Commons Sitting of 21 May 1906

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

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.
MR. SPEAKERinformed the House that he had received from the Judges appointed to try the several Election Petitions the following Certificate and Report relating to the Election for the Borough of Maidstono:—
The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Acts, 1854–1895.
Maidstone Election.
To the Right Hon. The Speaker of the House of Commons.
We, Sir William Grantham, Knight, and Sir John Compton Lawrance, Knight, Judges of the High Court of Justice, and two of the Judges on the Rota for the time being for the Trial of Election Petitions in England and Wales, do hereby Certify in pursuance of the said Acts that upon the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 14th. 15th, and 16th days of May of this year, we duly held a Court at the Sessions House, Maidstone, for the trial of and did try the Election Petition for the Borough of Maidstone between Sir Francis Evans, Baronet, K.C.M.G., Petitioner, and Charles Stewart Henry, Viscount Castlereagh, Respondent.
And in further pursuance of the said Acts We Certify that at the conclusion of the said trial, we determined that the said Charles Stewart Henry, Viscount Castlereagh, being the Member whose Election and Return were complained of in the said Petition was duly elected and returned.
And whereas charges were made in the said Petition of Corrupt and Illegal Practices having been committed at the said Election, We, in further pursuance of the said Acts, Report as follows:—

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

2. That Henry Archibald Waring was proved to have been guilty of the illegal practice of making a payment on account of the conveyance of Electors to and from the Poll.

3. That corrupt or illegal practices were not proved to have, nor have we reason to believe that corrupt or illegal practices have extensively prevailed at the said Election.

4. That no Candidate has been proved to have been guilty by his Agents of any corrupt or illegal practice at the said Election.

5. That the person reported guilty of an illegal practice has been furnished with a Certificate of Indemnity.

A Copy of the Evidence and of our Judgment, taken by the Deputies of the Shorthand Writer of the House of Commons, accompanies this our Certificate.
Dated this 18th day of May, 1906.
WM. GRANTHAM.
J. C. LAWRANCE.
Shorthand Writer's Notes laid upon the Table by Mr. SPEAKER.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked whether the House might expect to be furnished with the shorthand notes of the proceedings at the Yarmouth trial. He asked the Question for various reasons of which the House was in possession.
Mr. SPEAKER: I cannot inform the hon. Member, but I will make inquiries.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  PRIVATE BILL [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY IN QUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH.)
  Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of
  890
  Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—Havana United Railways and Regia Warehouses Bill [Lords]; Cambrian Railways Bill [Lords]; Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Tramways Bill [Lords]; Hull and Barnsley Railway (Steam Vessels) Bill [Lords]; Great Northern (Ireland) and Midland Railways Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.

  PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (STAND ING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERE TO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.:—Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time To-morrow.
  Accrington District Gas and Water Board Bill [Lords]. Read a third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Ascot District Gas (Electric Lighting) Bill (King's Consent signified). Bill read the third time, and passed.
  Brixham Gas (Electric Lighting) Bill (Prince of Wales' Consent signified). Bill read the third time and passed.
  Bristol Corporation Bill. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  London United Tramways Bill. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Buenos Ayres Grand National Tramways Bill [Lords]; Oldham and Saddle-worth District Tramways (Abandonment) Bill; Wallasey Tramways and Improvements Bill [Lords]. Read a second time, and committed.
  London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Bill (by Order). As amended,

  891
  considered; A Clause added; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Hackney Electricity Bill (by Order). Read a second time, and committed.
  Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill; Marriages Provisional Order Bill. Rend the third time, and passed.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Liverpool and the counties of Bedford, Buckingham, and Hertford," presented by Mr. Runciman; supported by Mr. Burns; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 218.]
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill. "To confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to Cuckfield (Rural), Leek, and the Wanstead and Woodford Joint Hospital District," presented by Mr. Runciman; supported by Mr. Burns; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 219.]

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to,—Cathcart District Railway (Superfluous Lands) Order Confirmation Bill; North Berwick Corporation Order Confirmation Bill; Carlisle Corporation Bill, without Amendment.
  Thornton Urban District Gas Bill, with Amendments.
  That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to include Bribery amongst Extradition Crimes." [Extradition Bill [Lords.]
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for the suppression of Betting in Streets and other public places." [Street Betting [Lords.]
  And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for incorporating and conferring powers upon the Crediton Gas Company; and for other purposes." [Crediton Gas Bill, [Lords.]

  CREDITON GAS BILL [LORDS].
  Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
PETITIONS.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL (RELIGIOUS TEACHING).
  Petitions against alteration of law: From Aberystwyth (two); Addlestone; Ashby cum Fenby; Chorlton cum Hardy; Dudleston; Heaton Mersey; Holme in Cliviger; Hougham and Marston; Keevil (two); Knightsbridge: North and South Stoke; Patricroft; Scunthorpe (two); Tatham (two): Whitworth (two); and, Wrawby (two); to lie upon the Table.
  VAGRANT CHILDREN BILL.
  Petition from Warminster, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ARMY (MEDICAL DEPARTMENT).
  Copy presented, of Report for the year 1904 [by Command] to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented, of Thirty-third Annual Report by the Accountants for Scotland to the Scotch Education Department [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3589 to 3594 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1889 (ORDINANCE).
  Copy presented, of University Court Ordinance No. XV. (Edinburgh, No. 6.) (Regulations for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Forestry) [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 174.]
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) (NON-PROVIDED SCHOOLS).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 23rd February: Mr. Birrell]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  H.M.S. "Dreadnought."
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will include in his promised statement about the "Dreadnought," the increase of cost and displacement due to the last knot and last two knots of extra speed; and whether an explanatory statement will be issued prior to the discussion of the Shipbuilding Vote giving these details for the battleships, cruisers, and submarine boats which are under construction or projected, similar to the information which used to be given in the Navy Estimates.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) It is intended to issue, prior to the discussion on Vote 8, the promised statement in regard to the "Dreadnought," and certain details respecting the other vessels under construction. In reply to the first part of the Question, as any reduction in the speed would vitally alter the design and result in an entirely different ship, the information asked for is not available, and any estimate that might be given would be misleading.

  The Naval Intelligence Department.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty for what length of time do captains serving at the Naval Intelligence Department retain their position; whether he can cause to be shown in the Navy List the dates of appointment of all officers serving at the Admiralty, as is done, in the case of officers serving in ships; whether he can also indicate in the index the fact if they are serving at the Admiralty; and if these facilities cannot be afforded he will state the reason.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) Captains serving in the Naval Intelligence Department hold their appointments during pleasure. The duration of the appointment does not as a rule exceed three years, but it may be extended at pleasure. The dates of first appointment in the case of officers holding civilian appointments at the Admiralty can be shown in the Navy List, though it will give extra work; but as regards the proposed alteration to the index, the
  894
  symbols already given indicate the department in which the officer is serving, and it is not considered desirable to make any alterations or additions involving further elaboration.

  Summer Uniforms for Rural Auxiliary Postmen.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will inquire why the Department does not supply a summer suit and overcoat to a rural auxiliary postman doing less than five hours work a day in view of the fact that those articles are supplied to auxiliary postmen whose posts are much less exposed.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I will inquire into the matter.

  Central Telegraph Store Depots.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Postmaster-General what is the total cost, including overtime, of the clerical staff and labour employed in the central telegraph store depots during 1903–4, 1904–5, 1905–6, and 1906–7 estimated, and what was the value of the stores examined and issued from these depots in each year of the same period; whether he is prepared to consider favourably proposals to establish a central telegraph store depot in Dublin, where stores would be delivered by contractors, examined, and issued for engineering works in Ireland.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The total cost, including overtime, of the clerical staff and labour employed in the central store depots, including the chief pole depots in the provinces, during the years in question was:— £

  £

  1903–4

  37,650

  1904–5

  42,958

  1905–6

  49,916

  1906–7

  53,540 (Estimated)

  The gross value of the stores dealt with at those depots is estimated as follows:—

  £

  1903–4

  1,419,000

  1904–5

  1,654,000

  1905–6

  1,838,000

  1906–7

  2,047,000

  There is a local store depot in Dublin, but I do not think it would be expedient to establish a central depot such as the hon. Member contemplates.

  Cost of Naval Shipbuilding.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what are the figures of comparative cost of hulls only in the case of similar ships built in the Royal dock-yards and private yards respectively,

  Cost of hull.

  Contract built.

  Dockyard built.

  Battleships.

  £

  £

  King Edward VII. Class:

  Commonwealth

  …

  …

  …

  918,517

  —

  Dominion

  …

  …

  …

  884,435

  —

  Hindustan

  …

  …

  …

  899,607

  —

  King Edward VII

  …

  …

  …

  —

  905,741

  New Zealand

  …

  …

  …

  —

  872,560

  Armoured Cruisers.

  Monmouth Class:

  Berwick

  …

  …

  …

  400,354

  —

  Cumberland

  …

  …

  …

  410,105

  —

  Donegal

  …

  …

  …

  409,256

  —

  Lancaster

  …

  …

  …

  424,594

  —

  Kent

  …

  …

  …

  —

  420,667

  Suffolk

  …

  …

  …

  —

  393,482

  Essex

  …

  …

  …

  —

  445,694

  Cornwall

  …

  …

  …

  —

  419,053

  Devonshire Class:

  Devonshire

  …

  …

  …

  —

  450,851

  Antrim

  …

  …

  …

  501,506

  —

  Argyll

  …

  …

  …

  511,164

  —

  Carnarvon

  …

  …

  …

  492,292

  —

  Hampshire

  …

  …

  …

  490,472

  —

  Roxburgh

  …

  …

  …

  481,063

  —

  since the system of allowing contractors to complete vessels for service came into operation.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The information asked for is as follows:—

  Early Morning Delivery of Letters in the City of London.
  MR. A.J. BALFOUR (City of London): To ask the Postmaster-General whether it would be possible to make arrangements for the earlier delivery of letters by the first post in the city of London, so that there shall be security for the delivery of letters before 8 or 8.15 in the morning.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) It would not be possible to afford an earlier delivery of letters by the first post in the City of London without excluding various mails and a large amount of correspondence, and thereby giving rise to grave complaint. The utmost efforts are made to deliver the correspondence as early as possible. As regards letters which could be prepared for delivery at an earlier hour, the number of people desiring such earlier delivery of part of their correspondence is believed to be small, and I would suggest that they should have their letters sorted into private boxes and obtain an early delivery by employing their own messengers.

  Promotions to Head Postmasterships.
  MR. NUTTALL: To ask the Postmaster-General, if he will state what percentage of the promotions to head postmasterships have been granted to established sub-postmasters, and the percentage to sorting clerks and telegraphists, during the past ten years.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Considerable labour would be involved in obtaining the information asked for by the hon. Member. Appointments to head postmasterships are filled by the selection of the most suitable candidates, irrespective of the classes to which they belong, and I do not think it would be expedient to reserve fixed proportions of such appointments for particular classes of officers.

  School Board Franchise in the Island of Lewis.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that out of 936 persons on the valuation roll for the parish of Barvas, Island of Lewis, no less than 880 have no vote for school board elections by reason of their rentals being less than
  898
  £4; and, seeing that this results in schools being placed under the chairmanship of the proprietor's factor who is chairman of three of the four school boards in the island, will he take such stops as may be necessary to extend the school board franchise to all persons entitled to vote at parliamentary and county council elections.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) Pending the issue of the Return referred to in my Answer to his Question of March 26th, I can express no opinion as to the correctness of the figures quoted by the hon. Member. The question of the school board franchise is one to be dealt with in a general education bill for Scotland.

  Effect of London County Council Power Station on Instruments at Greenwich Observatory.
  MR. ASHLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can now state the result of his investigation into the effect of the London County Council power station, erected on the meridian close to Greenwich Observatory, on the instruments used there; and whether it will be possible in the future to rely on observations taken there for the purpose of the Nautical Almanack.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) Tests have recently been carried out to determine the possible effect of this station on the instruments in the Observatory, and I hope to be able to make a statement on the subject as soon as the results have been examined.

  Grant to John Bennett on the Denning Estate.
  MR. REDDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that John Bennett, an evicted tenant, has been allotted 20 acres by the Estates Commissioners on the Denning estate, in King's County; can he say how long he has been in possession; whether he was promised a grant by the Estates Commissioners to enable him to stock his land; whether he has yet received the grant; and, if not, what is the cause of the delay.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners

  899
  that on the 19th February last they allotted to John Bennett a holding of about 86 acres on the estate of J. Denning. The Commissioners have sanctioned a free grant of £100 to this tenant for the provision of stock, and have instructed their inspector accordingly.

  Game Licences in King's and Queen's Counties.
  MR. REDDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that during the last shooting season a magistrate, with others, in the Midlands, was several times shooting partridge and other game over game dogs, to the knowledge of the police, without a game licence; whether in the same neighbourhood land grabbers, and the supporters of and sympathisers with land grabbers, were constantly shooting partridge and pheasants, to the knowledge of the police, without a game licence; can he say why the police took no notice and did not acquaint the excise officer of these breaches of the law; and whether instructions will be given to the police in King's County and Queen's County that no persons are to be permitted to defraud the revenue with impunity.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that the police have any duty to discharge in respect of game licenses. They are, in fact, instructed that it is not their duty to inquire whether persons have such licences. The Inspector General, however, informs me that, so far as he can ascertain, no case has occurred in King's or Queen's County in which unlicensed persons have shot game to the knowledge of the police.

  Prosecutions for Trespass in Ireland.
  MR. REDDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether instructions have been issued or intimation given to the rural police in Ireland by head constables, district inspectors, county inspectors, or other officers, to the effect that grabbers, emergency men, their supporters or sympathisers, are not to be summoned or proceeded against for the trespass on the high roads of cows, calves, goats, donkeys, or other animals their property;
  900
  if no such instruction or intimation has been given, can he explain the action of the rural police in permitting the parties named to commit trespass with impunity; and whether he will take steps to have the police informed that it is their duty to impartially proceed against all offenders, and that such action will not militate against promotion.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Inspector General informs me that no instructions of the nature indicated have been issued, and he is not aware of any failure on the part of the police to prosecute any class of persons for the offences named. It is the duty of the police to act impartially in the matter of prosecuting all offenders against the law. If any specific instance of default by the police can be given the Inspector General will have the matter fully inquired into and the proper action taken. There is, he informs me, absolutely no foundation for the suggestion that promotion is affected by the matters alluded to.

  Amount Standing to Credit of the Irish Department of Agriculture.
  MR. MOONEY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, what is now the total amount at the credit of the Board of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, Ireland, caused by the non-expenditure of the yearly Parliamentary grant since the creation of the Department: for what purpose is this fund being formed, and by what authority this money is being diverted from the purposes for which it has been voted by Parliament; and why is no statement of the amount of this fund shown in the annual Report of the Board.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.). It is assumed that this Question relates to the sum of £18,000 per annum voted by Parliament as a grant-in-aid under Section 15 of the Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act of 1899. This sum, which forms part of the general endowment fund of the Department arising from various sources, is applied in accordance with the provisions of Section 16 of the Act, and has not been diverted to other purposes than those specified in that section. A statement relative to the unexpended balances of the income

  901
  of the endowment fund is given on page 9 of the Department's Fifth Annual Report recently published.

  Average Attendances in Irish National Schools.
  MR. MURPHY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the average attendance required for the first assistant and for the second assistant in Irish national schools; when were these averages introduced and what were the previous averages required, and is it proposed to reduce the present averages; whether the average for the second assistant has been reduced in proportion to that for the first assistant, and, if not, why; what additional sum would be required to grant a second assistant to schools with an attendance of eighty pupils or above; and whether, considering the necessity that exists for additional help in these schools, he will favourably consider the question of reducing the 95 average and providing the necessary funds.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The average attendance necessary to warrant the employment of one assistant teacher is fifty, and of two assistant teachers, ninety-five. The rules as to these averages were introduced in 1904 and 1898 respectively. The former averages were sixty and 105, respectively. It is not proposed to reduce the present averages. The average for the second assistant was not reduced in 1904 because in the opinion of the Commissioners, an adequate reduction had already been made, namely, in 1898. Smaller schools require a relatively larger teaching staff than larger schools. The Commissioners estimate that about £14,000 per annum would be required to grant a second assistant to schools with an average attendance of eighty. I am afraid that the suggestion made in the concluding part of the Question cannot be entertained having regard to the many other claims on the Ireland development grant for other (including educational) purposes.

  Reinstatement of Evicted Tenants on the Shelton Estate.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether
  902
  applications have been received by the Estates Commissioners with regard to the reinstatement of two evicted tenants, named James Murphy and Laurence O'Connell, on the Shelton estate, situated at Rossmore, in the county of Limerick; whether the holdings in question have been derelict for the past three years; and, under the existing circumstances, what steps the Commissioners propose to take in regard to the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners have received applications for reinstatement from both of the evicted tenants named, who state that their former holdings are in the occupation of Simon Morrissey. The Commissioners intend to have the applications, inquired into in due course.

  Boycotting, Intimidation, &c., in Ireland.
  MR. LONSDALE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the cases of boycotting, intimidation, outrage, and incitement to outrage which have been reported to the Irish Constabulary during the six months ending March 31st last which have not been followed by the arrest or prosecution of the offenders; and can he explain why so many offenders escape being brought to justice.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) When any cases of the kind mentioned occur, the facts are reported by the Inspector-General to the Irish Government. The Question would appear to suggest that the number of such cases has increased or that the proportion of offenders brought to justice has decreased. The Inspector-General, however, informs me that there is no foundation whatever for any such suggestion.

  Payments to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society.
  MR. DILLON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to his statement that some £19,000 had been paid to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland whether it was necessary for the Department to have the approval of the Board of

  903
  Agriculture before these payments were authorised; if so, on what dates was authorisation given for any sum in excess of £2,000; and whether he can refer to any Minutes, Annual Accounts, or Reports of the Board in which the fact of these payments having been made was clearly set out.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) At the second meeting of the Agricultural Board, held on July 11th, 1900, the Board had under consideration an arrangement in regard to the technical instruction then carried on by the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society in connection with agriculture, creameries, egg packing, poultry, fruit growing, and flax cultivation, and they approved of the Department taking over that work and employing the experts engaged in such instruction as from April 1st, 1900, to such extent and subject to such conditions as the Department might approve. All such payments prior to February, 1905, other than those in respect of the organisation of agricultural banks, were made under this covering authority, and were not grants to the Society, but payments in respect of work done for the Department by the experts in the above subjects employed by the Society. Sanction for payments in respect of the organisation of agricultural banks through the organisers employed by the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society was given by the Board at their meeting on April 23rd, 1901, when £1,000 was voted for this purpose; at their meeting on November 4th, 1902, when a further sum of £1,000 was voted; and at their meeting on June 16th, 1904, when £1,200 was voted. The question of revising the arrangements for directing the work done through officers of the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society was brought before the Board by the Department on August 25th, 1903, November 11th, 1903, June 16th, 1904, November 8th, 1904, January 25th, 1905, and February 8th, 1905. On the latter date a scheme employing the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, in connection with certain forms of agricultural organisation other than that of agricultural banks, was adopted. The expenditure upon payments to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society for work done for the Department by
  904
  the Society's agricultural experts is included in the amount set out in the Department's Annual Reports under the sub-head "Agricultural Instruction." The expenditure out of the votes of the Agricultural Board for organisation and agricultural banks is shown in the Annual Reports under the sub-head "Organising Agricultural Banks." Portion of an annual sum of £3,000 voted by the Agricultural Board for rural industries was also expended in payment for work done by the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society in the organisation of such industries. The amount so expended is included in the sum set out in the Annual Reports under sub-head "Rural and other Industries." The members of the Agricultural Board have always had full access to all particulars in regard to the Department's expenditure, and no expenditure out of the Department's agricultural surplus has been undertaken without their sanction

  Cost of Army Horses.
  CAPTAIN KINCAID SMITH: To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the average cost to the State per horse supplied to officers as chargers, including upkeep, staff, stabling, etc.; and whether, considering the unsatisfactory results of this arrangement, he will consider the advisability of giving a grant of money to officers towards the cost of providing themselves with chargers.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The average price allowed in Estimates for the purchase of chargers is £65, and this sum covers the cost of purchase, and of the staff, upkeep, stabling, etc., before issue to the officer. The suggested grant of a sum of money to him to buy his own charger would not enable him to buy a horse as economically as under present arrangements, as he has not the same opportunities as an expert buyer, who purchases several horses at a time. Further, the Reports received from the different commands and units do not lead to the conclusion that the present arrangement is unsatisfactory.

  Troops Camped in the New Forest.
  MR. FIENNES: To ask the Secretary of State

  905
  for War if he will state the number and description of the troops that were camped and trained in the New Forest in 1904–5 on Crown lands, and the number and description of the troops that are to receive their annual training there this year; and whether the camps are to be situated on Crown land or private property.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) 1904. Royal Marine Artillery, six Volunteer battalions. 1905. Royal Marine Artillery, 1st and 2nd Divisions, Telegraph battalion, Royal Engineers, five Volunteer battalions, and one Cadet Corps. 1906. Royal Marine Artillery, eleven Volunteer battalions, and one Cadet Corps. All these will camp on private property.

  Closing of Mounted Infantry Schools.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War if the mounted infantry establishments are to be disbanded; and, in such case, how he reconciles such a decision with the necessity in the South African War of improvising large masses of such troops, and with the Reports of General Sir Ian Hamilton as to their utility in Manchuria.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The Mounted Infantry Schools at Bulford, in Ireland, and at Malta, will be closed. The School of Mounted Infantry at Aldershot is considered by the Army Council to be sufficiently large to provide for the force of mounted infantry which will be required immediately on mobilisation.

  Saving Effected by the Abandonment of the Surrey Defences of London.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: To ask the Secretary of State for War what amount he calculates will be saved by the abandonment of the Surrey defences of London; and what it is proposed to do with the dismantled forts.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) No decision has as yet been reached in regard to the disposal of the buildings and sites alluded to in the Question, and it is not therefore possible at present to
  906
  give even an approximate estimate of the probable saving.

  The Judge Advocate General's Letters Patent of Appointment.
  MR. PAUL: To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a Copy of the Letters Patent appointing Mr. Milvain Judge Advocate General for life, or until he shall have reached the age of seventy.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) A copy of the letters patent appointing Mr. Milvain Judge Advocate General will be laid upon the Table.

  Consecration of War Department Chapels.
  SIR J. JARDINE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, since 9th May, 1894, the general principle stated by his predecessor, the Prime Minister, has been upheld, namely, that it would be highly inconvenient that War Department buildings used for public worship should be consecrated, and that it was not his intention to sanction consecration except in certain cases.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Yes, Sir. All applications for consecration have been refused.

  Nigerian Grant in Aid of the North Nigerian Regiment.
  MR. COX: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, if he can form any estimate of what portion of the grant in aid of the revenue of Nigeria is expended on the cost of the Northern Nigerian regiment.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The total authorised expenditure of Northern Nigeria in the current financial year is £500,000, of which £156,600 is estimated to be spent on the Northern Nigerian regiment. The grant in aid is £315,000, so that the proportion of the grant to be expended on the regiment will be approximately £98,500, or about five-sixteenths of the total grant in aid.

  Maps for Natal and Zululand Blue-book.
  MR. WALKERTo ask the Under Secretary of State for

  907
  the Colonies, whether, seeing that such publications as the Annual Reports upon the Protectorates in Africa, and the Blue-book upon the disturbances in Natal and Zululand, cannot be understood without a reference to maps, while the ordinary atlases are totally inadequate, the Secretary of State will give instructions that maps shall in future be appended to these publications.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The Secretary of State will bear the suggestion of the hon. Member in mind, and in any cases where it may appear that the ordinary atlases would be inadequate, he will consider whether a suitable map could be appended without causing undue delay and with a proper regard to public economy. But it would not be practicable to prepare a special map in all cases and often nothing but a special map would suffice.

  Increase in Admiralty Printing.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, having regard to the fact that the Stationery Office Vote, Class II., Vote 23, shows that the Admiralty charge for stationery and printing has increased from £82,684 in 1902–3 to £117,774 in 1904–5, will he explain the cause.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) I have nothing to add to the reply given by the Secretary to the Treasury, on the 8th instant, to a similar Question asked by the hon. Member for King's Lynn. †

  Battleships Removed from Fighting Line since January, 1902.
  MR. RIDSDALE: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, whether he will state the names of the eight battleships removed from the righting list since 1st January, 1902, and also those of the three since classed as of little fighting value.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The names of the eight battleships removed from the fighting list are:— "Collingwood," "Alexandra," "Superb," "Dreadnought," "Sultan," "Hercules," "Bellerophon," "Monarch."
  The names of those classed as of comparatively small fighting value are:— "Conqueror," "Sans Pareil," "Hero."
  †see(4)Debates, clvi.,1157

  Newfoundland's Contribution to Main tenance of Royal Naval Reserve.
  MR. COX: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what is the annual contribution received from Newfoundland in respect of the maintenance of the Royal Naval Reserve in the Colony; and what is the annual cost of the maintenance of that branch.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The arrangement is that the Colony of Newfoundland shall pay a sum of £3,000 annually towards the Newfoundland Royal Naval Reserve for a period of ten years from 1902, provided that the force shall consist of not less than 600 men. This annual payment is to be proportionately reduced for each man less than that number. The number of men. borne on the 1st April last was 591. The annual cost of the maintenance of this branch of the Reserve is, approximately, £18,400.

  Expenditure for Provided and Non Provided Schools.
  DR. MASSIE: To ask the President of the Board of Education, whether he will give the expenditure for provided and non provided schools separately, under three heads, for each year since 1902 (in continuation of the figures given in Table 25 of the Statistical Report [Cd. 1476] of Session 1903).
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I must refer the hon. Member to my reply to a Question which he asked me on 1st May, † and my reply to the hon. Member for Chester on 8th May. ‡ Since the Act of 1902 came into force no separate accounts have been kept for provided or non-provided schools, and it is impossible therefore to give the information asked for.

  Enactment Repealed under Schedule 2 of the Education Bill.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: To ask the President of the Board of Education if he will furnish a memorandum explanatory of the enactments proposed to be repealed under the Second Schedule of the Education Bill;
  † See (4) Debates, clvi., 411–412.
  ‡ See (4) Debates, clvi., 1145.

  909
  and the effect of such repeals, both in regard to the present Education. Bill and the various Education Acts dealt with by reference in the Second Schedule of the Education Bill.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The repeals in the Second Schedule of the Bill are purely consequential on the provisions of the Bill. A memorandum can be furnished, in due course, showing how each repeal is necessitated by various provisions in the Bill.

  Remuneration for Cleaning Schools.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary for Scotland having regard to the fact that Mr. Boyd, on page 5 of his Report for the northern division, Education (Scotland), states that in some localities it is difficult to obtain persons to clean school premises, is he aware that this is due to the remuneration offered for the work being insufficient; and will he consider the expediency of directing the attention of school managers to this point.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) From inquiries made, it appears that in a number of rural localities the people open to employment of the kind in question are extremely few, and there the difficulty is not necessarily one of pay. The attention of managers is systematically drawn to the fact, whenever an inspector reports that a school is not kept clean; and, in cases of flagrant neglect, the grant is reduced; but the question of the proper amount of remuneration is one for managers.

  Medical Inspection of Ross-shire Schools.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary for Scotland in view of the statement contained on page 5 of the Education (Scotland) Report, Northern Division, will he supply a list of the forty schools on the mainland of Ross-shire which were visited by the medical officer of health for the county, in company with Mr. Macdonald, in March last; and will those schools to which a water supply is not laid on be indicated.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The following are the names of the forty schools in question: Alness Public School, Boath Public School, Glenglass
  910
  Public School, Strathconan Public School, Contin Public School, Scatwell Public School, Dingwall Academy Public School, Edderton Public School, Balmuchy Public School, Hill of Fearn Public School, Hilton Public School, Fodderty Public School, Maryburgh Public School, Kilmuir Easter Public School, Tullich Public School, Kiltearn Public School, Achnahannet Public School, Croick Public School, Culrain Public School, Gledfield Public School, Loubcroy Public School, Achnasheen Public School, Kinloch-Luichart Public School, Strathgarve Public School, Logie Easter Public-School, Scotsburn Public School, Nigg Public School, Pitcalnie Public School, Ardross Public School, Bridgend Public School. Invergordon Public School, New-more Public School, Saltburn Public School Strathrusdale Public School, Inver Public School, Tain Public School, Old Public School, Tarbert, West Public School, Tarbert, Marybank Public School, Tarradale Public School. The names of those in which a water supply was not laid on at the date of the visit are printed in italics.

  Breaking up of Farms in the Isle of Lewis.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary for Scotland in view of the fact that the last Report of the Congested Districts Board shows that the Secretary for Scotland, in order to meet the difficulties of the cottar question in South Uist, has induced the proprietrix to break up the farms of Kilbride, Gerinish, and Glen-dale, will he consider the expediency of using his influence with the proprietor of the Island of Lewis to induce him to break up farms in order to meet the cottar difficulty in that island.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) I note the suggestion of the hon. Member, but am not able to make any further statement at present as to the policy of the Government.

