Commons Sitting of 2 May 1906

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

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Norwich Union Life Insurance Society Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read a second time, and committed.
Cathcart District Railway (Superfluous Lands) Order Confirmation Bill; North Berwick Corporation Order Confirmation Bill. Considered; to be read the third time upon Friday.
Water Provisional Order Bill, "to confirm a Provisional Order made by the Board of Trade under The Gas and Water Works Facilities Act, 1870, relating to Poole Water." Presented by Mr. Kearley; supported by Mr. Lloyd-George; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 183.]
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill, "to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Beckenham, Oswald-twistle, Rochdale Rochford (Rural), and Warrington," presented by Mr. Runciman; supported by Mr. John Burns; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill184.]
Local Government Provisional Order (Poor Law) Bill, "to confirm a Provisional Order of the Local Government Board relating to the Bury Saint Edmunds Incorporation," presented by Mr. Runciman; supported by Mr. John Burns; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 185.]
Cork City Railways and Works Bill. Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on the Cork Junction Railways Bill in Session 1905 be referred to the Committee on the Cork City Railways and Works Bill.—;(Mr. Caldwell.)

PETITIONS.
  COAL MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Petitions in favour; From Aber; Britannic; Brynsheffrey; Gilfach Goch; Liversedge; Netherton; Old Hill; Quarry Bank; Shireoaks and Steetley; and, Wyke Collieries; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL (RELIGIOUS TEACHING).
  Petitions against alteration of Law; from Addington; Ash next Sandwich (two); Ashton; Bedminster; Birkenhead; Bosham and New Fishbourne; Bishopston (two); Caterham; Caterham Valley; Cheetham; Childrey; Chillenden; Chiswick (two); Dudley; Edge Lane; Felpham; Felpham and Middleton; Goodrich; Grasmere (two); Great Toller; Hammersmith (six); Haxey; Heathfield; Hertingfordbury (two); Hillmorton; Hinckley; Hoar Cross (two); Hythe; Ingoldmells; Isle of Elmley (two); Islington; Kingstone and Thruxton (two); Linton; Liverpool; Llangarron; Llanwarne; London (three); Loppington; Lymington (two); Merton (two); Mildenhall; New Fishbourne; Northbourne; Oving; Peterchurch; Ramsgate (two); Ravenscourt Park; Ravenstonedale; Reading; Rochester (two); Ryde; Salesbury (two); Shepherd's Bush; Staines; Stanford; Stanford with Postling; Stanley (two); Stodmarsh; Tilmanstone; Turner's Hill Tyringham cum Filgrave; Wakefield; Wellington Heath (two); Westbere (two); Westhampnett; West Kensington; Weston Subedge; Woburn; Wollaton; and, York; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petition from Sarum and Wilts, against; to lie upon the Table.
  LAND VALUES TAXATION, &C. (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Aberdeen, against; to lie upon the Table.
  LANDS VALUATION (SCOTLAND) ACT (1854) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Petition from Aberdeen, against; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions in favour; from Edinburgh; and, Scottish Executive of the British Women's Temperance Association; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING ARRANGEMENTS (PARLIAMENTARY BOROUGHS) BILL.
  Petition from Westminster, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF COKE BILL.
  Petition from Cambridge, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  SUNDAY TRADING (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition of the Scottish National Sabbath Union, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  VAGRANT CHILDREN BILL.
  Petition from Bloomsbury, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  DRUMDOE, COUNTY ROSCOMMON (INQUIRY).
  Return [presented April 30th] to be printed. [No. 151.]
  NATIONAL SCHOOL TEACHER (IRELAND) PENSION FUND.
  Account [presented May 1st] to be printed. [No. 152.]
  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Copy presented, of Rules and Programme of Examinations for 1907 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 153.]
  GAS COMPANIES (METROPOLIS).
  Copy presented, of Accounts of the Metropolitan Gas Companies for the year 1905 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table and to be printed. [No. 154.]
  EAST INDIA (RAILWAYS AND IRRIGATION WORKS).
  Return presented, relative thereto [Address, April 30th; Mr. Robert Price]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 155.]
  TRANSVAAL (CHINESE LABOURERS) (CRIMES).
  Return presented, relative thereto [Address, February 21st; Mr. Mackarness]; to lie upon the Table.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION.
  Return ordered, "showing (1) names of Judicial and other Commissioners, of the Legal and Lay Assistants and Assessors in connection with the Land Commission holding office on the 1st day of January, 1906; (2) date of original appointment; (3) date upon which appointment expires; (4) age of appointment; (5) residence at time of appointment; (6) locality in which practical experience of land was acquired; (7) where educated; (8) previous occupation; (9) acreage of land farmed; (10) whether held as owner or tenant; (11) what other experience in agriculture; and (12) what experience in valuing, mapping, and surveying (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 151, of Session 1902)."—;(Mr. Dillon.)
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    Working Hours in Royal Dockyards.
    MR. J. WILLIAMS BENN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty when the proposed new scheme as to working hours in the Royal Dockyards will take effect, and what is the reason for departing from the date of April 2nd, mentioned in the Admiralty order.
    (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The date for commencement of the contemplated new scheme of working hours, which provides for a uniform forty-eight hour week throughout the year, is not yet definitely fixed. April 2nd, the first working day of the present financial year, was a provisional suggestion only. It has been not found practicable to deal with all the details involved in a change of this magnitude in time to admit of the institution of the new scheme on that date, but it is hoped to introduce it early in July.

  Land Purchase in County Galway.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Estates Commissioners are negotiating with the view of purchasing some eleven farms of four to five acres of land each in the townland of Mincloon, Galway, at the request of the tenants on the same, which purchase will include a grazing portion of some forty acres adjoining and belonging to the same landlord; whether the uneconomic holdings will be enlarged by reason of this purchase; whether attempts are now being made to deprive the tenants of a portion of the seaweed which heretofore they have been allowed to use; and, if so, will he give such instructions as will protect the interests of the tenants in this matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I understand from the hon. Member that the estate referred to is the property of the Alliance Assurance Company. The Estates Commissioners inform me that they are unable to trace any proceedings before them in reference to that estate.

  Devonport Dockyard.
  MR. J. WILLIAMS BENN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the increased accommodation at Devonport, the breaking-up of obsolete ships with dockyard labour and the sale of the materials would yield a better financial result to the Government than the prices realised at recent sales; and whether he is prepared to give the dockyard an opportunity of showing what can be done in this department.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) There is no reason to anticipate that the breaking-up of old vessels in the dockyards would yield a better financial result than selling them by public auction, and it is not proposed to adopt the course suggested.

  Hamburg Seamen Strikes.
  MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that police officers were employed at Cardiff, on Thursday, April 19th, assisting to send away by train a number of seamen of various nationali-
  538
  ties engaged by foreign shipping agents to take the place of seamen now on strike at Hamburg, in Germany; whether he is aware that one of the officers threatened a coloured seaman who objected to go; whether he is aware that police officers have been employed at Dover on similar work, and also members of the Metropolitan Police Force; if he can state under whose instructions these officers were rendering foreign shipping agents assistance; and whether he will give instructions in future that English police officers are not to be employed to assist foreign shipping agents.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I have not heard of the employment of the police on the occasions referred to by the hon. Member; but I presume that they were present for the purpose of performing their duty in the maintenance of public order. I will, however, make inquiry of the Cardiff police authorities, and also of the other police authorities, if the hon. Member will indicate precisely the occasions to which he refers.

  School Inspection in Ireland.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Commissioners of National Education approve of inspectors holding the annual inspection of a school on the day on which the annual vacation commences; and whether, seeing that such a test is unfair to the teacher, steps will be taken, to get inspectors to endeavour to meet the teachers' wishes in this respect.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that the date on which the annual inspection of a school takes place depends, amongst other things, on the engagements of the inspector and the circumstances of the school. If the particulars of any case in which it is alleged the date fixed for the annual inspection has operated unfairly towards the teacher are supplied to the Commissioners they will investigate the matter.

  South African Constabulary—;Officers' Pensions.
  MR. WILLIAM KESWICK: To ask the Under-Secretary of

  539
  State for the Colonies whether the officers of the South African Constabulary, serving in the Orange River Colony, would be entitled to pensions upon the reduction or disbandment of the force; and, if not, what special measures are contemplated for compensating there officers for the loss of their employment, should the force be disbanded upon the grant of self-government to the Colony.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The terms of appointment of the officers of the South African Constabulary are not such as to entitle them to expect a pension in the contingency suggested.

  Royal Naval Hospital, Stonehouse.
  MR. J. WILLIAMS BENN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that in Government works carried out at the Royal Naval Hospital, Stonehouse, masons have been employed to do the work of plasterers, and that the premium system has been adopted with regard to such work; and whether such conditions are consistent with the trades union rules agreed between masters and men in these trades outside the dockyards.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) Masons have been employed to do the work of plasterers in certain cases where the work consisted of patching and jobbing, i.e., where a mason did cutting-out of brickwork or masonry, etc., he made good the plastering as well, and so finished the job on which he started. As regards the second part of the Question, the premium system has not been adopted in the case of such jobbing work previously mentioned, but it has been adopted in regard to plastering done by plasterers on new work. With regard to the last part of the Question, it is believed that the premium system is not employed by firms in the building trade in the Plymouth district; but as the men cannot lose but only stand to gain by this system, it is not considered that its adoption is in any way inconsistent with the rules agreed between masters and men.

  Ordnance Survey Employees' Grievances.
  LIEUTENANT - COLONEL PHILIPPS: To ask the hon.
  540
  Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the order issued last year to the arsenals and dockyards, whereby in the case of reduction of the staff the men selected for discharge should be drawn from those with less than fifteen years service, is applied in the case of the Ordnance Survey Department; and, if not, the reason why the Government employees in the Ordnance Survey with long service should be treated with less consideration, especially in view of the fact that, owing to the nature of the work in the Ordnance Survey, it is practically impossible for an employee of long service to find suitable employment outside the department; and whether, seeing that amongst the employees in the Derby division of the Ordnance Survey who are now under notice of discharge, there are a number of employees of very long service in the department, ranging up to thirty-three years, and that there are between 400 and 500 men in the department who have less than fifteen years service, many of whom are performing duties precisely similar to those men now under notice of discharge, he will, when making such discharges, if any such discharges are absolutely necessary, undertake to apply to the Ordnance Survey the same principles in recognising long service as are now applied to the arsenals and dockyards.
  (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The order to which my hon. friend refers does not apply to the Ordnance Survey. It is, however, the general rule on the Ordnance Survey, when a reduction of staff becomes necessary, to select the younger men for discharge where possible, but the circumstances of each case have to be considered. In the case of the abolition of the Derby division it is not possible to make room elsewhere for all the older men in that office by discharging younger men from other divisions. There is a certain amount of work that must be done by youths, for which the older men are in no way suitable. Younger men and men with inferior records in other divisions have already been displaced, as far as possible, in order to retain the older men, but it is not practicable to do this in all cases.

  541
  Out of fifty-one men discharged within the last twelve months at least thirty-seven were young men with short service.

  Separation Orders.
  MR. H. H. MARKS: To ask Mr. Attorney-General if he can state the number of separation orders made by courts of summary jurisdiction in each of the years 1904 and 1905.
  (Answered by Sir Lawson Walton.) Table XIV. of the Judicial (Criminal) Statistics for 1904 show that the number of separation orders made by courts of summary jurisdiction in that year was 6,752, viz., 273 under section 5 (2) of The Licensing Act, 1902; 163 under section 5 (1) of the same Act; and 6,316 under section 5 of The Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act, 1895. The figures for last year are not yet complete.

  Great Northern Railway (Ireland) Rates.
  MR. LIDDELL: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Great Northern Railway Company (Ireland) charge the same rates for goods from Belfast to Glenavy as from Belfast to Antrim, though Glenavy is ten miles nearer Belfast than Antrim, and although the total distance from Belfast to Antrim is only 27½ miles; and whether he will make representations to the railway company on the subject.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) No complaint has been made to the Board of Trade with respect to the rates to Glenavy, but I have asked the railway company for their observations on the subject, and will communicate with the hon. Member on receiving their reply.

  Stamping of Documents at Newport, Monmouthshire.
  MR. L. HASLAM: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury is he aware that inconvenience to and delay in the transaction of business are caused by the absence of facilities for stamping documents at Newport, Monmouthshire; and, seeing that this absence of facilities involves not only financial loss to traders, but places them on unequal terms of com-
  542
  petition with business centres, where stamping facilities are at hand, will he consider the advisability of providing the desired facilities at an early date.
  (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The provision of stamping centres depends upon (a) the population of the town or city which they would serve, (b) the average number of documents which require stamping, and (c) the existing facilities in a neighbouring town. In the present case the population and number of documents fall below that of any town which at present has such a centre. Moreover, facilities exist at Cardiff, which is not far distant from Newport. As the number of documents to be stamped would not be increased by the creation of a centre, the course proposed would involve an additional expenditure without any compensation to the Exchequer. There are many towns which have greater claims, but at present have no stamping facilities, In these circumstances, although I regret the fact stated in the first part of the Question, I am unable to authorise the desired concession. My hon. friend, no doubt, is already aware that facilities are provided by the Post Office for the transmission, free of cost, of documents, executed or unexecuted, on prepayment of the duty.

  Celluloid Hair Combs.
  MR. E. BETHELL: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been drawn to accidents arising from the use of celluloid hair combs; and whether, having regard to the inflammable nature of this material, he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to secure the marking of these articles in such a way that the public may know the danger to which they are exposed by their use.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I am aware that a certain number of accidents have arisen from this cause, especially when impure celluloid is used. The question of putting marks upon materials of all sorts that are likely to be dangerous is a very wide one, and I do not see my way to deal specially with celluloid, but I hope the question will call attention to the possible danger

  543
  of these articles, and will put the public on their guard.

  Railway Clerks and the Workmen's Compensation Bill.
  MR. NIELD: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the danger frequently attending the performance of their duties, he will include railway clerks generally or railway checking clerks within the scope of the Workmen's Compensation Bill, now under the consideration of the House.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I think it will be more convenient for hon. Members for me to defer making any statement on this point until the time comes to discuss it in Committee.

  Church of England School and Non-conformist Scholars.
  MR. W. H. LEVER: To ask the President of the Board of Education, if he can state in how many parishes where a Church of England school is the only available elementary school, the managers have arranged for the children of Nonconformists attending such school to have religious instruction in accordance with the faith of their parents.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Board have no information on the subject.

  Upkeep of Voluntary Schools.
  MR. TREVELYAN: To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he can state the total amount expended by the managers upon the upkeep of voluntary schools from subscriptions or sources other than rates and taxes during each of the last three years.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Board have no information on the subject.

  Bombay-Sinde Railway.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the construction of the proposed Bombay-Sinde Railway has been sanctioned by the Secretary of State in Council; and whether he can state what the length and gauge of the railway will be, and what is the estimated cost per mile.
  544
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The construction of a railway on the broad gauge to connect Bombay with Sind has been sanctioned, but there is still some uncertainty as to the route which will be followed. The Railway Board have sanctioned a reconnaissance of alternative routes to the north and south of the Runn of Cutch. Supposing the southern route to be adopted, the length would be about 295 miles, and the cost has been roughly estimated at £1,406,667, or £4,768 per mile.

  Army Pensioners.
  MR. THORNE: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can see his way clear to order the payment of Army pensioners weekly or monthly instead of quarterly, as at present.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) This question is at present receiving careful consideration.

  Army Forage Cap.
  COLONEL LEGGE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can see his way to allowing the cavalry to revert to the old pattern forage cap for walking out in now that a khaki cap has been issued for parades.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The question of reverting to the old pattern forage cap for cavalry was fully considered when the introduction of the new peaked cap was under discussion. The new pattern peaked cap will be issued for walking out purposes when the stock of the present pattern is exhausted.

  Army Desertions in Scotland.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of desertions from the respective barracks in Scotland during each year since 1900.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The figures readily available are detailed below. No figures have been given prior to 1902, as any figures for the period of the South African War would cause considerable labour to compile, and would not serve any useful purpose for comparison.

  Cavalry, Artillery, and Infantry.

  Number of desertions from the respective barracks in Scotland, during each year from 1902.

  Period.

  Aberdeen (Castle Hill).

  Ayr.

  Barry Camp.

  Berwick (Infantry).

  Edinburgh (Piershill).

  Edinburgh (Castle).

  Fort George (Albany).

  Glasgow (Maryhill).

  Glencorse.

  Hamilton (Infantry).

  Inchkeith Camp.

  Inverness (Cameron).

  Leith Fort.

  Perth (Queen's Barracks).

  Stirling (Castle).

  Stobs.

  Totals.

  1st Jan. to 31st Dec. 1902.

  45

  88

  —;

  89

  7

  7

  17

  58

  61

  82

  2

  46

  14

  101

  92

  —;

  709

  1st Jan. to 30th Sept. 1903

  4

  22

  —;

  24

  14

  50

  53

  53

  30

  43

  3

  12

  10

  8

  45

  24

  395

  1st Oct. 1903 to 30th Sept. 1904.

  10

  11

  —;

  11

  31

  39

  19

  46

  34

  54

  —;

  1

  8

  7

  15

  12

  298

  1st Oct. 1904 to 30th Sept. 1905.

  12

  13

  8

  19

  26

  58

  19

  40

  28

  43

  —;

  3

  11

  4

  15

  4

  303

  71

  134

  8

  143

  78

  154

  108

  197

  153

  222

  5

  62

  43

  120

  167

  40

  1,705

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Keyham Engineer Cadets.
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether an estimate can be formed of the value of the services of the engineer cadets at Keyham during the last financial year in refitting the machinery of the "Ringdove," "Traveller," and "Thistle," and for their assistance on other vessels; and whether he will state how far Keyham College is self-suporting as the result of this work.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON,): A report has been called from the dockyard, and I will communicate the result to my hon. friend as soon as it has been received.
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the attention of the Board has been drawn to the recent Report of the Committee appointed by the Institute of Civil Engineers, with representatives of all the distinctive engineering bodies, and to the Committee's recommendation in favour of engineering education and specialisation commencing at seventeen years of age; and whether this recommendation will receive the consideration of the First Lord of the Admiralty before steps are taken to stop the entries of engineer students into Keyham in favour of the Osborne cadets entered at thirteen years of age.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The attention of the Admiralty has been drawn to the Report in question, but it does not appear that the inquiries of the Committee extended to marine engineering as applied to the naval service, nor have any communications passed between the Committee and the Admiralty on the subject. The Report deals with a scheme for the training of youths whose after career and employment would be essentially different from the career and duties of a naval officer.

  New Short Rifle.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will make arrangements for
  548
  the new short rifle to be placed in the tea-room for inspection by Members of the House; and if he can not see his way to adopt this course, will he say when it can be inspected.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,): A specimen shall be put in the tea-room.

  Ross-shire Militia.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the names of the firms with whom the commanding officer of the 3rd Seaforth Highlanders (Ross-shire Militia) communicated in order to secure a special steamer for the conveyance of the men of the Ross-shire Militia, living in the Lews, from Stornoway to Kyle of Lochalsh, on the evening of the 3rd April.
  MR. HALDANE: The firm was that of Messrs. MacBrayne, Limited.

  Cost of Rifle Manufacture.
  MR. HIGHAM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, in view of the fact that the Enfield Factory made 83,590 rifles at a cost of £2 9s. 5d. each in 190–12, 60,757 at a cost of £2 11s. 6d. each in 1902–3, and 14,805 at a cost of £2 13s. 7d. each in 1903–4, will he state why orders for rifles should now be given to the trade while our own machinery is stat ding idle, as shown by the reduced production just stated; and will he give the number of rifles and the cost as produced in 1904–5 and 1905–6.
  MR. HALDANE: The grant of orders to the trade, while the Ordnance Factory machinery is not fully occupied, is part of a settled policy. This policy has been explained to the House on previous occasions, and I believe it to be a very valuable one. As regards the figures asked for in the Question, these were given fully in reply to a Question put yesterday by my hon. friend.

  Vaccine for the Army and Navy.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any calf lymph produced at the Army and Navy Vaccine Institute last year is preserved on ivory points; and, if so, how many; and will he state the original source of the lymph

  549
  with which the calves at this establishment have been inoculated.
  MR. HALDANE: No lymph is now preserved at the Institute on ivory points. The stock calf lymph at present in use has been obtained through the courtesy of Messieurs St. Yves Menard and Chambon from the Institute of Animal Vaccination, Paris.
  SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD: Can we have some of this lymph in the tea-room also?

  Operations in Natal.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can say how many troops the Natal Government now have ready for operations; how many mounted and how many infantry; the estimated number of rebels with Bambata and with Sigananda; and whether there is official information that Sigananda is in rebellion?
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL,): It is not, I think, always desirable to give detailed information as to the composition and strength of forces about to be employed in active military operations. It is, I think, sufficient to state that the Zululand Field Force numbers about 2,000 men, the majority of whom are mounted. The rebels were reported on the 27th of April to have three strong impis, but I cannot say the numbers. The Governor telegraphed on 17th April that Sigananda's tribe had broken into open rebellion.
  MR. MYERasked whether the hon. Gentleman could explain with any kind of exactitude the phrase "state of rebellion."
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: What are they rebelling against?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I presume a state of disorder which is menacing to life and property would constitute a state of rebellion.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDasked the hon. Gentleman whether he had not reason to believe that this unfortunate and lamentable state of affairs in South
  550
  Africa was the direct outcome of the recent summary execution of natives.
  MR. CHURCHILL: No, Sir. I am bound to say I do not think there is any connection between the executions to which my hon. friend has referred and the rising in Zululand.
  MR. MYER: Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that this rebellion has been engineered by the Natal Government for the past two or three years.
  [No Answer was returned.]
  MR. J. WARDasked whether it was not a fact that the rebellion was almost entirely due to the imposition of the poll tax, and whether it was not an act of rebellion for a chief to leave his kraal without having committed any other offence.
  MR. SPEAKER: I think these are questions for which notice ought to be given. They do not properly arise out of the question on the paper.

  The Boers and Chinese Crime.
  MR. MACKARNESS: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the report sof a meeting held on April 7th at Vrededorp, at which General Botha, addressing a meeting of citizens of the Transvaal, said that the atrocities which were being committed by the Chinamen must be put an end to, that the uncertainty of life and property which at present existed in the Transvaal could no longer continue, and that he had asked Lord Selborne to receive a deputation of himself and his friends; will he say whether Lord Selborne would receive such a deputation; and whether what took place would be communicated to the House.
  MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been called to a newspaper report of the speech. It appears that Lord Selborne is to receive a deputation on May 4th. I have received no official information on the subject, but Lord Selborne will no doubt report the result in due course, and the question of publication will then be considered.

  Chinese Deserters from the Mines.
  MR. MACKARNESS: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to a letter, dated March 29th, by the President of the Chamber of Mines in the Transvaal, in which he states that the recently reported outrages by wandering Chinese deserting from the mines had caused the gravest concern to the directors of the mining companies; that the Chamber had been in communication with the Government on the matter of more effective police protection; that a deputation would wait upon the Attorney-General to discuss the matter in all its bearings on March 30th; whether the Secretary of State had received any Report of the interview between the deputation and the Attorney-General; and whether he would lay such Report before the House.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I have seen the letter to which the hon. Member refers. The Secretary of State has been informed by Lord Selborne in a despatch received by the last mail that the mining companies have been actively engaged in consultation with the acting Lieutenant-Govern or and himself in considering whether it is possible to take further steps to exercise an effective supervision over the coolies, and that he was expecting definite proposal from them shortly. The Secretary of State expects to receive a further report as to the result of these communications, and will consider the question of publication or its receipt.

  Withdrawal of the Reward for Bambata's Capture.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can inform the House whether the price set upon Bambata's head has now been withdrawn by the Natal Government; and whether His Majesty's Government has any communication from the Governor of Natal as to whether natives now captured are to be tried by military or civil courts.
  MR. CHURCHILL: Yes, Sir. The offer of a reward for the capture of Bambata alive or dead has been withdrawn; and the Secretary of State has been informed that it is the intention of the Natal Government to try all natives
  552
  other than those actually taken fighting with arms in their hands by the civil tribunals and not by courts martial.

  The Executed Natives.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state when the House may expect to be put in possession of the evidence against the condemned twelve natives which satisfied the Governor of Natal that they had been properly tried.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The Governor has been asked to send copies of the evidence. I am in communication with him as to the question of the publication of Papers. The evidence, which is very bulky, may be expected to reach the Secretary of State before the end of the month.

  Papers on Natal.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALDasked when it was proposed to lay further Papers on Natal on the table of the House?
  MR. CHURCHILLsaid he undertook before the Easter recess to lay Papers, but events had since arisen which would render it necessary to include further papers. But as he gathered from the hon. Gentleman it would be convenient to have as much information as possible up to the present, he would draw the attention of the Secretary of State to the desire for an interim Blue-book on Natal affairs, and he should think that by Monday next one could be laid.

