Commons Sitting of 14 June 1906

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.
Mr. SPEAKERinformed the House that he had received from the Judges appointed to try the several Election Petitions the following Certificate and Report relating to the Election for the City of Worcester:—
The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Acts, 1854–1895.
Election of a Member of Parliament for the City of Worcester, holden on the 17th day of January, 1906.
To the Right Honourable The Speaker of the House of Commons.
We, Sir John Compton Lawrance, Knight, and Sir Joseph Walton, Knight, Judges of the High Court of Justice, and two of the Judges on the Rota for the time being for the Trial of Election Petitions in England and Wales, do hereby Certify in pursuance of the said Acts that upon the twenty-second to the twenty-sixth day of May in this year, we duly held a Court for the trial of and did try the Election Petition for the City of Worcester between Henry Devenish Harben and Richard Cadbury, Petitioners, and George Henry Williamson, Respondent. And in further pursuance of the said Acts We Certify that at the conclusion of the said trial, we determined that the said George Henry Williamson, being the Member whose Election and Return were complained of in the said Petition was not duly elected and returned, and that the said Election was void. And we do hereby certify in writing such our determination to you.
And whereas charges were made in the said Petition of Corrupt and Illegal

1103
Practices having been committed at the said Election, We, in further pursuance of the said Acts, Report as follows:—

1. That no corrupt or illegal practice was proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge and consent of any Candidate at the said Election.

2. That the persons whose names appear in the First Schedule hereto were proved to have been guilty of the corrupt practices of bribery and treating.

3. That there is reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the said Election.

4. That the said George Henry Williamson was guilty by his agents of the corrupt practice of bribery.

5. That Certificates of Indemnity have been furnished to the persons proved guilty of bribery or treating whose names appear in the Second Schedule hereto.

6. That the corrupt practices which, as there is reason to believe, extensively prevailed at the said Election were treating and the distribution of small sums, varying in amount from sixpence to two shillings and sixpence, as bribes amongst the poorer class of voters.

A Copy of the Evidence and of our Judgments, taken by the Deputies of the Shorthand Writer of the House of Commons, accompanies this our Certificate.

The First Schedule.

  Part I.
  Names of Persons guilty of Bribery and Treating.

  Francis Stephen Clarke.

  William Watts.

  Thomas Epps.

  John Fincher.

  Henry Ranford.

  John Price.

  William Caseley, jun.

  John Cox.

  George Hughes.

  John Phillips.

  Charles Albert Webb.

  Charles Gregory.

  Charles Hughes (Queen Street).

  Thomas Collins.

  Nathaniel Turner.

  Part II.
  Names of Persons guilty of Bribery.

  Alfred Verrier.

  Walter Baulch.

  Thomas Henry Burton.

  Ernest Cordle.

  John Taylor.

  William Henry Smith.

  Edgar Billings.

  George Brant.

  Elijah Bunn.

  Thomas Joseph George Andrews.

  Henry Willis.

  George Manton.

  Robert Brant.

  Alfred Boister.

  Edwin Elcock.

  Daniel Taylor.

  Walter Soulsby King.

  Arthur Hall.

  Walter Poole.

  Charles Hughes (of Dolday).

  William White.

  John Hughes.

  Samuel Hale.

  Charles Thomas.

  Henry Glover.

  George Edward Griffiths.

  Ernest John Hodnett.

  Samuel Giles.

  Joseph Lee.

  Thomas Edward Andrews.

  Harry James Dovey.

  Owen Cook.

  John Gough.

  William Hickling

  William Henry Prodger.

  Ernest Charles.

  Frank Millington.

  Part III.
  Names of Persons Guilty of Treating,

  Thomas Hugh.

  Walter Church.

  John Bridges.

  The Second Schedule.
  Names of Persons who have been furnished with Certificates of Indemnity.

  Francis Stephen Clarke.

  William White.

  John Hughes,

  John Fincher.

  Charles Thomas.

  John Price.

  George Edward Griffiths.

  John Cox.

  John Phillips.

  Thomas Edward Andrews.

  Charles Gregory.

  Thomas Collins.

  John Gough.

  Nathaniel Turner.

  William Henry Prodger.

  Alfred Verrier.

  Thomas Henry Burton.

  John Taylor.

  Edgar Billings.

  William Henry Smith.

  George Brant.

  Thomas Joseph George Andrews.

  Elijah Bunn.

  Henry Willis.

  Robert Brant.

  George Manton.

  Edwin Elcock.

  Alfred Boister.

  Thomas Pugh.

  Daniel Taylor.

  John Bridges.

  Arthur Hall.

  Walter Church.

  Walter Poole.

  Dated this 13th day of June, 1906.

  J. C. LAWRANCE.

  JOSEPH WALTON.

  And the said certificate and Report from Mr. Justice Lawrance and Mr. Justice Walton, Judges of the High Court of Justice, was ordered to be entered in the journals of this House.
  Copy of Shorthand Writer's Notes laid upon the Table by Mr. Speaker.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. GEORGE WHITELEY,)asked whether it would be open to the Government to advert at a future date to the declaration just made that corrupt practices extensively prevailed.
  MR. BLAKEasked whether it was not usual in such cases to have the evidence printed.
  *MR. SPEAKER: If any hon. Member or right hon. Member moves that the judgment and evidence should be printed of course that would be done.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir JOHN WALTON, Leeds, S.)moved that the judgment and the evidence be printed.
  *MR. SPEAKERsaid it was not necessary for him to put the Motion.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked whether it was not in accordance with precedent that in a case where corrupt practices extensively prevailed the issue of the writ should be opposed; and whether this was not a ground for disfranchisement.
  *MR. SPEAKER: That is not a proper Question for me.
  MR. GEORGE WHITELEYsaid that notice of Motion for a new writ had to be on the Paper for forty-eight hours before it could be moved.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEpresumed the Government would follow the usual practice of themselves calling attention to this subject.
  Ordered, That the Copy of the Shorthand Writer's Notes of the Judgment of Mr. Justice Lawrance and Mr. Justice Walton on the Trial of the Election Petition for the City of Worcester, also the Minutes of Evidence taken at the
  1106
  Trial of the said Election Petition, be printed. [No. 198.]—(Mr. Attorney-General.)

  PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 7) Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
  Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
  Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
  Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire Electric Power Bill, Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Roport to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Hackney Electricity Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Oldham and Saddleworth District Tramways (Abandonment) Bill; Mary-port Harbour Bill [Lords]. Reported, without Amendment; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Hull Joint Dock Bill [Lords]; Buenos Ayres Grand National Tramways Bill [Lords]; Channel Ferry Railway and Quay Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Scottish Provident Institution Buildings Bill [Lords]. Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill to be read the third time.
  Poole Corporation Water Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Wallasey Tramways and Improvements Bill [Lords]. Reported from the Police and Sanitary Committee, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bury Corporation Bill [Lords] Reported from the Police and Sanitary Committee, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: From Bermondsey; East Grinstead; Leigh; Llanberis; Oldham; Poulton; Rochester (three); St. Cuthbert; Shipton Moyne (two); Sleaford; Stow on the Wold; and, Wandsworth Common; to lie upon the Table.
  (EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL (RELIGIOUS TEACHING).
  Petitions against alteration of Law: From Blackburn; Kilburn (two); Leek; Martley; Nassington; North Peckham (two); Oldham; Paddington Green; Radwinter; Weston-super-Mare; Wilberforce; and Yarwell; to lie upon the Table.
  INFANT LIFE PROTECTION.
  Petitions for alteration of Law: From Faversham and Northwich; to lie upon the Table.
  JURORS' EXPENSES BILL.
  Petition from Carmarthenshire, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL AUTHORITIES (QUALIFICATION OF WOMEN) BILL.
  Two Petitions from North Paddington, in favour: to lie upon the Table.
  POISONS AND PHARMACY BILL [LORDS].
  Petitions for alteration: From Ashford; Clitheroe; Codnor; Colne; East Ham; Exeter (three); Ilkeston; Leeds (West); Paddington (North); Reigate (two); Romford; St. Pancras (East); Salisbury (two); Southport; and Tewkesbury (two); to lie upon the Table.
  VAGRANT CHILDREN BILL.
  Petitions from Longtown, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  PHARMACY (IRELAND) ACTS 1875– 1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated June 9th, 1906, approving of a Regulation made by the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PHARMACY (IRELAND) ACTS 1875–1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated June 9th, 1906, approving of Amended Regulations made by the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Rule made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland appointing the places at which Examinations for 1906 shall be held [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  COLONIAL REPORTS ANNUAL.
  Copy presented, of Colonial Report No. 483 (Ashanti, Report for 1905) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  AGRICULTURAL SETTLEMENTS IN BRITISH COLONIES (DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE).
  Copy presented, of Report of the Departmental Committee appointed to consider Mr. Rider Haggard's Report on Agricultural Settlements in British Colonies. Part I. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  AGRICULTURAL SETTLEMENTS IN BRITISH COLONIES (DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE).
  Copy presented, of Minutes of Evidence taken before the Departmental Committee appointed to consider Mr. Rider Haggard's Report on Agricultural Settlements in British Colonies, with Appendices, Analysis, and Index. Part II. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SOUTH EASTERN AND CHATHAM RAILWAY.
  Copy presented, of Report to the Board of Trade by Major John Wallace Pingle, R.E., of the Inquiry into the circumstances attending the fall of the roof of Charing Cross Station which occurred on December 5th, 1905 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3633 to 3637 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.:
  WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered May 29th; Mr. Dickinson]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 197.]
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Pembroke Dockyard—Reduction of Staff.
  MR. O. C. PHILIPPS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can now give a definite assurance that there will be no further reductions at Pembroke Dockyard (other than what may be due to natural wastage) during the financial year ending March 31st, 1907.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) In addition to the reductions which have already taken place, it will be necessary to discharge about fifty more men at Pembroke, in order to make room for that number of apprentices who complete their time during the current financial year. Beyond this, no further reduction is contemplated other than that due to natural wastage.

  Navy Estimates—Armaments Vote.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state approximately, for purposes of comparison, by how much the Navy Estimates of 1906–7 would be reduced if the old arrangement, existing prior to 1888–9, still existed of charging
  1110
  the Vote for armaments to the Army Estimates.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The Navy Estimates for 1906–7 would be reduced by, approximately, £2,803,000 if the arrangement existing prior to 1888–9, under which provision for Naval Armaments was made in Army Votes, were revived. It may, however, be mentioned that the transfer of the cost of Naval Armaments from Army Estimates was associated with, and was partially counterbalanced by, the transfer to those Estimates of the Vote for Sea Transport (Army), previously included in the Navy Estimates. The amount voted for Army Transport services in the Navy Estimates for 1887–8 was £206,000.

  Conviction of Albert Bach.
  MR. THOMASSON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Albert Bach who, at the Middlesex Sessions on January 9th, 1904, was sentenced to seven years penal servitude for receiving goods, valued at £3 15s., knowing them to have been stolen; whether there was any other evidence of this guilty knowledge than Bach's neglect to record the purchase; whether he is aware that the police gave evidence that Bach was friendly with one Lionel Green, a convicted receiver of stolen goods, and that Bach contented and evidence was given in support of the contention that this evidence of the police was due to confusion between Lionel Green and a Mrs. Green totally unconnected with him, who lived in the same street and was an acquaintance of Bach; whether, seeing that the clerk of the peace wrote to Mrs. Bach that the chairman regretted that having carefully inquired into the whole matter and considered the evidence adduced before him, and further information he had received, he was unable to concur in any application being made to the Secretary of State for any remission of sentence, will he say if the further information thus referred to has ever been communicated to the prisoner or his legal advisors so that he might have an opportunity of rebutting it; and whether, seeing that Bach had never before been convicted of any breach of the Law, he will take steps to reduce the sentence of

  1111
  seven years penal servitude passed upon this man for his first offence.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The case of Albert Bach has repeatedly been under the consideration of my predecessor and myself, and, after giving very careful attention to it, I regret that I can find no grounds for interference. I regret also that it is not possible to discuss by way of Question and Answer either the details of the evidence on which the jury arrived at their verdict or any information which the chairman may have obtained for the purpose of replying to applications from the prisoner's friends.

  Belfast Valuation Return.
  MR. MOONEY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he will grant the Return standing on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Newry.†
  (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) I am informed that the information asked for in the Return has already been given in the valuation and appeal lists issued to the Belfast Corporation, which were open to public inspection. In these circumstances I do not feel justified in authorising the expenditure which would be involved if the Return were granted.

  Army Meat Contracts.
  MR. BARRIE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has found any difficulty in securing an adequate supply of home-fed meat, at a reasonable price, for Army requirements; what is the saving he expects to effect by permitting the supply of foreign meat to the Army; and whether he is prepared to reconsider his decision to permit the supply of foreign meat to the Army in view of the present want of confidence in foreign meat, and the serious injury that will be caused to British and Irish farmers by the threatened partial or total displacement of home-fed meat for Army use.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) There has been no difficulty in obtaining
  —The Return was as follows:—Belfast (Valuation. Return showing the Valuations placed upon each House in Royal Avenue and Donegal Place, Belfast, at the recent re-valuation, showing (1) the Valuation fixed in first instance; (2) after the first appeal; (3) after the appeal to the Recorder.
  1112
  home-bred beef; but so long as there were no tenders for foreign home-killed beef, it could not be possible to say whether the price was reasonable in comparison. Further, it would not be possible to estimate the saving without obtaining tenders to the two specifications. As regards the last part of the Question I have nothing to add to my previous replies on this subject, beyond pointing out that the want of confidence mentioned applies to tinned meat and not to live cattle killed at port of entry.

  Similarity between Blank and Ball Ammunition.
  MR. LANE-FOX: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any complaints have been made of the similarity in shape and general appearance between the blank rifle ammunition now issued to His Majesty's forces and the ball ammunition; whether any accidents have yet occurred through any confusion between the two; and whether, by effecting a difference either in colour or in feel he can see his way to obviate the danger of accident now existing.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The short blank rifle cartridge is quite distinct from the ball cartridge, but the long blank only differs in having its case coloured black. It has now been decided to make a groove round the case of the long blank cartridge so that it can be distinguished by feel.

  Revaluation of the City of Dublin.
  MR. FETHERSTONHAUGH: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury why the Commissioner of Valuation in Ireland did not proceed with the revaluation of Dublin when he finished the revaluation of Belfast; whether the staff employed in the revaluation of Belfast would not have been able to deal with Dublin, a city of about the same size; whether he is aware that in the existing valuation of Dublin no account is taken of business goodwill or the value of publicans' licences; can he state the comparative valuations of Guinness's brewery, Dublin, the Bass and Company's brewery at Burton; and say why exactly the Commissioner of Valuation does not at once proceed to the revaluation of Dublin.

  1113
  (Answered Ly Mr. McKenna.) The revaluation of Belfast, with the revisions necessary to bring it up to date, was only completed on the 6th of this month, and the Commissioner of Valuation is ready to proceed with the Dublin revaluation as soon as the necessary financial arrangements are made. The surveyors and valuers employed in Belfast were discharged some time ago, the appeal work during the past year being done by the permanent staff of the Department. Up to the present no account is taken of the value of the publicans' licences in Dublin. The valuation of Messrs. Guinness's brewery is £22,000, and I am informed that that of Messrs. Bass's breweries is £22,150.

  Dock, Wharves, etc. Return.
  MR. O'GRADY: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is able to grant the Return, re docks, wharves, quays, and ships, which stands on the Order Paper for to-day,†
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I regret that I am unable to grant the Return desired by the hon. Member. As regards several of the points in the Return, e.g., (b), (c), and (e), there is no information in my possession and my Department has no means of obtaining it, while as regards others there would be considerable difficulty involved in getting out the particulars desired. Such information, however, as I am able to give the hon. Member on the different points included in the Return is set out below. (2) The number of docks, wharves, and quays in the United Kingdom recorded in
  †Return showing—(a) The number of Docks, Wharves, and Quays there are in the United Kingdom; (b) The length of working Quays: (c) The number of Ships worked, and tonnage handled; (d) The number of visits paid, during the working time, by the Factory Inspectors to Docks, Wharves, Quays, and Ships: (e) The aggregate number of men employed aboard working Craft and Quays; (f) The number of Accidents, general and fatal, aboard Ship or working overside to Quay; (g) What gears and working plant examined on Docks, Wharves, Quays, and Ships; (h) The number of Factory Inspectors allocated to inspection of Docks, Wharves, Quays, and Ships; (i) What qualification determines the appointment of Inspectors to Docks, Wharves, Quays, and Ships; (j) The number of Accidents in consequence of defective and unsafe ladders in holds of vessels.
  1114
  the Factory Department as subject to the regulations made under Section 79 of the Factory Act is 3,067, but I am not prepared to say that this figure includes every wharf or quay on the rivers, canals, etc., of the country, however small and unimportant, (d) The number of docks, wharves, and quays visited by the factory inspectors during 1905 was 2,147, but I cannot give the number of separate visits. Many docks would be visited frequently. There is no separate record of ships visited in connection with the enforcement of the regulations, (f) and (j) The accidents in docks, wharves, and quays are not tabulated separately or classified according to cause for the purpose of the annual statistics, but some statistics were specially prepared by the Department in connection with the public inquiry two years ago into the regulations when in draft, and I shall be happy to furnish the hon. Member with these if he wishes, (g) All the gearing and plant dealt with by the Regulations are examined, (h) and (i) The work of inspection is carried out by the factory inspectors for the district in which the premises are situated, and no inspectors have been specially appointed for these duties.

  Rehousing of Persons from Prospect Terrace and Derry Street, St. Pancras.
  MR. P. W. WILSON: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the dishousing of persons who reside at Prospect Terrace and Derry Street as tenants of the St. Pancras Borough Council; whether any arrangements have been made for re-housing these people at a reasonable rent; and, if not, whether he can take any steps to secure that such arrangements shall be undertaken without delay.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I am aware that in connection with a Scheme made under Part II. of The Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890, the borough council of St. Pancras are displacing certain persons of the working class who reside at Prospect Terrace and Derry Street. The Order of the Local Government Board sanctioning the scheme required that housing accommodation for 213 persons should be provided in respect of these displacements on a site in Great College Street, and I understand

  1115
  that this accommodation has been provided. The Order further provides that not more than half of the area shall be cleared until provision has been made for housing seventy-two persons on that area. It does not appear to me that the Board can do anything further in the matter.

  Pensions for Lighting and Ventilating Staff of Houses of Parliament.
  MR. ALDEN: To ask the First Commissioner of Works if he will state the number of men employed in the lighting and ventilating department of His Majesty's Office of Works who are qualified to receive a pension on retirement; whether any of the employees are not so qualified; if so, how many, and what is the reason for placing them on a different footing to the remaining portion of the staff.
  (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) There are seventy-four men employed in the lighting and ventilating department at the Houses of Parliament; none of them are qualified to receive a pension on retirement.

  Imports of Colonial and Foreign Plain Spirits for Industrial Purposes.
  MR. CLARK: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state how he intends Sub-section (1) of Section 1 of The Revenue Bill, 1906, to affect Colonial and Foreign plain spirits when imported for use in art and manufacture, or for making industrial methylated spirits; seeing that the surtax, if imposed, after the passing of the Revenue Bill, would act as a protective duty pure and simple.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) Under the sub-section in question, it is proposed to pay the same allowance on Colonial or Foreign plain spirits, when used for industrial purposes, as will be paid in the case of plain British spirits, viz. 3d. per proof gallon. The relative position of these spirits will, therefore, be the same when used for industrial purposes as when used for any other purpose.

  Indian Railway Construction—Line through Cutch.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Government of India, in their programme of railway construction for the year 1905–6, included an allotment of six lakhs for a line from Viramgam to Malia, which forms part of a projected connection with Sind through Cutch; and, in view of the fact that the Cutchi inhabitants of Bombay, the Bombay Chamber of Commerce, the Karachi Chamber of Commerce, and the Municipality of Hyderabad, have sent forward petitions urging that in the public interest the line should pass through Cutch, will he state whether the objections raised by the Rao of Cutch have yet been considered; and, if so, with what result.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The estimates for the construction of the Viramgam-Malia line were sanctioned by the Secretary of State last year, and an allotment was, as stated in the Question, included in the programme for 1905–6, but no expenditure was incurred on it during that year. The allotment for the Bombay-Sind connection in the railway programme for 1906–7 is three lakhs. As I stated in reply to a Question on 2nd May last,† a reconnaissance; of alternative routes to the north and south of the Runn has been sanctioned. I understand that when this reconnaissance has been carried out, the question of the route will be considered.

  Judicial and Executive Functions in the Baroda States.
  SIR H. COTTON: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that, as reported in the last Administration Report of the Baroda State, the complete separation of judicial from executive functions has been effected without any practical difficulty in that State; and whether he will bear what has been done in that State in mind in considering the long pending memorial from the late Lord Hobhouse and others urging the separation of the exercise of these functions by the same officer in the advanced districts of British India.
  †See (4) Debates, clvi., 543.

  1117
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I understand that the change of system referred to in the Question was introduced in the Baroda State only a year ago. When the time comes, it will of course be impossible to overlook the working of the experiment there in arriving at the conclusions upon the memorial mentioned in the Question.

  Government Maintenance of Indian Garrison Churches.
  MR. HERBERT: To ask the Secretary of State for India how many churches in India, for the use of troops, have been built either wholly or partly out of funds provided by the Government, respectively, or upon land provided by the Government; how many such churches are maintained either wholly or partly out of funds provided by the Government; in how many cases such churches are, owing to consecration, either not available, or only available with the consent of a bishop, for the free use of all troops of any denomination for the time being stationed where such churches are; whether any person, other than the Secretary of State, can prevent the equal use of any such church by troops of any denomination; and whether he will take measures to prevent any such exclusion in future; or if in the circumstances of any case that is not feasible, whether he will in future refuse any grant of public money to any church which is not equally available for troops of any religious denomination.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I am unable, without reference to the Government of India, to give the statistics asked for. The effect of consecration is fully explained in the Papers presented to Parliament in 1900 (Cd. Paper 129); it makes the consent of the bishop necessary for the use of the church by any denomination other than Anglicans. As regards the future, measures have been already taken to prevent inconvenience arising from consecration, as I explained in my Answer on the 21st May to the Question (No. 63) of the hon. Member for Roxburghshire.†Churches built wholly or partially at the public expense are not allowed to be consecrated except
  †See (4) Debates, clvii., 929, 930.
  1118
  where separate provision exists for other than Anglican services; and, being un-consecrated, are available for use by all denominations.

  Murder of Coolie Sahiya at Jullundur.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will cause some inquiry to be made in regard to the alleged murder in May last of a punkha cooly named Sahiya by a British gunner at Jullundur, Lahore.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I have already addressed an inquiry to the Government of India, as I undertook to do in my Answer to a Question on the 30th ultimo.‡

  Eviction of William Ryan at Ballinaguile.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners have made any inquiries into the case of William Ryan, who was evicted in the year 1887 from his farm containing 100 acres at Ballinaguile, Croagh, in the county of Limerick, by the landlord. Colonel R. Conway; and, if not, will they do so with a view to reinstating the evicted tenant.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners have received an application on behalf of William Ryan for reinstatement, and will have the case inquired into in due course.

  Evicting of Owen Sheehy at Ballinaguile.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether it is the intention of the Estates Commissioners to send down an inspector to inquire into the case of Owen Sheehy, who was evicted from his farm at Ballinaguile, Croagh, in the county of Limerick, containing forty-six acres, by the landlord, Colonel R. Conway, with the view to bringing about his reinstatement.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) the Estates Commissioners propose to send an inspector at as early a date as practicable
  ‡See Col. 409.

  1119
  to inquire into the cases of all evicted tenants, including Owen Sheehy, in the district in question.

  Reinstatement of John Sheehy of Raheen
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners have yet done anything to bring about the reinstatement of John Sheehy, who was evicted in the year 1884 from his farm at Raheen, Croagh, in the county of Limerick, by the landlord, Colonel R. Conway; and, if not, will they at once do so.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The answer given to the preceding Question applies to this case also.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners have taken any action in reference to the reinstatement of John Sheehy, of Raheen, Croagh, in the county of Limerick, who was evicted in the year 1884 by the landlord, S. Dickson; and, if not, whether they will negotiate with the landlord to have him reinstated.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that no steps for the reinstatement of John Sheehy have yet been taken, but that his case will be duly inquired into by an inspector with the view of effecting a settlement.

