look upon that as an injustice and that it would prevent them taking the same interest in education in the future as in the past. One of the great advantages they had in Scotland over England was the local interest the people took in education, and especially in elementary education. That had been very largely stimulated by the small school boards, the members of which were thoroughly well known to the parents of the children. If that was done away with, some of the interest would vanish and that would be most disastrous to the general education of the country. He was aware that some people believed that the more money was spent on education, the better that educat ion would be. He did not altogether agree with that, because it was very easy to

1213
spend large sums of money on education and to have very poor results. And what they had to do was to be as economical as they could. At any rate, they should strive to get the best result for the money spent. If that were done there would be less grudging on the part of the ratepayers. The best way to achieve that result was to take the parish as the unit for elementary education, and to develop that up to some larger area for the chief control of secondary education. As regarded the grievances of the teachers under the present school boards, there would be no difficulty in guarding against their occurring in the future. It was quite right that the teachers should have a proper position and fair treatment. He himself knew, from places he had experience of, that in a great number of cases the district area would be most unsatisfactory unless the whole of the districts were combined into a county; but then that would involve too large a board for elementary education. He would again press on the Government to refer the Bill to the Committee of the Whole House; to reconsider the equivalent grant and to separate the administration of primary from secondary education.
CAPTAIN ELLICEsaid that so far as he was concerned he would support the Amendment of the hon. Member for Banff in having the Bill sent to a Committee of the Scotch Members. He thought there was a danger of the Bill being swamped by the eloquence of English and Welsh Members. They had seen one Welsh Member called to order already by Mr. Deputy-Speaker; and he felt certain that they would have that repeated during the discussions on the Bill in Committee of the Whole House. He believed that if the Bill were sent to a Committee of all the Scotch Members, with an added number of English Members to give the Government a majority, it would be better.
And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the Debate stood adjourned till this Evening's Sitting.

EVENING SITTING.

  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Question [8th May], "That the Bill be now read a second time."
  Question again proposed.
  CAPTAIN ELLICE, continuing his speech, said when the House adjourned he was calling attention to the desirability of allowing the Scotch Members to consider this in a Committee composed of Scotch Members. He pointed out to the Lord-Advocate that if that course were followed it would greatly facilitate the passing of the Bill and save a considerable amount of time. So far as the House was concerned, such a Committee would not only ensure the Bill being passed quickly through the House but it would ensure their getting a good Bill. He himself entirely approved of the proposal to feed hungry children. In the Highlands for many years they had fed the children who had come long distances. They had not grudged the expense, but they quite recognised that in large districts it would be impossible to feed, the children without some financial assistance. With regard to the rating clauses the Bill would require a certain amount of alteration. Last year they had a Secretary for Scotland in charge of this Bill, who represented a county constituency. This year they had the Lord-Advocate who represented a burgh constituency. Of the four Scottish Members in the Government only one represented a county constituency. No doubt a fellow feeling made them wondrous kind; he, therefore, hoped that on the question of the withdrawal of the equivalent grant the Government would be more lenient than they had been in the past year. With regard to the transference of the endowments to the school boards he pointed out that the endowments were at present limited to £1,000, but that it was considered desirable that they should be allowed to transfer, if they pleased, those endowments which were over

  1215
  £1,000 to the school boards; that was to say, that the limit should not be any definite sum but that any of the endowed schools of Scotland should, if they chose, be allowed to transfer their endowments to the school board.
  What filled him with amazement was the opposition to the proposal with regard to the provincial council for St. Andrews Burghs. The hon. Member for Leich Burghs, himself an inhabitant of the Kingdom of Fife, had opposed this council. It was very bad taste on the hon. Member's part to make such an attack on his own county. Every one understood that the Highlands were in a different situation to the rest of Scotland. The opinion of all Scottish Members on the Liberal side of the House was in favour of a separate council for Inverness, and as one who had resided longer in Invernesshire than any other Member in the House he would assuredly support the establishment of such a council. The special circumstances of that district made it necessary to have an additional council. There was a large Gaelic-speaking population and many Gaelic-speaking schools. But when it came to a question as to whether Inverness should have a provincial council or whether St. Andrews Burghs should have one, there could be no doubt that St. Andrews had more claim to such a council than Inverness possessed. St. Andrews had the oldest University in Scotland. It was established in 1411, whereas that of Edinburgh was not established till 170 years later. On the provincial councils it was proposed to have the highest educational intellect, and under those circumstances it would be most unfortunate if St. Andrews were left out. If one of these provincial councils was to go it should certainly be that for Aberdeen. Aberdeen was in an out-of-the-way part of the world. As far as the Highlands were concerned it was easier to get to St. Andrews from Perthshire Skye and the South and West of Inverness than to Aberdeen, and, so far as he could see, Aberdeen might well go to Inverness. He would cordially support the Bill and hoped the measure would be pressed forward in Committee.
  MR. BRIGGsaid he wished very briefly to support the appeal put before the House by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen with reference to the limitation of the areas to be brought under the control of the local authorities. That was, in his opinion, a very important matter. He was himself on the local education authority for the West Riding, and they found those large areas most unsuitable. They had 900 schools under the control of the local authority, and that authority had sub-divided the districts into a large number of divisions, each one of which was much larger than the old school board districts, but it was most difficult to carry out the work of education in those districts; in fact, almost impossible. Under the Act of 1902 the local education authority had all the needed powers but could not delegate powers to the local sub-committees to spend money on their own account, because those committees were not the rating authority. It would be very desirable if those committees had power to spend money each on its own school, but, as they had no responsibility for the collection of it they were not allowed to have the responsibility of spending it. The result was that all those local authorities were obliged to apply to headquarters for extremely trivial things. If they wanted to supply a few lead pencils or a little notepaper, they had to send to headquarters for it. As a consequence there was a considerable amount of friction, and it was under those circumstances that he desired to place before the House the undesirability of placing Scotch education in the same position. At the present moment there was a revolt against this system in the Division of Elland. One district council that had been called upon to elect members to the education authority had refused, and the education authority of Elland was stuck fast, and could not move because the district council which ought to have elected members to that education authority had not done so. A considerable amount of friction had been raised in many other places from the same cause. In olden days members of school boards gave time and thought to this matter, but as it now stood the

  1217
  managers were appointed by the authorities and had very little interest in their work, inasmuch as they had 1o refer everything to headquarters. The failure arose from the fact of their having those very large areas in place of the small ones they had under the school board. The only alternative that had been suggested was to arrange the area so as to make the district small. It would be quite possible to arrange them into what were formerly school board districts. The effect of the present system, so far as the West Riding was concerned, had been that they had lost their director, and he was not sure that they had not hastened the death of their chairman. The position of things at present was actual despair on the part of the committee as to how the thing could be worked. He only mentioned those matters in order to show the desirability of curtailing the areas in the Bill before the House.
  SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid he was bound to say the impression left upon his mind by the observations of the hon. Member for Camberwell was that the hon. Gentleman did not appreciate the difference between education in Scotland and education in England. The hon. Member had spoken of this Bill as an admirable Bill and had contrasted it with the measure passed by this House in 1902 to deal with the question of education in England. But, after all, there was a very substantial difference between the condition of affairs in Scotland and the condition of affairs in England. In Scotland they had a school board to every parish in the country. In England half the children were educated under the school board and half in schools built not by the ratepayers but from voluntary funds. It was this fact which caused the difference between the two countries—the position of affairs which obtained in Scotland as compared with that which obtained in England—in regard to the position from which they approached the question of education. In Scotland they had no very acute religious differences. He thought he was not exaggerating when he said that three-fourths or seven-eighths of the population of Scotland
  1218
  belonged to the Presbyterian Church. The Roman Catholics and the Episcopalians, who constituted the other fourth or eighth of the population, war in a very small minority, and, so far as the educational system of Scotland was concerned, the views of the great Presbyterian majority prevailed. They had no burning question connected with Church and Dissent, and for his part he did not think that the fears of the hon. Member for Camberwell as to the dangers of a certain part of this measure were likely to be fulfilled. Just as in 1872 they had in Scotland contrived, with a system which had obtained the general assent of the country, to avoid conflicts, so notwithstanding the powers which this Bill proposed to confer for the first time on the new school board authorities, in Scotland there would be no difficulty in exercising those powers, and, if they found it necessary or desirable, in assisting the voluntary schools, which really after all were carrying on a certain amount of educational work in Scotland very successfully and well, and did really deserve some consideration from the ratepayers.
  Various questions had been raised in this discussion. First there had been the question of area. The right hon. Member for South Aberdeen criticised the selection of area; he spoke of the parish area, the district area, and the county area, and spoke of the parish area with the same affection with which all who had been interested in Scottish education for the last twenty-five years felt towards that educational institution. The connection with the parish area went back to the time of the Reformation, and there was not the slightest doubt, so far as education was concerned, that the work done under the parochial system had been admirable and effective work; there was equally little doubt, when they were considering the question of further administration, that difficulties had arisen in the demand which was now being constantly made in Scotland for technical, secondary, and higher education, and when it came to be a question of adjusting those requirements to the education of parishes, there came the difficulty which had given rise to this Bill, and which was the necessity for the Bill.