  Railways on the Afghan Frontier.
  MR. LYNCH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, what progress has been made with the extension of the railway from Peshawar towards the Afghan frontier; and whether, in view of the effect of the penetration of Russian influence into Persia during recent years upon the frontier problem in India, he will refuse to sanction the expenditure of large sums of money in connection with railways on the north-west frontier.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. JOHN MORLEY,): I stated on February 26th that a railway 22½ miles in length was

  553
  under construction, from a point near Jamrud on the existing line to a point on the Kabul river.† Any proposals that may be received for further railway construction towards the Afghan frontier will receive most careful consideration from the financial and other points of view indicated in the hon. Member's Question.

  China and the Tibetan Agreement.
  SIR H. COTTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Chinese Government have accorded their adhesion to the Tibetan agreement of September 7th, 1904; and, if so, whether he is in a position to announce the terms of this adhesion.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RUNCIMAN,) (For Sir EDWARD GREY): The Convention between Great Britain and China which was signed at Peking on April 27th secures the adhesion of China to the Convention established with Thibet in 1904. The text of the Convention has not yet been received, bat it will be laid before Parliament in due course. The Convention does not, however, alter the arrangements arrived at under the Convention with Thibet, as confirmed by the Government of India. It contains an engagement on our part not to encroach on Thibetan territory, nor to interfere in the government of Thibet, the Government of China undertaking not to allow any foreign State to interfere in the government or internal administration of Thibet. It also states that we do not seek for ourselves any of the concessions mentioned in Article IX. of the Convention with Thibet which were denied to any other State or to the subjects of any other State. The Convention with China does not alter the amount of the Thibetan indemnity in any way.

  Pentonville Warders Grievances.
  MR. WARDLE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that on the visit of His Majesty's Inspector of Prisons to Pentonville on the 7th and 8th of February last an entry was made in the inspector's minute book that no
  †See (4) Debates, clii., 771.
  554
  officers fell out of the ranks to make complaints, and that such entry was endorsed by the governor of the prison; and whether, seeing that some twelve or thirteen officers so fell out and preferred complaints, he will say what he proposes to do in the matter.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (MR. GLADSTONE,): The facts are as stated in the hon. Member's Question, except that as I understand only six officers fell out, and that the governor of a prison does not endorse entries in the inspector's book, but merely notes any instructions it may contain. The explanation is that the inspector was specially engaged during the afternoon of this day on a Committee which was sitting at Pentonville to inquire into certain matters relating to the prisoners' clothing and property. The chief warder accordingly was not able to communicate to the inspector that certain officers desired to see him, until 5.30 p.m. In the meantime the inspector, not being aware that any officer desired to see him, had made the entry in the book referred to. He saw the officers immediately, but by inadvertence omitted to delete the original entry in the book. The inspector acquainted the Commissioners on the following day that certain officers had made representations to him on the subject of their hours of duty, etc.

  The Invasion of Continental Gipsies.
  MR. COCHRANE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that a band of about fifty-four German gipsies arrived by different stoamers at Leith on April 2nd, distributed in such numbers in each vessel as to evade the regulations of The Aliens Act, 1905, as amended by him, and under which the number of steerage passengers necessary to constitute a vessel an immigrant ship was raised from twelve to twenty; whether a similar band of gipsies, numbering twenty-six, reached West Hartlepool about April 26th, and were refused permission to land under the Act; whether, seeing that the arrival of gipsies has caused uneasiness to the inhabitants of those counties of Scotland through which they have been wandering for the past few weeks, he will say whether constables

  555
  have been obliged to be on duty day and night to watch these gipsies and escort them from county to county; and whether the Government propose to take any, and, if so, what steps to bring undesirable immigrants of this class under the provisions of the Act. The hon. Gentleman, in putting the Question, said several points were answered on the previous day, and he would only trouble the right hon. Gentleman with the fresh points.
  MR. GLADSTONE: It is the fact that on or about the date mentioned and since then several parties of aliens, known as German gipsies, have arrived at Leith and elsewhere. They have come in numbers not exceeding twenty, and on non-immigrant ships, so that they are not subject to inspection under the Act. A party of alien passengers believed to be of the same character and numbering twenty-six also arrived on April 26th at West Hartlepool, and were not permitted to land, as that is not an immigration port. As regards the fact that those of the gipsies who have landed in Scotland appear to have taken care to evade the provisions of the Act by coming in parties nor exceeding twenty, I may point out that the same evasion was possible, with only a little more trouble, when the number was fixed at twelve. I have set on foot inquiries into this matter, and when I have obtained full information I shall consider without delay what steps, if any, it may be necessary for me to take for the purpose of restricting the further arrival of such aliens. As regards the measures taken for dealing with those of them who have already landed in this country, I would refer to the Answer to a similar Question which was given yesterday by my right hon. friend the Secretary for Scotland.
  MR. COCHRANE: Then steps will be taken to prevent an evasion of the intentions of the Act?
  MR. GLADSTONE: When I have ascertained the facts I will answer that Question.

  Dangerous Trades—;Home Office Rules.
  MR. VIVIAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the
  556
  Home Department, whether he could see his way to lay upon the Table a Statement showing to which dangerous trades rules and regulations have been applied by the Home Office.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Yes, Sir; I shall be happy to do so, and I hope at the same time to furnish information showing what is the present position with regard to each of the trades which have formed the subject of an inquiry.

  Aliens Act.
  SIR WILLIAM BULL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he proposes to move any amendments on the Committee stage of the Aliens Bill.
  MR. GLADSTONE: No, Sir.

  Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Goods Porters.
  MR. HUDSON: On behalf of the hon. Member for Derby I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has now received the Return of the number of hours worked by the goods porters employed by the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company, at Goole, during the months of October, November, and December, 1905; and, if so, will he publish it.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. KEARLEY,): The Board of Trade expect to hear from the Company in a few days.

  Hours of Work of Railway Signalmen.
  MR. HUDSON: On behalf of the hon. Member for Derby I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will call for a Return of the number of instances on which eight and ten hours signalmen on the railways of the United Kingdom have been called upon to work more than eight and ten hours, and how many hours per shift, respectively, during the month of February last.
  MR. KEARLEY: Yes, Sir. The Board of Trade will take steps to obtain a Return of the nature desired by my hon. friend.

  Small Dwellings Act.
  MR. SEARS: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will state the total number of advances made by local authorities under the Small Dwellings Act, 1899, to the present time, distinguishing between those in the county of London and the rest of the kingdom.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN BURNS,): As regards London, I am informed that the total number of advances made by the County Council under the Act up to the end of 1905 was ten. Advances have, I believe, also been made by some of the Motropoltitan Borough Councils, but I do not know the number. As regards England and Wales, excluding London, the only information in my possession relates to cases of application by local authorities to the Local Government Board for sanction to loans under the Act. The total number of these applications up to the end of 1905 was ninety-seven.
  MR. CROOKSasked whether the Act had done much to prevent overcrowding.
  MR. BURNS: From these figures I should say not.

  Street Improvements in Newcastle-on- Tyne.
  MR. HUDSON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he has seen the Report of the inquiry held by Mr. H. Percy Boulnois, M.I.C.E., Inspector of the Department, into an application made by the City Council of Newcastle-on-Tyne for leave to borrow £7,665 for works of street improvements, wherein the said inspector stated that the Board would not sanction the loan if the corporation regular staff were to be employed on the work, but if special men were employed for the purpose the loan might be granted; and can he state the reason of this order, if such order has been given.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: The view taken by the Local Government Board is that the wages of workmen permanently employed by a local authority should not be paid out of borrowed money, and
  558
  consequently it is their practice to exclude from the amount to be borrowed for works proposed to be executed by the authority any sums which would be paid in respect of such wages. In the present instance, I understand from the inspector's Report that he thinks that each of the intended works will be carried out by gangs specially employed for the purpose. If this course is adopted, there will be no objection to including their remuneration in the loan.
  MR. HUDSON: Will this rule in any way prevent municipal corporations from doing their own work?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: Cortainly not. It is drawn up in the interest of sound equitable finance.

  Provincial Postmen's Allowances.
  MR. CLYNES: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that an official promise was made in March, 1905, to pay special allowances, not exceeding 3s. per week, to provincial postmen for performing various mail bag night duties, and that those allowances have not yet boon paid to a number of men who have been performing the specified duties since April of last year; and, if so, will steps be taken to pay the allowance to the men concerned from the time they have performed the duties.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,): I am aware of the promise referred to, and in the majority of cases the allowances are now being paid. In those cases which are still under consideration the allowances, when granted, will of course date from April 1st, 1905.

  Education Question—;Column B. of the Register.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education, what compensation, if any, will be afforded to those students who have incurred expense and have deferred the commencement of their professional career with a view to qualifying for a place on Column B. of the Register, which is now to be abolished.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. BIRRELL,): The Board are prepared, on the abolition of the Register, to take steps to repay the fees paid by students for registration. The additional attainments obtained by students with a view to qualifying for a place on Column B. of the Register are, I should have thought, likely to be equally valuable to them in their professional career, even though the Register is abolished, and I do not consider that any compensation is due to them.

  Secondary School Teachers.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education, whether he has considered the probable effect upon the secondary training colleges of the proposed abolition of the Register, and the consequent withdrawal of the inducement which the Register offered to those who intend to teach in secondary schools to undergo a course of training for their profession; and whether he proposes to take any steps to encourage such training.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Board of Education have considered what effects the proposed abolition of the Register is likely to have upon the existing schemes of training for secondary school teachers, and they are proposing to take steps which they believe will be effective in encouraging the continuance and further development of such schemes.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONasked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that the entries both for secondary training colleges and diplomas were already diminished in number in consequence of the proposal.
  MR. BIRRELL: I was not aware of that fact.

  School Endowment.
  MR. CREMER: I wish to ask the President of the Board of Education, if he will state how many endowments were inquired into and dealt with by the Endowed Schools Commission before that body ceased to exist; what was the total value of the endowments dealt with; and how were the funds appropriated.
  MR. BIRRELL: The powers and jurisdiction of the Endowed Schools Com-
  560
  mission have been taken over by the Board of Education, and the work formerly carried on by that Commission has been continued without a break, so that the hon. Member's Question practically amounts to an inquiry as to the total amount of endowments which can be held to have been, or to be, subject to the operation of the Endowed Schools Acts. It has been estimated that the total annual income from such endowments is somewhere about £735,000. It is impossible to state in answer to a Question how such part of these funds as have been dealt with under the Endowed Schools Acts have been allocated,, whether by the Endowed Schools Commission or this Board, as the schemes under which they have been allotted number several thousands and have every variety of purpose.

  Non-provided Schools and the Four-fifths Clause.
  MR. LANE-FOX: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education how many non-provided schools would be in a position, owing to local conditions of population, to take advantage of the four-fifths Clause of the Education Bill, and how many, owing to the 5,000 limit, would be precluded from taking advantage of such facilities.
  MR. BIRRELL: I have nothing as yet to add to the Answer which I gave to a Question on this subject on Monday last from the hon. Member for South Hants,† but I hope to be able to supply the figures at the end of the week.

  Vaccination of Teachers.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he is now in a position to state whether he can allow local education authorities to use their discretion regarding the vaccination of teachers.
  MR. BIRRELL: I am proposing to insert in the Board's Regulations a provision under which vaccination will not, so far as the Board are concerned, be required of any intending teacher who may state to the Board when applying for recognition that he has conscientious objections to being vaccinated. It will
  † See Col. 246.

  561
  rest with the local authority to decide in each case whether they shall employ such a teacher. The Board will keep a record of any teachers who have not been vaccinated.
  MR. ADKINSasked whether the same discretion would be given to local authorities in respect of pupil teachers entering training colleges within the area of such authorities.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he thought that was the intention.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Does a similar discretion exist in any other civilised country in the world?
  MR. BIRRELL: I am not a judge of civilisation.

  Secondary School Capitation Grants.
  MR. W. JOHNSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether any of the head-masters or head-mistresses of the centres or secondary schools in which pupil teachers and probationers are instructed receive capitation fees on such pupils; and if so, whether, in view of the Regulations for the Instruction and Training of Pupil Teachers, Articles 15 (3) and 23, he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  MR. BIRRELL: I understand that in many secondary schools in which pupil teachers and probationers are instructed the head-teachers are paid partly by a fixed salary and partly by a capitation grant, in respect of each scholar or pupil teacher admitted. This course does not appear to be contrary to any of the provisions of Section 15 of the Regulations for the Instruction and Training of Pupil Teachers. But if the hon. Member has any particular case in which he believes irregularities exist, I will have it investigated if he will communicate it to me.

  Fees for Swearing-in Magistrates.
  MR. COWAN: To ask Mr. Attorney-General whether any county or borough official is entitled to ask for any payment from a person appointed to be a justice of the peace therein; and, if so, what is the scale of payments, and for what service.
  THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON,): Clerks of the Peace can charge fees for administering oaths to justices on appointment. A fee of £2, to be reduced to 5 shillings in the case of an ex-officio justice, is the amount suggested in the model table recommended by the Home Office, but it is impossible to say what is the fee customarily charged.

  Sewage Farms and Fruit Culture.
  MR. H. H. MARKS: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether any action has been taken, or is contemplated, with reference to the recommendation of the Departmental Committee on the fruit industry that an inquiry should be instituted into the alleged practice of growing fruit on sewage farms, and the effect of such a practice on the public health.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: We have been in communication with the Local Government Board on this subject, and we are informed that no instance of disease attributed to fruit grown on sewage farms is known in the Medical Department of the Board. The information in the possession of the Board indicates that fruit is very seldom grown on sewage farms in this country, and there is no confirmation of the suggestion-that injury to health is caused by fruit so grown.

  Cattle Diseases in Argentina and the United States.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth disease are at present rife in Argentina and the United States of America; and, if so, whether the Board of Agriculture intends to prohibit the landing of cattle from America for slaughter at the ports.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: We have no information that pleuro-pneumonia is prevalent either in Argentina or the United States. Foot-and-mouth disease is known to be prevalent in Argentina, but no case has been reported from the United States since 1903. The importation of cattle from Argentina is

  563
  already prohibited, but similar action is not necessary in the case of cattle from the United States.

  The Zoological Gardens.
  MR. SEAVERNS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what is the acreage of land covered by the Zoological Gardens; what is the rent paid to the Government for its use; and what is the estimated rent which would be procurable for the same if offered in the open market.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA,): The acreage of the Gardens is approximately 30½ acres and the rent paid to the Commissioners of Woods is £358 Os. 9d. I have no means of estimating what rent would be procurable in the open market.
  MR. SEAVERNS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if, in view of the smallness of the rent which the proprietors of the Zoological Gardens pay to the Government for the use of the land occupied by them, he will suggest to them the propriety of opening the Gardens to the public during certain hours in the week, preferably on Sundays, either without charge or at a nominal charge for admittance, so that the educational advantages of the Gardens may be more generally enjoyed than at present.
  MR. MCKENNA: I do not think under all the circumstances that the course proposed would be at all desirable. The ordinary charge for admission to the Zoological Gardens is 1s. for adults and 6d. for children, but on Mondays throughout the year, on four days at Easter and again at Whitsuntide, and on two days at Christmas the charge is only 6d. Specially reduced rates are given throughout the year to excursion and school parties, whilst children from the public elementary schools, in charge of their teachers, are admitted on five mornings in each week at the rate of 1d.
  MR. SEAVERNS: Has the Secretary to the Treasury been in communication with the Society?
  MR. MCKENNA: Yes, Sir.
  MR. WARDLE: How long is it since the rent was fixed?
  MR. MCKENNA: I must ask for notice of that.

  Ex-Cabinet Ministers' Pensions.
  MR. G. H. FABER: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will state under what circumstances pensions are granted to ex-Cabinet Ministers, with the names of the present recipients and the amounts they individually receive.
  MR. MCKENNA: The First Lord has asked me to reply to this Question. These pensions are granted in accordance with the provisions of the Political Offices Pension Act, 1869 (32 and 33 Viet., cap. 60). The particulars asked for in the latter part of the Question are as follows:—;First-class.—;The right hon. Viscount Cross, £2,000; the right hon. Lord George Hamilton, £2,000. Second-class.—;The right hon. Henry Chaplin, £1,200; the right hon. Sir John E. Gorst, £1,200; the right hon. Lord Balfour of Burleigh, £1,200; the right hon. Gerald W. Balfour, £1,200.

  Appropriation of Charity Funds.
  MR. CREMER: I wish to ask the hon. Member for the Elland Division, as representing the Charity Commissioners, if he can state the number of charities and endowments which have been inquired into by the Charity Commissioners; what is the total value of the charities and endowments which have been inquired into; how the funds have been appropriated; the number of charities and endowments which, in the opinion of the Charity Commissioners, remain to be investigated; and how long they calculate it will be before their labours terminate.
  MR. TREVELYAN: Under the Endowed Schools Acts, since 1901 only exceptional cases can be dealt with by the Commissioners. The jurisdiction under the Charitable Trusts Acts is not, as the hon. Member is aware, of a terminable character. It is not possible to give the information desired as to number of inquiries and particulars of Endowments, since this would in fact involve an epitome of the labours of the Commissioners during half a century; but the Index recently prepared, referred to in their current Report, records upwards of 15,000 schemes, showing in each case the place, name of

  565
  endowment, date of scheme, and Act conferring jurisdiction.
  MR. CREMER: I want to know how the money has been appropriated. Is the hon. Gentleman aware there is a strong feeling among the people that endowments appropriated by the Charity Commissioners have been taken from the poor and utilised for purposes not of the general profit?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I have said that the information may be obtained on reference to the records.

  Stornoway Fisheries.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state what housing accommodation is provided at Stornoway for the influx of girls specially engaged on work in connection with the fishings, during the herring fishing season; and will steps be taken to prevent overcrowding in the sleeping rooms.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,): This matter has been under observation since 1899, and it is reported that the by-laws as to houses let in lodgings have been more strictly enforced and overcrowding has been diminished. The Local Government Board for Scotland has now issued a circular to thirty-four different Burgh and District Local Authorities, including the Burgh of Stornoway, asking that a special inspection be made when the fishing season is at its height in the respective localities and a report sent to them.

  Fishery Cruiser "Norna."
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, having regard to the fact that the Fishery Board cruiser "Norna" was sold, on the ground that she was unsuitable for the service, will he state how the sum of £550 derived from her sale has been disposed of.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The sum derived from the sale of the Fishery Board cruiser "Norna" was placed to the credit of the Marine Deposit Account.

  Lewis Industrial Training Grants.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state what sum it
  566
  is proposed to expend out of the General Aid Grant, under Section I., Sub-section D, of the Education (Scotland) Minute of March 19th last, in providing industrial training to boys and girls resident in the Island of Lewis, and, seeing that the Minute has only recently been issued, will he state why the period within which applications under this section must be lodged is limited to May 1st; and whether he can see his way to have the time extended.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The amount of grant to be allocated under Section I. D. of the Minute of March 19th last cannot be determined till all the applications under this section of the Minute have been received and considered. As any balance of the Vote remaining at March 31st, 1907, must be surrendered, it is important that applications for a share in the grant should be made at as early a date as possible, but applications received after May 1st will be considered if reasonable cause for the delay is shown.

  Scottish Teachers—;Training Regulations.
  MR. SMEATON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland have been consulted in the framing of the draft regulations for the training of teachers which are, it is understood, shortly to be laid upon the Table of the House.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The draft regulations referred to, should they be laid on the Table of the House, will be so laid by the authority and direction, properly signified, of the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland.

  Constable Anderson, Royal Irish Constabulary.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now in a position to state under what circumstances Constable Anderson, formerly of Kiltimagh, county Mayo, was recently removed from county Tyrone to county Meath.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BRYCE,): It would be contrary to practice and undesirable, for disciplinary and other reasons, to disclose the circumstances in which a

  567
  constable is transferred from one district to another.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, as a matter of fact, charges similar to those which caused this constable's removal from another place were the cause of this removal?
  MR. BRYCE: I have no knowledge of that.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Is it not the fact that on the occasion of his last removal efforts were made to prove that he was persecuted on account of religion? Cannot the right hon. Gentleman tell us something about the latest performances of this Gay Lothario?
  MR. BRYCE: I think the time has come when what happened years ago might well be dropped.

  Irish Evicted Tenants.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any special extra staff of inspectors, in connection with the work of reinstating evicted tenants in Ireland, has been sanctioned by the Treasury; and, if not, will he explain why; and whether the Irish Government intend to take any steps to expedite the work of reinstating evicted tenants.
  MR. BRYCE: The Treasury have sanctioned the employment of six assistant inspectors for the purpose of inquiring into the cases of evicted tenants, and the necessary appointments will be made with the least possible delay.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of evicted tenants reinstated in their old holdings, and the number placed in new farms, since January 1st, 1906, and the amount of money which has been issued by way of free grant, and of loan, respectively, in connection with those cases of reinstatement.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners estimate, from the information available to them, that 101 evicted tenants were reinstated in their former holdings between January 1st and March 31st, 1906. In addition, one evicted tenant
  568
  was provided with a new holding. Free grants, amounting to £525, and advances for improvements, amounting to £100, have been issued, or are in course of issue, in connection with the reinstatement of these evicted tenants. It is hoped that proceedings will now be sensibly accelerated.
  MR. DILLON: Were any of these evicted tenants re-instated by the landlords, or all through the agency of the Estates Commissioners?
  MR. BRYCE: Judging from the information supplied me, they were reinstated by the Estates Commissioners. I will, however, inquire if the hon. Member wishes.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: At this rate of progress how many years will it take to settle the evicted tenants' question?
  MR. BRYCE: The hon. Member knows as well as I do that there were causes in existence till lately which prevented progress being made.
  MR. LONSDALE: How many of the tenants re-instated immediately sold their holdings?
  MR. BRYCE: I have no information as to that, but I should think it extremely improbable that more than the smallest number did.

  Irish Land Advance Inspectors.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will an inspection and comparison be made of the Reports furnished by inspectors on behalf of the Estates Commissioners, with a view to identifying those in whose connection purchasers are now in default discovering substantial differences between the results and those which would have been reached under the present instructions, making amends wherever substantial injustice has been done, and dispensing with the services of inspectors whose Reports led to that injustice.
  MR. BRYCE: I must remind the hon. Member that when once an advance has been made, no alteration in the amount

  569
  of the annuity can be made on the grounds that the sum advanced is in excess of the value of the holding. The Estates Commissioners, however, inform me that if they should have reason to believe that any serious errors in reporting as to security were attributable to any of their inspectors, they would make such inquiries and take such action as they should consider necessary.

  Irish Land Purchase—;Sales by Collusion.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will the Estates Commissioners inquire and ascertain all the cases on the estates already sold in which tenancies had been created by collusion between landlord and grazier for the purpose of extracting money under the Land Act of 1903, using upland previously untenanted and thus preventing the distribution of such land, which was one of the purposes of that Act; will the services of any inspector, who by his report facilitated such a transaction, be dispensed with; and what precautions will the Commissioners take to prevent the recurrence of such abuses.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that they require the date of the creation of all tenancies created after January 1st, 1901, to be disclosed, and they have exercised and will continue to exorcise the discretion given to them by the Act in judging of the bona fides of such tenancies and of the amount of advance which should be made in respect of them. The instructions to inspectors (paragraph 16) require the necessary information to be given as to the wants and circumstances of other persons in the neighbourhood, and the Commissioners are not aware of the occurrence of any such case as is referred to in the Question.

  The Sinn Fein Association—;Views of Mr. Kelly, J.P.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. P. J. Kelly, J.P., at a meeting of the Kilcreede branch of an association known as the Sinn Fein Association, held for the purpose of honouring and perpetuating the memory of a man named Daly, who was hanged for shooting a land agent, said he was
  570
  proud to see so many rebel men present to commemorate the anniversary of the execution of the man Daly, and that, after asking the Dublin Castle note-taker to take down carefully what he said, he declared that he and his audience were prepared to act in the same way as Antony Daly; whether, in view of the fact that Mr. Kelly holds His Majesty's commission of the peace, and of the nature of the speech in question, the Government intends to take any action in the matter; and whether he will draw the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the matter, with a view to the removal of Mr. Kelly from the magistracy.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed by the police authorities that the meeting in question was held for the purpose of raising funds for placing a tombstone upon the grave of Antony Daly. I have not been able to ascertain the precise offence for which Daly was executed in the year 1820. A newspaper report of the time says it was "for being a Ribbonman," and an official letter described it as being "for an attack on a house." I am informed that it is as a Ribbonman that Daly is locally remembered. I am not aware that any police shorthand note-taker was present on the occasion referred to. As regards the latter part of the Question, the matter lies within the jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor and not of the Irish Government.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is impossible for this House to approach the Lord Chancellor except through the right hon Gentleman?
  MR. BRYCE: It is no business of the Irish Government to interfere with the Lord Chancellor's discretion.