  Irish National School Teachers' Pension Fund.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what was the actual expenditure for the last financial year in connection with the National School teachers' pension fuud.
  (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) I am informed that the expenditure in question was £71,333 6s. 4d.

  Military Bands for Entertainments.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state under what
  1120
  circumstances military bands are permitted to compete with civilian bands for engagements at entertainments in districts where they are stationed; and what is the object of such competition.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The orders issued by the Army Council enjoin that military bands are not to seek for or take up engagements through the medium of musical or other agents, or through the press, and that no engagement should be accepted on terms which are less than those which would in the same circumstances be offered to other than military bands. They are thus prevented from entering into competition with civilian bands for engagements.

  Proportion of Artillery to other Arms of the Service.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the present proportion of regular field and horse artillery guns available for service per 1,000 sabres and rifles of the regular Army, Militia, and Volunteers.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) According to our present war organisation, as laid down in War Establishments, the proportion of field and horse artillery guns to sabres and bayonets in an organised field force is about one to 200, or, approximately, five per 1,000. If, on mobilisation, all the regular batteries in the United Kingdom could be used as batteries, the proportion of guns to the mobilised war strength of the regular cavalry and infantry units available for service would be somewhat higher than indicated above. But under the existing arrangements the personnel of a large number of these batteries would have to be employed for the formation of ammunition columns. No regular batteries have, so far, ever been provided for service with the Militia or the Volunteers.

  Lancashire Militia Field Artillery Brigade.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the number of officers, non-commissioned officers, and men respectively, in the Lancashire Militia Field Artillery Brigade

  1121
  who are serving or have served in the Regular Army.

  Belonging to Regular Army.

  Who have served in Regular Army.

  Officers

  3

  1

  Warrant officers

  1

  —

  Non-commissioned officers

  36

  4

  Trumpeters

  6

  —

  Gunners, & c.

  76

  30

  Weekly Payment of Army Pensions.
  MR. MORRELL: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is yet able to say that the system of payment of Army pensions will be changed, so as to enable retired soldiers to receive their pensions by weekly instalments.
  Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The question is still under consideration.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  H.M.S- "Assistance."
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what is the estimated cost of the salvage and repairs of H.M.S. "Assistance;" whether the coal expenditure and other costs incurred by warships rendering aid are included; and whether H.M.S. "Assistance" is to be supplied with stronger ground tackle.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON,): The estimated cost of the salvage and repairs to the "Assistance" is £70,000. The cost of coal, etc., expended by other ships of the Fleet in rendering aid cannot be calculated separately, and is not included in this Estimate. As regards the last part of the Question, no material change is being made in the anchor equipment of the "Assistance."

  Navy Provision Contracts.
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the
  1122
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The figures are as follows:—
  Admiralty have any contracts or agreements with Chicago firms or agents of Chicago firms by which these firms undertake to maintain stocks of provisions for the use of the Royal Navy in war.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The Answer is in the negative.

  Naval Shipbuilding.
  MR. COWAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Government have decided not to build one of the battleships mentioned in this year's Navy Estimates.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I have nothing to add to my reply to a similar Question asked by the hon. Member for Fareham on Tuesday last. †

  Stobs Camp.
  SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the arrangements to change mixed farms into pasture at Stobs Camp, in order to facilitate manœuvres of troops, and the consequent change of three farms into one, were made before or after he assumed office.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,): The arrangements mentioned were made before I took up office as Secretary of State for War.

  Vaccination of Government Workmen.
  MR. BRANCH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War
  † See Cols. 812, 813.

  1123
  whether his attention has been called to a protest by the workmen engaged at the Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield Lock, against compulsory vaccination as a condition of employment there; and whether, seeing that the workers regard such a condition as contracting themselves out of their rights as citizens, he will take steps to abolish this condition of their employment.
  MR. HALDANE: The question was raised in March last at an interview between the Secretary to the Employees' Union and the Chief Superintendent of the Ordnance Factories. I am not prepared to depart from the decisions of my predecessors not to admit men to the various Ordnance Factories unless they consent to be vaccinated.
  MR. BRANCHasked whether insistence on vaccination had not been followed by serious results to individual workers.
  MR. HALDANEdid not think serious results had followed. Wherever there was a large body of men working together the case seemed to be that risks might result from not insisting upon vaccination.
  MR. LUPTONasked whether the Secretary for War would examine the Army medical records and ascertain whether they would not show that there had been over a certain period of years a thousand cases of smallpox, a hundred of them fatal, in carefully re-vaccinated troops.
  MR. HALDANE: I think the hon. Member must give me notice of that Question if he wants a definite Answer to it.

  Military Police.
  MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will appoint a Committee to inquire into the appointment of privates and non-commissioned officers to the military police, and also into the manner in which that body performs its duties, with a view to its thorough reorganisation on different lines, in view of the manner in which some of its members behave toward soldiers.
  In putting the question the hon. Member asked whether the Speaker had authorised
  1124
  the alteration of the Question, and whether the Clerks at the Table had power to sub-edit Questions put in by hon. Members.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I have not seen the Question in its original form. Certainly the Clerks at the Table have full power to sub-edit any Questions brought to them. If any necessity arises I shall be glad to consider any Question myself, but with the duties which are imposed upon me by the House it would be practically impossible for me to revise all the Questions brought to the Table.
  MR. MORTON: Should the Clerks at the Table not inform an hon. Member whose Question is altered so that he might have an opportunity of seeing it before it is placed on the Paper?
  *MR. SPEAKER: The Clerks always endeavour to do so. If an hon. Member has left the House, it is not easy to get into communication with him, but if he is in the House, they take every possible means of getting into communication with him.
  MR. MORTON: But, Sir, I never leave the House.
  MR. LEA: I was certainly in the House yesterday and the day before, when I put down the Question, and I had no notification that the Clerks desired a change.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member places me at a great disadvantage. This Question must have been on the Paper for some days. If he had a complaint to make, why did he not come to me?
  MR. HALDANE,answering the Question, said men were carefully selected for the military police. No complaints had been received of the manner in which they performed those duties. He saw no reason for appointing a Committee of Inquiry.

  Preserved Meats for the Army.
  *DR. COOPER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any of the current Army contracts are held by British makers of canned or preserved meats; whether any of these contractors are firms whose articles were condemned

  1125
  during the South African War; whether there is any inspection into the quality and soundness of the materials used during their manufacture; if so, is the inspector a medical man holding a public health diploma or is he a military man.
  MR. HALDANE: No Army contracts for tinned meat are held by British makers at present. Whenever a contract for preserved meat is held by a British firm surprise visits to the works are paid by Army officers, and samples are submitted to a Government analyst. These Army officers hold certificates from the Birkenhead Medical Officer of Health and some from the Royal Sanitary Institute, the latter being similar to those held by inspectors employed under the Local Government Board.
  MR. LEAasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would cause a trained Army officer to pay surprise visits and take other precautions to ensure good quality.
  *DR. COOPERasked whether the inspector should not be a trained veterinary inspector and expert in meat, or a medical man holding a diploma of public health.
  MR. HALDANEthought the hon. Member did not appreciate the kind of training that these Army service medical officers had. They were trained for this very purpose, and there were several certificates which they had to obtain. One was the Birkenhead certificate. Another certificate was that of the Metropolitan Meat Market. Colonel Hobbs, who had gone out to inspect the stockyards, not only held that, but had had practice in judging meat for some years.
  *DR. COOPERasked whether the Secretary of State had made himself acquainted with the nature of these two examinations and whether they were not very perfunctory.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he was informed that the examinations for some of these certificates, particularly that of the Sanitary Institute, were very searching indeed.
  MR.WILLIAM REDMOND: asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would ascertain the value of the tinned meat and other provisions supplied, not by American, but by British contractors during the late war.
  [No Answer was returned.]

  2nd Battalion West Yorkshire Regiment.
  MR. LANE-FOX (Yorkshire, W.R., Barkston Ash): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the 2nd Battalion West Yorkshire Regiment, at present quartered at Holy wood, near Belfast, is almost entirely recruited in Yorkshire, that this battalion has not since its return from foreign service been quartered in Yorkshire, and that it is now under orders to move to Aldershot next spring, he will say whether at the end of its time at Aldershot it will again be due to go abroad; and whether, in view of the fact that other Yorkshire battalions have been for more than one period of their time of home service quartered at York, he will be able to give to this battalion the same privilege at an early date, or at any rate before they go again on foreign service.
  MR. HALDANE: This battalion will probably go on foreign service shortly after the end of its time at Aldershot, but on leaving Aldershot an effort will be made to quarter it in the north of England before going abroad. It must be remembered that there are only two infantry stations in the north of England for eighteen regiments who have claims to be quartered there, and that it is therefore impossible to ensure for all northern regiments home service in the vicinity of their territorial districts.
  MR. LANE-FOXpointed out that the regiment had not been quartered in Yorkshire for over twenty years.

  Abbotsham Rifle Range.
  MR. SOARES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the rifle range at Abbotsham, near Bide-ford, has been closed by the War Office on the ground that it is situated too close to property owned by Mr. Wingate; that the adjutant of the 4th Volunteer Battalion Devon Regiment and the

  1127
  District Inspector of Musketry inspected the range and passed it as safe and suitable some five years ago, and that consequently considerable expense was incurred in the erection of targets and other paraphernalia of the range; whether he is aware that the local companies will be put to expense in acquiring a new range or arranging for a temporary one; and whether, having regard to the desirability of encouraging the Volunteer system, he will give such financial assistance as may be necessary to enable the local companies to obtain another range.
  MR. HALDANE: This range was approved by the War Office on condition that the Officer Commanding the 4th Volunteer Battalion Devonshire Regiment obtained a lease or permission for firing rights over the range and danger area, then owned by one person. The lease, however, was never made, and subsequently to the establishment of the range Mr. Wingate acquired a portion of the land, the boundary of which is within about twenty yards of the targets. As this distance was not considered safe, and as he objected to firing under these conditions, the range had to be closed. It is regretted that there is no money available for the financial assistance of the corps suggested in the Question.
  MR. SOARES: Was it not the duty of the War Office to see that the lease was obtained before expense was incurred?
  MR. HALDANE: I think not. Permission was only given on the condition that the lease was obtained.

  Salisbury Plain Barracks.
  MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary whether any of the barracks recently of State for War erected on Salisbury Plain are un provided with hot and cold baths for the use of the soldiers; and, if so, will he give orders for this provision to be taken in hand at once by the military authorities.
  MR. HALDANE: Assuming that Tidworth Barracks are intended, a bathhouse, with hot and cold baths has been provided in the Aliwal Barracks. This was of an experimental nature, and the building of bath-houses for the rest of the
  1128
  barracks at Tidworth has now been commenced.

  Lighting of Barracks.
  MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether there are any barracks in Great Britain which are still unlit by incandescent burners where gas is the illuminant; if so, what would be the cost of substituting incandescent light in those barracks; and whether he can carry out this reform to add to the comfort of our soldiers this year.
  MR. HALDANE: There are many gas-lit barracks still so un provided with incandescent burners, but the work of substitution is proceeding as rapidly as funds will allow. It is estimated that to complete the work will cost about £9,000 beyond the funds already voted. I am afraid, therefore, that it will not be possible to complete the work during the current year.
  MR. LEA: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman bring in a Supplementary Estimate this year?
  MR. HALDANE: I am in a difficulty, for the House is continually asking me to keep down the expenditure.

  Execution of a Reprieved Prisoner in Bengal.
  *SIR H. COTTON: On behalf of the hon. Member for the Tyneside Division of Northumberland, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that in a recent case in which a capital sentence had been passed, a prisoner prayed to the Lieutenant-Governor of Eastern Bengal and Assam for mercy or, as an alternative, for the transmission of his memorial to the Governor-General in Council; that the Lieutenant-Governor rejected the prayer and forwarded the memorial to the Governor-General in Council, but ordered the man's execution; that the Governor-General in Council telegraphed staying the execution, but too late, as the man had already been executed; and whether he will make inquiries into the facts of this case, and prescribe rules which shall prevent the occurrence of any such incidents in future.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. MORLEY,): I find it difficult to believe that the facts are as stated in the Question, but if they are they amount to an enormity. I will therefore request my hon. friend to furnish me with the date of the case and the name of the prisoner, and I will immediately telegraph to the Government of India.

  Prosecutions of Indian Schoolboys.
  *SIR H. COTTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the circumstances of a case in which the sub-divisional officer of Munshigunge, in the newly-established province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, has fined two schoolboys Rs.500 and Rs.150 respectively, and has awarded thirty stripes each to two other boys, for obstructing a constable in the alleged discharge of his duties, and also to the judgment of the magistrate in the case, which describes the offences as not very serious, and, while exonerating the boys from any bad motive and questioning the propriety of the constable's action, justifies the severity of the sentence on the ground that the prevailing spirit all around requires to be curbed in such a manner as to prove a sound lesson to the accused and a warning to their class; and whether, having regard to the frequency of schoolboy prosecutions in Bengal and to the feelings which this policy is arousing in the new province, he will issue instructions to refrain from schoolboy prosecutions, as far as possible, in future.
  MR. MORLEY: I have seen a report of the magistrate's judgment in the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers. While giving weight to the points which were in favour of the accused persons the magistrate, who was a Bengali Hindu gentleman, stated that he was unable to overlook the fact that it was no business of theirs to interfere in matters that were not within their province. If the sentences were considered too severe it was open to the accused to move the Courts to reduce the fines. The case occurred three months ago, and as I have no reason to suppose that schoolboy prosecutions are or are likely to become frequent, I see no necessity to issue any instructions on the subject.
  *SIR H. COTTON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will be prepared to give facilities in procuring a Return which I have asked for, regarding these schoolboy prosecutions?
  MR. MORLEYpromised to consider if he could grant a Return of these cases.

  Public Meetings and Processions in India.
  MR. O'GRADY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he can assure the House that the circular issued on 12th May by the Government of Eastern Bengal and Assam, signed by Mr. Lyon, the Chief Secretary, restores the liberty that the people of the province possessed of public processions and public meetings; and whether he can assure the House that Swadeshi meetings, public or private, are in no danger of interference by the local officials or police.
  MR. MORLEY: I stated in reply to a Question on the 24th of May † that the Lieutenant-Governor had withdrawn all restrictions on processions and public meetings imposed by previous orders; and the only restrictions that now remain are those imposed by the ordinary law, which gives to the district police authorities the duty of regulating and licensing public assemblies and processions. These powers will only be used to stay actual or imminent breach of the peace.
  MR. O'GRADY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the effect of the issue of this circular has been to create a bitter feeling between the Mahommedan and Buddhist people?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Outrages by British Soldiers in India.
  MR. O'GRADY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a case in which two soldiers on the road to Simla demanded some soda water from a native, and that they were duly supplied with what they wanted, but that when payment was demanded one of the soldiers raised his rifle and shot the native in the chest, the billet passing out of his back; and whether, having regard to the frequency of these incidents in India. this
  † See (4) Debates, clvii., 1413.

  1131
  ease being the fifth of its kind during the present year, he will address the Government of India with a view to taking stringent measures to prevent their recurrence.
  MR. LEA: May I be permitted, Sir, before the Question is answered, to enter a protest against the wording of the Question?
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member may ask a Question.
  MR. LEA: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, considering that there are 80,000 white soldiers in India, even it be true that there have been five cases of shooting during the year, he thinks that justifies putting the Question in this way?
  MR. MORLEY: I rather sympathise with what has fallen from the hon. Gentleman behind me. I have no information as to the case stated in the Question, but if the hon. Member who put the Question will give me the necessary information, I will make inquiries.
  MR. O'GRADY: Am I to understand that the Government are in sympathy with the shooting of black people in this way?
  MR. MORLEY: I cannot think that that is a Question I can be expected to answer.
  MR. O'GRADY: Is it the fact that four cases have already been proved to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State for India?
  *SIR H. COTTON: There is a report of this case in the Indian newspapers by this mail.
  MR. MORLEY: Need I say that if these cases are accurately reported, and some, I am afraid, have been accurately reported, I will at once give them my most prompt and earnest attention? Nobody has a more complete detestation of such acts than I have.
  MR. O'GRADY: The effect of the right hon. Gentleman's Answer has been to indicate some kind of approval of this
  1132
  procedure. That is the effect of the right hon. Gentleman's Answer. It bore that interpretation.

  Ceylon Pearl Fisheries.
  SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies why the assent of the Legislative Council of Ceylon was required to the twenty years lease of the Government pearl fisheries at an annual rent of £20,660; whether he is aware that the Legislative Council was not allowed to discuss the terms of the lease at their session of February 14th, 1906; whether he is aware that the Ceylon Government share of the fishery of the year 1905 was £150,000 net; and will he say what was the net value of the fishery of the year 1906; and whether that value goes to the company.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL, Manchester, N.W.): As regards the first two Questions, I would refer my hon. friend to Mr. Lyttelton's despatch of December 1st, 1905, and the Secretary of State's despatch of the 9th ultimo (Nos. 24 and 30 in Cd. 2906) and also to my reply to a Question put by him in the House on April 2nd last. † The answer to the third Question is in the affirmative. The net value of this year's fishery, after allowing for the expenses of management, is approximately Rs.1,125,000 (£75,000), and of this, as far as can be calculated at present, the company will receive, after deduction of the various payments specified in the lease, about Rs.484,000 (£32.207).
  SIR J. JARDINEasked why the Legislative Council was asked to pass a law approving of the lease, and then refused permission to discuss any single detail thereof.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The reasons why the Government adopted the procedure they did are fully set out in the Blue-book which has lately been presented to Parliament, and if my hon. friend will consult that I think he will find it was held by Mr. Lyttelton that it would be difficult for the Council to go into every detail in the lease, and that it would be better either to accept or reject it as a whole.
  † See (4) Debates, clv., 165,166.

  1133
  Whether that was a desirable thing or not I do not desire to express a decided opinion.
  SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in the negotiations with Mr. Lyttelton, between December, 1904, and January, 1906, about the lease of the Ceylon pearl fisheries, Sir J. W. Ridge-way acted at any time on behalf of the Government of Ceylon or the people of Ceylon, or solely on behalf of the Gulf Syndicate and the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers; whether he is aware that the capital of the syndicate was nominally £10,000, of which £1,687 10s. was called up, and that the Gulf Syndicate sold the concession, after expending £200 as cost of obtaining the concession, £106 as cost of registration, and £110 as preliminary expenses, to the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers for £11,000; and whether, before the twenty years lease was conceded, any intimation had been given by the authorities to the commercial centres of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, Rangoon, and Singapore, of the intention to lease the Ceylon Government pearl fisheries.
  MR. CHURCHILL: Sir J. W. Ridge-way did not act at any time on behalf of the Government or people of Ceylon. There appears to be no information available in the Colonial Office concerning the financial transactions mentioned by my hon. friend, and as regards his last Question, I would refer him to the Answer which I gave him on April 9th†.
  *MR. SMEATON: Arising out of that Answer, may I ask why the Government did not cause information as to the expiration of the old lease, and the proposal to grant a new twenty years lease, to be given and tenders to be asked for from the Scotch firms, which have had such a large share in the development of the resources of India and Ceylon.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I believe there is some possibility—I do not know whether it amounts to a probability—of Mr. Lyttelton again becoming a Member of this House. He is much more capable of giving the hon. Gentleman the explana-
  † Sec (4) Debates, clv., 986, 987.
  1134
  tion he desires than I am. I confess I have formed views somewhat different from those which appear to have actuated Mr. Lyttelton throughout the arrangements connected with the lease—views which have become more adverse the more I have had to deal with the matter.
  MR. COWAN: May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that Sir J. W. Ridgeway is Chairman of the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers, and that he holds 1,000 ordinary and 1,600 deferred shares in that company, and that the deferred shares, which are of the nominal value of Is., are selling at from 10s. to 12s. each.
  *MR SPEAKER: The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.
  SIR J. JARDINE: May I ask why the information was given to Sir W. J. Ridgeway and the capitalists, and not to the Scotch or Indian firms?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I think there are grave objections to the procedure which was followed, and that the result has not been at all satisfactory.

  Native Disturbances in Natal.
  MR. MYER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state how many outrages, causing death or personal injury to Europeans, had been committed by the natives in Natal during the twelve months preceding the attempt on the part of the Natal authorities to enforce payment of the poll tax; and whether this Government, in view of the loss of life, both native and white, occasioned by the pursuit of the natives, will take any steps to put an end to the conflict.
  MR. CHURCHILL: There is no information in the Colonial Office as to outrages by natives on Europeans in Natal during the period referred to. It is not true that the poll tax has been the only, or indeed the principal, cause of the present native doubles. The tax is levied on about 115,000 persons, of whom about 30,000 are Europeans, 25,000 Indians and 60,000 natives of Natal, mostly young unmarried men working in the European settlements and not assessable to the hut tax. The collection appears to be proceeding

  1135
  smoothly in all parts of the country outside the limited districts affected by the Bambata rebellion, and all except about £15,000 has already been received at the Treasury. His Majesty's Government would welcome the termination of native disturbances in Natal. But it is obvious that the only possible end to the conflict must be found in the restoration of peace and order, for which the Colonial Government are responsible.

  Repatriation of Chinese Coolies.
  *MR. LEHMANN: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps are being taken to carry out the pledges given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, to annul or repeal or amend the Chinese Labour Ordinance, so as to prevent the new Transvaal Government from inheriting the present Ordinance and from finding in force all its powers, and especially the power of re-enlisting or detaining, under the conditions of that Ordinance, the coolies now in the Transvaal.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I would refer my hon. friend to my Answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne. †
  *MR. LEHMANN: What will be the practical effect on the coolies still serving supposing a date is fixed during the period their indentures are still in force?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I thought I had made it clear that when the Transvaal received responsible government a date would be fixed for the order to lapse, and the powers under which Chinese coolies are imported will cease unless in the meantime another Ordinance is introduced which does not present the same objection to His Majesty's Government.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: And when will the Transvaal get responsible government?
  MR. CHURCHILLwas understood to say he hoped to make an announcement on that subject in five or six weeks time.
  † See col. 953.
  *MR. LEHMANN: Can the right hon. Gentleman now indicate the date to be fixed for the termination of the Ordinance?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I can add nothing to my Answer.

  Congo Free State.
  MR. WEDGWOOD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his-attention has been called to that part of the open letter from the King of the Belgians to the secretaries of the Congo Reform Committee in which he says that no Power has the right of intervention in the Congo Free State, that nothing could justify any intervention, and that his rights in the Congo are personal and indivisible; whether His Majesty's Government are prepared to accept these statements of the case; and, if not, whether they will protest, either alone or in conjunction with the other Powers.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir EDWARD GREY, Northumberland, Berwick): I am not sure what is meant by personal and indivisible rights. We have recognised the independence of the Congo State, and the rights of intervention which we have are those of seeing that treaty obligations are observed. These cannot be affected by subsequent declarations on the part of the Sovereign of the Congo State, and the letter in question cannot alter them.
  MR. WEDGWOOD: Do His Majesty's Government intend to tell the King of the Belgians that?
  SIR EDWARD GREY: No, Sir. I do not see any necessity for making any communication.

  Anhui Mining Contract.
  SIR EDWARD SASSOON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if His Majesty's Government have received a reply in writing to the repeated representations which were made by His Majesty's Minister at Peking to the Chinese Government, urging that the Anhui Mining Contract should be recognised as still valid and binding; is he aware of the loss that has been occasioned during the thirteen months to the promoters by this infraction of the Mackay Treaty; whether he

  1137
  will consider the advisability, as a matter of policy, of avoiding submission to such a violation of the legally acquired right of His Majesty's subjects; and that pending the re-affirmation of the contract, would His Majesty's Minister be instructed to demand the necessary permission to enable mining operations to be provisionally proceeded with.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: No written reply has yet been received from the Chinese Government to the representations which have been made to them with regard to the Anhui Mining Contract, the continued validity of which is disputed by the Chinese authorities. The efforts of His Majesty's Legation have already been directed to obtaining permission for the promoters of the scheme to commence operations, but so far without success. Those efforts are being continued, and I am unable to make any further statement on the subject at present.