  1219
  On the Second Beading of the Bill of last year he had expressed the opinion, expressed by the right hon. Member for South Aberdeen that evening, as to the desirability, if it had been possible, of keeping the large old parishes for elementary education purposes and grouping the smaller parishes for the same purposes, and of administering higher, secondary, and technical education on a wider basis. He admitted that if this Bill was to be passed he did not believe it was possible to graft that system on it. They must either take this Bill and accept it as the considered view of the Department and the Government upon Scottish education, or they must reject it. If they accepted it they must bid farewell to the system of administering education on the parochial basis. They had either to accept the proposal of the Government, which was to have a district or burgh authority and to amalgamate the district and form a county Board, or they would have to take.the county as an area in the first instance, with power to break it up into districts suitable for educational purposes. That, in his opinion, was the simpler and more effective method of solving this question.
  Then with regard to the question of rating. The view he took about the rating clause in last year's Bill was that he was most anxious to retain that provision of the Bill that was to retain and charge on each locality the debt which had been incurred by each educational authority. He did not take the view that it would be better to pool the debt and apportion the rate partly on the basis of population and partly on the basis of valuation. Upon the debate on the clause last year a division as between pooling the debt or not was taken and lost in the lobbies by about 233 to 43, and the matter having been decided in that way he supported the proposals to apportion half on population, and half on a valuation, which he thought least injurious to the rural parts of the country. The Bill introduced this year proposed that the debt existing in elementary schools should be charged to the parish incurring those debts, but it proposed that the debts incurred in erecting higher-class
  1220
  schools should be a charge, which should be apportioned on the districts. He thought there should be an addition to that. It was not only the high-class secondary schools in the proper sense of the term which were very limited in their numbers, but also the higher-grade departments which contributed to the higher education of the area outside the limits within which they were erected. He took the view that the debt of the higher - grade departments should be a charge on the district and not on the parish, and in his opinion it was desirable in the interests of education, that whatever area might be fixed for educational purposes, one uniform rate should be levied within the area. He was perfectly certain that was the only way to give to the localities a check on undue expenditure and so to prevent extravagance. He did not see any reason whatever why the rate for capital expenditure on elementary schools, whether past or future, should not be levied on the old parochial basis and subject to the old parochial system of reduction or classification. He did not see why all the other charges which came under Sub-section 2 of Clause 23—the rating clause—should not be levied on the gross valuation, so that every one within the area, whether it was county or included municipalities, or whether it was a distinct area, might know that they were paying the same rate and might be able to compare progress, either in regard to the rise and fall of the rate.
  There was another portion of the Bill upon which he had a very definite view. He welcomed as warmly as anyone the recent Minute of the Department in regard to the training of teachers, and rejoiced that a Department had sufficient power to issue a Minute so wide in its scope. It set up four committees for the four different parts of Scotland to deal with the training of teachers. An hon. Member had spoken about the dearth of teachers in the country, but it was largely due, not to the fact that there were not plenty of young men and women who were willing to go into the teaching profession, but because the access to that profession had been made so difficult. That was the charge they had to make against the existing system of training

  1221
  teachers in Scotland. He hoped that that Minute which had been issued was to be the beginning of better things in this matter, and that the training of; teachers might be put upon a wider and a sounder basis. It would encourage; a larger number and a better class to come forward and take their places in the ranks of this noble profession, upon which the future of their country so largely depended. It was not a badly paid profession at the present moment, and he thought the inducements to enter it as compared with the inducements to enter clerical life, or even the ministry in certain parts of Scotland, were very much greater than they were in the two latter cases. But while he rejoiced in the institution of these provincial councils for the purpose of training teachers, he looked upon the proposals in the Bill with regard to the future duties devolving upon those councils with a very doubtful eye. He was all in favour of making the local education authority a strong authority; he was for trusting it and giving it the fullest powers to work out the salvation of its own district, and he looked with almost a feeling of aversion upon the proposal that, at the very outlet of the career of the new responsible authorities, provincial councils were to he instituted, which were to be consulted, to check them, and it might be to warp their action. He did hope that before they parted with this measure, whatever powers the new provincial councils were to have as regarded the training of teachers, they would not make any provision which would give them any other work to do until, by the failure of some of the school boards established under the Bill, the necessity for that course had been demonstrated.
  With regard to the formation of the new education fund, he would point out that the old fund was originally created by bringing together various sums which had been devoted from time to time either for educational or quasi-educational purposes. There was this difference between the Bill of last year and the present one, that last year's measure proposed to take away from local authorities all the money given under the equivalent grant under the Act of 1892. The equivalent grant, which
  1222
  amounted at the time it was given to the rating authorities in Scotland to about £100,000, had now, inconsequence of increased sums connected with the collection of public taxation, risen to about £163,000. Last year there was considerable criticism, in which he took part, as to the then proposal of the Government. He did not think that any Member of that House who represented a Scottish constituency could fail to appreciate the fact that both in counties and burghs that money had been used for very many useful purposes. In his own county it had been largely used for the purpose of renewing bridges and of building hospital accommodation, which was necessary in consequence of an increased demand for it. Under this Bill the proposal was to give the local authorities £100,000 and take the balance. The measure would, therefore, give to the local authorities as much as they got when the Act of 1892 was passed, and all the Department proposed to take was the increment of £63,000. He was bound to say that, having regard to the source and origin of the fund, and that the money was originally devoted to educational purposes—[Cries of "No"]—well, undoubtedly the equivalent grant was given to them in respect of the sum which was devoted to the reduction of school fees in England—he thought this money was originally a sum which the Scottish Members, including Dr. Hunter, unanimously decided to devote to the reduction of fees which were then being charged in elementary schools in Scotland. Then came a time when demands for free education were made in England, and in response to that a Bill was introduced by which the Government devoted money out of the public Exchequer for the purpose of doing away with school fees in England altogether. A proportionate amount was devoted to Scotland, and as a result this equivalent grant, which originally had been devoted to educational purposes, was given over for other purposes. Several matters were made a first charge, one of them being a charge for secondary education, but the balance was left to the local authorities either to be used for the purpose of reducing rates or for the purpose of their applying it to some work of

  1223
  public utility approved by the Secretary for Scotland. That being so, he was bound to say that when the Government said that they needed this money now for the purpose of carrying out this scheme of secondary education, and, there being no equivalent grant available, that they proposed to lay more or less violent hands upon this £63,000, they were taking a course which he could not resist. But he should like to make an appeal to his right hon. friend. There had been expressed that day a strong feeling with regard to this matter on behalf of burghs in Scotland. Perhaps a way out of the difficulty might be found by the Lord-Advocate and the Secretary for Scotland agreeing to take a fixed sum out of the grant, say of £50,000, and then they could give to the local authorities, not only the £100,000 which the Bill gave, but the £13,000 and any further increment of it. If that were done he thought it ought to meet the extreme views even of the burgh representatives.
  There had been considerable discussion that day upon two other questions; one the question of feeding children in schools, and the other the question of medical inspection. He should like to say this in regard to the feeding of school children, that it was a very easy thing for them in that House to say what every one of them desired, viz., that no hungry child should ever be in attendance at any school which it was compelled to attend. That was a thing upon which they were all agreed, but, when it came to putting the question as to whether there were a large number of such hungry children in Scotland or not, he thought some of them possibly might differ. He had had some experience in connection with school board work in Scotland, and during the twenty-one years he had been connected with it he did not remember ever having this question brought before him, and he was connected with one of the largest rural school boards in Scotland. How many hon. Members had ever been asked in Scotland to subscribe to funds for feeding school children? It might be that such was the case in regard to some schools in the Highlands, but he bad never been asked, and, except in one or two of the poorest parts of some of
  1224
  their richest cities, he doubted whether any such need existed. He would therefore ask hon. Members, before they passed legislation of so general a character, to consider that this question might gradually creep into such a position that the cry for relief from the payment of school fees assumed. He would ask them to pause and consider whether in their opinion the mothers and fathers of Scotland were really open to this charge of generally neglecting their children. He did not believe it for a single moment. He did not believe that except in certain districts there was necessity for special treatment of this kind. He thought, however, that in those special localities where the necessity existed power ought to be given to deal with it. But it should be a power which was very carefully restricted so that if might not do more harm than good, because he thought that, if it once came to be felt throughout Scotland that there was to be a general system of feeding school children, it would add enormously to the cost of education, and might seriously interfere with the class of education which they would be able to give.
  Then as to the medical inspection which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University would like to have. He admitted that he had seen a report from Dundee which was exceedingly painful reading, as it was a description of people who belonged to a class who would always, unhappily, be with us, but he did not know that having regard to the conditions of life in which those children lived that they could expect them to be free from disease. When he heard, however, that there was to be a general medical inspection of all the day schools in Scotland he asked Members of the House to consider what that was going to cost and whether they were going to get a benefit out of such inspection at all commensurate with that cost. There must be an enormous number of children for whom no such inspection was necessary at all, but if they were going to set up a general system of anthropometrical examination of the children and they were going to do that twice a year the cost would be large. They had 800,000 children in Scotland, and supposing