  The d'Angely Case.
  MR. H. H. MARKS: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the refusal to offer an apology to Madame d'Angely is due to the intention of the Government to empower the Royal Commission which

  911
  is about to be appointed to reopen the charge against her and to review the magistrate's decision.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The Royal Commission cannot, of course, reverse the magistrate's decision dismissing the charge against Madame d'Angely. But I must remind the hon. Member that grave charges have been made in this House and elsewhere against the three policemen who gave evidence. The Commission, will, no doubt, investigate those charges without delay, and I cannot anticipate the results of the investigation by any further statement.
  MR. HERBERT: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is any precedent for an apology being tendered by the police, by a magistrate, or by the Home Secretary, to any person against whom a charge has been improperly brought in a police court.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) There have from time to time been cases where the Secretary of State or the Commissioner has expressed regret to the defendant that a charge should have been brought against him, if after inquiry he was satisfied that the police had acted improperly in bringing the charge.

  Unemployed Legislation.
  MR. MYER: To ask the President of the Local Government Board, what steps the Government intend to take during this Session of Parliament with regard to amending the Act relating to the unemployed, as promised in the King's Speech.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The Government hope to introduce a Bill for the purpose of amending the Act, but I am not able to give any intimation as to what the proposals of the Bill will be.

  Belfast Postal Learners and the New Scale of Wages.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Postmaster-General, if he can say
  912
  why the new scale of wages which were to come into operation on January last has not yet been applied to the male learners at Belfast.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The delay in applying the new scheme at Belfast has been due to local difficulties. These have now been overcome and the new scheme has been brought into force; the new scale will date back to 1st January.

  Fees of Public Works Loan Committee.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether the fees received by the Public Works Loan Committee do not more than cover the expense.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) From 1898–9 to 1903–4 the fees received by the Public Works Loan Commissioners considerably exceeded the entire expenses of the establishment. Since the latter date the receipts from fees have fallen off, as a result of the restrictions which have been placed upon the making of new loans, and they do not at present cover the expenses.

  Solicitor to the Public Works Loan Commissioners.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will state by whom the solicitor to the Public Works Loan Commission was appointed.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The appointment was made by the Commissioners, in whom it is vested by Section 6 of the Public Works Loans Act, 1875.

  Public Works Loan Commission Accounts.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in regard to the Public Works Loan Commission, if he will say how many accounts were open in the year 1896; whether the number has largely increased up to the present time; and whether they involve a great amount of separate calculations of interest, and a large number of half-yearly payments.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The number of accounts open in the financial year 1895–6 was 11,390. This number

  913
  has increased to 18,392 in 1905–06. All the Commissioners' loans are repayable by half-yearly payments, and the number of separate calculations involved in respect of these payments is considerable.

  Suggested Taxing of Motor Cars.
  MR. HERBERT: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the advisability of imposing an additional tax upon motor cars, the proceeds of which should be allocated to reimburse local authorities the cost of watering roads in their districts used for motor traffic, so as to diminish the nuisance from dust.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) Consideration of this suggestion should, I think, be postponed until the Commission which is now sitting has presented its Report.

  Transfer of Burma Police Inspectors to Bombay.
  SIR J. JARDINE: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether two inspectors of police, originally appointed by the Chief Commissioner of Burma, are, or will be, transferred to the Bombay Presidency; and whether they are to be graded above superintendents of police in the Bombay Presidency who were appointed by the Secretary of State after passing examinations.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I have no information as to the transfer of police officers mentioned in the Question, but I would refer my hon. friend to the Answer given by me on the 14th instant to a Question by the hon. Member for Hull dealing with a similar matter, † As I then stated, it is open to any officer who considers himself aggrieved to memorialise the Government of India and the Secretary of State in Council.

  Irish District Hospitals for Infectious Cases.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, with the view of meeting cases of people who are suffering from infectious diseases,
  † See Col. 344.
  914
  but who are not destitute poor within the meaning of the Irish Poor Law Relief Acts, and in view of the fact that it has been decided by the county court judge of Kildare that such persons cannot be compelled to pay for their maintenance in the workhouse hospital, he will consider the advisability of issuing orders showing how far district councils have power, under the existing law, to provide district hospitals for cases of infectious disease, and how far boards of guardians can enter into agreements for the use of such hospitals for the accommodation of their cases.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Local Government Board do not think that any necessity exists for the issue of an instructional circular as suggested. The Board have no reason to believe that the various rural and urban district councils are not fully aware of their powers under Section 155 of The Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1878, in regard to the providing of hospitals themselves, or entering into agreements with boards of guardians for the reception and treatment of patients in hospitals attached to union workhouses; and of their powers under Section 156 in regard to the recovery of the cost of maintenance-from patients who are not paupers.

  Irish Land Sales in 1903.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what towns and villages have been included under the Land Act sales of 1903, and what was the price; and the price and number of years' purchase in each town or village.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that sales of town and village plots have taken place under the Irish Land Act, 1903, in several cases in which such plots were included in the estate for sale and the Commissioners were satisfied as to the sufficiency of the security for the advance applied for. Separate; records of such sales are, not kept by the Commissioners.

  Grants under the Marine Works (Ireland) Act.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the places to which grants have been made under the Marine Works (Ireland) Act, 1902, the amounts spent in each place, and the amount still remaining unexpended; and what steps it is proposed to take for the expenditure of the.balance.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I beg to refer to the full statement in this matter which I made in reply to a Question on 9th April,† and which has probably escaped the hon. Member's notice.

  Case of Constable Harte, Royal Irish Constabulary.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Thomas Rice, of Poyntzpass, county Armagh, publican, reported Constable Harte, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, for being drunk on his licensed premises on 25th December, 1905, and that a charge was preferred against the constable founded on this report, with the result that Constable Harte was held to be not guilty of the offence with which he was charged, whilst the charges against the constable by Thomas Rice were held to have been made through vindictive motives, the constable having entered the licensed premises solely for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Licensing Acts; and whether, seeing that Constable Harte subsequently applied to the authorities for permission to bring an action against the Rice family for false imprisonment and slander, he will explain why such permission was refused; whether, seeing that it is usual for the police authorities to pay the expenses incurred by the police in defending themselves against charges arising out of the execution of their duty, he will say why Constable Harte's application to be re-imbursed his expenses and solicitor's costs was refused; will he say whether any prosecution has been brought against Rice for obstructing the constable while in the execution of his duty; if not, will he explain why; what steps will be
  — See (4) Debates, clv., 939.
  916
  taken that members of the Constabulary will not be again treated in a similar manner; and if the constable's application for leave to take an action for false imprisonment will be further considered.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Inspector General informs me that a disciplinary court of inquiry was held in reference to a complaint of Mr. Rice that Constable Harte was drunk while on duty. The constable was acquitted. He had applied for and obtained permission to employ, at his own expense, a solicitor to defend him at the inquiry. Expenses so incurred cannot, under the regulations of the force, be defrayed from public funds. Constable Harte subsequently applied for permission to take legal proceedings against Mr. Rice for false imprisonment and slander, but the Inspector General refused permission, as he did not consider the case to be one which would justify a departure from the ordinary and salutary rule, that members of the force should not take civil actions for matters arising out of the performance of their duty. There was no necessity for prosecuting Mr. Rice for obstructing the constable while in the discharge of his duty. The Inspector General sees no reason for re-considering the application of the constable.

  Report of Proceedings under the Diseases of Animals Act.
  MR. O'SHEE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland why the Report of the Irish Agricultural Department's proceedings, under the Diseases of Animals Acts, for the year 1905, has not yet been presented to Parliament; when may the Report be expected; and whether he will secure that in future it will be presented punctually in February each year.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) It has not been usual to present the report referred to earlier than the present month. The veterinary branch of the Department has had considerable pressure of work this year, but it is expected that the Report will be ready next mouth. It would not, I am informed, be practicable to prepare the Report as early as February

  917
  without neglecting current departmental work.

  Outbreak of Epizootic Lymphangitis at Waterford.
  MR. O'SHEE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, what is the cause of the delay of the Department of Agriculture in Ireland in acceding to the request of the Waterford County Council for an inquiry by an independent veterinary expert as to the outbreak and spread of epizootic lymphangitis in county Waterford.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) On 10th May the Department sent a reply to the Waterford County Council stating fully the reasons why, in the opinion of the Department, it was unnecessary to hold the inquiry asked for. The facts which have been already elicited leave practically no room for doubt as to the origin and spread of the disease, which has now happily disappeared.

  Compensation to Tenants on Eviction for Improvements.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he has received a resolution from the Arva branch of the Town Tenants Association calling his attention to the treatment of one Peter Mulligan, of that town, who is under notice of eviction, which expires on 1st June; and, in view of the fact that £464 worth of improvements become the property of the landlord on the day of eviction, will he give the matter sympathetic consideration, with a view to remove the further possibility of such proceedings against industrious tenants.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I have received the resolution referred to, which appears to suggest that a clause should be inserted in the Town Tenants Bill giving retrospective effect to its proposed enactments. The Bill in question is not a Government measure, but in any event it would appear difficult to give effect to the suggestion.

  Sale of Farm of James Carroll, of Fielduff.
  DR. AMBROSE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention
  918
  has been called to the fact that a farm and land belonging to James Carroll, of Fielduff, near Louisburgh, county Mayo, was recently sold by public auction at the instance of the landlord, to whom £10 were due for rent, that the farm realised £35, and of this sum £16 were offered to the tenant, the remainder, £19, going to the landlord for rent and costs; whether he is aware that these proceedings took place without the authority or consent of the tenant; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I have no means of ascertaining the precise facts of this case, but even assuming them to be as suggested the matter would not appear to be one in which the Government have power to interfere. If the tenant has been wrongfully deprived of his property, he has, I presume, a remedy at law.

  Irish Teachers—Payment of Triennial In crement of Good Service Salary.
  MR. MURPHY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, when will the Commissioners of National Education authorise the payment of the triennial increments of good service salary due since 30th April last to teachers whose schools were satisfactory during the last three years.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that the Reports on the schools for the last three years are now under their consideration, and that payment in respect of the triennial increments which may be granted will be made with the current quarter's salaries.

  Marine Works at Falchorrib.
  MR. HUGH LAW: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can now state when it is intended to proceed with the works proposed to be carried out at Falchorrib, county Donegal, under the Marine Works Act.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The question of undertaking these works is receiving my consideration. It is no doubt important, but before making a

  919
  definite statement, the Irish Government have to consider whether a larger sum than that originally proposed would not be needed in order to provide a harbour of shelter which would be really-valuable, and it is also desirable to ascertain what prospect there is of obtaining local contributions.

  Reinstatement of Evicted Tenants.—Case of Miss Lloyd, of Borrisnoe.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the attention of the Estates Commissioners has been drawn to the claims of Miss Lloyd, who was evicted in 1894 from her farm at Borrisnoe, on the estate of G. A. Medlin; is he aware that this farm was taken by one John Hodgins, and is at present in occupation of his son; does this man hold under a yearly tenancy or otherwise; is Hodgins or his herd, Denis Connolly, at present under police protection; and what steps have been taken, if any, towards effecting the reinstatement of the evicted tenant.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement, as evicted tenant, from Miss Catherine Lloyd. The farm in question is stated to be in the occupation of Mr. John Hodgins, junior, but the Commissioners are not aware of the terms of the tenancy. Mr. Hodgins' caretaker, Denis Connolly, is in receipt of police protection. Miss Lloyd is stated to be in the occupation of another holding in the neighbourhood, but the Commissioners will have her application inquired into by an inspector in due course.

  purchase of the Earl of Lucan's Estate.
  MR. JOHN O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the Congested Districts Board are negotiating with the Earl of Lucan with a view to purchasing that portion of his estate in the Ballinrobe Union, county Mayo, comprising several townlands almost entirely given over for grazing purposes; whether he is aware that large numbers of tenants were evicted from
  920
  these lands some fifty years ago, some of whom were permitted to live on a neighbouring marsh; that the descendants of these people live on the borders of these grazing ranches in a state of poverty and congestion: and, if so, whether he will see, when this estate is purchased, that these poor people will be supplied with economic holdings before applications from other persons are taken into consideration.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Congested Districts Board have not so far made an offer to purchase this estate, but the Question of purchase is under their consideration. If the Board should acquire the property they will, in accordance with their usual practice, provide for the enlargement of the small holdings upon it.

  Condition of Accommodation on the Bal linrobe and Claremorris Light Railway.
  MR. JOHN O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the character of the accommodation on the Ballinrobe and Claremorris Light Railway; whether he is aware that on various occasions several persons travelling between the two places were forced to stand up in cattle trucks and vans; that there is no train leaving the town of Ballinrobe later than 2 o'clock p.m. each day; that the people of that district have repeatedly asked the Midland and Great Western Railway Company for better train accommodation without result; and, if so, whether he will communicate with the Agricultural Department, with a view to getting that body to give a grant in aid of extra accommodation on this line at the earliest possible moment.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The question of the sufficiency of accommodation for passengers by this railway is one for the Board of Trade, to the President of which Department I beg to refer the hon. Member. I will commend it to the attention of my right hon. friend. As regards the concluding part of the Question, the Department of Agriculture do not consider that their funds

  921
  could be properly supplied to the purpose suggested.

  Lotteries in Ireland.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the carrying on of lotteries in Ireland; and what action, if any, does he propose to take in enforcing the law in this respect.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) My attention has not been called to the carrying on of lotteries in Ireland, but upon this subject I may refer to the Answer given by the right hon. Gentleman, the then Attorney-General for Ireland, to a similar Question on the 28th April, 1903.†
  † See (4) Debates, cxxii., 647.

  Cost of West African Garrison.
  MR. COX: To ask the Secretary of State for War, what is the annual cost of the troops stationed in West Africa; and what is the amount of the annual contribution received from the West African Colonies.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The cost of the British troops stationed in West Africa for the year 1904–5 was £226,900. No contribution was received from the West African Colonies in aid of this expenditure.

  Weekly Payment of Army Pensions.
  MR. REES: To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he is aware that the system of making monthly or quarterly payments to Army pensioners conduces to thrift-lessness, and is an indirect cause of pauperism among ex-soldiers; and whether he will take into his consideration the question of making such payments in future by the week.
  ((Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) This Question is at present under consideration.

  Powers of the Director of the National Gallery.
  MR. HORNIMAN: To ask the Prime Minister, whether the post of director of the National Gallery is
  †(4)Debates, cxxii., 647
  922
  filled; and whether the holder of this office will in future be possessed of larger powers, so that pictures of importance may be purchased with less delay, and the danger of the prices being enhanced by their passing through the hands of intermediaries diminished.
  (Answered by Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman.) No public announcement can yet be made on the subject of the directorship of the National Gallery, but I hope shortly to be in a position to supply the information asked for by my hon. friend.

  The Lords and the Aliens Bill.
  MR. F. E. SMITH: To ask the Prime Minister, whether he will, at an early date, cause the Aliens Bill to be reintroduced in the House of Lords as a Government measures in charge of a Minister.
  (Answered by Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman.) As I understand it, the Bill in which the hon. Member is so much interested is still on the Order Book of the House of Lords, and does not require re-introduction. I have no doubt that it can be proceeded with if the hon. Member uses his influence in that direction with his friends in that House who stopped its progress the other day.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Greenwich Observatory.
    MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can now state the result of his investigation into the effect of the London County Council power station, erected on the meridian close to Greenwich Observatory, on the instruments used there; and whether it will be possible in the future to rely on observations taken there for the purpose of the Nautical Almanack.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ROBERTSON, Dundee): Tests have recently been carried out to determine the possible effect of this station on the instruments in the Observatory, and

    923
    I hope to be able to make a statement on the subject as soon as the results have been examined.

    White Women in Chinese Compounds.
    MR. DOBSON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any official information showing that white women are kept in the Chinese compounds around Johannesburg; and, if so, whether he will take stops to quickly and effectually render such an arrangement illegal.
    MR. NUSSEY: May I also ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any official information in regard to the presence of white women in Chinese compounds in South Africa; and, if so, what action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter.
    MR. RUNCIMAN (for Mr. CHURCHILL): If the hon. Member does not object I will answer another similar Question addressed to me by my hon. friend the Member for Pontefract at the same time. The Secretary of State has no official information that white women are kept in the Chinese compounds, and has no reason whatever to believe that there is any truth whatever in any statement to that effect. Immoral relations between white women and coolies are already punishable in either party under the law of the Transvaal by long terms of imprisonment with hard labour.

    Flogging Natal Natives.
    MR. J. WARD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has referral to the Secretary of State for the Colonies the question of courts martial inflicting the lash upon natives in Natal who refuse to act the part of traitors to their friends; and whether the Secretary of State is satisfied that this punishment is in accordance with British law and custom; and, if not, what action he proposes to take on the subject.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: The Secretary of State cannot view without regret the circumstances which in the opinion of the Natal Government render such measures necessary. He is not aware of any case in which they have been carried into effect; and he is confident that nothing
    924
    but dire necessity involving peril to the lives of many persons would be held by the officers of the Zululand Field Force to warrant their application. There are many precedents in the history of every rebellion in every country and of most wars for the infliction of punishments which would not be in accordance with the custom of this or any country which happily enjoyed a state of profound peace.

    Transvaal Gold Mines.
    MR. BELLOC: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the threat of shutting down the gold mines in the Transvaal; and whether, seeing that under Section 140 of Law No. 15of 1898, as amended on 18th September, 1899, the right is expressly reserved to the Government to call upon the owner to work the mine, and, upon his refusal to do so, to take over whatever mining rights may have been granted to him, he proposes to take such action in case of this threat being carried into execution.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: This Question has been pit several times before, and I would refer the hon. Member to the answer of the Under-Secretary for the Colonies on the 9th instant. There is nothing further to say on the subject.
    MR. BELLOC: The last part of the Question has not been answered before
    MR. RUNCIMAN: Yes.
    MR. BELLOC: What do the Government intend to do?
    MR. RUNCIMAN: That Question has been answered before.

    British Guiana.
    MR. J. WARD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention has been drawn to a petition of the inhabitants of British Guiana calling attention to the precarious condition of the Colony, and to the refusal of the authorities of the Colony to carry out the recommendations of the West Indian Royal Commission of 1897, and the failure of the Governor to take proper precautions for the good order of the Colony, and to the shouting of strikers by the military on 1st December last;

    925
    and what action, if any, the Secretary of State for the Colonies proposes to take in these matters.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: The petition in question has lately been received and will be duly considered. The Secretary of State is not able to make any statement at present.

    Land Settlement in the Transvaal.
    SIR JOHN DICKSON-POYNDER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will furnish a Return of all lands in the Transvaal withheld from sale for settlement under the Gold Law or any other law creating a possible monopoly of lands in the hands of individuals or companies. I beg also to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will furnish a Return of lands proclaimed under the Gold Law, which are held by individuals or companies for gold exploration and production, but are being withhold from agricultural development; and whether he will take steps to remove any restrictions upon the development of such lands for agricultural purposes.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: Any alteration in the Transvaal Law affecting the tenure of these lands will be a matter for the consideration of the responsible government about to be conferred upon the Colony. If with this information before him, my hon. friend still desires the Return for which he asks, the Secretary of State will ascertain from the Governor whether it is possible to furnish it.
    SIR JOHN DICKSON-POYNDER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can say to what purpose the £500,000 allocated, but not voted, for land settlement in South Africa has been applied; and whether it is the intention of the Government to cause this amount to be replaced to the Land Settlement Fund.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: I would refer my hon. friend for explanation to p. 58 and p. 59 of Cd. 2563, Head III., of the Guaranteed Loan, which allotted £5,000,000 to meet claims for repatriation and compensation after the war has been overspent, and until the recoverable out-standings of the item of advances made by
    926
    way of loan have been realised the money is not available. But my hon. friend may be assured that the desirability of maintaining the operations of the Land Settlement Fund by all reasonable and practicable moans is fully recognised by the Secretary of State.

    Pietermaritzburg Shipping Conference.
    MR. C. B. HARMSWORTH: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is in a position to communicate to the House full particulars as to the evidence adduced and resolutions passed at the Shipping Conference recently held in Pietermaritzburg, and, further, to name an approximate date for the suggested Imperial inquiry.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: Papers on this subject will be laid shortly, but the Secretary of State is not aware that any evidence was given at the Conference. It is not at present possible to name an approximate date for the Imperial inquiry.

    Natal Rising—Trials of Ringleaders.
    MR. LEHMANN: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether special courts are to be established in Natal to try the rank and file of the natives implicated in the disturbances in Natal, and whether the ringleaders and chiefs will be tried by courts martial; and whether His Majesty's Government will make representations to the Government of Natal urging them, so far as is possible, to try all such natives in the ordinary courts of the Colony.
    The following Questions also appeared on the Paper:—
    MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government approve of the appointment of special courts to try the rank and file of the natives captured during the Natal operations, with power to inflict lashes and impose a term of two years' imprisonment, and of the intention to try the chiefs and ringleaders by martial law; and, if they do not, what steps they propose to take, in order to bring pressure to bear upon the Natal

    927
    Government to have the natives tried by civil courts.
    SIR H. COTTON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any official information showing that the trial of native political offenders, in connection with the present troubles in Natal, will be held by special courts to deal with the rank and file, with power to impose penalties up to two years' imprisonment and lashes, and that the ringleaders and chiefs will be tried by martial law tribunals; and, if so, whether the policy indicated, especially in regard to inflicting lashes as a punishment for political offences, will be repudiated by His Majesty's Government.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: It will be convenient for me to answer at the same time the Questions by the hon. Members for the Elland division of Yorkshire and for Nottingham East on this subject. The Secretary of State understands that no special courts are to be established to try the rank and file, but that all minor cases of sedition, including illegally carrying arms, are to be tried by the magistrates. Serious cases requiring to be dealt with promptly will be tried by court martial. The Governor states that this decision was arrived at after considerable discussion with the Attorney-General, who attended the meeting of Ministers and himself. The Secretary of State does not consider that he could with advantage make representations to the Government of Natal upon the matter.
    MR.KEIRHAEDIE: What are the cases of special emergency?
    MR. RUNCIMANasked for notice of the Question.

    White Labour in the Transvaal Mines.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that' a deputation representing 6,000 skilled artisans have declared to Lord Selborne that if the scheme of repatriating the Chinese coolies in the Transvaal is carried out, 7,000 whites will lose their employment; and whether the posters in the mines will be removed.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: The information received by the Secretary of State from Lord Selborne is that a deputation of working men delegated from a mass meeting of 3,000 minors hold at Boksberg came to see him at Pretoria, also a deputation from meeting of miners in Simmor and Jack and Glen Deep Mines, and other bodies of minors were represented. They expressed great alarm at the possible results of the posters, and showed intense anxiety lest the industry should be dislocated and many of them lose their employment. No mention is made in Lord Selborne's telegram of their having said that 7,000 men would lose their employment. Resolutions in a contrary sense have been received by Lord Selborne from the Independent Labour Party and from Pretoria Lodge of the South African Operative Masons' Society. His Majesty's Government having determined their policy on this matter after sufficient deliberation, do not propose to remove the posters.

    Casualties in the Natal Rising.
    MR. BYLES: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state the number of Zulus reported as killed in the various engagements which have occurred during the Bambata rebellion, and what have been the losses in the Colonial troops.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: Up to the present the numbers as reported to the Secretary of State in the telegrams he has received from the Governor relating to the operations in connection with the Bambata rebellion are, losses in the Colonial troops five killed, five wounded, besides two native policemen wounded. The number of Zulus reported killed is eighty-five.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: There are no reports of the wounded. Has the hon. Gentleman any information about them?
    MR. RUNCIMAN: I will communicate my hon. friend's desire to the Secretary of State.

    Natal Poll Tax Collection.
    MR. BYLES: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether official orders were given, and by whom, for the premature collection of the poll tax in Natal, in violation of Clause VI.

    929
    of The Poll Tax Act, 1905, of the Natal Government.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: The Tax was due on the 1st of January. There was therefore no premature collection.

    State Aid for Indian Schools.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state whether, and, if so, to what extent and under what circumstances, the schools of various denominations are State-aided in India.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. MORLEY, Montrose Burghs): The aid given from public funds to schools other than Government schools in India is given solely in respect of secular instruction. No cognisance is taken of the religious teaching, if any, given in such schools. Many denominational schools are in fact aided by the State; but, as they are not shown separately in the returns, the number and the amount of the grants cannot be stated. The amount of the grant is determined by the necessities of the locality and class for; which the school is provided, the efficiency of the school, the expenditure upon it from private sources, and other conditions, none of which has any reference to the teaching of religion.

    Church Consecration in India.
    SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, since January 1st, 1900, the Government of India has in regard to any buildings belonging to the Government of India, or built wholly or partially at its expense, sanctioned the performance of the rite of consecration according to the forms of the Church of England.
    MR. MORLEY: The Secretary of State in Council decided in a despatch dated March 1st, 1900, that thenceforward no churches at military stations built wholly or partially at the public expense should be consecrated, except in places where separate provision existed or might be supplied for meeting the requirements of the Presbyterian and Wesleyan forms of worship. Since then the consecration of churches has been limited in accordance with this decision at all stations where British troops are quartered; but some assistance was given from public
    930
    funds in four consecrated churches in Assam, which were built to supply the place of previously-existing consecrated churches which had been destroyed by an earthquake.
    SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the legal opinions given to Lord George Hamilton about the effect of the rite of consecration according to the forms of the Church of England, upon buildings built by or belonging to the Government of India; and whether, as a matter of practice under the rules made by the Governor-General of India in Council, to regulate the use of Government buildings for public worship, buildings so consecrated are available for public worship by Presbyterian and Wesleyan chaplains and troops, without previous licence from the authorities of the Church of England.
    MR. MORLEY: It would be contrary to precedent to lay upon the Table legal opinions given by the law officers of the Crown, or other legal authorities consulted by the Government; but the hon. Member will find the substance of those opinions stated in Lord George Hamilton's despatch of March 1st, 1900, printed at pages 47–48 of Command Paper No. 129 of 1900. As stated in that despatch the authority of the Bishop is by law necessary for the admission of services other than those of the Church of England in churches which have been consecrated for the service of that denomination.

    Argentina.
    MR. C. B. HARMSWORTH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that numbers of persons have recently emigrated from South Africa to the Argentine Republic; that many of these persons are alleged to be in a state of destitution; will he say to what nationalities these persons belong; and whether he can state the causes of their emigration from South Africa.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RUNCIMAN, Dewsbury, for Sir EDWARD GREY): A party of some 140 persons arrived in the Argentine Republic from South Africa at the end of last year. The

    931
    latest information received from the British Consul dated the middle of April was that the Colonists were reported to be suffering hardships, as many of them were living in tents, but he did not report that they were in a state of destitution. These persons were from the Transvaal, the Orange River Colony, and the Cape Colony, but most of them apparently from the Cape Colony. One of the chief causes is said to be dissatisfaction with the local conditions of South Africa, economic and social. The leading Dutch paper published in the Cape Colony, Our Land, has dissuaded people from going, but without complete success.

    Local Taxation in Denmark.
    MR. LAMONT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will instruct the British Legation at Copenhagen to furnish such a Report on the system of local taxation in Denmark as will enable Members of this House to form a comparison as to the burden imposed by the rates upon agriculture in the United Kingdom and in Denmark respectively.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: If my hon. friend will let me know what the precise points are to which the Report should be directed, instruction will be sent as desired.
    MR.BRIDGEMAN: Will the import duties on agricultural produce in Denmark also be included in the return?
    MR. RUNCIMAN: They are already provided by the Board of Trade.

    Wei-hai-Wei.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether negotiations are in progress, or have been concluded, for the retrocession of Wei-hai-Wei to China, to be used by that Power for the purpose of a naval base.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: The Answer is in the negative.

    Tashkent-Tomsk Railway.
    MR. REES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any
    932
    information, which may be made public regarding the survey or commencement of the Tashkent-Tomsk Railway.
    MR. RUNCIMAN: My attention has been called to a paragraph in the Russian Press to the effect that the question of constructing a line from Tashkent to Tomsk via Vierni and Semipalatinsk had been decided in the affirmative, and that a sum of 711,000 roubles had been allotted for preliminary surveys. I have no further information on the subject which can be given.

    Death Duty Grants.
    MR. EDWARD BARRY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, what is the amount of the Death Duty grants, under Section 19 of the Finance Act, 1894, collected in England, Ireland, and Scotland in the years 1895 to 1905; what is the ratio of the contribution of the three countries; what proportion of the total is devoted to the relief of local taxation; and in what proportion is that part divided between the three countries.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. ASQUITH, Fifeshire, E.): I would refer the hon. Member to the Annual Report of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue for 1904–5 [Cd. 2633], pages 247–249, which gives particulars on the subject raised in his Question.

    Prosecutions for Sunday Trading.
    MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will grant a Return of the number of shopkeepers who have been summoned for Sunday trading under the Act of Charles II.; and whether the Government are prepared to promote legislation to repeal the Sunday Trading Act.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE, Leeds, W.): The figures of prosecutions for trading on Sunday are to be found in the annual volumes of Judicial Statistics. The totals for England and Wales wore 2,925 in the year 1893, 3,729 in 1897, 4,950 in 1900, 5,510 in 1903, and 5,411 in 1904, but I must refer the hon. Member to the volumes quoted for the details of these prosecutions, which are very unevenly distributed throughout the

    933
    country. As regards the latter part of the Question, the whole subject of Sunday trading is at present under consideration by a Joint Committee of the two Houses.

