§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. JAMES CALDWELL (Lanark, Mid.) in the Chair.]
§ *MR. CAVE
, continuing his speech, said that although the local education authorities were, under the Bill, entitled to the use of the schools for a certain period, the ownership remained with the trustees. Everybody who was familiar with the administration of property knew that where alterations on a building were to be made it was desirable that this should be executed by the owners, and not by what were practically licensees. Let me take the case where part of a building was used for school purposes and the rest, say, as a parish hall, the owner was the person who ought to decide exactly in what form the alterations to the building should be made. The agreement between the local education authority and the owner or owners of the voluntary school might be for only a short time— one, two, or three years. Was it right that lessees or licensees for a short period only should be able to take possession of the building, put their own workmen into it, and make architectural alterations without the control of the owner or owners? Surely the freeholder ought to make the alterations, put in his own contractors or workmen, and supervise the work.
In page 1, line 20, after the word 'that' to insert the words 'the owners of the school-house shall at the cost of.
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ *MR. LOUGH
said that extraordinary liberality had been shown by the State to owners under this sub section and it 895 was significant that no proposal was made to omit it. Under this provision owners were relieved of the duty of repairing schools and their upkeep would probably cost the public over £250,000 per annum. He recognised the friendly tone of the hon. Member, but he asked him to look at the question somewhat broadly, and he would see that the Bill had been drawn in a very considerate manner in regard to owners. The case put by the hon. Member was extreme; there would surely be give and take between the local authority and the owners of the schoolhouse. The substance of the Amendment, too, must be examined. There was often a difficulty in getting owners of property to execute necessary repairs; sometimes they could not be found and if found they raised many objections. It might be a great inconvenience to the local authority if it were prevented from taking action at once. Then, it was not a sound principle for one to spend and another to pay. There was an old maxim that the person who paid the piper should call the tune. He imagined that a friendly arrangement could always be come to. It was impossible for the Government to accept the Amendment.
§ MR. LANE-FOX (Yorkshire, W.R., Barkston Ash)
said that he could give one instance of the manner in which a school-house might be made absolutely unfit for other than school purposes. The local authority might decide on placing double desks in the schoolroom, and these would make it impossible to hold, say, a bazaar or a large parish meeting in the building. There were, in fact, innumerable instances in which the education authority might do considerable injury to the owner or owners of the school. He confessed that the Amendment of his hon. friend was rather too broad to meet most cases; but there were other instances in which alterations to the school buildings might be made which would be extremely unsatisfactory to the owner. If alterations were to be made on a school building on which a patron had spent a considerable sum of money, the owner should have a chance of seeing that these alterations were carried out according to his wishes. The Parliamentary Secretary had spoken of the 896 generosity with which this part of the Bill had been drawn. He agreed, but there were other parts of the Bill which did the grossest injustice. He thought that the State did owe something to the men who had done so much to advance the cause of education in England in the past. He hoped that at some future time the Government could give an assurance that some alteration of this kind would be made in the Bill, so that the wishes of the owners and managers of the school could be met.
§ *SIR FRANCIS POWELL
thought they were under an obligation to his hon. friend for submitting this proposal, even if it had no other result than the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary. He thought it was an act of justice that the owners should have as much control over their property as was consistent with the Act. This Amendment would give the owners some remnant of authority at any rate, and he was quite sure that the good feeling to which the hon. Member had referred would be made more secure by the adoption of some Amendment in the sense of that now before the Committee. He would be very glad, therefore, if this Amendment were carried now, although it might have to be itself amended at a later stage. He was indebted to the Parliamentary Secretary for the friendly spirit which he had shown.
§ *MR. LEIF JONES (Westmoreland, Appleby)
said he had a great deal of sympathy with this Amendment, but he hoped it would not be pressed to a division, a; he preferred the Amendment standing in the name; of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shropshire. He would like to remind the authorities of the Board of Education that unless they were inclined to meet private owners of schools in some such way as was suggested by the Amendment they might find that these owners would be unwilling to enter into arrangements under the Bill. He quite recognised that if the building was to be used as a school it was absolutely necessary that the local education authority should have the last word as to what was to be done with the school buildings. If the 897 owners were willing to meet the authorities to that extent it seemed only fair—if the owners were willing to concur in alterations—that they should be consulted in regard to them. There were a good many village schools which were used as the village forum, and if the local authority insisted in treating the schools in a particular manner it might destroy their utility for that purpose. The local authority might, for instance, provide fixtures of a kind which would render the schools unfit for the purpose of meetings at night. He hoped the President of the Board of Education would take into consideration the rights and wishes of private owners and endeavour to meet them in the way suggested.
§ COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY (Shropshire, Newport)
said, as reference had been made to his Amendment, perhaps he might, suggest that if the Minister in charge of the Bill would indicate that when reached it would have a favourable reception, it might then be open to his hon. friend behind him to withdraw the present Amendment. If that course were adopted he would not detain the Committee by an elaborate argument which otherwise he should have to address to them. His Amendment gave the owners the option of carrying out alterations or improvements at their own expense, and charging a fair percentage on the expenditure they incurred.
§ *MR. LOUGH
thought the hon. Member who had moved the Amendment which was under discussion might rest satisfied with the debate which had taken place and withdraw it. Even he was not very well satisfied with the form of this Amendment, but when they came to the Amendment of the hon. and gallant Gentleman he was sure that the President of the Board of Education would carry out the undertaking he had given in regard to it.
§ COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY
said he was not prepared to say that the right hon. Gentleman had given an undertaking, but he had certainly expressed a favourable view, although he guarded himself in regard to certain small matters. 898 From what had passed, however, he should think the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to give a favourable consideration to his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSON
moved to insert that the alterations and improvements should be made "with the consent of the owners of the-schoolhouse." That, he said, involved the same important principle as had been dealt with during the last quarter of an hour It was that premises which belonged to owners and trustees should not be altered in character or use by any action by the local authority without the consent of the owners. He did not know whether the Government were prepared to accept, or at any rate to regard with a favourable consideration, the Amendment of his hon. and gallant friend the Member for Shropshire, which stood lower down on the Paper. That Amendment would carry out his wishes more thoroughly than his own would do, and if the Government were prepared to accept it, or to give it favourable consideration, he would not occupy the time of the Committee by pressing the Amendment which he had moved.
In page 1, line 22, after the word 'enabled' to insert the words 'with the consent of the owners of the schoolhouse.'"—(Sir W. Anson)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. LOUGH
said that with reference to the Amendment of the hon. Baronet, he thought the same remark might be made as that which he had made in regard to the previous one. He did not think the Amendment was in the very best form, but he thought there ought to be a disposition on the part of the 899 local authorities to consult the owners and make an arrangement in a conciliatory spirit. The Government would do their best to see that the Bill was so worded as to permit of conciliatory action being adopted. As to any future Amendment, when they came to it, his right hon. friend the President of the Board of Education would be present,; and no doubt he would deal with it.
§ *SIR WILLIAM ANSON
said if he could get no better answer than that he must press his Amendment, because it was most important that owners and trustees should not find their property altered without their consent. As he understood the compromise offered by the Government that afternoon, school owners would be bound to offer their property to the local authorities. That made it all the more important that the owners of the schools should not find buildings, erected for a definite purpose, possibly in the neighbourhood of their own residences, altered without any consultation with them. The purpose for which these schools were to be taken over was that they should be used as public elementary schools during a certain number of hours on a certain number of days in the week. Was it fair that persons having the use of a school for a particular purpose should be able to alter the character and use of the building so as to make it unavailable for other purposes where the owners had erected a building which might be used only not for elementary school purposes but for many other purposes. Besides this, unless some sort of provision of the kind he suggested was introduced, the local authority might make changes which would be unsightly excrescences upon the buildings. They were told that the President of the Board of Education was prepared to be conciliatory on this point, but he wanted a more definite assurance. He was somewhat weary of the conciliatory assurances they had upon this point as well as upon others.