  1225
  it cost 2s. 6d. a head each time—[Cries of "No!"] His hon. friends shook their heads, but he was sure that they would not get doctors to go through the labour of examining children to the extent suggested in these reports without a substantial fee, especially when they knew that that fee was to come out of the rates or the Exchequer. If the cost was 2s. 6d. per head it would cost £100,000 for each examination. That was equivalent to a penny rate upon the assessable value of Scotland, and he said that whilst it might be necessary to make examinations in certain schools in certain localities and for certain specific objects, he did not believe it was necessary to take Scotland all over, and he deprecated the idea that they should start on a new branch of public expenditure of that kind. Feeding the children and that system of medical examination, when the rates were so high, was not necessary especially when there was a growing feeling that what they wanted was good educational results but as light an addition to the rates as possible. For his part he hoped the Second Reading of the Bill would be passed, but he trusted that no proposal would be made to refer it to a Grand Committee. It should be dealt with by a Committee of the House, and he hoped that they might as soon as possible have it before them in Committee and pass it into law.
  MR. WALLACEsaid he did not propose to discuss the general principle of the Bill because, as far as the discussion had gone, there had been no attack upon it and the debate had been entirely upon questions which would probably be more properly dealt with in Committee. As far as he understood it, if there was a principle underlying the Bill at all it was that of the maintenance in Scotland of the system of government of schools by the people themselves and the election of the authorities ad hoc, by those interested in education, to control education. He entirely dissented from his hon. friend opposite who said that the principle applicable to Scotland was not applicable to England, and he regretted very much that the Government did not last year, having introduced their Bill, press it forward and carry it. If it had been
  1226
  carried at that time it would have been received in Scotland with great cordiality, but in the interval which had elapsed a more critical examination had been given and there was the coldness which always followed delay. Although, therefore, the Bill would be acquiesced in, there was not now the same feeling of entire agreement in regard to it which prevailed a year ago.
  The first question which had been raised was the question of area. Some hon. Members had proposed the larger area of the county as an alternative to the Bill, and others had proposed the smaller area of the parish, but for himself he thought the Government had been very happy in their selection. He thought that they had struck the golden mean between the two, as he considered the county was too large and for practical purposes many of the parishes were too small. He did think, moreover, that it was an important thing that they should have larger areas than at present, as he had noticed in Scotland in connection with country parishes that the teacher who got an appointment in a school settled down practically for the rest of his life. The teacher had not the opportunities which prevailed in larger school boards of promotion, and the result was that, with the best intentions in the world, oft-times the stimulus which the opportunity of promotion gave was taken away from him. He was sure that for the purpose of getting effective teachers the teacher should have the opportunity which would be given him under a larger school board. He should regret, however, if the effect of the measure should be to destroy the interest taken by parents in the education of their children. He realised that in Scotland school boards were very unlike school boards in England, and were bodies which were largely composed of the parents of children. They were largely composed of working men such as the grieve and the small crofter. He had seen these men do the most effective work in the world upon those school boards because the one thought of the Scotch parent in this matter was not economy, but how they could get the best education for the children attending the schools. That was the difference which existed between

  1227
  the parish school boards of Scotland and the small boards in parishes in England. The one desire of the latter was to save the rates—a very worthy object, but not when they were saved at the expense of education. He should be very sorry if representation, of the kind he had alluded to, on the school boards of Scotland were to cease.
  He thought it would be very necessary that some provision should be made by which members of school boards should have their expenses provided for. It was all very well to say that they ought to sacrifice themselves and that they ought to give their time for the purposes of education. They had to live and to work, and they could not afford to attend those meetings unless the House made some provision of the kind he had indicated by which the necessary expenses of coming some distance to the central point where the school board met should be paid. If that was not done the House would destroy altogether the representation of that class in Scotland and that would be a great misfortune. On this point he had some doubt and misgiving as regarded the destruction of these smaller school boards, but he thought it could be met in the way he had suggested. He also thought that the Lord-Advocate might have considered in connection with this matter the difficulties in regard to the four districts described in the Bill. He thought that there were other large towns and cities in Scotland who might have had school boards. He knew that there were cities in Scotland large enough for the purpose of having an effective school board. He would take the case of Paisley, and suggested that in Committee the right hon. Gentleman might see whether he could not extend the number of districts.
  Something had been said in regard to underfed children in Scotland. It might be true and was true, no doubt, that the grievance was not so great in Scotland as it was in England, but still it existed in Scotland, as any one who knew Scotland knew well, in many of their great cities. The Scotchman was nothing if not economical, and nothing could be more economical than to see that a child should be sent to school with strength to assimilate the education which was given.
  1228
  Money spent in order to enable a child to appreciate and take in the education.was not money wasted, but the best investment that the State could possibly make. He supported that view not merely on the ground of humanity, but on the further ground that no truer economy could, be found than that which enabled a child to make the best use of the education provided for him.
  Another point was that no doubt there was a strong feeling at the-present time with reference to the-proposal of the Lord-Advocate with regard to the grants which the cities, enjoyed. The effect of the Lord-Advocate's proposal would be to alter the incidence of taxation as between the owner and the occupier entirely to the advantage of the owner, and against that the cities protested. He did not object to the money being devoted to education, but he did object to am alteration which would be in the interest of owners as against that of occupier, and he would take strong objection to the clause in Committee.
  He would say only one word on the denominational difficulty. A clause in the Bill gave power to the school boards to give grants to other than schools under their own absolute control. That might shock some English Members, but in Scotland they took the view that they could trust the people in those matters. Practically, they never had any religious difficulty in Scotland; they had got rid of it simply by letting the people determine the question for themselves.
  As to the provincial councils, he did not like them at all. He believed they would be a source of danger and friction, and would tend to destroy responsibility, but so long as the Scottish Education Department was in London they would probably be a necessity. The true solution was to bring the Education Department to Edinburgh into a new atmosphere and under new influences; there would then be no necessity for provincial councils. On the whole he congratulated the Lord-Advocate on the Bill, and hoped it would be speedily passed into law.
  THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT-DICKSON,)said the

  1229
  Government could not complain of the reception which had been accorded to the Bill, but there had been a suggestion made in some of the speeches that neither last session nor this were the Government really anxious to get the Bill. He hoped that that suggestion would not receive credence either in England or in Scotland. There was no Bill that the Government, and especially the members of it who were connected with Scotland, were more anxious to get. He was convinced, indeed, from communications which he had received from all classes and sections of people in Scotland, that there was no Bill which Scotland desired more to get, even if it were passed without any Amendments at all. The enormous preponderance of Scottish feeling was in favour of it. The discussion, interesting and useful though it had been, had dealt with matters which were rather Committee points than Second Reading questions, and it would not be right for him, on many of those, matters, to give a final or definite decision until they had been considered in detail in Committee.
  The hon. Member for Camberwell, who had made his usual speech on Scottish education, did not take account of the unfortunate position of England so far as education was concerned. [Dr. MACNAMARA: I do.] The differences between the two countries began long before 1902 or even 1870—[Dr. MACNAMARA: I know]—when the English people were unfortunate enough to take refuge in Cowper-Temple clauses and the refusal to have a universal school board system or to recognise that they had trusted far too long to voluntary and Church methods. It was too bad, however, now not to recognise the debt which England owed to the Church, for no other body in England had done its duty in this matter so effectually as the Church had done.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I have often admitted it.
  MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the hon. Member declared that the Government dare not abolish school boards in Scotland. That was because the Scottish people were a long way ahead of England, and the hon. Member had better
  1230
  set about educating the English people before he tried his hand on the Scotch. One could not help recalling that the consideration of this Bill came up at a time when the author of the Act of 1872, of which it was an Amendment, was retiring from official life, and all would recognise the debt which Scottish education owed to Lord Young.
  The question which had been referred to most frequently in the debate was that of the areas, and upon that he did not think the Government could see their way to modify the position they had laid down in the Bill. There were two great problems to consider in discussing this question of areas. Undoubtedly, so far as elementary education was concerned, the smaller the area the better would be the administration. ["No."] On the other hand, the same principle would not apply to secondary education. Accordingly the Government had endeavoured to find some mode of reconciling these two difficulties; and, giving the best consideration they could to the matter, they thought that the district really afforded, on the whole, the best solution, the best compromise. Undoubtedly there were cases where a smaller area might have been better, and other cases where a larger area would have been preferable; it was not at all a Party question, and on the whole the Government had thought the district was the best basis on which to work. Last session large concessions were made which went a long way to meet the difficulties that were raised, and it was not thought necessary to divide the House on the question. He could not think a point like this was worthy, he did not say of consideration, but of long discussion, either upon Second Reading or in Committee, when it was borne in mind that the House unanimously accepted the principle last session and when, in addition, it was remembered that they had taken care to give greater elasticity to the powers which would enable greater combination or greater division to be made according to the special circumstances of each division of the country. The Government had, in this respect, shown their anxiety to meet, as far as they possibly could, the fair claims of those who

  1231
  differed upon this matter, and he could not, as at present advised, offer any hope that they would change their views on this question. He trusted that nothing they did would diminish local interest in education, because that would be an enormous misfortune. They hoped the provisions they had introduced with regard to management, even as they stood or under reasonable amendment, would secure that local interest would not only not be diminished, but would be even enhanced in the future.
  As to the financial aspects of the Bill, he thought too much had been said about the question of the equivalent grant. Personally he represented a Division of Glasgow where the town council held strong views on the question with which he was sorry not to be able to agree. It was some consolation, however, to believe that he had the cordial support of the Glasgow School Board.
  MR. McCRAE: They are getting the money.
  MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that was no doubt the case, and even town councils were human. The equivalent grant really had its origin in education, because in the Act under which it was given it was enacted that there should be distributed
  "a sum of £100,000 or such other sum as with the sums directed to be applied under the provisions of the three preceding sub-sections of this section will be equal to the fee grant in Scotland."
  Originally fixed at £100,000, the amount had grown to between £160,000 and £170,000, and last year in the Bill as introduced it was proposed to take the whole of the money. Representations were then made both by county and by burgh councils, and, as a result, Lord Dunedin intimated that he was prepared to say that he would not take more than the surplus over the £100,000 for education. He thought that concession was accepted by many representing both the counties and the burghs as fair and reasonable—["Hear, hear! and "No."]—that was his view of it—and he confessed that, so far as he was concerned at that moment, though he would listen to reasonable
  1232
  arguments, he was not prepared to go one halfpenny beyond that arrangement. He hoped he should receive the support of hon. Members on both sides of the House in securing that the £60,000 should go to education. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen, who was in duty bound to support his constituents in this matter, had spoken of the heavy burden this would place on the rates. As a matter of fact the total difference would be ½d. in the £, but taking into account that some rates were paid by occupiers alone, and some by owners and occupiers, the net balance would be something like one farthing in the pound, and, for himself, he was not sorry for any of the burghs if they lost that farthing in the interest of education. So far as that matter was concerned, he did not see his way, although he would keep an open mind, to suggest that there was any room for concession at all. The suggestion of his right hon. friend the Member for Govan with regard to the enumerated districts and the pooling arrangement affected only Edinburgh and Glasgow, and if there was a general desire in those districts that the course suggested by the right hon. Gentleman should be taken it seemed fair and reasonable that it should be done. That did not apply to the other districts of Aberdeen and Dundee, as they included only the existing school board districts, Dundee was naturally desirous of enlarging its boundaries, but he did not feel inclined to concede that. Govan and Leith, on the other hand, were naturally anxious to remain where they were, but he did not feel inclined to concede that either, so that perhaps the one might be set off against the other.
  As to the grant to voluntary schools, the hon. Member for Camberwell did not seem to appreciate that it would be made only under Minute containing general conditions, and no doubt the structural and sanitary conditions of the schools would be taken into account. There would be no special provision for voluntary schools apart from other schools. In Scotland they settled their religious differences in regard to education thirty years ago, and they did