  Detention of the Steamship "Briardale" at Genoa.
  MR. CAIRNS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the British steamer "Briardale" is still detained at Genoa, that the total period of detention is now fifteen months, and that the Italian courts still refuse to release the vessel upon the provision of adequate bail; and whether His Majesty's Government will make strong representations to the Italian Government with a view to procuring the acceptance of bail as customary in all other countries and so effecting the release of the vessel without in any way prejudicing the rights of the Italian claimants.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: As my hon. friend is aware, His Majesty's Government have made urgent representations to the Italian Government in regard to the general principle involved in the treatment of this case by the Italian courts, but they cannot undertake to endeavour to influence these courts on a purely legal issue such as that of the conditions to be attached to the acceptance of bail.
  MR. CAIRNS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that in a recent judgment of the court of appeal at Genoa,
  1138
  in the case of the British steamship "Briardale," the principle has been laid down that an Italian subject, having a private claim against one shareholder in a British vessel, can arrest the entire ship, and thus inflict heavy loss upon the other shareholders; and what steps His Majesty's Government propose to take, having regard to the effect the admission of this principle will have upon British shipping.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. His Majesty's Government have represented to the Italian Government that the maintenance of this principle will be most prejudicial to the commercial relations between the two countries.

  Admission of Anarchists.
  SIR W. EVANS-GORDON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the event of persons known to be anarchists arriving as immigrants in this country, the plea that they are political refugees is accepted as entitling them to admission.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,): The Aliens Act makes no provision for the exclusion of anarchists, as such. Further, the question of political refugeeism does not arise unless the immigrant has no means or prospect of means of decently supporting himself. When it does arise, it can only be settled according to the facts of the particular case, and does not admit of a general answer.
  MR. THORNE: Can the right hon. Gentleman give a definition of an anarchist?
  *MR. GLADSTONE: I certainly cannot.
  MR. PAUL: Does not the chief danger to society arise from persons who are not known to be anarchists?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Anarchist Propaganda and the London Police.
  SIR W. EVANS-GORDON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware of the extent to which the anarchist propaganda is being carried on in London by means of journals and other publications, wherein murder is openly advocated and murderers are extolled and held up as examples for imitation; and, if so, what steps the Government propose to take to bring the persons responsible for these publications to justice.
  *MR. GLADSTONE: The extent of the anarchist propaganda in the Metro-polis is not considerable. The police keep themselves fully acquainted with the contents of all publications of the nature referred to in the Question, and will be prepared to take action again, as they have taken action in the past, should the published matter show grounds for criminal prosecution.

  Expulsions of Aliens.
  MR. FELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of the 105 orders which he has made for the expulsion of aliens have been acted on: whether the aliens have been in fact deported in each case; and whether any difficulties have arisen with the countries affected as to receiving these expelled aliens.
  *MR. GLADSTONE: In fifty-one cases steps were taken to deport the alien; of the other aliens who were left to find their own way out of the country, some are known to have gone, and if any are found in this country they will be arrested and punished as rogues and vagabonds. No country has, to my knowledge, refused to receive its own nationals when expelled from these shores, but there is sometimes a difficulty in establishing nationality.

  Dangerous Performances.
  MR. FELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the death of Miss Cove when descending from a balloon in a parachute on June 11th; and whether he proposes to take any steps to prohibit such exhibitions in the future.
  *MR. GLADSTONE: My attention has been called to this shocking case. I have prepared, and hope to introduce shortly, a Bill extending the Dangerous Performances Acts to all women whatever their age may be.

  Vaccination Exemption Orders.
  MR. W. H. DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the case of A. E. Ather-such, of 24, Sion Hill, Clifton, who has been twice refused a vaccination exemption order by the Bristol magistrates; and whether he will call their attention to the provisions of the Act of Parliament under which exemption orders for vaccination are granted.
  *MR. GLADSTONE: My attention has not been called to this case; but a circular has very recently been sent to justices drawing attention to the principles which I am advised should guide them in dealing with applications for certificates of exemption.

  Potted Foods—Inspection of Factories.
  DR. COOPEE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether there is any Local Government Order, or regulation, or by-law, requiring the makers of sausages, brawn, potted meats and paste, meat pies, &c., or of similar articles of food, to register their premises with any public authority, or which limits the hours of their manufacture to the hours inspectors are by legal custom allowed to enter, viz., 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN BURNS,): The Answer is in the negative. The Local Government Board have no power to make any such requirement as that suggested.

  Vaccination.
  MR. LUPTON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will request the various medical officers of health throughout the country to ascertain the vaccinal conditions of all small-pox patients, not merely by verbal inquiries, or by examination for marks of vaccination, but also by examination of the registers to ascertain if the patient has been registered as vaccinated.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: Such an examination of the Vaccination Registers as that suggested would involve considerable trouble and some expense, and in a great many cases it would be impracticable. The majority of small-pox patients are adults whose vaccination, if any, took place at a remote and uncertain date, and often in another and perhaps distant place, many of these patients being persons of vagrant habits. It forms no part of the duty of the medical officers of health to make the proposed examination, and I do not feel that I could ask them to undertake it.
  MR. LUPTON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if it is a practice in the small pox hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board, and of authorities in charge of small-pox hospitals throughout the country, and of medical officers of health, in reference to small-pox patients, to have the vaccination registers searched in order to ascertain authoritatively the vaccinal conditions of small-pox patients.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: No, Sir, I believe not.
  MR. LUPTON: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Metropolitan Asylums Board publishes statistics as to the conditions of the patients?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I will inquire.

  Re-vaccination Registrations.
  MR. LUPTON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if it is the practice for all vaccinations at all ages, and re-vaccinations, to be registered in public registers, and, if not, if he will direct that all re-vaccinations performed at the public expense shall be entered in a register, and if he will also address a request to private practitioners to cause all cases of re-vaccination, which are not at the public expense, and of primary vaccination, where not previously registered to be registered.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: Every public vaccinator is required to enter in his Vaccinator's Register all vaccinations and re vaccinations performed by him at the public expense. It would be advantageous if private medical practitioners kept similar records, but I have no authority
  1142
  to ask them to do this. Every medical man, however, whether a public vaccinator or not, is required by the Vaccination Acts to give a certificate of the vaccination of any child successfully vaccinated by him. The certificate has to be sent to the Vaccination Officer for entry in the Register kept by that officer.

  The Unemployment Bill.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the recommendation contained in the Report of the Central Unemployed Committee for London that no time should be lost in bringing before Parliament supplementary legislation, as promised in His Majesty's speech, he is now in a position to say when his proposals will be introduced.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I hope to be in a position to make a definite statement on this subject shortly.

  Local Distress Committee's Report.
  MR ARTHUR HENDERSON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he would state the number of Reports requested, also the number received from the local distress committees re the administration of the Unemployed Act, 1905; if he proposes to lay any of these Reports upon the Table of the House; and whether he can inform the House when the Unemployed Bill will be introduced.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: The Central (Unemployed) Body for London were asked to make a Report, and application was made to each of the eighty-nine Distress Committees in England and Wales, outside London, for returns as to their receipts and expenditure and as to their proceedings in various matters. They were also asked to send a copy of any Report presented to or by the Committee as to the operation of the Act within their area. Returns have been received from eighty of the Committees, and in sixteen cases these are accompanied by copies of more detailed Reports. As soon as all the Returns and Reports have been examined, I will determine as to the course to be taken as to laying information on the Table. As regards the last part

  1143
  of the Question, I would refer to the Answer I have just given to the hon. Member for Bethnal Green.

  Universal Penny Postage.
  MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the British delegates to the Postal Conference at Rome opposed the proposal which was made by the delegates from New Zealand, and supported by the delegates from the United States, in favour of a universal penny postage for letters; and whether this House will have an opportunity of expressing an opinion as to that opposition.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,): His Majesty's Government were not in a position to support the proposal for universal penny postage for letters, and the British delegates to the recent Postal Congress at Rome were instructed accordingly, and they abstained from voting on the proposal. The House will have an opportunity of discussing this, or any other postal question, on the Post Office Estimates.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: Will the right hon. Gentleman take care that the House has an opportunity of discussing this question on the estimates?
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Personally I have no control over the debate, but I hope there will be full opportunity.
  MR. MORTON: Ought not this House to be consulted before the delegates commit it in any way?
  *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That is a matter of opinion.

  West Indian Mail Service.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that inconvenience is being felt in business circles in the West Indies and Demerara owing to the practical discontinuance of the regular mail service between the United Kingdom and the latter Colony; and whether he will endeavour to arrange a regular and permanent mail service to the Colony in question.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Inconvenience has no doubt resulted from the recent curtailment of the opportunities available for the conveyance of mails to Demerara, and I am considering to what extent improved arrangements are practicable.
  In reply to a further Question the right hon. Gentleman promised that the service to the North-West Indian Islands should likewise be inquired into.

  School Teachers and Citizen Rights.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether there are any rules or regulations preventing teachers in England and Wales from taking part in the ordinary duties of citizens; and whether, having regard to the existence of regulations by which teachers in Ireland are restricted, under the penalty of withdrawal of salary, from the same liberty as teachers in England and Wales enjoy, he can say whether he considers the drafting of any regulations necessary to secure uniformity.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (MR. BIRRELL,): I am not aware what is included by the hon. Member in "the ordinary duties of citizens." The teachers in England and Wales may be subject to various rules imposed by their employers (the Local Education Authorities), of which I have no cognisance; but so far as the Board of Education are concerned the restrictions implied in Section 17 (4) of the Education Act, 1902, and in Sections (c) and (d) of Article 11 and (c) of Article 51 of the Code, are, I think, the principal limitations, as regards teachers in Public Elementary Schools in England and Wales, upon what the hon. Member might perhaps consider to be so included. I am not anxious to secure rigid uniformity in any portion of our national education.

  Medical Inspection of Schools.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he contemplates the creation of a special State medical staff to supervise the efforts of local educational authorities for attending to the health and physical condition of

  1145
  the children educated in the public elementary schools.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Board of Education are only responsible in respect of England and Wales. They already possess one medical inspector of schools, and I am contemplating the appointment of a second. I do not think it would be wise for the Board to embark upon the establishment of a large staff of such officials—at all events until there has been time to see to what extent the development of local authorities' activities under Clause 35 (b) of the Education Bill render such a course desirable.

  Electric Trains—Methods of Working.
  *MR. HUDSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether any inquiry has been made into the method of working electric trains on various electric railways with only one man in the motor-house in charge of the motive power; and, having due regard to the safety of the traveling public, can he say whether his Department considers the present system of working those trains satisfactory.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. KEARLEY,): This question has been considered by the Board's Inspecting Officers of Railways, who inform me that they are not aware that any accident has arisen owing to there being only one man in charge of the driving gear upon electric trains, and that they have no reason for regarding this system of working such trains as dangerous.

  Single Line Train Staffs.
  *MR. HUDSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can give the number of cases and the nature of injuries to servants of the Great Northern Railway Company (Ireland) as a result of the use of the apparatus placed on locomotives to catch the train staff for single line working when running at high speed through stations.
  MR. KEARLEY: Only one case of injury from the use of the apparatus in question has been reported to the Board of Trade, the man injured sustaining a fracture of the skull. This is the case referred to in the next Question by the hon. Member.
  *MR. HUDSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Great Northern Railway Company (Ireland) have the authority of the Board of Trade to continue the use of their invention placed on locomotives to catch the staff for the single line working of their railway at several stations between Portadown and Londonderry, after the defects revealed by the inquiry into the accident to an engine driver, caused by this apparatus, at Trew and Moy, in view of the rules laid down for working single lines of railway, which stipulate that the engine-driver must see and have in his possession the proper train staff for the section before he enters such section of the line.
  MR. KEARLEY: The Board's Inspecting Officers of Railways have always advocated the employment of an apparatus for the purpose of exchanging staffs or tablets as being, generally speaking, safer than the usual practice of exchanging from hand to hand. The officer who inquired on behalf of the Board of Trade into the accident at Trew and Moy reported that alterations were being made in the experimental apparatus which should effectually prevent the occurrence of a similar mishap in future.
  *MR. HUDSONasked if the Board of Trade were aware that these trains passed through stations at a speed of fifty miles an hour in some cases.
  MR. KEARLEY: I will inquire.

  Inland Revenue Assessors.
  MR. SEARS: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the fact that in many small towns and villages local tradesmen are employed in the position of assessors of inland revenue; that butchers and bakers are put in the position of naming the income for income-tax purposes of the local doctor, solicitor, banker, of brother tradesmen who may be their rivals in business, and of their customers; is he aware that the Boards of Inland Revenue have from time to time drawn attention to the unsatisfactory features of this system, and expressed the desire for its discontinuance; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made as to whether assessments of incomes are frequently done by

  1147
  deputy and sometimes by youths, and I consider the desirability of introducing the Scottish system of assessment and collection of taxes by responsible officers of the Crown.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA,): The employment of local persons as assessors of income-tax is based on the advantage which their local knowledge gives to them in assisting the Commissioners of Income Tax to make proper assessments. The Board of Inland Revenue are of opinion that this advantage much outweighs any drawbacks that the system may have; and they have never recommended its discontinuance. The Board have no reason to suppose that assessors are in the habit of delegating their duties to others.

  Inland Revenue Assessment Staff.
  MR. SEARS: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the multiplication of officials employed under the present system of assessing and collecting revenue under which the same taxpayer may be called on by an officer of the inland revenue to pay excise, by a collector of inland revenue to pay income-tax under Schedules D and E, by a local collector of taxes to pay income-tax under Schedules A and B, and by a surveyor of taxes or other officer of inland revenue for arrears; and whether he will consider the desirability of reforming the system on lines more consonant with economy and public convenience.
  MR. MCKENNA: In the opinion of the Board of Inland Revenue there is at present no undue multiplication of officials employed in the assessing and collecting of revenue, but I will look into the matter.

  Clerks to Local Commissioners of Taxes.
  MR. SEARS: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that clerks to Local Commissioners of Taxes are usually solicitors of high standing who have a large portion of the work of copying of assessment of charge showing the incomes of all persons under Schedules D and E entrusted to casual labour obtained at the moment at the lowest possible rates; will he cause inquiry to be made as to how far this
  1148
  system infringes the secrecy enjoined in this connection to prevent disclosures of income.
  MR. MCKENNA: Under Section 38 of the Income Tax Act, 1842 "clerks and clerk's assistants" to Commissioners of Income Tax are required to be sworn to secrecy in respect of assessments under Schedule D; and no complaint has reached the Board of Inland Revenue that this requirement is not observed, or that improper disclosures have been made.

  Justices of the Peace—Fees on Appointment.
  MR. COWAN: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General whether, in view of the fact that it is proposed to abolish the property qualification for Justices of the Peace in counties in England and Wales, he will take steps to assimilate the amount of £4, payable as foes to the county officials on an appointment as Justice of the Peace for a county in England and Wales, to the smaller amount payable on such appointments in Scotland.
  *THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir JOHN WALTON, Leeds, S.): I think it is very desirable that the amount of the fees payable by Justices should be reduced to a reasonable sum. I am informed by the Home Office that every effort is made to effect this result, and to limit the charge to £2 in the case of ordinary Justices of the Peace, and 5s. in the case of those appointed ex officio. I am not aware of the amount paid in Scotland, and, therefore, cannot say whether the table applying in that country should be adopted in England.

  New Arrangements for Divisions.
  MR. REMNANT: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if the new arrangements for taking divisions will involve any extra expenditure; and, if so, how much.
  *THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. HARCOURT, Lancashire,): The cost of the structural work has been £248. If it is ultimately determined to retain the extra marking clerks an additional sum of £300 per annum will be required on the Votes for the House of Commons Offices.
  SIR ROBERT HOBART: Can some early opportunity be given for the thanks of this honourable House to be passed to the right hon. Gentleman for the great benefit he has conferred upon us all by his clever new arrangement for taking divisions?
  *THE SPEAKER: I am afraid there is no opportunity of offering the right hon. Gentleman thanks inside the House. Perhaps the hon. Member can devise some means of offering thanks to him outside.

  New Government Buildings.
  *MR. P. W. WILSON (St. Pancras, S.): I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he has received any representations respecting the towers which appear upon the plans of the new Government building facing Great George Street; and whether he is prepared to authorise the construction of any or all of those towers.
  *MR. HARCOURT: Yes, Sir; I received a strong representation from the Council of the Royal Institute of British Architects in favour of the completion of the towers on the Great George Street front of the new Public Offices. I replied to them in the following letter:—" I am much obliged by your letter of the 25th. Though I maintain my own opinion that the proposed very high towers on the Great George Street front of the now Public Offices are not architecturally or aesthetically desirable, I am not prepared to put my artistic opinions against those of the Council of the Royal Institute of British Architects. I have therefore given immediate instructions that the single tower of the building now in course of construction shall be continued and completed on the lines originally laid down by Mr. John Brydon. I need not say that I shall always greatly value any criticism or assistance that the Institute is good enough to afford me in that part of my duties which is connected with architecture." I may add that I have asked the contractors to see that as far as possible the masons to be engaged on this work shall be those who were discharged on its suspension, and the contractor has promised to meet my wishes.

  Enclosure of Commons.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board regard it as their duty to keep a vigilant eye on the enclosure of commons; and whether, if the Board have information which establishes a primâ facie case that land, for the enclosure of which the consent of the Board is by statute required, has been enclosed without such consent, the Board are accustomed to take any, and, if so, what, action.
  MR. J. A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden) (for Sir E. STRACHEY): The Board scrutinise all proposals in Bills which involve enclosure of common land and report to Parliament thereon, but the Board of Agriculture have no power to institute proceedings in the case of other enclosures. As stated in the reply to my hon. friend on the 11th instant,† district councils may under the Local Government Act, 1894, aid in maintaining rights of common, and the Board of Agriculture will be ready at all times to give them any assistance in their power.

  The Captain Sutherland Bequest.
  MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether a Return has been made of the Captain Sutherland Bequest in favour of the poor of the parish of Rogart, Sutherland; and, if so, what means have been taken to protect the trust.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,): The Local Government Board for Scotland have obtained a return of this bequest as an item in the collection of a general Return of parish trusts ordered by the House last session, but they are not responsible for the financial position of any such trusts.

  Scottish Magistrates.
  MR. EUGENE WASON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland when the Return of Magistrates appointed in Scotland since the date of the last Return, and promised early in the session, will be issued to Members?
  † Sec Col. 705, 706.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The materials for the Return have been collected and are in process of revision with a view to printing. The Return will be printed and issued as soon as practicable.

  Scottish Procurators Fiscal.
  MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate whether a county or burgh procurator fiscal can hold office or interfere in or be elected a representative on a county council, a parish council, or a town council.
  THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. THOMAS SHAW,): Under a regulation by the Lord-Advocate dated 28th November, 1889, procurators fiscal were directed not to allow themselves to be nominated as candidates nor interfere in any way in the election of county councillors. There is no regulation that a procurator fiscal should not interfere in municipal or parish council elections. It has been the practice of Crown Counsel, however, to advise that they should avoid taking any action in municipal or parish council affairs which would prejudice them in the due performance of their official duties. There is already in force a further regulation against procurators fiscal interfering or taking part in political affairs. I think these regulations to be sound in principle and if any case should be brought under my notice of procurators fiscal interfering in municipal or parish council elections, I shall consider the propriety of issuing a similar general regulation against such interference.

  Dunblane Police Dispute.
  MR. WILKIE: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that none of the offences and contraventions under The Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, and relative Acts, are prosecuted within the burgh of Dunblane; that the town council of Dunblane are desirous of having these matters attended to, but, in consequence of the refusal of the county police, for which the burgh is being assessed, to carry out the orders of the magistrates, these offences are not being attended to; and will he give instructions to the county police to obey the orders and warrants of the magistrates.
  MR. SHAW: I understand that certain minor offences under the Burgh Police Acts are not being prosecuted at the present time, owing to a dispute between the Town Council of the Burgh of Dunblane and the Standing Joint Committee of the County of Perth as to the attendance of the Police at the Burgh Police Court. The Burgh authorities have power under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act of 1892 to require the attendance of the Police upon the terms specified in Section 81. The Burgh authorities have hitherto not exercised this statutory power, and, it is understood, decline to do so. In the difference which has thus arisen between the Burgh and the County authorities neither the Secretary for Scotland nor the Lord Advocate has any authority to interfere.
  MR. WILKIE: Who has power, then, to interfere?
  MR. SHAW: It is a matter solely for the burgh authorities. The offences are offences under the Burgh Police Act, but I understand that a small financial dispute between the county and the burgh has prevented the police doing their duty.
  MR. MORTON: Am I to understand that the Lord Advocate is not the superior officer concerned in this matter?
  MR. SHAW: That is a question which I would rather not answer off-hand.
  MR. MORTON: Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to look up a case in connection with the Dumfries County Council in which Lord Robertson expressed the opinion that in these cases the Lord Advocate is the superior officer.
  MR. SHAW: Perhaps the hon. Member will give me the reference so that I may look it up.

  Close Time for Hares—Waterford Resolution.
  MR. O'SHEE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a resolution passed by the Waterford County Council containing a petition for an alteration of the close season for hares in the county of Waterford has been received; and whether, as it seeks to extend the

  1153
  close season from 12th April—12th August to 1st March—20th September, it will be favourably considered.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (MR. BRYCE,): The resolution in question has been received and is under the Lord-Lieutenant's consideration.

  Dublin Metropolitan Police Courts.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Dublin Metropolitan Police magistrates have this year declined to grant a Return of the number of cases of a certain class tried in their courts during the year 1905 because of the discovery of a serious discrepancy between their Return and the official Return of the Chief Commissioner of Police for the year 1904; and whether, in view of the fact that the public are entitled by law to this information in a less convenient way, he will give instructions to the magistrates to extend the same facilities as in past years.
  MR. BRYCE: The Chief Magistrate of the Dublin Metropolitan Police district informs mo that he has declined to order the preparation of the Return in question, because he has no power to do so, and not because of any discrepancy between a previous Return and the Return of the Chief Commissioner of Police. The magistrates did not order the previous Returns to be made, though they acquiesced in the preparation of such returns by a member of the Police Court staff at the cost of the Licensed Vintners' Association. Neither the magistrates nor the police authorities are aware of any discrepancy between the Returns mentioned. I have no power to give instructions to the magistrates in the matter.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Who has the power?
  MR. BRYCE: Nobody. Even if the magistrates had, I have no power to direct them to make the Return.

  Richmond District Lunatic Asylum.
  MR. COGAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-
  1154
  Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the manner in which Sub-section (7) of Section 9 of The Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, has operated in regard to the apportionment of lunatic asylum expenses against contributing county councils on the basis of a triennial average; whether he is aware that in the case of the Richmond District Lunatic Asylum during the six years ended March;31st, 1905, the county councils of Dublin, Wicklow, and Louth have been charged with £4,552, £1,214, and £2,678, respectively, more, and the Corporation of Dublin with £8,444 less than the actual cost of their patients, and that this difference of charge would be greatly increased by the transfer of lunatics from the north and south Dublin union workhouses to the Richmond Asylum, which has been so repeatedly urged upon the Board of Guardians of those unions by the Local Government Board and the inspectors of lunatics; and, if so, whether he will consider the advisability of having the Act amended at the first opportunity by restoring the system in operation prior to 1899, viz., charging at the end of every year to each county council the actual cost of the maintenance of their patients.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed that the facts are correctly stated in the Question. There is admittedly some inequality in the existing system, and this results from the proviso in the subsection quoted to the effect that the expenses in a joint asylum district shall be defrayed by the several counties in proportion to the number of lunatics from each county according to the average of the three local financial years which ended next before the last three annual elections of county councils. The Richmond Asylum district comprises the city of Dublin, and the counties of Dublin, Wicklow, and Louth. In compound districts such as this, in which the number of lunatics from the city increases continually at a much greater rate than those from the contributory counties, the city does not pay in proportion to the number of its lunatics owing to its quota being calculated on the basis of three antecedent years. The remedy suggested by the hon. Member would undoubtedly remove the inequality, but I am advised that it is not clear that the plan could be successfully carried out in

  1155
  practice. The matter, however, deserves to be further inquired into with the object of seeing whether any, and if so what, legislation could be undertaken at a convenient opportunity.