    Mr. Hugh Watt.
    MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has been furnished by the solicitors acting for Mr. Hugh Watt with a signed statement by Mrs. Lightfoot, and a statutory declaration by Hannah Parker, to the effect that the convict Lightfoot was not at any time during the month of August last, and down to and including the 15th September last, within 150 miles of London, and that on the morning of the 24th August last Lightfoot and his wife drove to Ripon and returned the same day at 7 p.m.; and whether, having regard to the bearing of these statements upon the evidence given at the recent trial of Hugh Watt, he has taken any, and, if so, what steps to test their accuracy.
    MR. GLADSTONE: I have examined the statements referred to, but as at present advised I do not think that these statements, even if they should prove to be true, would afford any justification for my advising interference with the sentence. I am, however, making some inquiries, and when I have further considered the matter I will let the hon. Member know my decision.

    Vaccination Exemption Certificate.
    MR. J. M. ROBERTSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the repeated refusals of the Barrow magistrates to grant a certificate of exemption from vaccination to Mr. William Watts, of 20, Westmoreland Street, Burrow-in-Furness; and whether he will take any action in the matter.
    MR. GLADSTONE: My attention has not been called to the case in question, but I am at the present moment issuing from my Department a circular to Justices setting out what I am advised is the intention of the law respecting the grant of certificates of exemption.

    Cabmen's Badge Fees.
    MR. BRIDGEMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
    934
    ment whether the additional charge of 2s. 6d. for a cabman's badge, which was recently imposed, has been removed; and, if so, whether that sum has been refunded to those cabmen who had paid it.
    MR. GLADSTONE: The operation of the regulation referred to was suspended shortly after it came into force, pending the consideration of the matter by a Select Committee. It was, however, never intended to make any additional charge for a cabman's licence, but only to require a deposit of 2s. 6d., which would be returned when the badge was given up. Certain cabmen paid this deposit of 2s. 6d. before the operation of the regulation was suspended—in many cases the money has already been refunded; in those where it has not, it may be had on application at any police station, on production of the receipt.

    Convict's Religion.
    MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has yet ascertained the religious denomination of the convict mentioned in the recent Return showing the religious creeds and denominations of prisoners in His Majesty's prisons, and who was simply returned as suffering from delirium tremens.
    MR. GLADSTONE: I am informed that the man belonged to the Church of England.

    Case of W. B. Norris.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that convict No. Y 319, William Buffton Norris, is still detained at Parkhurst Convict Prison, although his sentence expired in December last, and his conduct during his imprisonment has been uniformly good; and if he will state on what grounds this man is not discharged to ticket-of-leave at once, seeing that his relatives are capable and eager to provide for him, no matter what his physical or mental state may be alleged to be by the prison authorities.
    MR. GLADSTONE: The hon. Member is mistaken as to the date of the expiry of this convict's sentence. The sentence does not expire until June 19th, 1908; and it has been impossible for me,

    935
    in view of the convict's mental condition, to release him on ticket-of-leave. I have, however, a few days ago received an application from the convict's wife for his removal to a private asylum, and, if satisfactory arrangements for this purpose can be made, I hope to be able to allow his conditional discharge.

    Firewood Industry and Cheap Labour.
    MR. HODGE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if his attention has been directed to the practice of utilising the services of the unemployed by religious and philanthropic bodies at lower rates of wages than the ordinary market rate of wages, more particularly in the firewood industry, and the selling of the product at less than the current price, to the detriment of those regularly engaged in such industry, and of the payment by such bodies for such work in kind instead of in cash, in broach of the provisions of the Truck Acts; and what action, if any, he intends taking to compel compliance with the said Acts.
    MR. GLADSTONE: A communication on the subject has been received by me from the Firewood Cutter's Protection Society. I am advised that it is by no means clear that the Truck Acts would apply in the case of persons seeking aid from charitable institutions and the question of extending the Acts so as to cover such cases would involve considerable difficulties. I understand the point has been brought to the notice of the Committee on the Truck Acts which is now sitting, and it will no doubt receive their consideration.

    Ex parte Police Court Applications.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department is he aware that application was, on Tuesday last, made to the magistrate at Bow Street by counsel for Alfred Mangena, a Natal native resident in London, to prefer sworn informations and depositions against Sir Henry M'Callum, the Governor of Natal, charging him with acts of oppression involving the illegal proclamation of martial law and the homicide of the twelve natives put to death on the 2nd of April last; and that the magistrate refused to hear the
    936
    application otherwise than in camera and in the absence of a professional shorthand writer; and whether, having regard to the great public importance of the proceedings, the Government will take steps, in the event of any further application of a similiar character, to have an official shorthand note taken of the hearing of the application, and will lay the same upon the Table of this House.
    MR. GLADSTONEsaid that it was, he believed, the usual and proper course for a magistrate to whom an ex parte application was made to hear it in private. Obviously, great injustice might be done by giving publicity to applications of such a character. In the matter referred to by the hon. Member the Bow-Street magistrate appeared to have followed the usual course, and he saw no reason why it should have exceptional treatment. He would answer at the same time the unstarred Question of the hon. Member for Montgomery Boroughs,† at his request. Under existing law special provision was made for the trial in this country of Colonial Governors and others charged with offences in the Colonies, and proceedings for the purpose might be commenced at a police court. As at present advised he saw no sufficient grounds for proposing any amendment of the law. He thought that magistrates might be trusted with frivolous applications.
    MR. SWIFT MACNIHLL: This case is analagous to that of the Governor Eyre. Did the magistrate act on his own initiative?
    MR. GLADSTONE: I have no power to interfere with magistrates in such matters.

    Central Criminal Court.
    MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether is aware that at the last sessions of the Central Criminal
    †The Question was as follows:—
    MR. REES: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the attempt of individuals to lay informations against Colonial governors in the London police courts, in repect of acts preformed by them in their official capacity and approved by their Governments, action will be taken to amend the Law in this behalf, in order to the maintenance of the proper independence and dignity of such governors and Governments.
    Court, out of the sixty-nine prisoners tried, no fewer than eighteen were found not guilty, while in three other cases the bills were ignored by the grand jury; and whether these and similar statistics will be referred to the proposed Royal Commission on Police Administration, with a view to the consideration by that body of the proportion of cases in which police evidence, acted upon by magistrates, is eventually found to be untrustworthy.
    MR. GLADSTONE: The Question seems to mo to show a misapprehension as to the respective duties of the committing magistrate and the court of trial. It is the duty of the magistrate to commit for trial if a prima facie case is established, but the jury is bound to acquit unless the absolute guilt of the prisoner is proved beyond all reasonable doubt. There must therefore always be a large proportion of acquittals among the cases committed for trial; and it would be an evil thing if it were otherwise. Further, in a large proportion of the cases, the question of guilt or innocence does not turn on police evidence In those circumstances I do not think it would in any way assist the Commission in its inquiry if I were to refer to them these or any similar figures.

    Railway Passenger Duty.
    MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will State the estimated amount of railway passenger duty that has been remitted to the railway companies who have a terminus in London up to 1905 under the Cheap Trains Act of 1883.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA, Monmouthshire): The receipts from railway passenger duty paid by London railway companies have declined from £620,000 in 1882 to £276,000 in 1905. But the Board of Inland Revenue do not see how it would be possible to estimate the proportions in which this decrease, and the decreases in the intervening years, should be attributed, to the operation of the Cheap Trains Act, 1883, or to other conditions.

    The Unemployed.
    MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether a circular has been sent round to
    938
    the various boards of guardians calling upon them to close the relief works and stoneyards which have been opened for the purpose of finding work for the unemployed; and, if so, whether the Board can suggest to the boards of guardians what kind of work should be undertaken to relieve the thousands of men who are out of employment in the various industrial centres.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN BURNS, Battersea): Labour yards are opened, not for the purpose of finding work for the unemployed, but of enabling the guardians to set able-bodied men to work as a condition of their receiving outdoor relief. The Local Government Board have not issued any circular to boards of guardians as to the closing of the labour yards, but in some instances the Board have, now that the winter is over, asked the guardians to consider the question of closing the labour yard. If the guardians, with their knowledge of the local circumstances, adopt this course, any destitute able-bodied male person applying for relief would be relieved in the workhouse, unless in a special case the guardians departed from the requirements of the regulations on the subject, and the Board assented to their doing so.
    MR. THORNEput a supplementary Question which Mr. Burns declined to answer on the ground that it did not arise out of that on the Paper.

    Post Office Changes.
    MR. C. E. SCHWANN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will state how many post offices changed hands during the year 1905.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON, Tower Hamlets, Poplar): The total number of post offices to which new appointments were made during the year 1905 is 1,970.

    Dismissal from the Postal Service.
    MR. J. WARD: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the dismissal of E. C. Feasey, of Walsall, who has been an efficient officer in the postal service for seventeen years; whether he can say what was the cause of such dismissal,

    939
    and if any offence was committed; whether such offence was connected with his duties in his Department or referred to some private matter; and whether he will consider the question of the man's reinstatement.
    MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I have looked into the circumstances connected with the dismissal by my predecessor of E. C. Feasey, formerly a town postman at Walsall. I find that Feasey had a most unsatisfactory record and that by his private affairs he was bringing discredit on the Department. I am not prepared to consider the question of his reinstatement.

    Post Office Employees and Vaccination.
    MR. T. F. RICHARDS: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will consider the advisability of allowing the employees of his Department who have a conscientious objection to vaccination to claim exemption from such.
    MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The question is one affecting the whole Civil Service. I do not see my way to make a change.

    Mail-Driving Contracts.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will furnish the following information respecting each current contract for mail-driving in the metropolis, the name of the contractor, the period of the contract, and the date of its determination.
    MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I will send the hon. Member a statement giving the information he desires.

    Bishop's Stortford College—Dismissal of Mr. Kitchener.
    LORD R. CECIL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that Mr. Kitchener, one of the masters at Bishop's Stortford College, has recently been dismissed because he joined the Roman Catholic Church, whether Bishop's Stortford College is a rate-aided school carried on in connection with a Nonconformist denomination; and what reason was given by the head master for the dismissal.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. BIRRELL, Bristol, N.): The incident referred to took place in December, 1904, but I know nothing about it beyond what appeared at the time in the public Press. I understand that the school was at that time in receipt of aid from the county council and that this is still the case. Neither then nor at any time since has the school been in receipt of any grants from the Board of Education. In a reply given on February 28th last year to a Question in the House the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education stated that he did not consider the matter one in which the Board should properly intervene. † So far as I can see I have absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever in regard to it.
    LORD R. CECILasked for an Answer to the last paragraph.
    MR. BIRRELL: I understand the reason was given in one of the letters.

    Irish Butter Statistics.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he will take steps to see that the value of Irish butter imported into England every year is ascertained, as in the ease of Danish butter.
    SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: I understand that the question of the improvement of the statistics of trade between Great Britain and Ireland is engaging the attention of the Board of Trade and the Irish Department of Agriculture. Legislation is probably necessary for the purpose.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Will the hon. Gentleman introduce legislation on the subject?
    SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: I cannot promise.

    The Colonial Conference.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, in reference to a statement of the Secretary of State for
    † See (4) Debates, cxli., 1462.

    941
    the Colonies, that a Colonial Conference i will be held in April, at which it is the desire of the Government to promote measures for closer unity of the Empire; whether that Conference is to be confined to representatives of His Majesty's Government and of the self-governing Colonies; or whether India and other portions of the Empire will be represented, with due regard to the importance within the Empire of their population, trade, revenue, and expenditure on Imperial purposes.
    MR. REES: I beg also to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether at the Conference to be held in April, 1907, at which the Colonies will be represented, the different provinces of the Indian Empire will be represented by official and non-official representatives, in order that a reasonable and properly preponderating representation may be accorded to our greatest foreign possession.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN, Stirling Burghs): The invitations to the Colonial Conference of 1907 have, as in the case of the previous Colonial Conferences, been made to the Prime Ministers of the self-governing Colonies. His Majesty's Government do not intend to propose that the Crown Colonies should be specially represented at the next Conference, but we are of opinion that India should be represented.

    Criminal Appeal Bill.
    MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the Criminal Appeal Bill was read a second time in another place on March 17th last, he can add anything to the information already given as to the prospects of such measure being passed into law during the present session.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: No, Sir, I have no further information to give. It is not in the power of the Government, at this period of the session, to pledge themselves and to pledge the House of Commons as to the passing of any particular measure. We shall do our best to pass this Bill, but of course our success will depend, in a large degree, on whether the House is willing to dispense with any lengthy discussion.

    Scottish Supply.
    MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he will take Scotch Estimates on Thursday, June 14th.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes, Sir; that is the intention.

    Royal Commission on Sea Erosion.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he has yet appointed the Royal Commission to inquire into the defence of the coast from sea erosion; if so, who are the members of the Commission; and whether they will take evidence in the districts of Ireland bordering on the sea.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am sorry that I cannot as yet give the hon. Member the information for which he asks in the first part of his Question. With regard to the hearing of evidence affecting Ireland, I have no doubt that the Commission will take all necessary steps to enable them to submit an adequate report on the matters referred to them.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Will an Irishman be appointed on the Commission?
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am not sure of that.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Why not?
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: If the hon. Member means why I am not sure, the Answer is because I do not know. the selection of members does not primarily rest with me, and so I have no reason to know at this stage. But if the hon. Member means to ask why an Irish member should not be appointed, the Answer is that I did not say that ail Irish member would not be appointed.

    The Lords' Rejection of the Aliens Bill.
    MR. J. WARD: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the rejection of the Aliens Bill by the other House; whether, in view of the fact that such Bill passed this House unanimously, he will undertake at an early date to reintroduce the Bill into the other place and

    943
    give it the sanction and assistance of His Majesty's Government; and whether he will submit to the appreciation of this House and the country a measure which will insure that in the future important Bills, which have received the assent of the representatives of the people, will become law without unnecessary delay.
    MR. PAUL: May I ask whether it is not open to any peer to move the Second Reading of this Bill again, and what the Lords have to do with the authorship of Bills sent from the House of Commons? Is not the unanimous opinion of the House of Commons good enough for them?
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: That Question is rather of an abstruse and argumentative character. As to the Question of the hon. Member for Stoke, I cannot give the undertaking desired. It is, in our opinion, an unconstitutional attitude on the part of an Opposition to reject a Bill apart from its merits merely on the ground that the Government have not taken it up, and we are not disposed by our action in this case to sanction any such precedent. My hon. friend may be sure that the serious subject raised in the last paragraph of his Question is not likely to escape the attention of his Majesty's Government.

    Irish Market Tolls.
    MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will the Estates Commissioners take advantage of the sale of an estate, comprising the site of a fair or market at which a toll or other charge is levied by the landlord upon people transacting business, either to enfranchise the fair or market or to have the amount of the charge applied to the improvement of the place and the relief of local taxation.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BRYCE, Aberdeen, S.): The Estates Commissioners inform me that up to the present they have not purchased the site of any fair or market at which a toll is levied by the landlord. In any event, they are not aware of any provision in the Act of 1903, or any other Act, which would enable them to enfranchise a fair or market on any estate
    944
    which they might purchase, or to apply the amount of the charges to the improvement of the locality and the relief of local taxation.

    Lansdowne Estates, Queen's County.
    MR. MEEHAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the settlement of the evicted tenants on the Lansdowne Estates in Luggacurran, Queen's County, the Estates Commissioners entered into a contract for the erection of seven houses for the tenants, that it was a condition in the contract that the houses were to be completed and ready for occupation last December, and is he aware that none of the houses are yet finished, and that very little progress is being made with the work; whether, seeing that under the scheme of settlement other houses were to be built, he can say how many and if any steps have been taken to obtain contracts; if not, will he direct that contracts shall be obtained find the building proceeded with in order that the tenants may get into occupation before winter; and is he aware that one of the tenants has to walk seven miles from his lodging to his farm, and the other tenants in a lesser degree are subject to inconvenience and loss by the delay in having the houses erected.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that it was a condition of the contract that the houses referred to were to be completed in March last. Owing, however, to unforeseen difficulties, the contractor was unable to complete the work within the time limited, but anticipates that it will now shortly be finished. The Commissioners are making preparations for the erection of fifteen other houses on this estate, and they are aware that until the houses are built some temporary inconvenience must necessarily be caused to those for whom the houses are intended. There will be no avoidable delay.

    Irish Petty Sessions Clerks.
    MR. MEEHAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what arc the qualifications, conditions of service, and method of appointment of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland, and whether there is any examination or other test of qualification

    945
    applied to the candidates; and, if not, seeing that the salaries average about £120 per annum, and that nearly all appointments of public positions are conditional on the candidates passing a test examination, he will arrange that all appointments to the office of petty sessions clerk in Ireland shall be made only from candidates who have successfully passed a competitive examination open to all persons wishing to compete.
    MR. BRYCE: Petty sessions clerks must on appointment be between twenty-one and forty years of age, but the age limit is extended to fifty years in the case of persons who have filled certain specified positions affording a legal training. A clerk holds office during the pleasure of the magistrates of the district and of the Lord-Lieutenant. The election of clerks is by statute vested in the magistrates, and the appointment is subject to the approval of the Lord-Lieutenant. A clerk after election is required to pass a qualifying examination in literary and technical subjects, including, in the case of the larger districts, the elementary principles of criminal law. The salary depends on the size of the district and the length of service of the clerk, the average initial salary being about £70. As these appointments are governed by statute, there is no power to throw them open to competitive examination. I understand that the present system has worked well.

    Arms Act in Ireland.
    MR. MEEHAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland in how many counties in Ireland is the Peace Preservation or Arms Act in force, and will he give the names of the counties exempted; is he aware that under this Act the right to grant gun licences is reserved to resident magistrates; whether, seeing that licences have been refused to men of the highest character, he will give the number refused and the grounds of refusal; and, as this Act has to be renewed each year under the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, will he say if he intends to renew the Act; and, if so, will he arrange that the power of granting gun licences to farmers and others who require a gun for the protection of their crops from vermin shall be given to the magistrates sitting in petty sessions.
    MR. BRYCE: The Peace Preservation Act is in force in all the counties of Ireland with the exception of the counties of Londonderry, Louth, and Wicklow. It applies, however, to portions only of the counties of Antrim, Armagh, Donegal, Down, Monaghan, and Tyrone. The proclamations made under the Act empower resident magistrates to issue licences within their respective districts, and empower the Inspector-General and Deputy-Inspector-General of Constabulary to issue licences throughout Ireland generally. A return of the number of licences issued and refused is published each month in the Dublin Gazette, but the Irish Government have no information as to the grounds of refusal in any case. The working of this Act is under my consideration, but I cannot, as at present advised, say that no provisions respecting the possession of arms are needed, nor do I feel sure that any licensing power ought to be vested in the magistrates sitting in petty sessions.
    MR. JOHN REDMOND: Is not this part of the repressive legislation which forms the coercion code in Ireland? Do the Government intend to continue its existence?
    MR. BRYCE: The matter is under my consideration.

    Mr. Boyd's Castleconnor Estate.
    MR. P. A. MCHUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that untenanted lands belonging to Mr. Boyd, at Castleconnor, county Sligo, have, at the landlord's request, been inspected by order of the Estates Commissioners, and that the Estates Commissioners intimated to Mr. Boyd the price which they would be prepared to give for the untenanted lands, and that Mr. Boyd declined to accept such price; whether he is aware that Mr. Boyd recently sold the untenanted lands in lots and created present tenancies, with the object of having the recently untenanted lands sold to the new tenants under the Land Act of 1903; and can he say whether, in this case, the purchase money will be advanced by the Estates Commissioners in the event of an agreement being come to by the owner and the new tenants for a sale under the provisions of the Land Act of 1903.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that the facts are as stated in the first part of this Question. The Commissioners are not aware of any subsequent proceedings in respect of the estate mentioned. If proceedings for the; sale of any of the lands to newly created j tenants should be instituted before the Commissioners they will, when considering the question whether they will declare the lands to be an estate, have due regard to the circumstances under which such new tenancies wore created.

    Mr. Johnston's Drumkeerin Estate.
    MR. DOLAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Johnston, landlord of an estate at and around Drumkeerin, in the county of Leitrim, has taken proceedings against some of his tenants to recover rent which only fell due on the first of the present month; and whether, seeing that terms of purchase on this estate were almost agreed upon, the difference between the reduction offered by the landlord and that demanded by the tenants being only 6d. in the pound, he will, under the circumstances, request the Estates Commissioners to intervene with the object of effecting a settlement, and obviating the cost and irritation of the proceedings now threatened.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that they are at present in communication with the parties in this case with a view to effecting a settlement, if possible.

    Irish Land—Sales at Excessive Prices.
    MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland have the Estates Commissioners, within the last two months, disallowed the sale of any estate on the ground of excessive price; if so, has their disallowance, with the reason for it, been communicated directly to each tenant whom it affected; and will the Commissioners in future regularly communicate such decisions to all tenants whom they affect respectively.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that in no case within the last two months have they disallowed the sale of an estate upon the ground of
    948
    excessive price. In every case in which an application for an advance is finally refused, the tenant is duly notified of the fact.

    Untenanted Lands.
    MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will arrange that the Local Government Board shall send a copy of the forthcoming Return of Untenanted Land as soon as ready to the rural council of each district in which the Return shows land of that class to exist, together with a letter imforming the council of the facilities afforded by the Land Act of 1903 for distributing such land, all the various modes of distribution, and the benefits derivable therefrom.
    MR. BRYCE: The Parliamentary Return in question will in the ordinary course be on sale to the public. It is not the practice of the Local Government Board to distribute such papers gratuitiously to local authorities. The Board have no functions to perform in connection with land purchase, and it would be highly undesirable that they, or any other executive department, should attempt to define or interpret, for general information, the provisions of the Land Purchase Acts. The functions of the Estates Commissioners in regard to untenanted land are explained in the published reports which anyone can purchase.

    Morrogh Bernard Estate, Kerry.
    MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the inspector sent by the Estates Commissioners to deal with the question of evicted tenants on the Morrogh Bernard estate, county Kerry, has instructions only to deal with the cases of evicted tenants mentioned by the estate agent; whether such instructions will cause some of the evicted tenants to be neglected; and whether he will give instructions to the Commissioners to have inquiries made and a settlement effected of all the cases of evicted tenants on the estate.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that up to the present their inspector has inspected the holdings only of the four evicted tenants on this estate who have signed agreements to purchase. The inspector has not received

    949
    such instructions as mentioned in the Question. The Commissioners, however, intend to have inquiries made into the cases of the other evicted tenants on the estate.

    Newtowngore Evicted Tenant.
    MR. T. SMYTH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners have received an application from Mrs. Bridget M'Caffrey, widow of the late Hugh M'Caffrey, with reference to her being reinstated on the farm from which her husband and herself we-e evicted in March, 1883, on the estate of Mrs. Upperton, Newtowngore, county Leitrim; also if there has been an offer made for the sale of this estate, and, if so, will he see that the sale is not carried out without giving due consideration to the evicted tenant's application to be reinstated under the provisions of the Land Act of 1903, the holding being at present in the occupation of the landlord
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement from Patrick M'Caffrey, son of Mrs. Bridget M'Caffrey, and that they will have the application inquired into by one of their inspectors in due course. No proceedings in respect of the sale of the estate on which the evicted farm is situate have yet been instituted before the Commissioners.

    West and South Clare Railway.
    MR. HALPIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the county of Clare has a liability of 2 per cent, on £283,000 in perpetuity on the West and South Clare Railway; that the Treasury has also a similar liability on this railway; that the ratepayers have to pay over £7,500 a year for the railway which runs on Merchant's Quay, Kilrush; and whether he will take any steps to have the control of this quay vested in the county council of Clare for the benefit of the rate-payers.
    MR. BRYCE: I am informed by the Board of Works that the capital of the West and South Clare Railways together is £283,520. The liability of the county
    950
    is to pay dividends on the capital at 4 per cent., and also any deficit on working. The Treasury liability is to re-pay to the county half the amount which the county pays as dividends up to a maximum of 2 per cent. The net amount paid by the county in respect of both lines, allowing for the recoupment made from the Local Taxation Account, was, in 1904, £6,254, and in 1905, £6,212. I have already explained to the hon. Member that the Court of Appeal have decided the quay to be private property, and that I have no power to have it given over to the county council.

    Cork and the Exchequer Grant.
    MR. EDWARD BARRY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state in what proportion is the Exchequer grant of £40,000 divided amongst the Irish counties; how much has been given out of this grant to the county of Cork from 1891–1905; what amount was given to Cork for the year ended March, 1906; and how much of the total has been unexpended in Cork.
    MR. BRYCE: The sum divisible amongst the counties is, approximately, £37,000 per annum, as about £3,000 of the grant goes to the six municipal boroughs. The shares of the counties are determined in the same way as if the money were the estate duty grant, namely, on the basis of the certified expenditure of the counties on roads and bridges in the year 1887. The grant did not become available until 1896, because for five years after the passing of the Land Purchase Act, 1891, it was, in pursuance of that Act, accumulated to form a reserve fund of £200,000 in respect of land purchase. During the ten years which have elapsed since 1896 the amount paid to the county of Cork for labourers' cottages has been £34,871, of which the sum of £3,466 was paid in respect of the year ended March 31st, last. No portion of the grant remains unexpended in the case of the county of Cork.

    Mr. O'Meara's Abbeyville Estate.
    MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland why the Estates Commissioners have not as yet visited

    951
    the estate of Mr. William H. O'Meara, situate at Abbeyville, Lorrha, county Tipperary, which has been sold to the tenants, the agreements having been signed on October 9th, 1904, and lodged with the Estates Commissioners on July 8th, 1905; also when will the estate be visited and a valuation of the same made.
    MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that it is the fact that agreements for purchase in this case were lodged with them in July, 1905. Estates are inspected in the order of priority in which purchase agreements ate lodged, and the Commissioners do not anticipate that the estate in question will be reached during the present year.

    Maguire Estate, County Leitrim.
    MR. T. SMYTH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that several tenants on the Maguire estate, in county Leitrim, wore served with final notices for the sale of the property in 1895, and that the hearing was adjourned from time to time without assigning any cause; that a Commissioner visited the estate in 1902, who informed the tenants that the lands wore in the Land Judge's Court, and that those who had notices served for second-term fixtures would get the equivalent or three years purchase; that when the tenants appeared before Judge Ross the Commissioner, whose name was Mr. Roberts, stated that they agreed to buy at a higher purchase, which was twenty years; the tenants objected, and explained the case to the judge, who gave judgment for them; that their case was neglected, while some of the tenants on other portions of the property bought their holdings in 1904; that the receiver on the estate, who is sub-sheriff of Cavan, has notified the tenants who have not bought that he is prepared to accept offers, and that he will give reductions of 2s., 4s., and 6s. in the pound; and whether he will instruct the Estates Commissioners to investigate the case.
    MR. BRYCE: the Registrar of the Land Judge's Court informs mo that, with one exception, all of the thirty-four tenants on this estate were offered their holdings under the 40th Section of the Act of 1896. As a result, twenty-eight of the tenants purchased, and their
    952
    holdings have been vested in them. The remainder refused the terms offered, being dis-satisfied with the turbary allotments assigned to them. The Registrar states that it is not the case there was any adjournment without cause assigned. The Assistant Commissioner who visited the estate for the purposes of the Land Commission is dead, and there is now no moans of ascertaining what statements he may have made to the tenants. He had, however, no authority to make any statement as regards price, which was a matter for the Land Judge, and he did not as a matter of fact make any report to the Land Judge on the subject. I am informed that the remaining tenants are now negotiating with the receiver for the purchase of their holdings, but it will be for the Land Judge to determine whether their offers should be accepted. The matter is not one, in its present stage, for the Estates Commissioners.

    Challenging of Jurors in Ireland.
    MR. P. A. MCHUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is the intention of the Irish Government to introduce legislation dealing with the assumed right of the Crown to unlimited challenge without cause assigned in trials by jury in Ireland; can he state approximately when such legislation will be introduced; and, in the event of the Irish Government's neglect or refusal to introduce such legislation, will he take steps to abolish trial by jury in agrarian and political cases in Ireland.
    MR. BRYCE: It is not proposed to introduce legislation on the subject during the present session, but I may remind the hon. Member of the instructions regarding the practice of directing jurors to stand by which were issued by my right hon. friend the Attorney-General this spring, and the substance of which he stated in this House.

    Lord Ashbrook's King's County Estate.
    MR. REDDY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutentant of Ireland whether he can state the number of evictions which have taken place on the estate of Lord Ashbrook, in King's County, since 1903, and the number of evictions pending on this estate, decrees having been obtained;

    953
    whether he will obtain from the police authorities in King's County and the Crown officials the exact number of those evicted who were first turned into caretakers under Section 7 of the Land Act of 1887, and the number turned into caretakers not yet evicted, with the cost of the entire proceedings; whether he is aware that these tenants are weighed down with arrears of a rack rent; and whether, in view of the general circumstances of the estate, the Estates Commissioners propose to take any action.
    MR. BRYCE: I am informed by the Inspector-General that, so far as the police are aware, three tenants only have been evicted from this estate since 1903, and in one of these cases the evicted tenant became a caretaker under Section 7 of the Act of 1887. The cost to the public of affording protection to the sheriff was £1 10s. 3d. I have no information as to any other costs in the matter, nor as to whether the tenants were rack rented. I presume they could have had fair rents fixed if they had so desired. As to the action of the Estates Commissioners, I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member's Question of Wednesday last. †

    Obsolete Crown Bents in Ireland.
    MR. FETHERSTONHAUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in several cases on allocation of purchase money under the Irish Land Purchase Acts claims have been made on the part of the Crown, and allowed, in respect of obsolete Crown rents which had not been paid for upwards of 100 years; that in one case an arrear of 170 years was claimed and had to be allowed, as there was no statute of limitation available against the Crown in Ireland; and whether he will procure an Amendment to be made in the Crown Lands Bill with a view to a reasonable period of limitation against claims of the Crown in Ireland.
    MR. MCKENNA: Claims are never now made in respect of quit or Crown rents which have remained unpaid for sixty years or upwards, though there was a legal decision some years ago that the Nullum Tempus Acts, by which Crown
    † See Column 491.
    954
    claims to land are barred after sixty years, do not apply to quit and Crown rents. I hope, however, to introduce an Amendment in the Crown Lands Bill which, if carried, will have the effect of making the law conform with the existing practice in this respect.