  1233
  not want to raise them again. They had never had passive resisters in Scotland. They had rated Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, and had refused to teach Episcopalianism or Roman Catholicism except in some Highland parishes where Roman Catholics were in a majority. He sincerely hoped that no religious question would be raised on this Bill. In Scotland they had reached the stage where they thought they could conduct their education on lines suitable to their views on denominational education, and the minority recognised that they must submit to the majority in the matter. He hoped that that feeling would prevail throughout the proceedings on the Bill, as they would then avoid an enormous amount of difficulty and contention which it seemed to be impossible to avoid south of the Tweed.
  DR. MACNAMARA: Why did you not give us the Scotch Bill?
  MR. SCOTT DICKSON: Well, you are not educated up to it.
  Other important questions raised were those relating to medical inspection and the feeding of children. So far as medical inspection was concerned, he thought they had gone far enough in Sections 26 and 46. He did not suggest that they had gone too far. It was quite proper that those powers should be given, and now that public attention had been directed to the question local authorities might be trusted to do what was fair and reasonable in the matter. Without desiring in the least to make Party capital out of the fact, he might remind the House that the question had been brought prominently forward during the existence of the present Government. If public opinion had been focussed on this question of the physical condition of the children in the schools, it had been the result of the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland and the Committee on Physical Deterioration. No public body concerned with the education of the young would now fail to give due attention to the question. As to the feeding of the children, the Royal Commission, which was not a Party body, reported that in Scotland existing difficulties were to a large extent met by voluntary effort in
  1234
  co-operation with the school boards. The Commission was distinctly of opinion that, apart from providing for the kitchen accommodation, no further charge should be put upon the rates.
  MR. McCRAEpointed out that the Commission was confined to the question of physical training, and it was only so far as it had to do with physical training that the Commission was able to deal with the question of feeding.
  MR. SCOTT DICKSONreminded the hon. Member that the Commission made careful inquiry into the medical inspection and the feeding of the children, and in to, the question of how the underfed children should be dealt with, the result of the inquiry being as he had stated. That being so he thought it would be a strong order to say that that House, after an examination which could not be exhaustive or satisfactory, should go beyond the recommendation of the Commission, which heard all the evidence and considered it carefully. He was sure that it would not be thought for a moment that they on that side of the House were less concerned about this question than members of the Opposition. Certainly, if ever there was a question devoid of Party this question was. One heard charges against Imperialism, but this was the very basis of Imperialism, and therefore he was sure that, whatever their views might be as to the course to be taken, no one would doubt for a moment that Members on the Government side were entirely in sympathy with the views of those who desired to do what was best in this matter in view of all the circumstances of the case. But it was necessary to bear in mind the Report of the Commission and the fact that they had not only to deal with the children of paupers, but also with the children of people who were just a little above paupers, and who were determined to secure that they should be independent of public aid. They had also to remember that they had voluntary schools to deal with, and they could not provide food for the children in the Board schools and say that the children in the voluntary schools should not he provided with it. All he would say

  1235
  on this matter was that they had safe ground to go upon if they took the recommendations of the Commission as a tentative measure, and if that did not prove satisfactory then they might go further. But in what was really an experimental matter he suggested that they should not go further at present than those who had been appointed to consider the matter had advised.
  MR. KEIR HARDIEasked whether the Lord-Advocate was prepared to go as far as the Report of the Commission in saying that—
  "Powers should be given to provide a meal and to demand from the parents the payment of the cost."
  MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that if the hon. Member would look at paragraphs 105 to 174 of the Report he would see that the Commission suggested that certain steps should be tried to begin with. He thought they might at least try this to begin with. They should endeavour to get more co-operation between the school boards and voluntary agencies, and by doing that they would get out of the difficulty. He had made inquiries from the school inspectors, and from many of the leading educationists in Scotland, and he was quite convinced that he was expressing enlightened public opinion upon the matter when he said that they ought not to go beyond the recommendations of the Commission upon this question. All he would say on this matter was that they had safe ground to go upon if they took the recommendations of the Commission as a tentative measure, and, if that did not prove satisfactory, then they might go further. But let them make this experiment first.
  Reference had been made to the training of teachers, and he quite appreciated many of the observations made. At the same time, he thought the proposals of the Government embodied in the Bill and in the Minute of the Department had met with general approval. He had no doubt any points raised could be satisfactorily met in Committee.
  As to the provincial councils, he did not think sufficient attention had
  1236
  been paid to the very considerable powers, given to them. Some trust in these matters must be given to the Education Department, which had not proved unworthy of trust in the past. He was sure the desire of the Department would be to see that these councils were strong: representative bodies whose advice would be likely to be of service. With regard to what had been said about the Universities, he thought that was a matter more for Committee, and so far as he was concerned he saw no difficulty in having an additional provincial council in order that the views of the Highland population should receive adequate consideration and attention, and more especially that they should secure adequate provision for the teaching they required, according; to their special needs. He did not think that would raise any difficulty at all and it would not cause any loss of time in dealing with this question. As for the powers of the committees established under the Bill, he thought they had given them a great deal. The Government had not been able to meet the views of those who preferred a national council, but he trusted that the joint committee they had established would be accepted as evidence of their desire to see that the provincial councils should have the opportunity of meeting and consulting each other.
  The only other point he had to-deal with was in reference to the future procedure in regard to the Bill. He did not know whether the kind things which had been said about this Bill by hon. Members opposite would be followed up by equally kind action in the future and equally short speeches. Failing that, of course, a Bill of the dimensions of this measure could very easily be killed. He had no-answer to make to that question until knew what was the attitude of horn Gentlemen opposite towards the Motion of the hon. Member for Banffshire, on the Paper, that the Bill should be referred to a Committee consisting of all the Members from Scotland, together with fifteen other Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection.
  MR. THOMAS SHAW: Will my right hon. friend give us a Committee or the Whole House if that Motion is withdrawn?
  MR. SCOTT DICKSON: Certainly. He had endeavoured before the Second Reading came on to arrange that that should be so, but he had been unable to do so.
  MR. BLACK: Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that, if the Bill goes to a Committee of the Whole House, the views of the Scottish Members shall prevail?
  MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he should like to know who was the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The hon. Member for Hawick Burghs imposed one condition, and then the hon. Member for Banffshire wished to impose another condition. They would never get the Bill through at all if that was the way they were going to proceed. He felt certain that the people in Scotland would understand the position, and if they did not get a Committee of the House they would know that the reason was on account of the opposition of hon. Members opposite, and they would know that it was because hon. Members opposite could not agree as to the course to be pursued. He was prepared to accept the suggestion of the hon. Member for Hawick, but as to the proposal of the hon. Member for Banffshire, they should never get the Bill if that were carried. As time was the essence of the whole thing, he was prepared to give a Committee of the Whole House, provided the Bill was read the second time that night and there was no further trouble about getting into Committee.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: It has always been urged from the Liberal Benches that all big Scotch measures like this should be referred to the Scotch Members, with a decent margin of other Members to preserve etiquette in the matter, but the Committee should comprise all the Scotch Members. It is very seldom that we have so big a, Scotch Bill at this, and why should the Scotch Members not be allowed to have their say upon it, not in the sense of letting off speeches, but in the sense of having their votes recorded and their influence having proper weight in the decision of this question. The Lord-
  1238
  Advocate is rather scornful of the idea-put forward by my hon. friend the Member for Banffshire, that if it is to be treated in the Whole House only Scotch votes should be counted. I admit that that is a novelty, but it is not an idea which should be treated in a scornful way, because it at least has common sense at the back of it. The Lord-Advocate comes forward in a sort of Dutch auction, and asks us to make a bargain by which we are to agree to his proposal that the Bill shall be dealt with in the Whole House on certain conditions, or else some dreadful things will happen. The right hon. Gentleman has spoken about the value of time in regard to the future fortunes of the Bill. But has there been any waste of time? Not a moment. We have no desire to obstruct the Bill. But, as I have said, we have always insisted upon the principle that a Bill of this kind should be decided by the Members from Scotland; and if the right hon. Gentleman will not give us a purely Scotch Committee, we should prefer the open light of a Committee of the Whole House to a hole-and-corner Committee upstairs; although it has been our experience in similar cases in the past that while, so far as the Scotch Members are concerned, we have had majorities of two, three, or four to one, we have been overborne by the votes of English, Irish, and Welsh Members.
  MR. CALDWELLsaid this Bill was of a highly technical character, and one which the ordinary member of the public could not be expected fully to comprehend without a much fuller explanation and criticism than had yet appeared, either in the Press, or in the speeches of supporters of the Bill, Indeed, it would not be until the Bill had passed into law, and was in actual working, that the general public could or would comprehend the drastic and reactionary nature of the changes contemplated. In the meantime, the Bill had been discussed, and, in the main, approved of, by various educational authorities from the point of view of their personal interests; and the interests of the teachers had been well looked after by their powerful organisation, which had been unceasing in its efforts, and which had been able to claim that all or