  Irish Intermediate Education Rules.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Commissioners of Intermediate Education (Ireland) have considered the alteration of their rules recently proposed by the House of Commons; and, if so, with what result; when will the revised programme be laid upon the Table; and whether he will publish the minutes of the last meeting of the Board.
  MR. BRYCE: I beg to refer to a reply which I gave to a Question on this subject yesterday,† namely, that communications in reference to the matter are passing between the Irish Government and the Commissioners, and that I am not in a position to make any statement on the subject.
  In Answer to a further Question by the hon. Member, Mr. ERYCE said the matter was involved in great difficulty as regards time.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Have the Board refused to act on the unanimous resolve of this House?
  MR. BEYCE: I can make no statement at present.

  Captain Caldbeck's, Queen's County Estate.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can say what progress has been made with the sale of the estate of Captain Caldbeck, Ballacolla, Queen's County, to the tenants, which has been before the Estates Commissioners for I over twelve months; whether the point of law in the case referred to Judge Meredith has been decided; if there is any prospect of the untenanted land upon the estate being acquired for the enlargement of the small holdings and the settlement of the evicted tenants in the locality; and can he say what is the cause of the delay.
  † Sec Col. 969.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received from their inspector a further report upon the estate in question. The Commissioners are not satisfied with the proposed allocation of the untenanted land according to the purchase agreements at present before them, and they propose to offer to purchase the estate from the vendor under Section 6 of the Act of 1903. No necessity has, therefore, arisen for referring any question of law in the case to Mr. Justice Meredith. If the Commissioners should purchase the estate they will consider the most suitable mode of re-selling the untenanted land, having regard to the wants of occupiers of small holdings and evicted tenants in the neighbourhood. The cause of the delay has been, amongst other matters, the difficulties as to the disposal of the untenanted land.

  Athlone Workmen's Dwelling Scheme.
  MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the site for workmen's dwellings in St. Peter's Ward, Athlone, selected by the urban council and known as Dolan's site, has been condemned by the Local Government Board on the Report of Mr. Price on certain specified grounds; whether he is aware that this site was passed by the engineer of the council and that the grounds set forth by Mr. Price were refuted by Mr. Middleton, surveyor of Pembroke District Council, who reported most favourably on the site, and that Mr. Cowan, chief engineer to the Local Government Board, unofficially visited the site and stated he would not condemn it; and whether he will state why, in face of these facts, the Local Government Board persists in its objection to this site and prevents by so doing the erection of houses so much needed in the town of Athlone.
  MR. BRYCE: The reply to the first inquiry is in the affirmative. It is the fact that the site in question was passed by the engineer of the council; and after the decision of the Local Government Board adverse to the site had been conveyed to the council, a communication was received from them stating the grounds upon which Mr. Middleton

  1157
  sought to controvert the report of the Board's Inspector, Mr. Price. The Board again carefully considered the matter, but saw no reason to alter their opinion as to the site. Mr. Cowan was not asked to report on the merits of the different sites concerned, and he has never reported regarding any of them. The council are not proceeding with the proposal to acquire Dolan's site, but have put forward another site concerning which a local inquiry was to have commenced yesterday.

  Barrow Strand, Fenit.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Messrs. Holt and Oliver visited Barrow Strand, Fenit; whether they have sent in a Report; and whether the Department of Agriculture or the Land Commission, or both, will find the money necessary to protect the land of the district from being rendered useless.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed that Mr. Holt, the scientific adviser of the Fisheries Branch of the Department of Agriculture, and Mr. Oliver, the Department's engineer, recently visited Barrow Strand, when their attention was directed to the fact that sand had drifted upon certain agricultural holdings and houses. The engineer is of opinion that the alteration of the course of a channel through the sand banks may have caused the drifting, and that if the channel were restored to its original course the accumulation of sand would cease. The cost of such an operation would be considerable and the Department have no funds applicable to the purpose. It would seem also that the Land Commission have neither the funds nor the legal power to undertake such a work.

  Belfast Constabulary Inquiry.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Report of the Commission held in connection with the Royal Irish Constabulary at Belfast, together with the correspondence that led to its appointment.
  MR. BRYCE: The Commission has only now finished its sittings, and its Report has not yet been prepared. I am
  1158
  not at present aware of any reason why the Report, when received, should not be laid upon the Table.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: At whose instigation did the right hon. Gentleman appoint the Committee.
  MR. BRYCE: I appointed it.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: What facts were brought to the knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman to induce him to appoint it.
  MR. BRYCEdeclined to answer that question.

  Kerry Evicted Tenants.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners in endeavouring to effect the reinstatement of evicted tenants in Kerry merely make a request to the landlord as to his willingness to negotiate; whether in the event of a refusal by the landlord the Commissioners have any power to proceed further with the reinstatement; and whether he can give a Return showing the names of the landlords and tenants in which failure to reinstate has occurred owing to the landlord's refusal.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that it is their practice to approach the landlord with a view to ascertaining whether he is willing to enter into negotiations for the sale of the holding, but they have no power to compel an owner to sell. If the owner will not sell, the Commissioners consider the possibility of providing a holding for the evicted tenant elsewhere. The Commissioners propose to publish in their annual report, or half-yearly if it is so desired, a statement snowing generally how far the reinstatement of evicted tenants in their former holdings has been effected, or how far holdings have been provided for them elsewhere, and generally the causes of success or failure as the case may be. The Commissioners do not, however, propose to detail the names of the owners in cases in which reinstatement has not been effected.

  Trinity College Commission.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: On behalf of the hon. Member for Mid Armagh, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of his declaration that the Trinity College Commission was to be an impartial and non-political body, he will reconsider the appointment of Dr. Douglas Hyde, the President of the Gælic League, who has shown a partisan spirit, and on the platform and in the Press has held up Trinity College to obloquy and ridicule.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDinterposed to ask the Speaker whether it was in order to make allegations in a Question such as were here made.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGasked, on the point of order, whether it was not perfectly correct to say what was said in the Question of a man who had spoken of the devouring demon of Anglicization.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I do not see that there is anything I can object to in the Question. the hon. Member who has put it down makes himself responsible for that view, although I daresay a great number of persons would not take a similar view of Dr. Douglas Hyde.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDasked whether Questions were not for the purpose of asking for information, and whether they were to be used for the purpose of making calumnious statements.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I have always tried as far as possible to soften down any expressions brought to my notice in Questions which might be taken exception to.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked whether Questions were not put as to matters of fact, and whether an hon. Gentleman was to be able to put his own opinion through the vehicle of a Question as to whether a partisan spirit had or had not been shown, which was a matter of opinion and argument. The Nationalist Members had often been told that they were not allowed to put any Questions involving discussion.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is travelling beyond the limits of a Question.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked whether arguable matters and matters of opinion were allowed to be conveyed by way of question. He would again impress on the Speaker not to allow this Question to be put.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I do not think I can add anything to what I have already said. I have tried as far as possible to discountenance any Questions in which expressions are used likely to give offence.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to give notice that I will put down a Question which will contain some allegations against the hon. Member.
  MR. BRYCE, answering the Question, said: It would be impossible to adopt the suggestion made in the Question. I am not aware of any foundation for the allegations made, and I am informed that Dr. Douglas Hyde, who is a distinguished graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, has constantly exerted his influence to prevent the Gælic League from being drawn into the vortex of Party politics—
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGasked whether Dr. Douglas Hyde had not on numerous occasions given vent to strong anti-English feeling, and whether it was not the fact that on one occasion—
  *MR. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman has already said that he has no information to that effect. If the hon. Member wishes to ask anything further he had better give notice.

  Belfast Valuation.
  MR. MOONEY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will grant the Return standing on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Newry.†
  † Return showing the Valuation placed upon each House in Royal Avenue and Donegal Place, Belfast, at the recent revaluation, showing (1) the Valuation fixed in first instance; (2) after the first appeal; (3) after the appeal to the Recorder.
  MR. MCKENNA: I am informed that the information asked for in the Return has already been given in the Valuation and Appeal lists issued to the Belfast Corporation, which were open to public inspection. In these circumstances I do not feel justified in authorising the expenditure which would be involved if the Return were granted.

  Danish Consulate Report.
  MR. JOYCE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Department of Agriculture has been drawn to the review by the Danish Consulate on the British butter and bacon market, and whether he proposes to take any, and, if any, what steps to test the accuracy of the statements there made relative to Irish bacon, and, if they are found to be inaccurate, to secure their contradiction.
  MR. BRYCE: The attention of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction has been drawn to the report of the Danish Consulate referred to, and they are instituting inquiries in reference to the statements as to Irish bacon contained in that report.

  Irish Teachers' Pensions.
  MR. O'SHEE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many national teachers were in the first division of the first class in 1897, when the last revision of the pension scheme was made; how many of these were, in 1897, declared eligible for pensions of £88, and were then included in the standard number; how many teachers in the division and class named were, in 1897, excluded from pensions of £88; how many of those excluded in 1897 have since been included for such pensions; how many then excluded still so remain; on what principle are those teachers placed in a worse position than other teachers having the same qualification; and why is the standand number not abolished in this class as it has been in all other classes.
  MR. MCKENNA: The numbers asked for in the first five parts of the Question
  1162
  are in order 559; 150; 409; 63; 346. With regard to the last two parts of the Question I must inform the hon. Member that under the rules of 1897, which are in force at the present time, the maximum pension of £88 was abolished. Vested interests, however, wore to be respected, and teachers who were eligible for the higher pension on the 1st January, 1898 —the date on which the new rules came into operation—retained their existing rights subject, of course, to the existing conditions, one of which was the maintenance of a standard number for the First Division on the First Class.

  Irish Lunacy Grant.
  MR. COGAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the sum of £50,692, voted by Parliament in the 1874–5 Civil Service Estimates as a grant-in-aid of the maintenance of pauper lunatics in Irish district asylums, for the nine months ended December 31st, 1874, was surrendered to the Exchequer as an unexpended balance on March 31st, 1875, in consequence of the certified claims, based on the audited accounts to the asylums for 1874, not having been received in time to enable payment to be made before the expiration of the financial year 1874–5; that a similar sum was re-voted in the next Parliamentary Estimates, and the actual grants for the nine months ended December 31st, 1874, paid out of this vote during the year 1875; that since that time the capitation grant claims have always been paid in arrears after the audit of the asylums accounts for the previous financial year had been completed; and that on the change in the asylums financial year from December 31st to March 31st, after the passing of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, the Irish county councils defrayed the cost of maintenance of pauper lunatics for fifteen months from January 1st, 1899, to March 31st, 1900, and only received twelve months' grant-in-aid, covering the period from April 1st, 1899, to March 31st, 1900; and whether he will give instructions that the certified claims for three months thus omitted (from January 1st, to March 31st, 1899), amounting approximately to £37,000, shall be paid out of the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account direct to the various county councils, in

  1163
  accordance with Section 53 (2) (c), of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898.
  MR. MCKENNA: It is true that as a result of the Local Government Act of 1898 a gap of three months did occur in respect of which payment was due from the Exchequer of the Local Taxation Account. The period in question was, however, January 1st to April 1st, 1898. The hon. Member cannot be aware that a Supplementary Vote was taken in 1900, especially to repay to the Local Taxation Account the charges, amounting to £37,030, which the Account had borne during these three months. The Supplementary Estimate is contained in Parliamentary Paper No. 280 of July 17th, 1900, and attached to it is a note to which I would refer the hon. Member for a fuller explanation of this complicated Question.

  Bangor Post Office.
  MR. T. L. COKBETT: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he proposes to raise the new post office in Bangor, county Down, to the position of a head office, with the second office as a branch.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: It is not proposed to raise the main post office at Bangor (County Down) to the rank of a head post office. No improvement in postal facilities would result from such a change.

  THE "EDITING" OF QUESTIONS.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLcalled attention to the alleged interference by the Clerks of the House with Questions handed in at the Table by hon. Members. He understood that the rule was that the power of editing Questions was vested in the Speaker; but in practice, when a Question was handed in at the Table, the Clerk at the Table could, if he so chose, show the Question to the Speaker and alter it under his supervision. Now, for the first time, the Clerks at the Table, without communicating with the hon. Members who handed in the Questions, had exercised the power of editing the Questions, although the Speaker was incapable of delegating that power to them.
  1164
  He submitted that the Clerks at the Table had no right to alter a single word in a Question without the consent of the hon. Member who handed it in. He objected strongly to their interference; it would be better to postpone the Question.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I regret very much the tone of the speech from the hon. Member and his attack upon the Clerks at the Table, who are not in a position to reply. I totally differ from the view of the hon. Member. I think the Clerks at the Table during the ten years in which I have been in close contact with them have done their very difficult work in a most admirable manner. There is often great difficulty with regard to Questions. The Clerks at the Table, acting under my directions, edit them according to well-established and well known regulations; and if any difference arises between them and the hon. Members who bring the Questions to the Table, the proper course is that the Questions should be submitted to me. As every Question has to appear upon the Paper one day before it is asked in the House, there can be no difficulty whatever, if an hon. Member has a complaint to make, in bringing the Question to me, and I should be very glad to consider it.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsuggested that a Rule should be established that no Question should be altered until the Member who wished to ask it had been consulted by the Clerks at the Table.
  *MR. SPEAKER: That, no doubt, would be a good rule in some respects. But I think the obvious disadvantage of it is that the hon. Member would lose his place. The Clerks frequently consider the desirability of not putting a Question upon the Paper until the terms of it are settled. But, on the whole, it would be better to put it upon the Paper, otherwise the hon. Member who expected to ask his Question, say, on Thursday, might lose his place and would not be able to ask it until Monday.
  SIR W. EVANS GORDONasked whether the difficulty could not be over-

  1165
  come by hon. Members waiting at the Table until the Questions had been read over.
  *MR. SPEAKER: That would be impracticable. Very often a great number of Members come to the Table at the same time, and if they were all to be kept waiting it would cause great inconvenience.

NEW BILLS.
  NURSES' REGISTRATION BILL.
  "To regulate the qualifications of trained Nurses and to provide for their registration," presented by Mr. Munro Ferguson; supported by Dr. Macnamara, Mr. Rose, Sir John Kennaway, Mr. A. W. Black, Mr. Eve, Mr. Fell, Mr. Crooks, and Mr. M'Killop; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 253.]
  GOVERNMENT OF SCOTLAND BILL.
  "To amend the provision for the future government of Scotland," presented by Mr. Pirie: supported by Mr. Barnes, Mr. Dalziel, Mr. Arthur Dewar, Mr. Gulland, Mr. Lamont, Mr. Murray Macdonald, Mr. Evans, Mr. Keir Hardie, Sir William Holland, Mr. William O'Brien, and Mr. Walker; to be read a second time upon Monday, July 9th, and to be printed. [Bill 254.]
  BOND INVESTMENT COMPANIES BILL.
  "To provide for the better regulation of Bond Investment Companies," presented by Mr. Kearley; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 255.]

  PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE.
  Ordered, That Mr. Blake be discharged from the Committee.
  Ordered, That Mr. Hazelton be added to the Committee.—(Mr. Whiteley.)

  SUPPLY [12th ALLOTTED DAY].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1906–7.

  CLASS IV.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum not exceeding £1,122,128 be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland, including a Grant in Aid."
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,)said he might be allowed, in submitting these Estimates, to introduce a few remarks in order to bring the consideration of the Committee to the question which would form the chief topic of discussion, namely, the Minute for the training of teachers. In the last few years there had been many changes carried out administratively in Scottish education, and these Estimates, like those of various other Departments which had been discussed already, were inherited. The present Government came into office at a time of the year when the Estimates were in an advanced condition, and under any circumstances it would have been difficult to make any radical change in either policy or Estimates this year. There had not been, however, in the House of Commons in the last few years any great difference between Scottish Members in regard to Scottish education, except perhaps when they came to discuss the Education Bills of the late Government. But so far as the administration of Scottish education had been concerned, whilst there had been great interest shown by Scottish Members in all parts of the House, and, as an expression of that great interest, considerable criticism, there had never been any deep or wide difference of opinion between them. In reviewing very briefly what had occurred during the last few years he did so under the eyes of the hon.

  1167
  Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities, who, they all recognised, had had an honourable share in directing that policy. Since the year 1898 great changes had been carried out in Scottish education. Elementary education had been transformed in many directions. The custom of leaving school after passing the fifth standard had gone. The leaving certificate, and all the arrangements as well as the grants depending on the results in different branches of study, had gone, and there was now a system under which there was much greater freedom to the teacher in connection with the work of the school, much greater security to the school board, in that its resources depended on the fixed grant, and altogether an improved state of things. One incidental advantage of great importance was that they had longer attendance at school. By the Act of 1901 the age of fourteen was fixed as the limit of compulsory education, and the arrangements since had been based upon that. In consequence of the changes there had been a considerable increase in the attendance at the primary schools of pupils at a later age. Another change carried out was the organisation of the higher grade schools. Roughly, when pupils in the elementary schools reached the average age of twelve there was a bifurcation between those who intended to prolong their education by going to a higher grade school and those who, looking forward possibly to taking up unskilled occupations or for other reasons, could not remain at school beyond the age of fourteen. These latter, whose school course was based upon the principle that their study of the elementary subjects should be as complete as possible, could go on and get the intermediary certificate at the age of fourteen. It was among these partly that there had been a great increase of attendance. The pupils contemplatng another course of study after the age of twelve entered upon a course of higher grade education. In former days the education now given in higher grade schools or in the higher grade departments of the elementary schools was entirely unorganised, and, except in special cases, was incoherent. There were science and art classes; there were
  1168
  classes established by the county council' but there was no organised system of higher grade education. The establishment of higher grade schools had been encouraged throughout the country, and the opportunity was afforded to pupils who wished to continue their education up to fifteen or sixteen years of age to attend higher grade schools. It was obvious that this opportunity was limited; that was to say, there could not be higher grade schools within the reach of all pupils, especially in rural districts. Though the increase in the number of these higher grade schools in Scotland had been very marked, there were still only 137 throughout the country. It was hoped and intended that when this system was fully developed there should be facilities for higher grade education within the reach of all those who wished to take advantage of them. Personally he held strongly, now that the State had practically swept out of its course all private adventure in the matter of such schools, that it was the bounden duty of the Government to place within the reach of ability of all kinds, and wherever it might be found, the opportunities of development. The increase of higher grade education implied a great increase in the teaching staff and, from the fact that the education was of a somewhat higher kind, an improvement in the quality of the teaching. There was one other respect in which advance had been made in the last few years, and that was in affording facilities for education to those who had left school and who found the necessity or the desirability of improving their education as years went on. To supply this need in former days they had the evening continuation schools, but it had been felt that there was need of an organised effort to meet this growing want, and there had now grown up a system which was described in the continuation class code, and which afforded to pupils an opportunity of this kind. These continuation classes, which had been organised into a system, might be held at any time during the day and not necessarily in the evening, and instruction might be given in single subjects or in groups of subjects. They provided elementary education for those who found themselves deficient in it. Indeed it was very often found that

  1169
  before such pupils could go on to the other advantages given under the code they had to supplement their earlier and elementary education. Having done that, or if they were to enter upon the other branches of study without it, they could provide themselves with special instruction having application to the trades in which they were engaged. The idea underlying the system of continuation classes was two-fold. In the first place, it was hoped that the system might really lead up to the central technical institutions which were now established in Scotland, and that these technical institutions, governed as they were by the representatives of trade and employers actually engaged in trade, might exercise a powerful influence upon the character and education of the young people who took advantage of' them. Just as it was hoped that the higher grade facilities would be placed within the reach of the pupils who took advantage of them in the day schools of the country, so it was hoped that as this system was more widely known and taken advantage of continuation classes would be within the reach of all pupils who wished to take advantage of them. This development postulated an increase in the number of qualified teachers. It had always been the traditional boast of Scotland that it was possible for an able and capable boy to go from the parish school to the University. It should be possible now, but for the fact that in regard to the greatness of the population in Scotland the operation of altered circumstances compelled some degree of specialisation in the different classes of schools. Whereas in days gone by advanced and exceptional pupils went to the University at sixteen, fifteen, or even fourteen years of age, the Universities themselves had moved forward and such cases were rare under existing conditions. Regard must be had to the fact that there was division and specialisation of schools, and now probably men rarely entered the University at a lower age than seventeen. The principle underlying the organisation of the schools he had briefly described was clearly stated in the explanatory memorandum of the collection of circulars issued some years ago. The principle
  1170
  was this: Whereas in Scotland for those who were not going to stay at school beyond the age of fourteen there were to be public elementary schools which would give the education qualifying for the merit certificate at that age, for those who intended to take a more prolonged course there was the higher grade schools which would carry them on to the age of fifteen or sixteen, while for those who wished to prolong their education to the University point at seventeen or eighteen there was the higher class school. These three lines of education were not to be imposed one on another; they were on parallel lines, and they rested on the foundation that where higher grade schools were not actually within the reach of pupils they must be put within their reach by means of bursaries; and by that means, right through the whole system, to open the channel of education to those who were able to take advantage of the facilities thus afforded. It would interest the Committee to know the figures showing the increase in the number of pupils in the elementary schools since the Act of 1901 established the statutory age at fourteen. The number of pupils over twelve on the register in 1901 was 157,543, being 20·5 of the whole. It was now 22·89 of the whole. At the same time I the percentage of increase on the number of children between seven and twelve was only 1·89, while the percentage of increase under seven was 0·81. The increase, therefore, had been chiefly in the pupils above twelve. Taking the figures in another way, the total increase of pupils over twelve was 26,542. Allowing an increase of 7,000 for the growth of population this represented a clear gain on the attendance of these particular children of over 19,000. He had said enough to show that the view taken hitherto was that every elementary school should be at any rate in posse a higher grade-school. There was nothing to prevent a higher grade pupil from being taken on to higher grade subjects in an elementary school. While that applied to an elementary school so far as higher grade education was concerned, it was intended that it should apply in the higher grade schools so far as secondary education was concerned. There was no desire to put any limit on such development so long as the

  1171
  higher grade schools did not come into unnecessary competition with the other schools. The success of the higher grade schools had been considerable. There were now 135 in Scotland, and, although their distribution left something to be desired, there were comparatively few districts now, he understood, where the opportunity for secondary education was not within the reach of enterprising youth. There were six of these higher grade schools in the county of Sutherland, four in Ross-shire, one in the Island of Lewis, and one in the Island of Skye, and it was hoped that these facilities might increase as time went on and as there was more readiness to take advantage of them. The average attendance in the higher grade schools, including the higher grade departments, in 1900 was 2,949; four years later it was 10,000; and last year it was about 15,000. These figures showed that considerable advantage had been taken of this development. He would not dwell on the continuation class schools. In recent years there had been considerable development in the attendance of pupils of more mature years at the schools in Scotland. This seemed to carry with it the obligation to provide an increase, if possible, of the teaching staff. How had the training of the teachers been provided in the past? Until the year 1895 the training of teachers in Scotland was entirely carried on in denominational colleges under the control of the churches. These colleges and churches had unquestionably done great service to Scotland and to the interests of Scottish education. But even before that year there was a growing feeling that this was properly not denominational but national work. Apart entirely from that question of principle, there were pressing practical reasons for attempting to increase the supply of teachers. The fact was, as had been often stated in this House, and by nobody more emphatically than himself, the existing provision in regard to teachers was not, sufficient. The churches expressed themselves averse to undertaking any development in this matter without the aid of State funds. Public opinion, he thought, was not inclined to justify the placing of further State funds at the disposal of the denominations for this purpose, in view of Mr. Sinclair.
  1172
  the growing feeling that this was a national duty and obligation. In 1895 the Committees which went under the name of King's Students Committees established one after another in the principal Universities schools for the training of intending teachers, thus endeavouring to add to the output of the Training Colleges King's students. The number of such students was 335. This Minute had worked for some years, but it was varied in its definite form. The Minute issued last year constituted what were now known as Provincial Committees, and a definite shape and form was given to the machinery for providing an extra supply of teachers. These Committees consisted of representatives from the Universities, but the predominating proportion of their number were representatives of the school boards. It was thought that all these bodies had an interest in the matter and that they should be properly represented. Then power was given to train King's scholars as well as King's students. That was practically to undertake the work of the old training colleges. It was premature to build new premises until the view of the churches was known. The Provincial Committees were empowered to accept the transference of the Church training colleges on conditions. On the one hand the churches were not bound to transfer the colleges, nor were the Committees under obligation to accept them except under proper conditions; and it was laid down in the Minute that if such transference involved the payment of money the Treasury had first to be consulted. There was one condition which it was as well to make clear, and that was that in no case did the Department introduce any proposal that the expense of providing religious instruction by the Provincial Committees, whether for King's students in new colleges or in existing colleges, should be made in any degree out of the grants coming from Parliament. The next step taken by the late Government was the provisional issue of drafting regulations for the training of teachers. These regulations had been under consideration for the last six months; they had been published in all the Scottish newspapers; they were known to the authorities interested in education; and the school