    Cork and Fermoy Railway.
    MR. POWER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the City of London, in reply to a Question, stated on July 18th, 1901, † that there was no doubt that this company (Fishguard and Rosslare Railway Company) are pledged to construct the line from Cork to Fermoy, and the Treasury neither have the power, nor would they exercise it if they did possess it, of sanctioning any escape from that Parliamentary obligation; and will he say if the railway company was under obligation to connect the railway termini in Cork; if the Treasury is now offering a portion of the £93,000, placed in connection with the sale of the County Waterford Railway, at the disposal of the Hybrid Committee which investigated the matter in 1898, for railway development in the South of Ireland, towards connecting railways in the city of Cork; and will he take steps to secure that such expenditure of public funds will not enable these railway companies to further evade their obligations to Parliament.
    MR. MCKENNA: The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The obligation laid upon the Fish-guard Company as regards the connection at Cork is contained in Sub-section 12 of Section 68 of the Act of 1898, which enacts that the company shall "use their best endeavours to obtain the assent and co-operation of the Cork Commissioners and the corporation of Cork, and of the Cork, Bandon, and South Coast and Cork and Macroom Railway Companies"; and it is understood that this co-operation would not have been adequate without Government assistance. No portion of the £93,000 is or has been placed at the disposal of any Committee. The Treasury has, however, stated that, in the event of the Cork City Railways and Works Bill being approved by the Committee and passing
    † See (4)Debates, xcvii., 856.

    955
    into law, it will be prepared on certain conditions to invite Parliament at a convenient opportunity to contribute £25,000 to the purposes of the Bill.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Hybrid Committee recommended that none of this money should be given to any railway that did not comprehend a direct railway service between Cork and Waterford? I wish to know whether this scheme, which is now to have a contribution of £25,000, has any such provision attached to it.
    MR. MCKENNAwas understood to say that the hon. Gentleman's assumption was correct.
    MR. T. M. HEALYasked whether £25,000 was the sum to be given. £50,000 had been mentioned as the amount.
    MR. MCKENNA: Yes, I did say £25,000. A sum of £65,000 was mentioned formerly as possible to be obtained if a local contribution of £50,000 was received in respect of the scheme which last year was to cost £200,000. The total cost of the present scheme is £98,000, and under these circumstances the Treasury consider that a grant of £25,000 is sufficient.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: Do the Treasury consider it equitable to divert this money from the purposes for which it was originally intended? This money is a contribution by the Treasury in consideration of money subscribed by certain baronies in Waterford for Water-ford purposes. [NATIONALIST cries of "No."] But it was, and I wish to ask whether the Treasury consider it fair to give any of the money towards any railway scheme unconnected with Cork and Waterford.
    MR. MCKENNAsaid the Treasury had given the matter full consideration.
    MR. MOONEYasked whether the hon. Gentleman would make public the conditions under which the Treasury were prepared to grant this sum. Was it not a fact that one of the conditions was that the Treasury should be satisfied, after a Committee of the House had
    956
    passed the Bill, that the scheme from an engineering point of view was a satisfactory one. Was the Treasury to have that power of practically overriding a decision of the House?
    MR. MCKENNAsaid there was no question of the decision of the House being overridden. The Committee would meet on Wednesday and, as he understood the position, would then consider their decision, having regard to the amount of the Treasury grant.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNORasked whether, seeing that they were flying in the face o f the recommendation of the Joint Committee of both Houses, the Treasury would undertake to reconsider the whole matter.
    THE SPEAKERsaid the hon. Member should give notice of that Question.

    Irish Local Taxation Collection.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether it is the custom of the Inland Revenue Department in Great Britain to collect all moneys for the local taxation account free of charge; does a like custom prevail in Ireland; and are fees charged in either country for auditing the accounts of local authorities.
    MR. MCKENNA: No charge is made by the Inland Revenue Department for the collection of moneys for the local taxation account either in Great Britain or Ireland. In both England and Ireland I am informed that in eases where their accounts are audited by Government auditors payments are made by the local authorities in respect of this audit.

    Fishguard and Rosslare Railway.
    MR. POWER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that it was agreed by the terms of The Fishguard and Rosslare Railways and Harbour Act, 1898, that the railway company was not to be paid £93,000 by the Treasury until they had completed the line from Rosslare to Waterford and the line from Fermoy and Dunkettle, and that an effort was made in July, 1901, by the railway company to induce the Treasury to assent to the abandonment of the Fermoy and Dunkettle line to Cork, and to transfer the £93,000 to a scheme to join the several railways in Cork; and

    957
    will he say if the Treasury refused the application of the railway company.
    MR. MCKENNA: Under the Schedule to the Act referred to the Treasury agreed to pay the sum of £93,000 to the Fishguard Company upon the fulfilment of certain conditions, one of which was the construction of a line between Fermoy and Dunkettle. The railway company in 1901 sought to be relieved of this statutory obligation and to obtain the £93,000 in the manner suggested, and this application was refused.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIENasked whether the Rosslare and Fishguard Company had given the Treasury any assurance that they would now make the line between Fermoy and Cork.
    MR. MCKENNA: No, Sir, I am not aware that they have.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Have the promoters of this Bill given the Treasury any assurance that in return for this money the line to Fethard will be made?
    MR. MCKENNAreplied in the negative.
    MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: I will bring the matter up on the Estimates, and I strongly advise the hon. Member to reconsider his decision.

    Kerry County Council and the Irish Language.
    MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that official communications to members of the Kerry County Council have been delayed in delivery owing to the fact that they have been addressed in the Irish language; whether this delay arises owing to such communications having to be sent to Dublin for translation; and whether, having regard to the practice of most of the public bodies in the county of Kerry addressing communications to members in Irish, he will take steps to secure that in the post offices of the principal towns of the county at least one official understands the native language of Ireland.
    MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Correspondence addressed in the Irish language in Kerry has to be sent to Dublin for
    958
    translation. I do not see my way to take the stop indicated by the hon. Member.

    The Signalling of Divisions.
    MR. BYLESasked whether the attention of the Speaker had been called to the fact that, owing to the failure of the electric bolls on Thursday, a largo number of Members engaged in the Committee rooms upstairs were shut out from the first division on that day; whether that division would nevertheless be entered on the Journals of the House without explanation; and whether, in the case of any similar accident in future, the doors might not be left open until Members within the precincts of the House had had time to be warned.
    MR. SPEAKER: My attention was called to the fact that the system for ringing electric bells failed to act. I think the remedy which the hon. Member has suggested is an impracticable one. The police have instructions to call out in a loud voice that a division is about to take place. As long as we rely partly on mechanical means I fear that occasionally—although I am glad to think very rarely—accidents will happen. I am afraid I cannot suggest any remedy for them.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. JOHN REDMONDasked as to the course of business.
MR. BRYCEsaid he had hoped to be able to introduce the Irish Labourers Bill on Wednesday, and he trusted that it would be introduced not later than Monday or Tuesday next week.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid he anticipated that the Motion for the adjournment for the Whitsuntide recess would be made on Wednesday next week, and that the House would rise the same night and meet again on Thursday in the following week. In reply to Mr. Keir Hardie (Merthyr Tydvil), the right hon. Gentleman said the Committee tage of the Trade Disputes Bill and the introduction of the Bill on the unemployed could not be taken before Whitsuntide. Answering Mr. A. J. Balfour (City of London) the right hon. Gentleman said that on Thursday next it was

959
proposed to take the Navy Votes, with the exception of those relating to shipbuilding, which would be deferred to a later period of the Session.

SELECTION (POLICE AND SANITARY COMMITTEE).
Sir William Brampton Gurdon reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged Colonel Williams from the Police and Sanitary Committee; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Samuel Roberts (Sheffield).
NEW BILLS.
  EDUCATION ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
  "To amend the Education Acts, 1870 to 1903," presented by Sir John Brunner; supported by Sir William Anson, Mr. Burt, Mr. Butcher, Mr. Cameron Corbett, Mr. Crooks, Mr. Eve, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, Mr. Masterman, Mr. George White, Mr. Whitley, and Mr. Yoxall; to be read a second time upon Monday, 18th June, and to be printed. [Bill 220.]
  CHARITABLE LOAN SOCIETIES (IRE LAND) BILL.
  "To amend the Acts relating to Charitable Loan Societies in Ireland," presented by Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland; supported by Mr Bryce; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 221.]
  TOWN HOLDINGS BILL.
  "To give compensation to occupying tenants of Town Holdings for beneficial improvements," presented by Mr. Rowlands; supported by Mr. Channing, Sir Walter Foster, Sir John Brunner, Sir James Wood house, and Dr. Pollard; to be read a second time upon Friday, 22nd June, and to be printed. [Bill 222.]

  METROPOLITAN POLICE COM MISSION.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE, Leeds, W.)asked leave to introduce a Bill" to facilitate the proceedings of the Commissioners appointed to hold an inquiry respecting the duties of the Metropolitan Police in dealing with cases of drunkenness, disorder, and solicitation in the streets." The Bill he said closely followed the lines of the Bill
  960
  of last year investing the South African War Stores Commission with the necessary statutory powers. Consequently, the names of the Commissioners were recited in the Bill, viz.:—Mr. Alfred Lyttelton (chairman). Mr. W. H. Dickinson, M.P., Mr. Rufus Isaacs, K.C., M.P., Mr. D. Brynmor Jones, K.C. M.P., and Mr. C. A." Whitmore. The changes in this Bill from that of last year wore the omission of the indemnity clause and the provision to enable the Commission to send Sub commissioners of inquiry abroad. Last year's Bill went through the House unopposed in a very short time. For obvious reasons it was most desirable that this Bill should pass all its stages at the earliest possible date, and he hoped the House would give it the necessary facilities.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to facilitate the proceedings of the Commissioners appointed to hold an inquiry respecting the duties of the Metropolitan Police in dealing with cases of drunkenness, disorder, and solicitation in the streets."
  MR. J. WARD: I desire to know how it is there is no Labour Member included on this Commission?
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Secretary Gladstone and Mr. Herbert Samuel.

  METROPOLITAN POLICE (COM MISSION) BILL.
  "To facilitate the proceedings of the Commissioners appointed to hold an inquiry respecting the duties of the Metropolitan Police in dealing with cases of drunkenness, disorder, and solicitation in the streets," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time To morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 223.]

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Order for Committee read.
  MR. SPEAKER: The first three Instructions on the Paper are out of order

  961
  because the matters dealt with can be raised on the Kill either by new clauses or by way of Amendments. †
  MR. STUART WORTLKYrose to move that it be an Instruction to the Committee, "That they have power to deal separately with Part IV. (Council for Wales), and to report the same to the House as a separate Bill. He said that the appearance of this Instruction upon the Paper would create little surprise amongst those acquainted with the provisions of the Bill." In moving the Instruction it would not be necessary for him to say anything which would give offence to any of the many representatives of Welsh opinion. With regard to Welsh questions, however, it behoved the House to order their proceedings with especial care when they reflected that in Wales there was a large and influential minority totally unrepresented in the House, and, in a large majority of instances, practically excluded from a semblance of power upon any of the elected local authorities. He submitted this Instruction upon grounds which need not excite any of the animosities which might possibly arise upon other parts of the Bill. He moved it, firstly, upon the ground that the clause ought not to have its fate tied up with the rest of this self-contained, but nevertheless quite sufficiently extensive measure. Separate treatment of the clause was advisable in the interests of peace. There was already
  †The Instructions referred to were as follows:
  MR. WINFREY: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to provide that Education Committees, constituted under Section 17 (1) of the Education Act, 1902, shall consist in part or entirely of persons directly elected by the ratepayers for this purpose only; and that all powers and duties of the education authorities shall be exercised by and through the Education Committees.
  MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that it have power to provide that it be a condition of the recognition of any public elemental y school that the education given during school hours and at the public expense shall be in secular subjects only.
  MR. LAURENCE HARDY: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert into the Bill a clear definition of the particulars of the religions instruction which in future is to given at the cost of the nation in all public elementary schools where the local education authority authorises religious instruction to be given.
  962
  quite enough in the Bill to excite bitterness and give rise to suspicion without matters being added which necessarily raised the fear that there was an attempt on foot to give Welshmen the power of supervising education in England without allowing Englishmen the corresponding right of supervising educational matters in Wales. In the interests of good draughtsmanship and symmetry in our legislation this question should be dealt with separately. The clause was not a reform of education, but it might be regarded as the beginning of an organic or structural change in our system so great and far-reaching as to deserve the name of a constitutional change. When the House read the Bill a second time it was under a considerable misconception as to the genesis of the aims of this clause. In describing the proceedings of the conference which expressed in Wales an opinion upon this question the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, with quite pardonable optimism, conveyed to the House the view that the voluntaryists in Wales had practically agreed to the principle, if not to sonic of the details, of this clause. If the information which had reached him was correct, the most that the voluntaryists at that conference agreed to was the creation of some kind of central council for Wales, and that might very well amount to no more than the kind of proposal which he believed had been under the consideration of Lord Londonderry, namely, some kind of council consisting of delegates from all the local education authorities in Wales but wielding powers no greater than each local authority wielded in its own district. He was also advised that the voluntaryists at that conference never contemplated and never sanctioned anything like superseding the powers of the Board of Education in Wales to such an extent as to set up an executive department of the State responsible to no legislative body whatever. They did agree to the abstract idea of a Welsh Council, but they did not intend to do anything like ousting the only independent external authority which could at present arbitrate between disputing authorities, which were only too likely to be seen in conflict one with another in matters of administration under this Bill. Another impression which the President of the Board of Trade conveyed in his

  963
  very interesting speech on the Second Reading was that this clause conferred no power upon any council to legislate. Nobody said it did, but it must be quite clear that the clause might very well create a great deal of power without creating legislative power, and the clauses conferring power of this kind most deserving of scrutiny, if not of suspicion, were those which gave large powers of administrative and executive action of the very kind that admitted of unjust discrimination and oppression of all kinds, and which would be exercised free from the control which restrained Departments responsible to this House. It was clear that the power of the purse was about to be conferred on the Welsh council, by the Imperial grant being handed over to that body for distribution amongst the local authorities, and that power must be a source of and afford an opportunity for a great deal of injustice. What the House ought to be jealous of was the conferring of irresponsible powers to do injustice or make unfair discriminations of any kind. The Welsh Council in Wales would practically be judges in their own cause.
  MR. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman now seems to be discussing the merits of the clause. That is not relevant on the Instruction.
  MR. STUART WORTLEYsaid the clause would impose an almost incalculable amount of labour upon the House in passing this Bill through Committee. He submitted that it was not a clause which the Bill ought to carry, for it was really a constitutional change which should be discussed under other conditions and at another time. He hoped the Government would see fit to make this change while there was yet time. He begged to move.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it be an Instruction to the Committee on the Education (England and Wales) Bill that they have power to deal separately with Part IV. (Council for Wales), and to report the same to the House as a separate Bill."—(Mr. Stuart Worthy.)
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. BIRRELL, Bristol, N.)said the Government could not see their
  964
  way to accept this proposal. It was no fault of the Government that all the representatives for Wales were of one way of thinking. He quite agreed that the proposal to establish this council in Wales might very properly be considered separately by itself, but on the other hand they had an Education Bill relating to England and Wales before the House, and he saw no reason why they should not attempt to secure what they considered was a very reasonable reform. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Hallam division of Sheffield had admitted that there was floating about in people's minds an abstract idea of a council. What an abstract idea of a council was he hardly knew, but at all events everybody was aware of the fact that there had been a great disposition on the part of all authorities in Wales, belonging to the Church of England as well as to Nonconformist bodies, to believe that a time was coming when they might do for themselves in the matter of elementary education what they had done for themselves in the region of intermediate education with so much success. Believing that this could be clothed in proper form so as to represent the real wishes of the people, whose zeal for education could not be denied, the Government had thought fit to include this proposal in their measure. As a matter of administration everybody who had had anything to do with the administration of education at Whitehall knew very well that Welsh subjects and Welsh questions formed a part by themselves and were subject to considerations which did not apply so much to other parts of the country. He thought there would be no difficulty whatsoever, if wise counsels prevailed and wise methods were devised in handing to a people whole zeal for education was admitted the control in some important respects of the disposition of public money set aside for elementary education in Wales. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that they had a great deal of work before them in this Bill, and he thought that the best thing they could do was to set about it at once, and see whether they could not grapple with this difficulty as well as with the many others before them.
  Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid the right hon. Gentleman had not removed the difficulty as to whether Part IV. should be included in the Bill or not.

  965
  It seemed to him to depend almost entirely on what the intention was. A statement was made in the Second Reading debate by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade in which he gave his version and interpretation of the clause. If that interpretation stood, then he thought his right hon. friend's Motion was well founded. The President of the Board of Trade delivered what might be called a good-natured, but that the same time rather strong censure on the Leader of the Opposition for the opinion he had expressed with regard to the appropriateness of including this part in the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman told the House that at a conference which was the genesis of this clause a resolution was unanimously passed in favour of asking the Government to set up a central council for the control and direction of education in Wales, and he pointed out that the Leader of the Opposition was entirely ignoring the fact that this resolution came with the imprimatur of both parties in Wales, and was the accepted rendering of their wishes in regard to education. Since that happened they had had another version of what the clause really meant. He understood that the right hon. Gentleman was present at the conference, and that he then spoke in quite different terms of the clause. He then stated that such an authority ought to deal with matters of a purely educational character, and that all the great controversies, as between parties and sects, ought to be settled in the first place by the Imperial Parliament. The hon. Member for Swansea, who also spoke at the conference, was still more definite; he said that the council would have nothing to do with the management of elementary schools. Did that stand? If it was really the fact that Part IV. of the Bill had nothing to do with the management of elementary schools, and if it was to touch none of those questions likely to raise strife or difference in Wales, it was conceivable that this part of the Bill might be allowed to pass without any great objection on that side of the House. He should like to know from the President of the Board of Education whether it was really the intention that elementary education should not come within the purview of this council. Could the House not be told at this stage whether
  966
  they were dealing with a matter that would raise controversy, or with one that was as innocuous as the council described by the President of the Board of Trade. He thought that an impression was created in this House by the speech of the right hon. Gentleman totally different from that which had been made on the mind of many who had read the other side of the story. There might be a misconception—he was sure there was no misrepresentation—and he should like to know whether the Government were going to eliminate from Part IV. anything which might be called controversial.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDsaid he apprehended from the Speaker's ruling that it would not be in order to discuss the broad merits of this portion of the Bill, but the right hon. Gentleman who moved the Instruction, before the Speaker gave his ruling, went sufficiently into the merits to indicate to his mind, and, he thought, to the mind of the House, that his Motion was directly in hostility to this portion of the Bill, and the right hon. Member gave his reasons, and was proceeding to give them at greater length when the Speaker intervened. The reasons the right hon. Gentleman gave, before he was interrupted, for his hostility to this portion of the Bill were reasons which rather recommended it to the Nationalist Members. The fact that it came here through an unanimous representation of Wales surely could not be held to be an argument against this portion of the Bill, at any rate in the minds of those who were Home Rulers. He did not desire, if it wore out of order, at this stage to go into the merits of the proposal. He accepted absolutely the description of its meaning which the President of the Board of Trade gave on the Second Heading. He accepted from him the statement that it was proposed in pursuance of an agreement come to by all parties and all religions, including Bishops of the Church of England and Bishops also of the Catholic Church; and that being so, he thought it would be extraordinary if those who represented Ireland in this matter were to withhold their support from including this in the Bill. He regarded the Instruction as a hostile movement towards this measure of Home Rule for Wales. The Nationalist Members recognised to the

  967
  full the obligations of gratitude they were under for many years to the support of the Welsh Members; and for these reasons and on the broad ground of Home Rule they would certainly vote against this Instruction.
  MR. CLAVELL SALTERsaid that, apart from the convenience of debate, there was a strong practical ground for the separate treatment of Part IV. if their desire really was to arrive at a practical solution of the religious difficulty which the Bill was designed to meet. The President of the Board of Education, in opening the debate on the First Reading of the Bill, referred in two sentences to Part IV. of the Bill. The first sentence referred to the alleged, but he thought incorrectly alleged, unanimity in Wales itself. The second sentence was in these words—
  "If on investigation it is found that this country can hand over to Wales whatever her share may he of moneys allocated to education and leave her to distribute it in her own way, Whitehall will have no occasion to regret her departure."
  It appeared to him that as an exposition of Part IV., and as a defence of its policy, the observations of the right hon. Gentleman were a little inadequate, and undoubtedly it indicated that there was at that date in his mind an uncertainty as to whether Part IV. would be found practicable or not. He thought they were entitled to ask whether in the time that had elapsed since the right hon. Gentleman made that speech the investigation to which he referred had been hold. If so, who made it, and what was the result of it? If not yet made, when would the investigation be made, and by whom? If it was found, as the right hon. Gentleman plainly implied it might be found, that this country could not hand over to Wales her share, what was then to become of Part IV. of the Bill? Was not the plain meaning of what the right hon. Gentleman said that this was what would take place? The House was to be asked to pass Part IV. of the Bill as it stood, and then His Majesty in Council was to be clothed with authority to set up this strange new body if it should be found expedient to do so.
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is now discussing Part IV. The instruction which has been moved is
  968
  that the Committee should have power to deal separately with that Part.
  MR. CLAVELL SALTERsaid he would endeavour to avoid any second error. The Bill proposed to make certain experiments in England and Wales. In England it was proposed to invest the local authorities with delicate and important duties; and in Wales the same experiment was to be made, and concurrently with the change there it was proposed to alter profoundly the controlling authority. He suggested that it would be wiser to make the first experiment universal in England and Wales, and then if it was found to work well the second proposal in regard to the machinery and the controlling authority in Wales could be introduced at a later date.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that this Instruction was one greatly likely to lighten the labour of the House, which had a very serious task before it in passing those parts of the Bill which had been discussed at the First and Second Reading stages. This part of the Bill had never been discussed; it had never, except in a strictly legal narrow sense, been read a second time. It differed in its matter and object from the rest of the Bill. It did not even own the same paternity, for there was an impression during the debate on the Second Reading that whereas the Minister for Education was responsible for the main part of the Bill of which he was in charge, this part was due to the inventive ingenuity of the President of the Board of Trade. He thought that admission was got from right hon. Gentlemen opposite; but it was also elicited from a consideration of a, speech made towards the end of the Second Reading debate which showed why that Minister took an earnest interest amounting to paternity in this clause. The only defence of the Minister for Education of this part of the Bill in the Second Reading debate was that if the Education Department could get rid of the President of the Board of Trade and Wales, they would be delighted if they could do so by means of this clause, and if Wales could get rid of the Board of Education Wales also would be delighted. It was the case of a mutual desire to separate—a mutual repulsion with which they all had a natural

  969
  sympathy, knowing the two parties to the case—which showed how little this part of the Bill was in any true sense an integral part of a great measure dealing with education. It might be a good or a bad thing; but it was an important and an irrelevant thing. He would suggest to the Government that, dealing with suggestions both important and relevant, they should agree in their own interest to separate this part of the Bill from these parts which were relevant. Another reason was that, by the admission of Ministers themselves, this part of the Bill had never been considered by the Government; it had never been considered by the House of Commons. It was a mere sketch. He thought that it was manifest that that was so and he believed that he had proved it. It might be supposed that if this clause had been planned and threshed out in the ordinary manner of a Government Bill, it would have been something else than the almost unintelligible skeleton presented to the House of Commons. He would have supposed that the Government would have been prepared to say what was the particular flesh—the particular form of body with which they proposed to clothe this skeleton. The Government had told them little with regard to these proposals —they had not chosen the orthodox means of communication with the public They had chosen the Lord Mayor of Cardiff, who did not belong to their Party but was a man of great position. [An HON. MEMBER: You made him Lord Mayor.] He did not know what the hon. Member meant by saying that he made him Lord Mayor. It was the right of their municipal institutions alone to say who should be Lord Mayor. But this gentleman I was not, at any rate, a member of the Government, and yet he wrote a letter in which he said—
  "I am authorised to state that the fourth part of this Bill—the part now in question— will be amended in such and such a, manner."
  It would be improper for him to discuss what those alterations were likely to beat the present moment. They had not heard in the House what they were to be The Opposition did not know any more
  than the Government; and they had had no authoritative statement except through the mouth of the Lord Mayor of Cardiff about the proposals the Government intended to make for administrative Home Rule in educational matters in Wales. The right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill did not in his speech add one iota to what he said on its First Heading. The right hon. Gentleman said the hon. Members for Wales last year wanted to get away from the Board of Education and that the Board of Education wanted them to go away; but that was no reason why they should bring in at the tail-end of the most controversial measure which had been introduced in Parliament— a measure which had been received with the greatest and most passionate opposition in all parts of the country, and which was calculated both on broad constitutional grounds and in relation to its details to prove a most controversial measure—a scheme which had never been dealt with or properly thought out either by the Government, or by the Government draughtsman, or perhaps even by the Secretary to the Board of Trade. That surely was not the way to carry a great legislative proposal. If a proposal for granting educational Home Rule administration in Wales had been brought forward some time ago it would have met with the most deep-seated opposition. Before the Committee stage of the Bill was concluded, the Government would see the desirability of not adding to a measure from which religions discussions and considerations could not be separated, another question which was not religious but political and constitutional, and of sufficient importance in itself to provide matter enough for a first-class Bill in any session. These teemed to him to be grounds—broad-based, sound Parliamentary reasons—why this instruction should be accepted. The Government had everything to gain and nothing to lose by adopting the course now suggested.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 102: Noes, 388. (Division List No 83.)

  AYES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Ashley. W. W.

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. A.J.(City Lond

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey.

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

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Middlemore, J. Throgmorton

  Beach, Hn. Michael HughHicks

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Forster, Henry William

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlingt'n

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Percy, Earl

  Bull, Sir William James

  Haddock, George R.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hamilton, Marquess of

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Cavendish, Et. Hn. Victor C.W.

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

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.

  Starkey, John R.

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.

  Hills, J. W.

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J.G. (O 'f'd.Un.

  Chamberlain, Rt.Hon.J. (Birm.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Lanark.)

  Clarke, Sir Edward (City Lond.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W.

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancash.)

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Keswick, William

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.)

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., F'h'm

  Wilson, A. Stanley(york, E.R.)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Cross, Alexander

  Liddell, Henry

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart.

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Eveshm

  Wyndham. Rt. Hon. George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers.

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Younger, Geroge

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinb'gh.W.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Fell, Arthur

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordsh.)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Blake, Edward

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Adkins, W. Ryland

  Boland, John

  Cowan, W. H.

  Agnew, George William

  Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Brace, William

  Cremer, William Randal

  Alden, Percy

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Crombie, John William

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Branch, James

  Crooks, William

  Ambrose, Robert

  Brocklehurst, W. D.

  Crosfield, William J.

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Brooke, Stopford

  Crossley, William J.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

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

  Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

  Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberd'n

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Delany, William

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Devlin, Charles Ramsay(Galw'y

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Burke, E. Haviland.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Barker, John

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Dickinson, W.H. (St.Pancras, N

  Barlow, John Emmott (S'm'set

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Buxton. Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Barnard, E. B.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Dillon, John

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cairns, Thomas

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Caldwell, James

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Cameron, Robert

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Beale, W. P.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Duckworth, James

  Beauchamp, E.

  Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

  Duffy, William J.

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R.

  Duncan. J. H. (York, Otley)

  Beloc, Hilaire Joseph Peter R.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Benn, John Williams (D'v'np't

  Clough. W.

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Bonn, W. (T'w'r H'ml'ts, S.Geo

  Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Bennett, E. N.

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Bertram, Julius

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Elibank, Master of

  Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Erskine, David C.

  Billson, Alfred

  Cooper, G. J.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Corbett.C H.(Sussex, E. Grin'std

  Essex, E. W.

  972

  973

  Evans, Samuel T.

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  O'Brien, Kend'l, Tipperary Mid.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Kitson, Sir James

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow.W)

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Field, William

  Lambert, George

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustance

  Lamont, Norman

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

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  O'Dowd, John

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

  O'Hare, Patrick

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras, E.

  O' Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accr'gt'n

  O'Mara, James

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lehmann, R. C.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford, S.

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Paul, Herbert

  Gilhooly, James

  Levy, Maurice

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Ginnell, L.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Pearce, William (Lime-house

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Perks, Robert William

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Lough, Thomas

  Philipps. J. Wynf'd (Pembroke)

  Glover, Thomas

  Lundon, W.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pombroke)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Grant, Corrie

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Lynch, H. B.

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

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

  Grove, Archibald

  Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

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

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Maclean, Donald

  Radford, G. H.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Halpin, J.

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Hammond, John

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merth'r T'dvil

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  M'Crae, George

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Rees, J. D.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  M'Kean, John

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Harwood, George

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  M'Killop, W.

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

  Haworth, Arthur A.

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

  Richardson, A.