  1239
  nearly everyone of their recommendations I had been embodied in the Bill, and whose one desire was to see the Bill Speedily passed in its present shape. It had also been approved of by voluntary school managers, who were specially interested in certain provisions of the Bill, which, while continuing unimpaired the existing control of their schools, permitted not only of further grants from Imperial and Scotch sources, but also from the rates, at the will of a school board, subject to such conditions as the school board might impose. The Bill had also the active approval of the Glasgow School Board, as, by the Bill, not only was its own autonomy preserved, but a further population of not less than 208,000 was added to its existing population of 623,000, by the abolition of Govan us a separate school board district. Then it went without saying that the teachers in both the Govan and Glasgow schools actively supported the Bill, inasmuch as they believed that the larger area would furnish them with a greater field for promotion. Now, these were all powerful influences, whose opinions on educational matters had deservedly much weight with the general public in Scotland, although, in the matter of this Bill their personal interests predominated. The Bill had been but little discussed from the point of view of the general public. There had been a great deal of head-shaking and disapproval of the Bill in many influential quarters, but there had been no organisation to combat the powerful influences at work on the part of interested education authorities, and, hence, it was clamed that the feeling of Scotland was in favour of the Bill, whilst, in reality, the nature of the Bill and its effect had been little discussed from the point of view of the parents and the general public. Finally, the Bill had the hearty approval of the Scotch Education Department, by whom it had been drawn up; who had collared for education nearly all the Imperial grants given to Scotland, and who, by the Bill, had centralised in themselves (a body sitting in London), practically all power and authority as regarded education in Scotland; whilst the education authorities and even the provincial councils created by the Bill were simply so much educational machinery to carry out the behests of the
  1240
  Department. The distribution of huge grants of money were at the unfettered disposal of the Department. The Bill no doubt provided for these monies being distributed under Minutes to be laid before Parliament; but whilst these Minutes were put on the Table for information, there was no power in the House of Commons to discuss and amend them, or to prevent their coming into effect, except by the drastic remedy of a change of Government produced by a defeat on the Education Estimates.
  When the Education Bill of last year was introduced it seemed to meet with a favourable reception. That approval, however, was not due to any inherent merits of the Bill, but rather to the relief that was felt when it was announced that, contrary to the English Bill, and to the arguments of the Government thereon, the Bill continued the recognition of the principle of popularly-elected school boards. It was not a case of approval of the Bill as being better for education, but of relief that the Bill was not worse. He had been unfortunate in not having an opportunity of speaking on the Bill of last session, either on its introduction or on the Second Reading. If, therefore, he went pretty fully into the Bill on this occasion, it was because this was the first and only opportunity which he had had for discussing the Bill as a whole. Besides, there were obvious advantages of a full discussion on Second Reading.
  The leading features of the Bill were that, in the first place, it abolished 920 parish and parish district school boards and fifty-seven burgh school boards, substituting for them 107 county and county district school boards and four burgh school boards. Glasgow (including Govan, Partick, Kinning Park, Rutherglen, and Pollokshaws), Edinburgh (including Leith), Dundee, and Aberdeen, making one hundred and eleven in all-Secondly, the Bill also sought to deprive county councils and town councils of a residue granted to them by Parliament in 1890—amounting roughly to £70,000 per annum—which they had power to apply either to the relief of rates, or to technical education, but which they had been applying to the extent of three fourths to technical education and of

  1241
  only one-fourth, to the relief of rates. Thirdly, the Bill further sought to deprive local authorities of a large portion of the residue given to them under the Act of 1892—being a sum of ten shillings per child in average attendance, less certain preferential payments amounting to about £168,000. This, for the current year worked out at a clear residue of £182,000, obtained by taking the fee grant of this year (£350,000), and deducting the preferential payments. The residue was an annually increasing one, increasing with the increase in the school attendance. The Bill of last session appropriated the whole of the residue. The present Bill allowed local authorities to retain a fixed sum of £100,000, but appropriated the balance, namely, £82,000 a year, plus the increment of future years. Fourthly, the Bill deprived popularly-elected bodies, such as county councils and town councils, of that say and control in subsidising secondary and technical education, both in counties and burghs, which they had been exercising for the last fifteen years to the great benefit of secondary and technical education within their districts. In the distribution of this money, the local authorities were able to act on their own local knowledge of the value of the secondary educational work done in counties and burghs, and, having no schools of their own, these local authorities were able to treat all schools impartially in the distribution of the grants. No complaints had been made against the distribution, whilst no valid reason had been assigned why county councils and town councils should be superseded in the management of these funds. The great value of popularly-elected bodies lay in the interest in education which was thereby created and aroused in the community, and which was so essential to the progress of education.
  Although education was not in Scotland a Party question, there was much in this Bill which partook of a Party character. The Liberal policy had always been to encourage, whilst the Conservative policy had generally been to discourage, popularly-elected management and control. The present Government favoured county councils, but a Liberal Government passed the Education Act, 1872, estab-
  1242
  lishing school boards in every parish and burgh in Scotland, which the present Bill sought to abolish. A Liberal Government also took an early opportunity to establish parish councils in every parish, and so brought popularly-elected institutions as close as possible to the doors of the people. Parish councils, no doubt, would next be threatened if the present Government had a longer lease of power. That the people of Scotland appreciated the management of their local affairs was shown by the avidity with which populous places, consisting of 700 inhabitants, had been erected into burghs. In England the present Government had abolished popularly-elected school boards, and had relegated education to be dealt with by an education committee appointed by the county council. In Scotland the Government had not dared to go that length; but they had gone a long way in that direction by seeking to abolish 1,000 school boards and to replace them by only 111 school boards; whilst at the same time depriving county councils and town councils of all say in secondary education.
  From this survey, it must be obvious that the Bill opened up a wide field for discussion, and that it was not a Bill which ought to be allowed to pass without such a full discussion, both on Second Reading and in Committee, which the importance of education, and the great changes involved, necessarily demanded. Schools giving public education—not wholly of an elementary character, but including secondary—had existed in every parish in Scotland since 1696, and in some cases before that. The parish was not only the area for education, but also for the church, the management of the poor, and such like. Accustomed to act together in every matter relating to the parish area, and affecting the well-being of the parishioners, each parish came to have a unity and characteristic of its own, which made it differ essentially from any of its neighbouring parishes. Accordingly, the Education-Act, 1872, not only perpetuated the parish area, but also established school boards in burghs, handing over to these latter the schools in the burgh which were of a secondary character. Parliament thus recognised that education was

  1243
  essentially bound up with the life of the people, and that the inhabitants of burghs might have views and aspirations with regard to education totally different from those in the landward portion of parishes, No complaints had been made of the manner in which existing school boards had performed their work. On the contrary, the reports of His Majesty's inspectors spoke most highly of educational progress, and of the manner in which education, both primary and secondary, was being encouraged, alike by parents, ratepayers, and local authorities. There was nothing which a school board created under this Bill, might do which could not be equally and better done by existing school boards, if the power were conferred.
  The county and county district; area which it was proposed by the Bill to substitute was quite a modern area, with no special reference to population, and formed with reference to such subjects as roads and bridges, sanitation, and the like, matters in which the people of the district had a common interest as ratepayers, but not affecting their life so closely as education. The county and county district area presented every variety and anomaly. Let him take for a contrast Buteshire—the constituency of Mr. Graham Murray who brought forward the Bill of last session—and compare it with the Middle Ward of Lanarkshire, in which Mid Lanark was situated. Buteshire, with a population of 18,787 had at present two school boards in Arran, three in Bute, and one in Cumbræ. By the Bill Buteshire would have three school boards—one in each of Arran, Bute, and Cumbræ, the latter having only a population of 1,800. The Middle Ward of Lanarkshire, on the other hand, which had a population of 322,000, about four times the population of Dumbartonshire and three times the population of Perthshire, and covered an area extending from and including Airdrie to Cambuslang and thence to Shotts, was only to have one school board, and the existing nineteen school boards were to be abolished, the officers and servants being pensioned. In the case of Renfrewshire, with a population of 295,000, there were to be two school boards, whilst twenty-three existing school boards were to be abolished.
  1244
  The effect of this change of area was that the parishes and burghs in Scotland which had hitherto had the full control of their education—the appointment and dismissal of teachers, the fixing of salaries, the erection of school buildings, the determination of the school rate, the enforcement of compulsory powers and the exemption of children from attendance at school—would be deprived of that control, which would be exercised by a school board whose head office, no doubt, would be in some central position in the county or county district, but which would be equally inconvenient for a large number of parishes.
  The Bill, although discarding the parish and burgh area in regard to school control, had not been able altogether to discard the parish area. Bach parish was to be separately assessed for the annual sum necessary to pay off existing loans for school buildings erected in the parish, whilst the annual sum necessary to pay off future loans for any new school buildings which the school board created by the Bill might erect was to be charged upon the parish or parishes whose educational requirements the schools were calculated to serve. A parish council might appeal to the Education Department against any determination of the school board on this matter of capital expenditure for schools. The whole of the other expenditure of the school board, including school board contests, was to be paid out of the common fund of the entire school board district, to be apportioned among the parishes according to their valuations in the valuation roll. The school rate was to be collected in each parish along with the poor rate, and was to be subject to the same classification of occupier's rate (if any) as the poor rate. The school rate would not, therefore, be uniform throughout the education district, but the Bill provided a means for arriving at a hypothetical rate in determining certain grants. At present, a parish or burgh was left free to rate itself, to appoint its own teachers, and to push on its own education untrammelled by any interference of neighbouring parishes. By the Bill it might find itself thwarted in its desire to appoint a superior class of teachers by a majority of representatives who might decline to assess the