  1173
  boards, especially in the great centres of population, had been in conference on the points raised by the Minute. The main change carried out by the Minute was the establishment of a concurrent system of the supply of teachers—a system of junior students which should be concurrent with the existing system of pupil-teachers. The fact was that the pupil-teacher system did not induce a sufficiently elastic supply of future teachers. There was no increase in the number of pupil-teachers sufficiently corresponding to the increase in the teaching staff. In 1873 the percentage of pupil-teachers to the total staff was 58·09; ten years after the figure had fallen to 33·18; in 1893 it was only 25·68; and last year it was only 20·43. It was notable also in particular that the output of male teachers under this system was inadequate. In 1873 the percentage of male pupil-teachers to the total staff was 53·22; but in 1905 it had fallen to 12·13. Another notable fact was that the proportion coming from the country districts had been growing less and less. As a matter of fact the pupil-teacher system had been given up. He did not say that the pupil-teacher system had not been of great assistance in the past; it had in many cases produced good teachers, but looked at coldly it was a form of cheap labour. The business of the pupil-teacher originally was to carry on the mechanical part of teaching under the guidance of some other teacher. In former days he had very little opportunity for his own education or for the study of the requirements of his profession. All honour to those who had surmounted those difficulties. In 1873, by regulation, the number of pupil-teachers to one certificated teacher was cut down to four; in 1878 it was three and in 1888 it was two. That brought with it a greater proportion of certificated teachers and an improvement in the work by which the pupil-teachers prepared themselves for their profession. As a matter of fact a great departure in this matter was taken in 1895, when what was practically the half-day system was instituted. The pupil-teacher was then obliged to teach half the day and to give the rest of the day to his own improvement. He or she lost his or her essential position in the
  1174
  school. That to was say, the pupil-teacher became an auxiliary who, whether boy or girl, could not give uninterrupted care to the class of children. While on the one hand he lost his former position in the school it was undoubtedly the case that the attainments of the pupil-teacher improved. Although he did not rely upon these points he thought he could give figures to establish what he had said. The pupil-teacher had, in fact, been abolishing himself; that was to say, the proposed regulations did little more than recognise existing developments. As to the cost, the school board was relieved from all expenditure for the maintenance and pay of these junior students who took the place of the pupil-teachers. Each board was given the opportunity of putting forward a certain number of candidates to be trained as junior students and to receive the maintenance allowance which might be taken while being trained. This maintenance allowance might be taken as the equivalent of the salary of the pupil-teachers, and it would enable the holder to obtain an education not only in his own parish, but anywhere in his own county, so that he would receive an education which would be comparable not with that which he would receive in country districts but with that which he would receive in large towns under school boards. The managers of the special training centres would receive a grant for the instruction of these junior students to the extent of such a sum as would almost, if not altogether, provide for their education and training. Two important alterations been made in the Minute in deference to criticisms. There was in the first place nothing in the Minute which arrested or abolished the present pupil-teacher system, and in the second place the paragraph in the Minute as originally drafted, which dealt with candidates on probation, had also been omitted. He must confess that these omissions had been made contrary to his own judgment and that of the Department. There were of course, however, pros and cons—advantages and disadvantages. As the Minute now stood a junior student must have obtained an intermediate certificate before he would be accepted as a junior student. There were very many schools

  1175
  in the country, however, which could not bring their scholars up to the intermediate certificate, and it seemed necessary, therefore, that arrangements should be made to enable the bright pupil in distant parts of the country to be sent to a school—and boarded if necessary— which could give him the education to enable him to obtain the intermediate certificate which was the necessary preliminary to his becoming a junior student. That was the part of the scheme to which objection was taken and it had been omitted, but under the Aid Grant Minute an additional sum of £25,000 in the present year, an amount which could be increased in future years if necessity was shown, would be placed at the disposal of the county councils for the express purpose of enabling them to make these provisions for pupils in out-of the-way districts who were unable to obtain the intermediate certificate in their own locality. A part of this £25,000 would go for the purpose of trying the scheme of the draft Minute, and it would be for future consideration if further and more definite steps were to be taken in that direction. It was urged that great expense would fall upon school boards if they were to replace pupil-teachers by certificated teachers, and had to make structural alterations in classrooms to meet the additional number of children. In reply to that objection he might first point out that the pupil teacher was not yet abolished. And even when the time came (if it ever came) when it seemed desirable to adopt wholly this system of junior students, several years must elapse before any system took the place of the existing system of pupil teachers. This question of expense and difficulty in structural arrangements might be considered to fall with exceptional hardship on the small schools. In the small schools every effort had been made to meet the difficulties. Special encouragement was given to small schools in the shape of grants towards the payment of teachers to improve their staffs. Another objection to this proposal was that the regulation made it more difficult for children of working-class parents to enter the teaching profession. If that could really be urged against this Minute it would be a grave and fatal objection, for he held strongly that it would be
  1176
  disastrous for the purpose of the education of the country not to pick their brains from wherever they could get them. The whole brain power of the country should certainly be drawn upon for the supply of the teaching profession. The intention of these regulations was entirely in the direction of opening the door more widely to the brains of all classes of the community. This would certainly have been the effect in black and white, in his humble judgment, if the previous chapter of the Minute which they had omitted had not been omitted; but it having been omitted the attempt had been made in the meantime to place at the disposal of the educational authorities for this purpose a sum equivalent for the year to the sum now paid in salaries for pupil-teacher students and for pupil-teachers. There was only one other objection which had been urged against the regulation, that was that these new junior students would not receive sufficient practice in teaching. The answer to that was that they were substituting for the present facilities for teaching, which were casual and not thorough and very often without direction or guidance, an organised system of instruction in teaching. The Minute provided for a minimum of six months instruction in teaching, which could be increased afterwards to two years. That, he thought, was a complete answer to the objection. There had been additional expenditure in recent years in education on Scotland. It has been due to two causes, namely, the increase in the attendance of senior pupils and the regulations restricting the number of pupils to be taught by one teacher. But there had been additions to the resources of the local authorities which had been placed at their disposal by Parliament. There was the higher grade grant to the higher grade schools, the increased grant to the supplementary classes, and the help given under the general aid grant. The question had been raised in various memorials as to the proportion of the burden borne by the school board authorities and the proportion supplied by grants. What was the result of the additional burdens imposed on the school authorities and the additional grants available since that time? Taking all the additional expenditure for Scotland

  1177
  for all the objects towards which State aid was given, reckoning capital expenditure in the shape of interest on and the repayment of loans, and counting local grants not as part of State grants but local contributions, he found that the figures were these. In 1900–1 the proportions were: State aid, 47·7 per cent, and the local charge 52·3; in the year 1904–5 the State aid was 51·22 and the local charge 48·78. The same general results were arrived at if they excluded the expenditure for the training of teachers as being a national object, the burden of which should not fall on the locality. In 1900–1 the State aid was 46·74 per cent., the charge on the locality 53·26. Four years later the position was reversed, the State aid being 50·17 as against that of the locality, which was 41·83. The contribution of the State to general expenditure was 29 per cent, as against a local contribution of 12·26 per cent. He suggested that in the memorials that had been prepared the whole question had been treated on a rather narrow basis. It had been discussed as if it were simply a matter of expenditure of and grants to school boards. Nearly one-ninth of the school population of Scotland was taught in voluntary schools. Any increase of grants to school boards in years past had necessitated an increase of grant to those schools also. Furthermore, only half of the higher grade schools in the country were under the school boards and additional assistance given to the school boards for the purposes of education would necessitate an increase of grants to other schools rendering the same service to the nation. Lastly, the most expensive part of Scottish education, the continuation classes at the central institutions, were not under the management of the school boards. Even if they took school boards alone and reckoned every item of expenditure incurred, such as the rent of offices, salaries of officers, and so forth, as part of local contribution and not part of State grants, the general conclusion would not be substantially altered. The grants for the higher grade schools had not yet been fully taken advantage of. Let them take the following comparison: In 1900–1 the State provided 45·6 per cent and the local authority 54·4. Four years later, viz., 1904–5, the State had advanced to 49·2
  1178
  against the localities' 50·8. The proportion of State grants was in reality normal. On the whole it was inevitable that State grants should have kept pace in recent years with the additional expenditure imposed by the State, and further, that a set of grants should have been made available sufficient to meet expenditure not already in sight. Let them take, for instance, the new regulations for teachers. Under those regulations the school boards would be relieved of the maintenance of junior students, and on the other hand school boards would receive for the instruction of junior students at approved centres grants for more than double, and approximating to three times, the amount of what they at present received for the instruction of pupil teachers. There were two points on the question of expenditure which remained. It was possible that while the proportion of Scotland was, as a whole, satisfactory, certain localities bore a disproportionate burden. He might say that that very question was receiving at the present time the serious consideration of the Department with a view to seeing whether some more equitable scheme might not be formulated. The second point was that it was possible, though the proportion in the past had been maintained or even exceeded, that that proportion was in itself inadequate and should be revised, either upon broad general grounds in the interest of the community out of consideration for the due proportion as between State aid and the income of the schools. This question would also receive careful consideration, and representations would be made, if necessary, to the Treasury. In the meantime he ought to mention that the Treasury had consented to a measure of relief to extra necessitous school boards in Scotland, viz., those who required to levy a rate of over 1s. 6d. in the £, on similar terms to those which would be granted to similar districts in England. That came as a Treasury subvention in consequence of the subventions of England under the Bill. [An HON. MEMBER: You are not using any part of your own money for that purpose.] The right hon. Member explained that it was not Scotch money. Continuing, he said he would endeavour to show where they stood in the matter of public

  1179
  education in Scotland. There was, of course, an ample field for further development. There was the higher grade school system which was not yet complete. It must be gradually developed, but it would not be complete until all those facilities were within reach of the pupils who wished to take advantage of them. It was extremely desirable not only that greater use and advantage should be taken of the higher grade school in the case of pupils who had not left school, but also that advantage should be taken of continuation schools in the case of pupils who had left the day schools. In many other countries the education of the people did not stop at the age of fourteen, but continued in later years, the people giving not the whole time, but portions of their time to it. It seemed to him that the time had almost, if not altogether arrived, when consideration might be given to the suggestion which had already been made, viz., that some discretion, some power, should be given to school boards to compel attendance at the evening continuation classes, at the same time giving powers to exempt pupils who could not, for good reasons, attend. In that way they might advance gradually and slowly in the direction of prolonging the education of the people.
  *SIR HENRY CEAIK, congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on his clear statement, and was glad that he had found no reason to depart from the main policy of the Department. There was scarcely an item in the Estimates which did not remind him of some past struggle with the Treasury, and he could promise the right hon. Gentleman support in his efforts to secure the rights of Scotland in educational matters. He was glad that the right hon. Gentleman had paid a very deserving tribute to the policy initiated by Lord Dunedin. He trusted that if there were any reasons for complaint in the future that Scotland had not been treated with sufficient liberality, it would not be the Secretary for Scotland or the Department over which he presided that would be to blame. He was fully in accord with the Minute produced by the right hon. Gentleman in regard to the training of teachers, though he regretted that, in deference to more or
  1180
  less well-informed criticism, he had not had the courage to carry out his intentions fully, but had withdrawn a certain part of the regulations which he originally put forward. In dealing with those regulations he wished to allude to one sort of criticism which had been too frequently used with regard to this and other regulations. Could the Department find any better way of taking the country into its confidence than by issuing a Minute for full and free criticism? The Minute was issued in draft, and that fact was found fault with and discussed at various meetings and in various journals. He would recall to the right hon. Gentleman an experience of his own. About fourteen years ago there was a certain considerable sum of money that had to be distributed in some way or other. There was much doubt as to how it should be distributed, and as a fair and reasonable way of taking the country into its confidence, the Government of the day issued a Memorandum in draft for which he was himself more or less responsible. That Memorandum was discussed in this House by some with full intelligence, and by others with no understanding whatever. One gentleman, who was no longer a Member of this House, denounced the Memorandum in most unmeasured terms, and declared that whatever scheme might be invented for distributing the money none could be worse or more absurd than the one put forward in the Memorandum. At the time he happened to be in a certain part of this Chamber, and the hon. Member he referred to came and asked him if he had a copy of that Memorandum, which he said he had never read. That was the I fate which mot a good many Memoranda, which were often criticised before they; had been read. [Cries of "Oh, oh !"] The abolition of the pupil-teacher system could not come too soon, and he regretted that the end of it had been to some extent postponed. He was glad that, in a lurking corner of the Minute, it had been provided that although the probationers disappeared in name they remained in substance, and even this partial disappearance was due to criticisms which were not always well informed. He felt bound here to allude to one reflection which the right hon. Gentleman had made upon training colleges. They were all aware of the excellent work which had

  1181
  been done by the training colleges carried on by the Churches. He was not aware that there was any serious complaint in regard to the training colleges thoroughout Scotland, or of the work they had done. They were carried on in a most liberal spirit, and the reason for reconstructing the system was not that the denominational system of training had failed, but it was due to an entirely different cause. There were two ways of training teachers. Some, of them were taken at an early ago and made pupil-teachers. They then passed on to the training colleges, but they never associated with those who were preparing for other professions, and they emerged from the colleges without having had an opportunity of mixing with a wide body of students. This was felt to be an improper training, and so there had been added the other way by which the teachers entered the University and carried on their instruction along with the ordinary students of the University. Those two systems undoubtedly worked one against the other. One system was carried on in institutions specially supported by the State, which, by their nature were not allowed to admit any other students than those who were preparing for the teaching profession. The other system gave certain support to the students at Universities carrying on their general work. The question they had to consider was how to present the overlapping of the two systems and the Minute was intended to do this. He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman seemed to have found a reason for the new system in a doubt as to the efficacy of the work done by the training colleges, and in their denominational character.
  MR. SINCLAIR: No.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he was pleased to have that denial. He was glad to hear there was to be a grant to school boards in necessitous districts in Scotland as an equivalent to the £135,000 which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had announced was to be given to necessitous schools in England.
  MR. SINCLAIR: It is equivalent in the sense that we are claiming for Scotland equal treatment; that is to say,
  1182
  school boards in the same position in Scotland will receive the same aid.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he understood that the sum was to balance the English grant of £135,000. The necessitous districts were more numerous in Scotland than in England, and the grant to Scotland ought to be larger than it would be if it was fixed on the basis of population. But further, in recent years the grants to University colleges in England and Wales had risen from £15,000 to £100,000. Why was there nothing to correspond to those grants upon this Vote? He knew they would be told that in the Universities Act of 1889 they accepted a certain sum in lieu of their claims. Nothing could be more unfair than to quote that Act against them. The words of Section 28 of that Act were—
  "And the sum granted in pursuance of this Act shall be deemed to be in full discharge of all past and present claims."
  The grants to which he was referring were new since the year 1889. This was a matter of simple justice. It was quite true that they had £30,000 under the Local Taxation Act of 1892, but that came from money which belonged to Scotland, and was not drawn from the National Exchequer in any sense whatever. Under the English Education Bill, which was now under the consideration of the House, £1,000,000 annually was promised to carry out certain regulations in England, and more than £100,000 of that sum would come from Scottish pockets. They must insist that a corresponding sum should be given to Scotland. It would not do for the Treasury to say that they would consider the Scottish claims as they were put forward. They must clearly understand what claims were to be admitted, and see that they were admitting them upon a similar foundation both for England and Scotland. Let the Committee consider what was going on. They were adding more grants in England for training colleges. The other day he noticed that the President of the Board of Education had announced that the secondary education grants in England were to be largely increased. As far as Scotland was concerned, they were told to put forward their claims, and the Department would see what they wore worth, He would

  1183
  remind the Committee, however, that while the rate for secondary education in England was limited to 1d. in the pound, the rate levied for secondary education by Scottish school boards frequently amounted to from 8d. to 10d. in the pound. Therefore they claimed that, whatever increase there might be in the grants made for secondary education in England, there should be at least a similar increase in the grants to Scotland. He hoped the Government would do something to remedy the grievance of Scotland in regard to the granting of pensions and gratuities to teachers. He wished particularly to refer to this question, because not only were the teachers, but Scotland as a whole was suffering under a serious grievance in this matter. When the Superannuation Act of 1887 was before the House the Scottish Education Department were anxious that that measure should not in any way curtail the powers of school boards under the Act of 1872. A different view, however, was taken by the Government, and, unfortunately, after having fought the question with some pertinacity they found that an arrangement had been come to between the National Union in England and the representatives of the teachers of Scotland and the powers of the Scottish school boards were curtailed. At the time he thought that was a mistake, and he had never since altered his opinion in regard to it. He thought that the powers given to the school boards in regard to this question under the Act of 1872 ought to have been preserved. It should be remembered that the Act of 1872 was not an elementary education Act, but an Act for the education of the whole people of Scotland, and not one line of the Act restricted it to elementary education. He thought it would have astonished Scotsmen in 1872, and above all the framers of that Act, if they had thought that the average pension of the teachers at any school in Scotland would be not more than £32 or £34 a year. One reason why he regretted that the Bill laid before Parliament by the late Government was not passed was that it proposed to alter that anomaly, and to give to school boards the powers they had under the Act of 1870. He trusted that if this provision could not be put in a comprehensive Education Bill it might be embodied in a Bill of one clause. There were in the Estimates Votes for the
  1184
  Scottish Museum, the National Gallery of Scotland, and the Royal Society of Scotland. It would not be in order to enter at present into the discussion of these items, but he wished to point out to the Secretary for Scotland that it would be for the convenience, not only of the Committee and the Department but of Scottish administration generally, that all these items should come under the Education Vote.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The question of the form of future Estimates is not in order. Hon. Members can only discuss the matter to which the Vote now before the Committee refers.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he quite understood that. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider the suggestion he had made. Referring to the constitution of the Department, he wished to recall a discussion which took place earlier in the session with regard to the salary of the Minister who was at the head of the Department. He listened to that discussion with very considerable surprise. He had hoped that one of Lord Crewe's colleagues I in the Cabinet, and most of all the Secretary for Scotland, would rise to point out that after all the Lord President of the Council was at the head of this Department and responsible for the whole Vote now before the Committee, and for the whole conduct of Scottish educational affairs. He thought that would have been a very good answer to the remarks as to the inadequate work assigned to Lord Crowe. The fact was apparently unknown to his colleagues that Lord Crewe was at the head of and entirely responsible for Scottish Education.
  MR. PIRIE: Did Lord Crewe know himself?
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid his surprise would be still greater if Lord Crewe did not know. The hon. Member for Ross-shire and the hon. Member for Sutherland were both much perplexed over the payment of a salary to the Lord President, being unable to find out any reason why it was paid. The Lord President was responsible for every one of the Answers given in this House in regard to Scottish education.
  MR. WEIRwas understood to say that the hon. Member himself, when he hold the office of Secretary of the Scottish Education Department, prepared the Answers which were read in this House. The hon. Member was paid to do that work.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid the hon. Member had shown himself entirely ignorant of how the work of the Department was conducted. There were something like 800 to 1,000 letters per week to be answered in the Department, and as the subordinate officer responsible for that work, he received a living wage. But the responsibility for excogitating the Scottish education policy of the Government belonged to the Lord President as head of the Department, and he was surely worthy of his salary. He had nothing more to say on that point. He congratulated the Secretary for Scotland on the satisfactory statement he had made, and on the fact that he had given generous recognition of the work of his predecessors Lord Balfour and Lord Dunedin. He wished the right hon. Gentleman success in connection with the future work of the Department.
  *MR. SMEATONsaid the first impression made on his mind by the speech of the Secretary for Scotland was that he had succeeded most admirably in giving a rechauffé of the Memoranda and Circulars and Reports prepared by the hon. Member for the Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities. He had very little trouble in tracing the intimate connection between the speech and these productions of Dover House. The speeches of the Secretary for Scotland and of the hon. Gentleman opposite were both very laudatory of the existing state of affairs. According to the right hon. Gentleman nothing could be better than the present state of Scottish education. He thought hon. Members from Scotland would have preferred to hear something original from the right hon. Gentleman instead of a mere precis of the Memoranda issued by the hon. Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities, who for several years had been largely responsible for directing the policy of Scottish education. The right hon. Gentleman had told the Committee that there had been no difference of
  1186
  opinion on the part of Members of the previous Parliament in regard to the policy which was new being pursued. He found from reference to Hansard that there had been serious differences of opinion amongst Members of Parliament in regard to the policy of Scottish education during the past few years, and in particular in regard to the constitutional aspect of the question. It was to that matter he desired to draw the attention of the Committee. He had heard the opinions of a large number of men and women who were deeply interested in Scottish education, and he ventured to think that their opinions were at least worthy of being fairly put before the Committee. A leading Scottish newspaper had described the present school board system as a farce, so far as effective control of education was concerned, as the boards simply existed to carry out the orders of the Education Department situated in London, whose powers were exercised in the most arbitrary manner. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that there was nothing to prevent a promising pupil from entering the higher grade department of a board school. Did the right hon. Gentleman not know that under the most recent orders the aid grant to a higher grade department was not made unless the course of instruction was given in a separate building? If the higher grade department was under the same roof the grant was withdrawn. In regard to continuation classes the system pursued of having a hard and fast curriculum had been found to be an impediment to the use of the schools by the working class—the very class for whom they were intended. The right hon. Gentleman had made a remark to the effect that the pupil teachers had abolished themselves. He did not desire to discuss that question at the present moment, because he had not had sufficient time to study the revised draft of the Minute. But he would say that although the pupil teacher system had not been technically abolished it was practically wiped out.
  MR. SINCLAIRsaid that there was nothing whatever to prevent the school boards continuing the system during this financial year.
  *MR. SMEATON: Yes, this year. But after?
  MR. SINCLAIRsaid that what would be done after was for future consideration. What he had put before the Committee was precisely the fact. The school boards had full discretion to employ pupil teachers until the arrangements for another year were considered.
  *MR. SMEATONsaid there was no use shirking the question. The right hon. Gentleman knew perfectly well that the abolition of the pupil teacher system was coming on.
  MR. SINCLAIRsaid that the policy of the Government went no further than he had stated.
  *MR. SMEATONthought that everyone who had studied the first draft and the final draft of the Minute would be of his opinion. What he wished, however, more particularly to draw the attention of the Committee to was the unconstitutional and in some respects the illegal action of the Scottish Education Department in its administration of Scottish education. For; the past ten years the Department had been practically legislating by Minute and circular without the consent of the representatives of the Scottish people whose money it was using in promotion of its unauthorised legislation. The Department had certain legal functions to perform under the Scottish Education Act of 1872. These were simply the administration of the Parliamentary grants given for specific purposes under the Act. It had no authority to alter the educational policy of Scotland as set forth in that Act. He maintained that the Department had been usurping the powers reserved to Parliament and using the financial resources at its disposal as a lever to compel the school boards to consent to an alteration of the old educational policy of Scotland. The principal objects of the Act of 1872 were to devolve the entire management and control of Scottish Education on popularly elected school boards and to stimulate those boards by Parliamentary giants of money to be distributed by the Department. In the distribution of those grants the condition imposed was that the standard of education which existed in Scotland in 1872 should not be lowered in the parish or public schools. The author of that Act, Lord Young, knew full well how admirably the old
  1188
  system had served the nation, and that system, re-established in 1872, had never been surpassed for efficiency and results by any system in the world. The interest and co-operation of the parents in the schools was a marked feature in the old system, and that was continued under the school boards. A new and democratic franchise was created, and every man and woman whose name appeared on the valuation roll had a vote in the election of the school boards. It was recognised that education was different from other branches of local and muncipal government, and that the parents had an interest in the education of the children apart altogether from their interests as ratepayers. Hence the creation by the Act of ad hoc boards for education alone and the close touch of the parents and ratepayers with the school management. Each parish had the exclusive control of its own system of education, secular and religious. Of late years, the Education Department had steadily undermined the control and initiative of the school boards; it had steadily encroached on its statutory powers and centralised all power in itself. The Department had done this by diverting, he had almost said perverting, the large funds at its disposal for the maintenance of the old parochial system, to the promotion—he might say the compulsion—of a new policy of its own, to the detriment of the education given to the children in the board schools. He admitted that many of the regulations of the Department for the encouragement of higher education among the favoured few were admirable. In fact, what had given the Department its strong position was that the advance of higher education was absolutely necessary, and that Parliament had not, as yet, provided any machinery for controlling the Department or laid, down any line of policy in an Act for the distribution of the money granted from time to time for secondary education. Hence the grip which the Department had fastened on the school boards. The tactics of the Department were self-evident and crafty enough. It suggested a new curriculum and gave high grants for it, although it allowed the old curriculum to remain optional, for a time, but the latter was finally abolished and with it the grants, so that the school boards had to fall into line in respect of the new curriculum or lose all grants.