  Mr. W. Daly's Dunsandle Estate.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the estate of Mr. W. Daly, of Dunsandle, near Loughrea, has been sold to the tenants; that Patrick Carr, a tenant on that estate who took a loading part in the agitation for the sale of the estate, instead of having his former holding sold to him, has been given a large holding on the estate of Captain Cowan, near Eyre Court, county Galway,

  571
  nearly twenty miles from his former holding; will he explain why was Carr's old holding not sold to him, and on what grounds, and under what authority and in pursuance of what section in the Land Purchase Act of 1903 have the Estates Commissioners acted in selling to him a holding on another estate when it was possible for him to purchase his own holding.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed that the estate referred to has been sold to the tenants under an Originating Request lodged with the Estates Commissioners on August 31st, 1905. For the purpose of facilitating the resale and redistribution of the estate, the vendors arranged with Mr. Patrick J. Carr to surrender a holding of 289 acres on the estate on payment to him by the vendors of the sum of £1,000; and this area was purchased by the Estates Commissioners as other lands in the occupation of the vendors, for the purpose of enlarging holdings on the estate. Subsequently an advance for the purchase of a "parcel" on the estate of Stephen J. Cowan, county Galway, was made to Mr. Carr, under the provisions of Section 2, Sub-section (1) (d) of the Act of 1903.

  Irish Agricultural Department Contributions to Congested Districts.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of the resolution and correspondence from the County Kerry Joint Technical Instruction Committee, dated February 16th, with reference to the contributions from the Department of Agriculture and the Congested Districts Boards to technical schemes in the congested districts of the county; and whether he will request the Commission of Inquiry into the working of the Department of Agriculture to look closely into this matter, so that effect may be given to the representations which have frequently been made on the subject by the Kerry County Council.
  MR. BRYCE: I have received the documents referred to. The Question whether the Committee of Inquiry into the working of the Department will deal with the subject mentioned is one for the discretion of the Committee, to whom any representations on the subject may
  572
  be addressed, either directly or through the Irish Office.

  Irish Department of Agriculture—;Return of Local Contributions.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will the Return of local contributions ordered by the House for the purpose of discussion on the Vote for the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland be ready in time for that purpose; will he explain the reason for delaying or witholding it; and will he say who is responsible for the fact that for more than a fortnight after the House had given the order for this purpose no steps had been taken to prepare the information.
  MR. BRYCE: The Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction will complete this Return without delay as soon as the necessary information has been received from the local bodies concerned. There is, I am informed, no foundation for the suggestion that the information is being withheld or delayed. The Order of the House reached me on April 6th and I at once forwarded it through my Dublin office to the Department. As soon as the Department were satisfied that the required particulars could not be fully supplied without communicating with the local authorities, circulars were prepared and issued to those bodies on April 14th. Ninety-seven out of the 115 local bodies have supplied the necessary information, and the Department are pressing the remaining eighteen for replies.

  Irish Agricultural Inquiry.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the Departmental Inquiry into the working of the Board of Agriculture, whether facilities will be given to professional representatives of the veterinary staff to give evidence.
  MR. BRYCE: I have already stated that it was never intended that grievances of members of the staff should be dealt with by the Committee. If the Committee think that evidence as to the working of the Department is needed from the veterinary staff, they will no doubt call for it. I cannot interfere with

  573
  the discretion of the Committee in the matter.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will consider the advisability of appointing an eminent independent member of the veterinary profession to the Commission of Inquiry into the Department of Agriculture, in view of the importance of the veterinary branch to Ireland and the number of matters of a veterinary nature carried out by the Department generally; and will he instruct that professional officers of the Department are to be called to give evidence before the Commission.
  MR. BRYCE: It would not, in my opinion, be desirable now to increase the Committee, which has already begun its work, by appointing a member of the veterinary profession. In reply to the latter part of the Question, I beg to refer to the reply which I have now given to the similar Question of the hon. Member for South Down.

  Public Meetings in County Sligo.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a public meeting to denounce a farmer named Cuffe was announced as intended to be held at Camcuill, county Sligo, on April 22nd, and that, although the meeting was prevented by the police from being held at Camcuill, it was in fact held at Dromore West in the neighbourhood, and that two hon. Members of this House attended and spoke at the meeting; will he say whether the Irish Government has a shorthand report of the speeches at the meeting and the language used, inciting outrages towards Cuffe; whether, seeing that the only offence of which Cuffe is alleged to be guilty is that he recently purchased a small estate sold by the devisee in trust, he will say if it has been necessary to afford Cuffe police protection; how many police were employed in preventing the meeting being held at Camcuill; and who is to pay the expense of their employment.
  MR. BRYCE: A public meeting was summoned for Camcuill, but the placard convening it contained no reference to the case of Mr. Cuffe. The meeting was,
  574
  in fact, held at Dromore West. No shorthand report of the speeches made at that place was taken by the police, and the Inspector-General informs me that no speeches inciting to outrage against Mr. Cuffe were delivered. It has not been found necessary to afford police protection to Mr. Cuffe. A force of seventy police was assembled at Camcuill to preserve order and prevent any possible attempt at intimidation. This force was drawn from the county establishment, and no expense, save that of the usual travelling and subsistence allowances, was incurred. This expense will be defrayed from the Constabulary Vote.

  Dr. Ellis's Copyrighted Books.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Dr. Ellis, Local Government Board Auditor, has copyrighted books, forms, and ledgers, which are used by public bodies under the jurisdiction of the Local Government Board in Ireland; whether he derives any, and, if so, what, profit from the sale of such books, forms, and ledgers; and whether the books, forms, and ledgers were devised by Dr. Ellis.
  MR. BRYCE: The Local Government Board have no knowledge that Dr. Ellis, or any other member of their audit staff, has copyrighted any such books and forms as are referred to. The forms of account prescribed by the Board have not been copyrighted, and there is no obligation on local bodies to use any other books or forms of account. The system of book-keeping proscribed for local authorities was not devised by Dr. Ellis, but by the Local Government Board with the assistance of their audit staff generally.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to an advertisement published by a Dublin firm in which they speak of Dr. Ellis's copyrighted books now used by almost every public body in Ireland? Is the official who supplied this Answer the one who told the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor that these books never were copyrighted?
  MR. BRYCE: I cannot say. I know nothing of the advertisement.

  Discretion of Estates Commissioners.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he will explain how the statement of the Estates Commissioners that they can exercise no discretion as regards price in cases of sale within the zones is to be reconciled with the decision in the Blake-Foster case, which was to the effect that they did possess and had properly exercised such a discretion; and will the Commissioners be instructed to apply the rule in that case to all cases of excessive price and of mala fides.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY,): The decision in the case of the Blake-Foster Estate established only that the Estates Commissioners were entitled to refuse to declare any particular lands an estate on the ground that the annuities on advances for the purchase of holdings proposed to be comprised in the estate could not be duly paid, or on the ground that the holdings were congested and required improvement, and that the boundaries were confused. If, however, a holding, under a judicial tenancy is included in lands declared by the Commissioners to be an estate for the purpose of the Act, then, provided the price comes within the zones, the Commissioners hold that they have no discretion as to the price and are bound to make the advance.

  Irish Poor Rate Collectors.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland under what statutory authority the Local Government Board claim to have the power to prescribe disqualifications for poor rate collectors in Irish counties; and whether such power has been conferred on them by statute.
  MR. CHEERY: The Local Government Board claim to have power to prescribe the qualifications for poor rate collectors in Irish counties under Sections 31, 32, 33, 73, and 94 of the Poor Belief (Ireland) Act 1838, and Section 83 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act 1898. The qualifications are prescribed by Article 86 of a general order issued by the Board on December 17th, 1904.
  MR. DILLON: The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the latter part of the Question.
  MR. CHEERY: That is a legal Question I am not prepared to Answer without longer notice?
  MR. DILLON: Then I give a week's notice.

  Irish Land Purchase—;Treasury Interventions.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland does the Treasury intervene in cases under the Land Act of 1903 only in opposition to the State and in the interests of the landlords; is the jurisdiction of the Treasury ousted by collusion between a landlord and his tenants for the purpose of extracting public money from a State Department; has the attention of the Treasury been directed to the fact that public money is now being advanced indiscriminately to buy from landlords the occupation, interest, and permanent improvements which are, in law and in equity, the property of the tenant; will he explain why no action has yet been taken to reverse the decision in King-Harman and Hayes, in which a woman, under landlord influence, bought with public money houses certified by the Estates Commissioners to have been already her own property; are the Estates Commissioners bound by that decision; are they applying it in other cases; and is it proposed, by appeal or by legislation, to protect purchasers and the State from the consequences of paying public money for property which belongs not to the so-called vendors but to the so-called purchasers.
  In putting the Question, the hon. Member asked Mr. SPEAKER if he could rule that it should be answered by the Irish Minister to whom it was addressed, instead of by an English Minister dependent on an Irish official for the necessary information.
  MR. SPEAKER: I am afraid I cannot answer that, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman will receive a satisfactory Answer by whomsoever the Question may be answered.
  MR. GINNELL: Then I respectfully address the Question to the Attorney-General for Ireland.
  MR. MCKENNA: My right hon. friend has asked me to reply, but of

  577
  course if the hon. Member does not wish for the Answer I will not give it.
  MR. GINNELL: Let me have the Answer, please.
  MR. MCKENNA: There is, of course, no foundation for the imputation contained in the first part of the hon. Member's Question. The entire Question appears to turn upon the decision in the case referred to—;King-Harman and Hayes—;in which the Treasury were not parties or represented in any way, and to imply that in this case there was collusion between vendor and purchaser with the object of extracting public money. In view of the finding of the Judicial Commissioner that there was no suspicion of fraud in this case, and that there was sufficient security for the advance, there was no ground for the intervention of the Treasury and I see no reason for any action on the part of the Department. With reference to the fifth and sixth Questions, I assume that the Estates Commissioners are bound by all judicial decisions. I have no information as to whether they are applying the decision referred to in other cases.
  MR. GINNELL: How does the hon. Gentleman defend what in ordinary business would be a gross sale to a woman of rights which already belonged to her.
  MR. MCKENNA: The Treasury act under statute, and having no power to go outside, they were satisfied that the property in question was sufficient security for the amount advanced.
  MR. GINNELL: Why do the Treasury interfere as against tenants and not as against landlords?
  MR. MCKENNA: I have nothing to add to my Answers.

  Trade Disputes Bill.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can inform the House what Amendments the Government intend to propose in Clause 4 of the Trade Disputes Bill; and, if not, when this information will be forthcoming.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN,): When the Committee stage is reached the House will be in possession of the proposals of the Government.

  Ecclesiastical Discipline Commission.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline will be able to issue their Report.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Report of the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline in the Church of England, and the print of the evidence taken by them, will be ready for and distributed to Members in time to be considered before the discussions on the Education Bill are taken either on the Second Reading or in Committee.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have no further information since the 22nd of February,† when I stated that I understood from the Chairman of the Commission that the Report would probably be completed by Whitsuntide; and I need hardly remind the hon. Member that the Government have no control over the proceedings of a Royal Commission.
  MR. SLOAN: Has any inquiry been made since this Question was placed on the Paper?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: No, I do not think so in view of inquiry having so recently been made of the Chairman of the Commission.

  San Franciscan Disaster.
  MR. SEAVERNS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the unprecedented character of the disaster which, at San Francisco, has fallen upon a nation closely allied to us by ties of common interest and friendship, he will grant facilities for the passage of a Resolution expressing the deep sympathy of the Members of this House with the people of the United States in their misfortune.
  † See (4) Debates, clii., 519.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The Government at once conveyed officially their deep regret and sympathy when this calamity occurred, thereby giving expression to the universal feeling in this country. It is not customary for the House to pass such a Resolution as my hon. friend suggests.

  British Shipping—;War Guarantee
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if it is the intention of the Government to appoint a Committee at an early date to investigate the question of a national guarantee for British shipping in war.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes, Sir, a Committee to consider this Question is in process of formation, and an announcement as to its composition and the terms of reference will shortly be made.

  WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION [EXPENSES].
  Committee to consider of authorising the payment, out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, of remuneration and expenses incurred under any Act of the present session to consolidate and amend the Law with respect to Compensation to Workmen for injuries suffered in the course of their employment, and of Compensation to Workmen employed by or under the Crown in pursuance of such act (King's Recommendation signified), To-morrow.—;(Mr. Whiteley.)

  SELECTION [STANDING COMMITTEES].
  Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONreported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from the Standing Committee on Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, in respect of the Workmen's Compensation Bill:—;Mr. Ellis Griffith and Mr. Lehmann; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Mond and Mr. Spicer.
  Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONfurther repotted, That they had discharged the following Members from the Standing Committee on Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, in respect of the Workmen's Compensation Bill:—;Sir Francis Lowe and Mr. Flynn: and had
  580
  appointed in substitution:—;Mr. F. E. Smith and Mr. Edward Dunn.
  Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONfurther reported; That they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, in respect of the Workmen's Compensation Bill:—;Mr. Swift MacNeill: and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Havelock Wilson.
  Reports to lie upon the Table.

  ELECTRIC POWER AND SUPPLY BILLS.
  Ordered, That the Memorandum by the Commissioners of Works on Electric Power and Supply Bills be referred to the Committees on the St. Pancras Electricity Bill, the Twickenham and Teddington Electric Supply Bill, the London Southern Tramways Bill, and the Edinburgh Corporation Bill.—;(Mr. Harcourt.)
NEW BILL.
  INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
  "To amend the Indian Railways Act, 1894," presented by Mr. Ellis; supported by Mr. Secretary Morley; to be read a second time upon Thursday, May 10th, and to be printed. [Bill 186].

PLURAL VOTING.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. HARCOURT,): It is my duty to ask the leave of the House to introduce, under the Ten Minutes' Rule, a Bill to limit the abuse and anomaly of certain classes of plural voting. In doing so I shall adhere strictly to the imaginary time limit imposed by this non-existent rule, and I will not, therefore, waste precious moments in a superfluous request for that generous indulgence which the House always so readily extends to a new Member making his maiden speech. The prohibition of plural voting has been enforced by Parliament for many years in our municipal and county council elections and also in the Parliamentary register, so far as the duplicate qualifications fell within the

581
same constituency. The Government propose to extend those provisions to the whole country for Parliamentary purposes. If I thought this Bill demanded any apology—;which I do not—;I should put forward the excuse which you, Sir, dignified by its use from the Chair in defence of a breach of procedure that it is "only a little one." I do not wish specially to minimise this Bill, because de minimis non curat lex, and I hope in future the law will have much care of this very necessary and desirable amendment to it. But though happily and conveniently diminutive in form, it will, I hope, be extensive in effect; and I think, perhaps, its value will be in inverse ratio to its size. It does not aim at one vote one value, because it is not a redistribution Bill, but it does secure one man one value. It does not give to every man a vote, because it is not a franchise Bill, but it secures that one man shall exercise one vote only. It is not an enfranchising and not a disfranchising Bill. [An HON. MEMBER: Surely.] No, because it leaves to every man all the qualifications which he at present possesses all over the country, though it limits the caprice and redundancy of their exercise. It removes that multiplication of electoral power which comes from the geographical distribution of real estate, and sometimes from the vagaries of boundary commissioners operating upon small areas. The scandal has become more obvious and more intolerable since the Redistribution Act of 1884, when the counties were parcelled out into smaller divisions. If we ever come to equal electoral districts with even more fanciful boundaries, the anomaly will be more glaring and more unjustifiable. This Bill does not abolish the property qualification, though much might be said for such a method of procedure. I personally should advocate it in any comprehensive scheme of general reform, because I believe—;though here I speak only for myself—;that the franchise is really and rightly founded upon manhood and not upon property, and I regard residence and ownership as only convenient methods of identification and localisation. But this Bill is only an Amendment and an extension of the existing machinery of the electoral law. Under the present system a voter with duplicate qualifications in the same
582
borough or county division is forbidden by law to exercise more than one of them at a time. The Government desire to extend those provisions to the country as a whole. We propose to make it a similar offence to do in other boroughs and in other county divisions what it is now illegal to do in one. The most effective method, no doubt, of carrying this out, would have been to say that the plural voter, after selecting a locality for the exercise of his vote, should be starred or put in division 3, or on the parochial electors' list, or omitted altogether from the register in the non-selected districts where he has a duplicate qualification But there are two obvious objection to that course. First of all, it would entail a great deal of labour and confusion in the intercommunication of the registration officials all over the country, or in the alternative it would compel the plural voter to take a considerable amount of trouble to divest himself of his redundant qualifications. We do not feel it is either necessary or just to ask this of him. But we do ask of him, and we think we have a right to demand, that he should select once a year, or if indolent or satisfied with the selection, once for life, which of his several votes he will exercise during the ensuing calendar year, and, unless subsequently cancelled by the voter himself, that selection will continue in operation in future years. On receipt of notice from the voter by the proper electoral authorities, he will be marked by some distinguishing letter or symbol in the margin of the register in the selected constituency, as is at present done with duplicate qualifications in the same constituency. We leave the plural voter on the register in all Parliamentary constituencies where he at present has a qualification, but without the distinctive mark which alone entitles him to record his vote. The object of this is that the voter, having the right to vary his selection once a year, should not be put to the risk or trouble of having to reclaim for his vote in a district whore he already possesses a qualification and to which he may wish subsequently to transfer his voting power. All that has to be done by this individual is this; I will take myself as an example; I assume that I am marked to vote in the register for St. George's, Hanover Square. If I wish to change my place of voting, I

583
notify in proper time the authorities at St. George's that I wish no longer to remain a constituent of the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite. In that case the distinctive mark would be deleted from my name there. At the same time I should inform the authorities in South Oxford-shire that in future I wished to vote there, and I should at the proper time acquire in that division the effective symbol in the margin of the register. The method presents no difficulty to any plural voter who is not an illiterate or who cannot once in his life afford a penny stamp. To the property owner who cares so little for his constitutional rights that he omits to make any selection it is possible that this Bill may mean a temporary disfranchisement; but their number is likely to be very few. I do not think they will command much sympathy, and in any case their number is likely to be rapidly reduced by the activity and omniscience of those party agents to whom most of us owe our presence in this House. The difference in the currency of the register in England and Scotland presents a slight difficulty; the method of its solution will be better understood when hon. Members see the text of the Bill. I hope the time may be very near when England and Ireland will assimilate their electoral practice with that of Scotland, and bring into operation on November 1st for all purposes the register which is already in existence at that date throughout the United Kingdom. It is provided in the schedule of this Bill that a question may be put in the polling booth to any suspect voter; and it is also provided, in accordance with the present law, that to ask for a ballot paper without a title to vote shall be regarded as a corrupt practice. Under the Ballot Act of 1872 the attempt to vote or the act of voting twice in the same constituency is treated as personation. We apply the same provision and the same penalty to the attempt to vote elsewhere than in the selected constituency. I know the Bill will not secure the universal assent of the House, and I dare say there are some Members opposite who will wish to misquote some early lines of the Duke of Rutland—;
"Let wealth and commerce, laws and learning, die;
But leave us still our old mobility."
This, with the help of the House, the Government do not intend to do. The
584
time has gone by when the pluralist can command the pity of the public. If he receives common justice in the ease of selection amongst the superfluity of his qualifications, he will have neither ground for sympathy nor cause for complaint. In moving for leave to introduce this Bill I do so in the belief that it will secure a more equable and a more equitable representation of the people as a whole, and that it will remedy the over representation of certain classes, arising not from the amount or the value of their property, but from the geographical accident of its distribution. I beg to move.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to impose a penalty on a Parliamentary elector, registered in more than one constituency, who votes in any constituency except that selected for the purpose"—;(Mr. Harcourt)
SIR WILLIAM ANSON: This Ten Minutes' Rule has of late years shown itself of a somewhat elastic character, but I venture to think no more startling development of it has ever taken place than the introduction of this Bill under it. I should have thought that a measure of this vast constitutional importance, which not merely affects the present distribution of political power but goes to the very root and foundation of our electoral system, would have been introduced by the Prime Minister, with all the pomp and circumstance of a First Reading debate. But we have it brought in by the First Commissioner of Works under the Ten Minutes' Rule. I say that it not merely affects the present distribution of power but it affects also the very root of our system of representation. What has that been in the past? You may found your representation on interest, class, ideas, localities or numbers. Our system has always been the representation of locality. That principle has been observed throughout the various changes of the franchise and of the distribution of power which have taken place during the nineteenth century, and it naturally follows that if a man has a substantial interest in two localities he has a right to a vote in each. That view has never been departed from in the successive changes of our system, and I venture to say that, looked at from that

585
point of view, the right hon. Gentleman's analogy of municipal government and of the municipal voter wholly falls to the ground. Moreover, there have been from time to time efforts to secure the representation of minorities—;to ensure that this House is, what I do not think it is at present, a true representation of the conditions of political opinion throughout the country. Mr. Gladstone, by a process of reasoning which I have never been able to follow, thought that single member constituencies would promote the representation of minorities. That has not been the effect, but at any rate, this measure, whatever else it is worth, will absolutely kill any possibility of the representation of minorities throughout the country. It involves a departure from the system of local representation and an adoption of the system of purely numerical representation. Henceforward neither localities nor the men interested in localities, nor the interests of localities, are to be considered, but the mere number of the voters in these localities, and the logical result is equal electoral districts. The right hon. Gentleman said he proposed to give one man one vote, and he was bold enough to say that there followed from that the result that each man's vote would have one value. But it is not the same value. The value of the individual voter in certain of the small constituencies of the
United Kingdom is very different from the value of the individual voter in some of the overgrown constituencies in certain of the crowded parts of the country. If this measure is to be seriously considered in this House it should be considered as part of a larger scheme of redistribution of seats, and the redressing of all existing inequalities—;as part practically of a scheme of equal electoral districts, which can be adjusted from time to time in accordance with the shifting of population. I will not go into the question of machinery, with which the right hon. Gentleman dealt no doubt with clearness, but not for the purposes of this debate in a manner which affects our action on this side of the House. The real question we have to consider is the question of principle. Are we going to accept, without hesitation and without a division a proposal to recast our whole electoral system, to say nothing of the immediate change in the existing distribution of political power? This we cannot do, and under the circumstances we shall divide against the Bill, and I think, I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that in its subsequent stages it will be carefully considered, if not seriously opposed.
Question put.
The House divided:—;Ayes, 327; Noes, 66. (Division List No. 64.)

AYES

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Blake, Edward

Clynes, J. R.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Boland, John

Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.)

Acland, Francis Dyke

Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

Cobbold, Felix Thornley

Adkins, W. Ryland

Brace, William

Cogan, Denis J.

Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C.

Branch, James

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Agnew, George William

Brigg, John

Cooper, G. J.

Ambrose, Robert

Brooke, Stopford

Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E Grinst'd

Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

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

Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire)

Cory, Clifford John

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert H.

Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen

Cowan, W. H.

Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Cox, Harold

Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

Burke, E. Haviland-

Crean, Eugene

Barker, John

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Cremer, Wiliam Randal

Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

Burnyeat, J. D. W.

Crombie, John William

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Crooks, William

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

Crossley, William J.

Beale, W. P.

Byles, William Pollard

Dalziel, James Henry

Beauchamp, E.

Cameron, Robert

Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Delany, William

Bell, Richard

Carr-Gomm, H. W.

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway

Bellairs, Carlyon

Cawley, Frederick

Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

Benn, John Williams (Devonp't

Cheetham, John Frederick

De war, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

Benn, W, (T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo

Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Billson, Alfred

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

Cleland, J. W.

Dillon, John

Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordsh'e

Clough, W.

Dobson, Thomas W.

Dolan, Charles Joseph

Lamb, Edmund G.(Leominster)

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

Duffy, William J.

Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

Lambert, George

Priestley, W.E.B. (Bradford, E.)

Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

Law, Hugh Alexander

Radford, G. H.

Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

Rainy, A. Rolland

Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Raphael, Herbert H.

Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

Lea, Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

Lehmann, R. C.

Redmond, John E. (Waterford

Elibank, Master of

Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

Redmond, William (Clare)

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Levy, Maurice

Rees, J. D.

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

Renton, Major Leslie

Everett, R. Lacey

Lough, Thomas

Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mptn

Faber, G. H. (Boston)

Lundon, W.

Richardson, A.

Fenwick, Charles

Lupton, Arnold

Ridsdale, E. A.

Ferens, T. R.

Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Ferguson, R. C. Munro

Lyell, Charles Henry

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Findlay, Alexander

Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

Robertson, Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Macdonald, J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs

Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Robertson, Sir G. Scott (B'df'd

Fuller, John Michael F.

MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

Robinson, S.

Fullerton, Hugh

MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Furness, Sir Christopher

M'Callum, John M.