  1245
  whole district for such increased expenditure, whilst the parish or burgh would not be able to burden its own rate. A school board might also insist on a parish or burgh accepting against its will a teacher from another school in the same education district whom the school board might be desirous of promoting. The necessary effect of combining parishes into a county or county district area would be that some parishes would have to pay more school rate and others less than heretofore. Parishes who were to pay less might be expected to be satisfied, but parishes which were to pay more would have a decided grievance. The Bill did not present an equitable solution of this matter. Some adjustment would be required having regard to the existing variety of school rate in the different parishes.
  The wider area would lead to extravagance of management without any corresponding educational benefit, whilst the management would drift more and more into the hands of officials and further away from popular control. Indeed, that was just one of the results which the teachers expected to follow from the larger area. The larger area would also render it impossible for working men from a distance to become members of the school board. Provision would have to be made for payment of expenses. The Bill provided for the appointment of school managers. In the case of the four larger burghs, the school board might, but were not bound to, appoint managers either for one school or for a group of schools. All existing school boards had that power which was conferred by the Act of 1872; but it had been little, if ever, acted upon. The existing school boards had undertaken the work personally, which was in the interest of all concerned, whether teacher or pupil, parent or rate paper. In the case of county or county district school boards managers, must be appointed for each school or group of schools under their charge. The number of managers and the appointment of the managers rested with the school board and not with the people of the parish, The Bill of last year did provide that two-thirds of the managers were to be appointed, in the case of schools situated
  1246
  in a burgh by the town council, and if other cases by the parish council or the landward committee. Even that little concession to local control was taken away by the Bill of this year, showing to what an extent the Bill was being controlled in the supposed interest of the teachers. School managers were to have no power of raising money by rate or loan, or of incurring capital expenditure, or of appointing or dismissing teachers, whilst the managers must observe such rules, conditions, and restrictions as the school board might from time to time prescribe. The managers were to include the member or members of the school board representing the electoral division or burgh, as the case might be, in whish the school was situate. The appointment of managers under such circumstances was simply a sham, giving an appearance of local control where, in reality, there was none. He wished the teachers much joy in their association with the class of managers who accepted office under such conditions. Certainly, the status of such managers could not be compared with the status of members of existing school boards chosen by the people.
  There was another matter specially affecting the interest of the parent dealt with in the Bill, namely, the school attendance committee. At present the power of compelling parents to perform their duty of providing efficient elementary education, and of granting exemption to individual children from the obligation to attend school, was vested in, and was exercised personally by, the members of the school board, who were personally acquainted with the district, with the circumstances of the people, and with the conditions of employment. That was one of the most important duties which school boards had to perform. It was laid upon them by the Act of 1901. In the wider area, a parish might only have one school board representative. The Bill provided for delegation to a school attendance committee or committees of their own number to which they were to have power (but there, was no compulsion) to add—
  "Such number of persons connected with the locality, not being members of the school board, as they may see fit, not exceeding one-half of the whole number of the committee."

  1247
  There was no security here that parents would continue to receive that protection which at present they were receiving from the local knowledge of school board representatives. There was a good deal of friction arising at present owing to the action of the Department in seeking to over-ride the exemptions granted by school boards. He had had this matter brought under his notice in visitations throughout Mid Lanark and he had no hesitation in saying that matters were approaching a crisis. Perhaps it might be said that the wider area would result in few exemptions being granted. Yes, but fewer exemptions might in many cases mean greater poverty and the inability of parents to feed and clothe their children—the man with the smallest and most precarious wage having not infrequently the largest family. The Education Act of 1872, in making education compulsory, recognised that education was a matter of personal and vital concern to parents, and an interference with parental duty and responsibility. Prior to 1872 education was not compulsory, although as a rule parents did give their children an education compatible with their means. As education was not compulsory, the parent had the choice of school, especially in populous places. The effect of the 1872 Act was to kill private adventure schools and to leave parents with no choice of school other than Board school. The Act, however, appointed school boards for every parish and burgh, to whom the control of education was handed over. In order that the interests of parents might be protected, a wide franchise for school board purposes was adopted, not merely household suffrage in counties, but of every person whose name appeared on the valuation roll, without any disqualification through non-payment of rates. For the better protection of minorities the cumulative vote was given. Not only was the cumulative vote taken away, which no one objected to, but this personal touch and control of the parent in the electing of a parish school board was also taken away in breach of the undertaking given when education was made compulsory.
  He asked, now, what was the justification for such a drastic change as the
  1248
  abolition of parish and burgh school boards. It was not said that the management of education by existing school boards had been a failure. On the contrary, the annual Reports of the Scotch Education Department were a series of annual congratulations of the steady progress of education both in regard to school attendance and quality. By the Estimates, the grant this year was now £1 4s. per scholar. In the last published Report of the Department, that for the year ended August 31st, 1903, it was stated—
  "The increase in the number of scholars on the register, 16,875, as compared with an increase of 1,177 for the preceding year, is sufficiently striking; but it is all the more remarkable that it is traceable for the most part to an increase in the number of older scholars. The increase may be taken as a measure of the efficacy of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1901, and it is satisfactory to find that it has been accompanied by more than a corresponding increase in the average attendance. The percentage of average attendance to the number on the register, 85 per cent., is the best on record."
  Again, it could not be said that the wider area would attract a better class of members for the school board. Take the case of Glasgow School Board. He did not think that there was any special superiority in the members of that school board; whilst on smaller school boards, from the very fact that they were smaller and possessed a local interest, some of the best educational talent would be found. There remained, however, one argument which was put forward in every speech delivered from the Government Bench in support of the county area in the English Bill, namely, that of co-ordinating all education, primary and secondary, in one education authority. The word "coordination" in their mouths rolled as sweetly as the blessed word Mesopotamia. However applicable the coordination argument might have been in the case of England, it was utterly inapplicable to the case of Scotland. In England the education to be given was elementary and was so described in the Act of 1870; and many were familiar with the Cockerton case, where the London School Board was surcharged for providing education which was of a secondary character. In Scotland, on the other hand, there never had been

  1249
  any division of education into elementary and secondary, and the Education (Scotland) Act, 1872, made no such distinction. The national system of education in Scotland was never limited to elementary. The parish schools were the usual feeders of the University. Under the Act of 1872 eleven of the burgh schools, now under the management of the school board, were scheduled as higher-class schools, and school boards were empowered, subject to the approval of the Department, to convert any of the schools under their management into higher-class public schools. By an Act passed in 1878, the application of the school fund was authorised for the purposes of these schools. In Scotland, therefore, there was no distinction between elementary and secondary education, and all forms of education were co-ordinated in existing school boards.
  The manner in which this co-ordination was carried out under school boards was very interesting, and much developed during the last few years. The ordinary State-aided board schools, in receipt of Parliamentary grants under the Code had two ascending stages of secondary education. (1) The supplementary courses for those who had passed the elementary stage, and were compelled to remain at school till fourteen years of age. (2) Higher-grade, departments might be formed in any Board school for those pupils who, having obtained the merit certificate, desired to carry their education further. These departments were intended as preparatory training for entrance to higher-class and secondary schools, as well as for carrying forward the education of those who did not intend to embark upon a regular curriculum of study in a higher-class school, but who might intend to leave school between fifteen and sixteen years of age. There had been a remarkable increase in the number of these higher-grade departments from thirty-six in operation in 1902–3 to seventy at the beginning of session 1904. In addition to the ordinary State-aided Board schools in receipt of Parliamentary grants, existing school boards had, as he had already stated, higher-class public schools, where secondary and technical education might be carried to any height. There
  1250
  were thirty-two of such schools under school boards. The schools did not get grants under the day school Code, but they got grants from funds allotted for secondary education, and they received bursars and free scholars from other schools. In addition to these there were continuation classes in centres all over Scotland, which took cognisance of all forms of specialised instruction, from the most elementary to that given in specially selected central institutions, which, according to last year's Education Report, might be described as Industrial Universities. These central institutions were:—1, Dundee Technical Institute; 2, Elinburgh Heriot Watt College; 3, Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College; 4, Glasgow School of Art; 5, Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture; 6, The West of Scotland Agricultural College; and, improcess of establishment; 7, Aberdeen Agricultural College. Besides the thirty-two higher-class public schools under school boards, there were twenty-four endowed schools, and thirty-eight schools under voluntary managers, making ninety-four in all, which were under inspection as higher-class schools. These schools had 17,921 children of all ages on the school roll—one half of that number being in the thirty two schools under the management of school boards. Of the total 17,921 children on the roll, 4,551 were under twelve years of are, most probably receiving preparatory training; leaving 13,370 children on the roll twelve years of age and upward. It was obvious that the instruction given in these higher-class schools was of a totally different character from the primary and secondary instruction given in the ordinary State-aided schools, which were the feeders of these higher-class schools; and that these higher-class schools were as much distinct from the ordinary State-aided schools as were the Universities from the higher-class schools. Education in Scotland naturally divided itself into three divisions: (1) the State-aided schools where all primary and secondary education of a kind was carried on; (2) the purely secondary and technical schools; and (3) the Universities. Each of these divisions required different educational qualifications for management. It would be absurd that the 800,000 children