  Hayden, John Patrick

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

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Hazleton, Richard

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Maddison, Frederick

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Roberts, John H. (Denoighs.)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Herbert, Col. Ivor (Mon., S.)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Robertson, Sir G.Scott (Bradf'rd

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Massie, J.

  Robertson, J M. (Tyneside)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Robinson, S.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Meagher, Michael

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Hobhouse, Charles E. N.

  Menzies, Walter

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Hodge, John

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Rose, Charles Day

  Hogan, Michael

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Runciman, Walter

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Mond, A.

  Russell, T. W.

  Hooper, A. G.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Hope, W.Bateman (Somerset, N

  Montagu, E. S.

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Montgomery, H. H.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Mooney, J. J.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Hudson, Walter

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Schwann, Chas. E (Manchester)

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Morrell, Philip

  Sears, J. E.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Morse, L. L.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Jackson, R. S.

  Murnaghar, George

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Murphy, John

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Murray, James

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

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Myer, Horatio

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Jones, David Brynmor (Sw'nsea

  Napier, T. B.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Nicholls, George

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Donc'str

  Snowden, P.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Joyce, Michael

  Norman, Henry

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Kearley, Hudson E

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Spicer, Albert

  Kelley, George D.

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Nuttall, Harry

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  974

  975

  Steadman, W. C.

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Wallace, Robert

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Strachey, Sir Edward

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

  Williams. Osmond (Merioneth)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Williams. W. L. (Carmarthen)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent

  Williamson, A.(Elgin and Nairn

  Sullivan, Donal

  Ward, W Dudley(Southampton

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Wardle, George J.

  Wilson, Hon. C. H.W.(Hull, W.

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

  Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

  Wason, John Catheart (Orkney)

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

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Watt, H. Anderson

  Winfrey, R.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Wodehouse, Lord(Norfolk, Mid

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Weir, James Galloway

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Whitbread, Howard

  Woodhouse, Sir JT (Huddersf'd

  Thorne, William

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Young, Samuel

  Torrance, A. M.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Toulmin, George

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Whitehead, Rowland Pease.

  Verney, F. W.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Wadsworth, J.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  MR. SPEAKERruled that the Instructions on the Paper in the names of the hon. Member for the Kingston Division of Surrey and the hon. Member for Ayrshire were out of order, and that that of the hon. Member for the Ecclesall Division of Sheffield was in order to the end of the third line, the remainder being out of order, †
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTSsaid his object in moving that part of his Instruction which was in order was to divide this Bill into two. Part I. dealt with religious instruction and religious difficulty alone. It did not deal with education, properly so called. In
  † The Instructions referred to were as follows:—
  MR. CAVE: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision for dividing parishes and consolidating any parts of parishes for the purpose of varying the incidence of the charge proposed to be created by Clause 30 of the Bill.
  MR. COCHRANE: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision for giving effect to the wishes of parents (of children in actual attendance at provided schools), with regard to the religious education to be. given to children attending such schools by giving to such parents direct representation on the management of such schools as their children attend.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to divide the Bill into two Bills, the one dealing with elementary education, and the other with endowments and other educational purposes, and that the second Bill be reported to the House before the other is proceeded with.
  976
  Part I. the right hon. Gentleman had attempted to deal entirely with the religious difficulty, but he did not think his attempt up to the present had been successful in satisfying any large section of the House. It did not satisfy many of the right hon. Gentleman's own followers; it did not satisfy those who represented Ireland and it did not satisfy those who represented Labour. Part II. did deal with education and in a very wide and comprehensive way. The right hon. Gentleman pointed out with respect to Part II. in his introductory speech that it widened and strengthened the Board's power to establish a more elastic system of co-ordination. Part II. gave the Board of Education very wide and extensive powers. It gave the Board power to make schemes in all cases, excluding the schools mentioned in Section 3 of the Public Schools Act, 1868. In all other cases, both in secondary and in elementary schools, the Board of Education took powers to make schemes. It was quite true that where the value of the endowment was more than £50 a year the scheme had to come to this House to be confirmed. But in all other cases the Board of Education had power to make schemes without there being any appeal. This Bill was a very lengthy one and very controversial. It was divided into five parts and contained forty clauses. It was full of difficulties, and the object of this instruction was to otter the right hon. Gentleman a golden bridge to get out of those difficulties. He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman' to take Part II. first ["No !"] and give

  977
  himself and his colleagues time to reconsider Part I. He was afraid that if the right hon. Gentleman would not do that, before Part II. was got rid of a very long time would elapse. His suggestion was that the Committee should take Part II. first and deal with that. Part II. was a Bill in itself. Was it not right, before they dealt with Part I., that those who had educational establishments should know what their rights were? One of the difficulties with which the right hon. Gentleman was confronted did not come from the Church of England alone. It came also from Nonconformist bodies who had educational endowments, and there was some doubt in their minds as to what power the Board of Education sought to have overthose endowments. The language of the Bill was indefinite on that point, and the people interested in the schools were very anxious to know what their rights were going to be. Therefore he suggested that the Government should let those people know what their position was before they proceeded to deal with Part I. He had no wish to delay the House, and simply put his suggestion before the Government that as these two parts of the Bill were absolutely distinct they should be taken separately. The right hon. Gentleman might have had a mandate for Part I., although he doubted that, but he was certain there was no demand in the country for the Government to deal with the endowments of the schools in the way they proposed to deal with them in this Bill. He begged to move.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON, in seconding, said he would like to make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman on behalf of the Instruction of his hon. friend on the ground of practical convenience. Part II. proposed to deal with the endowments and to deal with them in a way which made the subject extremely contentious. He would not enter into the merits of Part II., but he would like to point out the very important matters in which changes were proposed and upon which lengthy discussion was almost inevitable. The Bill altered the law in the way of substituting new powers for those which the Board of Education had under existing Acts; it altered the time which exempted endowments from interference; it altered the terms which entitled endow-
  978
  ments to special treatment: it abolished the cyprés doctrine, and so altered the principles upon which trusts and endowments were dealt with; it altered the definition of endowments and left it to the Board of Education and gave them liberty to say what an endowment was. Owing to the somewhat curious manner in which that clause was drafted an educational endowment was anything that the Board of Education chose to regard as educational. It was impossible to say that that was a provision that was not contentious or one that the Opposition could accept without a very lengthy discussion. He suggested to the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education that this particular portion of the Bill, Part II., involving as it did so many extremely technical questions, would be much better dealt with apart from the rest of the Bill which it encumbered and embarrassed to a degree which the right hon. Gentleman would hardly realise until he reached that portion in Committee. Although they could not press this Instruction like the last on the ground of great constitutional importance, he thought that they could press it on the ground of general convenience to the House.
  Motion made, and Question proposed "That it be an Instruction to the Committee on the Education (England and Wales) Bill that they have power to divide the Bill into two Bills, the one dealing with elementary education, and the other with endowments and other educational purposes."—(Mr. Samuel Roberts.)
  MR. BIRRELLsaid the hon. Member for the Ecclesall Division of Sheffield had shown very great sympathy for this measure, and he hoped that he would continue to show that sympathy throughout the whole of the debate. But all were agreed that Part I. of the Bill was the part that would receive most discussion, and all must be anxious to get it out of the way as soon as possible. Whatever might be the difficulties in Part II., that part stood by itself and did not affect the consideration of Part I. The difficulties of Part II. belonged to Part II., and when they were raised they would be dealt with in due course. He appealed to the Committee to get to work on Part I. as soon as possible; when that had been dealt with he thought they would have

  979
  no difficulty in forming its opinion on Part II.
  LORD R. CECILhoped that the Government would see their way to take Part I. as a separate Bill. It was conceded by the President of the Board of Education and the Government generally that Part I. was unquestionably the important part of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman in his introductory speech scarcely alluded to any other part. Might he, therefore, impress upon the House the great importance of adequate discussion being given to that part I The express object of the Bill, the real object of the right hon. Member, was to arrive at some solution which would bring peace in the religious conflict. He could not see how Part I. would accomplish that object, but of one thing he was quite certain, namely, that there was not the least chance of bringing that home to anybody without fair and adequate discussion of Part I. The Bill was not quite clear upon that subject. If the President of the Board of Education looked at the Notice Paper he would see that there were thirty pages of Amendments with respect to Part I. alone. If the Government intended to get through that Part with proper and adequate discussion he could not help thinking that if Part II. were superadded the task before the House would be so heavy that great pressure would be put upon the Government to devise some means for unduly curtailing the discussion on that part of the Bill.
  MR. BIERELLdissented.
  LORD R. CECILsaid he was glad the right hon. Gentleman dissented, but they were now only at the beginning of the Committee stage, and sometimes right hon. and hon. Gentlemen changed their views during Committee. He could not help feeling that one portion of Part I. was absolutely destructive of the whole intention of the Government, and he thought that some of the Members of the Government were quite at sea as to the moaning and magnitude of Part II. The magnitude of the proposals in Part II. was enormous. Unless he wholly misconstrued the definition of education endowments, it appeared to him that it would be possible to consider
  980
  under Part II. every kind of endowment, and, when they took it in conjunction with Part IV., it meant that the Council for Wales would have the power of dealing with any kind of endowments, however purely religious or denominational such endowments were, or of making any provision they liked. It was quite evident that there was abundant matter both in Part II. and in Part IV. for very elaborate discussion, and there were other clauses, such as Clause 16, which must necessarily take a very long time. He could not see how the Government proposed to get through all those clauses if they were to allow full and free discussion of Part I., and he ventured to think that if they could really dispose of the religious difficulty and set at rest the fears of denominationalists and undenominationalists, they would facilitate the progress of the Bill. He did hope the Government would devote their whole energies to disposing of this question, and leave the other questions raised by the Bill, many of which were difficult, to be disposed of on a future occasion.
  MR. DILLONsaid that since Mr. Speaker had ruled out of order the last part of this Instruction, it had become rather absurd. The only real point in the Instruction was the portion which had been ruled out of order. But supposing the Instruction were passed, its only effect would be to enable the Committee to divide the Bill into two Bills and to report them both during the present session. But it was competent for the Committee without any Instruction at all so to divide the Bill by simply dropping Part II. if they found that the discussion on Part I. had occupied too much of the session. All they had to do was to omit the clauses forming Part II. and take them up as a new Bill next year. That in his opinion was a thing which was not at all likely to happen; therefore, he could not vote in favour of this Instruction. Another reason was that, although Part II. would be exceedingly objectionable to the Catholic Party, the Government had distinctly and repeatedly said that it was not their intention to do what in the Catholic meetings throughout the country they had been charged with doing in the Bill, and that they were prepared to

  981
  receive with a perfectly open mind Amendments to Part II. And if he properly understood the intention of the Government it might be perfectly possible to come to an understanding satisfactory to those for whom the Nationalist Party spoke. There was another reason why he would be sorry to declare war on Part II. He thought they knew what were the real intentions of the Government in regard to that portion of the Bill. On the other hand he was somewhat in a difficulty, because undoubtedly, though it was not the true meaning of a vote against that instruction, it would bear the appearance to the outside public that the Nationalist Members were in favour of Part II. as it now stood, which they were not. And while at this stage he was not disposed to offer to the Bill irreconcilable or unreasonable opposition until they knew how far the Government would carry out the promises and indications given on the Second Heading, he certainly was not prepared to give any vote which could be interpreted as approval of Part II. Therefore he proposed to abstain from voting at all, and he thought that in that matter he expressed the opinion of his friends of the Nationalist Party.
  MR. RAWLINSONsaid Part II. of this Bill was perhaps the most revolutionary proposal that had been put forward for many years. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education had curtly dismissed it as a few simple clauses to get over a difficulty, but he had never defined what those clauses proposed to do. The right hon. Gentleman might be aware, but he ventured to say that many Members of this House and the general public certainly were not aware, that Part II. not only referred to elementary and secondary schools, but to such institutions as theological colleges. Under this Bill such institutions could be immediately taken away from the trustees, although they wore entirely for teaching of a denominational nature. The Bill also gave the power to take away the trust deeds of those institutions and to deal with any privilege which the denomination might have over educational purposes. It applied also to Church training schools where the teachers for various elementary schools were trained. Whether or not
  982
  that was intended he did not know, but he understood from the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education that he did not mean to touch those schools. Hut there was not the slightest, doubt that the draftsmen of the Bill did intend it and had carried out the intention, of course acting under the instructions of the President of the Board of Education. It would also apply to all such schools as convent schools in England which wore clearly schools of a denominational character. After the most flattering remarks of the President of the Board of Education and the President of the Board of Trade as to the Roman Catholic religion, it was a wonder the right hon. Gentleman should have included in Part II. a right to confiscate practically every convent school in the country. Further than that, it applied to such schools as choir schools annexed to to such places as cathedral towns. Not a word was said about this on the Second Heading. There were also institutions founded by Nonconformist bodies on strictly denominational lines, such as the Leys School at Cambridge. They had to render accounts every year. That might be an excellent innovation, although he differed from those who hold that opinion. There were lots of people in this country —he did not agree with them—who thought it would be an excellent thing that all convent schools should be shut up to-morrow. But the subject required discussion in this House. The Leys School and the other schools he had mentioned would have to render accounts to the Board of Education each year under this Act. All the theological colleges would have to do the same. It would affect other institutions probably not so familiar to hon. Members. There were various schools, such as high schools for girls, which had been worked under different denominations, notably the Church of England. Part II. of the Bill affected all of them. There was one other point which he wished to press very fully, because he was certain the right hon. Gentleman had not realised it. It was understood by everyone who heard or read the right hon. Gentleman's speech that, when a school belonging to trustees was taken, rent was to be paid for it. How would that work out in practice if Part II. of the Bill were allowed to remain? Let them take a small village

  983
  where there was a school vested in trustees, the trust having existed for more than thirty years, and there was a small separate endowment of about £50 a year. The innocent elector thought that some part of the £50 a year was going for Church purposes. Not at all. Part II. would come along. The President of the Board of Education would send down, without the consent of the trustees, and against their wishes and those of the managers, a man from the Board of Education who was bound to follow the instructions under the Bill. What would be the fate of the £50 a year in the little village? It was bound to be put down for educational purposes. What other educational purpose was there in that village once the question of Church and creed was eliminated? [An HON. MEMBER: Scholarships.] He agreed. What more excellent educational purpose could they have than the board school of the villages, and so the £50 they were giving with one hand, they were taking back the next moment with the other. The President of the Board of Education had told them that the money would be devoted to the payments which would be incurred by the necessary renting of the schools, but they knew now that it was nothing of the kind.
  MR. SPEAKER: I fail to see the bearing of the hon. Member's argument. The Instruction is that the Bill should be divided into two parts. They may both be either good or bad, but the only question is whether they should be divided.
  MR. RAWLINSONsaid the effect of Part II. was that it absolutely ousted the jurisdiction of the High Court in connection with such trusts. [Cries of "Order, order !" from the MINISTERIAL Benches.] Not only this, but it utterly altered the law of trust deeds. [Renewed cries of "Order !"] The very cries from the Ministerial Benches were the strongest argument in favour of the course suggested by his right hon. friend the Member for the Ecclesall Division of Sheffield. This was an important proposition which deserved full and calm discussion. The President of the Board of Education had told them the story of his walk in Battersea Park. On the Saturday previous to the First
  984
  Reading of this Bill the right hon. Gentleman perused some documents to be ready to open his case in this House on the Monday, and apparently he had not time to read his brief further than Part I. and consequently they did not hear anything about Part II. In other walks of life, such as the law courts, it was frequently desirable to give a learned counsel time to read the whole of his brief, and no harm would be done by taking Part II. as a separate Bill, because it raised questions of great importance and proposed sweeping changes.
  MR. BURDETT-COUTTSsaid the President of the Board of Education had expressed a desire to get to work, but the reason why they could not get to work was that the right hon. Gentleman had attached to a Bill dealing with elementary education two great public questions which on all grounds ought to be treated apart from an Elementary Education Bill. Although the proposed sweeping treatment of endowments might not, like the Welsh Council, involve a great constitutional principle, it certainly was the initiation of a new theory and practice which would be of far-reaching importance to the country, and was of sufficient importance to require separate treatment at the hands of the House. The principle at stake was whether it was right or expedient for the House, on the plea of facilitating some legislation with regard to a particular subject, to pass a Bill which enabled them to alter the law wantonly and violently in regard to endowments, and trusts, and money, and property which had been handed over upon conditions which were perfectly legal. That was a new legislative departure for this House, and it would have very serious effects upon the whole practice of testamentary benefactions from which many of the less fortunate class in this country had reaped such great benefit. They were proposing to take into their own hands the power to divert endowments and trusts from their original and legitimate purpose which in many cases had been confirmed by schemes on which the ink was hardly dry, and granted by the authorised department of the Government. They would in this way be telling people that it was no use for them to single out objects for the public good to which to leave their money.
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is giving very good reasons against Part II., but that is not the question. The question is whether it should remain part of this Bill or be dealt with as a separate Bill.
  MR. BURDETT-COUTTSsaid he was endeavouring to show that Part II. of the Bill introduced a new treatment of the principle of endowments which went far beyond the scope of any question of education, and that this constituted a strong reason why that Part deserved to be treated in a separate Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he should not have intervened had it not been that he thought some observations made by the hon. Member for East Mayo might possibly greatly mislead both hon. Members from Ireland and the House generally as to what was likely to occur if this Instruction were rejected. The hon. Member appeared to suppose that if the Government found Part II.—which carried with it an absolutely revolutionary proposal in connection with the whole trust system of the country—too heavy a load for them to carry, they could omit it from the Bill and go on with other parts of the measure which were more relevant. The hon. Member for East Mayo was mistaken, because nothing that the Committee could do if the House rejected this Instruction would put them in the position which the Instruction would put them into. The Instruction would practically divide the Bill, and enable the House to deal separately with the question of elementary education.
  MR. DILLON: Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that it would not be competent for the Committee to omit Part II. if they chose to do so?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the hon. Member for East Mayo had led some hon. Members to believe that, if the House rejected this Instruction they could, as it were, retrieve their steps at a later stage of the Bill, and then do what they now deliberately refused to do. That was not so in two very important, but different, respect. In the first place, if this Instruction was carried, and only if carried, they would be able to get two Bills—one containing the provisions
  986
  in regard to elementary education and Welsh administrative Home Rule, and the other containing the revolution in the principle of trusts. The two Bills would be there to their hands, and they could be proceeded with as time allowed. But even if it were possible to defer their proceedings to the middle of the Bill, there would be the right of discussion at some later stage. If they did not agree to this Instruction now, they would only be able to omit Part II. clause by clause, and having done that the Government would have to bring in a new Bill.
  MR. DILLONsaid the right hon. Gentleman was not correctly representing what he said as to the effect of not accepting this Instruction. What he said was that the Committee without the Instruction would have power to drop Part II.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the hon. Gentleman was wrong even in that statement, as he would show if allowed to go on with his speech in his own way. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that they could defer a decision on this point until a later stage of the Bill, and quite unintentionally he misled some hon. Members when he said that they could drop Part II.
  MR. DILLON: You can drop it clause by clause.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that at the end of each clause a Motion to omit the clause could be put down. A Motion of that kind would have to be put down separately for each clause, and all the amendments relating to each clause must be disposed of before the Motion to omit it could be made. A Motion to omit a clause could not be made at the beginning of the clause. He did not say that that was a good system. It was a system which he tried to alter when he made proposals to the House on procedure, but the House did not like the alteration. It was impossible for the Government under the Standing Orders to omit a clause in the Committee stage of a Bill until the whole of that clause had been discussed line by line and amendment by amendment. The hon. Member for East Mayo would see from what be had said that it would be perfectly impossible

  987
  for the Government, if they rejected this Instruction, to come down to the House and carry out in any shape or form the lightening of the Bill in the way urged now. He was quite sure the advice offered to the Government was good. They were initiating in Part II., as any lawyer, of whom there were plenty on their own side, would tell them, an immense revolution in the whole law of trusts which touched every class of the community—Nonconformists, Roman Catholics, and Anglicans alike. Every class of the community, rich or poor, was interested in this law of trusts, and why on earth the Government, having insisted already this afternoon in initiating one great revolution, should now insist on initiating another in the middle of a Bill which was certainly revolutionary enough, and was going to lead to heart burning and bitterness throughout the country, he did not know. Now, and now only, was the time for the Government to diminish the burden they were carrying and to lessen the difficulties they had to surmount, and he urged them not to neglect the warning which he, for the second time this afternoon ventured to give them.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWEsaid that whether they agreed or disagreed on the question of having one or two Bills the point which they had to consider now was whether Part II was germane to Part I. He ventured to say that the one had nothing whatever to do with the other, and that the one was not necessary in any shape or form to the other. The first Part dealt wholly with elementary schools, and the second Part gave the Board of Education power to deal with schemes and charitable endowments, and said that the courts of law should in future cease to have power to make any such schemes. There were only a few public schools such as Eton and Harrow which were exempted from this portion of the Bill. The question whether such schools as Rugby, Wellington, Marl-borough, Shrewsbury, and Uppingham should be deprived of their endowments was a separate question from whether something should be done to deal with religion in public elementary schools. He thought the Motion was a perfectly fair and reasonable one.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 107; Noes, 353. (Division List, No. 84.)

  AYES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Gardner, Krnest (Berks, East)

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Cecil,Lord John P. Joicey-

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cecil, Lord K. (Marylebone, E.)

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Chamberlain. Rt. Hn. J.(Birm.

  Haddock, George R.

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Balcarres, Lord

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

  Hamilton, Warquess of

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashfird

  Balfour, RtHn. A.J.(CityLond.)

  Courthope G. Loyd

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H.B.

  Balfour, Capt C. B. (Hornsey)

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester)

  Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.)

  Helmsley, Viscount

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

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

  Beach, Hn.Michael Hugh Hicks

  Cross, Alexander

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Hills, J. W.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Hunt, Rowland

  Bull, Sir William James

  Duncan, Robert(Lanark,Govan

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Kenyon-Slaney,Rt. Hn. Col.W.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Keswick, William

  Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M.

  Fell, Arthur

  King, SirHtnrySeymour(Hull)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Ed. H.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Lee, ArthurH. (Hants. Fareham)

  Cavendish, Rt.Hn.Victor C.W.

  Forster, Henry William

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Liddell, Henry

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walker, Col. W.H.(Lancashire)

  Long, Col. CharlesW.(Evesham)

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Walrond, Pon. Lionel

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

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

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  M'Iver, SirLewis(EdinburghW

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield,Ecclesall)

  Wilson, A.Stanley(York, E. R.)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Wolff, Gustav Wilbelm

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B.Stuart

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Starkey, John R.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Middlemore, JohnThrogmorton

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Younger, George

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Talbot, Rt.Hn.JG(Oxf'd Univ.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Thomson, W.Mitchell (Lanark)

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

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Pease,Herbert Pike(Darlington

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Ferens, T. R.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cairns, Thomas

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Adkins, W. Ryland

  Caldwell, James

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Agnew, George William

  Cameron, Robert

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Fullerton. Hugh

  Alden, Percy

  Causton, Rt. Hn Richard Knight

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford, S.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Armitage, R.

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peekham)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cleland, J. W.

  Glover, Thomas

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Clough, W.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

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

  Grant, Corrie

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Collins, SirWm. J(S. PancrasW,

  Grove, Archibald

  Barker, John

  Cooper, G. J.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Barlow, John Emmott(S'D'rs't

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

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Barnard, E. B.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Haridie, J.Keir(Merthyr Tydvil

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cowan, W. H.

  Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r)

  Beale, W. P.

  Cox, Harold

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

  Beauchamp, E.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hart-Davis, T.

  Beaumout, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Crombie, John William

  Harwood, George

  Benn, John Williams(Dov'np'rt

  Crooks, William

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

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

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Crossley, William J.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Bertram, Julius

  Davies, David(Montgomery Co.

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Bethell, J.H.(Essex, Romford)

  Davies, M.Vaughan- (Cardigan

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Billson, Alfred

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

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

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)

  Dickinson, W.H.(St. Pancras, N.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,.)

  Black, ArthurW.(Bedfordshire

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

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

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Higham, John Sharp

  Bottomley, Horatio

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Duckworth, James

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Brace, William

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Hodge, John

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Branch, James

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Holland, Sir William Fenry

  Brocklehurst, W. D.

  Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

  Hooper A. G.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset,N)

  Brooke, Stopford

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Horniman, Emslie John

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

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Brunner, Sir John T.(Cheshire)

  Elibank, Master of

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Bryce. Rt. Hn. James(Aberdeen

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Hudson, Walter

  Bryce, J.A.(InvernessBurghs)

  Erskine, David C.

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Essex, R. W.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Jackson, R S.

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  990

  991

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Nicholls, George

  Steadman, W. C.

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Norman, Henry

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Summerbell, T.

  Kelley, George D.

  Paul, Herbert

  Sutherland, J. E.

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxeth)

  Kitson, Sir James

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

  Lamb, EdmundG.(Leominster)

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

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Perks, Robert William

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Lambert, George

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Lamont, Norman

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

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

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

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

  Thorne, William

  Lea, HughCecil (St.Paneras, E.

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

  Tomkinson, James

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Torrance, A. M.

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich

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

  Toulmin, George

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Radford, G. H.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Levy, Maurice

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Verney, F. W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Vivian, Henry

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Wadsworth, J.

  Lough, Thomas

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Walker, H. De. R. (Leicester)

  Lubton, Arnold

  Rees, J. D.

  Wallace, Robert

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes.

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Walter, John Tudor

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th

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

  Lynch, H. B.

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

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Richardson, A.

  Ward, John(Stoke upon Trent)

  Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Ward, W. Dudley(Southampton

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Wardle, George J.

  Maclean, Donald

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Wason, John Catheart (Orkney)

  M'Crae, George

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Watt, H. Anderson

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

  Robinson, S.

  Wedgwood. Josiah C.

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

  Robson, Sir William Snewdon

  Weir, James Galloway

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Whitbread, Howard

  Maddison, Frederick

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Rose, Charles Day

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Manfield Harry (Northants)

  Rowlands, J.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Mansfield. H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Runciman, Walter

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Marnham, F. J.

  Russell, T. W.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Massie, J.

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Menzies, Walter

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Schwann,Chas.E. (Manchester)

  Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Williamson, A.(Elgin andNairn

  Mond, A.

  Sears, J. E.

  Wilson. Hon. C.H. W. (Hull, W.)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Seaverns, J. H.

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

  Montagu, E. S.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Montgomery, H. H.

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

  Wilson, J.W. (Worcestersh. H)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Shipman, Dr. John G. J

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

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Winfrey, R.

  Morrell, Philip

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wodehouse, Lord(Norfolk, Mid)

  Morse, L. L.

  Snowdon, P.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Woodhouse, Sir J.T. (Huddersf'd

  Murray, James

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Myer, Horatio

  Spicer, Albert

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

  Napier, T. B.

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Stanley, Hn. A.Lyulph.(Chesh.)