Roche, Augustine (Cork)

Gibb, James (Harrow)

M'Crae, George

Roe, Sir Thomas

Gill, A. H.

M'Kean, John

Rogers, F. E. Newman

Ginnell, L.

M'Kenna, Reginald

Rose, Charles Day

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

M'Killop, W.

Rowlands, J.

Glover, Thomas

M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

Runciman, Walter

Grant, Corrie

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

Russell, T. W.

Greenwood, Hamar (York)

M'Micking, Major G.

Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

Gulland, John W.

Maddison, Frederick

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Marnham, F. J.

Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

Massie, J.

Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

Hall, Frederick

Meagher, Michael

Scott, A.H. (Asht'n-under-L'ne

Halpin, J.

Meehan, Patrick A.

Sears, J. E.

Hammond, John

Menzies, Walter

Seaverns, J. H.

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

Molteno, Percy Alfred

Seddon, J.

Hardie, J. Keir(Merthyr Tydvil

Montagu, E. S.

Seely, Major J. B.

Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

Mooney, J. J.

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Hart-Davies, T.

Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

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

Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

Morrell, Philip

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Harwood, George

Morse, L. L.

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Monton, Alpheus Cleophas

Silcock, Thomas Ball

Haworth, Arthur A.

Murphy, John

Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

Hayden, John Patrick

Murray, James

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Hazel, Dr. A. E.

Myer, Horatio

Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

Hazleton, Richard

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Snowden, P.

Hedges, A. Paget

Napier, T. B.

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Helme, Norval Watson

Nicholls, George

Soares, Ernest J.

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Nicholson, Charles N.(Donc'st'r

Spicer, Albert

Higham, John Sharp

Nolan, Joseph

Stanger, H. Y.

Hobart, Sir Robert

Norman, Henry

Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.

Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Steadman, W. C.

Holland, Sir Willim Henry

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'y Mid.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Horridge, Thomas Gardner

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

Hudson, Walter

O'Brien, William (Cork)

Stuart, James (Sunderland)

Hutton, Alfred Eddison

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

Sullivan, Donal

Illingworth, Percy H.

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Summerbell, T.

Jacoby, James Alfred

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

Sutherland, J. E.

Jardine, Sir J.

O'Doherty, Philip

Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

Jenkins, J.

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

Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

O'Grady, J.

Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

O'Hare, Patrick

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

O'Kelly, James (Roscom'n, N.)

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

O'Malley, William

Thomasson, Franklin

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

O'Shee, James John

Tillett, Louis John

Jowett, F. W.

Parker, James (Halifax)

Tomkinson, James

Joyce, Michael

Paul, Herbert

Torrance, A. M.

Kearley, Hudson E.

Pearce, William (Limehouse)

Toulmin, George

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampt'n)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

Pirie, Duncan V.

Ure, Alexander

Kitson, Sir James

Pollard, Dr.

Verney, F. W.

Laidlaw, Robert

Power, Patrick Joseph

Villiers, Ernest Amherst

588

589

Vivian, Henry

Wedgwood, Josiah C.

Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

Weir, James Galloway

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)

Wallace, Robert

Whitbread, Howard

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

Walsh, Stephen

White, George (Norfolk)

Wood, T. M'Kinnon

Walters, John Tudor

White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

Woodhouse, Sir JT.(Huddersf'd)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Young, Samuel

Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Ward, W. Dudley (S'thampton

Whitehead, Rowland

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—;Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Herbert Lewis.

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Waterlow, D. S.

Wiles, Thomas

Watt, H. Anderson

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

NOES.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

Parkes, Ebenezer

Anstruther-Gray, Major

Faber, George Denison (York)

Percy, Earl

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Ashley, W. W.

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Ratcliff, Mafor R. F.

Balcarres, Lord

Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Baldwin, Alfred

Helmsley, Viscount

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornesy)

Hervey, F. W. F. (B'ry S. Edmd.

Smith, Abel H. (Hertf'd, East)

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

Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

Smith, F. E. (Liverp'l, Walton

Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

Hunt, Rowland

Starkey, John M.

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Bowles, G. Stewart

Lane-Fox, G. R.

Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

Bridgeman, W. Clive

Lee. Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

Thornton, Percy M.

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

Castlereagh, Viscount

Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R.

Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor C.W.

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

Lowe, Sir Francis William

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

MacIver David (Liverpool)

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. D. Stuart

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

Magnus, Sir Philip

Younger, George

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Marks, H. H. (Kent)

Courthope, G. Loyd

Mason, James F. (Windsor)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—;Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S

Meysay-Thompson, E. C.

Craig, Captain James (Down, E.

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Craik, Sir Henry

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Dixon, Sir Daniel

Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Harcourt, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Ellis, and Mr. Runciman.

PLURAL VOTING BILL.
"To impose a penalty on a Parliamentary elector, registered in more than one constituency, who votes in any constituency except that selected for the purpose," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 187.]
EDUCATION (PROVISION OF MEALS) BILL COMMITTEE.
Ordered, That Mr. Nolan be discharged, and Mr. Dolan be added to the Committee.—;Mr. (Whiteley.)
WAYS AND MEANS [1ST MAY.]
Resolution reported.

TEA.
"That there shall be charged, on and after the fourteenth day of May, nineteen
590
hundred and six, until the fourteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and seven, in lieu of the duty now payable on tea, the following Customs import duty on tea (that is to say):—;
Tea - - the pound, Five-pence."
Resolution read a second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Rosolution."
MR. J. CHAMBERLAINsaid that, with respect to the change of date which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had announced for the coming into force of the new duty, he had been informed that the present proposal was an unusual one. Time had usually been given to enable the trade to settle down to the altered circumstances. He was also informed that under the present arrangement a very grievous injustice might be done to certain persons. Acting on the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Monday, that the new duty

591
would not come into operation until July, dealers and others who required to hold considerable stocks proceeded on Tuesday to clear their stocks in bond. Then it was decided that the duty should come into force on May 14th. Clearly that involved a considerable injustice to those who had acted on the faith of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement. The case could easily be met by a drawback, and no doubt the right hon. Gentleman would make arrangements of that kind.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. ASQUITH,)said that the change of date was made because fuller information showed that the earlier date was more convenient to the trade, some branches of which would have been hampered and even paralysed if the operation of the new duty had been delayed until July. It was not a new practice to fix an early date. On the contrary, the practice of postponing the operation of a new duty was a recent usage. As to the hardship mentioned by the rght hon. Gentleman, the dealers who cleared their stocks on Tuesday had evidently abstained from doing so earlier in anticipation of some change in the duty. While that was a natural and legitimate thing to do, it did not give rise to a serious case of hardship, though it afforded ground for inquiry. He had himself inquired into a considerable number of cases brought to his notice, and his advisers had been in communication with the leading representatives of the trade. Steps would be taken to prevent any hardship resulting from the declaration made by him on Monday.
Ordered, That it be an Instruction to the Gentlemen appointed to bring in a Bill upon the Resolutions reported from the Committee of Ways and Means on the 1st day of this instant May, and then agreed to by the House, that they do make provision therein pursuant to the said Resolution—;(Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer).

FINANCE BILL.
"To grant certain duties of Customs and Inland Revenue, to alter other duties, and to amend the Law relating to Customs and Inland Revenue and the
592
National Debt, and to make other provisions for the financial arrangements of the year," presented, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 188].

JUSTICE OF THE PEACE (No. 2) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
Clause 4:—;
Motion made, Question proposed, "That Clause 4 stand part of the Bill."
MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONsaid he desired to point out in regard to this clause that it seemed to him a great constitutional difficulty was bound to arise if this Bill applied to Scotland. The Solicitor-General was no doubt aware that in Scotland in the issue of Commissioners of the Peace there were invariably included certain Privy Councillors, the Lord-Advocate, the Solicitor-General for Scotland, the Senators of the College of Justice and the sheriffs. The Senators of the College of Justice and the sheriffs were irremovable from their positions upon any account whatever save fault or misdemeanour of their own. This clause proposed that justices of the peace who held office ex officio should be removable by the same authority as the other justices, which meant that they might be removed by the Crown through the exercise of its Commissioners. He suggested that if the Bill were passed into law and was to affect Scotland Borne constitutional safeguard on the point ought to be inserted.
THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON,)said the Lord Advocate was not present at the moment, but it did not seem to him that any great injustice was likely to be caused, because it would not affect any of the gentlemen named in their offices. It would be in regard to their functions as Justices of the Peace alone that the Bill would affect them. The point, however, might be considered when the Bill got to the other House.
MR. COCHRANEthought the Question was a much larger one than the few words of the hon. and learned Gentleman would lead them to suppose. He thought there was a very big constitutional question involved. Under this clause ex officio justices, who had been elected to the post of chairman of a district council and other important bodies, were to be removed from the Bench, not necessarily for any statutory offence, but merely upon the ipse dixit of the Lord Chancellor. The principles of the Liberal Party appeared to be at stake—;if they had any principles left—;on this important point. A direct interference was proposed with men elected by the ratepayers to fill certain important posts which carried with them the duties of acting as Justices of the Peace. Were they going in this Bill, without any adequate explanation, to allow a Lord Chancellor to annul the election of the ratepayers without any limitations? A justice so elected might be excluded on mere grounds of caprice. Limiting words, requiring that the justice should be first convicted before he was removed, should certainly be introduced.
MR. YOUNGERsaid he could not see on what principle in the Bill the Lord Chancellor should be allowed to stop the exercise of their jurisdiction as Justices of the Peace by such people as sheriffs in Scotland. It might as well be suggested that the Lord Chancellor should have the same power to stop the excercise of their judicial functions.
MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid the framers of this clause clearly contemplated that the Lord Chancellor would not exercise this power without good reasons, and he took it the clause got into the Bill largely in consequence of a matter which arose in a certain case where the conduct of a man who was elected mayor became objectionable. It was perfectly evident that he was an unfit person to be either mayor or chairman, or a member of the Bench. His fellow members of the Town Council boycotted him, but had to form a quorum as he had the power to pass resolutions, and he continued to sit on the Bench in spite of everybody. That case had evidently called forth this clause, but in so far as it
594
was framed in a way which apparently gave very arbitrary power to the Lord Chancellor to deprive a Justice of the Peace of his office without any reasonable restrictions, he thought the criticism passed upon the clause was perfectly justified.
THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. THOMAS SHAW,)said he was sorry he was not present when the hon. Member for North West Lanarkshire raised this point. There was, however, nothing specially Scottish about the clause. There was no disqualification. There were not a few officers, notably under the recent Local Government Acts in Scotland, who acted ex officio as justices, the most numerous being chairmen of Parish Councils. There might be cases in which it would be expedient that a person of that kind should be excluded from the functions of the justices, and all that was done by the clause was that if such a case arose the powers of the clause could be properly and wisely exercised with the entire consent of the person involved, because it was often a matter of convenience that there should be no exercise of judicial powers in the case of an ex officio appointment. There was nothing compulsory in the clause, and he saw no reason to differentiate between England and Scotland.
MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONsaid that the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman did not bear exactly on the point to which he had referred, namely, the constitutional point. As the right hon. Gentleman knew, he, in common with the Solicitor-General for Scotland and sundry others, was by virtue of his office a Justice of the Peace for every county in Scotland. While the right hon. Gentleman and the Solicitor-General were removed from the position, no doubt, with their removal from office owing to the demise of their Government, the Senators of the College of Justice were ex officio Justices of the Peace whom nothing but death could remove, and it would be committing a breach of constitutional usage to interfere with that privilege.
MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he had omitted to mention that the clause originated with the late Lord Chancellor, Lord Halsbury, and therefore

595
might be taken by hon. Members to be perfectly in order. A very exceptional case had been mentioned by his hon. and learned friend, but he might point out that in a short clause of this kind it would be highly inexpedient to provide for exceptional cases.
MR. AKERS-DOUGLASsaid it was perfectly true that this clause was in a Bill which was carried through the House of Lords by the late Lord Chancellor. Its object was to give the Lord Chancellor power to remove justices whose past history in connection with crime or misconduct in office, such as the gratification of personal spite on the Bench, rendered them unfit to be magistrates. His experience at the Home Office showed him that there ought to be a power in the hands of some authority to remove justices. There was an instance of an ex officio justice who, if he remembered rightly, was the mayor of a town, and who in the course of an action for slander was proved to have used his official position in order to gratify a personal spite. It was obviously very undesirable that a man of that character should be allowed to remain on the Bench. In another case it was proved that an ex officio justice had taken money and acted in collusion with licensed victuallers. Clearly, too, he ought not to have sat on the Bench. Therefore, he entirely approved the principle of this clause, though it was hardly clear, at all events to the lay mind, and he suggested that words should be inserted to make it plain that a previous conviction, bankruptcy, or some other stated causes, should be a condition of the liability to removal. He was most anxious that the clause should remain in the Bill.
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSONsaid the Labour Members viewed this clause with suspicion, which suspicion had been considerably increased by the Lord Advocate's statement. The fact that the late Lord Chancellor was responsible for the insertion of the clause in the Bill was sufficient to condemn it so far as the Labour Members were concerned. Apart from that they would have suspected any attempt to remove without some legitimate cause—;and there was no reference to that in the clause—;magistrates holding their position by the representative vote of the people.
596
They admitted there might be cases where the discretion of the Lord Chancellor ought to be used, and whore a name ought to be struck off the list of justices; but he thought it ought to be because of a very serious charge. In this clause, however, there was not a single suggestion as to why a justice should be removed, and that was their great objection to it. They had a right to expect from the present Government, believing as they did that they wished to recognise democratic tendencies, that they would protect the men whom they were now going to give the opportunity of taking part in the work of county magistrates, and he appealed to the Solictor-General to insert some words to that effect in the clause even at the risk of necessitating a Report Stage in the progress of the Bill, for there was nothing the country suffered from more than ill-considered and hasty legislation.
MR. F. E. SMITHwas sorry to hear the reference of the last speaker to Lord Halsbury, seeing how much the Labour Members owed to his judgments interpreting the Workmen's Compensation Act. The attitude of the Law Officers for both England and Scotland had been very conciliatory, and he hoped the hon. and learned Gentleman would see his way even now to accept an Amendment which he suggested was really one of substance. Many hon. Members in different parts of the House felt the strongest possible objection to the idea of a man who enjoyed his office by virtue of a popular vote running the danger of being removed on grounds which were not merely badly defined, but not defined at all. He believed he was right in saying that the justices would be at the mercy of the Lord Chancellor, and, if so, it was intolerable in these days that a man who was chosen to an honourable post as mayor of a corporation by the votes of the citizens should even theoretically be deposable from his judicial functions by the Lord Chancellor without any reason given.
MR. J. WARDsaid that unless the Solicitor-General would undertake that there should be some modification of the clause the Labour Members would be obliged to vote against it altogether. This class contained the only

597
popularly elected element upon the county benches; therefore they would have to be sure not to allow the authority of the Lord Chancellor to remove these justices from their position without some limitations. Reference had been made to Lord Halsbury's connection with the Workmen's Compensation Act. The late Lord Chancellor was responsible for the serious difficulties which had arisen out of the Taff Vale judgment.
THE CHAIRMANsaid the discussion of that subject was out of order.
MR. WARDsaid that was the reason why he imagined the hon. Member for the Walton Division would have been provented from making the observations he made.
THE CHAIRMANsaid the hon. Member must not question his ruling. The preceding speaker would have been called to order if he had made more than a passing reference to this question.
MR. WARDwas sorry if he had broken the rules. The Solicitor-General had enumerated several things, such as bankruptcy, as a reason for the Lord Chancellor having the power to remove a justice, but surely that worked automatically. He understood that a bankrupt could not hold an office of that sort or on a board of guardians, district council, or any other public body. Under these circumstances it was most essential that the Committee should have some guarantee that the only popularly elected justices would not run the risk of being removed from their office without some substantial cause.
MR. HIGHAMsuggested that the Solicitor-General should see his way at this or some later stage to amend the clause so that a popularly-elected justice of the peace, who had disqualified himself from holding his position, might be removed only on the representation of the town council or other local governing body.
MR. GEORGE FABERsaid he would take the case of his own constituency to illustrate what might happen under the clause. In York the Lord Mayor was Chairman of the Bench during his year of office, and under this
598
clause it would be in the power of the Lord Chancellor, without giving any reason at all and suddenly on his own ipse dixit, to remove from the bench the gentleman occupying that responsible position. He did not say that the Lord Chancellor of the day would do anything of the kind, but he urged that the clause should say specifically what it meant. It should not be left for any official to interpret it as he liked. He hoped the Law Officers would take this point into their serious consideration.
MR. CROOKSsaid he was delighted at the number of recruits on the Opposition side of the House who desired to get something like a democratic bench. The Solicitor-General had no desire that the clause should be misinterpreted, and if there was any doubt in the matter he hoped it would be made perfectly clear that no person democratically elected, perhaps a mayor, should be excluded at once from the bench through the whim or fancy of some person in authority. A whole neighbourhood might be robbed in that way of the useful services of a democratically elected person who was more known to the exceedingly poor people in the district than the ordinary justice of the peace. Poor people who could not leave their work without serious loss to make application to magistrates in the day time went to such a person as he referred to. When it became known that the magistrate was acting in this way some people might say, "Its time to clip that fellow's wings, and therefore we will write to the Lord Chancellor to get him cut off." He hoped the Solicitor-General would see his way to safeguard the interests of the justices who might be treated in that way.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid the object of the clause was exceedingly simple. There was power at present to remove all justices who were put on by the Lord-Lieutenant. Every person would agree that it was right that there should be the power of removal. Whether it was properly vested in the Lord Chancellor was a different matter. As to the power of removal it was contended by some hon. Members that there should be a difference between a person who held the office ex officio for one year and those who were permanent

599
members of the bench. His lion, friends opposite thought that a person who might at one time or other have the confidence of the public should remain a justice of peace without being liable to removal at all whatever his misconduct might be. [Cries of "No."] If necessary let it be proposed that the Lord Chancellor should be in some way or other fettered in the discretion he had to remove justices of the peace from office, but it would be a great mistake to make a distinction by which certain justices could not be removed from office at all. Broadly speaking, the whole of the justices were removable for misconduct.
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSON: The Bill does not say so.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid there never was any clause plainer than this one. Its object was simply to bring ex officio justices of the peace into line with all other justices in regard to being removable. It might be right—;he was not saying that it was—;to deprive the Lord Chancellor of this power, and that some other person should have it, but that was not the question now before the Committee. The powers of the Lord Chancellor to deal with justices who were not ex officio justices was not touched by the clause.
SIR W. ROBSONthought there was a good deal of misapprehension as to the scope and effect of the clause. He would again remind the Committee that this Bill did not pretend to codify the law. The small and simple object of the Bill was to abolish the double qualification now required, and the object of this clause was simply to create a perfectly just and necessary uniformity. In allocating to certain officials the functions of justices of the peace, previous Acts had omitted to say that they should hold the office on the same conditions as other justices. Therefore, it was stated in this clause. It simply stated that any person who became a justice of the peace by virtue of holding an office might be excluded from the exercise of the functions of a justice by the same authority by whom other justices could be removed. There was nothing invidious in that. Some hon. Members seemed to think that some insult was directed against ex-officio magistrates. Nothing of the kind. The clause was based on a necessary and proper uniform-
600
ity. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for St. Augustine's had said that there were cases which had made the clause necessary. He himself did not like to refer to individual cases; one could not be quite sure that he was acquainted with all the circumstances, and the person concerned was not here to answer for himself. He did not care to put this clause on the ground that in several well-known instances it had been necessary to remove justices. He was astonished that hon. Members opposite should get up, one after another, to attack a clause adopted by their own Government and suggested by by their Lord Chancellor. He thought he was entitled to say that. He dared say that there were hon. Members who would be astonished at his astonishment. That was just what he might expect from the course of the discussion. It was said that this clause did not state the grounds upon which a magistrate could be removed. Why should it state the ground? The general law remained, and upon the grounds upon which other magistrates could be removed these magistrates were to be removed. Unless he was prepared to do what he was not prepared to do, and codify the law referring to magistrates, he did not see in what other way the matter could be dealt with. He certainly could not undertake to express all the grounds upon which magistrates might be removed. It had been expressed, he thought rather unthinkingly, that a magistrate could be removed upon the mere ipse dixit of the Lord Chancellor. It was true that all judicial functionaries were appointed by the Lord Chancellor and were under his authority, but the Lord Chancellor was a member of the Government, and he and his colleagues in the Cabinet were responsible to Parliament. The Committee could have no better guarantee against wrongful, capricious, or illegal conduct than the fact that in these matters the Government were liable to the censure of this House, and that what they had got was not a guarantee of some collateral authority established side by side with the Lord Chancellor, but the judgment of the Lord Chancellor under the supervision of Parliament. He would like any hon. Member who differed from him to suggest any better tribunal for this purpose than the House of Commons. Of

601
course it was to some extent an incongruous tribunal for dealing with personal misconduct, but it had been thought fit to put this matter under the supervision of Parliament and that was why the Government were made responsible. He did not think anybody could suggest, much loss remember, a case where there had been any illegal or capricious removal on the part of the Lord Chancellor. What the Lord Chancellor did in this matter was merely an administrative act and was not an act done of his own personal and private will. It was an administrative act for which he was responsible to his colleagues and, therefore, as far as guarantee was concerned, hon. Members had under the existing law the best of all possible guarantees. They were not, in regard to this question, dealing with hypothetical cases, but with cases of which they had experience. Where in the whole history of the English judiciary could there be found a case of a Lord Chancellor removing a justice of the peace or other judicial officer without stating any grounds for his action? If he were guilty of such action it would probably be followed before very long by the removal of the Lord Chancellor himself. Hon. Members must not imagine that they were dealing here with any attack upon the elective element. Nothing could be further from the minds of those who framed the Bill. Certainly nothing could be further from his mind, and if he thought that all the dreadful consequences which had been predicted would follow from the passing of the Bill he would not have brought it forward or at that moment advocate the desirability of its passing. Under these circumstances he thought he might ask the Committee to allow the measure to proceed without further discussion upon this point.
COLONEL WILLIAMSthought the remarks of the Solicitor-General, about what had happened the night before, were rather uncalled for, especially as this clause had never been before the House of Commons before, although it had been before the House of Lords. The hon. and learned Gentleman had seemed to imply an immunity from error on the part of anybody who happened to sit upon the Treasury Bench, and that a clause must be right because it had been approved by both Govern-
602
ments. Nobody wanted to delay the Bill, and they were quite content with the promise that it should be considered in the House of Lords; but he would suggest the insertion of words which would provide that the magistrates now in question might be excluded from the exercise of judicial functions by the same authority and for the same reasons by and for which other justices were, disqualified from acting. [An HON. MEMBER: It is so under the Common Law.] He was sure that the Committee would be glad if the hon. and learned Member would accept some such words.
MR. F. E. SMITHsaid he was not satisfied as to the effect of this clause, and as to the existing law if this clause were allowed to pass. The hon. Member for Glamorgan had said that by Clause 4 the same conditions, and the same conditions only, would be attached to popularly elected justices as were attached to justices at the present time. That was not the effect of the clause. At the present time ordinary justices could be removed on grounds which were well understood, and which any lawyer could give after five minutes reference to the statute, but it was the whole object of the insertion of this clause that these popularly elected ex officio justices should not, so far as the jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor was concerned, be on the same footing as ordinary justices. If that were not so, what in the name of common sense was the necessity for the clause at all? If they were in the same position why should not the Solicitor-General state that they should be removed, not merely by the same authority as ordinary justices, but for the same causes? The very reluctance of the Solicitor-General to do this created the gravest suspicion. He would make a suggestion that just as the Attorney-General withdrew from one Bill, because he fell out with hon. Gentlemen below the gangway, the Solicitor-General should hand over the further conduct of this Bill to the Attorney-General. He was perfectly certain they would make progress then.
MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he was very much surprised to hear from hon. Members above the gangway on the Opposition side of the House, that they did not think that this clause should

603
stand part of the Bill, because it seemed to him that if the Committee excluded this clause they would be setting up a kind of class legislation which there was every prospect would be set up in other respects during the present Parliament. He was not surprised at hon. Members on the Ministerial side of the House attempting to do that, but he was surprised that hon. Members on the Opposition side should lend themselves to such an attempt. He had listened to the remarks of the hon. and learned Solicitor-General in the course of which he had explained very lucidly and fully that Parliament or some other authority had decided that the Lord Chancellor was responsible to that House, not only for the appointment but the dismissal of magistrates. He had given, however, various reasons, which could not be reconciled one with another. He had said in the first place, that the Lord Chancellor was responsible to Parliament. That prima facie might be very good reasoning, but in practice it was not carried out. No later than that afternoon he himself had submitted, as on a previous occasion, a Question on this very subject in regard to a magistrate who held office by reason of his being a district councillor in Ireland, and on each occasion he had been informed by the Minister to whom the Question was addressed that he could give no information, and that it was a subject entirely within the province of the Lord Chancellor for Ireland.
THE CHAIRMAN: This Bill does not apply to Ireland.
AN HON. MEMBER: He cannot keep out the head of King Charles.
MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that at a later period he intended to put down an Amendment to this clause which should make it apply to Ireland, and the fact that such an Amendment was going to be put down he respectfully submitted would make it permissible for him to argue upon the subject.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has not handed in any Amendment of that kind, and if he had I am not sure that I should allow him to proceed with his remarks on Ireland at this point.
MR. CHARLES CRAIGasked whether he might argue from analogy. This House was not the ultimate Court of Appeal in matters of this kind, and therefore the Solicitor-General's reference to the Lord Chancellor was not justified. On the other points he perfectly agreed with the Solicitor-General. He thought it was obvious that whether a Justice of the Peace was appointed in the ordinary way or whether he was elected, his duties and position ought to be the same, and he should be subject to the same conditions as any other magistrate. It seemed to him perfectly clear that if an ordinary magistrate was removable by the Lord Chancellor the other class of magistrates should be subjected to the same rules and regulations. Therefore he trusted that if the clause went to a division the Committee would affirm it.
MR. MADDISONsaid he desired to see the ex officio magistrates treated as fairly as, and on an absolute equality with, other magistrates. He admitted he could rarely understand the clause by once reading it through. During the discussion which had taken place he had read this clause over and over again and he could not see in it anything but absolute equality. This was all his hon. friend representing Barnard Castle wanted, and he would suggest to him that as this was a question of law he would be well advised not to take the law from hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition side, because during the discussion on this Bill the Committee had been treated to something besides law: there had been a frivolous childish discussion by the very Gentlemen who were now trying to mislead the Labour Members about the law. He hoped the Labour Members would not be led into the Lobby against the Clause, because nothing would do more injury to the cause they represented than to put forward the idea that the working men of the country wanted some preference for the workman magistrate. Democratic representation would be seriously injured by demanding anything else but equality, and that was what the Bill gave.
MR. JOHN JOHNSONsaid the Labour Members at first feared that the new magistrates were going to be put on a footing different from that of other magistrates. They did not desire

605
any special advantage for their class, but it should be distinctly understood that they were exceedingly zealous for the maintenance of the dignity of the class to which they belonged, and therefore they did not desire that magistrates should be removable at the mere caprice of any individual. He was satisfied however with the explanation of the Solicitor-General. He had sufficient confidence not only in his levelness of head but also in his buoyancy of heart. He was satisfied that the
hon. and learned Gentleman desired to do all he could in the interest of the working classes, and therefore he had no objection to the clause as framed, being prepared to accept the statement that no special disability would be imposed on new magistrates.
Question put.
The Committee divided:—;Ayes, 355; Noes, 82. (Division List No. 65)

AYES

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Cawley, Frederick

Fuller, John Michael F.