  1251
  on the school registers of State-aided schools should have their whole educational system upset for the sake of coordinating and controlling it in the interest of the 13,370 children in the secondary schools with whom there was nothing in common. If co-ordination was to be a principle, why not carry it to its logical conclusion and co-ordinate the whole three divisions; University education as well? Existing school boards had been proceeding in the direction of higher education as fast as—indeed, according to Sir Henry Craik's Report on Higher Education, much faster than—the capacities and circumstances of the pupils would allow. Sir Henry Craik said—
  "One drawback to which the inspectors have frequently adverted as a hindrance to efficiency shows some signs of diminishing. This is the fact that scholars who come to the secondary schools from the primary schools are not always fitted by previous education to take their places in the same class with those who have had the advantage of being trained with a view to higher education. This tendency is found to be largely increased by bursaries and free places, which are provided out of the amount available for secondary education for scholars from primary schools."
  Again, speaking on the subject of the growth of over-pressure, Sir Henry said—
  "It remains to be added that by far the most serious feature which the reports of the inspectors reveal is the continued steady growth of over-pressure in the upper classes of many of the second-try schools. Inquiries made in different parts of the country show that, under existing circumstances, it is no uncommon tiling for boys, and even for girls, to spend live or six ho us nightly on home less ins. It must be obvious that the nervous strain entailed is excessive, and that it cannot f dl to react unfavourably on the intellectual no less than on the physical development of at least a certain proportion of the pupils."
  These higher-class schools—both the thirty-two under school board management and the sixty-two under authorities other than school boards—were all inspected by inspectors selected by the Department, at a cost of £6,300 for these inspections; and for the leaving certificate examinations. The inspectors conferred with the school authorities as to methods of instruction, and pointed out weaknesses, arid showed how defects might be removed. According to Returns for the year 1900–1, these higher-class schools; were in receipt of ample funds. They received grants from funds
  1252
  allotted to secondary and technical education of £61,000; from endowments £33,331; from fees (including fees of bursars and free scholars) £85,381; from rates £23,007; or a total of £203,719. This Bill did not propose in any way to touch any of the schools other than those under the management of existing school boards, the new school boards simply coming in place of, and as successors to, existing school boards. Existing school boards could do everything which the new school boards could do under the Bill if existing school boards had the same powers conferred upon them, whilst the whole complications caused by the wider area would be avoided.
  The Bill was mainly a Bill of machinery for transferring education from existing school boards to the school boards created by the Bill. The first 24 clauses all had reference to, and were necessitated by, that transference. Clauses 24 to 28 inclusive, which dealt with additional borrowing powers; additional general powers; differential scale of fees; and keeping and audit of school board accounts, could be put in a Bill conferring these powers on existing school boards. Part III. relating to provincial councils for education would apply whether the school boards were the existing school boards, or were the school boards created under the Bill. The same with regard to Part IV. relating to the Education (Scotland) Fund and higher education. Clauses 35 to 40 inclusive would go out, whilst, if desired, Clauses 41 to 47 inclusive could be made to apply to existing school boards. The remaining clauses, excepting Clause 55, would go out. That the Bill was simply one of transference from existing school boards to school boards created under the Bill was shown by the fact that thirty-seven clauses were all connected with, and caused by, that transfer, and only eighteen clauses related to matter of new powers, which could be dealt with by themselves and applied to existing school boards. As he had pointed oat, the education would be more efficient under existing school boards, whilst the funds available for education would be the same. The real fact was that the changes of area had been brought about largely at the instance of those who seemed to

  1253
  think that their personal interests might be promoted by the change.
  It was fancied by some teachers that the wider area might load to more lavish expenditure and to an increase in teachers' salaries. That there might be lavish expenditure might he expected, but not necessarily in the way of increase of teachers' salaries. In practice, it would probably be found that, in some cases, it would work out towards lavishness of expenditure, but in other cases, chiefly rural districts, the tendency might be in the reverse direction. Where there was a large populous centre with a large representation on the school board, combined into an education district with agricultural parishes with a large valuation and a small population, no doubt there might be a temptation to increase expenditure if the increase were largely borne by the country parishes In other cases, where a burgh was formed into an education district with a number of country parishes, the estate factor and the large ratepayers in the parish who might rule the school board might go in for economy, and might not sympathise with the educational aspirations of the townspeople. They all knew the extraordinary effect which the mere proposal of a one penny per pound tax for free libraries produced on some minds. His own decided conviction was that teachers would find that the more their work commended itself to the parents, and to the community in which they taught, and the closer the parents and the community were to the purse-strings, untrammelled by any outside interference, the better would it be for the pecuniary interests of the teacher. It would, in his opinion, deprive the teachers of much public sympathy and support if the idea got abroad that it was in their interest, or through their representations, that the people of parishes and burghs were deprived of the exclusive management of the parish schools.
  It was also said by some teachers that the wider area would afford a greater opportunity for promotion. That, however, was an entire mistake. Automatic promotion in an education district might, no doubt, give advancement to teachers whose abilities were of so mediocre a character as not
  1254
  otherwise to secure them promotion. On the other hand, the teacher of enterprise and ability might find that he required to wait for almost a lifetime for promotion in; his educational district and that it would probably not be much when it did come. There would necessarily be no promotion for the man at the top. At present, with a thousand school boards in existence, a teacher in any part of Scotland might apply for a vacancy in any other part, excepting perhaps in the ease of a few of the larger school boards which, being large, were kept strictly preserved, and which would still he preserved under the Bill. It was found, in practice, that educational talent found its way from the remote Highland parish to the great educational centres in the South. If, however, every educational district was to be kept as a preserve for the promotion of its own teachers, a teacher would necessarily find every other education district closed to him, unless, indeed, he began at the bottom and automatically worked his way up. Automatic promotion might benefit the inferior teacher, but it would spell ruin to the teacher of ability, who would be deprived of the usual incentive to push his work. School boards who were anxious to save the rates would, no doubt, welcome promotion within their district, as promotions could take place without increasing salaries, and simply involve the putting of a new teacher at the bottom of the list.
  The wider area was further approved because it was said that the wider area would remove the teacher further from local influence, and protect a teacher against capricious dismissal. Lord Balfour of Burleigh, when Secretary for Scotland, made inquiries into cases of alleged capricious dismissal, with the result that, in his judgment, there were very few of the cases which could not be justified. Nearly all the employees in this country were subject to capricious dismissal on receiving the usual notice. It was a risk which every employee ran, and there was not likely to be much sympathy for teachers, under this head of complaint. It was difficult to see how a teacher's position could be comfortable, or the interest of education could be served, if he had not

  1255
  the good will and sympathy of the people of the locality. It was not practicable that an employer should, in every case, be called on to give reasons justifying every dismissal, even where very substantial reasons might exist. In the case of a school board, a teacher had a greater protection against capricious dismissal than in the case of a private employer of labour. There was first, the protection of the school board as a whole, a majority of whom must concur in the dismissal. Then, if harshly or unjustly treated, a teacher could enlist the sympathy of the parents which, worked up by the teachers' organisation, was more likely to be extended to the teacher (the individual sufferer) than to school board representatives. Probably, in most cases, the wider area would prove to the disadvantage of the teacher. Whilst parish school boards might bear with a teacher, and hesitate to dismiss owing to the local sympathy that might be evoked, a district school board would not have the same influences to fear; and the dismissal might take place oven although the school board representatives of the locality might unanimously vote against it. Of course, if the bad influences of a locality were removed from the teacher by the wider area, so might the good influences of the locality unavail when an increase of salary or other preferment was desired.
  He had thus dealt at length with the objection said to be entertained by some teachers, but not, as he knew, by all teachers. He had not been able to discover any educational, or even financial, reason for abolishing the parish and burgh area and adopting a county or county district area which was quite unsuitable alike for primary and secondary education. There really could be, and ought to be, no real antagonism between the interest of the parents and the interest of the teachers. They had a common object, the education of the child, and the educational progress of the child would best be
  1256
  promoted by the hearty sympathy and cooperation of the parent with the teacher and the teaching. The removal of that sympathy and co-operation from school work could not make the teaching more pleasant for the teacher. There was one effect of the reduction of the number of school boards from 1,000 to 111, that the new school boards would be much stronger, and would be able to combine more easily against the teachers' combination. However, that was a matter which might be left to experience to settle. As a rule, changes did not work out to all the advantages which the promoters of the change expected. The evils of an existing system were ever present, for they were daily experienced, but the evils of a new system were not present to the mind, but had to be learned by experience. There was one point referred to by the Lord-Advocate regarding the grants given for education which the different local authorities were claiming to retain. When the discussion on this Bill was going on last year, Lord Dunedin, when Secretary for Scotland, stated that there were only two men in the House who understood these grants. Lord Dunedin referred to himself as one; and to him (Mr. Caldwell) as the other. He must say, he was not surprised at the imperfect statement which the Lord-Advocate made as to these grants. The subject was a somewhat complicated one, and he feared it would not be possible in the very few minutes left to explain the matter clearly. He would only say that prior to 1888 certain local grants-in-aid both for England and Scotland, appeared on the Estimates, and that in connection with the Local Government Legislation in 1888 a certain proportion of probate duty (now estate duty), and certain licences were transferred to Local Taxation Accounts, to which these grants were to be transferred, a further amount being added with the view of making personality contribute to local taxation. In the case of England, England's share was given wholly in relief of rates; but in the case of Scotland, Scotland's share (after providing for the Votes transferred)

  1257
  was wholly applied to the relief of school fees, and, with a further sum of £40,000 given in 1900, education in Scotland had been in receipt of a fee grant of 12s. per child fro m moneys which, in the case of England, went to relieve the rates. In 1892, when England got 10s. per child of a fee grant, Scotland, although provided with 12s. out of Scotch money, became entitled to an equivalent of a similar amount. Parliament considered that now was the time to recoup the local rating authorities for what, in the interest of education, they had given up in 1889, and, after making certain prior fixed charges, including £600,000 per annum for secondary education and £30,000 per annum for University education, the Act of 1892 directed the balance to be apportioned among the local rating authorities, who had been in receipt of it ever since. The amount of this balance was estimated at £182,000 this year, and increased with the school attendance. There was absolutely no justification for taking from local authorities any portion of that amount, but it was now on the stroke of midnight, and he did not mean to talk the Second Reading out.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.