  1189
  Naturally the school boards were eager to get the money even on conditions which they disliked and disapproved. The Department was absolutely master, and said "must" where it formerly said "may". The parish schools of Scotland had from 1696 down to 1872 given instruction in both elementary and secondary subjects, and their standard was always high. The national system which was continued under the Act of 1872 was never limited to elementary instruction. It included higher teaching, and for 200 years the parish schools had been the direct feeders of the Universities. It was the boast of Scotland that the poorest of her sons could and did qualify in the parish schools at little expense to themselves, and none to the State, for entering straight into the Universities. It was this combination of primary and secondary education in the same school under the same roof which had maintained the remarkable efficiency and high standard of the Scottish parish schools. He wished to say that he quite exonerated the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland from any participation in the reactionary policy of of the last few years which he most heartily condemned. That was a policy initiated under the late Tory Government. It never was the policy of Liberal Governments to crib, cabin, and confine education in Scottish parish schools. He had ventured to hope that when the Liberal Government came into power they would take a new departure in this regard, and he confessed the disappointment which he felt that they had not done so. The indictment which he brought against the Department was that instead of maintaining, as required by clause 67 of the Act of 1872, the combination in the parish schools of primary and secondary education, their policy had been to lower the standard of the parish schools by confining the instruction given in them to elementary subjects, and concentrating the higher education in certain selected centres not accessible to the children of the working classes, who were thereby deprived of their birthright. But this retrograde policy did not end there. Even in many of the selected higher schools the Department was working to compel a uniform curriculum designed to impede preparation for the University, ignoring the great prin-
  1190
  ciple advocated by John Stuart Mill that the very life of a liberal education depended on diversity of curriculum; and it was moreover aiming at confining University preparation to what were called higher class schools, which were altogether out of reach of the poor, and were intended only for the children of the well-to-do. This was one of the characteristics of the late Government—sacrifice of the interests of the masses to the interests of the classes. Even in the continuation classes the same characteristic was apparent; cast iron uniformity was being insisted on by the Department, and resulted in many I working men and women being debarred from getting the benefit which those classes were designed to give. The Education Department was thus guilty of a threefold contravention of educational policy as established by custom and law—in usurping the powers both of Parliament and of school boards, practically denying to working class children the right, enjoyed for over 200 years, to an education fitting; them for the University, and in lowering the standard of education in the board schools. This retrograde policy of the Department—which must eventually result in depressing the condition of the working classes—had been in operation for about ten years, and was being rapidly consummated. Before 1896 it encouraged higher grade classes in the parish schools by giving special grants for specific subjects, and the school boards responded, by employing a superior class of teacher. Since then, however, this policy has been reversed, and the Department now aimed at isolating higher education in certain selected centres, depleting the ordinary board schools and withdrawing grants from higher grade departments, injuring the elementary education in them by necessitating the appointment of an inferior class of teachers, and removing the stimulus of the presence and example of a few bright advanced pupils. The Department had succeeded to a large extent in this reactionary policy by manipulating the grants. Formerly, special grants were made to school boards for specific advanced subjects. Since 1896, however, these grants had, he believed, been withdrawn, and now they were given simply for average attendance as in England. The incentive to higher education had thus been taken away, and the standard of the parish school

  1191
  lowered. The last important matter in which the Department had been acting unconstitutionally, and in his opinion illegally, was in regard to pupil teachers. He had not yet been able to study the final draft of the new Regulation for the training of teachers. But he understood that it embodied in substance the policy of the original draft. That policy, in a word, was to abolish, after a certain date, pupil teachers as recognised by the Act of 1872, and to substitute for them a class of nominated probationers, who were to be taken away and trained in selected centres under committees. Under the Act of 1872, the pupil teacher was an integral part of the board school establishment, and, apart altogether from the wisdom or unwisdom of the proposed change, no Department had the power or right to abolish what the law had established, without an Act of Parliament. As to the merits of the change, he hesitated to give a final opinion. But of this there could be little doubt, that it would deprive the working classes of the opportunity of entering the teaching profession; it would largely increase the difficulty and cost of staffing the schools; it would raise the rates; it would certainly not afford the excellent individual practical training which the present; method afforded, and it would destroy; the democratic character of the teaching profession and of Scottish education, by introducing class distinctions in the school staff—a kind of distinction altogether foreign to the traditional educational policy of Scotland. Surely it would be far better to take the simple and not very costly step of enlarging the accommodation of the training colleges so as to allow entry for training to the hundreds of male and female pupil teachers who, year by year, were refused admission simply from want of room. The purpose of his Motion was this. The Scottish Education Department had during all these years been pursuing a course contrary both to custom and to law, and to established policy, and contrary also to a large body of the best informed Scottish opinion, including the opinion of several of the highest educational officials. This must be arrested, and the whole field of Scottish education surveyed by representatives of the people in touch with national and local opinion. At present the school boards were being overridden by what
  1192
  were called "My Lords" of the Committee of the Privy Council for Education. But he asked, Who were "My Lords" From the answer given by the right hon. Gentleman to several questions it appeared, at any rate, that "My Lords" never met in Committee on Education, that there was, in fact, no working Committee at all, that the whole thing was a fiction. "My Lords" wore simply the Secretary of the Scottish Education Department sitting at his desk in Dover House. It was a one-man Department; and Scottish education, instead of being administered by its popular local school boards, was controlled by one well-meaning despot sitting in London. This was certainly never contemplated by the law, and the nation resented it. It was a sham which a Liberal Government must put an end to. What was now needed was a National Board of Education for Scotland —such as Wales was about to have—elected by the people and in touch with them, sitting in Edinburgh and controlling the Department, and a carefully planned and comprehensive Act dealing with every aspect of Scottish education, laying down clear lines of policy and leaving the National Board to carry out this policy with the aid of Parliamentary grants, distributed through the agency, but not at the discretion of the Department. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give them an assurance, and guarantee that this course would betaken at the earliest possible moment. He begged to move.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £l,122,028, be granted for the said Service." (Mr. Smeaton.)
  *MR. CROMBIEsaid that at the present time they had a most important Minute on the Table of the House, a Minute as important as an Act of Parliament. Speaking as a county Member, he wished to draw attention to the aspect of the Minute so far as it concerned the counties. In the form in which it was orginally introduced, it would have, no doubt, worked well in the towns, but he believed it would have been entirely a dead letter in the country, and he was glad indeed to see the change his right hon. friend had made in leaving the pupil teacher system alone in the country districts for the

  1193
  present—not that he was an advocate of the pupil teacher system, but because had that not been done, he believed no teachers would have been drawn from Scottish country lads. Instead of pupil teachers they were to have junior students who must attend secondary schools. Secondary schools, however, wore not as common as blackberries; in the county he represented there was only one. Before the pupil went to a secondary school he must also have an intermediate certificate, which meant that for three years he must attend an intermediate school. They, too, were by no means to be found in every parish. Therefore, before a country boy could become a teacher under the new system something entirely revolutionary must be done. Whether that was to take the form of the establishment of further schools he did not know, but he believed it was the intention to establish a sort of bursary system by which a lad in one parish could attend a school in some other parish. He very much wished to see such a system established, but they must have money before they could do that, and the £25,000 spoken of would be a mere trifle. Therefore, if the system was going to work, one of the first essentials was that they should have more money. He was a little disappointed with the tone of his right hon. friend with regard to getting money from the Treasury. The other day a letter was published, signed by himself, the hon. Member for Dumfries Burghs, and the hon. Member for Leith Burghs. It was an admirable letter. The proof of the pudding was in the eating. It had already effected a large part of its purpose, because he understood they were going to got a grant for necessitous schools. His right hon. friend must try and get all the money he could for them from the Treasury. What he must venture to do, if such a thing might be suggested, was to make himself disagreeable. It would be a difficult task, no doubt, but he must remember that the Treasury had a hide of iron and a heart of stone. There was only one other point to which he wished to allude, and that was the question of retiring allowances for the teachers. The object of this Minute was to got teachers in Scotland, and he was perfectly certain that it would be absolutely futile so long as these beggarly allowances were given. Teachers had to retire at the age of sixty-five, and
  1194
  the allowances they got were so shabby and poor as to keep people out of the profession. The Superannuation Act had been a very great disappointment. When that Act was before this House he moved as an Amendment that school boards should be allowed to supplement these allowances, and though the Amendment was supported by the vast majority of Scottish Members on both sides of the House, it was unfortunately defeated. It would not be in order now to discuss an Amendment of that character, but what he wished to ask was whether in the meantime something could not be done in that direction. Since the Superannuation Act had been passed 118 teachers had retired. Some of those were dead. There were only ninety-one now alive. The average retiring allowance was£32, half that given to a policeman. He ventured to suggest that something might be done by the Department to enlarge this allowance. He believed so small a sum as £2,000 would do a great deal in that direction, and he ventured to suggest that some such sum might be taken from the money not yet allocated and applied to this purpose. He was not specially championing the cause of the teachers. He considered it as an educational question, and the Scottish school boards were alive to the necessity of it. He believed 250 school boards were now trying, he would not say to evade the Act, but, to get round it by themselves paying the contribution which the teachers had to pay to ensure this retiring allowance. This was of the greatest importance educationally, and it was a matter to which he hoped his right hon. friend would give attention.
  MR. BLACKsaid that one of the first objections to the regulations issued with respect to the training of teachers was that they dealt with matters which ought not to have been dealt with in a Minute at all, because the House was thus deprived of an opportunity of criticising in detail the proposals of the Government and of addressing themselves to the points which they would wish modified. They had the Minute thrown at their heads, and they either had to take it or vote against the Government. That, he considered, was a very unfortunate position. There were some regulations which were good and some which were bad, and he would remind

  1195
  the right hon. Gentleman that, whilst, no doubt, continuity of policy was a good thing, a general election had taken place, and a new Party had been returned to power with a mandate to make Scottish education democratic. That election condemned the whole educational system of the late Government, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would respond to the mandate given and say that the traditional policy of Scotland, under which there should be available to every boy and girl the opportunity of continuing his education through the elementary stage right up to the university, should receive effect at the hands of the Government, and that the policy of doing away with the parish school system and of gathering the children into large centres should cease. They were told that the policy of the abolition of the pupil teacher was designed to increase the supply of teachers. That was a remarkable statement in view of the last Report of the Committee of the Council of Education for Scotland, in which it was stated that whatever sources of supply might be added, it was not proposed to abolish the pupil teachers. In the original draft the pupil teacher was in so many words abolished. Those words disappeared in the final regulations, but there remained a very important provision which said that by 1914 the pupil teacher would be as extinct as the dodo. What young man or woman in Scotland was going to become a pupil teacher when told that by 1914 he would not be recognised as part of the staff of the school, and would cease to have any status at all, unless he became a certificated teacher? The manifest result would be to dry up the supply. He did not know whether the statement that the supply was now drying up was well founded in fact, but for the last four or five years pupil teachers had remained 4,000 in number. What wonder was it that they did not increase if the Department gave them to understand that they were going to be abolished, and that persons were to be placed at a disadvantage if they took that method of entering the profession? Unless they opened the door to every working man's family they would restrict the area of supply, and do away with the democratic element in Scottish education and the Scottish teaching profession. If this proposal of the Scottish Education
  1196
  Department were carried out, it would prevent the children of the artisan and the working man from entering the profession, and it was from the working classes that the great bulk of successful teachers had been obtained. Under the present system such persons were welcomed, and received a full development of any aptitude they had for teaching, and he sincerely hoped the right hon. Gentleman would maintain that system without any discouraging expressions. He trusted that no Scottish Member would encourage the Government in the belief that in abolishing the pupil teachers they were following the real inclinations and true opinions of the Scottish people.
  *MR. COCHEANEsaid he had listened with great interest and attention to the very full account of the position of Scottish Education given by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman when he said that Scottish Members, however they might disagree upon other points, were united on one subject, namely, the desire to see a steady and continuous improvement in the educational system of Scotland. He was glad that the right hon Gentleman during the time he had been Secretary for Scotland had noticed the steady improvement all desired to see. The hon. Member for Stirlingshire had accused the Secretary for Scotland of not having a policy of his own, but of relying on the policy laid down by the hon. Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities. He however, thought the right hon. Gentleman would be very well advised indeed to adhere as closely as he possibly could to any policy laid down by so high an authority as the hon. Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities. The hon. Member for Stirlingshire had declared that the policy was a retrograde policy and had expressed deep disappointment, but, at the same time, he had endorsed what was said by the Secretary for Scotland, that education in Scotland was in a very flourishing condition and improving every day.
  *MR. SMEATONsaid he had referred to the average attendance only.
  *MR. COCHRANEsaid that if the average attendance had increased it

  1197
  showed that a larger proportion of the population was attending school.
  *MR. SMEATONsaid the hon. Gentleman perhaps forgot that there was a law which compelled every child up to a certain age to attend school and that therefore mere figures of attendance did not justify the assertion—which by the way he had not made—that education in Scotland was in a nourishing condition.
  *MR. COCHEANEsaid that fortunately it was not his duty to defend the Estimates. He was merely congratulating Scottish Members upon the rosy statement made by the Secretary for Scotland. The main point, so far as he could gather from the course of the discussion, to which hon. Members took exception was the policy laid down by the right hon. Gentleman as regarded pupil teachers. It was complained that he desired to abolish the present system of pupil teachers and substitute another system. The argument used against the proposal was that it would prevent the sons of working men from rising to the teaching profession. He did not believe it could possibly have that effect, because careful provisions were made whereby promising pupils who desired to enter the teaching profession could get that measure of education which would best fit them to impart education to others. Was it not the better method that they should themselves first devote time to acquiring the most modern and best means of conveying instruction to others before they endeavoured to impart that which they had not had the opportunity of acquiring? He believed that under the regulations of the Scottish Education Department it would still be open to the humblest to rise in the future as in the past; but in the interests of the education of the children let them advance with the times, and see that the teachers had every possible means of acquiring the best education to enable them to discharge their duties in the most efficient manner. All hon. Members could unite in seeing that the Treasury dealt in a fair and reasonable manner with their requirements. They could not get education for nothing. They must have money, and whatever their opinions might be as to the way in which the money was applied, no one would complain that money spent on education in Scotland
  1198
  was in any way wasted. He was glad to note that there was to be a small additional grant given to necessitous schools, and he hoped all Scottish Members would see that it was adequate, and fully equivalent to the similar grant given to schools in England. Then, again, as regarded the fresh contribution of £1,000,000 that was to be given to schools in England, as £100,000 of that would be contributed by Scotland, he hoped that Scottish Members would unite in getting Scotland her proper share. He agreed with the hon. Member for Kincardineshire on the question of the superannuation of teachers, which had become somewhat acute in Scotland. The evil was brought to the notice of the late Government, who also desired to meet the grievance. Every day they imposed upon the teachers in Scotland higher duties and responsibilities. The teachers had the care of the children from three to fourteen years of age—their most impressionable years. Was it wise or right to offer to the teachers after forty years of arduous work a pension, the average of which was £32 4s. 6d., some being as low as £15 or £17 a year? It was half the amount that was given to a police constable for serving twenty-five years. He felt that at any rate the Committee were in unison and sympathy with regard to this question, and if the right hon. Gentleman felt that a short Bill would meet the circumstances he was perfectly certain that the Opposition would not take any hostile attitude. There were two points that had not been touched upon in the debate. He had had the honour with several other hon. Gentlemen of serving on the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland. They made very careful inquiries into the conditions of school children in Scotland, and it would be impossible to imagine a more pitiable account than that which was brought to them from some of the large cities and towns. The Commission made moderate recommendations; they did not suggest any wild proposals for feeding children at the expense of someone other than their parents. He did not think they wanted that in Scotland. But what they proposed was that accommodation and means for enabling children to be properly fed should be provided in each school or at a centre, but that, except for a limited sum to provide the necessary equipment,

  1199
  no part of the cost should be thrown on the rates. There were few districts in which concerts or other entertainments by the children could not be successfully organised to raise money. The Commission found that the spirit of independence still existed in Scotland, and that the people, so long as they could afford to feed their children, as they generally did sufficiently and well, did not want to ask any others to do it for them. The other point related to the sanitary condition of the schools in Scotland, and there again they had evidence brought before them that many of the most recently and most expensively constructed schools were in a far from sanitary condition. He hoped they might get from the Secretary for Scotland or the Lord Advocate some assurance that matters of such vital importance to the health and welfare of the children were receiving the attention of the Department, and that as regarded the medical supervision of the children the Government intended to take means to see that everything possible was done. The Report of the Commission on that point contained some valuable information. They appointed some fully qualified gentlemen to inspect certain schools in the populous parts of Scotland, and they reported that very little attention would save the eyesight of thousands of children, and that very little attention would prevent advanced stages of phthisis. Upon questions of this kind he thought Scottish Members might present a united front, and when he saw how kind Scotland was to the Cabinet, which had become a sort of asylum for Scottish Members, he thought they had a claim that the least they could do was not to allow these questions to fall into the background.
  THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. THOMAS SHAW,)said the debate had been of much practical interest. He wished to acknowledge the services which his hon. friend had given upon the Physical Training Commission. He was afraid that education was very often made to rest upon a physical basis which was quite inadequate to support it. Unfortunately under our present system we had to proceed with the facilities for training the mind without considering the state of the body. Revelations had been made
  1200
  by the Committees on Physical Training and Physical Deterioration which were calculated to shock the mind not only of every educational reformer but also every social reformer. The state of these young creatures who were placed together in the same room was sometimes too appalling to be described. Some of them suffered from defects of vision and of hearing and other ailments, but he would give hon. Members the assurance that the Scottish Department would not in any respect neglect the duty of very carefully weighing and considering both those Reports. Whenever his hon. friend opposite declared that anything was wild in the extreme he generally took a fancy to it, and when he declared that proposals for feeding the children were wild and extreme, he began to think there must be something in them worth considering. With regard to finance, perhaps the Deputy-Chairman would permit him to say that his services on this subject in the past had been absolutely invaluable and his utterances would always furnish Scotsmen in search of a financial grievance with ample material. He did think, however, that the British Treasury was not going to behave niggardly with regard to Scotland, and the Committee might rely upon having the very sympathetic ear of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to Scottish demands. There were no wild cat schemes floating about in Scotland; every object was well considered by the Department which made the demand. With regard to the pupil teacher question, he would say frankly that he thought it would have been a national disaster if suddenly or in any inconsiderate way they had abolished the system of pupil teachership in Scotland. What was the situation at present? In regard to all the engagements under the system of recent years, the broad fact remained that out of these teachers in Scotland one in five was a pupil teacher. Therefore to abolish them would be almost a revolutionary act, and this showed the advantage of public criticism. The clause now in force provided that pupil teachers from July 1st, 1906, or prior to that date, might continue to serve under the terms of their engagement, and be reckoned as part of the school staff. Hon. Members should contrast that with the previous Minute.

  1201
  The House of Commons quite understood that those Minutes wore framed in a transition period. The hon. Member for Banffshire had called attention to what he thought was still a matter worthy of consideration, that after the year 1914 no uncertificated teacher would be recognised as a part of the staff except as assistant teachers. He would promise his hon. friend that that matter would be carefully considered by the Scottish Department. He could assure him that there was a general desire to be loyal to the spirit of the continuance of the pupil teacher system throughout this Minute, and if there was anything in it which was inconsistent, they would see that that genuine spirit was realised in the technical terms of the Minute. He hoped the Committee would not consider that that was an unsatisfactory view.
  MR. BLACK: What means will the Committee have of judging of the sufficiency of that proposal?
  MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he could only say that the Education Department would have to frame alterations and they would take the earliest opportunity of considering the matter.
  MR. C. E. PRICEasked if the new form of the Minute would be laid upon the Table.
  MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid that if any amendment of the Minute in the direction indicated by his hon. friend was found to be necessary, it would have to be made in the form of a supplementary Minute which would be laid on the Table of the House, and would be open to the criticism of hon. Members. There was a very great deal to sympathise with in the speech of the hon. Member for Stirlingshire. The hon. Member had raised a question which had been raised over and over again—namely, the outstanding controversy in Scotland, which he had described as the contest between the democracy in Scotland and the forces of the bureaucracy in London. That was what it meant. The Secretary for Scotland and the Government were very anxious to give every facility possible for the fuller expression of the mind of Scotland upon educational subjects. They recognised that the issue of Minutes from an office in virtue of general words in the
  1202
  statute which gave them Parliamentary effect, but without any opportunity for full and effective control either in Scotland or in this House, was a power which could be accompanied—he did not say it had been—with not a little abuse. The Government thought the time had come for taking the public more into their confidence. As to the general question of the effect of the Minutes, he thought his hon. friend the Member for North Ayshire made a great mistake in attributing the enormous progress with regard to the most excellent part of the educational career between twelve and fourteen to something in the history of the Scottish Education Department. No doubt it happened in the history of the Scottish Education Department, but his point was that it was effected by Act of Parliament, and by open discussion in this House. The passing of the Act of 1901 had been far more effective than all the Minutes ever issued, because in the few years that had elapsed since then a net increase of 19,000 scholars had been made between the ages of twelve and fourteen. He rejoiced that this result had been achieved. He knew quite well that all Departments were necessarily apt to fall into the mistake of endeavouring to methodise things too much. The school system of departments and compartments, and the segregation of the various portions of school life could not be rashly superimposed on the fine old traditional system under which all the parish schools and schoolmasters had their highest ambition satisfied in training their best boys and sending them right forward to the university. While he said that, might he say that he did not think the Scottish Education Department had done a better thing than in endeavouring to introduce into that system, not compulsory compartments, but a scheme whereby there could be graduation from one stage of education to another, going on without interrupting the career, and always opening up fresh avenues of advance to the pupil? He had said over and over again that he did not think they would be right in Scotland until they took money out of the matter altogether, in so far as money was an impediment in the career of the humblest in the land towards getting the best education that could be afforded. Here he spoke not as a member of the Government, but he spoke, he hoped, not against