Acland, Francis Dyke

Channing, Francis Allston

Fullerton, Hugh

Adkins, W. Ryland

Cheetham, John Frederick

Furness, Sir Christopher

Agnew, George William

Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

Gibb, James (Harrow)

Alden, Percy

Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

Ginnell, L.

Ambrose, Robert

Clough, W.

Glover, Thomas

Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

Clynes, J. R.

Gooch, George Peabody

Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.

Grant, Corrie

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Cobbold, Felix Thornley

Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

Cogan, Denis J.

Greenwood, Hamar (York)

Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Gulland, John W.

Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. P'ncr's, W

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

Cooper, G. J.

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Hall, Frederick

Barker, John

Corbett, C.H. (S's'x, E.Grinst'd

Halpin, J.

Barlow, John E. (Somerset)

Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

Hammond, John

Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

Cory, Clifford John

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr T'd'l)

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

Beale, W. P.

Crean, Eugene

Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

Beauchamp, E.

Cromer, William Randal

Hart-Davies, T.

Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

Crombie, John William

Harvey, A G. C. (Rochdale)

Beck, A Cecil

Crooks, William

Harwood, George

Bellairs, Carlyon

Crossley, William J.

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Benn, W.(T'w'r Hamlets, S Geo.

Dalziel, James Henry

Haworth, Arthur A.

Bertram, Julius

Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

Hayden, John Patrick

Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford

Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

Hazel, Dr. A. E.

Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

Delany, William

Hazleton, Richard

Billson, Alfred

Devlin, Charles Ramsay (Galw'y

Hedges, A. Paget

Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire

Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

Helme, Norval Watson

Blake, Edward

Dowar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Henderson, J. M. (Aberd'n, W.)

Boland, John

Dillon, John

Higham, John Sharp

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

Dobson, Thomas W.

Hobart, Sir Robert

Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

Dolan, Charles Joseph

Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

Brace, William

Donelan, Captain A.

Holland, Sir William Henry

Branch, James

Duckworth, James

Hooper, A. G.

Brigg, John

Duffy, William J.

Horniman, Emslie John

Brooke, Stopford

Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

Horridge, Thomas Gardner

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

Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire

Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

Hudson, Walter

Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberd'n)

Edwards, Clements (Denbigh)

Hutton, Alfred Eddison

Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs)

Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

Illingworth, Percy H.

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

Jackson, R. S.

Buckmaster, Stanley O.

Elibank, Master of

Jacoby, James Alfred

Burke, E. Haviland-

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Jardine, Sir J.

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Erskine, David C.

Jenkins, J.

Burnyeat, J. D. W.

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Essex, R. W.

Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

Evans, Samuel T.

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Byles, William Pollard

Everett, R. Lacey

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

Cairns, Thomas

Faber, G. H. (Boston)

Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

Cameron, Robert

Fenwick, Charles

Jowett, F. W.

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Findlay, Alexander

Joyce, Michael

Carr-Gomm, H. W.

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Kearley, Hudson E.

Kekewich, Sir George

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Soares, Ernest J.

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool

Spicer, Albert

King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

O'Doherty, Philip

Stanger, H. Y.

Kitson, Sir James

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

Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

Laidlaw, Robert

O'Grady, J.

Steadman, W. C.

Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

O'Hare, Patrick

Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

O'Kelly, James (Roscom'n, N.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Law, Hugh Alexander

O'Malley, William

Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

O'Mara, James

Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

O'Shee, James John

Stuart, James (Sunderland)

Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras, E.

Parker, James (Halifax)

Sullivan, Donal

Lehmann, R. C.

Paul, Herbert

Summerbell, T.

Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

Paulton, James Mellor

Sutherland, J. E.

Levy, Maurice

Pearce, William (Limehouse)

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampt'n

Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

Lough, Thomas

Pirie, Duncan V.

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Lundon, W.

Pollard, Dr.

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Lupton, Arnold

Power, Patrick Joseph

Thomasson, Franklin

Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

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

Tillett, Louis John

Lyell, Charles Henry

Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

Tomkinson, James

Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford, E

Torrance, A. M.

Macdonald, J.M. (F'lk'rk B'ghs

Radford, G. H.

Toulmin, George

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Rainy, A. Roland

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Macpherson, J. T.

Raphael, Herbert H.

Ure, Alexander

MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

Verney, F. W.

MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.

Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

Villiers, Ernest Amherst

M'Callum, John M.

Redmond, John E. (Waterford

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

M'Crae, George

Redmond, William (Clare)

Wallace, Robert

M'Kenna, Reginald

Rees, J. D.

Walsh, Stephen

M'Killop, W.

Renton, Major Leslie

Walters, John Tudor

M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

Richards, T.F. (Wolverh'mpt'n

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

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

Richardson, A.

Ward, W. Dudley (S'thampton

M'Micking, Major G.

Ridsdale, E. A.

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Maddison, Frederick

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Mallet, Charles E.

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Wason, John Cothcart (Orkney

Marks G. Croydon (Launcest'n

Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

Waterlow, D. S.

Marnham, F. J.

Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Br'df'd

Watt, H. Anderson

Massie, J.

Robinson, S.

Wedgwood, Josiah C.

Meagher, Michael

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Weir, James Galloway

Meehan, Patrick A.

Roche, Augustine (Cork)

Whitbread, Howard

Menzies, Walter

Roe, Sir Thomas

White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

Micklem, Nathaniel

Rogers, F. E. Newman

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Molteno, Percy Alfred

Rose, Charles Day

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Mond, A.

Rowlands, J.

Whitehead, Rowland

Money, L. G. Chiozza

Runciman, Walter

Whitely, J. H. (Halifax)

Montagu, E. S.

Russell, T. W.

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Montgomery, H. H.

Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

Wiles, Thomas

Mooney, J. J.

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Morse, L. L.

Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

Schwann, Chas. E. (Manch'st'r

Wills, Arthur Walters

Murphy, John

Scott, A.H.(Ashton-under-L'ne

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

Murray, James

Sears, J. E.

Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

Myer, Horatio

Seaverns, J. H.

Wilson, J.W.(Worcestersh. N.)

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Seddon, J.

Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)

Napier, T. B.

Seely, Major J. B.

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

Nicholls, George

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Winfrey, R.

Nicholson, Charles N. (Donc'r)

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

Wood, T. M'Kinnon

Nolan, Joseph

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Woodhouse, Sir J.T.(Hud's'f'd

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Young, Samuel

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Silcock, Thomas Ball

Yoxall, James Henry

Nuttall, Harry

Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

O'Brien, Kendal (Tip'ry Mid.)

Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—;Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Herbert Lewis.

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Snowden, P.

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

NOES.

Acland-Hood, Rt Hn. Sir Alex. F.

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Balcarres, Lord

Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

Anstruther-Gray, Major

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Ashley, W. W.

Barnes, G. N.

Bowles, G. Stewart

608

609

Bridgeman, W. Clive

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Ratcliff, Major R. F.

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Hervey, F.W.F.(Bury S.Edm's

Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

Butcher, Samuel Henry

Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

Carlile, E. Hildred

Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Castlereagh, Viscount

Houston, Robert Paterson

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Hunt, Dowland

Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

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

Lane-Fox, G. R.

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fare'm

Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton

Courthope, G. Loyd

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Starkey, John R.

Craig, Captain James (Down, E.

Long, Col. Charles W. (Ev'sh'm

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Dairyrmple, Viscount

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Talbot, Rt. Hn. J.G. (Oxf'd U'v.

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Lowe, Sir Francis William

Thornton, Percy M.

Dixon, Sir Daniel

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Valentia, Viscount

Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

M'Calmont, Colonel James

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

Doughty, Sir George

Marks, H. H. (Kent)

Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent

Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

Mason, James F. (Windsor)

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Faber, George Denison (York)

Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.)

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

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

Fardell, Sir T. George

Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

Younger, George

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Nield, Herbert

Fletcher, J. S.

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—;

Forster, Henry William

Parkes, Ebenezer

Colonel Lockwood and Mr. Mitchell-Thomson.

Haddock, George R.

Percy, Earl

Helmsley, Viscount

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Clauses 5 to 7 agreed to.
MR. BRACE: said he desired to move the new clause standing in his name. His proposal was that every elected mayor of a municipal authority or chairman of a county council, urban, or rural district council, or other like authority should automatically become a permanent justice of the peace. His chief reason for bringing the matter before the Committee was the experience of recent years, in which there had been the extraordinary spectacle of large progressive areas with no justice of the peace who could be fairly called representative of the people. The Committee would be doing a great act of justice if they placed in the hands of the people the election of a magistrate, as would be done if this clause were accepted.
Now clause—;
"Any person qualified to be elected mayor of a municipal authority or chairman of a county council, urban or rural district council, or other like authority, and who, in fact, has been elected and served in the office of mayor for one year, or in the office of chairman as aforesaid for one year, shall be a permanent Justice of the Peace with all the rights and privileges appertaining to that office."
Brought up and road the first time.
Question proposed, "That the Clause be now read a second time."
SIR W. ROBSONsaid he was obliged to his hon. friend for his interesting speech. After all, it did not require very much arguing one way or the other. The proposed clause introduced a very important principle, which was far beyond the scope of this Bill, and he did not propose to argue it as an abstract principle on its merits. What he desired above all things was to get this Bill. He was sorry he was not able to take this opportunity of extending and altering the law in various directions. It was clear, however, that if such a principle as the hon. Member had proposed were inserted in the Bill, it would cause a remarkable degree of discussion and opposition, which might imperil the main principle of the Bill. The number of bodies included in the terms of the hon. Member's clause was about 9,000, and the proposal was to add 9,000 persons per annum to the roll of permanent justices. He did not wish to condemn or approve such a proposal; but it was a large order. The question of how a popular element in the ordinary magistracy could best be introduced required consideration. He would not like to commit himself now to the form which such a proposal should take. It was clearly a subject for a separate measure, for this Bill did not deal with the appointment of magistrates. It dealt only with the qualification of magistrates. He was not sure that it would be altogether to the advantage of those who might be appointed chairmen

611
of parish councils that there should be attached to them a permanent magistracy. There were a great many men who were competent to act as chairman of a council but were unfitted for the high, serious, and sacred responsibility of a magistrate. He thought, therefore, he was justified in declaring that the adoption of this clause, or of the next clause on the Paper,† would hamper and endanger the progress of the Bill.
MR. STUART WORTLEYrecognised the hard necessity under which the Solicitor-General was to evade the principle involved in the Amendment. But they ought not to negative the clause on the ludicrous and fallacious ground put forward by the hon. and learned Gentleman. He had said that the clause would have the effect of adding 9,000 persons annually to the roll of Justices of the Peace. That argument rested entirely upon the assumption that no county, district, municipal, or parish council allowed its chairman to exercise his functions for more than a year. Except in the case of municipal councils, the reverse was the practice. He did not believe the County Council of the West Riding of Yorkshire had had more than two chairmen since its inception, and he knew a case of a district council which had been working for many years under one chairman.
MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid that this clause was by far the most valuable one the Committee had had to discuss in connection with the Bill. If adopted there was no doubt it would be a good thing for the Bench, as it would be frequently recruited with a man who had been selected by his fellows deliberately and in a democratic manner. It would also be a good thing for the councils, because it would attract men of higher attainments to their service. The figures given by the Solicitor-General were utterly fallacious, because the chairmen of these bodies were, for the most part, already magistrates, so that the magis-
† The Clause referred to was as follows:—; The chairman of a board of guardians and the chairman of a parish council shall, if otherwise qualified, be by virtue of his office justice of the peace for the county in which the district is situate, in the same way as a chairman of a district council becomes a justice of the peace.
612
tracy would not be increased in anything like the proportion suggested. In the part of Lancashire where he lived, there was only about one in seven, he believed, of the gentlemen appointed as chairmen of these bodies who was not already a magistrate. He pointed out that in connection with the Liverpool Bench the average number elected every year was fourteen, and that in four cases out of five the gentleman who was elected Lord Mayor was already a Justice of the Peace. It was, therefore, perfectly obvious that there would not be added to the Bench members in anything like the proportion suggested by the Solicitor-General. He was one of those who believed that the present system of appointing magistrates was open to very grave criticism. Many Members strongly objected to the kind of men who were appointed, and when there was put forward a wholesome and first-class suggestion under which a man selected by his fellows for high office would have a chance of being placed on the Bench he thought it ought not to be lost sight of. He, therefore, supported the proposed new clause.
MR. ARTHUR HENDERSONsaid that every Member of the Committee on whichever side he sat ought to be prepared to support the proposed clause, if only for the reason that it would relieve him of one of the difficulties of his position. No sooner was a Member of Parliament elected than he was appealed to on all hands to obtain appointments to the magisterial bench, and Members sometimes found it impossible to resist the appeals of their strongest supporters, in many cases irrespective of qualification for judicial position. He thought there was something to be said for his hon. friend's Amendment from the standpoint of continuing the services of the Chairmen of county, borough, and rural councils in judicial positions. The numbers given by the Solicitor-General did not at all frighten him, because he did not think they were at all accurate. Those who had been connected with public bodies knew that the chairmen in a considerable number of instances were already magistrates. That remark applied especially to the chairmen of the county and borough councils. He would like to point out to the Solicitor-General that in some of the rural districts there was a great scarcity

613
of magistrates, not so much for performing the actual work of the bench as for minor purposes such as the taking of oaths. There was a very great lack of qualified men to do this work. He knew that from his own experience, representing as he did a very widely scattered rural district. People had sometimes to go miles in order to find a justice to render them the service they needed. He might be told that this would all be altered when the Bill came into operation. It would probably be said that magistrates in the county divisions would come up almost like mushrooms, inasmuch as the Bill removed the qualification which had debarred many people from receiving these appointments. But having removed the high and absurd qualification which had existed so long, the difficulty was that they would commit the making of the appointments to the Lord-Lieutenant or it might be the Lord Chancellor. He was quite willing to make every allowance for the possible argument that the appointments were made fairly. That was not his experience. The political and party element entered far too largely into the appointment of magistrates. The Solicitor-General had urged that the Bill did not deal with the process of appointment by election. While there was something to be said for the hon. and learned Gentleman's argument, he would point out that these men were already appointed, and he and his friends merely wanted to extend the period of office. They had received the confidence of the authorities of which they were chairmen, and in order to do so they must have rendered considerable public service. They got their positions not because of any political services rendered to one Party or another. Except in those cases where the local elections were conducted on purely Party lines—;he was pleased to be able to say that there were very few of them, and he hoped they would become fewer—;a man who succeeded to the position of chairman did so because of the very valuable services he had rendered to the public authority by whom he was elected. That being so, why should they object to continue as a permanent justice a man who had secured the confidence of a representative public body? If the Solicitor-General was not prepared to recognise
614
that the time had come when the magistrates should be elected by an entirely different process, he hoped he would be prepared to consider an extension of the term, he did not say to all the authorities named in the Amendment, but to those men who had by virtue of office held the position of magistrates for one or two years. He thought the Bill might be amended in that direction with considerable advantage.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSappealed to his hon. friend who had moved the Amendment not to press it, for the reason that he would not get the sense of the Committee on the particular subject with which it dealt. This was a Bill to remove the present property qualification for the office of Justice of the Peace; it did not deal at all with the persons who appointed him. He was not going to express any final opinion as to the merits or demerits of what had fallen from his hon. friend. There was a great deal to be said both for and against the proposal now before the Committee. One thing that might be said was that Members of Parliament were worried by people who had an ambition to become Justices of the Peace. It might be that in order to achieve that ambition they would obtain the position in local authorities indicated in the Amendment. Having thus qualified for appointment as Justice of the Peace they might no longer care to servo the public in the capacity by virtue of which they gained the office. The proposal was one which required a great deal of consideration. He would point out to his hon. friend also that people who were ex officio Justices of the Peace during a year of office in a post to which they were elected, were people who enjoyed the confidence of the electors at the time, but it did not follow that that confidence would be continued. There were many Members in the last House of Commons who were not elected to the present House, and there were many Members in the present House who would not be elected to the next one. Those were considerations which went to the substance of the clause. He appealed to his hon. friend to withdraw the Amendment for the reasons stated. If it were possible upon such a Bill as this to deal with the matter they might have long discussions upon whether there

615
out to be Justices of the Peace at all. For Parliamentary reasons he could not support the Amendment.
MR. BRACEsaid that without some undertaking from the Solicitor-General to deal with this point he was not disposed to withdraw his Amendment. If the present opportunity passed he did not know when another chance would occur for dealing with this question, which was one of considerable public importance. The present Bill only removed the property qualification, and the appointment of magistrates would still remain with the Lords-Lieutenant and the Lord Chancellor, and his object was to secure some selection by the people. The Lords-Lieutenant in many counties had declined to make gentlemen magistrates who had the fullest qualifications. As a rule the fact that a gentleman belonged to the opposite political party to that of the Lord-Lieutenant was sufficient to condemn him. He had been endeavouring to get some labour magistrates appointed, but he had not met with much success, and unless he got more encouragement from the Solicitor-General he could not agree to withdraw his Amendment.
MR. CAVEsaid that the Amendment which had been proposed was extremely vague and unworkable. It referred to "all other like authorities" and that was a very vague expression. It proposed that the chairman in question should be a permanent Justice of the Peace, but it did not say whether for the county or for the borough. He agreed that this question was outside the scope of the Bill. It was quite true that chairmen were not changed every year, but if this Amendment were adopted he ventured to say that they would be changed much oftener, and there would be a tendency to allow every member of the District Council to become the chairman in turn, so that they might become permanent Justices of the Peace. In this way they would in some Divisions practically double the number of justices every year, and the magisterial benches would become overcrowded. It had never been considered right in this country that those who were to have criminal jurisdiction over any community should be subject to election by that com-
616
munity. He did not think that a man to whom it was proposed to entrust this power over his fellows should be subject to election. He believed that in America there had been and perhaps still was an elected magistracy, but it had not worked well. In this country the last vestige of the practice disappeared in the abolition of the method by which coroners used to be appointed, and he hoped the House would never revive any proposal of that kind. He did not think any serious attack had been made upon the manner in which magistrates had been appointed, for they all knew what great pains were taken by the lords-lieutenant to select suitable men. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh, oh!"] He would remind hon. Members that he was speaking with some experience upon this question. He knew that lords-lieutenant had a great many applications and considerable pressure was brought to bear upon them, and he believed that they all took great pains to sift the applications, and many of them were extremely anxious to appoint magistrates from both sides of politics. Apart from that there was the power of the Lord Chancellor for the time being, who could, if the case required it, exercise a certain amount of persuasion upon lords-lieutenant to submit names from both Parties, and he very properly exercised that power. He did not think any case could be made out for attacking the present system. If they were going to establish a system of indirect popular election to the Bench, then it would become a matter of politics. Many councils were elected for political reasons, and in that way they would get the very thing which they so much objected to, namely, a political selection instead of a selection independent altogether of Party. For those reasons he hoped that the principle of this Amendment would not be admitted.
MR. MARKHAMsaid as a magistrate for several counties that his experience was that the qualification as a rule was not ability, but a question of money. Any man who came into a county, if he were rich, generally managed to be appointed a Justice of the Peace. It had been said that the appointments made by the Lords-Lieutenant were generally of a satisfactory character, but his experience was that

617
the appointments were invariably of a political character, and the question which the Government ought to ask themselves was whether these appointments in the future were going to be free from political bias. During the time he had been a Member of Parliament he had never been asked to recommend names to the Lords-Lieutenant. In his county they had a very excellent Lord-Lieutenant, but what was going to be the position in future? The Bill would remove the property qualification. The reason the Solicitor-General would not accept the Amendment was that he considered it outside the scope of the Bill. He thought it was the duty of hon. Members sitting on the Ministerial side to support the Amendment. If the Solicitor-General could give them some undertaking that he would in a reasonable time reconsider this question in all its bearings, and abolish the present system, then he thought the Amendment might be withdrawn, in order that the Government might have time to consider the point. But if the hon. and learned Gentleman could not give such an undertaking he would be bound to vote for the Amendment.
MR. LANE-FOXsaid he should certainly support the Solicitor-General in the stand he had made. A strong attack had been made on the method of appointing magistrates, an attack which was absolutely unjustified, and a strong attack had been made on Lords-Lieutenant which also was unjustified. An interesting statement had been made by the hon. Member for South Glamorgan to the effect that if it was made a little more easy for some of the gentlemen in whom he was interested to be made magistrates he would support the hon. and learned Gentleman. After that they would watch with great interest any appointments to the magistracy in the constituency represented by the hon. Member. They had heard a good deal about integrity, and he would like to know whether the Party opposite were going to set an example of integrity in this matter. He hoped there was no truth in the statement that pressure was being brought to bear upon the Government to appoint magistrates of a different character. Perhaps the most remarkable feature in
618
the debate was the extraordinary dexterity of various legal Members opposite. The speech of the hon. and learned Solicitor-General was in itself remarkable, but the speech of the hon. and learned Member for Mid Glamorgan was the most remarkable exhibition of skating over thin ice he had over seen. The line taken by the hon. and learned Member was that it would be a mistake to take a division on this Amendment because a division would not record the true opinion of the Committee. Why not? He was going to record his opinion on the merits of the Amendment. He was totally opposed to it, and the hon. and learned Solicitor-General, he was glad to say, had also signified his intention of so doing. He hoped that the pressure from behind would not on this occasion be sufficiently severe to induce hon. Members to recede from that position. Another argument of the hon. and learned Member for Mid Glamorgan was that these elected gentlemen should not be made permanent magistrates because at some future time they might forfeit the support of those who placed them in their positions.
MR. SAMUEL EVANS: You are quite wrong.
MR. LANE-FOX: If the hon. and learned Gentleman did not say that he would like to know what his argument was. He also disavowed the attack the hon and learned Gentleman made on the personnel of the magistracy. This was a matter of considerable principle, and he was surprised that hon. Members opposite were not more anxious to do something for their protégé, the chairman of the parish council, who was the one ewe lamb of a Radical Government of other years. The Committee ought to consider those who had taken part in the conduct of affairs before the magistrates and who wished to see the welfare of the bench preserved. They ought to take care that nothing they did impaired the position of the bench and prevented them from giving an unbiassed opinion on the questions which came before them. The Government should insist that those appointed to the position of a magistrate should not be dependent on the vote of anyone. The object of the original property qualification was to secure men who were independent