ADJOURNMENT.
THE PARLIMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Sir A. ACLAND-HOOD,): I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."
MR. DALZIELsaid he would like to take advantage of this opportunity of asking the Patronage Secretary whether he could give the House any idea when the post of Junior Lord of the Treasury was going to be filled. This matter was becoming a public scandal. This office of public profit under the Crown had now been without an occupant for two or three months. He had put a Question to the Prime Minister on the subject and the Answer was that it was under consideration. Was, at this moment, the post of Junior Lord of the Treasury really vacant? That was a matter on which there was a difference of opinion. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Patronage Secretary, with his usual lucidity and practical experience, would give the House some information on the point. If Mr. Gerald Loder was not at this moment Junior Lord of the Treasury, when was the post going to be filled up? Were the Government going to make a declaration in the face of the whole country that they were unable to find a safe seat for Mr. Gerald Loder or some other supporter. He presumed that the right hon. Gentleman the Patronage Secretary must have been looking up Whitaker's Almanack to see where he could find a constituency where the Government had a majority of 2,000 or 3,000. The Government were not treating the House fairly in this matter. It was not fair to the Patronage Secretary himself. They all recognised the splendid service he rendered in the House, and the amount of anxiety ho had in keeping his Party together at the present time. This was a stage when the right hon. Gentleman ought not to be short-handed in his staff and, from considerations of humanity,

1259
the right hon. Gentleman ought not to be so overworked. He should have a full staff, for he required more scouting done than at any previous period in the history of the present Administration. It was probably true that the general election was so close at hand that the right hon. Gentleman was willing to perform this extra duty so as not to put any constituency to the trouble of an election. If that were the case the right hon. Gentleman ought to tell the House so. It seemed to him that the sooner this post was filled the better it would be for the Government, and he could not see any reason for delay. Were the Government afraid of a by-election, or had they appointed some Gentleman to the post and so created a feeling of dissatisfaction on the part of others of their followers?
MR. BLACKsaid he desired to associate himself with his hon. friend in his wish for further information in regard to this very important matter. Were the Government considering the appointment of a Scotsman to this vacant post? That was the constitutional usage. There was, for instance, the hon. Member for Partick who would make a most suitable occupant of the office. Would the Government not give him a look in? There might be reasons, which it would not be becoming in him to mention, why the Government should not; but there was the hon. Baronet the Member for East Renfrew who had been so consistent in his support of the Government. He hoped, in any event, the Government, in this matter, was determined to adhere to constitutional usage and appoint a Scotsman.
MR. JOSEPH DEVLINsaid he disagreed altogether with the hon. Member for Banffshire that Scotland should receive this appointment. Everybody knew that the Government was more shaky in Scotland than in England; and it was highly desirable that they, in Ireland, who were philanthropists with tender hearts, should come to the assistance of the Government in this delicate situation. There was no excuse whatever for this vacancy. They had in Ireland thirteen representatives, supporters of the Government, who were lawyers. Since he came into the House he had noticed that they made themselves extremely disagreeable on the other side of the House until they were taken into the Administration. Nearly every Irish Member of the Administration had been a keen critic of his predecessor. There was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Belfast, who applied his critical and analytical mind to the problems of the Army, and he became Minister of War. Then, the Ulster Tory Party had not got what they desired, although they had been unsparing critics of the Government. The hon. Member for North Antrim had raised five votes against the Government. Surely he deserved some recognition from the Government. The hon. Member for North Antrim would be satisfied with a very small place; but, now that the chance of the Government retaining power for a much longer period was diminishing, the hon. Gentleman might meet with the same fate as the hon. Member for Brighton, because he understood there was not much chance of his being re-elected. There was the hon. Member for Belfast. He represented the Tory democracy, and he ought to have a show! There was no excuse for the Government keeping this vacancy open

1261
in view of the many candidates who believed themselves qualified to give their services. For his part, he was sure that hon. Members on the Irish Benches would be glad, in co-operation with Scotch Members, to do something to get the Government out of the difficulty. They invited some explanation from the Patronage Secretary, and the suggestions they had offered, he was certain, would be useful to the right hon. Gentleman.
SIR A. ACLAND-HOODsaid that, of course, he could only speak with the permission of the House. He had already expressed his views on this subject without undue warmth, and at no unnecessary length. He could only say that, strongly as he held these opinions, he would not at that period of the night weary the House by making a further statement.
The right hon. Gentleman then walked out of the Chamber amid ironical OPPOSITION cheers.
MR. WHITLEYsaid he thought the right hon. Gentleman had not treated the House with his usual courtesy. This was the only opportunity they had of obtaining information on current important questions. He looked upon this matter from rather a different point of view than that of his hon. friend. He regarded it as a matter of economy.
At this point Mr. SWIFT MACNEILL, amid ironical OPPOSITION cheers, left his usual bench, crossed the floor of the House, and took a seat on the empty Treasury bench.
MR WHITLEY, continuing, said that when the Estimates came on he would see
1262
whether the salary for this post could not be removed from the Vote, for obviously it was not necessary to vote the money since it had been so clearly proved that the post could be left vacant for so long a period. He could not believe that there was not a constituency throughout the length and breadth of the kingdom which could be trusted to elect a supporter of the Government, and he hoped that the protest which had been made would be continued until the House was treated in a better manner.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILLsaid he rose to support the Chair. It was a peculiar thing that this question should be discussed from the Treasury bench by a private Member—the question of the salary of an office which the Prime Minister had allowed to be so long vacant. He had looked into the precedents and found that it was in accordance with constitutional practice, except on rare occasions, that one of the Lords of the Treasury should always be a Member for Scotland. When Mr. Anstruther resigned in 1903 on his appointment as a Director of the Suez Canal there was no Scotch seat vacant. When Ministers absented themselves from the Treasury bench, this House, so far as they could do it, was degraded into a farce. He believed that this was the first time that an Irish Nationalist Member had addressed the House from the Treasury bench in defence of law and order. He was there, with his colleagues, to support the Chair. What was the position in which the Government, whose paramount duty it was to support the Chair, had placed the House He would not show the slightest disrespect to the Chair, and especially not

1263
for its present occupant. But, let them look at the position in which, as the mouthpiece of the House, Mr. Deputy-Speaker had been left by the Government! He said without fear of contradiction that, in the present state of the House, if they chose to impute any bad motives to the Government and violated the rules of Parliamentary procedure—if they used language which infringed on the order of Parliamentary debate—Mr. Deputy-Speaker would ask them to withdraw, and if Mr. Deputy-Speaker named them on refusal, where was the Minister who would move their expulsion from the House? The Prime Minister had left the House of Commons in a condition in which anything disrespectful might be said; and there was no one who had respect for the Chair who could officially defend the Chair. He held that, with some knowledge of history, since the Union there had been no Administration which had been guilty of such moral turpitude as the present. No Treasury bench had ever been packed with so many relatives who had been slaves to the Prime Minister at the expense of the community. Noah's Ark was a most respectable institution, it only floated; on a waste of waters; but this Administration only rested on a waste of relatives.
MR. MOONEYsaid that that night, for the first time, they had to complain of the way the Patronage Secretary had replied to a very simple Question. That Question was whether the office of Junior Lord of the Treasury was vacant, and they were entitled to have an Answer. Two different statements had been made in regard to the subject—
MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONcalled attention to the fact that there were not forty Members present.
MR. MOONEY, on a point of order, asked whether the hon. Member was entitled to challenge a count on the Motion for the Adjournment.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: He is in order.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL, who had returned to the corner seat below the gangway on the OPPOSITION side and speaking seated and with his hat on, said that he did not in the slightest degree wish to challenge Mr. Deputy-Speaker's ruling; but, with great respect, he submitted that there was no precedent for a count on an occasion like the present. The Prime Minister or his representative should be present at such discussions when Questions of public interest might be asked. He observed that the hon. Member for Hackney had now fled, like his chief the Prime Minister. Might he ask Mr. Deputy-Speaker for his ruling on the point raised. He did not know of a single precedent for it in their whole Parliamentary history. He was sure that the gentlemen at the Table would instruct Mr. Deputy-Speaker.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKERcounted the number of hon. Members present and, declaring that there were only thirty-six [Loud OPPOSITION cries of "Forty-two"], he said that the Question was that the House stood now Adjourned
The House was Adjourned at half after Twelve of the clock till To-morrow.