  MR. SPEAKER: The Instruction in the name of the hon. Member for the
  992
  Holderness Division, and the subject matter of all the other instructions on

  993
  the Paper †, may be raised either as Amendments to existing clauses in the Bill or by new clauses, and they are therefore out of order.
  † The Instructions referred to were as follows:—
  MR. STANLEY WILSON: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert provisions for altering boundaries of parishes for the purpose of varying the incidents of the charge proposed to be created by Clause 30 of the Bill.
  LORD R. CECIL: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert provisions for establishing a central education authority in London to be called the Council for London.
  MR. BRIDGEMAN: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert provisions for establishing a central education authority for the county of London, to be called the Education Council for London.
  MR. RADFORD: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision for the establishment of an education authority for London directly elected for the purpose of education only.
  MR. EVERETT: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision in the Bill for the constitution of local education authorities elected for educational purposes only for areas of suitable size, with provision for the combined action of such authorities where thought expedient in county or other large areas.
  MR. CHANNING: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision for the establishment of authorities directly elected for the purposes of education only in areas of suitable size throughout the country.
  MR. BECKETT: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert provisions for establishing central education authorities for the counties of York and Lancaster consisting of members to be appointed by the councils, county boroughs, and other municipal authorities of the said counties.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to make provision for the creation of a directly elected body to constitute the local education authority for London, and having only educational duties to perform.
  LORD BALCARRES: That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to insert provisions that in the event of excess of authority on the part of the council proposed to be created under Clause 37 of the Bill the powers thereby to be conferred shall, ipso facto, cease and determine, and revert to the Board of Education.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
  Clause:—
  MR. LAURENCE HARDY, in moving to postpone Clause I., said that he could not be accused bringing forward the Amendment in an obstructive sense, for an Amendment to a similar effect was moved by the hon. Member for Northampton, E., when the Education Bill of 1902 was before the House. If it was desirable to raise a discussion on the point then, it was tenfold more so on this occasion, when the wording of the first clauses of the two Bills was compared. He wanted to put shortly before the Government the reasons why they would do wisely in postponing this clause. What did the Government, inform them on the Second Reading of the Bill? They said they had to fulfil certain mandates: one referred to local control, and the second, which had a new and vague description, was the abolition of tests for teachers. If those were the objects with which the Government had brought forward their Bill, he would point out that this clause did not deal with either, because so far as local control was concerned, it was limited in its wording. These were council schools; they were virtually under local control, and if the words passed as they stood, the Bill did not deal in any sense with the question of complete public control. Neither did it deal with the question which had reference to the tests for teachers, because in these council schools there were not, even in the opinion of hon. Gentlemen opposite, any real tests for teachers. Therefore, so far as their mandate was concerned, the Government were not, under this clause, dealing with either of these great questions, and if they desired the conciliation of which they spoke there was a very grave and serious reason why they should consent to do justice by postponing this clause. In a few words the clause provided, when it had been passed, that every public elementary school should be a provided school. [MINISTERIAL cheers] Hon. Members cheered that statement, and they therefore desired in a one-sided manner, by departing from the concordat which had existed in this

  995
  country for thirty-six years, to destroy by three lines in a Bill 16,000 schools which were educating half the children of this country. Nobody could deny that this clause did that. [MINISTERIAL cries of "No."] Hon. Members said "no," but how could a voluntary school at this moment be a "provided" school? He saw that hon. Members were silent now. Practically he thought they could sum up this clause in no other phrase than in a very well-known rallying cry belonging to another religion which ran —
  "There is but one Allah and Mahomet is his prophet."
  He thought that they might say that the Government asserted by this clause that "There is but one school and Cowper-Temple is his prophet." There was good reason for postponing this clause, because the Government had to make further arrangements, and having destroyed the whole of the schools in the country which were worked under voluntary principles they might, by a subsequent clause "deem" them to be provided schools, and use words to that effect. Supposing one desired to be conciliatory, one did not on meeting a man in the street knock him down first and then say "Now I am willing to come to terms with you, but you must remember that if you do get up, I have another chance of knocking you down again under a scheme for a Commission, and it will be the worse for you if you refuse this Bill." Another reason for accepting the Amendment was one of expediency. The proposal to postpone the clause was an alternative to a proposal to omit it. He should be sorry under present circumstances to see it omitted because he desired that they should have one form of school for secular education in this country. He voted for the 1902 Bill believing that he was voting for one co-ordinated form of secular instruction. If that Act required strengthening he was willing to go forward and strengthen it provided it could be done with justice Surely, therefore, it was better for them to deal with clauses standing between 1 and 13 which would enable them to find means of transferring the voluntary schools to the local authority with full justice and fairness before passing this clause. Then if they were satisfied and Members representing other denominations were satisfied,
  996
  instead of being the subject of amendment Clause 1 might be accepted without any discussion at all. So long as this was put in the forefront of the Bill they were, however, bound to oppose it. Another argument was the financial one, which he thought showed that the clause should be postponed. Hon. Gentlemen opposite were extremely anxious for economy, and if they could only hit upon some just means of transferring these schools it was very possible that the £1,000,000 a year or the £20,000,000 proposed to be spent under this Bill might be saved. Hon. Members opposite seemed to think that the desire for money was the only consideration which affected them. He believed that none of the denominations interested were desirous of money. They desired to secure the advantages they had at present, which they believed vital to their own schools, and to carry through the main object for which the schools were established, the religious education of their children. Another reason for the postponement was the maze in which they found themselves from the speeches delivered from the front Ministerial bench. They did not know whether the schools were to be handed over in the spirit of the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Duchy, or in the spirit of the speech of the President of the Board of Trade. They had not yet been favoured with any opinion from the Prime Minister, and they had before them no presentation of a satisfactory basis for a great settlement. He therefore thought that on the ground of the different tenor of the speeches dealing with the most vital subjects they ought not to commit themselves without due consideration of the terms to the suppression of those schools, which, after all, had been built and carried on under the guarantee of the State for a great number of years. It was most unfair that they who might be called the elder brother in education should have their interests entirely disregarded and forgotten as they were in the first clause of the Bill. They had been taunted that they did not care for Bible teaching, but there was one passage of that Book of which he was reminded. They were told that the schools of 1870 were not to supplant but to supplement the voluntary schools, but this clause was finally going to supplant and not to supplement them, and they might well

  997
  recollect the pathetic words which they read in the Bible of the elder brother—
  "Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times; he took away my birthright, and behold now he hath taken away my blessing."
  They might have to part with their birthright in these schools under the intolerable strain of poverty and hunger but they were determined that if they did they would not part with the blessing, viz., the blessing of definite religious instruction of the children in the tenets of their parents' faith by teachers who believed in that teaching.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 1 be postponed."—(Mr. Laurence Hardy.)
  THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (SIR W. ROBSON, South Shields)said he would not follow the hon. Member into the merits of the clause, and he was afraid if he did so he should not be successful in keeping within the strict limits of order because this Amendment raised no question as to the merits of that clause but only referred to the place it should occupy in the measure. It was said that they should discuss the clause at the end of the Bill, but undoubtedly it embodied the fundamental principle of the measure, and he could not understand if it wore postponed what sort of discussion they were likely to have upon Clauses 2, 3, and 4. Those clauses were consequential to Clause 1, and it was therefore essential that they should take the principle of the primary clause in its proper place. The hon. Member dashed to the ground the hope he at first raised that they might get the clause without debate by denouncing it in unmeasured terms.
  "There is but one school and Cowper-Temple is his prophet"—
  that was not exactly holding out a hope that by postponing this clause they would find themselves in such a position that there would be no difficulty in agreeing to it. The hon. Member had not mentioned what the Amendments were in the second clause which would satisfy him and his friends, upon which they would accept Clause 1, which contained the principle of the Bill which they denounced on its second reading. He was afraid from the statement of the hon. Member they must accept his promise as an illusory one and relegate it to its
  998
  proper place. The Government could not accept the Motion.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that this was not a dilatory Motion, neither was it one that would kill or mutilate the Bill. The first clause embodied the fundamental proposition of the measure, and this meant that it fulfilled the pledges given by many hon. Members opposite during the election. Undoubtedly the clause would place the appointment of the head teacher of a non-provided school in the hands of the local authority instead of, as now, giving the local authority the right to consent to the appointment or not. But the clause also said that what was known as the Cowper-Temple clause of the Act of 1870 should from a certain date govern all religious instruction in every school in the country. The Opposition regarded that as an act of injustice, and it seemed to them, rightly or wrongly, that it ought not to be placed in the forefront of the Bill, because if hon. Members insisted upon giving it that place, and stating that it was the fundamental proposition of the Bill, with what confidence could they ask the Opposition to look forward to the discussion of exemptions and exceptions from the clause? If this clause were passed it would kill all denominational instruction throughout the country. ["No, no."] There ought to be in the clause some announcement that the Government were prepared to meet the Opposition claim that the State should act impartially as between the different kinds of religious instruction for which individual sections of the community had a preference. But the clause contained nothing of the kind, and the Bill in effect was a measure enabling the local education authority to take over on terms the present non-provided schools. Then why not begin with Clause 2, which said that the local authority, if it so desired, might enter into an arrangement for renting schools? Surely that was the logical starting point for a Bill which contemplated arrangements of this character. Instead of adopting that course, however, the Government had drawn up their Bill in the most provoking manner that could have been selected, thereby destroying any hope raised by the assurances, often repeated, that the Government wished to meet the just claims of those who urged provision for denominational education. Once the first clause was enacted the

  999
  Government created a presumption for all time that this was the proper kind of religious instruction to be given in all places, and nothing they might do afterwards would defeat the presumption so created. They said, therefore, that it was not just to create a presumption in favour of a system which at its best, the high-water mark of the Hampshire syllabus, did not satisfy a great number of their fellow-countrymen, and which at its worst did not coincide with their religious convictions
  MR. DILLONsaid that Clause 1 undoubtedly contained the fundamental principle of the educational proposals. It was intended to set up in this country a uniform system of State schools under popular control, and not only to do that, but to set up in those schools the endowment of one particular form of religious teaching. He recognised that as the principle of the Bill, and while so far as he was concerned he thought that ideal a false one—false from a purely educational point of view as well as from the point of view of religious justice—still, under certain circumstances, he and those who worked with him on this question would be prepared to accept that system, not because they thought it was fair but because they were a minority in the country. He was amused to hear the hon. Member who moved the Amendment say that he should be sorry to omit Clause 1 because he desired to see one form of school for the whole country.
  MR. LAURENCE HARDY: For secular education.
  MR. DILLONremarked that surely all schools must be for secular education. He did not suppose that the hon. Member would banish secular education altogether. He believed that the ideal that was set up as a fetish of one cast-iron system of school in the country was a false ideal and that in the end they would find that out. The history of humanity had taught that all improvement in education and in everything else came not from Governments but from individuality. The Irish people had enough to complain of in the way of education, but there was one bright spot in the education of Ireland which challenged comparison with the primary education of any other country
  1000
  in the world, even Germany; it was the system which governments had not touched or interfered with. The Christian Brothers conducted a system of primary education by private effort as good as any which existed. Why had their system been so marvellously successful? It was because it was original. It was devised by the Brothers themselves, and they had always refused to have it cramped, cabined, or confined by the Government. Therefore he said that so far as he himself was concerned, and he was glad to have that opportunity of saying so, from a purely educational point of view they would not be pursuing the true ideal if they set up a bed of Procrustes and attempted to stretch every system of primary instruction in the country upon it. His ideal was to encourage diversity, and he did not believe in uniformity. But he thought that there ought to be in every country a State system, though every effort should be made to encourage variety and individual effort.
  THE CHAIRMAN: Order! order! I think the hon. Member is getting rather wide of the Question before the Committee.
  MR. DILLONadmitted that he had done so. He would go on to show why he thought the clause ought to be postponed. He had already stated that he could not share the view of the hon. Member who moved the Motion. As the clause was good in itself they were prepared to accept it if the other causes were so found and amended as to enable them to obtain justice and save their schools. But how were they able to determine what their attitude was to be towards Clause 1 or as to the various amendments on Clause 1, when they did not know what facilities were to be given in Clause 4 and the other clauses? He did not think that it was quite so absurd as the Solicitor-General on behalf of the Government seemed to think, that this Clause 1 should be postponed until Clauses 2, 3, and 4 and other clauses were decided upon, for by such postponement the length and bitterness of the discussion on the Amendments to Clause 1 might be enormously decreased. He did not know what the feeling of the Opposition might be on this matter, but his own feeling, and the feeling of

  1001
  his colleagues, was that they trusted that the course of the debates on other clauses of the Bill would take such a shape as would enable them heartily to accept Clause 1. But when they were in a state of uncertainty as to what the future course of these clauses was to be, it put things in a very different light, and it might necessitate their taking part in a discussion on this particular point He did not wish to be misunderstood; he was not now pressing the Government to disclose their intentions with regard to Clauses 3 and 4. He did not think it would be reasonable to ask, or politic on the part of the Government to disclose them, and he did not see that the attitude of the Government on Part I. could be altered by a forecast as to what they proposed to do on Clauses 3 and 4. The only way to meet the difficulty was by allowing discussions on Clauses 2, 3, and 4 to come on, and then they could make up their minds as to their attitude on Clause 1.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWEsaid that on much the same ground as the hon. Member for East Mayo he pressed very hard the postponement of this clause, which proposed that no elementary school should be regarded as such unless provided by the local authority. That was to say, that unless it became a provided school, it should cease to have any assistance from the rates and taxes. It might be possible that some of them would consent to such a course being adopted if they knew the terms and conditions on which they were asked to concur in the arrangement, but to ask them to consent to the 16,000 voluntary schools being handed over to the local education authority without knowing on what terms they were to be handed over, was very much like asking anyone to sell his property without knowing what the purchase money or the other items wore to be. He thought, however, it was quite possible that equitable terms might be arranged by which these voluntary schools should be handed over to the local education authority, and so far as he was concerned he was most anxious to assist in bringing about such an agreement as would settle this difficulty once and for all. But first of all they wanted to know what facilities were to be afforded for denominational teaching.
  1002
  Clause 3 said that facilities were to be given on not more than two mornings of the week, it did not say that they were even to be given on two mornings, and they need not be given on more than one morning. It did not say whether they were to be given in or out of school hours. [Cries of "Question."] They wanted to know whether these facilities were to be real or illusory.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must confine himself to the Amendment.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWEsaid he was only trying to show that if fair and equitable terms were accorded they might agree to Clause 1, but it was impossible to agree to it until they knew what the terms were to be. It was only reasonable that they should ask for the clause to be postponed until the Government had more clearly made known exactly what facilities they proposed to give for denominational teaching, and for that reason he strongly supported the Amendment.
  MR. CARLILEsupported the proposal to postpone the clause. If the right hon. Gentleman in framing the measure had avoided throwing this tremendous bone of contention at their heads in the very forefront of the measure, it was likely the Bill would have been received with more consideration by the Opposition and the country at large. When the right hon. Gentleman introduced the measure he referred to himself as a singularly untrained man. Hon. Members might have their own opinion as to the sort of training that the, right hon. Gentleman had had, or as to his capacity, but at any-rate they greatly appreciated the great ability and skill with which he introduced the measure. If he had illustrated in the arrangement of the measure the same skill and ability, they would not have found the first clause where it now was. It had caused the friends of education, and more particularly that portion who were deeply interested in the welfare of the voluntary schools, to meet the whole Bill with a non possumus. The mere fact that this clause did away with any diversity or variety in the schools would in itself condemn the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman, in introducing the measure, referred to the glorious work of

  1003
  the School Boards. That work was greatly appreciated.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Gentleman must confine himself to the question of postponing this clause.
  MR. CARLILEsaid he merely wished to show that the clause was placed in a wrong place. Unless the clause were put later in the Bill, those who had as they thought the highest interests of education at heart could not do otherwise than contest the clause word by word and line by line.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid that it was generally a good rule to begin at the beginning. This clause meant rather more than the right hon. Member for Dover attributed to it, because it meant the establishment of the principle that all schools which received public money should be placed under public control. If the Bill became law, whatever might be the facilities given under Clauses 3 and 4—and he hoped that they would be found by no means illusory—they would still be given in schools under the control of the local education authority. Therefore, Clause 1 was a real good clause standing by itself. The Government would have departed from fair dealing and common sense if they had not put the bone of contention in the forefront. This first clause was the spinal cord of the Bill, and he did not see where else they could have put it. It was therefore impossible for him to accept the Motion.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that this was much more than a mere drafting question. From the point of view of drafting he entirely agreed that Clause 1 ought to come first; but it did not follow that it ought to be considered first. There were strong reasons why it should be postponed until the Government plan in regard to Clauses 3 and 4 was known. It would be much more convenient if this clause were postponed so that the Government might state what their policy was in regard to Clauses 3 and 4. The hon. Member for East Mayo had said that he saw no way of gaining that object without actually postponing the clause. The most strenuous and anxious admirers of Clause 1 must admit that it had produced a very painful feeling amongst all those who were interested in voluntary schools.
  1004
  The most ardent Nonconformist would have sufficient power of sympathy to understand that it could not be an agreeable process for those who had spent vast sums upon establishing schools for denominational purposes to have those schools turned into provided schools. Was it not fair to the class they wished to oppress [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh, oh"]—the class they wished to deprive of their schools—that before assenting to this summary justice or injustice they should know what were the mitigating and alleviating circumstances the Government meant to bring forward? Had the Government themselves made up their minds? The Minister for Education, in his opening speech, quoted from a different draft of the Bill to that which they had now before them and made two material and most important variations from the text of the Bill presented to the House. Which was to stand? Did the conversations to deputations contain the kernel of the new policy? The Committee ought to approach the consideration of Clause 1 with some knowledge of what were the mitigating circumstances in relation to the great injury proposed to be done to the whole system of religious education. They ought not to have to consider Clause 1 blindfolded if the Government could give them any light upon the most important portion of their own Bill.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSdid not think the Minister for Education would act the part of the fly to the spider of the Leader of the Opposition. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down of what he said when a Motion was proposed to postpone Clause 1 of the right hon. Gentleman's Bill of 1902. At that time the right hon. Gentleman declared it was good drafting to place the principle upon which the Bill depended in the early part of the measure, and that what hon. Members had called "the backbone of the Bill" should be in front. [An HON. MEMBER: But this Bill is robbery.) He did not think hon. Members on the Opposition side would advance the cause by cries of "robbery." If the right hon. Gentleman was of the same opinion as he was in 1902 he ought to vote against this Motion.
  SIR E. CARSON: Might I ask the hon. Member how he himself voted on that occasion?
  SIR FRANCIS LOWE: Will the hon. Member read an extract from his own speech upon that occasion?
  MR. SAMUEL EVANS: I do not think I spoke upon that occasion.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELL, in supporting the Motion, claimed that all the parties who were about to he injured by this measure—the parents whose rights would be interfered with, the teachers whose liberty would be fettered, and the founders of great schools whoso property would be, he would not say confiscated, but alienated—all these were entitled to further information as to the intentions of the Government.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Baronet must confine his remarks to the Motion before the House, which is that this clause should be postponed.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid he was endeavouring to give reasons why the Bill should be postponed. It seemed to him that the children of the parents whose rights were interfered with by the Bill and the founders of these great schools were entitled to some consideration.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid there was a wide difference between the first clause of this Bill and the first clause of the Act of 1902. The latter was merely a transfer of this control of secular instruction from one sort of local authority to another. This clause involved not merely a transfer of property, but an invasion of rights of conscience. He thought, therefore, the Committee were justified in looking closely into the terms of the first clause and asking for some assurance from the Government which would enable them to proceed with the consideration of the Bill in a more satisfactory frame of mind than was possible at present. It was proposed to transfer all voluntary schools and convert them into provided schools. He thought the Opposition were entitled to ask what was meant by a provided school. He hoped the President of the Board of Education would enlighten them on that point.
  THE CHAIRMANsaid the hon. Baronet was asking questions with regard to the clause, whereas he was supposed to
  1006
  be arguing in favour of postponing the clause.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he would not put his argument in the form of questions; instead of asking a question he would state a difficulty. They knew what was meant by a provided school now. It was a school entirely belonging to the local authority, wherever it was. Then Clause 2 stated that voluntary schools with which arrangements would be made under the Bill would be deemed provided schools. But besides these there was a large number of schools with regard to which it was contemplated that no arrangement would be made, but with regard to which schemes would be made. Were they to be provided schools?
  MR. SOARESasked the Chairman whether the hon. Baronet was in order.
  THE CHAIRMANrepeated that the hon. Baronet was not entitled to put a series of questions.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONexpressed regret that he should have departed from his undertaking not to use an interrogative form. The Committee, however, were entitled to know what was to be the position of a school which was transferred under a scheme, and in what sense the term "provided" applied to a voluntary school in respect of which a scheme was made. The country was threatened with a uniformity of education which he deprecated. The Government said there was a possibility of escaping that uniformity. The Government assured the Committee that things were in the Bill which he confessed he could not find. They had been told that Clause 4 would be a reality. He saw no reality in that clause. The Opposition wanted to know whether the facilities which were suggested were going to be realities or not. They were entitled to information on such matters, and for that reason they were compelled to ask for the postponement of the clause. They ought to be informed as to the reality of the concession which the Government had promised before they wore asked to dispose of the very drastic provision which turned the voluntary schools into council schools.
  MR EVELYN CECILsaid he was very much struck by one sentence which fell from the President of the Board of Education. It was that when they came to discuss Clauses 3 and 4 he was quite disposed to think that the Government might accept Amendments. He thought that was the first time there had been an indication that the Government would be disposed to accept Amendments on these clauses. It was a very important statement, and he was exceedingly glad to hear it, but it made; the matter all the worse if they were not allowed now to postpone the consideration of Clause 1. In what direction were Clauses 3 and 4 to be Amended? It would make the whole difference. The Committee should be allowed to postpone Clause 1 until they knew what the Amendments on Clauses 3 and 4 were to be. They wanted also to know exactly how these schools were going to be provided by the local authority. They had heard nothing about what syllabuses were going to be imposed, and they should have some information on that subject. Nor had they heard anything about how the local authorities were going to make use of the £1,000,000 which had been promised. That was a matter of material importance when they were considering whether this clause should be postponed.
  MR. RAWLINSONappealed to the Government to reconsider their position on this point. Their conduct might be misunderstood in the country. It would be said in the country, if the Motion for the postponement of this clause was rejected, it was because, if the clause was pressed to a division now, hon. Members would vote under a misapprehension of what they were voting for. Hon. Members from Ireland who spoke on behalf of the Roman Catholic community had stated over and over again that they would not be content with Clause 4 as it stood, and that they would demand further concessions. It had been said by Nonconformist Member after Nonconformist Member that they would not vote for this Bill if Clause 4 remained part of it. Did the Government take that seriously or did they not? Nonconformist Members had stated that they objected strongly, if he might say so, to the preference which was to be given to the Roman Catholic religion. He ventured to say that every Nonconformist Member knew that
  1008
  the Nonconformist constituencies wore strongly opposed to any preference being given to Roman Catholics. He was not discussing the desirability or otherwise of this clause. No harm could be done by postponing the consideration of it; on the other hand it would remove a real grievance.
  MR. CLAVELL SALTERsaid that of those who would vote in favour of the first clause, one-third would support it in the hope that Clause 4 would be dropped out of the Bill. Many would support it in the hope that Clause 4 would be not merely retained, but strengthened; and a third portion of the supporters of the Government who would voce for the clause would do so in the hope, which they had so strongly expressed, that the Bill would result in the banishment of religion from the teaching in State schools —a result repugnant to Roman Catholics and Nonconformists. It was certain that two of the three parties would be bitterly disappointed, and if the Government had made up their minds which of the three sections these were to be, they ought to say so before the division was taken.
  LORD HELMSLEYwho was received with Ministerial cries of "Divide," said he would endeavour to keep within the limits of the Chairman's ruling, but he had considerable doubt whether he could keep within the limits of the ruling of hon. Members on the Ministerial side of the House who seemed to arrogate to themselves some of the functions of Chairman. If this question was to be looked at from a fair point of view, he would say that, if the Government forced the acceptance of Clause 1 before Clauses 3 or 4 were considered, it would be like putting a noose round a man's neck and then trying to make a bargain with him. If Clause 1 were passed trustees and owners of non-provided schools would be absolutely driven without any alternative to accept any terms which the Government chose to offer them in the Bill, or which the local authorities might offer them when the Bill became law. Therefore, he thought it would be more convenient to the minority, and more consistent with the dignity of the Government if the course recommended by the Motion was adopted.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 160; Noes, 335. (Division List, No. 85.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Ambrose, Robert

  Field, William

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Murnaghan, George

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murphy, John

  Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn Hugh O.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Nolan,, Joseph

  Ashley, W. W.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid

  Balcarres. Lord

  Forster, Henry William

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  O'Connor, James(Wicklow, W.

  Balfour, Rt Hn. A.J.(CityLond.)

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Baring, Hon. Guy(Winchester)

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Barrie H.T. (Londonderry,N.)

  Ginnell, L.

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

  Barry E. (Cork S.)

  Haddock, George R.

  O'Dowd, John

  Beach, Hn. Michael HughHicks

  Halpin, J.

  O'Hare, Patrick

  Beckett Hon. Gervase

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  O'Kelly,James (Roscommon,N

  Bignold Sir Arthur

  Hamilton, Marquess of

  O'Malley, William

  Blake Edward

  Hammond, John

  O'Mara, James

  Boland John

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent. Ashford

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Pease. Herbert Pike (Darlington

  Bull, Sir William James

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Burke, E. Haviland-

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

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Ratcliff, Major R F.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hills, J. W.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Hogan, Michael

  Redmond, William (Clare

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. VictorC.W.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Joyce, Michael

  Rutberford.W.W. (Liverpool)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W.

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

  Clarke,Sir Edward(CityLondon

  Keswick, William

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Coates,E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

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

  King,SirHenrv Seymour (Hull)

  Starkey, John R.

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Sullivan, Donal

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim S.

  Lee, ArthurH.(Hants.,Fareham

  Talbot, Rt. Hn J G (Oxf'dUniv.

  Craig, CaptainJames (Down, E.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Liddell, Henry

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Crean, Eugene

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Walker, Col. W.H.(Lancashire

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Devlin,CharlesRamsay(Galw'y

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Dillon, John

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal.E.

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

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Du Cros, Harvey

  M'Kean, John

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B Stuart-

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Killop, W.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Young, Samuel

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Meagher, Michael

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

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Fell, Arthur

  Middlemore JohnThrogmorton

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Mooney, J. J.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Barlow John Emmott(Somerset

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Adkins, W. Ryland

  Asquith, Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Barnard, E. B.

  Agnew, George William

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Allen, Percy

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.

  Beale, W. P.

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Beaumont, Hubert(Eastbourne

  Armitage, R.

  Barker, John

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich

  Bonn, John William (Devonp'rt

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Levy, Maurice

  Benn,W. (T,w'rHamlets,S Geo.

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bennett, E. N.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lloyd-George. Rt. Hon. David

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Lough, Thomas

  Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lupton, Arnold

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Billson, Alfred

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lynch, H. B.

  Black, Alexander Win. (Banff)

  Gladstone. Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Macdonald. J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

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

  Glover, Thomas

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Bottomley, Horatio

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  M'Crae, George

  Brace, William

  Grant, Corrie

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

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

  Branch, James

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  M'Micking. Major G.

  Bright, J. A.

  Griffiths, Ellis J.

  Maddision, Frederick

  Brocklehurst. W. D.

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Mallet, Charles E,

  Brodie, H. C

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Brooke. Stopford

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

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

  Hardy, George.A. (Suffolk)

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen

  Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

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

  Mason, A. E W. (Coventry)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Hart-Davis, T.

  Massie, J.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Harwood, George

  Menzies, Walter

  Buxton. Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Byles, William Pollard

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Cairns, Thomas

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mond, A.

  Cameron, Robert

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Montagu, E. S.

  Causton, Rt, Hn. Richard Knight

  Henderson'J. M. (Aberdeen. W.

  Montgomery. H. H.

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarther

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morley. Rt. Hon. John

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morse, L. L.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Clough, W.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Murray. James

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

  Hodge, John

  Myer, Horatio

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Napier, T. B.

  Collins. Stephen (Lambeth)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Nichells, George

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

  Hooper, A. G.

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncastr

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

  Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset,N

  Norman, Henry

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Cory, Clifford John

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Nuttall, Harry

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hudson, Walter

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Paul, Herbert

  Crooks, William

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Cross, Alexander

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Crossley, William J.

  Jackson, R. S.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Davies,David(Montgomery Co.

  Jacoby, James Alfred

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

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Perks, Robert William

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembrok

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneator)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Dickinson, W.H.(St.Pancras,N

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

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

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

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

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Jowett, F. W.

  Radford, G. H.

  Duckworth. James

  Kearley, Hudson, E.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Duncan, J. H. York, Otley)

  Kelley, George D.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall

  Laid law, Robert

  Richards, Thomas(W.Monm'h.

  Edwards, Cement (Denbigh)

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

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

  Edwards, Enock (Hanley)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Richardson, A.

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Lambert, George

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Elibank, Master of

  Lamont, Norman

  Ridsdale. E. A

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Erskine, David C.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Essex, R. W.

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras.E.

  Roberts. John H. (Denbighs)

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Lehmann, R. C

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee

  1012

  1013

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Robinson, S.

  Summerbell, T.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Whitbread, Howard

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxeth)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Rose, Charles Day

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.

  Rowlands, J.

  Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Runciman, Walter

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Samuel, Herbert L,(Cleveland

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Thompson, J. WH(Somerset,E.)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col.Thos. Myles

  Thorne, William

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester

  Tillett, Louis John

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Tomkinson, James

  Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

  Sears, J. E.

  Torrance, A. M.

  Williamson, A.(ElginandNairn

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Toulmin, George

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Wilson, Hon. C.H.W.(Hull,W.)

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

  Verney, F. W.

  Wilson, John (Durham Mid.)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Vivian, Henry

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Wadsworth, J.

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

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Walker. H. De R. (Leicester)

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

  Snowden, P.

  Wallace, Robert

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Winfrey, R.

  Spicer, Albert

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

  Wodehouse, Lord(Norfolk,Mid)

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Woodhouse.SirJ T. (Huddersfd

  Steadman, W. C.

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southmp'n

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Wardle, George J.