§ MR. BIRRELL
said the right hon. Member for Shropshire had had a conversation with him upon this subject, and he told the right hon. Member that the Government could not agree with his 900 Amendment because it would deprive the local education authorities of important powers. When it came to the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Oxford University, he thought something might be said for the private owners. If, therefore, it was confined to private owners, and if it were understood that the additional rent would be confined to a fair interest upon the money expended, he would, when the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment came before the Committee, take that into consideration. If through some unforeseen circumstance the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment was not reached, he (Mr. Birrell) would consider himself bound to give this subject some consideration and arrive at some means of meeting the objection.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD BALCARRES
said he rose to move the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Holborn, to leave out from the word "alterations" to the end of the sub-section, and insert the words "which the Government inspectors may hold to be necessary." It seemed to him under subhead (a) that the authority now vested in the Board of Education to demand improvements was taken away. The local education authority was enabled to make alterations and improvements which in their opinion were necessary, or which in case of any dispute arising were in the opinion of the Board of Education necessary. The subhead (a) did not say who the parties to the dispute were in case of a dispute arising, but he assumed that they were the owners on the one hand and the local education authority on the other. In that case the Board of Education had no status until a dispute arose, which was a most undesirable state of things. Everybody familiar with elementary schools, voluntary or provided, knew that the main pressure to improve those schools from the structural point of view came in nine cases out of ten, or at least in a large majority of cases, from the Board of Education itself, through its inspectors, who were in and out the schools from time to time, and who were constantly saying, "If this is not done and if that alteration is not 901 made you will got yourselves into trouble." It was no use telling the Committee that the Board of Education could stop the grants. No doubt it had that right, but according to Sub-head (a) it had no status before a dispute arose. He considered that the Board of Education ought to have a status prior to what was practically their ultimatum, namely, the stoppage of supplies. There might be some explanation to be made on this point, and, if so, he would be glad to hear it, but it appeared to him that the Bill deprived the Board of Education of the faculty which they had possessed for many years for bringing pressure on the schools for the purposes of improvements. He begged to move.
In page 1, line 2*2, to leave out from the word 'alterations' to end of sub-section and insert the words 'which Government inspectors may hold to be necessary.'"—(Lord Balcarres.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there, inserted."
§ MR. BIRRELL
opposed the Amendment. He did not like dragging in the Government inspectors, who were the servants of the Board of Education, and giving them an independent position authorised by Act of Parliament. That the local education authority should only be entitled to insist on alterations which the Board, through their inspectors, thought necessary, was, in his opinion, most undesirable. At the same time, he gladly recognised that there had been growing up a spirit on the part of the managers of unprovided schools that they must keep up a certain standard of excellence, and in his opinion the persons more immediately concerned might be left to come to their decisions for themselves, leaving the powers of the Board of Education in reserve.
§ *MR. BURDETT-COUTTS (Westminster)
supported the Amendment. Speaking as a London Member he knew, he said, from his own experience that a good many of the requirements made on the then voluntary schools of London by the London County Council as educational authority had been greatly in 902 excess of what was necessary. They had been fanciful and extravagant to a degree. The tendency of the voluntary schools to improve their efficiency to which the right hon Gentleman had referred had grown up and been carried on under the guidance of the inspectors of the Board of Education. He did not know how far other local authorities would follow the example of the London County Council, but when the Council's Report was considered by those in charge of the voluntary schools which were hitherto considered thoroughly efficient and well equipped, they found the requirements of that Report were in many cases extravagant and even absurd. He was surprised to find his hon. friend the Member for North Camberwell making a plea for economy, when his friends on the County Council had shown such a tendency. Many of the requirements of the local education authority in this case had been in the direction of unnecessary extravagance. He drew from that experience an argument that to place the repairs entirely in the hands of the local authority would not tend to economy of the ratepayers' money.
§ *SIR W. J. COLLINS (St. Pancras, W.)
said that as he had been Chairman of the Education Committee of the London County Council for the past two years, he might be able to remove a little misapprehension on the part of the hon. Member and of others who in the course of debates on the Bill had alluded to the Report of the London County Council on the non-provided schools. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had intimated that this was a prime example showing how local authorities might deal harshly with voluntary schools. If hon. Gentlemen knew the facts as well as he did they would modify their statements.
§ *SIR W. J. COLLINS
said he held an extract from the minutes of the London County Council of May 30th, 1905, with regard to the requirements on managers 903 of non-provided schools. It was as follows—That with regard to the results of the survey and inspection, the managers be informed that the Council is prepared to consider any representations which the managers may think fit to make in regard to the requirements or directions which the Council may erve upon them.He also held in his hand copies of a letter sent by the Clerk of the Council in June last year to the managers of non-provided schools in the County of London informing them of the alterations and improvements in buildings required to render them suitable for the purposes of public elementary education. The letter concluded—I am to add that the Council is prepared to consider any representations which the managers may think fit to make with regard to the requirements and directions now made.He might say further that during the past twelve months architects representing the managers of non-provided schools and the architect of the London County Council had been engaged in friendly negotiations, and he had himself seen letters of thanks sent by managers of non-provided schools for the courtesy and consideration shown to them. No instructions of the kind suggested were given to the architect of the county council who made his survey in a perfectly official capacity, and unbiassed by political motive. If hon. Members would make inquiry as to the facts they would find that the London County Council was innocent of the charges made against it.
§ *MR. BURDETT-COUTTS
said he did not wish to accuse the London County Council of discourtesy or want of consideration for the managers, but only to give some idea of the requirements which would be made by local authorities by comparing the requirements of the County Council with those of the inspectors of the Board under which the schools had always been maintained in a state of efficiency.
§ *SIR HENRY CRAIK (Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities)
said the real question was as to who should be the judge of the structural efficiency of the schools. The President of the Board of Education often told the Committee that he had great experience in dealing 904 with local authorities. Well, other members of the Committee had also experience in that direction. Did the right hon. Gentleman find that local authorities had always perfect judgment as to the proper efficiency of school buildings? In his own experience over and over again they had had to find fault with premises of local authorities just as much as they had had to find fault with the premises of voluntary schools. Both classes of schools were earning public grants, and the standard of efficiency must be judged, only by the public department which allocated the grant s. It was not fair t hat one body of managers, who were called, the local authority, should be set as judges of the work of another set of local managers. It was far better to leave the judgment entirely to the Board of Education.
§ *MR. BRIDGEMAN
said that as the Member for West St. Pancras had referred to some remarks of his he might be allowed to say a word in explanation. What he stated last night was that he was not prepared to accept the Report of the London County Council on the sanitary and structural conditions of voluntary schools in London. He did not say that that Report had in it political bias, but that the action of the London County Council with regard to the administration of the Education Act was marked from the first with the strongest possible political bias. It was not against the hon. Gentleman, for whom he had the greatest respect, and who was deeply interested in the cause of education, that he levelled this accusation. It was against those who controlled the policy of the London County Council. As he said last night he defied anyone to say that that Council was not controlled by political reasons. [" No."] He could j prove what he said by a speech delivered in November, 1904.
said the hon. Gentleman would not be in order in opening a question about the London County Council.
§ *MR. BRIDGEMAN
said they were not prepared to accept the Report of the London County Council in preference to that of the Board's inspectors. The point of the Amendment was that they should have something more than the Report of the local education authority to go upon, and that the authority to which they ought to submit was that of the inspectors of the Board of Education.
§ LORD BALCARRES
said he was not quite satisfied, but he did not wish to divide the Committee, and would therefore beg leave to withdraw the Amendment. He was not aware that the hon. Member for West St. Pancras was Chairman of the Education Committee of the London County Council when he made certain remarks yesterday, and, quite apart from the position which the hon. Gentleman occupied, he hoped he would accept his assurance that there was nothing personal towards him in the statement.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *SIR FRANCIS POWELL (Wigan)
, moved an Amendment requiring that improvements made to a school building should be "not prejudicial to the use of it by the owners for any purpose consistent with the trust." One of the first communications received by him in reference to the Bill dealt with this point. Some of the buildings contained rooms of a considerable size used for purposes not wholly educational, but of great social value. Such rooms were often divided into classrooms by partitions, which, though impervious to sound, were easily removed. It was possible for local authorities to insist on their being replaced by thick walls, thus entirely defeating the intentions of the owners of the building, who wished to use the rooms sometimes for public worship or for recreations and amusements of a most innocent and laudable kind. The object of the Amendment was to protect buildings from capricious or unreasonable alterations, and to make it certain that the school-houses would be reserved during the tenancy of the 906 local authority 'for the purposes of elementary education.