  1203
  the policy of the Government. There were difficulties, he knew, in the way of making secondary education absolutely free. But he considered that all these Minutes must be regarded as steps partially in the dark until a state of affairs was reached when a finger could not be pointed to any Scottish boy or girl who had been cramped in exercising to the full the faculties with which he or she had been endowed by nature. He said that particularly with regard to the remote districts of Scotland, and especially the Hebrides, where the system of education was a contrast between the love of education for its own sake and the financial difficulties which almost saddened the mind. He recalled not one jot or tittle of the criticism which for ten years he had delivered from the Opposition side of the House. His ideals were just the same, and this Minute was in no respect inconsistent with them. If he thought it was a Minute for abolishing the old pupil-teacher system he should condemn it out and out. Certain things would have to be considered in view of the present discussion. For example, it would have to be considered whether junior students should have to pay fees for any part of their instruction. But in all those things he had found that the spirit of the Minutes had been transformed into a desire to help the whole system of Scottish education without obstructing it by any foreign ideals and notions. The whole desire was to transform the system into a higher and bettor one. They were all very proud that in the discussions of recent years they had never been troubled with the idea of abolishing popular representation and control. No scheme would have lived an hour, even during the darkest time of the last decade, which had proposed the abolition of the Scottish School Board system. It was well to remember when they talked of the career of the pupil-teacher that they must take into account the fact that there was a school board watching over each particular pupil, anxious to provide him or her with facilities for living under the parental roof, and for the development and improvement of that career. These were all branches of one great question. It was with the hope that their education would thrive and push the people along with it that he made the observation to hon. Members sitting round him,
  1204
  that indeed they need have no fear that the spirit of the present Education Department was such as to be antagonistic to most of those ideals which had been expressed in the debate.
  *MR. GULLANDsaid he was glad the right hon. Gentleman had considered the question of schools for adults. He was glad that greater interest was being taken in the evening continuation schools, and expressed himself as being in favour of the Minute as amended. These schools were not now called evening schools, but continuation schools. He might mention a school of this sort in Dumfriesshire, where he had the pleasure of distributing the prizes a short time ago. A firm of boiler-makers had a continuation school in their works for their own apprentices, and among the men engaged in the works there were some who could teach. Instead of waiting until the evening the firm allowed the apprentices to go to their continuation school in the forenoon when their faculties were at the best. The whole of the community attended at the prize distribution, and he could say that it was one of the most interesting; functions in which he had ever taken part. He hoped that other employers would follow that example, and encourage their apprentices to go to the continuation schools. He was extremely glad also to hear the right hon. Gentleman say that he was considering the advisability of the making attendance at I continuation schools compulsory until the age of sixteen, for only in that way could the children get full advantage of the training. He shared the dislike of the hon. Member for Stirlingshire for this form of legislation by Minute and Circular. Before he came into the House he had said many hard things about that form of legislation, but since he had been there and saw how Scottish business was transacted he took rather a different view of the subject. Until that day they had not had five minutes of Government time for Scottish business. He did not know who was to blame. He supposed that it was as much the fault of the Scottish Members as of any Minister or official; they did not make as much noise as the Irish Members. Under these circumstances, if they could not get legislation by Act of Parliament, there was no reason why they

  1205
  should not get it by Minute. A good deal of the criticism levelled at the Minute was against the first draft, and not the revised draft. He regretted extremely that that revised draft had not been in the hands of Members until the previous day. He approved strongly of the present form of the Minute, and he congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on having given effect to all the Amendments proposed. He should like to say that there had been great success in submitting the regulations in draft form to the Scottish people for their criticism; and he would suggest that when the right hon. Gentleman came to frame a Bill for Scottish education, he should submit it to the people of Scotland, who could discuss it during the recess. He was sure that it was only in some such way that they would have a satisfactory Scottish Education Bill. There was one relic of the old Minute in its revised form which drew a class distinction between students. If a student went through a training college, paid his own fees, and did not get a bursary or State allowance, he might teach in a primary or secondary school; but if he obtained a bursary or had his fees granted him he could not teach in a secondary school until after two years. He did not think it was fair to put that limitation on young men and women who were clever enough to win bursaries. He was particularly pleased to see that the right hon. Gentleman insisted on opportunities for the further study of geography. The trouble was that at present there was no place where students could get a special course of geography, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to give the Scottish Geographical Society a good big grant to undertake such a course. The right hon. Gentleman had got the Treasury to agree to a grant of £8 per head for King's students, but he hoped that that grant would soon be increased to £10. He trusted that this Minute would have the desired effect of increasing the supply of teachers, but what was still wanted were higher salaries, greater security of tenure, and better pensions. As to the administrative body that was responsible for Scottish education, it was designated as "My Lords of the Committee of Council of Education." "My Lords" were appointed in February, and a most excellent body of men they were; the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the
  1206
  Exchequer, the Secretary for the Colonies, the Secretary for War, the Secretary for Scotland, the Lord-Advocate— in fact, all the brilliant men who were now governing the Empire. But he ventured to say that "My Lords" had never met, and that they never would meet. He would suggest that this polite fiction should be given up at once, and that the Secretary for Scotland should be placed at the head of a real Scottish Education Department. He pleaded with the right hon. Secretary for Scotland to magnify his own office, and not to play second fiddle to "My Lords," and that he should soon introduce a Minute that "My Lords" had disestablished themselves. Again he thought that the head office of the Scottish Education Department should be in Edinburgh, and not in London. He had been a Member of the Edinburgh School Board for many years, and he knew that correspondence between the Scottish school boards and the Department in London frequently accentuated differences which might have been minimised by a few minutes conversation. To have the head office of the Department in London was to keep it out of touch with Scottish opinion. It was said that it was necessary that the Department should be near the Treasury but, after all, money was only asked for once a year, and it would be easy for the heads of the Department to run up to London instead of only making a flying visit from London to Scotland. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would democratise his Department, and bring it down to Scotland. He had almost always looked on the pamphlet by the hon. Member for Mid Lanark on "Subventions to Scotland" as a sort of Shorter Catechism, and he hoped that now that hon. Member was in office he would take every opportunity to help Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to some figures contained in a memorial sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer about the relative proportion of grants and rates. Those figures did not deal with the local contribution, but with rates. He did not think it was necessary to go at length into that question now, because the plea had been granted by the Treasury and they had consented to give an equivalent grant. The reason the rates in Scotland were down three farthings in the pound on the year was that in consequence of the

  1207
  equivalent aid grant the Scottish school boards had fixed their rates low. The rates were now, however, going up again, and in Glasgow had gone up to the extent of a penny. In regard to educational matters in Scotland, however, there was the greatest need that more money should be wrung from the Treasury. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the money with which they were dealing was not Scottish money. In one sense it was not, it was true, Scottish money, but in another sense it was. It was money which had come out of Scottish pockets, and if it was not used in Scotland it would be used for the purpose of necessitous school districts in England. They had a right to claim more money. They had a right to an equivalent grant in regard to the million which was to be devoted to education under the Education Bill, and they also ought to have sums of money equivalent to the grants which were made to University colleges in England and Wales. While Scotland had in the past led the way in regard to education, of late years, in his judgment, it had not kept pace with other countries. They asked the right hon. Gentleman to sec that Scotland would always be in the van in regard to matters of education.
  *MR. JOHN DEWARwished to inquire what was being done in regard to Gaelic-speaking education. There were a great many thousands of children who did not know any English until they were four or five years of age, when they were taught by teachers who knew no Gaelic. That was most unfair to the children, because their education could not be complete unless it was conveyed in a language which both pupil and teacher understood. He saw nothing in the Report before them which showed that any special attention was being given to Gaelic speaking districts. He should like to see more special education given to the teachers who desired to teach in Gaelic-speaking districts, so that the number of Gaelic-speaking teachers might in their Education Bill be increased. The previous Government provided a special committee for the Highlands; this met with much favour, and he was much disappointed that there was no such arrangement in the proposals now before the House. He wished to ask whether any provision was made in regard to the representatives attending the Committee
  1208
  meetings at the University centres. The representative selected was usually the parish minister, or minister of other denominations, and it was a severe drain on the resources of a man with a limited income to have to go from a remote parish in the Highlands to Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Glasgow, or St. Andrews, and support himself there for several days. The hon. Member also criticised the pension system in regard to teachers, and declared that the pensions granted were quite inadequate and tended to depreciate the teaching profession in the eyes of the public.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid that the speech of the Lord-Advocate had very much changed the position of matters. He did not refer to the decorative personalities which the right hon. Gentleman was accustomed to use and which he was not concerned to answer.
  MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he did not understand what his hon. friend referred to. He had simply entered a good-humoured protest and was not conscious that he had indulged in any personalities.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he was speaking in the recollection of the Committee, who would no doubt recollect the words the right hon. Gentleman used in regard to hon. Members of the House.
  MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he would not pursue the subject but would leave the matter where his hon. friend left it. His hon. friend had said that the House would recollect and he was sure that no one in the House would think that he had made any personal references of an objectionable character.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he still maintained his own opinion and adhered to the statement which he had originally made. He wished to point out that it was a grave inconvenience to have the Minister in charge of a particular Vote making one speech while a colleague associated closely with that Minister made a speech which in spirit and in letter was opposed to the speech of the Minister in charge of the Vote. [Cries of "No, no."] He adhered to that statement. The Secretary for Scotland had said that

  1209
  he adhered to the Minute, that he had changed it without full conviction in regard to some small and unimportant points, and that the Minute carried out the object with which it had been drafted. The Lord-Advocate, however, seemed to take the contrary view.
  *THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. CALDWELL,)said it was unusual to call upon an hon. Member for the second time in regard to discussions of this kind, especially when there were so many Members rising to speak who had not yet spoken, and unless he had thought that the hon. Member had some new points to deal with, which would not occupy more than a minute or two, he should not have called upon him. The hon. Member seemed to be going over the same ground that had already been covered.
  *SIR HENRY CRAIKsaid he was talking about a now incident which had occurred in the course of the discussion. The speech of the Lord Advocate entirely changed their attitude towards this question. While the Secretary for Scotland had said one thing the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Advocate had said exactly the opposite.
  MR SINCLAIRassured the hon. Member that there was complete agreement between himself and the Lord-Advocate. He thought that the criticisms which the hon. Gentleman had made had been made under a complete misapprehension.
  *MR. SUTHERLANDsaid he had had a long connection with School Board work, and he could assure the Committee that when Boards received communications from "My Lords" of the Education Department they appreciated them at their true value. He wished to associate himself with what had been said by the two right hon. Gentlemen on the Front Bench. He congratulated them on the spirit which they had manifested in regard to education in Scotland. As the chairman of a school board he had known the late Secretary of the Scottish Education Department long and intimately through his Minutes and Circulars, and he was now glad to meet him face to face. The Minute for the training of teachers had
  1210
  been referred to. But Parliament could not alter it by one jot or tittle. Many of the provisions of the Minute were of sufficient importance to be embodied in a Bill, and in his judgment the sooner they got a new Education Bill for Scotland, the better. The Secretary for Scotland had said that he wished to have in every parish in Scotland a higher-grade school. That would be a very serious undertaking, because a higher-grade school cost a great deal for upkeep.
  MR. SINCLAIRexplained that he did not say he wanted a higher-grade school in every parish. What he did say was that he wanted higher-grade school facilities.
  MR. SUTHERLANDsaid that if the right hon. Gentleman only referred to higher-grade school facilities then he was at one with him. He wished, moreover, to associate himself with what had been said by the Lord-Advocate.
  And, it being a quarter-past Eight of the Clock, and there being Private Business set down by direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means under Standing Order No. 8, further Proceeding was postponed without Question put.

  CORK CITY RAILWAYS AND WORKS BILL (BY ORDER).
  Order for consideration, as amended, read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered."
  MR. O'SHEE, in asking the House to decline to proceed with the Bill on the ground that the companies concerned were seeking to evade the fulfilment of Parliamentary undertakings, said that the companies referred to in the Motion undertook in 1898, and their undertakings were embodied in the Fishguard and Rosslare Railways and Harbours Act of 1898, to construct the very works which it was proposed by this Bill to construct. The position to-day was that these companies were really the chief supporters of the proposals of the Bill, and intended to construct the works which were proposed to be constructed under the Bill. They

  1211
  intended to become the owners of the railways constructed under the Bill, and they appealed to the Treasury, seeking to get from the public funds of this country a grant of public money for the purpose of constructing works which they were under a statutory obligation to construct under the Act of 1898. The companies were under a series of obligations which were all embodied in the Act, but of which he would mention only two. They were under ten obligations, but the two he wished to refer to were, first—
  "The construction, with the sanction of Parliament, of a line from Fermoy to Dunkettle with running powers over the Great Southern and Western Railway Company's line to the Great Southern and Western Railways terminal station at Cork."
  and—
  "The construction, with the sanction of Parliament and the co-operation of the local authorities in Cork, and the railway companies west of Cork, of a line to connect the systems of the companies west of Cork with the systems of the Fishguard Company, and the Great Southern and Western Railway Company."
  That proposal was exactly the same as the proposal of the Bill. The connecting links in Cork City the obligations of which these companies undertook under the Act of 1898 were the connecting links to be made by this Bill. Section 68 of the Act of 1898 read as follows—
  "The company" (the Fishguard Company) "will use their best endeavours to obtain the assent and co-operation of the Cork Commissioners, and the Corporation of Cork, and of the Cork, Bandon and South Coast, and Cork and Macroom Railway Companies, and within a reasonable time of obtaining such assent and co-operation, will apply to Parliament for and use their best endeavours to obtain, and if such powers are contained will construct a direct communication across the River Lee so as to connect the systems of the company and of the Great Southern Company with those of the Cork, Bandon and South Coast, and the Cork and Macroom Railway Companies, which communication, when constructed, shall be part of the undertaking of the company."
  They were under the further obligation under the Act of 1898 of coming to Parliament in the following year for the purpose of obtaining powers to construct the Fermoy and Dunkettle line. They did come to Parliament and got powers to construct that line, and then began a series of attempts on the part of these two companies to evade those two obligations.
  1212
  They came to Parliament in 1901, and in order to get rid of the obligation to construct the Fermoy and Dunkettle line, suggested that Parliament should consent to their carrying out their obligation to construct the links in Cork City, and that that should be taken in substitution of their undertaking to construct the Fermoy and Dunkettle line. The Great Western Company were connected with the Bill, and both companies were parties to this Bill, as the evidence given before the Committee would show. When the Bill was submitted by the Company in 1901, the hon. Member for North Louth moved—
  "To leave out from the word 'that 'to the end of the question, and add the words 'that this House is not prepared to consider any Bill relating to the Great Southern and Western Company's system until the Company had given effect to the Parliamentary undertakings for which it is responsible respecting the construction of the Cork and Fermoy line under the Acts of 1898 to 1899."
  In response to the Amendment Lord Shuttleworth, then Sir U. Kay Shuttle-worth, who was the Chairman of the Committee which passed the Bills of 1898 and 1899, said that—
  "as chairman of the Committee which had considered the original Bill, he trusted that the strongest view would be taken both by the Government and the House of their attempt to evade their obligations on the part of these two great railway companies which were united under the concession granted to them three years ago by a very strong Committee specially appointed by this House, and that they should not be released from the solemn obligations they had then entered into. The concession that was then granted to them was a very large and a very exceptional one. In some respects it was a great monopoly, and the Committee had taken great care in granting the concession to consider all the obligations which they were bound to lay on the company in order that the public interests might be properly secured."
  Sir U. Kay Shuttleworth went on to refer to the suggestion then made by the company that if they carried out their second obligation they should be thereby entitled to claim a release from their first obligation. He said—
  "But what did they offer? They offered as an alternative to carry out a second obligation, one of many, but a second obligation which they equally solemnly undertook, namely, with the co-operation of the City of Cork to connect this new system with the particular district for the benefit of the fishing and agricultural industries. He hoped the House of Commons and the Government would not for a moment entertain the idea that because the company

  1213
  offered to carry out one of their obligations, they therefore should be let off carrying out the other. The hon. Gentleman read a paragraph of the Report containing the word 'co-operation,' and it was perfectly true that that word as used there could not have been intended to mean financial co-operation. If they had had financial assistance in view, the Committee would have taken care to have put that in the Report. What was meant was that the company should be given power to make this line, and that the commissioners should co-operate with them in the construction of a bridge across the River Lee which would be greatly to the advantage of the South West of Ireland, namely, of all parts of the country beyond Cork."
  In the course of that discussion the Leader of the Opposition, then First Lord of the Treasury, deprecated any attempt to introduce these subjects into an omnibus Bill. He said—
  "One word before he sat down with regard to the Bill before the House. It had no connection with the Cork and Fermoy line, or with the construction of the bridge over the river Lee, but it was a Bill, the object of which was to improve the conduct of traffic between the South of Ireland and England. It was an omnibus Bill, and in his judgment the House would act very foolishly if it attempted to penalise a railway company by refusing to pass an omnibus Bill, simply because the company had incurred and perhaps justly incurred suspicion in relation to certain matters. Let the House refuse in the future to remit to another Committee what one Committee had already decided; let the House refuse to allow a company to go back on a Parliamentary bargain, but it would be unwise in the interests of the travelling public, leaving out of consideration the shareholders, to penalise this or any other company, because they had incurred the displeasure of the House in connection with an entirely different matter. Therefore, he would suggest that this Bill, having been duly before a Committee, ought to be read a third time; but hereafter if either the House or the Treasury was asked to release the companies from a bargain into which they had solemnly entered for value received, then an entirely different set of considerations came in and probably a different course ought to be taken."
  A great number of Members spoke upon the subject. The hon. Member for County Cork pointed out that if they did this the construction of the links in Cork City would be very desirable, that the railway would assist the congested districts, develop the fishing industry and assist the transit of agricultural produce. And he went on to say—
  "As to the co-operation of the Cork local bodies, if they acted towards this scheme in a selfish and niggardly spirit, he trusted that that would be remembered by the House when the Cork authorities came for further powers."
  1214
  What had happened? The Cork Corporation was here for the first time supporting this Bill. Last year a similar Bill was before the House, and was rejected by the Committee for doing this, and they had the Cork Corporation, which now for the first time supported the Bill, then lodging a petition against it. They put forward the very ground which he was raising now. Last year as in this year a Bill was put forward and they said—
  "Your petitioners are advised and believe that the scheme sought to be authorised by the present Bill is put forward by or in the interests of the Great Western Railway Company the Fishguard Company, and the Southern Company, who as before stated are by Section 60 authorised with the other companies in the said section mentioned to subscribe to the undertaking and so aid the construction of the proposed railways. Your petitioners submit that this is apparently an attempt on the part of the Fishguard Company supported by the Western and Southern Company to evade their Parliamentary obligations."
  That was the same case as he was making on the present occasion. It might have been contended with some force that up to this year the Fishguard Company had never obtained the consent of the Cork local authorities which it was suggested they should get in the Act of 1898. This year for the first time all the local authorities of Cork were consenting to the Bill, and that being so for the first time the obligation on the Fishguard Company to construct those links came into operation. He made the same case as the Cork Corporation did last year, which was that it was an attempt on the part of the companies to evade their Parliamentary obligations. Was the House to be asked to help them to evade their obligations? There was no suggestion till this year that they should be helped to fulfil an obligation which they undertook to fulfil without public money. In 1901 they offered to construct the Cork and Fermoy line and the connecting links with the city without any grant, and now because they had been in default till they had allowed their powers to construct to lapse they asked to be helped. The matter had never properly come before the Committee, for they had no moans of knowing the history of the transactions. There was no evidence given before them on that point, and they were not in any way responsible for the position created by the fact that these

  1215
  companies now appeared as the chief promotors and sponsors of the Bill. The Committee did not know, so far as evidence was before them, that these companies had a Parliamentary obligation to carry out this very work as soon as they got the consent of the corporations concerned. If they had had that evidence before them he was quite sure that they would not have listened to a Bill which proposed to enable them to evade Parliamentary obligations which they undertook in 1898. In consequences of the Acts passed in 1898–9 the companies got an Act in 1900 for the amalgamation of the Great Southern system with two other important railways in the South of Ireland, and the net position was that, having failed to fulfil two important Parliamentary obligations, they now held that they were entitled to benefit by that evasion and to get for the purpose of enabling them to evade another Parliamentary obligation, £25,000 out of the money which had come back into the Treasury. There had never been a more flagrant violation of Parliamentary obligations. It was the most monstrous thing that Parliament could do to give them £25,000 as a reward for evading direct Parliamentary obligations and to help them to evade another obligation. He did not know whether the Railway Trust in Ireland was going to obtain the same power and influence as other trusts in America, but he thought that if ever there was an instance of the introduction of putrefaction into the body politic this was one. He moved.
  MR. POWER, in seconding, said that no one who attended the deliberations of the Committee which considered this Bill could deny that they gave the greatest care to the intricate evidence, or that their proceedings were prolonged and anxious. The Committee were at a serious disadvantage, however, in not having an opportunity of considering the Cork and Waterford Bill. Had they taken evidence with regard to the merits of that Bill he believed that they would have hesitated long before they even indirectly sanctioned a measure which was in the interests of two great companies
  1216
  which had evaded their statutory obligations in the most flagrant way. On behalf of the ratepayers in the county of Waterford, they regretted very sincerely that that Bill was withdrawn, for although they could not support all the details of the Cork and Waterford Railway Bill, at all events it did provide an alternative route, and had it come before the Committee they would have been able on behalf of the ratepayers of Waterford to have placed before the Committee facts which must have influenced their views in coming to a decision. The capital of this railway company was £280,000 and up to June, 1898, the ratepayers had paid £292,062, or, in other words, they had paid up to that time £12,062 over and above the capital of the company. For a year after that period the ratepayers were liable to £14,000, and they were liable to £7,000 a year at the present time minus some reduction under the Local Government Act. The capital of the company was not sufficient to construct the line, and so they applied to the Board of Works for a loan of £93,000. He might mention that in some districts the guarantee amounted to 1s. 4d. in the £ per annum. In 1898 the Great Western Railway Company brought forward a Bill to take up this county line. They offered to wipe out the entire guarantee if the Treasury would provide £93,000. The hybrid committee said they would not consent to this, but they agreed to half of the rate being wiped out, which left it at £7,000. It was agreed that for the other £7,000 a competitive route should be established which would compete with the Holyhead route and connect Waterford and Cork, and indirectly Cork and Dublin. From the moment they got these powers they commenced intriguing to get out of their obligations, and by the lapse of time they had managed to get out of them. He only wished that the Great Western Railway Company and their allies would come forward themselves and not put forward private promoters. The Great Western Railway Company had broken their pledges to Parliament in the most scandalous way, and they would be the parties who would gain most by this measure. The late Duke of Devonshire, in a most generous

  1217
  way, constructed a line from Formoy to Lismore at his own expense and this, together with the line which the ratepayers of Waterford constructed themselves, was the only competitive route. This company asked to be relieved from their obligations to construct the Cork and Fermoy line, and in place thereof to be allowed to substitute a scheme for connecting the lines in Cork, but that application was refused. If that application was refused, was it not equally their duty to refuse a similar application now. He thought it would be acknowledged that those who had paid for so many years these enormous sums had a claim for consideration with regard to this£93,000. It might be said that a portion of this £93,000 had been allotted to Waterford for a bridge, but the citizens of Waterford in twenty years had paid the sum of £20,000 towards the guarantee. He did not know whether he had made a good case or not, but he knew he had a good and an unanswerable case. If anyone had a claim to this money it was the poor ratepayers who had been paying through the nose in the county of Waterford. By the terms of the Bill they would be handing over a considerable portion of this money to enable the railway company to evade their statutory obligations. He wished to read a passage with reference to the proposal that the company should be allowed to evade its obligations of constructing this line between Cork and Fermoy. On this subject the present Leader of the Opposition had said—
  "As to the Question on the Paper, there is no doubt that the company are obliged to construct the line from Cork to Fermoy, and the Treasury neither have the power, nor would they exercise it if they did possess it, of sanctioning any escape from their Parliamentary obligations."
  His hon. friend had read some extracts used by the right hon. Gentleman on a subsequent occasion, and he had also referred to the language used by the Gentleman who was then the Chairman of the Hybrid Committee. The then First Lord of the Treasury on July 21st, 1901, said—
  "His opinion was that once a railway came before a Committee in that House and got a Bill for value received it ought to carry out its obligations. It might be that the obligations ought not in the interests of Ireland to have been entered into. It might be that the money to be spent, on this line had much better be
  1218
  Spent in carrying out other railway works in the south or west of Ireland—on that point he did not offer an opinion, although he was inclined to the opinion that the money might be better spent. But that did not alter the fact that a bargain had been made before two Committees and that it was in consequence of that bargain that the railway company obtained from the House the privileges which it now enjoyed. They must distinguish that from the question of expediency, and he thought the railway company were bound to carry out the bargain into which they had entered.''
  If this Bill were passed in its present form they would be rewarding the company for having broken their pledges to Parliament. He begged to second the Motion of his hon. friend.
  Amendment proposed—
  "To leave out from the word 'That,' to the end of the Question, in order to add the words 'this House, in view of the fact that by The Fishguard and Rosslare Railways and Harbours Act, 1898, the Great Western Company and the Great Southern and Western Company undertook the obligation to construct similar works to those proposed by this Bill, declines to proceed with the Bill, on the ground that these companies are seeking by it to evade compliance with their said undertaking to Parliament and are also in default as regards the further obligation to construct a line from Fermoy to Dunkettle which they accepted under the said Act of 1898."— (Mr. O'Shee)—intead thereof—
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  *MR. HUGH LAWsaid that as a Member of the Committee that considered this Bill he desired to say a few words upon it. He had very great sympathy with some of the remarks which had fallen from his hon. friends. He had thought all along that failure to fulfil the obligations placed upon them by Committees of this House, and of the House of Lords, on the part of the great railway companies, was a very serious matter indeed. His hon. friend had said that if they were to pass this Bill in its present form they should be enabling these companies to evade their obligations. He wished to point out that with respect to the £25,000 which was to be given as a Treasury grant, there was nothing about it in the Bill. The Committee had not to consider