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T

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

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  MR. T. M. HEALY MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.) moved an Amendment to provide that the Bill should not come into operation until "after the first election of a local education authority which shall take place" after January 1st, 1908. He said that the object of his Amendment was to provide that there should be a special election ad hoc before the Bill came into operation at which forms should be issued which would be plain to the elector. School Boards had been abolished, and they all knew that in every part of the United Kingdom in which school boards existed, the electors were compelled to vote not only on the question of education, but upon topics connected with religion. This Bill introduced topics of greater importance to the English Church than disestablishment, and he thought that as the country had not had for two centuries a pronouncement on the kind of religion which should prevail in schools, it was only reasonable that the educational authority should be instructed by the electorate with a direct and distinct knowledge of what it was they were to do. Towns in England elected their councils to deal with gas works, tramway powers, roads, sewage, lighting, electric lighting, and kindred topics connected with municipal life. But once
  1014
  this Bill was passed, the municipal authorities would have to consider questions quite distinct from anything that had ever concerned them. Once this Bill became law, he thought that councillors ought to pass a competitive examination as to the teachings of the first four great Councils of the Christian Churches; as to the cause and course of the Reformation in the Church in England, and as to the causes which led to a great body of the Nonconformists seceding from the Church of England. A member of a town council ought to be acquainted also with the merits of the Secularist programme, because many gentlemen were coming forward in public life who with marked ability supported that programme. They had seen that from the utterances of the Labour Party in this House, which he thought was rather surprising, as he should consider that nobody would be more benefited by Christian teaching than the masters of this country. It was the fact, however, that very many of the Labour members were in favour of secular torching; therefore it was not unfair they should say at the very outset of this Bill that the Local Education Authorities should be elected ad hoc and that every man who came forward as a town or municipal councillor should tell his

  1015
  supporters the lines upon which he desired that their children should be religiously educated. Hitherto municipal elections had been conducted upon questions connected with gas and water, but for the first time for many years, the Government were now introducing into English life animosity and sectarian bitterness which was unappeasable, and would not dream of any compromise. When one came to deal with the future life of a child, no compromise was possible; therefore it was desirable that every body who came forward to sit upon one of these bodies should understand the nature of the questions they had to deal with. There were some people who were singularly indifferent. They would vote for indifference. Some were singularly keen, and it was to be expected that throughout the country, when this question of religion was raised, there would be a keen contest. At one moment they were told that Clericalism was the enemy, and undoubtedly every one of those gentlemen who had been assailed because they preached the truths of the Christian religion as they understood them, would come forward on every municipal platform in the country to resist that statement, and to declare they were the friends and not the enemies of the country, and to advocate that every man who voted at a municipal election should vote for the truths they taught. He was very much struck on arriving from Ireland in the early hours of that morning to see a huge banner twelve or fifteen feet long and not less than three or four feet high in front of an English Church school. It bore the device "Churchmen, defend your schools," and he supposed every church school all over the country would have a similar banner or device. So it would be found that instead of being elected to deal with gas and water, roads and pavements, the only question which would be considered would be the eternal welfare of the children. That being so he did hope that before this new Education Authority was created there would be an election ad hoc. One of the advantages of the school boards was that at an election a clear cut issue was presented, and another advantage was there was a minority vote. As a result they might find a Catholic priest at the head of the poll in a constituency of 100,000 people, owing to the fact that the minority were able to pool their
  1016
  votes. In this case, however, there would be only one man one vote, and the only consolation the minority would get was to be told by the Minister for Education that suffering was the badge of all their tribe. It did not come to that in Clause 4, because under that one-fifth could rule four-fifths, and in some cases one-fourth could rule three-fourths. He was not going into that. All he said was that in creating this new authority the people of England should have the opportunity of creating it by a great and solemn act; that before this Bill came into force there should be an election of the authority which would have to administer it. The Government might be prepared to meet this by a separate clause. All he desired was that the voters of the country should know what they were doing, and should put this Act, when the Bill became an Act, into operation by a great and solemn declaration.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1. line 7. after the word 'and,' to insert the words 'after the first election of a local education authority which shall take place.' "—[Mr. Healy.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he did not think any man ever uttered a reproof in this House without regretting it. He regretted having said minorities must suffer, but the fact remained that they did suffer and always must suffer. The Amendment moved by the hon. and learned Gentleman would have the effect of postponing the operation of this Bill until after January 1st, 1908. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's desire that the people of the country should have an opportunity of electing their councillors before this Bill became law, he would point out that in March, 1907, there would be a triennial election of councillors, and so the people would have an opportunity of electing councillors so far as boroughs and urban districts were concerned where the councillors went out triennially. He did not think anything would be gained by the Amendment, and he thought on the whole, although the general question as to the date on which the Bill would commence might be considered after all its provisions were settled, it was desirable that the Government should take upon themselves the responsibility for saying

  1017
  when the Act should come into operation. It could not be allowed to come into operation piecemeal in different parts of the country.
  LORD R. CECILsupported the Amendment, which he thought was of very great importance, He had boon struck during the course of the debate by the utter failure of any hon. Member on the opposite side to realise the importance which attached to the Bill. The hon. Member for Glamorgan resented very bitterly the suggestion made by the Leader of the Opposition that Members on the Opposition side regarded the first clause as robbery. He could assure hon. Members that that was a very moderate statement of their views upon the clause. Hon. Members opposite would make a very great mistake if they thought they were going to carry this Bill through by ill-mannered clamours. Still more would they make a mistake if they thought this was the kind of Bill that could be forced through the House by brute force.
  THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. CALDWELL, Lanark, Mid.):Order! order! The noble Lord must speak to the Amendment.
  LORD R. CECILbowed to the ruling of the Chair, and said that what he was endeavouring to emphasise was that an important change of this kind could not be entrusted to a body elected on grounds which had nothing to do with the religious education of the children. The Amendment proposed that the Bill should not come into operation until after the first election of the local authorities after a particular date, the object being to insure that the local authority which had to administer this Act should have been elected to carry out its provisions with the full knowledge of the important duties cast upon it. It was for that reason that he ventured to insist on the importance of the change and the difficulty any local body would have in respect to this matter. The right hon. Gentleman had said that by January 1st, 1908, before this Bill came into operation, a large number of local education authorities would have undergone a fresh election. That might be so, and it might not. It entirely depended whether the Bill came into operation by that date. It might not be in operation then. He
  1018
  could see no solid ground for objecting to the Amendment, because if that were true it would not postpone the operation of the Bill and therefore the Amendment would not have any effect. But if it did postpone the operation of the Bill, then it was only right and proper that there should be an election.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid the right hon. Gentleman had not in any sense met the point of his Amendment. It was perfectly true that there would be an election of county councillors in March, 1907, but as regarded the urban areas, with which the Catholics were mostly concerned, they were not governed by county council elections at all, but by municipal elections. The system of those elections was triennial. Let them take a ward of three members. In March, 1907, a Methodist might be elected; in 1908, when the question became acute from the point of view of the Church of England, a Church of England man might be elected, and in 1909 a member of some other communion or an atheist. Then those three would have to select an alderman. Fancy the religious convictions of an alderman composed of those variegated religious components! If there was one thing which concerned the Catholics it was the urban areas, and it was only in those urban areas that Clause 4 was to have effect. It was absurd, it was idiotic, to say that there should be a body elected upon those presumable conditions to deal with this tremendous question. It was an absolute mockery to otter them Clause 4 under those conditions, and he respectfully said that this matter had not to be faced by county councils or rural councils. Those areas were not to have the power to put Clause 4 in force. As a matter of fact, the Government had fixed on 1908 because they reckoned on there being an election in 1907. Was it not a mockery to say that these bodies should decide upon questions of religion, as to questions of the Cowper-Temple clause, and all the other mysteries that affected the Christian faith and Christian mind? The spirit in which the Amendment had been tossed aside by the right hon. Gentleman showed, he feared, that he had not given the smallest consideration to the question. The right hon. Gentleman had looked at it solely from the point of view of the

  1019
  agricultural communities; he had not considered it from the point of view of the municipal communities, and, above all, he had not looked at it from the point of view of the piecemeal vote in these cases which had to be considered. Therefore, in 1908 there might be in London, Manchester, Newcastle, Leeds, and in all the other great constituencies of the country a municipal council elected as to two-thirds by reference to gas and water, and as to one-third by the question of Christianity or by what was called sectarian interest. And this was the body to which the tender mercies of the children were to be consigned. It was a body elected without the smallest regard to any Christian sentiment, but to decide solely on rates and taxes and questions of sewage and water-closets. It was to such bodies that they were going to entrust the religious future of the children.
  MR. LANE-FOXconsidered the reply of the right hon. Gentleman a very inadequate one to the objection that so many of the large urban authorities which would have the largest share in carrying out Clause 4 would not have an election before the time they came into operation. That applied with special force to those Northern towns in which a large proportion of the population was denominational. Unless this Amendment were accepted the Commission which was to be appointed would have ample time to re-model and alter the status of the schools which came under its control without the electorate having any chance of giving their opinion on the matter. This was not treating the parents and the electorate fairly. Without some such Amendment as was now suggested a grave injustice would be inflicted. Surely they could trust the people, which was the doctrine so frequently voiced by Ministerialists, and let them carry out the Act in their own way even if it retarded the operation of the Bill for a very little time. A great many local authorities at the present time had been elected on totally different issues from those which would be brought within their purview under this Bill. He would grant that a certain number of local authorities had been elected on the question of the carrying out of the Education Act of 1902, and he would admit still further that
  1020
  a certain number had boon elected on the principle of opposition to that Act. But this Bill would confer an absolutely new power and give an entirely new scope to the local authority. It would give the local authorities a chance of dealing with the rights of parents and children that they had never before possessed. He therefore maintained that before Parliament put these enormous powers in the hands of local authorities, elected for absolutely different purposes, the electorate ought to be given a chance of choosing men whom they believed to be capable and honestly anxious to carry out its provisions. They on the Opposition side had been told that they had said too much about the inalienable right of parents. This Amendment would allow that right to be safeguarded. In view of the great responsibilities they were placing upon the local authorities they ought to be very careful about rejecting this Amendment, which was founded on such just and fair principles. Certainly no one who had the religious interests of the children really at heart could oppose the Amendment.
  MR. CARLILEsaid there were a number of Amendments on the Paper which they could not expect would appeal to supporters of the Government, but this Amendment, he ventured to say, did appeal, and appealed strongly, to hon. Members on the Ministerial side. Since 1902 they had heard everywhere clamours for the ad hoc principle, and that principle underlay this Amendment. It claimed that the religious instruction of the children should not be placed under the control of an authority in the election of which parents had not had the opportunity of ascertaining whether they were the persons to whom they would safely commit such a high and holy responsibility. He commended to Ministerialists the consideration of the ad hoc principle. As it was, the men who were selected for their knowledge of mere material matters, who might be most unspiritual persons, might be called upon to administer the greatest of all responsibilities that could be laid upon any man with reference to the children. The other day, when the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster was speaking, he ventured to interpose to state that he knew a borough where,

  1021
  since 1870, no religious instruction of any kind had been given to the children. They wanted the opportunity of changing that, especially when they considered that, not only were the council schools in that borough to be under the control of such men, but also all the voluntary schools in which definite and religious denominational instruction was now given, whether Wesleyan, Roman, or Anglican, and which was held to be of such vital importance, and for which they had made such sacrifice since 1870, and far beyond. This religion was to be handed over in those borough councils to men who had been elected because qualified for such matters as other speakers had before enumerated. He had great pleasure in supporting the hon. and learned Gentleman's Amendment.
  SIR W. ROBSONsaid that by the Act of 1902 the duty of controlling education was taken away from the School Boards, who were elected ad hoc apparently as persons of high spiritual perception, and handed over without any interval for an election to the "gas and water" people, who apparently were thought sufficiently qualified to undertake it. That reminiscence discounted the indignation of the hon. Member who had just sat down. What was the substance of this complaint with regard to the transfer of the control of the school in which religious instruction was given?
  MR. CARLILEsaid that under the Act of 1902 religious instruction was left in the hands of those whom they thought were spiritually minded persons qualified to deal with it.
  SIR W. ROBSONsaid that under this Bill religious teaching was to remain in the hands of a religious community. [OPPOSITION Cries of "No, no!" and "Where?"] Special facilities and extended facilities were to be given to those who desired that in voluntary schools religious teaching of their own faith should be given. Those facilities would be paid for by the people who believed in the doctrines that would be taught. Those facilities would be put in the hands of persons of exceptional spiritual perception—they would be taken out of the hands of the lay teacher and put in the hands of the
  1022
  ecclesiastical teacher. That was denounced as a transference to some persons of minor or inferior spiritual perception. There was nothing in the objection.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: There is nothing in the answer.
  SIR W. ROBSONsaid that substantially the religious teaching given now would be continued under the Bill, and if it was not continued it would be the fault of those who believed in the religion which they desired to have taught. There was no reason on that ground why the operation of the Bill should be delayed. The hon. and learned Member for North Louth had said they must have an election ad hoc. There would be elections in 1906 and 1907 in the urban districts. Did the hon. Member for North Louth desire that the operation of this Bill should be delayed until three years after it had passed in order that these might be three annual elections upon it? That was doing little justice to those who would vote in the elections of 1906 and 1907, who would have ample opportunity of giving effect to their opinions in those elections. There was no reason why the Bill should be delayed on that account.
  SIR EDWARD CLARKEsaid he was glad the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill had been present to listen to the speech of the Solicitor-General. He had said, Why should they have three elections at each of which religious bodies would stir up religious strife? He foresaw the mischief as well as they did. Their suggestion was that it would be better to have no religious strife at these elections at all. They knew that by a more excellent way than was provided in the Bill there would be no necessity for any religious strife. The Solicitor-General had also said that religious instruction would remain in the hands of those who had directed it hitherto, because facilities were to be given for religious teaching. He wished it said so in the Bill. There was no such provision in the Bill. There was a provision that the local education authority might come to an agreement concerning religious instruction, but there

  1023
  was no compulsion on them to come to any agreement even in regard to the minor facilities, still less in regard to extended facilities included in that extraordinary clause, No. 4. He had not the opportunity of hearing the speech of the right hon. Gentleman in charge of this Bill upon its introduction, but he had read it, and he thought the same draft that must have been before him then had remained in the memory of his hon. and learned friend the Solicitor-General. In his speech on the first reading the President of the Board of Education said these facilities were to be given and it was only when they saw the Bill in print that they found there was nothing in the Bill which would compel those facilities to be given. If hon. Gentlemen opposite believed in local control they ought to accept the Amendment, because it was by it alone that they could censure that the administration of the Act would come into the hands of people who had been commissioned by the people at large to carry out those duties. If they did not believe in the principle of local control or intelligent local control, then he could understand their tossing this important matter of religious education to a body not elected in order to deal with it, and which hitherto had had no power to deal with it. It had been said that in the Bill of 1902 those who passed it had handed over this educational question to an authority not elected with a knowledge of the matter at all, but to local bodies already constituted for other purposes. That was perfectly true, but the Act of 1902 did not hand over any authority or power with regard to religious education. The denominational schools remained under the managers subject to the presence on the board of two persons who were intended to be the representatives of public judgment and public opinion in dealing with the secular teaching. [An HON. MEMBER: Not in board schools.] In that respect the Act of 1902 made no difference.
  MR. LEIF JONES: Under that Act the local School Boards directly elected
  by the parents had their schools transferred to the county authorities.
  SIR EDWARD CLARKEsaid he did not think he was misrepresenting what the learned Solicitor-General had stated. He said that in 1902 the same thing was done as that of which they were now complaining, namely, that the responsibility for education was thrown upon bodies not elected for that purpose. In reply to that he contended that the great question of denominational teaching did not come under the alteration made in 1902, and that so far as the denominational schools were concerned, under the Act of 1902 religious instruction remained substantially under the control of those who had had control of it in the past. Therefore, on all three points he would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill to take a different view of the proposal now made. If it was desirable to avoid strife on religious questions, surely it was desirable to modify this Bill so that that strife would not be aroused. If it was desirable to have the judgment of the people who had been elected, and who, knowing the responsibilities they had to fulfil, were prepared to be entrusted with those responsibilities, then it was only reasonable that this Amendment should be accepted, and that they should take care not to throw on those bodies, elected without any regard to this matter, duties so onerous and difficult.
  MR. DICKINSONsaid he should like to point out that the effect of this Amendment would be that in London and the other administrative counties the Act would not come into operation until after March, 1910— that was to say, they would have to wait four years for the Act to become effective.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 134;Noes, 284. (Division List, No. 86.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Balcarres, Lord

  Acland-Hood RtHn.Sir AlexF.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Ambrose, Robert

  Ashley, W. W.

  Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester)

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Ginnell, L.

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Beach, Hn. Michael HughHicks

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Haddock, George R.

  O'Donnell John (Mayo, S.)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Halpin, J.

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

  Blake, Edward

  Hamilton, Marquess of

  O' Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

  Boland, John

  Hammond, John

  O'Malley, William

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

  O'Mara, James

  Bull,.Sir William James

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Helmsley, Viscount

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

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

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hills, J. W.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Hogan, Michael

  Rasch. Sir Frederic Carne

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

  Clarke, Sir Edward (City Lond.

  Joyce, Michael

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

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

  Kilbride, Denis

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cogan, Denis J.

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield,Ecclesall)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Crean, Eugene

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Dalrymple. Viscount

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Delany, William

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Devlin,CharlesRamsay(Galway

  Lundon, W.

  Starkey, John R.

  Dillon, John

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  MacVeigh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Donelan, Captain A.

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.

  Talbot.Rt Hn.J.G.(Oxf'dUniv.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  M'Kean, John

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  M'Killop, W.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Walker, Col. W. H.(Lancashire)

  Fell, Arthur

  Mason. James F. (Windsor)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Ffrench, Peter

  Meagher, Michael

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Field. William

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mooney, J. J.

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.)

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murnaghan, George

  Young, Samuel

  Forster, Henry William

  Murphy, John

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Nolan, Joseph

  TELLERS OF THE AYES—Mr. T. H. Mealy and Mr. O'Hare

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary,Mid

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  NOES.

  Abraham. William (Rhondda)

  Benn, John Williams(Devonp'rt

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Adkins, W. Ryland

  Benn.W.(T'w'rHamlets,S. Geo.

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

  Agnew, George William

  Berridge. T. H. D.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Ainsworth. John Stirling

  Bethell, J. H. (Essex, Romford)

  Cairns, Thomas

  Alden, Percy

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Cameron, Robert

  Allen, A. Acland(Christchurch)

  Billson, Alfred

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Armitage, R.

  Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Black. Arthur W.(Bedfordshire)

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Bolton. T. D. (Derbyshire.NE.)

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bottomley, Horatio

  Cleland, J. W.

  Baker,Joseph A. (Finsbury,E.)

  Boulton.A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Clough, W.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Brace, William

  Clynes. J. R.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Bramsdon, T. A.

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

  Barker, John

  Branch, James

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Brigg, John

  Collings, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Bright, J. A.

  Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W.

  Barnard. E. B.

  Brocklehurst, W. D.

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

  Barnes, G. N.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Beale, W. P.

  Brooke, Stanford

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Beauchamp, E.

  Brunner.J.F.L. (Lanes.Leigh)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Beaumont, Hubert (Eastbourne

  Bryce,Rt.Hn.James(Aberdeen)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Crooks, William

  Bellairs, Carylon

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Cross, Alexander

  1026

  1027

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Rutherford. V. H. (Brentford

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Lever, A. Levy(Essex, Harwich)

  Samuel, Herbert L (Cleveland)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Dickinson.W. H.(St. Pancras.N

  Levy, Maurice

  Schwann,Chas.E.(Manchester)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Duckworth, James

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Sears, J. H.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Lough, Thomas

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

  Lupton, Arnold

  Shackleton, David James

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

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

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Elibank, Master of

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Snowden, P.

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Essex, R. W.

  M'Crae, George

  Spicer, Albert

  Evans, Samuel T.

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

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Stanley, Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh)

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Maddison, Frederick

  Steadman, W. C.

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Stewart-Smith. D. (Kendal)

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Marnham, F. J.

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Summerbell, T.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Menzies, Walter

  Sutherland. J. E.

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Glover, Thomas

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Mond, A.

  Thomas. Sir'A.'(Glamorgan, E.)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

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

  Grant, Corrie

  Morse, L. L.

  Thorne, William

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Tillet, Louis John

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Murray, James

  Tomkinson, James

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Myer, Horatio

  Torrance, A. M.

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

  Nicholls, George

  Toulmin, George

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Nicholson, CharlesN.(Doncaster

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Norman, Henry

  Verney. F. W.

  Harwood, George

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Wadsworth, J.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Haslam Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Wallace, Robert

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Paul, Herbert

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

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

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor(Mon.,S.)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Ward,W.Dudley (Southampton

  Higham, John Sharp

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Wardle. George J.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

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

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Hodge, John

  Philipps,J.Wynford(Pembroke)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Watt, H. Anderson

  Hooper, A. G.

  Pollard, Dr.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Hove, W. Bateman(Somerset,N.

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

  White, Geor (Norfolk)

  Horniman Emslie John

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  White, J. D. (Dunbartonshire)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

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

  White, Luke, (York, E. R.)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Radford, G. H.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Hudson, Walter

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Wiles. Thomas

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Jackson, R. S.

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Williams. J. (Glamorgan)

  Jacoby, James.Alfred

  Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

  Jardine, Sir J.

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

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

  Johnson, John. (Gateshead)

  Richardson, A.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Johnson, W (Nuneaton)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Ridsdale, E. A.

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

  Jones, Wiliam (Carnarvonshie

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

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

  Jowett, F. W.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee

  Winfrey, R.

  Kelley, George D.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tynesi le)

  Wodehouse,Lord(Norfolk,Mid'.)

  King, Alfred, John (Knutsford)

  Robinson, S.

  Wood, T M'Kinnon

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Lambert, George

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Lamont, Norman

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

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

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Rose, Charles Day

  Lea, HughCecil-(St,Pancras,E.)

  Rowlands, J.

  Mr. PIKE PEASE Mr. PIKE PEASE (Darlington) moved an Amendment to leave out "January" and insert "April" in the first Clause. He said that it would be remembered that the Parliamentary Secretary of the Board of Education had said that it would be a great improvement if all the schools were to adopt the same year, and he hoped the Government would accept his Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 7, Clause 1, to leave out the word 'January' and to insert the word 'April.'"—(Mr. Pike pease.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'January' stand part of the Clause."
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. LOUGH, Islington, W.)said that the hon. Member had not said much in support of his Amendment. He supposed that the date proposed for the recognition of public elementary schools did not correspond with the financial year recognised in the House. The right hon. the Minister for Education had told the House that the exact date on which the Bill would come into operation would be carefully considered.
  MB. PIKE PEASEasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that it ad been stated that the date on which his Bill would come into operation would he considered hereafter, but now that the date was actually before them it seemed to him the proper time for its consideration. As the Bill now stood the initiative for making any arrangement was to come from the local education authority. Anyone who read the Bill must see that there was a wide opportunity for discussion as to the arrangements which might be made for the use of the schools, as to the school hours, and as to facilities which were to be given. All these as the Bill now stood were to be matters of negotiation, although he and his friends hoped that the Bill would be made mandatory and not voluntary. If the negotiations broke down, and the local
  1030
  authority still wanted to acquire possession of a non-provided school during school hours, their next course was to apply to the Commission. Many thousands of schools would come before the Commission. He thought the Government far too sanguine in their estimate of the time which would be necessary to make the arrangements for the transfer of the schools. It would be very much better if they would give plenty of latitude in respect of time, and then the friends of voluntary schools would be more sure that they would get fair treatment both by the local authorities and the Commission. There was a strong probability that the Commission would find itself burdened with a large amount of work in coming to its decisions. He regarded the whole of Clause 8 as of the most threatening character in respect of the voluntary schools. If the Government declined to grant this concession in respect of time, he should be disposed to think that the Commission was after all a mere process of guillotine, constituted in order to transfer the property in the voluntary schools in the shortest time, and with the smallest amount of consideration to the local education authority. He begged to move the Amendment standing in his name.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, to leave out the word 'eight,' and insert the word 'ten.'"— (Sir William Anson.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'eight' stand part of the Clause."
  MR. LOUGHsaid he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not press his Amendment. A very generous promise had been made in regard to this matter of dates. The right hon. Gentleman insisted on taking the view that there would be a struggle in every locality. But what if the negotiations should all be carried out peacefully? If a change of this kind was to be made he was sure that the Committee would agree that it would be better if the period of transition were not unduly prolonged. At present there were in the country 327 local education authorities, and the machinery for all this business existed. There would be hardly any of the difficulties which

  1031
  existed in 1902 when the whole of the machinery had to be put down.
  MR. LAURENCE HARDYsaid he did not agree with the hon. Gentleman, because if they left this question unsettled they would have to leave other dates in the Bill unsettled. The Bill provided for other dates. For instance in Clause 8, January 1st, 1907, was mentioned, then if they got out of the difficulty in regard to that date, Clause 11 mentioned another, namely, January 1st, 1908. In that and other clauses, moreover, the date of January 1st, 1909, was mentioned. Therefore, on the Government's own admission, it would require three years to get this Bill into operation. Had not the Committee therefore better minimise the difficulty in regard to these dates, which the hon. Gentleman had admitted, by fixing a later date and one which would enable them to get these proceedings in force in a proper manner? In regard to Clauses 10 and 11 he did not think that it would be a very agreeable task for the owners of voluntary schools to carry them on under the conditions laid down for such a number of years. In view of the minimising effect of this Amendment upon the later clauses he would urge the Government to reconsider the point.
  LORD BALCARRESsaid he did not think that the Secretary to the Board of Education fully appreciated the meaning of the Amendment when he described it as unfair. It was a perfectly fair Amendment.
  MR. LOUGH: I did not say it was an unfair Amendment.
  LORD BALCARRESsaid he was sorry if he had made a mistake, but he thought the hon. Gentleman had so described it. In his opinion, if this Amendment was not accepted, it would be impossible to bring other clauses of the Bill into operation in time. If the hon. Gentleman would refer to the definition clause he would see that the expression "owners" was defined in a very wide manner, and anybody who could be conceived to have a trusteeship or ownership would be able to put his case forward before a transfer. That was of course just and
  1032
  proper, but the owners, being a composite body, would have to correspond between themselves and would have to take legal advice so as to define their position in regard to each particular trust. If the hon. Member would consult his officials at the Board of Education they would, he was sure, assure him that there was no branch of the public work of the Education Department which was slower and more complex than that which dealt with trustees and their responsibility. The hon. Gentleman thought that these matters might be very easily arranged. That might be the case, but it was difficult to believe it would be so when it was remembered that the Act would extend to 14,000 or 15,000 schools in regard to which arrangements under Clause 2 and proceedings under Clause 8 would have to be dealt with. The trustees or owners of these schools would have to start by defining their own position in the matter. They would have to take legal advice and discover what their responsibilities were. Having done that they would communicate with the local education authority or the local education authority would communicate with them. Of course the local education authority would immediately refer this matter to a sub-committee, because it would be quite impossible for the whole council to look into the details of each case. All this took time, and even then, when the local education authority had prepared a scheme, the owners or trustees could not, he thought, take it off-hand without further inquiry. That again would take time. [MINISTERIAL cries of "No, no!"] Well, he thought that was a reasonable view to take, and after the hon. Gentleman had had experience of the cumbrous process of dealing with trustees at the Education Department he would know that it was a matter which could not be pressed forward with great speed. In cases where arrangements had not been made the question was taken before the court— the triumvirate—and the whole question might be re-opened. Questions as to definition of the terms "owners" and "trustees" might arise; all these subjects might have to be re-opened and the matter referred back to the local education authority or to the trustees.