In page 1, line 23, after the word 'improvements,' to insert, the words 'not prejudicial to the use of it by the owners for any purpose consistent with the trust.'"—(Sir Francis Powell.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. DILLON
maintained that this Amendment was not in the interest of the voluntary schools. If hon. Members insisted upon introducing these restrictions, they would give a very plausible reason to the local authority for declaring that the voluntary schools should not be taken over by them. He had always said that the sub-section was a most valuable one and entirely in the interest of the voluntary schools. He thought there was ample protection given by the sub-section. The words were—That the local education authority during the continuance of the arrangement keep the school house in good repair, and are enabled to make any alterations and improvements which in the opinion of the local education authority (or in case of dispute in the opinion of the Board of Education) may be reasonably required by the authority.There were two courses open to the Committee. One was to endeavour to get the Bill so amended as to meet their views; and the other was to declare war on the Bill absolutely, and to say that they would not consent to have it under any conditions whatever, and that every concession offered, or conciliatory speech, made on behalf of the Government, was really a fresh insult to those who did not like the Bill as drafted. The second alternative did not represent the position he was going to take at all. He thought they ought to acknowledge that the Government in putting in Sub-section (a) were protecting the voluntary schools. They ought to give the Government credit for that good intention. Instead of quarrelling over Sub-section (a), he thought it would be better to pass on to the consideration of some of the very important Amendments of which notice had been given with respect to the clause. If they discussed Amendments of this kind at such length, there would 907 be no opportunity for discussing the other Amendments.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
thought that the hon. Member who had just defended the Government had mistaken the intention of the mover of the Amendment and the class of schools which he had in view. There were other schools besides those belonging to the Roman Catholics where this Amendment was perhaps more needed, because they were used for a greater variety of purposes than the Roman Catholic schools. Was it rot reasonable that there should be an appeal where an alteration was proposed in a school which might be suitable during the hours of elementary education, but was not reasonable for the hours when the school was being used for other public or private purposes?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
said that the local authority might suggest to the Board of Education the desirableness of certain alterations being made. Those alterations might be absolutely reasonable, but they had a side which touched the interests of the trustees and the private owner. From that point of view the alterations might be unreasonable.
§ MR. DILLON
The Amendment in my opinion would give the local authority a reasonable ground for saying, "We won't take over the school, because we may be unreasonably restricted in making reasonable alterations."
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
asked how the education authority was going to be unreasonably obstructed. The general desire of the Committee was, he believed, that the interests of the two parties to the bargain should be looked after, and he wanted the Government to do something to protect the owners of the schools from 908 the possibility which the mover of the Amendment had in view.
§ MR. BIRRELL
said that the interests of all parties were safeguarded by the sub-section in the Bill, which must have escaped the attention of the right hon. Gentleman. The duty was thrown on the Board of Education to act as an arbitrator between the two disputants, and it had to consider whether it was absolutely necessary in the interests of the education of the children that suggested alterations in a school should be carried out. If they were absolutely necessary they must be carried out. If the owners were not able to substantiate their case, no doubt the Board of Education would insist upon the alterations being carried out. If the alterations were not of an important character the Board of Education would act accordingly. The necessary protection was afforded in Sub-section (a), and he thought they might be allowed to proceed with the discussion of the clause.
§ MR. WYNDHAM
said no one had stated more distinctly than the Minister for Education that during Saturday and Sunday and five evenings in the week these schools would remain the property of those who owned them according to law. This was an Amendment of an innocuous character to make that clear. Why did the right hon. Gentleman not accept it? Why did he leave the sinister impression that if difficulties arose proceedings might be taken as if the Bill was of a totally different character?
§ MR. SAMUEL EVANS
said the object of the Amendment was to provide that no alterations should be made which would prejudice the use of the buildings by the owners for the purposes of the trust deed apart from educational purposes. He asked the Committee to consider from that point of view what the position was. It appeared to be the desire of hon. Members opposite that the local authority should only acquire the right to use the schools for five days a week, and that for all the rest of the time—all the evenings, the whole of Saturday, and the whole of Sunday—they should be kept for the use of the denomination to which they originally belonged. The local authority 909 must not alter a school, according to the Amendment, in a way "prejudicial to the use of it by the owner for any purpose consistent with the trust." Were those the schools which the local authority was to be compelled to take over? This was a most excellent object lesson to the Government, and he hoped they would take it to heart.
§ Leave was not granted.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 70; Noes, 349. (Division List No. 118.)913
|Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. Sir Alex F.||Dalrymple, Viscount||Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Douglas, Rt. Hon A. Akers-||Remnant, James Farquharson|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Du Cros, Harvey||Rutherford. John (Lancashire|
|Ashley, W. W.||Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)|
|Balcarres, Lord||Fell, Arthur||Salter, Arthur Clavell|
|Balfour. Rt Hn. A. J.(CityLond.)||Fletcher, J. S.||Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)|
|Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)||Forster, Henry William||Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)|
|Banner, John S. Harmood-||Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)||Haddock, George R.||Starkey, John R.|
|Beckett, Hon. Gervase||Hardy, Laurence (Kent. Ashford||Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Univ|
|Bignold, Sir Arthur||Hay, Hon. Claude George||Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)|
|Bowles, G. Stewart||Hill, Henry Staveley (Staffordsh.||Thornton, Percy M.|
|Bridgeman, W. Clive||Kenyon-Slaney. Rt. Hn. Col.W.||Tumour, Viscount|
|Brotherton, Edward Allen||King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)||Valentia, Viscount|
|Bull, Sir William James||Lane-Fox, G. R.||Walrond, Hon. Lionel|
|Burdett-Coutts, W.||Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham||Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)|
|Butcher, Samuel Henry||Liddell, Henrv||Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-|
|Carlile, E. Hildred||Long, Rt. Hn.Walter (Dublin,S.)||Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George|
|Castlereagh, Viscount||Lowe, Sir Francis William||Younger, George|
|Cave, George||M'Calmont, Colonel James|
|Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C. W.||Magnus, Sir Philip||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Francis Powell and Sir Henry Craik.|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Mason, James F. (Windsor)|
|Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham)||Muntz, Sir Philip A.|
|Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)||Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington|
|Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.)||Ratclifl, Major R. F.|
|Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.).||Bertram, Julius||Cawley, Frederick|
|Abraham, William (Rhondda)||Bethell, J. H. (Essex,Romford)||Chance, Frederick William|
|Acland Francis Dyke||Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)||Channing, Francis Allston|
|Agnew, George William||Billson, Alfred||Cheetham, John Frederick|
|Alden, Percy||Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine||Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.|
|Allen. A. Acland (Christchurch)||Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)||Churchill, Winston Spencer|
|Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)||Black, ArthurW. (Bedfordshire)||Clarke, C. Goddard|
|Ambrose, Robert||Blake, Edward||Cleland, J. W.|
|Armitage, R.||Boland, John||Clough, W.|
|Astbury, John Meir||Bolton. T. D. (Derbyshire. N. E.)||Cobbold, Felix Thornley|
|Atherley-Jones, L.||Brace, William||Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)|
|Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)||Bramsdon, T. A.||Collins, SirWm.J. (S. Pancras, W.|
|Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)||Branch, James||Condon, Thomas Joseph|
|Balfour, Robert (Lanark)||Brlgg, John||Cooper, G. J.|
|Baring. Godfrey (Isle of Wight)||Bright, J. A.||Corbett. C. H (Sussex. E.Grinst'd|
|Barker, John||Brooke, Stopford||Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.|
|Barlow, John Emmott (Someraet||Brunner, J. F. L. (Lanes., Leigh)||Cowan, W. H.|
|Barlow, Percy (Bedford)||Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen)||Cremer, William Randal|
|Barnes, G. N.||Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs)||Crombie, John William|
|Barran, Rowland Hirst||Buckmaster, Stanley O.||Crooks, William|
|Barry, E. (Cork, S.)||Burke, E. Haviland-||Davies, David (MontgomeryCo.|
|Beale, W. P.||Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Davies, Ellis William (Eifion.)|
|Beauchamp, E.||Burnyeat, J. D. W.||Davies, Timothy (Fulham)|
|Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)||Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas||Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)|
|Beck, A. Cecil||Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles||Delany, William|