  1219
  that condition at all. What they had to consider was this. It had long been felt and generally recognised that some linking up of the railways running into Cork was in the interest of the whole of the south of Ireland. Parliament itself, at the very time that it imposed the obligation which had been spoken of, viz., the construction of the Fermoy line, laid upon the railway companies a second obligation also, namely, that, as soon as they could secure the support of the local bodies, they should bridge the Lee. This Parliament had already declared that, subject to a satisfactory scheme being produced, this work should be carried out. The question the Committee had to consider was whether the scheme placed before them was a proper scheme. Proposals of one kind or another had been brought up year after year for a number of years, but for the first time the scheme had obtained what was contemplated by Parliament—the concurrence, sanction, and approval of all the local bodies. In view of that fact the Committee had felt that they could not refuse to pass the Bill. As to the outstanding question as to the allocation of the £93,000, he had never expressed, and he did not desire to express, any opinion, because the matter, important as it was, was one for the Treasury. He had no doubt that his hon. friend the Secretary of the Treasury would not have given his consent to any such grant of public money without a very good case being made out, but as he was quite capable of defending himself, he did not wish to say anything more on that aspect of the question. He had confined himself to what the Committee conceived to be the proper course to take in the interest of the whole of the south of Ireland. The financial question as between the different companies and the Treasury was not within their purview at all.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIENsaid that after the statement to which the House had listened from the hon. Member for West Donegal, who was an active Member of the Committee, he hoped the hon. Gentlemen who had brought forward the Motion would not consider it
  1220
  their duty to continue their opposition to the Bill. When the three Bills—all of which proposed to bridge the river Lee—came before the House for Second Reading he thought it was agreed on all sides that they should go on the same footing before the Committee upstairs, and that the Bill which stood the test of the Committee's investigation, should be accepted. That investigation had taken place, and the promoters of the measures had been heard by the Committee. It was no fault of the supporters of this Bill that a portion of the scheme was withdrawn. It was no fault of theirs that the full history of the transaction was not placed before the Committee. What he repeated was that it was perfectly certain that the true history of the scheme for bridging the river Lee was before the Committee. As his hon. friend had mentioned, that was an essential portion of the scheme, and with a full knowledge of the facts before them the Committee came to their decision, and he would really put it to hon. Members whether they seriously proposed to reject the decision of the Committee after a casual conversation in this House, and by the votes of Gentlemen who could not be expected to have any knowledge of the merits of this transaction. The hon. Member for West Waterford had said that the Bill was presented to the House by private promoters. He had himself acknowledged that this Bill had the united consent and concurrence of every great representative body in the south of Ireland and in the City of Cork. These bodies represented fully 500,000 people. It was supported by the Corporation of Cork, as the hon. Member said, for the first time, Why? Because it was the first scheme which would satisfy them. It was in the interests of the harbour of Cork, and it was supported by the Harbour Commissioners, who had made a contribution of £10,000 towards the expense of the project. It was supported in addition by the County Council of Cork. All the large bodies were absolutely agreed with the representatives of the city that this matter was of vast importance to the interests of the south of Ireland. The project this year was wholly different

  1221
  from previous proposals. This year a local contribution of £25,000 was to be subscribed for the project which would cost just half the money or less. How was it possible, if they were to have any respect for Irish public opinion and the decisions of the representatives of the Irish people, for hon. Members who were opposing this Bill to reconcile their action with that position and to ask this House, consisting of people who could not be acquainted with the merits of the transaction, to come in and by their votes over-ride the unanimous decision of the three great local representative bodies, and thereby put the promoters to all the heavy expense which the loss of this Bill would involve? He hoped that on reconsideration hon. Members would not think it their duty to carry their opposition to the Bill any further. He hoped they would not consider it disrespectful if he did not think it worth while to go over again the old story stated by the hon. Member. The hon. Member for West Donegal had pointed out that the opposition of the hon. Member for West Waterford, based on the £25,000 grant, was from beginning to end irrelevant and out of order.
  MR. O'SHEEsaid his case against the Bill was not based on the contribution. He objected to it because of the treatment given to the Great Western Railway Company of England and the Great Southern and Western Railway Company.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIENpointed out that this Bill did not contain a word from begining to end with reference to the grant of £25,000. That was a matter dependent wholly on the Treasury themselves in their dealings with the promoters of the Bill. The Secretary of the Treasury had merely, so far as he understood, confirmed the agreement that was come to last year by the late Government with the universal assent of all parties, and on the strength of which £33,000 had been already allocated to the perfectly proper purpose of the bridge. If that arrangement was to be challenged, let it be done at the right time on the Estimates, when the salary of the Secretary of the Treasury was under consideration. He was quite sure that the hon. Gentleman was perfectly able to give his own view of the matter, but let it not be done on a chance occasion of this kind. By re-
  1222
  jecting this Bill they would not be punishing the Great Western Railway Company of England, but they would be punishing 500,000 people in the south of Ireland.
  MR. O'SHEEdissented.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIENsaid he fancied that the hon. Member by his wild interruptions was supporting his arguments considerably better than he was in a position to do himself. If the hon. Member impugned the decision of the Secretary of the Treasury, let him raise the question on the hon. Gentleman's salary, and let it be discussed then. Let the House not attempt to make itself the instrument of what would be a most wanton and cruel wrong to the community in the south of Ireland. It was not too late to appeal to hon. Members. It was perfectly fair that within certain limits they should state their views. If next year or the year after the promoters of the other proposals produced a scheme of their own giving the promise of an alternative route to England, the people of Cork would be most happy to back them up, because they were sufferers from the want of an alternative route. Under these circumstances he hoped that not many Irish Members would be found to push their opposition to the Bill. He respectfully appealed to British Members of the House to respect the decisiont he Committee had come to and not to allow themselves to fly in the face of the decision of all local authorities.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA,)said he did not complain of a single utterance of the hon. Member for West Waterford, nor did he fail to appreciate that he was labouring under a sense of injustice. He felt that the undertaking by the railway company should have been carried out. Its obligations had not been implemented and he felt very strongly upon the subject.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: What I said was that Cork did not press the railway company to carry out its obligations.
  MR. MCKENNAsaid that when the railway company in 1898 entered into certain obligations it was a condition

  1223
  that the Treasury should give to the railway company £93,000, and upon the railway company failing to carry out its obligations the Treasury should receive the money back. The hon. Member for East Cork took a somewhat different line. He objected to the advance of that money not merely because the railway companies were under an obligation to build that or some other similar railway, but because he considered the £93,000 was allocated to the county of Waterford. It had not been alleged that the present scheme was not a good one; no one disputed that it was in the interests of the whole of Ireland. He was sure any Member would agree that it was most desirable that the railway should be built. Whilst he quite understood the feelings which prompted the remarks of the hon. Member for West Waterford, he hoped he would not press the question to a division. In defending the action of the Treasury in proposing to give the £25,000 he was afraid he would have to take up a ground which to hon. Members for England, Scotland, and Wales would hardly seem to be justified. In 1872 and 1873 the Acts for the building of the Waterford, Dungarven and Lismore Railway were granted to the company, which had a capital of £180,000. It was a Waterford county scheme. The Waterford county proposed to find the capital and they made a bad bargain. In 1878 the railway was built, but it did not pay. The Waterford county wished to exercise its borrowing powers and asked the Treasury to advance £93,000 upon mortgage. This was done, but not one shilling of principal or interest did the Treasury get back for 20 years. In 1898, however, a now Act was granted to the Fishguard and Rosslare Railway Company, and under that Act the company agreed to repay to the Treasury the £93,000 and to take over the Waterford, Dungarven and Lismore Railway. This was done, and on strictly accurate and justifiable lines the money should have come back into the British Treasury for use in any
  1224
  part of the country. The Treasury, however, did not do that; they looked upon the repayment of the money in the light of a windfall, and decided to allocate it for the development of communication in the south of Ireland. This was the view the Treasury took upon the matter, and the view they intended to go upon. Waterford, however, claimed that the money should be wholly used for the benefit of their own county. It had been represented to the Treasury that two urgently desirable objects for the spending of that money were a bridge in the city of Waterford and the linking up of the means of communication with the city of Cork, Accordingly, the sum of £33,000 was earmarked for the former purpose, and £63,000 for the latter. These schemes were now under consideration, and it would not be reasonable for the Treasury to go back upon its undertaking. He would ask the hon. Member for West Waterford, therefore, to look at the question in the broad light of the interests of the south of Ireland. It was their only chance of carrying out the two schemes for Waterford and Cork. He asked the House to allow the Bill to go through without further opposition.
  *MR. JOHN O'CONNORprotested against the language of his hon. friend the Member for Cork who said that the opponents of the Bill desired to do wanton injustice to 500,000 people. They had, no intention of inflicting injustice upon anybody, still less upon their own countrymen. They were only doing what they conceived to be their duty. He was strongly in favour of the linking up of railways on the south and north sides of the river Dee, and had done his best to promote that object. The Financial Secretary of the Treasury had omitted to state that there was a first charge on the debt of the railway on the part of the county and city of Waterford to the extent of £294,000. He also omitted to allude to the £93,000 which his predecessor, the

  1225
  late Mr. Hanbury, had earmarked for certain purposes in the event of two conditions being fulfilled. One was the object which was sought to be carried out by this Bill, viz., that these lines should be linked up. They had no objection to that linking up, but the second condition was that a line should be made between Cork and Fermoy, and that condition was being violated. Both conditions should, however, be carried out. The linking up would connect the most picturesque parts of Ireland, and also put those parts in connection with London, but that linking up was not all that was required. His hon. friend had said that this line was being made with the consent and at the request of the local bodies. But the corporation of Cork did not propose to spend one penny upon it, and neither did the Cork County Council. A permissive clause had boon inserted enabling the Harbour Board to subscribe £10,000, but according to a Resolution which that Board had unanimously agreed to they had said that they would not subscribe a penny towards the Cork City Railway and Works Bill. It was said that £25,000 was going to be subscribed locally, and this appeared to consist of the £10,000 he had already alluded to, and £15,000 it was said would be provided by the Cork and Bandon Railway. The hon. and learned Member having quoted from the Cork Examiner of August 10th, 1905, and February 15th, 1906, to show that it was impossible for the Cork and Bandon Railway to raise the £15,000 which they were relied upon to raise said the chairman of the Committee, who knew a great deal about these railway matters in the south of Ireland, served upon the committee which rejected the original scheme which put the railway system of the south of Ireland into the dead hand of these united companies. It was a case of mortmain. These companies could do as they pleased, and all the evils pointed out by those who were opposed to the amalgamation had since been realised by the unfortunate south of Ireland. He opposed this scheme because it was rotten in it-
  1226
  self, and while he opposed it he knew very well the duty would devolve upon him for suggesting some alternative, and he sincerely hoped he should be able to suggest an alternative which would be agreeable to the House. With regard to the Bill which would connect Cork and Waterford, and Cork and Dublin, the Committee held that the preamble was not proved. That was the Bill which would have connected Cork and Waterford, and would have given the people of Cork and Waterford a straight route to London and an alternative route to Dublin, and the people of America a direct route to London. Having dealt with the question of local bodies and the question of finance he thought that there were two questions of a vital character so far as this Bill was concerned, having regard to the nature of the support given by the local authorities. That was not such a whole-hearted support, unbacked as it was by any contribution on their part. It was not such a support as could be relied upon. He had dealt with the finances which must, he thought, also be regarded as unsatisfactory by the Secretary to the Treasury himself, because the hon. Gentleman did not know the things which he had revealed to the House. The Chairman of the Committee did not know the things he had revealed to the House. He had not read the Resolution and the Minutes of the Harbour Board, and therefore he was justified in asking this House to go back on the decision of the Committee. There was no one in that House who respected the decisions of Committees more than he did. They were decisions arrived at after discussion, and the best conclusions were come to that could be obtained. But there were cases when a Committee did not have before them all the information necessary to arrive at a correct conclusion, and he suggested that this was one of those cases. He did not wish to impeach the decisions of the Committee. He had sat on Committees and he respected them as highly as any man in this House. As he

  1227
  began so he would conclude, by saying that they were not inimical to the carrying out of some such scheme as this. He had endeavoured to show that there were two conditions attached to the giving of this money, namely, a linking up of these lines and the making of a direct route to Cork connecting it with the Fishguard and Rosslare line. As between Fermoy and Cork itself, the people now had to go right round two sides of a triangle. The object of the Committee was to make a line on the third side of the triangle and by that connect the two points together. That would bring them into direct communication with a line between Cork and Rosslare. He asked the House to reject this project. He asked them to think of it not from a local but from a universal point of view. He was aware that there were people considering at the present moment rapid transit between North America and the South of Ireland. There were schemes in contemplation which would bring the two nearest points of the Eastern and Western hemispheres together. There were means contemplated by a service of rapid vessels between the nearest points of Canada and Ireland to bring them closer together. He believed it would be possible to make the voyage across the Atlantic by means of large turbine boats in three or four days. There was in the south of Ireland a safe and good harbour capable of holding the defensive as well as the offensive fleets of the manœuvres. Even at low water there was a depth of fifty feet. It was the nearest point to America, and a passenger leaving America could travel as the crow flies straight to London if the proposed connection at Cork with the Rosslare and Fishguard route were made. But it was also necessary that a connection should be made between Cork and Waterford in
  1228
  the manner he had described; therefore he asked his friends to drop this Bill and make way for the promotion of a scheme that would connect the counties of Cork and Waterford. He was empowered to say that if the promoters of this Bill were not willing to introduce next year a measure comprehending the two conditions he had alluded to, he knew those who had the capacity, the ability, and the willingness to put up a sufficient amount of capital, with the aid and assistance of the Treasury, who would be asked to give them, not the £25,000, but the whole £60,000, to carry out the entire scheme of linking up the railways that it was now sought to link up, and to make the connection he had suggested. It was no empty proposal on his part. He believed that those who promoted the Bill that was thrown out by the Committee this year were capable of carrying out such a scheme. He had, therefore, authority for saying that if the Treasury would give them the whole £60,000, they would link up the railways so as to make a connection between Cork and Waterford that would satisfy the Waterford people and meet the requirements of the whole case. It would develop the tourist traffic of the south of Ireland, and give an alternative route to Dublin for which the people of the south of Ireland had been long anxious, and of which these petty schemes prevented the accomplishment.
  MR. ASHTON, as Chairman of the Committee which dealt with the Bill, desired to say a few words. A great deal of the opposition was on the ground of the Treasury making a grant of £25,000 instead of applying it in other ways. He thought it had been sufficiently shown that the money would be very wisely given by the

  1229
  Treasury to this purpose. It was strongly put before the Committee that unless that money was furnished, at least so far as the Great Western Bill was concerned, this railway would certainly not be made at the present time. The evidence before the Committee went to show that for the benefit of the south and west of Ireland the railway should be made immediately, and that weighed very largely with the Committee in the conclusions to which they came. They came to the conclusion to pass this Bill absolutely unanimously and he hoped the House would take note of that fact. He was bound to say one or two words as to the speech that had just been made by the hon. Member for North Kildare. It dealt mainly with the financial aspect of the Bill. He had some little knowledge of finance and he had also some little knowledge of the finance of Bills that had come before this House, and in his experience he did not think he had ever seen a Bill passed that shewed better finance than the measure under discussion. The hon. Member had sought to throw doubt upon those who had made promises of money for carrying out their bargain. There were such things upstairs as Parliamentary bargains and they knew that railways were very much averse to going outside those Parliamentary bargains, and he thought at the present moment,
  knowing the feeling of hon. Members below the gangway opposite, the Great Western Railway, at any rate, would be very careful in carrying out its Parliamentary bargain. They had so far as they could have the assurance that the money would be found, and if the money were found by the two railways and by the Treasury the thing would be seen through. He had never met with sounder finance. But supposing these two railways did not carry out their bargain as the hon. Member suggested, what was the worst that could happen? That the Treasury would not find the £25,000 and the scheme would come to an end; but from the evidence given to the Committee he felt morally certain that that scheme would be carried out. In the interests of all concerned, all he could say to the House was that they gave a very long and very careful consideration to all the evidence for and against this Bill, and the Cork Link Bill, and they were unanimous in their conclusion. They believed that the scheme was a good one and could be carried out and that its finance was sound. Therefore he asked the House to support the Committee.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 196 Noes, 29. (Division List No. 122.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork. N.E.)

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Brace, William

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Beale, W. P.

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Brigg, John

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Brunner, J.F.L.(Lancs., Leigh)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bell, Richard

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Benn, John Williams (Devonp'rt

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Balcarres, Lord

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Billson, Alfred

  Cairns, Thomas

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester)

  Boland, John

  Cave, George

  Barlow, John Emmott (Somerset

  Bolton, T.D.(Derbyshire, N.E.)

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor C.W.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Bottomley, Horatio

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Clarke, C. Goddard

  Cleland, J. W.

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Clough, W.

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

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

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

  Rowlands, J.

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Runciman, Walter

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Kennaway, Rt.Hon.Sir JohnH.

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton-under-Lyne

  Cowan, W. H.

  Laidlew, Robert

  Sears, J. E.

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Lamont, Norman

  Seddon, J.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Shackleton, David James

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.)

  Crombie, John. William

  Lough, Thomas

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Cross, Alexander

  Lupton, Arnold

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Macdonald, J.M.(Falkrik B'ghs

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Davies, W. (Howell Bristol, S.

  Maclver, David (Liverpool)

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Spicer, Albert

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Stewart, Halley (Grecnock)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Duckworth, James

  M'Crae, George

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Sullivan, Donal

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

  M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Thompson, J. W. H.(Somerset, E.

  Elibank, Master of

  Marnham, F. J.

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Erskine, David C.

  Massie, J.

  Toulmin, George

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Menzies, Walter

  Ure, Alexander

  Ferens, T. R.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Valentia, Viscount

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Mond, A.

  Walton, Sir John L.(Leeds, S.)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Morrell, Philip

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murphy, John

  Wason, John'Cathcart (Orkney

  Foster, Rt, Hon. Sir Walt r

  Murray, James

  Watt, H. Anderson

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Napier, T. B.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Gilhooly, James

  Nicholls George

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Gill, A. H.

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncaster

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Gulland, John W.

  Norman, Henry

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Hall, Frederick

  Nuttall, Harry

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  O'Brien, William (Cork)

  Whitely, J. H. (Halifax)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r.)

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

  Wiles, Thomas

  Harmsworth, R.L.(Caithn'ss-sh

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon.N

  Wilkie, Alexandir

  Hedges, A. Paget

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Williamson, A.(Elgin and Nairn

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Pease, HerbertPike(Darlington

  Wilson. J. W. (Woruestersh. N.)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Wood, T. M' Kinnon

  Henderson, J. M.(Aberdeen, W.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Woodhouse, SirJ T(Huddersf'd

  Higham, John Sharp

  Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh, Central)

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

  Hills, J. W.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Younger, George

  Hooper, A. G.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Sheehan and Mr. Essex.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Rees, J. D.

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Jenkins, J.

  Richardson, A.

  NOES.

  Corbett, CH.(Sussex, E. Grinst'd

  Lundon, W.

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Delany, William

  Mac Veagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.)

  O'Hare, Patrick

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

  O'Mara, James

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Ginnell, L.

  Meagher, Michael

  Summerbell, T.

  Halpin, J.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Wardle, George J.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Nolan, Joseph

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  Hudson, Walter

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. O'Shee and Mr. Power

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow W.

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Main Question put, and agreed to.

  Bill, as amended, considered; to be read the third time.

SUPPLY.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,122,128, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland, including a Grant in Aid."
Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,122,028, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Smeaton.)
*MR. SUTHERLANDreferred to the facilities which wore now enjoyed in Scotland for obtaining University education. He desired to acknowledge the indebtedness of the Scottish people to Mr. Andrew Carnegie for the munificent gift which had enabled the youth of Scotland to receive a university education free. As to the Minute which had boon placed on the Table he asked whether the Secretary for Scotland could state how many of the school boards and other educational authorities were in favour of it as it stood. Rural boards were unable to bring the same pressure to bear on the Department as the large boards could do. The Department often provided machinery without taking into account the circumstances of the localities. Pupils attending public schools in the rural districts had in many cases simply to mark time between the ages of twelve and fourteen. Could anyone tell him why there was such a hurry to carry this Minute into effect? The Secretary for Scotland had stated that neither he nor the very able and experienced Secretary
1234
of the Department approved of it in its present form. The Committee ought to be given time to go fully into the question, education authorities and others in Scotland should be afforded more time to study and consult regarding the Minute. Hon. Members had received copies of it only yesterday and to-day. Dealing with the question of grants to Scottish county councils for the purposes of technical education he thought that in many cases the technical education given was not of a kind to warrant the expenditure of so much money. The time was ripe for the reconsideration of the education question in Scotland. He urged that the Government should give adequate and continuous time for the discussion of Scottish estimates, and he thought that Members from Scotland should insist on getting that time.
MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid that after careful consideration he had come to the conclusion that the Minute was one which ought to be supported. He did not think that under it the children of the wage-earning classes would be excluded from the teaching profession. He maintained that the children of the wage-earning classes should get as good an education as possible, and that this end could only be attained by keeping up the standard of 'the teaching Profession. Democratic control of education was also needed, and a representative educational council and local boards should be established of a calibre to hold their own against the Scottish Education Department. As to the cost of education, the growth of local burdens was very great, and it was essential that Scotland should get the whole of the money to which she was entitled in regard to the equivalent grant for the money voted to the University Colleges, and

1235
the £1,000,000 to be devoted to English education under the Education Bill. The school boards at present had to work under great difficulties caused by lack of co-ordination and lack of funds, and they were further hampered by lack of recruits for the teaching profession. They had a great leeway to make up in regard to practical training and technical education. Another year should not be allowed to pass without the whole of this question of education, perhaps the greatest of all Scottish questions, being adequately dealt with.
MR. SINCLAIRrose to reply when—
MR. MORTONon a point of order, asked whether it was usual for the Member of the Government in charge of the Estimates to intervene when he had himself taken up the best part of the evening.
*THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANsaid that it was not only usual but proper that the Minister in charge of the Estimates should answer the various questions put to him in discussion, before the discussion closed.
MR. SINCLAIRsaid the last thing he desired to do was to stand between his hon. friend and the Committee.
MR. MORTON: But that is what you are doing.
MR. SINCLAIRthought it was only courteous to the Committee that he should endeavour to reply, in the few minutes that were left, to some of the criticisms that had been passed on the Estimates. He regretted that the Minute which had been referred to, and
1236
which had been welcomed by experienced Members in its altered form, was not in the hands of Members, but he was able to state that in that Minute provision was made for the proper teaching of Gaelic. On the question of teachers nothing could be done without legislation, while in regard to finance he should welcome most heartily any support which the Scottish Members on either side would give him in demanding both time and money from the Government. He concluded by expressing the hope that the Committee would now allow the Vote to be taken.
MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONsaid if the right hon. Gentleman would give the Committee an assurance that further time would be given for the discussion of Scottish Estimates, he was prepared to offer no opposition to this Vote, otherwise he was prepared to go on until he was interrupted.
MR. SINCLAIRsaid he would do his utmost to secure further time for Scottish Estimates, but he could give no positive undertaking.
And, it being 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.

LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS BILL [LORDS].
Read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.
Adjourned at five minutes after Eleven o'clock.