619
of local feeling or favour and therefore able to give a fair and unbiassed opinion. If the Committee thought they ought to abolish that qualification they ought not to go so far as to create magistrates who might be dependent on the support of their fellows in that way. He certainly hoped hon. Members below the gangway would press this Amendment to a division in order that they might see whether hon. Gentlemen opposite were totally opposed to elected magistrates. In holding the opinions they did and working as strongly as they did for the welfare of the magisterial bench he and his friends were only doing what they thought was right, because they had sat upon the bench and were anxious to keep it in as creditable a position as possible.
MR. BARNARDsaid he only intervened for a moment because he had put down an Amendment on the lines of that moved by the hon. Member for South Glamorganshire. Although he had withdrawn that Amendment after a conversation with the hon. and learned Solicitor-General, he had received no less than 123 letters from district councils confirming the view which he had adopted. He did not propose to follow Conservative speakers in their remarks as to a permament bench. It was a mockery to say they were attacking individual lords-lieutenant, but they could not shut their eyes to the fact that very few middle-class Liberals and Radicals ever got on to the bench at all. The system was this. The members of the bench considered who were suitable men and they suggested their names to the Lord-Lieutenant, who in his turn suggested them to the Lord Chancellor. That was all very well, but it practically resulted in a particular class of men being appointed to the bench to the exclusion of those who were perfectly entitled to be appointed. He hoped the Solicitor-General would be able to hold out some hope to the hon. Member for South Glamorganshire, because the present system did work most unfairly and to the disadvantage of those who occupied such positions as he himself occupied.
MR. MADDISONsaid that if this clause had any value at all it was for raising the question of elected magistrates. There
620
was much to be said both for and against that system. But it was quite obvious that the matter could not be left where this clause left it. He would therefore suggest to his hon. friend, after listening to the hon. Member for Barkston Ash, who was opposed altogether to the elective principle, that it would be more advantageous if he withdrew the clause and took an opportunity of raising the question on another occasion and in another way, when he would not be embarrassed as on the present occasion. What was the central principle which they defended in the country? It was that they were dissatisfied with the present system of appointing magistrates. He thought the hon. and learned Member for Kingston had marred an excellent speech by attempting to show that the appointments of lords-lieutenant had given satisfaction to both Parties. It was deplorably notorious that there were benches almost entirely composed of one side of politics. He was not satisfied with the existing system, and, although he was not so much desirous of voting against the elective principle, he thought it was a matter which required very grave consideration. The great principle he was anxious to secure was the removal of the property qualification for magistrates, and he felt that that central principle would be jeopardised if they allowed this Bill to be encumbered with such a proposal as his hon. friend had moved. [Cries of "Why?"] Because the division would be taken as a vote against the principle and as a declaration that the House of Commons was not in favour of something which it might otherwise be inclined to adopt. In politics he had painfully learned that one could not get all he wanted and when he wanted it. He urged his hon. friend opposite to get hold of a little bit and then to do his best to got the rest afterwards.
MR. BLAKEbelieved that the existing system of appointing magistrates worked most objectionably, and he trusted that the present Government would take strong and drastic measures to correct the obvious evils which through a long succession of Governments had arisen from the mode of appointment. The administration of justice required that the magisterial benches

621
should not possess a preponderance of one political Party. Personally he had never felt congenial towards the elective magistrate, but the present system was a scandal, and the best way of getting rid of a dangerous agitation was that bold and active executive action which he ventured to suggest was in the power of the Government. He felt some difficulty in agreeing to the elective magistracy as a permanency, because in the case of the election of a mayor one term of office would entitle him to become a permanent magistrate. They all knew the circumstances under which a man might be elected the mayor of a borough, and it might happen that his one term of office would convince the people that they ought not to have elected him. If the mayor had served two or three terms of office that might give some assurance that the people, after service, had determined that the man was fit to remain at the head of the municipality. The first election of mayor was as a rule an experiment, and if that experiment terminated to the dissatisfaction of the people and the man lost their confidence, under this Amendment that man would still for all time be a magistrate. He did not think that was a reasonable proposal.
Question put, and negatived.
Mr. LUTTRELLproposed to move the following new clause—;
"The chairman of a board of guardians and the chairman of a parish council shall, if otherwise qualified, be by virtue of his office justice of the peace for the county in which the union or parish is situate, in the same way as a chairman of a district council becomes a justice of the peace."
MR. T. W. RUSSELL, on a point of order, asked whether in view of the fact that the clause just negatived provided for "other like authorities," this Amendment was in order. He wished to know whether those words did not govern parish councils as well as boards of guardians.
MR. STUART WORTLEYcontended that because the House had refused the larger principle it ought not to be taken that they were not willing to accept the smaller principle.
MR. LUTTRELLsaid that the Amendment just disposed of was one to make
622
permanent magistrates, and he wished to point out that his proposal was to make temporary magistrates those who held a temporary office, and he submitted that that proposition was in order.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This Amendment raises a different principle from the last Amendment, and therefore it is in order.
MR. LUTTRELLsaid he was proposing to allow men who had been elected by their fellows to responsible positions and who enjoyed public confidence to become justices of the peace during their term of office. If it was admitted, as it must be admitted by all candid men, that the magisterial benches were too largely composed of one particular class, then it seemed to him that what he was proposing was a very fair way of remedying that state of things. His proposal was to allow the chairmen of parish councils to become justices of the peace, and it was practically giving the parish councils power to select a magistrate. One of the great faults of the present system was that a large number of cases were looked at from one particular point of view. With one particular class of magistrates poaching was looked upon as an awful crime, whereas a magistrate who belonged to the labouring class might not look upon poaching as a very serious offence. He believed the benches would be more respected if they were drawn not so much from one class, and by adopting his proposal they would largely achieve that result. By adopting the Amendment the Committee would only be following the example of a country which was certainly not lacking in intelligence, namely, Scotland, where chairmen of parish councils had for some time been justices of the peace. He thought the new clause was fair and reasonable and ought to have the support of a Liberal Government. He brought forward this question many years ago and got a Bill which contained a proposal of this kind through its Second Reading, but it went no further. On this occasion they had an opportunity. They had a Liberal Government bringing forward a Bill to amend the law relating to justices of the peace, and if the Government were worthy of the name of Liberal it would thoroughly amend the law including the

623
point under discussion. He heard an hon. Member say something about "another place," but he thought they would be a very poor sort of Liberals if they moulded their opinion upon what was said by noble Lords in another place. He intended to go to a division.
Now clause:—;
The chairman of a board of guardians and the chairman of a parish council, unless personally disqualified by any Act, shall be by virtue of his office justice of the peace for the county in which the district is situate, in the same way as a chairman of a district council becomes a justice of the peace.—;(Mr. Luttrell.)
Brought up and read the first time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the clause be read a second time."
SIR W. ROBSONsaid he would not detain the Committee very long upon this clause, because he really stated upon the last clause what he had to say in reference to this one. He had done so specifically with the other clause which raised the same question in a different and he thought a better and more intelligible form. He had taken the opportunity on the last clause of dealing with the reasons why he should invite the Committee not to accept this clause. His hon. friend had held up the fear of the report stage and of another place. He did not know that he was animated by any fear either of the report stage or of another place, but he took them into potential consideration. The question raised by this clause related more to appointment than to qualification, and if they were to deal with the question relating to appointment they would have to deal with it in a separate measure, in regard to which they would have to treat and discuss many things which were not germane to this question. Therefore he protested against any such principle or scheme being brought into the measure at all, because any one who had to face the programme of work which the House had before them would take note of the large amount of detailed business which awaited the consideration of the House on the various stages of the measure they had before them, and it would indeed be a bold Ministry who did not regard the work before them with some reason-
624
able fear—;he would not say craven fear—;and apprehension. He could not give any promise or undertaking that this question of elective magistracy should be dealt with in this session or in any session to come. He was not a member of the Cabinet, but only a very humble member of the Ministry; therefore he was not entitled to give any such undertaking, and he deprecated the introduction of this topic as one which was not wise in itself, and as one which was likely to damnify and endanger the prospect of carrying a really useful measure. He would not deal with the merits of this clause, but he would remind hon. Members who reproached him that they appeared to have an inordinate appetite for discussions which were beyond the scope of the Bill. He had no such appetite, and nothing would induce him to ask the Committee to vote upon this clause upon its merits. That was not the ground upon which he refused to accept the clause. If the Committee desired to pass this Bill they must carefully restrict its scope, they must not include matters with which it did not deal, and they must refrain from introducing any large and striking principle which it did not contain. The reform dealt with was not a slight one and had long been delayed, and on the eve of achievement he did not wish to see it imperilled.
MR. SHACKLETONsaid he was very grieved to hear the decision of the Solicitor-General in this matter. He had thought that after the waste of time in useless discussions and divisions they might have got something more substantial out of the Bill. The Bill as introduced was a useful one, but now they had a real opportunity of going one better. Hon. Members who lived in cities did not realise the responsibilities of chairmen of boards of guardians and parish councils as did those who lived in the country. He urged the Government to make the little concession which was asked for and hoped they would not press the question to a division against those who supported the new clause. If they did, however, he hoped the hon. Member for Tavistock would press the matter to a division himself. It was all very well to say they had the opportunity of raising this question on Tuesdays and Wednesdays when no

625
doubt they would get an expression of sympathy from the Minister concerned, but here they had an opportunity of obtaining real reform and he hoped hon. Members would support the Amendment.
MR. CLEMENT EDWARDSasked the Chairman, on a point of order, whether, if this Amendment were carried, it would not involve the appointment of women to the judicial bench inasmuch as a woman might hold the position of chairman of a board of guardians.
THE CHAIRMAN: That is not a point of order; it is a point of construction.
MR. CHANNINGsaid he rose to remind the hon. and learned Solicitor-General of a fact which might have escaped his recollection, viz., that the insertion of the chairman of the board of guardians as an ex officio magistrate was only accidentally omitted from the Local Government Act of 1894. He knew that from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton who was in charge of the Bill. He suggested that if his hon. friend would withdraw from his clause "the chairman of a parish council" they might agree upon the matter.
MR. DUNNurged that nothing could be better, both for the justices and for the parish councils, than that the chairmen of parish councils should be during their year of office ex officio justices. We had in this country three municipal bodies—;municipal corporations, urban district councils, and parish councils. At the present moment
the chairmen of two of these bodies were ex officio justices, while the chairman of last named was not. By adopting the proposed clause the Committee would simply remove a disability which ought not to exist.
SIR BRAMPTON GURDONsaid he could not vote with the hon. Member, and thought that hon. Members who were in favour of making chairmen of parish councils ex officio justices had no idea of the number of parishes in the country. In his own constituency he had no less than 140 parishes, and if the chairmen of the councils were made justices the bench would be swamped.
MR. O'HARAsaid that in Scotland the chairman of a parish council was a justice of peace, and he did not see why the least objection should be taken to the appointment of such chairmen in this country to a similar office. Scotland had not suffered in consequence of these appointments, and the people who occupied the position in England were surely in no way inferior to those in Scotland. He could not see why the proposal should not be accepted unanimously. He had had experience of a great many areas in Scotland since the Local Government Bill came into operation, and he knew of no more useful men in the capacity of magistrates than the chairmen of parish councils had been. He asked the hon. and learned Gentleman to accept the Amendment.
Question put.
The Committee divided:—;Ayes, 59; Noes, 315. (Division List No. 66.)

AYES.

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Dairymple, Viscount

Macpherson, J. T.

Agar-Robartes, Hon. T.C.

Dillon, John

Markham, Arthur Basil

Anstruther-Gray, Major

Duffy, William J.

Marks, H. H. (Kent)

Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

Meagher, Michael

Barnard, E. B.

Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

Money, L. G. Chiozza

Barnes, G. N.

Gill, A. H.

Murphy, John

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

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Hazleton, Richard

O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid

Brace, William

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

O'Grady, J.

Byles, William Pollard

Higham, John Sharp

O'Hare, Patrick

Channing, Francis Allston

Hodge, John

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

Clough, W.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Parker, James (Halifax)

Clynes, J. R.

Jenkins, J.

Radford, G. H.

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Jowett, F. W.

Richards, T.F.(Wolverh'mpt'n

Craig, Captain James(Down, E.

King, Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

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

Summerbell, T.

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Seddon, J.

Thomson W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

Shackleton, David James

Toulmin, George

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—;Mr. Luttrell and Mr. Ramsay Macdonald.

Smith, F.E.(Liverpool, Walton)

Wardle, George J.

Steadman, W. C.

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Cogan, Denis J.

Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r)

Acland-Hood, Rt Hn. Sir Alex. F.

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Hart-Davies, T.

Adkins, W. Ryland

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Ashton, Thomas Gair

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

Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Cory, Clifford John

Haworth, Arthur A.

Astbury, John Meir

Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn Sir H.

Courthope, G. Loyd

Hayden, John Patrick

Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

Hazle, Dr. A. E.

Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

Crean, Eugene

Hedges, A. Paget

Balcarres, Lord

Cremer, William Randall

Helme, Norval Watson

Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

Crombie, John William

Helmsley, Viscount

Barlow, John E. (Somerset)

Crooks, William

Henderson, J.M.(Aberdeen, W.)

Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

Crossley, William J.

Hervey, F.W.F(BuryS.Edm'ds

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Dalziel, James Henry

Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

Hobart, Sir Robert

Beauchamp, E.

Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

Delany, William

Holden, E. Hopkinson

Beck, A. Cecil

Devlin, Charles Ramsay(Galw'y

Hooper, A. G.

Bellairs, Carlyon

Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

Horniman, Emslie John

Benn, John Williams (Dev'np'rt

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Horridge, Thomas Gardner

Benn, W(T'w'r Hamlets, S.Geo.

Dolan, Charles Joseph

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

Berridge, T. H. D.

Donelan, Captain A.

Hudson, Walter

Bertram, Julius

Doughty, Sir George

Hutton, Alfred Eddison

Bethell, J.H.(Essex, Romford)

Duckworth, James

Hyde, Clarendon

Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

Du Cros, Harvey

Illingworth, Percy H.

Billson, Alfred

Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

Jardine, Sir J.

Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire

Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Boland, John

Elibank, Master of

Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

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

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

Erskine, David C.

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

Bramsdon, T. A.

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Branch, James

Evans, Samuel T.

Joyce, Michael

Bridgeman, W. Clive

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Kearley, Hudson E.

Brigg, John

Everett, R. Lacey

Kekewich, Sir George

Brooke, Stopford

Faber, George Denison (York)

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Faber, G. H. (Boston)

Kincaid-Smith, Captain

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

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

Bryce, Rt. Hn. James(Aberdeen

Findlay, Alexander

Laidlaw, Robert

Bryce, J.A. (Inverness Burghs)

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Forster, Henry William

Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

Buckmaster, Stanley O.

Fuller, John Michael F.

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

Burke, E. Haviland-

Fullerton, Hugh

Lehmann, R. C.

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Gibb, James (Harrow)

Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

Burnyeat, J. D. W.

Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

Levy, Maurice

Burt, Rt. Hon Thomas

Ginnell, L.

Lewis, John Herbert

Cairns, Thomas

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Glover, Thomas

Lough, Thomas

Carlile, E. Hildred

Gooch, George Peabody

Lundon, W.

Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

Grant, Corrie

Lupton, Arnold

Cave, George

Greenwood, Hamar (York)

Lyell, Charles Henry

Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C. W.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs.

Cawley, Frederick

Griffith, Ellis J.

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

Gulland, John W.

MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

Cheetham, John Frederick

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

MacVeigh, Charles(Donegal, E.

Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

Hall, Frederick

M'Callum, John M.

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Halpin, J.

M'Crae, George

Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

Hambro, Charles Eric

M'Kean, John

Cleland, J. W.

Hammond, John

M'Kenna, Reginald

Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

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

Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.)

Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

M'Micking, Major G.

Cobbold, Felix Thornley

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Maddison, Frederick

628

629

Magnus, Sir Philip

Pollard, Dr.

Sullivan, Donal

Mallet, Charles E.

Power, Patrick Joseph

Sutherland, J. E.

Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

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

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Marnham, F. J.

Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Massie, J.

Priestley, W.E.B.(Bradford, E.)

Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

Meehan, Patrick A.

Rainy, A. Rolland

Tillett, Louis John

Menzies, Walter

Raphael, Herbert H.

Tomkinson, James

Micklem, Nathaniel

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Torrance, A. M.

Molteno, Percy Alfred

Rees, J. D.

Ure, Alexander

Mond, A.

Renton, Major Leslie

Verney, F. W.

Montagu, E. S.

Richards, Thomas(W. Monm'th

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

Montgomery, H. H.

Richardson, A.

Wallace, Robert

Mooney, J. J.

Ridsdale, E. A.

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Walsh, Stephen

Morse, L. L.

Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

Robinson, S.

Ward, W. Dudley (Southampt'n

Murray, James

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

Myer, Horatio

Roe, Sir Thomas

Waterlow, D. S.

Napier, T. B.

Rogers, F. E. Newman

Watt, H. Anderson

Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Weir, James Galloway

Nicholls, George

Rose, Charles Day

Whitbread, Howard

Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

Runciman, Walter

White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

Nicholson, Wm. G.(Petersfield)

Russell, T. W.

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Nolan, Joseph

Salter, Arthur Clavell

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Whitehead, Rowland

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Nuttall, Harry

Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Sears, J. E.

Wiles, Thomas

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

Seely, Major J. B.

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

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

Wills, Arthur Walters

O'Doherty, Philip

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

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

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)

O'Malley, William

Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

Wood, T. M'Kinnon

O'Mara, James

Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

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

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Soares, Ernest J.

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Parkes, Ebenezer

Spicer, Albert

Young, Samuel

Paul, Herbert

Stanger, H. Y.

Yoxall, James Henry

Paulton, James Mellor

Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

Pearce, William (Limehouse)

Starkey, John R.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—;Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Pickersgill, Edward Hare

Strachey, Sir Edward

Pirie, Duncan V.

Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

Schedules agreed to.
Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report the Bill without
Amendment to the House."
The Committee divided:—;Ayes, 314; Noes, 37. (Division List No. 67.)

AYES

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Bellairs, Carlyon

Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs)

Abraham, William (Rhondda)

Benn, John Williams (Devonp't

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Adkins, W. Ryland

Berridge, T. H. D.

Buckmaster, Stanley O.

Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C.

Bertram, Julius

Burke, E. Haviland-

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford)

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Astbury, John Meir

Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

Burnyeat, J. D. W.

Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

Billson, Alfred

Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.

Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

Byles, William Pollard

Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire

Cairns, Thomas

Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight

Boland, John

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Barker, John

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

Causton, Rt. Hn Richard Knight

Barlow, John E. (Somerset)

Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

Cawley, Frederick

Barnard, E. B.

Brace, William

Channing, Francis Allston

Barnes, G. N.

Bramsdon, T. A.

Cheetham, John Frederick

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Branch, James

Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Brigg, John

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Beauchamp, E.

Brooke, Stopford

Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

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

Cleland, J. W.

Beck, A. Cecil

Bryce, Rt. Hn James(Aberdeen

Clough, W.

Clynes, J. R.

Higham, John Sharp

Nicholls, George

Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.)

Hobart, Sir Robert

Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

Cobbold, Felix Thornley

Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

Nolan, Joseph

Cogan, Denis J.

Hodge, John

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Holden, E. Hopkinson

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Collins, Sir Wm. J(S. Pancras, W

Hooper, A. G.

Nuttall, Harry

Corbett, CH (Sussex, E. Grinst'd

Horridge, Thomas Gardner

O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid

Cory, Clifford John

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

Hudson, Walter

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

Cowan, W. H.

Hutton, Alfred Eddison

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

Crean, Eugene

Hyde, Clarendon

O'Doherty, Philip

Cremer, William Randal

Illingworth, Percy H.

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

Crooks, William

Jardine, Sir J.

O'Grady, J.

Crossley, William J.

Jenkins, J.

O'Hare, Patrick

Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

O'Malley, William

Delany, William

Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

O'Mara, James

Devlin, Charles Ramsay(Galw'y

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Parker, James (Halifax)

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Jowett, F. W.

Paul, Herbert

Dillon, John

Joyce, Michael

Pearce, William (Limehouse)

Dolan, Charles Joseph

Kearley, Hudson E.

Pearson, W.H.M.(Suffolk, Eye)

Donelan, Captain A.

Kekewich, Sir George

Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

Duckworth, James

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Pickersgill, Edward Hare

Duffy, William J.

Kincaid-Smith, Captain

Pirie, Duncan V.

Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

Pollard, Dr.

Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

Laidlaw, Robert

Power, Patrick Joseph

Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

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

Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

Priestley, W.E.B.(Bradford, E.

Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

Radford, G. H.

Elibank, Master of

Lehmann, R. C.

Rainy, A. Rolland

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral

Raphael, Herbert H.

Erskine, David C.

Levy, Maurice

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Lewis, John Herbert

Rees, J. D.

Essex, R. W.

Lough, Thomas

Renton, Major Leslie

Evans, Samuel T.

Lundon, W.

Richards, Thomas(W. Monm'th

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Lupton, Arnold

Richards, T. F.(Wolverh'mpt'n

Everett, R. Lacey

Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

Richardson, A.

Faber, G. H. (Boston)

Lyell, Charles Henry

Ridsdale, E. A.

Findlay, Alexander

Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Macdonald, J.M.(FalkirkB'ghs

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Fuller, John Michael F.

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Robinson, S.

Fullerton, Hugh

Macpherson, J. T.

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Gardner, Col. Alan(Hereford, S.

MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

Roche, Augustine (Cork)

Gibb, James (Harrow)

MacVeigh, Char les(Donegal, E.)

Roe, Sir Thomas

Gill, A. H.

M'Callum, John M.

Rogers, F. E. Newman

Ginnell, L.

M'Crae, George

Rose, Charles Day

Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

M'Kenna, Reginald

Rowlands, J.

Glover, Thomas

M'Micking, Major G.

Runciman, Walter

Gooch, George Peabody

Maddison, Frederick

Russell, T. W.

Grant, Corrie

Mallet, Charles E.

Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

Greenwood, Hamar (York)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

Marks, G. Croydon(Launceston)

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

Griffith, Ellis J.

Marnham, F. J.

Seddon, J.

Gulland, John W.

Massie, J.

Seely, Major J. B.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Meagher, Michael

Shackleton, David James

Hall, Frederick

Meehan, Patrick A.

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Halpin, J.

Menzies, Walter

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

Hammond, John

Micklem, Nathaniel

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

Molteno, Percy Alfred

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil)

Mond, A.

Simon, John Allsebrook

Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

Money, L. G. Chiozza

Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

Montagu, E. S.

Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

Hart-Davies, T.

Montgomery, H. H.

Soares, Ernest J.

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Mooney, J. J.

Spicer, Albert

Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

Morse, L. L.

Stanger, H. Y.

Haworth, Arthur A.

Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

Hayden, John Patrick

Murphy, John

Steadman, W. C.

Hazel, Dr. A. E.

Murray, James

Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

Hazleton, Richard

Myer, Horatio

Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

Hedges, A. Paget

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Napier, T. B.

Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

Henderson, J.M.(Aberdeen, W.

Newnes, F. (Notts., Bassetlaw)

632

633

Stuart, James (Sunderland)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Sullivan, Donal

Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent

Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

Summerbell, T.

Wardle, George J.

Wills, Arthur Walters

Sutherland, J. E.

Waterlow, D. S.

Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

Watt, H. Anderson

Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Wedgwood, Josiah C.

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Weir, James Galloway

Wood, T. M'Kinnon

Tillett, Louis John

Whitbread, Howard

Young, Samuel

Tomkinson, James

White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

Yoxall, James Henry

Torrance, A. M.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Ure, Alexander

White, Patrick (Meath, North)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—;Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

Verney, F. W.

Whitehead, Rowland

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Wallace, Robert

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Walsh, Stephen

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

NOES.

Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. Sir Alex. F.

Dalrymple, Viscount

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Balcarres, Lord

Doughty, Sir George

Salter, Arthur Clavell

Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.

Du Cros, Harvey

Smith, F.E.(Liverpool, Walton

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Faber, George Denison (York)

Starkey, John R.

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Carlile, E. Hildred

Helmsley, Viscount

Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

Cave, George

Hervey, F.W.F.(Bury S. Edm'ds

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C. W.

Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

Houston, Robert Paterson

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham

King, Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Magnus, Sir Philip

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—;Mr. Claude Hay and Mr. H. H. Marks.

Courthope, G. Loyd

Parkes, Ebenezer

Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlingt'n

Craig, Captain James(Down, E.)

Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time upon Monday next.