|Bell, Richard||Byles, William Pollard||Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)|
|Benn, John Williarus (Devonport||Cairns, Thomas||Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)|
|Benn, W. (Tow'rHamlets,S. Geo.||Cameron, Robert||Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.|
|Bennett, E. N.||Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Dilke. Rt, Hoa. Sir Charles|
|Dillon. John||Kincaid-Smith, Captain||O'Hare, Patrick|
|Dobson, Thomas W.||Laidlaw, Robert||O'Kelly, James (Roscommon,N.|
|Dolan, Charles Joseph||Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster)||O'Malley, William|
|Donelan, Captain A.||Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.|
|Duckworth, James||Lambert, George||Parker, James (Halifax)|
|Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furnes3||Lamont, Norman||Partington, Oswald|
|Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)||Layland-Barratt, Francis||Paul, Herbert|
|Dunne. MajorE. Martin (Walsall||Lea, Hugh Cecil (S. Pancras, E.||Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)|
|Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)||Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington||Pearce, William (Limehouse)|
|Elibank, Master of||Lehmann, R. C.||Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)|
|Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward||Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich)||Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk, Eye),|
|Essex, R. W.||Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)||Philipps. J. Wynford (Pembroke|
|Evans, Samuel T.||Levy, Maurice||Pickersgill, Edward Hare|
|Eve, Harry Trelawney||Lewis, John Herbert||Pirie, Duncan V.|
|Everett, R. Lacey||Lough, Thomas||Pollard, Dr.|
|Faber, G. H. (Boston)||Lundon, W.||Power, Patrick Joseph|
|Fenwick, Charles||Luttrell, Hugh Fownes||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)|
|Ferens, T. R.||Lynch, H. B.||Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)|
|Ffrench, Peter||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)|
|Fiennes, Hon. Eustace||Macdonald, J. M. (FalkirkB'ghs||Priestlev,W. E. B. (Bradford, E.)|
|Flynn, James Christopher||Maclean, Donald||Radforcl, G. H.|
|Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter||Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.||Raphael, Herbert H.|
|Fuller, John Michael F.||MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'|
|Fullerton, Hugh||Macpherson, J. T.||Redmond, John E. (Waterford|
|Gibb, James (Harrow)||MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.||Redmond, William (Clare)|
|Gill, A. H.||MacVeigh, Chas. (Donegal, E.)||Rees, J. D.|
|Goddard, Daniel Ford||M'Arthur, William||Rendall, Athelstan|
|Grant, Corrie||M'Callum, John M.||Richards, Thomas (W. Monmth.|
|Greenwood, Hamar (York)||M'Crae, George||Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n|
|Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward||M'Kenna, Reginald||Richardson, A.|
|Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton||M'Killop, W.||Rickett, J. Compton|
|Halpin, J.||M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)||Ridsdale, E. A.|
|Hammond, John||M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)|
|Harcourt, Right Hon. Lewis||M'Micking, Major G.||Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)|
|Hardie, J. Keir (MerthyrTydvil)||Maddison, Frederick||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)|
|Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)||Mallet, Charles E.||Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee|
|Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r||Manfield, Harry (Northants)||Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd|
|Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-sh||Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)||Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)|
|Hart-Davies, T.||Marks, G. Groydon (Launceston)||Robinson, S.|
|Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)||Marnham, F. J.||Robson, Sir William Snowdon|
|Harwood, George||Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)||Roe, Sir Thomas|
|Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)||Massie, J.||Rowlands, J.|
|Haworth, Arthur A.||Masterman, C. F. G.||Runciman, Walter|
|Hayden, John Patrick||Meagher, Michael||Russell, T. W.|
|Hazleton, Richard||Micklem, Nathaniel||Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)|
|Helme, Norval Watson||Mond, A.||Scarisbrick, T. T. L.|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Money, L. G. Chiozza||Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester)|
|Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.)||Montagu, E. S.||Scott, A. H.(Ashton, underLyne)|
|Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.||Montgomery, H. H.||Sears, J. E.|
|Higham, John Sharp||Mooney, J. J.||Seaverns, J. H.|
|Hodge, John||Moss, Samuel||Seddon, J.|
|Hogan, Michael||Murphy, John||Seely, Major J. B.|
|Holden, E. Hopkinson||Murray, James||Shackleton, David James|
|Holland, Sir William Henry||Myer, Horatio||Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)|
|Hooper, A. G.||Napier, T. B.||Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick, B.)|
|Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset,N.||Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Horniman, Emslie John||Nicholls, George||Silcock, Thomas Ball|
|Horridge, Thomas Gardner||Nicholson, Chas. N. (Doncaster)||Simon, John Allsebrook|
|Hudson, Walter||Nolan, Joseph||Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie|
|Hyde, Clarendon||Norman, Henry||Snowdon, P.|
|Isaacs, Rufus Daniel i||Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Soares, Ernest J.|
|Jacoby, James Alfred j||Nussey, Thomas Willans||Spicer, Albert|
|Jardine, Sir J j||Nuttall, Harry||Stanger, H. Y.|
|Jenkins, J.||O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary,Mid||Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)|
|Johnson, John (Gateshead)||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Steadman, W. C.|
|Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)||O'Connor. James (Wicklow, W||Stewart, Halley (Greenoek)|
|Jones, Leif (Appleby)||O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)||Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)|
|Jones, William (Carnarvonshire||O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Jowett, F. W.||O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)||Stuart, James (Sunderland)|
|Joyce, Michael||O'Donnoll, C. J. (Wal worth)||Sullivan, Donal|
|Kekewich, Sir George||O'Dowd, John||Summerbell, T.|
|Kennedy, Vincent Paul,||O'Grady, J.||Sutherland, J. E.|
|Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)||Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.)||Williams W. L. (Carmarthen)|
|Taylor, John W. (Durham)||Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)||Williamson, A. (Elgin&Nairn)|
|Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)||Wardle, George J.||Wills, Arthur Walters|
|Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)||Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)||Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)|
|Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.||Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)||Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)|
|Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)||Waterlow, D. S.||Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh.,N.)|
|Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)||Wedgwood, Josiah C.||Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)|
|Thomasson, Franklin||Whitbread, Howard||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Thompson, J.W. H.(Somerset, E||White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)||Wood, T. M'Kinnon|
|Thorne, William||White, Luke (York, E. R.)||Woodhouse, Sir J.T. Huddersfi'd|
|Tillett, Louis John||White, Patrick (Meath, N.)||Yoxall, James Henry|
|Tomkinson, James||Whitehead, Howland|
|Torrance, A. M.||Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.|
|Toulmin, George||Whittaker, Thomas Palmer|
|Trevelyan, Charles Philips||Wiles, Thomas|
|Ure, Alexander||Wilkie, Alexander|
|Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
§ MR. BRIDGEMAN
said he had an Amendment on the Paper to provide that the local authority should be able to make arrangements with the trustees as well as with the private owners of school houses as to alterations and improvements. Before dealing with it he should like to have some explanation on the subject from the Minister of Education.
§ MR. BIRRELL
said it was quite true that he had promised to consider an Amendment standing in the name of the right hon. Member for Newport, which dealt with private owners of school houses. But in his opinion, it would be undesirable to extend the arrangement any further than to private owners who had a permanent interest in the school house, and who resided on the adjacent property.
§ MR. WYNDHAM
said that the Minister for Education had in the course of the afternoon obliterated the distinction between private owners and trustees. He had said that he was unable to see any distinction between the owner who owned the whole fabric and the trustees; but now he was resuscitating it. He really hoped that the Minister for Education would extend this provision to trustees.
§ MR. BRIDGEMAN
said that the object of his Amendment was to give the local education authority free scope in dealing with private owners or trustees. Unless this full scope was given to the 914 local authority to treat with trustees as well as private owners it might lead to more friction than was necessary.
In page 1, line 23, after the word 'improvements, to insert the words 'or to make any arrangements with the owners of the school house as to alterations and improvements.'"— (Mr. Bridgeman.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. LANE-FOX
said that the whole object of the Amendment was to give the owner the opportunity of making the improvements if he wished, and if he did not wish it to allow the local authority to execute the improvements themselves. The owner of the property would be much better conversant with the needs of the people and the kind of improvement to be made than the local authority. He hoped the Minister for Education would allow trustees as well as private owners to carry out needful improvements and so diminish friction.
§ MR. BIRRELL
said the only exceptions the Government felt justified in making were with regard to the private owner who was living in the district. Owners and trustees generally were people difficult to find or to communicate with; they would often be abroad, and it would be impossible to get all their consents. He could only make an exception in favour of the private owner living in the district.
§ Question put.916
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 87; Noes, 321. (Division List No. 119.)919
|Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. SirAlex. F.||Fell, Arthur||Percy, Earl|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.||Ratcliff, Major R, F.|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Fletcher, J. S.||Rawlinson, John Frederick P.|
|Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. HughO.||Forster, Henry William||Remnant, James Farquharson|
|Ashley, W. W.||Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)||Rutherford, John (Lancashire)|
|Balcarres, Lord||Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)|
|Balfour, Rt Hn. A. J.(CityLond.||Haddock, George R.||Salter, Arthur Clavell|
|Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)||Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford||Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert|
|Banner, John S. Harmood-||Hay, Hon. Claude George||Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)|
|Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.||Hervey, F. W. F. (BuryS. Edm'ds||Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East|
|Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks||Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)||Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton|
|Beckett, Hon. Gervase||Hills, J. W.||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Bignold, Sir Arthur||Hornby, Sir William Henry||Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk|
|Bowles, G. Stewart||Kenyon-Slaney. Rt.Hon. Col. W.||Starkey, John R.|
|Brotherton, Edward Allen||Keswick, William||Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'dUniv.|
|Bull, Sir William James||King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)||Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)|
|Burdett-Coutts, W.||Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham||Thornton, Percy M.|
|Butcher, Samuel Henry||Liddell, Henry||Tumour, Viscount|
|Carlile. E. Hildred||Long, Col. CharlesW. (Evesham||Valentia, Viscount|
|Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin, S.||Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire|
|Castlereagh, Viscount||Lowe, Sir Francis William||Walrond, Hon. Lionel|
|Cave, George||MacIver, David (Liverpool)||Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid).|
|Cavendish, Rt. Hon. VictorC.W.||M'Calmont, Colonel James||Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Magnus, Sir Philip||Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George|
|Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham||Mason, James F. (Windsor)||Younger, George|
|Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.)||Meysey-Thompson, E. C.|
|Craik, Sir Henry||Middlemore, John Throgmorton||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Bridgemati and Mr. Lane-Fox.|
|Dairymple, Viscount||Morpeth, Viscount|
|Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-||Muntz, Sir Philip A.|
|Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan||Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)|
|Fardell, Sir T. George||Poase, HerbertPike (Darlington|
|Abraham, William (Rhondda)||Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine||Cobbold, Felix Thornley|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff||Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)|
|Agnew, George William||Black, ArthurW. (Bedfordshire||Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras, W|
|Alden, Percy||Bolton, T. D. (Derbyshire, N.E.||Cooper, G. J.|
|Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)||Brace, William||Corbett, C. H (Sussex, E.Grinst'd|
|Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)||Bramsdon, T. A.||Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.|
|Armitage, R.||Branch, James||Cowan, W. H.|
|Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry||Brigg, John||Cremer, William Randal|
|Astbury, John Meir||Bright, J. A.||Crombie, John William|
|Atherley-Jones, L.||Brooke, Stopford||Crooks, William|
|Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)||Brunner, J. F. L. (Lanes., Leigh)||Crosfield, A. H.|
|Baker, JosephA. (Finsbury, E.)||Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen||Davies, David (Montgomery Co.|
|Balfour, Robert (Lanark)||Bryco, J. A. (Inverness Burghs)||Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)|
|Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)||Buchanan, Thomas Rybum||Davies, Timothy (Fulham)|
|Barker, John||Buckmaster, Stanley O.||Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)|
|Barlow, John Emmott (Somerset||Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)|
|Barlow, Percy (Bedford)||Burnyeat, J. D. W.||Dewar, John A. (Inverness-shire|
|Barnard, E. B.||Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas||Dickson-Poynder. Sir John P.|
|Barnes, G. N.||Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles||Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles|
|Barran, Rowland Hirst||Byles, William Pollard||Dobson, Thomas W.|
|Beale, W. P.||Cairns, Thomas||Duckworth, James|
|Beauchamp, E.||Cameron, Robert||Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness|
|Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)||Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)|
|Beck, A. Cecil||Cawley, Frederick||Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)|
|Bell, Richard||Chance, Frederick William||Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)|
|Bonn, John Williams (Devonp'rt||Channing, Francis Allston||Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)|
|Benn, W. (Tow'rHamlets, S. Geo.||Cheetham, John Frederick||Elibank, Master of|
|Bennett, E. N.||Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.||Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward|
|Bertram, Julius||Churchill, W'inston Spencer||Essex, R. W.|
|Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford)||Clarke, C. Goddard||Evans, Samuel T.|
|Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)||Cleland, J. W.||Eve, Harry Trelawney|
|Billson, Alfred||Clough, W.||Everett, R. Lacey|
|Faber, G. H. (Boston)||Luttrell, Hugh Fownes||Robertson, Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee)|
|Fenwick, Charles||Lynch, H. B.||Robertson. Sir G Scott (Bradford|
|Ferens, T. R.||Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)|
|Fiennes, Hon. Eustace||Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs||Robinson, S.|
|Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter||Maclean, Donald||Robson, Sir William Snowdon|
|Fuller, John Michael F.||Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.||Rogers, F. E. Newman|
|Fullerton, Hugh||Macpherson, J. T.||Rowlands, J.|
|Gibb, James (Harrow)||M'Arthur, William||Runciman, Walter|
|Gill, A. H.||M'Callum, John M.||Russell, T. W.|
|Gladstone, Rt. Hn. HerbertJohn||M'Crae, George||Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)|
|Goddard, Daniel Ford||M'Kenna, Reginald||Scarisbrick, T. T. L.|
|Grant, Corrie||M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)||Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester)|
|Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)||M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)||Sears, J. E.|
|Greenwood, Hamar (York)||M'Micking, Major G.||Seaverns, J. H.|
|Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward||Maddison, Frederick||Seddon, J.|
|Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton||Mallet, Charles E.||Seely, Major J. B.|
|Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis||Manfield, Harry (Northants)||Shackleton, David James|
|Hardie, J. Keir (MerthyrTydvil.||Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)||Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)|
|Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)||Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)||Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.)|
|Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)||Marnham, F. J.||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss sh.||Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)||Silcock, Thomas Ball|
|Hart-Davies, T.||Massie, J,||Simon, John Allsebrook|
|Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)||Masterman, C. F. G.||Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie|
|Harwood, George||Micklem, Nathaniel||Snowdon, P.|
|Haslam, James (Derbyshire)||Mond, A.||Soares, Ernest J.|
|Haalam, Lewis (Monmouth)||Money, L. G. Chiozza||Spicer, Albert|
|Haworth, Arthur A.||Montagu, E. S.||Stanger, H. Y.|
|Helme, Norval Watson||Montgomery, H. H.||Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)|
|Henderson, Arthur (Durham)||Morley, Rt. Hon. John||Steadman, W. C.|
|Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.||Morrell, Philip||Stewart, Halley (Greenock)|
|Henry, Charles S.||Moss, Samuel||Stewart-Smith D. (Kendal)|
|Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)||Murray, James||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe||Myer, Horatio||Stuart, James (Sunderland)|
|Higham, John Sharp||Napier, T. B.||Summerbell, T.|
|Hobart, Sir Robert||Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)||Sutherland, J. E.|
|Hodge, John||Nicholls, George||Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)|
|Holden, E. Hopkinson||Nieholson, Charles N (Doneaster||Taylor, John W. (Durham)|
|Holland, Sir William Henry||Norman, Henry||Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)|
|Hooper, A. G.||Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)|
|Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)||Nussey, Thomas Willans||Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen.E.)|
|Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N||Nuttall, Harry||Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)|
|Horniman, Emslie John||O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)||Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)|
|Horridge, Thomas Gardner||Parker, James (Halifax)||Thomasson, Franklin|
|Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Partington, Oswald||Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset,E,|
|Hudson, Walter||Paul, Herbert||Tillett, Louis John|
|Hyde, Clarendon||Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)||Tomkinson, James|
|Isaacs, Rufus Daniel||Pearce, William (Limehouse)||Torrance, A. M.|
|Jacoby, James Alfred||Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)||Toulmin, George|
|Jenkins, J.||Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk, Eye)||Trevelyan, Charles Philips|
|Johnson, John (Gateshead)||Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)||Ure, Alexander|
|Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)||Philipps, J. Wynford (Pem broke||Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)|
|Jones, Leif (Appleby)||Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)||Walters, John Tudor|
|Jones, William (Carnarvonshire||Pickersgill, Edward Hare||Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)|
|Jowett, F. W.||Pirie, Duncan V.||Wardle, George J.|
|Kekewich, Sir George||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central||Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.|
|Kincaid-Smith, Captain||Price, Robert John (Norfolk,E.||Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan|
|King, Alfred John (Knutsford)||Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Laidlaw, Robert||Priestly, W. E. B. (Bradford, E.)||Waterlow, D. S.|
|Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster)||Radford, G. H.||Wedgwood, Josiah C.|
|Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)||Rainy, A. Rolland||Whitbread, Howard|
|Lambert, George||Raphael, Herbert H.||White, George (Norfolk)|
|Lamont, Norman||Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'||White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire|
|Layland-Barratt, Francis||Rees, J. D.||White, Luke (York, E.R.)|
|Lea, Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.||Rendall, Athelstan||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington||Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th||Whitehead, Rowland.|
|Lehmann, R. C. Lever, A.||Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n|
|Levy (Essex, Harwich||Richardson, A.||Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)|
|Lever, W. H. (Cheshire,Wirral)||Rickett, J. Compton||Whittaker, Thomas Palmer|
|Levy, Maurice||Ridsdale, E. A.||Wiles, Thomas|
|Lewis, John Herbert||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)||Wilkie, Alexander|
|Lough, Thomas||Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
|Lupton, Arnold||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)||Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)|
|Williamson, G. H. (Worcester)||Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES— Mr Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.|
|Wills, Arthur Walters||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)|
|Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)||Wood, T. M'Kinnon|
|Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)||Woodhouse, SirJ. T (Huddersf'd|
|Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.)||Yoxall, James Henry|
§ *MR. LEVY (Leicestershire, Loughborough.)