RESERVE FORCES BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:—;
LORD BALCARRESsaid he desired to ask the right hon. Gentleman a Question as to the precise meaning of this clause. The Bill had been before the House many years and had been strongly objected to by hon. Members now supporting the Government, owing largely, he thought, to this Clause 2. He wished to know why the right hon. Gentleman required for the War Office powers for the future which it did not at present possess of transferring a man from one branch of the service to another. Was it to be supposed that a man who had enlisted as an infantry man, for instance, was to be transferred to some other arm?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,)said this Bill was introduced by the Government of which the noble Lord opposite was a member, and the reason for the clause was that under the Act of 1852 if a man enlisted in a particular arm of the service and went into the Reserve he could only be called up to join the particular arm in which he had enlisted. The Bill was not retrospective, for those who had already enlisted would have that right still. The change was only with regard to the future, and the reason it was proposed was that when, during the South African War, they wished to call up certain cavalry regiments for remount purposes, they found they could not call them up except for cavalry purposes.
MR. WYNDHAMsaid the Unionist Party could accept the clause and would be very pleased to see the Bill pass.
Clause 2 and remaining clauses agreed to.
Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time upon Monday next.

SEAMEN'S AND SOLDIERS' FALSE CHARACTERS BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clause 1:—;
MR. CLAUDE HAY MR. CLAUDE HAY (Shoreditch, Hoxton) moved to report Progress.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress and ask leave to sit again.—;(Mr Claude Hay.)
MR. HALDANEappealed to the hon. Member not to take that course. He pointed out that this Bill was also a legacy of the late Government. He proposed what the late Government had proposed, and desired to carry out the proposals they desired in the same way as the late Government proposed to carry them out. It was a Bill of the simplest character, and contained, he believed, no controversial elements. As the law stood there was no remedy against a man who forged the character of a soldier or seaman, save that to be obtained by the cumbrous procedure of common law. In the case of servants there was a remedy, and the late Government took the view that a remedy should be provided in this case. The object of the Bill was simply to bring these cases under summary jurisdiction.
MR. CLAUDE HAYasked leave to withdraw his Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid in his opinion the penalties to be inflicted for forging a man's character were far too light. A penalty of throe months imprisonment for falsifying the character of a soldier or a sailor was much too little. These documents were the only documents in the possession of a man who had served his country well, with which he could go into the open market and obtain employment in civil life. If once any doubt was cast upon the true value of those documents—;if once the employers doubted their
636
accuracy—;an additional penalty was inflicted on the man who had served in the Navy or Army. Under these circumstances he thought there ought to be a much more drastic penalty for this crime if it was at all prevalent, and as to that no one could give better information than the right hon. Gentleman in charge of this Bill.
MR. GEORGE FABERsaid that in the case of so serious a crime, the Bill provided a penalty which was quite insufficient. Forgery was one of the most serious crimes in this country, and the reason why the Bill had been blocked year after year by the Party opposite when in opposition must have been because the penalty was so inadequate.
And, it being a quarter past Eight of the Clock, further proceeding was postponed without Question put pursuant to Standing Order No. 4.

ARMY RECRUITING.
MAJOR SEELYrose to call attention to the question of recruiting for and the present establishment of the Regular Army, and to move "That under the present system large numbers of men are recruited for the Regular infantry who cannot become efficient soldiers, while at the same time it is found difficult to obtain the number placed on the Estimates, and that, in the opinion of this House, an amendment of the existing system is urgently required." He said that he moved the Resolution with a deep feeling of responsibility, because he submitted that the present system was ill adapted to our needs and added greatly to the sum of human misery. What did they do when they tried to recruit to the Army? When a man had to make his choice of a profession it might well be that he suffered some misfortune, and at that moment the State stepped in and took him very often as a recruit for the Army without his full sanction. He had confined his Motion largely to the Regular infantry. He wished to state that he knew many men who had served in that force with great credit to themselves and to the Army. His Motion principally referred to another class who had

637
not and could not become efficient soldiers. They were enlisted in an undignified manner. Recruiting officers endeavoured to attract men who were hungry and because they were hungry, and the men signed on for a number of years owing to their then circumstances, whereas, if they had had proper time to think over the matter, they would probably not have adopted a military career. Those unwilling soldiers did not add to the strength of the Army. In regard to this question, he would not deal so much with the disastrous effects on the Army itself as with the social results. This undignified method of entrapping men having been adopted, let the House consider whether there was any justification for the allegation that there were in the Army, owing to the system of service and the prospects held out, large numbers of unwilling soldiers. The annual report of the Army was very sad reading. He asked hon. Members to consider for a moment the case of men who left the Army within three months of joining it. A soldier could be of no use for defending India or other garrison service until he had served four or live years. Those who left in three months proved that they were unwilling soldiers. The penalties for desertion were heavy, and no man would face them unless he was very dissatisfied with the service, and the actual punishment for desertion debarred a soldier from employment in the future, because he lost that exemplary character which was essential if he was to be an efficient servant of the State after he had left the Army. Last year more than one in every ten of the men in the regular Army, or 107 per 1,000, left the Army for various causes such as desertion, dismissal, or purchase within three months of joining. He had compared those figures with the police force, in which he found that approximately only one in forty left within three months of joining the force. Why was there this great discrepancy? There was one illuminating page in the document to which he had referred giving the number who had become non-effective before three years were up. Out of 28,000 men enlisted three and a half years ago, no fewer than 9,000 had become non-effective before completing three years service. If one considered the money cost of those men, it would be soon what an absurd system it was
638
under which the Sta e enlisted 9,000 men and spent £100 a year upon each, and afterwards found that they had never been of the least use. With regard to crime in the Army, it was not like crime in civil life, because it was crime under the particular code of laws under which the soldier served. He had often thought it would be a good thing if soldiers were placed under the ordinary law. Although many of the soldiers' crimes were mostly moral delinquencies, the effects were the same, because a soldier lost his good character by going to prison. How many went to prison from the infantry? He had found that a little more than one in every twenty of the Regular infantry at home went to prison every year. When they reflected that going to prison meant not only suffering imprisonment, but also a loss of character hon. Members would see that there was some justification for the words be had used that the present system of recruiting added more to the sum of human misery than any other organisation in the body politic. He had denounced this system on many occasions and he denounced it again that night, it might be asked what was the particular vicious principle which was the cause of these evils. They might inquire why one in every twenty should go to prison every year when in the case of the Metropolitan Police only one in 12,000 went to prison each year. Why should there be this extraordinary discrepancy? The reason was that we had unwilling soldiers, and that was owing to the fact that we had a method of recruiting which was unknown to any other country in the world or to any other service in this country. We took a man just when he should be looking out for a profession or a trade, and enlisted him into something which was neither the one thing nor the other. Nothing which the infantry soldier learned was of any use to him in civil life. Attempts had been made to teach the soldier a real trade, but they had not been successful. It was his belief that we should never have the Army we needed until the Army was made a profession and career for every man who joined it. The voluntary Army of America cost nearly £300 or £400 per man, and out of a population nearly double that of this country America had an Army immeasurably smaller than ours. All other countries

639
had conscript armies, where every man had to serve, and each man suffered the disability of being withdrawn from civil employment for a fixed period of years. Every other country provided a career for the soldiers. If hon. Members put themselves in the place of an inhabitant of another planet, looking at this question de novo, they would find that in this island postal telegraphists, policemen, marine men and the men in the Navy all had a life career given to them, and their future was assured. But in the Army alone the State took men when it suited its purpose, and afterwards threw the men back upon the labour market like a squeezed lemon. It was a ridiculous and a wrong system, and it was wasteful of money, because the men who were supposed to be ready for active service were not ready. He did not think it would be an easy thing for the Secretary of State for War to send one single battalion of troops abroad without calling up the reserves except at such a low strength that it would be ridiculous to send it out at all. The system was far more wasteful in regard to human happiness and health. Of all the different occupations which the State exacted from its children, the Army was the one which took most out of the men. Therefore the Army was the first of all occupations in which the State should be careful to take men of the best character and to give them a life career. He believed that the only solution was that the State must absolutely abandon this system of enlisting men at the age of seventeen or eighteen for seven years, and thon throwing them back upon the labour market without a pension. He was convinced that this system added to the evil of unemployment, and could not produce an efficient Army. The State must enlist men as it enlisted the police and the Royal Irish Constabulary or other public employment. It must enlist men of full age who would be ready after a few months service to proceed to those foreign stations for which they were required. As to length of service, he did not desire to say anything beyond stating that it was essential, in view of danger to health of the occupation of a soldier, and of the impossibility of teaching him a trade, to give him a life career, and employment or pension, or both. The Secretary of State for War might say that this would add to the cost of the Army, and that he had a dread of
640
increasing the pension list. He wished to urge that during many years past various Secretaries of State, in order to satisfy so-called economists who always wished to see the greatest number of men at the smallest amount of cost, had sacrificed the happiness and welfare of thousands of men. By this system the War Office must of necessity enlist men whom they knew could never become efficient soldiers. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had said that this method of enlisting men must come to an end if we were to have an effective Army. Although he differed from subsequent suggestions of the right hon. Gentleman, at that point he was at one with him. So long as the State continue to entrap men into the Army, and then throw them back upon the labour market, a very heavy responsibility rested upon it. He believed this was an unfair and a mean thing on the part of the State. One could hardly look into the newspapers any day without seeing an account of some soldier being found in the workhouse, after having served his country faithfully. Frequently soldiers committed a crime in order to leave the Army. Therefore it was necessary to put an end to that state of thing, to assimilate the Army to other State employment, and to give a soldier a life career. This was the true Army reform, because the present system was the root of the trouble. It was necessary to look not only at the military force they would exert but also at the effect the system would have upon the body politic. For these reasons he commended his Resolution to the House, believing that the arguments he had urged were almost unanswerable. The evil was great, and he hoped that some amendment might be made in the present system which would at least provide a happy, efficient, and contented Army.
MR. GUEST, in seconding the Motion, said he was very glad that his hon. and gallant friend had raised this question of recruiting, because upon it hinged the whole problem of the Army and military organisation and preparation. The mover of the Motion had alluded to the social side of our present military system, and the way in which recruits were obtained. He proposed to look at the military side of the problem, because he contended that that was not less affected than the

641
social side. Everyone agreed that their object ought to be to devise, if possible, the most economical and the most efficient military system. What about economy? At present the Army cost this country £30,000,000 a year, and it cost the taxpayers of India another £22,000,000 a year. Our military system was the most expensive in the whole world. One would expect, seeing that relatively we had a small Army, that we should have with such a vast expenditure very great efficiency, but we did not get it. The efficiency of the Army was prevented and interfered with principally in two ways. In the first place, a great many men in the Army were immature and could not be used either for garrison duty in India or for campaigning. But beyond that there was a great waste going on. The present practice in the Army was to take men at least two years under the age at which they could serve in India or in a campaign. As the authorities had adopted in the past the system of seven years with the Colours, it was obvious that two-sevenths of the force at any moment was in a state of immaturity and could not be relied upon for any practical purposes. Apart from that immaturity, there was the waste. The Annual Report of the Army showed that the waste in 1904, exclusive of those who went to the Reserve, amounted to 30,000 men. Perhaps he ought to deduct from this total the 6,000 men who completed their engagement. Those figures showed a net waste of 24,000 men in the year 1904. In 1905 the waste was as bad as in 1904, there being a net loss of over 20,000. That was a very serious thing. Surely this very costly system should at least give some efficiency and some guarantee against such a tremendous loss from immaturity and other causes. He believed the size of the Army was responsible for the great loss. Every soldier cost the country £100 a year, and the size and cost were in direct relation. But the size and efficiency of the Army were also in direct relation, because so long as we enlisted men who were not at the moment of value as a military power and who could never become of any use, so long would the system continue to be extravagant and wasteful. Therefore, if there was to be any satisfactory reform in the Army, it must take the direction of the reduc-
642
tion of the size of the Army and an extension of the period for which the men served. The normal period now was seven years with the Colours and five with the Reserve. If one took 150,000 infantry of the line, which was approximately their present force, and assumed that they served on the basis of seven years with the Colours and five with the Reserve, it would be found that theoretically we should require 21,500 recruits. If the period with the colours were nine years instead of seven it would be found that a similar force could be maintained by 16,500, or a difference of 5,000 recruits. It was obvious therefore that the longer the War Office made the term of service the smaller they made the demand on the recruiting market. It seemed to him that on the acceptance of that fact must rest to a great extent any improvement in the status and quality of the recruits. Of course it would be said that the system of nine years with the colours, leaving only three years in the Reserve, gave very much too small a Reserve. He observed that the Reserve on the nine years system was only 49,000 as against 107,000 on the other side, but what was there in the period of twelve years which was so sacred? Why was it that the system of Reserve service should be confined rigidly to twelve years? Why not fifteen years service? With a fifteen years service, soldiers would servo nine years with the colours and six with the Reserves, and we should get 99,000 Reservists against 107,000, and the number of recruits would remain the same—;that was to say, 16,500. It seemed to him that if the Secretary of State for War was to improve the quality of his Army he would be obliged to accept as a permanency a period of nine years with the colours. He did not know that nine years with the colours was intended by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon to be permanent, but if improvement was to be made the longer period of service with the colours would have to be definitely adopted. This applied to the present force, but some hon. Members hoped very strongly that the Secretary of State for War would see his way to reduce the sum total of the force borne on the Estimates. Was that reduction possible? He thought it was. Where should the reduction take place? Was it to be by a reduction at home or abroad? The reduction he believed would

643
take the shape of a reduction in the number of battalions. It seemed clear that anyone who believed in the doctrine of the blue water school, or any doctrine of that kind, would take the view that the requirements for the defence of our shores from invasion would permit us to effect a very considerable reduction in the home force. If they could reduce the infantry of the Line by 50,000 men, mainly from the home establishment, so that they had only to provide 100,000 instead of 150,000 men, and if they adopted the principle of nine years with the colours and six years with the Reserve, they would only need 11,000 recruits annually. There would then be a probability of a real improvement in the class of recruits received, and if they went further and gave a pension after long service then he thought they might with confidence expect to get men at twenty years of age of high character, who would not desert, and who would not have to be put in prison. His point was that if we had a smaller Army and a longer period of service with that colours we would be able to get a better class of recruits, and to get rid of those men whom we must enlist now, although the recruiting sergeants and medical officers knew that they would never be of any value to the State as a military asset. What would become of the linked battalion system if we were to have a smaller Army? It was clear that the equipoise, which was something like a fiction at present, would be totally destroyed. The system called in War Office circles "On short tour," by which the force serving in the Mediterranean were supposed to be on the home establishment, might be said to have saved the face of the linked battalion equipoise in the past, but if there was a further considerable reduction of the battalions in England, it seemed to him that no extension of the system of counting South Africa or any other place abroad as a home station would enable the War Office to keep up the linked battalion equipose. That would disappear, and he did not know but that it would be a very good thing. It had been a greater stumbling block to successive Secretaries of State than almost anything else. The linked battalion system would, under these conditions, have to go altogether, and we should have to rely on the depot system; but the number of drafts would be much smaller. It would then
644
not be a long step to a long-service Army. He did not know whether the Secretary of State was prepared to take that step, but it was the logical outcome of the considerations which the recruiting problem had forced upon the minds of those who had given it a great deal of attention. Surely there was a prima facie case for this proposal. He thought the Secretary of State should at least undertake to show why this was an impossible system. Its frank adoption would be an enormous economy. A reduction of one-third of the Army in all its branches must mean a similar reduction in its cost, or a saving on the estimated cost of the Army next year, exclusive of auxiliaries, of £9,000,000, and it would only need a sum of £4,000,000 properly and wisely spent on the development of the Militia to enable us to count on a good and efficient second line of defence. Of course there was the question of pensions. One thing was certain—;India would be prepared to pay her share. Further, there would be a much smaller number of men coming out of the Army than under the present system, and those men might, to a great extent, be absorbed into Government employment. If those two facts were considered, the difficulty of pension of which so much was made as against a long-service Army would be found to be greatly exaggerated. He was glad to be associated with his hon. and gallant friend in this matter, and he hoped the House would see its way to support the Motion, for beyond doubt on the question of recruiting the whole possibilities of any efficiency and economy depended.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That under the present system large numbers of men are recruited for the regular infantry who cannot become efficient soldiers, while at the same time it is found difficult to obtain the number placed on the Estimates; and that, in the opinion of this House, an amendment of the existing system is urgently required.'—;(Major Seely)
MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERremarked upon the fact that when such a subject as this, which was of vital importance, and which affected expenditure perhaps more than any other question discussed this session, was

645
brought before the House it excited the interest of Members to a markedly less degree than many questions which appeared, to him at least, to be of slight importance. He was glad that the hon. and gallant Member for the Abercromby Division had given the House an opportunity of discussing a problem which he truly said was at the foundation of a great part, at all events, of the whole Army problem, for he was interested to hear how soon and how close the hon. Gentleman and his seconder had come to the view he had always maintained, and which he believed to offer the solution of the Army problem. He would not, however, enter into controversial matters. He himself wished to say a few words on the matter, not because for a short time he had been connected with the War Department, but because for twenty-five years he had been a very close student of the question of recruiting and had endeavoured to make himself acquainted with the problem not only as it appeared on paper, but also in flesh and blood. He both agreed and disagreed with the hon. and gallant Member. He did not agree that there was a failure to obtain the number of recruits required; but he did agree that the system under which they were obtained and the method by which they were applied were capable of a great deal of amendment. Some main facts in regard to recruiting wove not understood as they ought to be. Quantity we had, but quality we had not; and we were not applying what we had in the most economical and effective manner. The statement that there was a falling off in recruiting last year required great qualification. The total falling off during the year ending December 31st, 1905, was 4,600 men; but that was compared with the largest recruiting year ever experienced in time of peace, and when it was remembered that the recruiting in the latter year was accompanied by the largest number of rejections for unfitness ever experienced they would probably have the view which he entertained that the past year was one of the most profitable recruiting years known. The hon. Member for Cardiff had spoken of the lamentable waste of men. A very large proportion of that waste was in young soldiers who ought never to have been enlisted. Last year the Army
646
refused to take those men. There was a screwing up of the terms of physical qualification such as had never been known before, and the result was that during the summer months there was a very marked reduction in the number of results attested owing to this raising of the physical standard. He ventured now to prophesy that that action would be followed by a smaller amount of waste from the Army in subsequent years than there had been for many a long day. His experience went back to the Admiralty as well as to the War Office, and he well remembered that when they introduced the enforcement of characters for the Royal Marines—;a step afterwards followed in the Army, though perhaps not so rigidly as in the Navy—;the rejections in the Royal Marines fell 90 per cent. in six months and he was quite confident that if they extended that plan of increasing the rejections before the men got into the ranks they would have far fewer rejections from the Army and far less expenditure.
Did the House realise how many men were really giving military service to the Crown? At the present time no fewer than 960,000 were serving and drawing pay, directly or indirectly, from this country every year for service in the Navy, Army, Militia, Volunteers and the Royal Irish Constabulary, and this in time of peace. It constituted a tremendous draft on the population of the country, and if it were the case that it could not be made to meet the actual need then the House would have to consider very carefully the proposition which had been so often urged on them of compulsory service, which he for his part devoutly hoped might long be postponed and indeed altogether avoided. In 1904 the actual number of men raised for the Army and Militia was 77,335. If he deducted from that the men who passed from the Militia to the Regular Army, the net result would be about 63,000 men. How many men did we want? A very simple answer could be given. The hon. Member for Cardiff had truly said that the longer the period of service the smaller the demand for recruiting. But he only indicated very briefly, and by implication only, that to have a purely long-service Army would necessitate a short-service Army also under

647
another name. They might call it a short-service Army or they might call it a Militia, as they pleased. The hon. Member had asked why we could not have a purely short-service Army; He would tell him. On the basis of the Army as it now stood they would not have enough to mobilise in time of war, much less to supply the waste of war when it had begun. If they reduced the quantity of the Army, they would reduce the Reserve to an absolutely negligible amount, and therefore it was necessary to have some other source from which to supply the Reserve. If they increased the length of service from two to three years they would have a large margin of recruits available, and if they increased the number of long-service battalions they would diminish the demand for recruits. At present there were enough to meet the real demands for the battalions in India. Under the long-service system 110 to 120 men were required annually for each battalion there. Under our present system that demand was enormously exaggerated. To furnish 104 long-service battalions and seventy-one short service with two years training, there were required 19,600 men for short service and 12,000 for long service. If the service were for three years, the number required would be 12,000 long and 13,150 short service, or 4,600 less than the recruits actually taken for the Regular Infantry alone in 1904. Thus without impinging on the Militia they would on the basis of two years short service with their present recruiting strength obtain the whole number required with the exception of 4,000 men, while if they increased the length of the service from two to three years they would have a large margin of recruits available. There was an ample recruiting reserve at present if only our resources were properly utilised. The difficulty was not the number but the quality of the recruits, and that was mainly a question of how they dealt with the men they had got. The terms of service were not the trouble. The Army now was a very good career while the man was serving. The pay was high, the feeding good, and the conditions under which the soldier lived were excellent. But they had to face the fact that we were not getting for the expenditure all that the country had a right to demand. It
648
was not a radical revolution that was required at all. There were a great many men serving the country in other branches of the Army who were entirely satisfied with the terms they obtained, and there were excellent men filling those branches. Moreover, they could obtain men for the Navy, for the Royal Marines, for the constabulary and the police on terms which, so far as money went, were not greatly superior to those which were offered to the infantry of the Line. But there were other considerations which deserved the consideration of the Secretary of State. He would warn him against too literally accepting the opinions of officers on one point. There was no army in the world where the association between officers and men was closer or the feeling better than in our own; but he believed that the officers, by reason of living so long in contact with one state of things, were slow to recognise how the world was changing outside the ranks of the Army, and were sometimes prone to give advice which, if accepted, would make us slow in altering the conditions of Army service to keep pace with the conditions of civil life The barrack accommodation was bad. Improvement there had been, but it was in no way commensurate with the expenditure. He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had suspended the experiment which he desired to see tried of building barracks designed by the Director of Barrack Construction, the same architect who designed the great Rowton houses. Then there was the question of improving the amenities of barrack life. He had seen recruits examined and tested, numbers of men and boys standing stripped for an hour in one room. There was probably no class of society in which a man or boy, on entering on his career, would like to find himself associated for an hour under those circumstances, with a number of strange men and boys. Steps were taken immediately to alter the practice. That was one of the small things which effected outside views of the position of the soldier. He believed it might be possible to allow old soldiers to live in their own homes or in lodgings instead of in barracks, but in the interests of discipline this would not be reasonable for boys or young soldiers. But probably the most important matter of all was the employment of soldiers

649
on discharge. That was the great key of the problem. What a man wanted when he went into the Army was not the chance of charity but the assurance of employment. The thing could be done, but in one way only. He believed that by reducing the number of men who were taken for long service, by extending the period of service, and by giving to the men who had engaged for long service the opportunity of prolonging their career in the Army at home, by retaining them for the instruction of those who had engaged for a period not so long, they would go far to solve this problem. He believed the problem was not an insoluble one. It was not a question of numbers. It was a question of dealing with the men when they had them, and of appropriating them to the purposes for which they were required. He had said that the greatest difficulty of all was the want of employment at the end of a soldier's service with the colours. But he was not sure that the attitude of the House was not a still greater difficulty. He had always felt that it was lamentable that the Army should be spoken of in the House as it very often was. They too often heard it talked of as a sort of necessary evil, a thing to be tolerated and accepted because they could not for the moment get rid of it, but he had very seldom—;well, he would not say very seldom, but he had not always—;heard it talked of as what he believed it to be—;one of the most important branches of service in the country. He could not express to the House the sense he had always felt, in dealing with Army matters, of the difficulty created by the want on the part of hon. Members of sympathy for the Army as a great service. He believed nothing did the Army more harm than the refusal to give it the same appreciation and sympathy and good will that was accorded to the Navy. He believed the Army was worthy of that sympathy and good will; and, if they could have a new and happier tone imparted into discussions about the personnel of the Army under the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, he believed it would be repaid over and over again. If they made the service popular he believed their difficulties would vanish, and that the Army would be cheaper, more easily recruited, and more effective in war.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,): I think the right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down takes a somewhat too gloomy view of the attitude of the House of Commons towards the Army. I know there are many, and there always will be many, who chafe under the burden and the curse of war. But they recognise that the Army is there, not through any fault of its own, but through the defects of human nature; and so long as those defects exist, and so long as it is necessary to make provision for national defence, then our Army is a thing of which we ought, in so far as we can, to be proud. That being so, I believe that this debate illustrates a growth in healthy tone as regards the Army. Nobody who has listened to the speeches could fail to be conscious of the recognition on all hands of the great fact that there is a large social problem connected with the Army. You cannot have and maintain a body of men so enormous as this in your midst, sending out from itself discharged soldiers and taking in men who are to become soldiers, without its profoundly affecting the health and well-being of the social organism. And, therefore, the maintenance of the level of the common soldier is something which concerns us not merely as interested in military affairs, but as interested in the social health of the nation at large. I was very glad to recognise in every speech that has been made a growing consciousness, I think it is, of that fact. We all feel that it is an obligation, not merely of policy, but of conscience, to try to make the lot of the soldier bettor than it is. We all respond to the appeal of the right hon. Gentleman and to the appeals which fell from the hon. and gallant Gentleman and the hon. Member who sits behind him. We all feel the force of those appeals—;that we should address ourselves to the task of trying to make the career of the private who enters the Army a better one than it is at the present time. It is quite true that the system which we possess is disorganised in many respects and chaotic. It is quite true that a man who is taken into a very searching employment at eighteen and kept until he is twenty-seven and then sent out to search for civil employment competes at a disadvantage, and that we owe it to him that we should do everything in our power especially to