moved to insert the following words—But a separate account shall be kept of all moneys expended by the local education authority on repairs, alterations, and improvements of the structure, and the amounts so expended shall be taken into consideration in fixing, at any future time, the amount to be paid by the local education authority in respect of the hire or purchase of the building; and in the event of the non-renewal of the agreement by reason of the action or demands of the owners, the local education authority shall be empowered to recover from the owners the unexhausted value of such structural improvements, alterations, and repairs.The main object of his Amendment was to safeguard the local education authorities against unreasonable actions when it was necessary to renew agreements for the use of schools. He thought, if the Amendment were accepted, it would promote good feeling between the local education authorities and the owners of non-provided schools. It would also tend to prevent the erection of a lot of small schools, which did not tend to educational efficiency. He was quite sure that unless they had some provision and safeguard such as this, friction would arise, and the local education authorities would build new schools themselves. Therefore, he thought the Amendment was, not only in the interests of the general public, but also in the interests of the owners of the schools. He would point out also that the owners of the schools would enjoy the benefits of the alterations and improvements during two whole days of the week, and five evenings a week, whereas the local education authority, who carried out the improvements and alterations at their own expense, would only have the benefit of them for a few hours on five days a week. Therefore, it was not unreasonable to say that the local authority should have the unexhausted value of structural improvements, alterations, and repairs.
In page 1, line 26, after the word 'authority,' to insert the words, 'but a separate account shall be kept of all moneys expended by the
local education authority on repairs, alterations, and improvements of the structure, and the amounts so expended shall be taken into consideration in fixing, at any future time, the amount to be paid by the local education authority in respect of the hire or purchase of the building; and in the event of the non-renewal of the agreement by reason of the action or demands of the owners, the local education authority shall be empowered to recover from the owners the unexhausted value of such structural improvements, alterations, and repairs.'
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. LOUGH
said the provision which the hon. Member would like to insert no doubt referred to a very prudent arrangement which it might be desirable to make, but the question was whether it was desirable to make it a statutory arrangement. Although there might be circumstances under which it might be a good thing to make such a bargain as was suggested by the Amendment, yet there might be circumstances in which a different kind of bargain might be proper.
§ MR. LOUGH
said the words assumed that the local authorities were unable to make a bargain for themselves. They could not assume that. They must assume that they were capable local authorities and well fitted to make a bargain. If they altered the arrangements in this way, they should alter the whole structure of the scheme. Therefore, although, as he had said, the arrangement might be a very desirable one in many cases, he did not think they ought to make it statutory. Moreover, the Amendment extended to repairs, and he thought to apply such a provision to repairs would be rather straining the principles of justice. The local authority carried out their own 921 alterations for their own purposes and they might not be available for other purposes. Moreover, the Amendment would involve the necessity of recovering the money personally, which he did not think his hon. friend would desire. For all these reasons the Government thought it better to retain the idea embodied in the Bill, that the local authority should make its own bargain, and therefore they could not accept the Amendment of his hon. friend.
§ The Amendment was, by leave with-drawn.
§ COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY
moved an Amendment to provide that where a school house was made over by agreement to the local education authority for the purposes of the Bill, and owing to an increase in population, a demand by the Board of Education, or some other circumstance an enlargement was found necessary, the owner should have the option of carrying out such alterations at his own cost and of recouping himself by charging such a fair percentage on his expenditure as would be equivalent to the amount the local authority would have to spend in carrying out the work in its own way. It was, of course, an underlying principle of the Amendment that the owner would have to satisfy in full the requirements made by the local authority in respect of space, ventilation, etc. But an owner might have built a school more architecturally beautiful than was necessary for strictly utilitarian purposes, and if alterations were carried out in the strictly economical way in which the local authority would be bound to carry them out the architectural beauty of the building might be destroyed. He therefore thought the owner should have the option of carrying out the work himself with absolute security to the local education authority. The Amendment would not only add to the inducement of the owner in the first instance to come to an agreement with the local education authority, but would also obviate a claim being raised at the 922 expiration of the lease because of the mischief done to the owner's property.
In page 1, line 26, after the word 'authority,' to insert the words, 'but the owners shall have the option of carrying out such alterations or improvements at their own expense, and to charge, in addition to any arrangements already made, such a sum as may represent a fair percentage of such expenditure.'
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. BIRRELL
said the Government were quite prepared to consider this Amendment. He had before him a rough draft of words which he thought would give effect to it, but they would probably require revision before the report stage. He would then be prepared with words which would carry out the right hon. Gentleman's intention.
§ COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY
said in view of the right hon. Gentleman's proposal he would ask leave to withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD BALCARRES
moved to omit Sub-head (b) of Sub-section (1), which provided that one of the conditions of an arrangement for taking over a school-house should be that it was free from any trusts or conditions which were not consistent with the conduct of a public elementary school or restricted the full control of the school by the local authority. He moved the Amendment formally in order that the President of the Board of Education might give some explanation of the sub-section. The impression one got from it was that it was an attack on the existing system of trusts, and the latter part appeared to be a diminution of those powers of delegation which were to be conferred on county councils by Clause 26 and on which the right hon. Gentleman in his introductory speech laid so much stress.
In page 2, line 1, to leave out paragraph (b), of subsection (1).—(Lord Balcarres.)
§ Question put, "That paragraph (b), of sub-section (1), to the word 'any,' stand part of the clause."
§ MR. BIRRELL
said the object of the sub-section was, he thought, obivous enough, namely, to liberate a school-house when obtained by the local education authority from trusts which would bind the authority in a denominational sense. It was, therefore, essential that if the main principles of the Bill were to have any effect—if there was to be full popular control and a cessation of religious tests—that some such sub-section as this should be inserted. If the subsection were struck out a number of denominational schools might continue to be hampered by trusts absolutely alien to the main purpose of the Bill.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSON
thought all were agreed that if the local education authority was to have the use of the building during school hours it should be unfettered in the use of it for the purposes of a public elementary school; but he should have thought words might safely have been introduced to ensure that the sub-section did not give away privileges which it was proposed to confer by Clauses 3 and 4. This was one of several instances in which those privileges were rendered nugatory by other words in the Bill.
§ MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR (Liverpool, East Toxteth)
asked for the Chairman's ruling as to an Amendment of which he had given notice, but which was not on the Paper. The Amendment would enable the owners of a voluntary school to include in their arrangements with the local education authority not merely the facilities under Clause 3, but also Christian instruction under the Cowper-Temple clause on every day. If his Amendment were not in order he would have to say now what he desired to bring forward.
said he had not had time to look at the Amendment, but if it were in order he would put the Question in such a way as would save the hon. Member.
§ MR. WYNDHAM
said the Minister for Education in opposing the Amendment stated that he must preserve local control. Surely that phrase was now threadbare. Under Clause 1 a general rule had been laid down restricting the liberty of the local authority to Cowper-Temple regulations. Under Clauses 3 and 4 it was said there was to be a certain degree of exception allowed for those preferring denominational education. He did not say it was a very logical plan. But why encumber the Bill by putting in sub-section (b)? It was wholly un-necessary.