651
assist him on whom we rely and have to rely for so much, and to whom we are under so deep a national obligation. Therefore, I was glad to see in all the speeches the recognition of that obligation as regards employment. There is no doubt that progress, substantial progress, is being made in that direction. Much remains yet to be done. We have a Committee sitting at the War Office just now upon this subject, and the information which it is collecting is useful and valuable information. But I think the main discoveries are rather that there is much to be done than that all things have been accomplished that are to be accomplished. There has been the want of organisation, the want of an attempt to bring into harmony the conditions of life and service of the soldier with the conditions of life and service when he passes from the Regular ranks into the Reserve. These questions are open. There is one method to which allusion has been made to-night which is of importance. I mean the chance that there is of teaching to the soldier some sort of trade. That is a thing which we have never taken up. It has been done in the Navy. Anybody who goes on board a training ship, anybody who has been on board the "Vernon," for instance, is familiar with the spectacle of the naval officer teaching the sailors, it may be, very often it is, electrical theory and the application of electrical theory to practice, and the result is that when the sailor leaves the Navy he becomes a person who is sought after for employment as an electrician, as a chauffeur, or whatever it may be. This systematic process of teaching is not so easy in the Army. In the first place, most of the time of the young recruit requires to be devoted to the perfecting of himself in his military education. But then, after that, he is moved; he goes abroad, he is constantly being shifted, and it is not easy to got that large amount of training that one could desire in those branches of special knowledge. But the thing is possible, and a commencement has been made. I am glad to think that the indications are all that this will increase, that the beginnings already accomplished will be carried further, so that I am not without hope that substantial progress may be made in the teaching to the soldier of something which may enable him the better to seek for employment when he passes into the Reserve.
652
Then there is another topic which was taken up by the right hon. Gentleman and also by other speakers. That is the state of recruiting. They pointed to the figures, which, I admit, although I think they have been somewhat unduly magnified to-night, show the state of recruiting, and they said, "The state is very significant; recruiting is falling off; people do not care to come into the Army as they did before." The right hon. Gentleman afterwards made some criticism upon the figures given and the arguments used, which, I think, were not without force. It is quite true that recruiting for the infantry of the Line has fallen off very much, but then it is plain, when you look at the statistics, that it is because recruiting for every other arm has gone up, and it will be found when the time comes for closing down the recruiting for other arms that the recruiting for the Line is very much what it was in the past if not little bettor. I have here some figures which have not yet been published, giving the results of recruiting according to the weekly Returns up to date. The House is in possession of the Report, to which reference has been made, giving the figures up to the end of September last, but the figures I am going to refer to are since then. I am going to take from October 1st, 1904, to April 21st, 1905, and compare that with October 1st, 1905, to April 21st, 1906. Taking that period last year the recruiting for the infantry was 14,422. The recruiting for all arms was 21,437. Taking the same period in 1905–6, the recruiting for the infantry shows the very serious falling off of nearly 3,000. It fell to 11,444. But the recruiting for all arms, including infantry, rose to 21,611, as against 21,437 in the previous year. That is due to the desire to enter the cavalry and artillery in preference to the infantry, those two being always the rather more popular and slightly better-paid arms. But as recruiting for these arms is somewhat closed down, which it will be when things are at a normal level, then I think it will be found that recruiting for the infantry of the Line will revert to its normal condition. It is very curious that there seems to be a solid mass of material out of which recruiting for the Army takes place. It is curious how nearly constant it is. It suggests to one that there is a class of young man,

653
perhaps about eighteen, who may not find himself very well circumstanced, who may have found that fortune buffeted him rather hard, who may have found it not very easy to get into a trade, and he goes into the Army. It is quite true that we should like to feel that the Army was such an attractive position that we got the very cream. But we get some very good men, although we get some rather rough ones; and the effect of the system is, I think, undoubtedly that those who may be very unfortunate when they recruit may become different creatures altogether after a time. With one thing which the right hon. Gentleman opposite did I most cordially agree—;he raised the standard. The percentage of medical rejections has gone up. That is not altogether an evil in regard to recruiting, because it stopped the leakage at the other end. Reference was made by my hon. and gallant friend, the Member for the Abercromby Division, to the wastage, and it is very interesting to follow out the figures, which are curious. To begin with, there may be said to be three great causes of wastage, there is "not likely to make efficient soldiers "—;the technical description, there is misconduct, and there is miscellaneous. One is very apt, looking at the recent figures from the beginning of 1905, to be misled by the first heading. My hon. and gallant friend noticed, I think, that the number had increased to 1,822 as against 1,373 in the previous year. Well, there is a reason for that, and it is that a new system was brought into operation; instead of the depot being, as it used to be, under the charge of a colonel who was responsible for sending out whoever was supposed to be inefficient and was responsible only to the commander-in-chief of the district, the new system, brought about by the changes suggested in the Esher Committee Report and sanctioned by this House, is that the regiments are grouped. There is a major in charge of the depot, the major is under control of the brigadier, and he is a very much more strict person to deal with than
654
the old-fashioned colonel and old-fashioned commander-in-chief. The result was that they raised the percentage at first, but it is because they did not lose at the other end. In the most recent statistics it is striking to notice the improvement, which, I think, goes through the Army as a whole. I take the same five months I took before, the period at the end of 1905 and the beginning of 1906. Taking the latest figures, the invalids were 1,692, as compared with 1,341 this year. There, I think, I can trace the beneficent operation of the right hon. Gentleman's stiffening of the medical tests. As to those not likely to make efficient soldiers, they began to sink this year, and were 666, as compared with 713 in the year before. As to misconduct, there has boon a drop, comparing 1904–5 with 1905–6, from 1,306 to 955. The fact is that all through the Army there is distinct evidence that a social movement has set in. Take temperance. Nothing is more striking than the number of times, when you walk down among the men and ask them what they take, that you get the answer "Kops" That indicates a striking change of attitude, and that expression may be heard still more often in the future than in the past. There is no doubt that the cause of Army temperance is advancing. Better education, better conditions, a great improvement, I think, in the zeal and earnestness of the officers—;and the South African War has been a stimulating influence among our officers—;all these things are combining to improve the social level of the Army. Although there is much to do, and I am the last person to say that things are as they should be, I do recognise that things are better than they have been. It rests with us to make them better still. My hon. friend behind me travelled into a very debateable region, and touched on the great question whether you could not improve things more by adopting a new Army system. Perhaps he is right; but the topic of controversy is so enormous that if we were

655
to enter on it our proceedings would be very much lengthened. The right hon. Gentleman opposite administered a gentle rebuke to my hon. friend as to long service. "Why," he asked, "did you not accept my system of two Armies, of long and short service?" Thereby hangs a tale, and I leave it to the conscience of my hon. friends who form what is termed the Army group in this House to reconcile it to themselves why they did not accept that proposition of the right hon. Member for Croydon. At any rate, I feel that the Member for Croydon in touching on it really gave the answer to my hon. friend the Member for Cardiff, because he showed that the question opened up was so enormous that really it could not be discussed within the compass of this debate. Moreover, I doubt whether it is really germane to the Motion, except, so far, perhaps, as it affects recruiting by the temptation to enter on a soldier's career. I can only, therefore, make the briefest observation on it. Suppose you have a long service Army, the first question is, What is it going to cost you? That lies at the root of the matter. My hon. friend thought he saw his way to the saving of £9,000,000. I should be very much obliged to him if he helped me to that; but he did not develop the way in which that could really be brought about. Let me point out that I think there is great force in the contention of the right hon. Gentleman that you cannot have a long-service Army without a short-service Army too. We have tried a long-service Army in this country; we tried very hard, and turned from it at last with a shudder. It was the greatest failure, I think, of all the things we have ever had. I fancy the point of my hon. friend was that you were to have a long-service Army because you were to furnish a career to the soldier for life, which would relieve him of the necessity of looking for civil employment, and leave him with a pension.
MR. GUESTsaid he meant that if there was a longer service, a smaller
656
demand would be made on the recruiting market, and a better class of recruits would be got.
MR. HALDANE: Is that so? The medical statistics show that the invalided cases increase to an appalling extent, particularly in tropical countries, and past the age of thirty, under the present system. With the old soldier, moreover, you had an amount of wastage which we do not get under the present system. And how are you to get the men for long service?
MR. GUEST: We can get them now for nine years.
MR. HALDANE: But my hon. friend wants more than nine years, and you certainly must go further than that if you are to tide the soldier over the period now spent in civil employment to his pension. You cannot give men a pension after nine years, at least I should not like to be responsible for the Army Estimates if you did. What you want is men below thirty for the Army; after that, experience shows you get wastage. The ideal system would seem to be one of turning out men at that age, and securing if you can civil employment for them; and by dint of reorganisation I think a good deal may be done in that direction. But again I ask, how are you to get the men for this long service? Are you going to recruit them at twenty-one? Why at twenty-one a man is married and has a family. The exception only proves the rule. At twenty-one if a man is ever going to get any occupation he has got it, the best men have got it, and men without occupation at that age would be men of a lower class than the men without occupation at eighteen. When you send a man out who is married you send his wife and children out, and schoolmasters to teach them, and you must do that to a much greater extent under those conditions. And then you send him out to, it may be, a tropical country which does not suit a man above that age.
MR. PIRIEasked how were men of twenty-one recruited in other countries.
MR. HALDANE: They get them, under the conscript system, by taking them by the neck and bringing them in. If that system were proposed in this country I am afraid it would lead to a great deal of trouble. What we require is an Army to serve abroad in tropical lands. You cannot get an Army to serve abroad under conscription. But the question between long service and short service was wisely left outside the Motion by my hon. and gallant friend who moved it. There were other topics to which he alluded that deserve the close consideration of the House; and if this Motion had assumed the form of urging the improvement of the social condition of the soldier with a view not only of facilitating recruiting, but of making the career of the soldier better than it is, I should gladly have accepted it and have had it placed on record as the opinion of this House of Commons. The House will see that I am not unsympathetic towards the spirit which has animated my hon. and gallant friend in moving this Motion or the purpose which he has in view. Indeed I agree with that purpose. But I think the terms proposed go too far, that the Motion is not worded precisely in the form which would best express the opinions which we all entertain more or less, and I should certainly desire to see the Motion a little more closely drafted before accepting it.
CAPTAIN KINCAID SMITHmoved as an Amendment to the Motion to add at the end—;
"And any such Amendment should include the introduction of physical drill of a military character in our schools."
He thought that in spite of what the right hon. Gentleman had said there would be few hon. Members who would not be to a certain extent in agreement with the Resolution of the hon. Member for the Abercromby Division
658
of Liverpool. If the Resolution had been less vague, and had contained some definite proposition, he for one would have hesitated in placing an Amendment on the Paper. The hon. Member's speech was principally a plea for giving the soldier a life career. He thought they were all in favour of that, but was there any prospect of adopting it after what the right hon. Gentleman had said? He could not gather that the hon. Member for the Abercromby Divison had put forward any solution of this difficult military problem. Taking into consideration that the question of recruiting was very difficult, and also that no small improvement in the pay of the private soldier or slight improvement in his surroundings was likely to result in obtaining a better class of recruits, he asked the House to express approval of the principle that no alteration in the present system of recruiting was likely to produce any useful result, unless they introduced at the same time in the schools a system of military training up to the age of eighteen. Such a system was advocated by that great soldier, Lord Roberts. It would produce a vast reserve—;a male population which in any national emergency would provide a number of men who after a few months training would be fit to take their places either alongside or against Continental armies. It was idle to jump to the conclusion that this was conscription in disguise. All that was advocated was that the usual school exercises should be supplemented by others of a more distinctive military character. What harm could it do a boy to be able to walk straight and handle a rifle? He was as much against conscription as any hon. Member in the House. Conscription was impossible in this country for many reasons, but he would mention only two—;it would not provide the Army for India, and it was unnecessary for home service. There was only one argument in favour of conscription, and that was that where there was such difficulty in procuring work for our soldiers after

659
their period of service, under conscription every man would be on a level in the labour market. That was the great difficulty—;to provide work. The right hon. Gentleman had said there was a Committee sitting on this question, but personally he believed their labours would never solve the problem. He did not think they would ever provide a scheme by which men who became soldiers because they could not find work would be able to find work when they left the colours. Those who came from the casual labour market, and unfortunately they were the majority, were not likely to be any more fitted for obtaining employment on leaving the colours. No scheme was ever likely to solve that knotty problem. There was an idea to teach soldiers whilst serving with the colours, but he was told that this was impossible except in the case of a few. Some hon. Members might laugh at his suggestion of military training up to the age of eighteen, but in a day of national calamity they might be forced to adopt real conscription. He was confident, however, that their masters would never consent to conscription except after the most appalling disaster—;in fact when the word "war" meant the same thing to the quiet little country village in this country as it did to the little village on a European frontier. We should teach our youth that war was harmful, but we should teach them at the same time that they could not have peace by hoping for it and being unprepared for war. They should also be taught that it was the duty of all to do a little towards fitting themselves to take their place in a national emergency. If we had military training up to the age of eighteen we should have a large male population able with a little training to face a Continental army. There was a great danger in pushing too far the doctrine of quality merely. He believed that in a European war expert efficiency would not win the day over great odds. If the State was to undertake the responsibility of feeding school
660
children, they should require more time to be given to the service of the State. The Minister for War had won golden opinions from all sides, because so far he had done nothing. The right hon. Gentleman had negotiated no great reform, but if the words of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer meant anything it was that the Minister for War would do something next year. If, however, he relied on his present material he was predoomed to failure. Probably his military advisers, if they had not told him so outright, had hinted at it. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would say that the policy Lord Roberts was advocating would receive full and sympathetic consideration from the Government. If hon. Members hesitated to support this Amendment, it would be because they feared the difficulty of persuading an infinitesimal proportion of their masters, the electors, that this was not the first step towards conscription, but the only policy which stood between this country and conscription. He begged to move.
COLONEL SANDYSin seconding the Amendment, said that the mere fact that the scheme of Lord Roberts emanated from a distintinguished soldier must, prima facie, recommend it to the favourable notice of the House. Looking at the subject as a practical soldier, he believed that a knowledge of military drill among our youth must conduce very much to the safety of the country. Not only would its acquisition by the young men of the country tend to make the Army as an institution more widely respected, but it was a valuable means of physical training, especially for the time when these young men became soldiers. The preliminary training in the elements of drill, and in habits of obedience to authority and discipline was a factor of the greatest importance in making soldiers; and therefore the proposal of the hon. Member was one which he had the greatest pleasure in seconding. In looking at

661
the question of recruiting, he asserted that the point they had to attend to in order to get men into the Army was to provide something for them at the end of their training. He remembered on one occasion marching with his company at the time the short service system was introduced and when recruits were difficult to get. He put a question to a colour-sergeant as to what was the reason for the falling-off in recruiting. He asked whether it was the foreign service or the long service that they did not like, and whether in his opinion recruiting would be better when the service was shortened. His reply was that the men did not mind either foreign or long service, but what they did want was something to look forward to at the end of their service. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would do all he could to bring about that result. If men were to be asked to give the cream of their lives in the service of the country the House was bound in return to provide the training by which these men might be enabled to maintain themselves as skilled labourers when they left the Army. In the depôts there should be a system of enlistment for boys similar to that which prevailed in the Navy. At the end of the five or six years of their boys' service the youths should be received as trained soldiers into the ranks of the Army; but during those five or six years in the depôts the lads should be taught the elements of a handicraft, so that when they left the Army they would be able to take their places in civil life as men who could handle tools and earn their livelihood as skilled workmen. He believed that the House of Commons was beginning to see the necessity for having an efficient and contented Army, and it was not satisfied with the spectacle which was too often seen, of men who had given the best part of their lives to the service of their country ending their days in the workhouse or asking for alms in the street. That, in his opinion, was a national disgrace. In conclusion he
662
hoped that the Secretary of State for War would seriously consider his suggestion that boys should be enlisted for the Army in the same way as they entered the Navy.
Amendment proposed—;
"At the end, to add the words 'and any such Amendment should include the introduction of physical drill of a military character in our schools.'"—;(Captain Kincaid-Smith.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEhoped that the Amendment would be withdrawn. [Cries of "No."] The Secretary of State had made an offer which ought to be accepted. It was most desirable that the House should place on record that it was deeply concerned, not only with the soldier in the ranks, but with his after career. The Amendment was not relevant to the Resolution, and was of so far-reaching a character that it ought to be debated separately and fully. The original Motion was to call attention to the state of recruiting for the Army, but this Amendment introduced a suggestion that there should be physical drill of a military character in the schools, and he thought it was the opinion of a great majority of hon. Members that that was undesirable. That was a subject of such far-reaching effect that it ought not to be brought up at the fag end of a discussion, but should be seriously argued at sufficient length upon a proper occasion. Both from a tactical and strategical point of view he hoped the Amendment would be withdrawn. To say that there ought to be physical drill in a school was to state something which was already accepted by the education authority, and everybody interested in education agreed that the physical development of the body must go along with the intellectual development of the mind. He did not see why they should tack on to that the question of the drill in the schools assuming a military character. He had always taken a deep interest in the Volunteer movement and

663
they got the Volunteers at the early age of seventeen. The Amendment raised a very important subject, and he hoped it would be withdrawn in order that they might arrive at the important decision to which the Secretary of State for War had assented.
MR. HUNTsaid that for the last three years the experiment had been tried in the elementary school in the district in which he resided of teaching the children to shoot with a single bullet, and also to shoot in teams and to shoot quickly. He thought that would be a great advantage to them in future if they were over called upon to serve their country. He thought that all the boys ought to be trained to shoot with a single bullet, and they ought to be given a certain amount of military drill. The expense was trifling, and the thing once learnt would never be forgotten.
MR. SEDDONsaid that some people seemed to think that the schools were only brought into existence for the benefit of the drill sergeant and the parson. Military drill in schools was vicious in practice and wrong in principle. If we needed an Army for the defence of the country it would have to be obtained by different methods. If hon. Gentlemen on both sides wanted to know the best moans of getting recruits from the better section of the working classes he would give it in a nutshell. It would be necessary to make promotion in the Army free from top to bottom. The upper ranks should not be the exclusive possession of those who had wealth, position, and influence. They should do away with monopoly entirely, and the man who had earned a position in the higher ranks as an officer should get it. There was another sweeping reform required, and that was to see that the expenses of officers in the mess room approximated to the pay which the officers received. It was a perfect scandal at present that
664
the higher ranks of the Army should be looked upon by a certain section of the community merely as their right and privilege.
MR. HALDANEindicated dissent.
MR. SEDDONsaid the right hon. Gentleman shook his head. He had read—
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must confine himself to the Motion or the Amendment.
MR. SEDDONsaid he was going to speak against the Amendment. He wanted to give an illustration from the working class point of view of what would be an inducement to enter and remain in the Army. The soldier should receive a wage approximating to that which could be earned in skilled trades, and his social position should be improved. If they made the Army a well-paid profession, if they improved the conditions of the soldier's life, if they created not merely a military spirit but a love of country, they would give all the incentive which was required in order to obtain the men wanted for the defence of the country. So far as hon. Members below the gangway were concerned, they repudiated entirely the idea of giving a military training in the schools as a means towards the defence of the country. All they asked was that the authorities at the War Office should treat the soldier as a man, and give him conditions approximating to those enjoyed by the better classes engaged in industrial pursuits, and they should show him that when approved by service he would be able to enter the upper ranks. When he became an officer he should not be blackmailed by those who had been pitchforked into similar positions. Complaints were often made that men who rose from the ranks could not live on their pay, and very often it was made clear to them in the mess room

665
that their room was preferred to their company. [Cries of "No, no!" and "Hear, hear!"] Yes, everybody had heard about "ragging" in the Army, and, if rumour was to be credited, a certain great officer who had risen from the ranks had a miserable time before he put an end to his existence. If fair conditions were given in the Army there would be no lack of men ready to defend their native country.
DR. MACNAMARA: said he had listened with a sort of sympathy to the hon. and gallant Member who moved the Amendment. He was obviously inspired by great courage. The hon. Member desired peace, he said, and therefore we must be prepared for war. But by his proposal he would so inflame the minds of the people that war would be made inevitable. The hon. Member sat for Stratford upon-Avon. Consequently he would agree with him when he quoted the words—;
"How oft the sight of means to do ill deeds makes ill deeds done."
He proposed to take a very severely practical view of the proposal before the House, because as a matter of fact the proposal to give military training to the children in the schools had actually been in operation. Not so long ago when the noble Lord the President of the Council in the late Government came into office he was keenly anxious for universal physical training in the schools; he went to the War Office and got a manual prepared with the object of securing that end. The manual was prepared as a model course of physical training for all the children in the public elementary schools in the country. When the hon. Member saw the manual he recognised that somebody had written what amounted to a réchauffé of the early part of the soldier's red-book. For two or three years this course was
666
inflicted on the children, the facing about, turning, and fours forming, and other military movements were practised, and the whole system was hopelessly wrong and cruel to the children. Nothing could have been worse for them than this military drill. The great bulk of it had to do with legs and arms. There were no breathing exercises, and no exercises for the muscles of the neck, sides, and abdomen. After the manual was issued he invited the then Parliamentary Secretary of the Board of Education to come into the lobby and show him how the prescribed exorcises were done, and the hon. Gentleman respectfully declined. It was only necessary at that time to describe what was put into the teachers' hands to show how hopelessly absurd and grotesque the manual was for the proper physical training of children. That book, having passed out of existence, it was an easy task for the Board of Education in its wiser moments to prepare a good eclectic system of scientific physical training largely taken from the Swedish drill, and more was not needed. He would certainly oppose the Amendment. What was wanted was that every youth of the age of from eighteen to twenty should be compelled to give two hours on two nights in each week to physical training under municipal auspices. He would add to that—;and he said this with fear and trembling, for he was far from advocating anything in the nature of conscription—;at the close of this training, a training in the use of the rifle, for he held the old-fashioned view that everybody ought to be trained to carry arms. But the square-toed, stiff, ramrod, military training was entirely unsuited at any time to school children.
CAPTAIN KINCAID-SMITHasked leave to withdraw his Amendment. [Cries of "No."]
SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he intervened to express regret that the Amendment had been moved because it appeared to him to be somewhat irrelevant. He also desired to repudiate the expressions which had fallen from the hon. Member for North Camberwell as to the action of the Board of Education in regard to physical training. He remembered that the hon. Member made a somewhat inflammatory speech on the subject, but he repudiated the suggestion that the hon. Member invited him to give an example of the exercises or that he declined to accept the invitation. It was true that the model course for physical training in 1903 contained some military terms, though as regards the training given it was satisfactory. The matter was carefully looked into, and the military phraseology was removed from the book, but the physical training remained practically the same throughout the elementary schools. The question raised by the Amendment affected all schools and required much more careful consideration than could be given to it in a debate of this character. The President of the Board of Education ought to be present to express his opinion as to the possibility of carrying out what was suggested in the Amendment.
MR. REESsaid he understood from his hon. friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon that he did not propose anything in the nature of physical training such as the hon. Member for North Camberwell had described. He believed he had in his mind that class of physical training which everybody in the House would admit was good. The Persians in old times taught their children to ride, shoot, and speak the truth, and if they were less particular in modern times on the third point, it
668
was none the less an excellent programme. All agreed that grown up boys should be taught the use of the rifle. He had known an excellent game shot who, when he took up a rifle with a 5lb. or 71b. pull, could not hit the target. It was easy without practice in the use of a service rifle, not only to pull the sight off the target, but off the mound behind the target, or even the mountain behind the mound. There were matters raised by this Motion into which he should have liked to enter had there been time. [Cries of "Divide."] He had not the slightest intention of ceasing to speak until he was called to order by the Chair, and had in fact had less than five minutes in which to address the House. He wished to bring before the House the question of capitation charges.
And, it being Eleven of the clock, the Debate stood adjourned.
Debate to be resumed upon Monday next.

ALIENS BILL.
Considered in Committee, and reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time to-morrow.

SEAMEN'S AND SOLDIERS' FALSE CHARACTERS BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clause 1:
Question again proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
Committee report progress; to sit again upon Monday next.
Adjourned at Ten minutes after Eleven o'clock.