§ MR. BIRRELL
said it was unfortunate that Members on the front bench opposite did not agree one with another. The hon. Baronet believed the sub-section was necessary, but raised the point that its language might conflict with the provisions of Clauses 3 and 4. He was advised that this would not be the case; but he would undertake to consider whether any saving words were necessary in order to ensure that nothing should be done that would in any way interfere with the full force of these subsequent clauses.
§ *MR. EVELYN CECIL
said the Amendment raised the serious question of tampering with trust deeds. There were many trustees who felt that they ought under no circumstances to depart from the conditions of their trust deeds. The feelings of those trustees were grossly disregarded by this sub-section, and the legislature ought not lightly to set about so dangerous a policy. Tampering with trust deeds was a thing which had never been attempted to this extent before. He knew that the right hon. Gentleman in a speech the other day stated that something of the kind was done in 1902. But it was done in a more limited way, and there were even stronger protests made then against its being done. He felt perfectly justified, therefore, in protesting against what was likely to become more and more a dangerous policy, and in insisting that no such general policy should be inserted in a Bill of this kind. The Committee ought to consider very seriously before passing Sub-section (b). The trusts had 925 proved of great public benefit and utility, and he thought it would very ungrateful on the part of the legislature so summarily to disregard them.
§ MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR
said he wished to point out the position in which religious education would be left in the transferred voluntary schools by this sub-section if passed without alteration. Under the subsection as it stood the owners or trustees of voluntary schools would be able to bargain with the local education authority for special facilities on two days of the week. That was the limit of their interest in religious instruction under Sub-section (b) if it went through as it now stood. If he was to believe some of the speeches to which he had listened from hon. Members on the other side of the House he must suppose that in regard to Cowper-Temple teaching they would prefer religious instruction in the transferred schools to be limited to two days of the week. He did not believe that the great majority of those who owned the schools would share that indifference. He believed it would add to the utility of the sub-section if power was given to the owners or trustees of voluntary schools to include in their bargain with the local authority a stipulation for the simple Bible teaching which was permitted under the Cowper-Temple Clause of the Act of 1870. He thought the Parliamentary Secretary would admit that the transferred schools would, unless something of this kind was put in, be loft to the absolute discretion of the local education authority.
This is an amendment that Sub section (b) be left out. The hon. Member is now proposing to add something to the sub-section. He is, therefore, not in order.
§ MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR
said he was arguing on the merits of the sub-section. The point was whether the sub-section should remain in the Bill or not.
The hon. Member is entitled to do that, but he did not seem to be addressing his remarks to that point when I stopped him.
§ MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR
said that one of the weaknesses of the position in connection with the Act of 1870 was that there was no security for the continuance of religious instruction at all. He submitted that this House had a particular duty to fulfil in regard to the transferred voluntary schools. If these schools were going to be transferred it would not satisfy the religious sentiment of those who owned or used them now to have facilities only two days a week for special religious instruction, while at the option of the local education authority there might be no religious teaching at all on the remaining days of the week. This House had rejected the secular solution of the question, and that, he thought, was a matter of general satisfaction. Having arrived at that decision, he submitted that it was the duty of the Committee to see that in the denominational schools, hitherto dedicated to religious instruction, there should be security for the simple Bible teaching allowed under the Cowper-Temple clause. He trusted that words would be introduced here or later which would secure by statute that in the transferred voluntary schools there should be not only the special facilities for which their owners would contend on two days of the week, but also some definite Christian teaching on the other days such as was permitted under the Act of 1870.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
said the hon. Member for the East Toxteth Division had raised one of the most important questions in the whole problem of the education of the country. The hon. Member had suggested, if he understood him rightly, that there should be a differentiation between a transferred voluntary school and an existing provided school, the difference consisting in this: the transferred school was to make Cowper-Temple teaching obligatory, while it was not obligatory in the case of the ordinary provided school.
§ MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR
said that on the question of making simple Christian teaching statutory some of them had an Amendment on Clause 1 which was ruled out of order as not being in the proper place. He would like to ask what would be the proper place for such an Amendment?
said it was hardly his place to answer that question. He could only deal with an Amendment when it was put before him.
§ MR. WYNDHAM
said that if Clause 2 passed in its present shape, even subject to the concessions foreshadowed by the Minister of Education, they would have lost the opportunity of discussing the question that those schools which had
§ been religious schools should remain religious schools.
said that that was only another way of putting the question which he had already stated he was not in a position to answer.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 382; Noes, 97. (Division List No. 120.)931
|Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)||Buckmaster, Stanley O.||Evans, Samuel T.|
|Abraham, William (Rhondda)||Burke, E. Haviland||Eve, Harry Trelawney|
|Acland, Francis Dyke||Burns, Rt. Hon. John||Everett, R. Lacey|
|Agnew, George William||Burnyeat, J. D. W.||Fenwick, Charles|
|Ainsworth, John Stirling||Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas||Ferens, T. R.|
|Alden, Percy||Buxton, Rt. Hn. SydneyCharles||Ffrench, Peter|
|Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)||Byles, William Pollard||Field, William|
|Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)||Cairns, Thomas||Fiennes, Hon. Eustace|
|Ambrose, Robert||Cameron, Robert||Flynn, James Christopher|
|Armitage, R.||Carr-Gomm, H. W.||Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter|
|Asquith.Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry||Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight||Fuller, John Michael F.|
|Astbury, John Meir||Cawley, Frederick||Fullerton, Hugh|
|Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)||Chance, Frederick William||Gibb, James (Harrow)|
|Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)||Channing, Francis Allston||Gill, A. H.|
|Balfour, Robert (Lanark||Cheetham, John Frederick||Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John|
|Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)||Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.||Goddard, Daniel Ford|
|Barker, John||Churchill, Winston Spencer||Gooch, George Peabody|
|Barlow, John Emmott (Somerset||Clarke, C. Goddard||Grant, Corrie,|
|Barlow, Percy (Bedford)||Cleland, J. W.||Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)|
|Barnard, E. B.||Clough, W.||Greenwood, Hamar (York)|
|Barnes, G. N.||Cobbold, Felix Thornley||Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward|
|Barran, Rowland Hirst||Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)||Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill|
|Barry, E. (Cork, S.)||Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras, W.||Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton|
|Beale, W. P.||Condon, Thomas Joseph||Hammond, John|
|Beaucharap, E.||Cooper, G. J.||Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis|
|Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)||Corbett, CH. (SussexE.Grinst'd)||Hardie, J. Keir (MerthyrTydvil)|
|Beck, A. Cecil||Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.||Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)|
|Bell, Richard||Cotton, Sir H. J. S.||Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)|
|Bellairs, Carlyon||Cowan, W. H.||Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithn'ss-sh|
|Benn, John Williams (Devonp'rt||Crombie, John William||Hart-Davies, T.|
|Benn, W. (T'w'r Hamlets. S. Geo.||Crooks, William||Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)|
|Bennett, E. N.||Crosfield, A. H.||Harwood, George|
|Berridge, T. H. D.||Davies, David (MontgomeryCo.||Haslam, James (Derbyshire)|
|Bertram, Julius||Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)||Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)|
|Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford||Davies, Timothy (Fulham)||Haworth, Arthur A.|
|Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)||Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)||Hayden, John Patrick|
|Billson, Alfred||Delany, William||Hazleton, Richard|
|Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine||Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.||Helme, Norval Watson|
|Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff.)||Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)||Henderson, Arthur (Durham)|
|Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire||Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.||Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.).|
|Blake, Edward||Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles||Henry, Charles S.|
|Boland, John||Dillon, John||Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.)|
|Bolton, T. D. (Derbyshire, N.||Dobson, Thomas W.||Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)|
|Brace, William||Dolan, Charles Joseph||Higham, John Sharp|
|Bramsdon, T. A.||Duckworth, James||Hobart, Sir Robert|
|Branch, James||Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Fumess||Hodge, John|
|Brigg, John||Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)||Hogan, Michael|
|Bright, J. A.||Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall||Holden, E. Hopkinson|
|Brodie, H. C.||Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)||Holland, Sir William Henry|
|Brooke, Stopford||Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)||Hooper, A. G.|
|Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh)||Elibank, Master of||Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)|
|Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen||Ells, Rt. Hon. John Edward||Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset,N|
|Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs(||Erskine, David C.||Horniman, Emslie John|
|Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn||Essex, R. W.||Horridge, Thomas Gardner|
|Howard, Hon. Geoffrey||Moss, Samuel||Runciman, Walter|
|Hudson, Walter||Murphy, John||Russell, T. W.|
|Hyde, Clarendon||Murray, James||Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)|
|Isaacs, Rufus Daniel||Myer, Horatio||Scarisbrick, T. T. L.|
|Jacoby, James Alfred||Napier, T. B.||Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester)|
|Jenkins, J.||Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)||Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne|
|Johnson, John (Gateshead)||Nicholls, George||Sears, J. E.|
|Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)||Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r||Soaverns, J. H.|
|Jones, Leif (Appleby)||Nolan, Joseph||Seddon, J.|
|Jones, William (Carnarvonshire||Norman, Henry||Seely, Major J. B.|
|Jowett, F. W.||Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Shackleton, David James|
|Joyce, Michael||Nussey, Thomas Willans||Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)|
|Kearley, Hudson E.||Nuttall, Harry||Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick, B.|
|Kekewich, Sir George||O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary, Mid||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Kennedy, Vincent Paul||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Silcock, Thomas Ball|
|Kincaid-Smith, Captain||O'Connor, Jamos (Wieklow, W.)||Simon, John Allsebrook|
|King, Alfred John (Knutsford||O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)||Smeiton, Donald Mackenzie|
|Laidlaw, Robert||O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)||Snowdon, P.|
|Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster||O'Doherty, Philip||Soares, Ernest J|
|Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)||O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)||Spicer, Albert|
|Lambert, George||O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)||Stanger, H. Y.|
|Lamont, Norman||O'Dowd, John||Stanley, Hn. A. Lyluph (Chesh.)|
|Lawson, Sir Wilfrid||O'Grady, J.||Steadman, W. C.|
|Layland-Barratt, Francis||O'Hare, Patrick||Stewart, Halley (Greenock)|
|Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras, E.)||O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.||Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)|
|Leese, Sir JosephF. (Accrington||O'Malley, William||Strachey, Sir Edward|
|Lehmann, R. C.||O'Mara, James||Straus, B. S. (Mile End)|
|Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich)||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.||Stuart, James (Sunderland)|
|Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)||Parker, James (Halifax)||Sullivan, Donal|
|Levy, Maurice||Partington, Oswald||Summerboll, T.|
|Lewis, John Herbert||Paul, Herbert||Sutherland, J. E.|
|Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David||Pearce Robert (Staffs. Leek)||Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)|
|Lough, Thomas||Pearce, William (Limehouse)||Taylor, John W. (Durham)|
|Lundon, W.||Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)||Taylor, Theodore C. (Radclifle|
|Lupton, Arnold||Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk, Eye)||Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury|
|Luttrell, Hugh Fownes||Philipps. Col. Ivor (S'thampton)||Tennant, H.J. (Berwickshire)|
|Lynch, H. B.||Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke||Thomas, A bel (Carmarthen, E|
|Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)||Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)||Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)|
|Macdonald, J. M. (FalkirkB'ghs||Pickersgill, Edward Hare||Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr|
|Mackarness, Frederic C.||Pirio, Duncan V||Thomasson, Franklin|
|Maclean, Donald||Pollard, Dr.||Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset,E.|
|Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.||Power, Patrick Joseph||Tomkinson, James|
|MacNeill, John Gordon Swift||Price, C. E. (Edinburgh,Central)||Torrance, A. M.|
|Macpherson, J. T.||Price, Robert John (Norfolk.E.)||Toulmin, George|
|MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down. S.)||Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)||Trevelyan, Charles Philips|
|MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)||Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford,E.)||Ure, Alexander|
|M'Arthur, William||Eadford, G. H.||Verney, F. W.|
|M'Callum, John M.||Rainy, A. Holland||Villiers, Ernest Amherst|
|M'Crae, George||Raphael, Herbert H.||Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)|
|M'Kenna, Reginald||Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro')||Walters, John Tudor|
|M'Killop, W.||Redmond, John E. (Waterford)||Walton, Sir JohnL. (Leeds, S.)|
|M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)||Redmond, William (Clare)||Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)|
|M'Laren, H, D. (Stafford, W.)||Rees, J. D.||Wardle, George J.|
|M'Micking, Major G.||Rendall, Athelstan||Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.|
|Maddison, Frederick||Richards Thomas (W.Monm'th||Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)|
|Mallet, Charles E.||Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampt'n||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)|
|Manfield, Harry Northants)||Richardson, A.||Waterlow, D. S.|
|Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln||Rickett, A. Compton||Wedgwood, Josiah C.|
|Marks, G. (Croydon Launceston)||Ridsdale, E. A.||Whitbread, Howard|
|Marnham, F. J.||Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)||White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire|
|Mason, A. E. W. (Covontry)||Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)||White, Luke (York, E.R.)|
|Massie, J.||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)||White, Patrick (Meath, North)|
|Meagher, Michael||Robertson, Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee)||Whitehead, Rowland|
|Meehan, Patrick A.||Robertson, Sir G, Scott (Bradf'rd||Whiteley, George (York, W.R.|
|Micklem, Nathaniel||Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)||Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)|
|Mond, A.||Robinson, S.||Whittker, Thomas Palmer|
|Money, L. G. Chiozza||Wiles, Thomas|
|Montagu, E. S.||Robson, Sir William Snowdon||Wilkie, Alexander|
|Montgomery, H. H.||Roe, Sir Thomas||Williams, J. (Glamorgan)|
|Mooney, J. J.||Rogers, F. E. Newman||Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)|
|Morley, Rt. Hon. John||Rose, Charles Day||Williamson, A. (Elgin & Nairn|
|Morrell, Philip||Rowlands, J.|
|Wills, Arthur Walters||Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.|
|Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)||Wood, T. M'Kinnon|
|Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)||Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersfi'd|
|Acland-Hood. Rt. Hn. Sir Alex. F.||Fell, Arthur||Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.||Nield, Herbert|
|Anstruther-Gray, Major||Fletcher, J. S.||Pease,Herbert Pike (Darlington|
|Arkwright, John Stanhope||Forster, Henry William||Percy, Earl|
|Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn.Hugh O.||Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)||Ratcliff, Major R. F.|
|Ashley, W. W.||Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)||Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)|
|Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (City Lond||Haddock, George R.||Rutherford, John (Lancashire)|
|Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)||Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford||Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)|
|Banner, John S Harmood-||Harrison Broadley, Col. H. B.||Salter, Arthur Clavell|
|Baring. Hon. Guy (Winchester)||Hay, Hon. Claude George||Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert|
|Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)||Hervey. F. W. F. (Bury S. Edm'ds||Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)|
|Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks||Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)||Smith,AbelH. (Hertford, East)|
|Beckett, Hon. Gervase||Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)||Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)|
|Bignold, Sir Arthur||Hills, J. W.||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Bridgeman, W. Clive||Hornby, Sir William Henry||Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk|
|Brotherton, Edward Allen||Kennaway. Rt. Hon. Sir John H.||Starkey, John R.|
|Burdett-Coutts, W.||Kenyon-Slaney. Rt. Hon. Col. W.||Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (OxfdUniv|
|Butcher, Samuel Henry||Keswick, William||Thomson-W. Mitchell-Lanark|
|Carlile, E. Hildred||King, Sir Renry Seymour (Hull)||Thornton, Percy M.|
|Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Lane-Fox, G. R.||Tumour, Viscount|
|Castlereagh, Viscount||Lee, ArthurH. (Hants., Fareham||Valentia, Viscount|
|Cave, George||Liddell, Henry||Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard|
|Cavendish. Rt. Hon. Victor C. W.||Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R.||Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham||Walrond, Hon. Lionel|
|Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone.E.||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin. S.)||Wardet Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)|
|Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham)||Lowe, Sir Francis William||Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)|
|Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.||Maclver, David (Liverpool)||Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-|
|Craig, Captain James (Down,E.)||M'Calmont, Colonel James||Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George|
|Craik, Sir Henry||Magnus, Sir Philip||Younger, George|
|Dairymple, Viscount||Mason, James F. (Windsor)|
|Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-||Meysey-Thompson, E. C.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Rawlinson and Sir William Bull.|
|Du Cros, Harvey||Middlemore, John Throgmorton|
|Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan||Morpeth, Viscount|
|Fardell, Sir T. George||Muntz, Sir philip A.|
§ And, it being after Eleven of the Clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.