  1033
  No doubt the right hon. Gentleman took the power of extending the time, but the original intention was to deal with 14,000 or 15,000 schools in twelve months. He did not think it possible that these schemes could be satisfactorily brought into operation in the limited time, placed at the disposal of the local education authority and the trustees. Under these circumstances he submitted that the Amendment was quite a reasonable one and worthy of the consideration of the Government.
  MR. CLAVELL SALTERthought that the Amendment was a very reasonable one indeed, and he was certain that if hon. Members opposite realised the view which was taken, not merely on those Benches, but outside the House, of the proposed constitution of this Commission by all of those who were in any way conversant with the working of the law, they would listen very carefully to the plea which was being urged for delay on that score. For his part he did not attach great importance to the plea for delay in order that there might be time for the making of arrangements. In those cases where arrangements were possible, they would not take long to make, especially having regard to the position which the contracting parties would occupy. But in the great majority of cases no arrangement would be possible, because these schools were held under trust deeds and the trustees were bound by law to maintain the particular school for the purpose of having Roman Catholic teaching or Church of England teaching alone afforded. It therefore did not rest with the trustees to make a bargain which would deprive such a school of its character. They had no legal competence or power to do so, and in every case where there was a trust they would be driven to go to this Commission. The Commission were vested with a most delicate and difficult work. They were empowered by this Bill, in so many words, to come to the conclusion that an absolute and direct violation of the trust deed was the best way of carrying out the trust. They were dealing with cases in which a man had died and left money for the establishment of a school and expressed his wishes
  1034
  as to what should be taught in that school.
  MR MYERrose to a point of Order and asked if the hon. Member was in order in discussing the merits of the trusteeships question.
  THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. EMMOTT,), who had taken the Chair, said he had only just come in and he would listen to the hon. Member.
  MR. CLAVELL SALTERsaid he was endeavouring to keep in order. His plea was that the Government ought to accept this Amendment in order to show that they intended that the Commission should be a judicial body. Was it possible that they could dispose of more than one school in one day? Could they tear up a man's scheme and arrange for a wholly changed status of a school at the rate of more than one school in one day? He thought that the Amendment would throw a great light upon the question of whether the Commission was to be a judicial and impartial body on which those interested in voluntary schools could depend. There were only 200 days in the legal year, and supposing the Commission made a complete new scheme every day they would only dispose of 200 cases in the year. Was it reasonable in view of that to object to the two years postponement? If the Commission was to be a mere packed body of hardy partisans the period named in the Bill was no doubt ample, but if it was to be a real judicial body, in which those interested in voluntary schools could place confidence, then the Amendment was most reasonable. The proposal of his right hon. friend was a most reasonable one. Nobody could say whether the Government intended that this body should be a judicial and impartial body or not.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that under Clause 8 the Commission came into being if an arrangement had not been made before January 1st, 1907. That being so, these words were a direction to the Commission and nothing else. That was why they thought them improper. There was no need to have a date in the first clause at all, because in the clause

  1035
  relating to the Commission it said that if an arrangement was not come to by a certain date the local authority could apply to the Commission and the Commission would make a scheme. Why state, therefore, at the beginning of the clause, which was drastic and peremptory, that the Commission had to complete its labours within this brief period? They complained of the clause because it gave a bias to anything that succeeded in the Bill; it gave a bias to any administrative or judicial action that might be taken under it. When it said that all these matters were to he settled, defined, and laid down within this brief period they found in that an index to the whole tenor of the Bill, and they were justified in saying that the Government should so far concede to the Opposition as to give them two years as the definite period for the confiscating purposes of the Bill, which could not be carried out with any decency in a shorter period.
  SIR E. CARSONsaid he did not wish to detain the Committee; he merely desired to put two Questions to the right hon. Gentleman. First, he wished to know what was to happen if the schemes were not settled by the date mentioned in the Bill? Were they to be dropped, and were some schools to be left without any terms of settlement at all? On the other hand, was a Bill going to be brought in to prolong the time during which the Commisisoners might perform their duties? That was the first Question; the second was, had the right hon. Gentleman calculated how many schemes were likely to be settled, because unless they knew approximately it seemed to him to be a very unbusinesslike way of drawing up a Bill by setting a rigid limit of time for the Commissioners to get through their work?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid it was curious how Members opposite desired to press this matter through before any answer at all had been given to the question which had been put. Up to the present they had had no answer at all, owing to the right hon. Gentleman not having been in his place, and it was only fair to the right hon. Gentleman that if he wished he should now have an
  1036
  opportunity of realising the points upon which they would like some information. The Bill provided practically that this Star Chamber procedure should not come into operation till January, 1907. The Bill by its first clause provided that on and after the 1st day of January, 1908, no school should be recognised unless it was a school provided by the local education authority. His right hon. friend had ventured to ask, and it was a reasonable question, whether the Government could give any estimate as to whether their anticipation was likely to be realised. Out of the numbers of schools that must come within the schemes of trusts there might be a very large number that would come within the purview of the Commission. Were the Commissioners supposed to undertake their work in one year, and, if not, was there to be another B ill? It was impossible that the whole of these schools could be adjudicated upon in any judicial manner in anything like twelve months. It was a perfectly reasonable request, and they wanted to know what was in contemplation. Were they to be told that twelve months was the period in which all these adjudications would take place; if so, they would like to know on what that calculation was based? If it was not so, then the Bill must fail, because there was no power to extend the time beyond one year.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid that, as the Bill stood, the local education authority could begin making its arrangements under Clause 2 to take over any schools it was desirous of taking over at any moment after the Bill became law. On 1st January, 1908, the State aid and the rate aid ceased to be given to any existing voluntary school; it could only be given to those schools which were under the control of the local education authority. Consequently the local education authority must make provision either by taking over the voluntary schools, or, if there was no alternative, for building new schools. Between January 1st, 1908, and January 1st, 1909, the authority would, under Clause 10, have power to use any voluntary school buildings they might wish to use temporarily, subject to the proper obligation of allowing religious instruction in those schools to go on as before. After January 1st, 1909, the local

  1037
  education authority would be responsible for providing all the schools which were necessary for the elementary education of the country. He agreed that it was difficult to say how long precisely it might take either under Clause 2 or by the proposals before the Commission of three. The Government and the Committee had to make some estimate of their own. The Government were of opinion that the time allowed was ample and sufficient, and to grant more time was not to obtain greater security that the difficulties would be settled. If some pressure of time were not exerted, the negotiations might linger on for ever. He was hopeful that when the Bill was better understood than at the present time, a good deal would be done under Clause 2, aided by the rulings of the Commission, which would be a perfectly impartial body applying principles of law. But they had to put some period to them, and in the opinion of the Government the time they had afforded was ample and sufficient. If it were proved by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite that the Government's calculations were mistaken, it would be necessary to extend the time. The matter did not admit of exact calculation, because so much depended on the temper and disposition of the parties concerned.
  MR. WYNDHAMexpressed his obligation to the right hon. Gentleman for having dealt, from the point of view of his own justification of them, with many of the dates in the Bill, but pointed out that he had omitted to deal with the one date mentioned. Clause 8 stated that if no arrangements had been made with respect to the school house under this Act, at any time after the 1st day of January, 1907, the local authority could apply to the Commission to make a scheme. On whom was the pressure going to be put? The words at the beginning of this Clause, "On and after the 1st January, 1908," did not apply to the trustees or to the owners of the schools, because, if they failed to come to an arrangement before the 1st January, 1907, the local authority, the other party to this precious bargain, under these very fair conditions, could at once back out of the bargain and have the proceedings removed to the Court—because this Commission was a court, and he treated it
  1038
  as a court. Here the Government said, not to the owners and trustees of the schools, but to this Commission, the only tribunal from which they could seek justice tempered with mercy, that they must deal with all these intricate legal questions involving trusts respecting 14,000 voluntary schools in twelve months. It would really expedite the proceedings if the right hon. Gentleman would answer the arguments he was venturing to advance, and in this matter he could assure him that he did not wish to bring heat into the discussion. He had shown much self-restraint in face of the twice repeated threat that if those concerned did not agree with their adversaries quickly the credit of the State was sufficient to build schools all over the country. Those were the terms under which the trustees and the people who cared for the teaching given in these schools wore asked to bargain. Was not that enough? Was it necessary also to say in the first line of the Bill that the only legal protection to be given was to be confined within twelve months? What credit could be attached, not to the sincerity, but to the value of the Government's promises at later stages of the Bill if in the first line such protection as was afforded in this miserable manner was to be shut off absolutely when the twelve months had come to an end? After that justice had been done ! Then they came to execution. What was the nature of the execution? After the time limit had expired what would happen to the schools which had failed to come to an arrangement? Would they become efficient schools under some obscure clauses in the Act of 1860, or what would happen to them? Supposing they were deprived of all State and rate aid, would they go on? The answer to this question was not in the Bill, and it was not given in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that he noted the Government's challenge to the ratepayer to provide schools all over the country in place of voluntary schools. He trusted that the ratepayers through-out the country, who were already complaining of the cost of education, would also note this. The Government might

  1039
  be left on this point to settle accounts with the ratepayers. But if the ratepayers failed them under this most economical of Governments he supposed the taxpayers would be called in. He would leave that to be settled between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the person he had described as a sturdy beggar. But would the President of the Board of Education pay attention to the dates in this clause? If the voluntary school had not come to terms by the date specified it became liable to a scheme framed by the Commission on the initiative of the local authority, and he trusted some assurance would be given that the Commission was going to be a judicial body, for the date in Clause 1 and the words in Clause 8 gave a very broad limit to the Commissioners to make short work of the voluntary schools.
  MR. LAURENCE HARDYsaid he did not think the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education had quite accounted for the difference between the date in Sub-section 6 of Clause 9 and the date inserted in Clause 1. As matters stood, while the Commissioners could go on making schemes after 1908, nothing short of an Act of Parliament would be required to enable non-provided schools to receive the assistance they had always received.
  SIR E. CARSONventured to make an appeal, because he could hardly imagine that he had rightly understood the answer of the Minister for Education. He asked the right hon. Gentleman what would happen if the Commissioners had not time to carry out the necessary schemes for taking over these schools. He understood the right hon. Gentleman to reply—
  "If they had not time, people had better come to an agreement, or if they do not, we build at the public expense."
  Did the House of Commons think that a fair argument? The default was not because people were unwilling to submit schemes, but because a proper date had not been fixed by the House of Commons. It was not a fair, was what
  1040
  he called a bullying argument. The right hon. Gentleman went on to say—
  "A good deal will depend upon the temper in which these matters are approached by the country in administering this Bill."
  He entirely agreed. Did the right hon. Gentleman think that at the very moment he was driving those who valued their religion out of their schools he would add to their good temper by telling them that for no fault of their own they were bound to contribute to the expense of erecting new schools? The right hon. Gentleman had not yet realised that there were people in this country in earnest in this matter.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he certainly did not intend to jest. If when the appointed date arrived there were still sub judice a number of schemes before the Commissioners who were considering the proposals on their merits, and this happened simply because there was not time to consider them all, he did not mean that all these schools should at once become provided schools without any regard being had to the terms of the proposals.
  SIR E. CARSON: But it is in your Bill.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid it might be that they had inaccurately estimated the mode and the manner in which these transactions would be carried on, and he quite agreed that it might be necessary by legislation to insert another date if they found the Court blocked by schemes which had not been properly adjudicated upon. He had no desire, simply by the operation of a particular date, to deprive the owners of the schools of the facilities given to them by applications to these Commissions. The Government had to make a proposal of their own, and, after full consideration, they came to the conclusion that these dates were adequate. He was not certain now that it would be found to be ample, but if so be when the date arrived that the Court was blocked with schemes which had not been properly considered it would then, no doubt, be necessary to extend the time.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURthanked the right hon. Gentleman for that clear and

  1041
  conciliatory answer to one of the questions at all events which had been put to him, but he thought the right hon. Gentleman would see that that answer showed that some Amendment of the clause was necessary. The Commissioners might find as many cases blocking their Courts as there were standing in the way of the Judges of the High Court. The right hon. Gentleman had admitted that his estimate of time might be wrong, and that the difficulty, if it arose, would be so serious that further legislation might be necessary. If further legislation were required, this Bill was very badly drafted. They ought to arrange this Bill so that another would not be required. He would suggest the difficulty would be overcome by adding after the first day of January, 1908, these words: "or such later date as may be determined."
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he was disposed to think it would not be a bad thing to allow a latitude in this matter, although he still was of opinion that when the matter came to be considered and the trust deeds came to be classified under a few heads the task of the Commissioners would not, perhaps, be so gigantic as the imagination of the right hon. Gentleman suggested. He thought the whole question of the date for the commencement of the Bill was a subject which they might, when they knew exactly what the nature of the Bill was, very fairly reconsider; and he was not at all indisposed to allow the latitude which the right hon. Gentleman had suggested, that the clause should specify January 1st, 1908, "or such other date as"——[Cries of "No."] The intention was simply to provide for a conjuncture which he hoped might never occur— namely, that the labours of the Commission might not be concluded. He thought words to that effect would not be beyond the ingenuity of draftsmen. It seemed to him that Clause 8 would be the proper place to insert words of that kind.
  MR. WYNDHAMconsidered that if Clause 8 were amended in the direction indicated, these words would be made more intractable than at present. He hoped more latitude would be given for arriving at some arrangement. If the words suggested by the right hon.
  1042
  Gentleman were inserted in Clause 8 the Bill would be nonsense; whatever change was made must harmonise with the Bill as a whole.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid that any school without State or rate aid could keep its doors open as a school inviting children to attend it. If it submitted to inspection and became a certified efficient school, attendance at that school was recognised as obedience to the law.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that if the right hon. Gentleman would agree to the words "January 1st, 1908, or such later date as the King in Council may determine," he thought his right hon. friend might well be disposed to withdraw his Amendment, and the Committee might avoid a division.
  DR. MACNAMARAhoped the President of the Board of Education would not agree to that. The speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover upon this point was nonsense. If the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for Dover had read the Bill, they would have seen that what they wanted was provided for. Clause 9, Subsection 6, provided that the powers of the Commission should remain in force until December 31st, 1908, and if there had not been agreement, the Commission could be continued by Order in Council. Clause 10 provided for the continued use of a school from January 1st, 1908, to January 1st, 1909, if an agreement had not been arrived at. If that was not long enough to allow the question to be settled, he did not know what more could be done for the trustees of denominational schools. He thought the Bill perfectly elastic under Sections 9 and 10, and hoped the President of the Board of Education would go no further.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONthought it was a little premature for the hon. Member for North Camberwell to say that his right hon. friend the Member for Dover was talking nonsense. It would be a fair retort to ask the hon. Member to take the trouble to read Clause 1. That clause provided that on and after January 1st, 1908, no school should be recognised as a public elementary

  1043
  school unless it was a school provided by the local authority. The Commission might be sitting, and its sittings might be prolonged under Clause 9, or the local authority might be taking possession of the schools without payment under Clause 10. But a school would cease to be recognised if by January 1st, 1908, it had not become a provided school under Clause 1, and it could only become a provided school within the meaning of the Act, being a voluntary school to start with, if either
  an arrangement had been made under Clause 3, or a scheme had been made under Clause 8. Under these circumstances he thought the hon. Member for North Camberwell should consider whether it was not to himself or to Clause 1 that the word nonsense was most appropriate.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 349; Noes, 171. (Division List No. 87.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, Willian., (Rhondda)

  Buxton, Rt. Hn Sydney Charles

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Byles, William Pollard

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Adkirs, W. Ryland

  Cairns, Thomas

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Agnew, George William

  Cameron, Robert

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Causton. Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Gardner, Col. Alan(Hereford, S.)

  Alden, Percy,

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Gill, A. H.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert Jn.

  Armitage, R.

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Cleland, J. W.

  Glover, Thomas

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Clough, W.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

  Clynes, J. R.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Atherley-Jones, L.

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

  Grant, Corrie

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Greenwood. G. (Peterborough)

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

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

  Griffiths, Ellis J.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Cooper, G. J.

  Grove, Archibald

  Barker, John

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

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Barlow, John Emmott (Somers't

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cory, Clifford John

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Barnard, E. B.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore 'r)

  Beale W. P.

  Cremer, William Randal

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

  Beauchamp, E.

  Crombie, John William

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Beaumont, Hubert (Eastbourne

  Crooks, William

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Harwood, George

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Davies, David (MontogomoryCo

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Benn, John Williams (Devorp'rt

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Benn, W. (T'W'rHamlets,S. Geo.

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Bennett, E. N.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Dickinson,.W. H. (St. Pancras,N

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Bethell, J. H. (Essex,Ron.ford)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Henderson, J.M.(Aberdeen, W.

  Billson, Alfred

  Dodd, W. H.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Duckworth, James

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon. S.)

  Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)

  Duncan,C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe

  Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire

  Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

  Higham, John Sharp

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

  Dunn, A. Edward (Can borne)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

  Hodge, John

  Brace, William

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Hooper, A. G.

  Branch, James

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset,N

  Brigg, John

  Elibank, Master of

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Bright, J. A.

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Horridge, Thomas Gradner

  Brocklehurst, W. D.

  Erskine, David C.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Brodie, H. C.

  Essex, R. W.

  Hudson, Walter

  Brooke, Stopford

  Evans, Samuel, T.

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

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

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Hyde, Clarendon

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

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Ferens, T. R.

  Jackson, R. S.

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Donnell, C J. (Walworth)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Straus, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Kearley, Hudson, E.

  Paul, Herbert

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Summerbell, T.

  Kelley, George D.

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Pearson, Sir W. D. Colchester)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Laidlaw, Robert

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

  Taylor, Theodore C (Radcliffe)

  Lamb, Edmund,G.(Leominster

  Perks, Robert William

  Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Philipps, J.Wynford (Pembroke

  Thomas,Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Lambert, George

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Thomas, SirA.(Glamorgan. E.)

  Lamont, Norman

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pollard, Dr.

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras, E.

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

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

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

  Thorne, William

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Tillett, Louis John

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

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

  Tomkinson, James

  Levy, Maurice

  Radford, G. H.

  Toulmin, George

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Verney, F. W.

  Lough, Thomas

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Wadsworth, J.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'h

  Wallace, Robert

  Lyell, Charles Henry

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

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lynch, H. B.

  Richardson, A.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Macdonald, J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southamp'n

  Maclean, Donald

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Wardle, George J.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  M'Crae, George

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Robinson, S.

  Waterlow, D. S.

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

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Watt, H. Anderson

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Whitbread, Howard

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Rose, Charles Day

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Rowlands, J.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Mansfield,H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Runciman, Walter

  White, Luke (York, E.R.

  Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

  Russell, T. W.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Marnham, F. J.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Whiteley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Massie, J.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Menzies, Walter

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Schwann, Chas. E.(Manchester)

  Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Mond, A.

  Sears, J. E.

  Wilson, Hon. C.H.W. (Hull,W.)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Seaverns, J. H.

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

  Montagu, E. S.

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Montgomery, H. H.

  Shackleton, David James

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

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

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

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Winfrey, R.

  Morse, L. L.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Wodehouse, Lord(Norfolk, Mid

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Murray, James

  Snowden, P.

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T. Huddersf'd

  Myer, Horatio

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Spicer, Albert

  TELLERS TOR THE AYES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Nicholls, George

  Stanger, H. Y

  Nicholson. Charles N-(Doncast'r

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Norman, Henry

  Steadman, W. C

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Ashley, W. W.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Balcarres, Lord

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Arnold-Forster.Rt Hn. HughO.

  Baldwin, Alfred

  1046

  1047

  Balfour, Rt Hn A.J.(CityLond.

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry,N.

  Ginnell, L.

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Haddock, George R.

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

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Halpin, J.

  O'Dowd, John

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hamilton, Marquess of

  O'Hare, Patrick

  Blake, Edward

  Hammond, John

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon.N

  Boland, John

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  O'Malley, William

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

  O'Mara, James

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hazleton, Richard

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Burke, E. Haviland-

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

  Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hill, Sir Clement(Shrewsbury)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff' sh.)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hills, J. W.

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Came

  Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C.W.

  Hogan, Michael

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Hunt, Rowland

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Joyce, Michael

  Redmond. William (Clare)

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J.(Birm.)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. SirJohn H.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Clarke, Sir Edward (City Lond.

  Kenyon-Slaney.Rt. Hn. Col.W.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield.Ecclesall)

  Coates, E.Feetham (Lewisham)

  Keswick, William

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

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

  Kilbride, Denis

  Rutherford, W. (Liverpool)

  Cogan, Denis J.

  King,Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Craig, Captain James(Down,E.)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham)

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Crean, Eugene

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim.S.)

  Cross, Alexander

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Stanley,Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Starkey, John R.

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Devlin, CharlesRamsay(Galway

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Sullivan, Donal

  Dillon, John

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

  Talbot,Rt. Hn J. G.(Oxf'd Univ

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  MacVeigh, Charles(Donegal, E.

  Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Walker, Col. W. H.(Lancashire

  Du Cros, Harvey

  M'Iver,SirLewis (Edinburgh, W

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Kean, John

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Mid, Kent)

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark,Govan

  M'Killop, W.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Wilson, A. Stanley(York, E.R.)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Meagher, Michael

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  Fell, Arthur

  Middlemore,John Throgmorton

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Mooney, J. J.

  Young, Samuel

  French, Peter

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Younger, George

  Field, William

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Murnaghan, George

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

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murphy, John

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Nicholson, Wm. G.(Petersfield)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Nolan, Joseph

  Forster, Henry William

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  MR. BRIDGEMAN MR. BRIDGEMAN (Shropshire, Oswestry) moved to insert after 1908 the words "or such later day as the Board of Education shall appoint in any district upon the application of the local education authority for the purposes of this section." He appealed to the House to assent to the desirability of his Amendment because he did not think hon. Members had entirely realised that if the discussion of this Bill continued, as it probably would, till late in the autumn
  1048
  there would only be about two months to elapse, or perhaps less, before the Christmas holidays intervened and there would be no possibility of coming to an arrangement before the January 1st, 1907. He had, therefore, some reason to hope that the right hon. Gentleman would accept his Amendment. They had heard a great deal about the concessions which were going to he made by the Government, and he should be very proud if the first little concession which

  1049
  they were going to give should be upon the Amendment which he had moved. He thought there was some hope, as the Minister for Education on the last Amendment virtually admitted that it was necessary to have an Amendment more or less to this effect, the right hon. Gentleman having said that he did not think it was beyond the ingenuity of men to devise an Amendment which he could accept. He hoped he had anticipated the right hon. Gentleman's wishes in drafting this Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, after the word 'eight, to insert the words 'or such later day as the Board of Education shall appoint in any district upon the application of the local education authority for the purposes of this section.' "—(Mr. Bridgeman.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. BIRRELL: This is very much the same proposal all over again. I want to say that the Government are quite prepared when they come to Clause 8 to deal with the proceedings of the Court by extending the time in order to ensure that all the duties put upon the Commission shall receive proper and due judicial attention, but to insert an Amendment here will be most inconvenient. It will extend and add to the difficulties of the transferring period with which we have to deal, and I think it will be far better that we should adhere to the clause as it now stands than provide for a difficulty which perhaps may never arise when we come to Clause 8, viz.: that the Bill as originally drafted does not give sufficient time to the Commission to enable them to deal with the cases which come before them.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURthought the right hon. Gentleman had misapprehended the point of the Amendment. Under the Bill, the bargains were to be made before January 1st, 1907. The proceedings on the Bill might, probably would, last for a considerable time. How could they have any security, any hope, that there would be adequate time left,
  1050
  before the beginning of next year, for carrying out these transactions between the various owners and trustees of voluntary schools and the local authorities with whom they were expected to bargain? He did not see how that could be put right by any Amendment to Clause 8. They were told that this Clause 1 was the spinal cord of the Bill and dealt with the whole subject, and Amendments of this kind ought to be made there, and not on subsequent clauses. The point was not the same as that which they had been discussing, and they should deal with it now upon the clause which pre-eminently concerned the working of the Bill. If they were going to put a pistol at the heads of the, unfortunate owners and managers of the voluntary schools and say that within three weeks or a month they must come to a satisfactory arrangement with the local education authority they were going to make the Bill unworkable.
  MR. BIRRELL: So far as voluntary arrangements under Clause 2 are concerned it seems to me that the scheme of the Bill provides ample time.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONdid not think that the President of the Board of Education understood the difficulty presented. There was not sufficient time before January 1st, 1907, for these arrangements to have been arrived at, considering the vast number of voluntary schools, the difficulty of making arrangements, and the possibility that the Bill might not become law until nearly the close of this year. Then there was the period up to January, 1908, when either an arrangement or a scheme might be made. He did not think that the short period of twelve mouths was enough to allow for all negotiations with regard to subjects of a complicated character taking place.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWEthought the Amendment was in favour of the Government and the Board of Education who had to make this Bill work and to secure that the arrangements between the owners and trustees of the voluntary schools were of a satisfactory character. These arrangements

  1051
  would be complicated and take a long time. If the Government wished the Bill to succeed they should support the Amendment, and allow a sufficient time for negotiations to be brought to a successful conclusion. Under those circumstances he could not for the life of him see why they should not accept the Amendment.
  SIR E. CARSONsaid that it occurred to him that the real substance of this Amendment had not been replied to by the right hon. Gentleman. It was not to extend the time at all, but to give the local authority, if it deemed it necessary, power to apply to the Board of Education for an extension of time. Did the right hon. Gentleman so distrust the Board of Education that he thought that they would not be able to grant the time asked for if it was necessary, or to refuse if it was not necessary; or was the right hon. Gentleman afraid from something which had happened in the Committee this afternoon that he would not be allowed to have any discretion upon the matter? Had it really come to this that an application made by the local education authority, which was the authority to which they were going to entrust all the various powers that were to be created under this Bill, was to be looked upon as something which would destroy or overrule some of the main provisions of the Bill? Could they not even trust the local education authority to make an honest application for a proper period of time to settle a scheme for a particular district? They could not trust the local authority, and the Board of Education could not trust itself, and it was under those conditions that right hon. and hon. Gentlemen were going to legislate.
  LORD R. CECILsaid he could not help thinking that if the right hon. Gentleman would disregard the views of some of his extremely zealous supporters he would not dissent from this Amendment. Even the hon. Member for North Camberwell, who prided himself on having mastered the contents of the Bill, had not yet quite mastered the dates. Under Clause 1 all grants and rates came to an end in all non-provided schools on January 1st, 1908. The
  1052
  school must, therefore, come to an end then, and the only way of extending it was under Clause 10, which provided that from January 1st, 1908, to January 1st, 1909, the local authority might—he observed, without payment to the owners—occupy a school for the purpose of public elementary education. Therefore it came to this, that unless the owners agreed, or unless the Commission managed to determine a scheme by the 1st January, 1908, which might well be an impossible matter, the owners were bound to hand over their school without payment on that date. The alternative was that the local authority should build a school and crush out the voluntary school. The fact remained that under this Bill as it stood unless the whole of the proceedings were concluded by the 1st January, 1909, they came to a hopeless impasse. Surely that was an unjust and unreasonable provision. He would have thought until he had had experience of the present House of Commons that the only question before them was what was the best provision to be made for meeting that difficulty, and that the proposition of his right hon. friend the Member for Oxford University was extremely fair and moderate. His Amendment proposed to leave the extension of the time to the Board of Education on the application of the local authority. That was only a fair and reasonable provision.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid the noble Lord had overlooked the fact he had already stated that the time for making an extension of time would be on Clause 8 or on Clause 10.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid the interpolation of the right hon. Gentleman showed that he did not understand that the date in Clause 1 applied to the Commission and not to the recalcitrant trustees or owners. Clause 10 was another pistol in the armoury of the Government, and if arrangements were not arrived at under that clause, then it was a case of "Bother all arrangements, go and take the school." The local authority would walk in without any arrangements. When discussing this Bill on Second Reading the Chancellor

  1053
  of the Duchy of Lancaster was outraged in his feelings because some of them had spoken of confiscation, and said that they might as well say the clause contemplated burglary. He received a postcard from a teacher next day who said that this Bill did propose burglary by Clause 10.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that upon the Second Reading of the Bill the noble Lord the Member for Marylebone said that money was nothing to him.
  LORD R. CECILsaid he wished the hon. Gentleman would not misquote him; he certainly never went so far as to say that money was nothing to him. The hon. Member must have forgotten that he had practised at the Parliamentary Bar. What he did say was that money was nothing compared to the religious interests.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he would put it in this way—that money was next to
  nothing to the noble Lord; that the most important thing was the continuance of the religious instruction in the way that it bad been given in the past under the trust. Let him refer the noble Lord to the Sub-section (2) of Clause 10, which provided that the local education authority should permit religious instruction to be given in the school of the same character as that previously given, and also permit teachers in the school to give that instruction as part of their duties. The noble Lord was ungrateful to the Government for having conceded to him all that he could ask for.
  LORD R. CECILsaid the hon. Member seemed to think that, because the Government had not done the grossest injustice that could be conceived, therefore he ought to be perfectly satisfied that they should take his money and not provide that for which the money was originally given.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 176; Noes, 354. (Division List, No. 88.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork. N. E.)

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J.(Birm.

  Forster, Henry William

  Acland-Hood. Rt Hn. Sir AlexF.

  Clarke, Sir Edward (City Lond.)

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Coates,E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Gilhooly, James

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Ginnell, L.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Glover, Thomas

  Arnold-Forster,Rt Hn Hugh O.

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Haddock, George R.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.

  Halpin, J.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.

  Hamilton, Marquess of

  Balfour.Rt.Hn A.J.(CityLond.)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Hammond, John

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Crean, Eugene

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent,Ashford

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

  Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester)

  Delany, William

  Haydon, John Patrick

  Barnes, G. N.

  Devlin, CharlesRamsay (Galway

  Hazleton, Richard

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

  Dillon, John

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Dolan, Charles Joseph

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Hervey. F.W.F. (BuryS.Edm'd

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

  Blake, Edward

  Duffy, William J.

  ills, J. W.

  Boland, John

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark,Govan

  Hogan, Michael

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Esmonde Sir Thomas

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Bull, Sir William James

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Jowett, F. W.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Joyce, Michael

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Fell, Arthur

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. SirJohn H.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Kenyon-Slaney.Rt. Hn. Col.W

  Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Keswick, William

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Field, William

  Kilbride, Denis

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  King, Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

  Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C.W.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lee, ArthurH. (Hants, Fareh'm

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

  Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

  Lundon, W.

  O'Dowd, John

  Starkey, John R.

  Macpherson, J. T.

  O'Hare, Patrick

  Sullivan, Donal

  MacVeagh,Jeremiah (Down, S.

  O'Kelly, James(Roscon n on,N

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J.G. (Ox'fdUniv.

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.

  O'Malley, William

  Thomson. H. Mitchell-(Lanark

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  O'Mara, James

  Thorne, William

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(EdinburghW

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Valentia, Viscount

  M'Kean, John

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  M'Killop, W.

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingtn

  Walker,Col.W. H. (Lancashire)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Walsh, Stephen

  Meagher, Michael

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Rawlinson, John Frederick P.

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

  Mooney, J. J.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Wilson, A.Stanley (York, E.R.)

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

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

  Murnaghan, George

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield,Ecclesall)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Murphy, John

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Young, Samuel

  Nicholson, Wm. G.(Petersfield)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Younger, (George

  Nolan, Joseph

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Bridgeman and Mr. Evelyn Cecil.

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Smith,Abel H. (Hertford,East)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Smith,F. E. (Liverpool, Walton

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Branch, James

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Brigg, John

  Dickinson, W.H.(St. Pancras.N

  Adkins, W. Ryland

  Bright, J. A.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Agnew, George William

  Brocklehurst, W. D.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Brodie, H. C.

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Alden, Percy

  Brooke, Stopford

  Dodd, W. H.

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

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

  Duckworth, James

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Bryce,Rt. Hn. James (Aberd'n

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Amitage, R.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Burnyeat, J. D. W.

  Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. SydneyCharles

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cairns, Thomas

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury,E.)

  Cameron, Robert

  Elibank. Master of

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Erskine, David C.

  Barker, John

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Essex, R. W.

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Barnard, E. B.

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cleland, J. W.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Beale, W. P.

  Clough, W.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Beauchamp, E.

  Coats, SirT. Glen (Renfrew, W.)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Beaumont, Hubert Eastbourne

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Bellairs, Carlyon

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

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Benn, John Williams(Devonport

  Cooper, G. J.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Benn, W.(Tw'rHamlets,S.Geo.

  Corbett, CH (Sussex, E. Grinst'd

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Bennett, E. N.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Gill, A. H.

  Bethell, J.H. (Essex,Romford)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. HerbertJohn

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Billson, Alfred

  Cremer, William Randal

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Crombie, John William

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff)

  Crooks, William

  Grant, Corrie

  Black, Arthur W.(Bcdfordshire

  Crosfield, A.H.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

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

  Crossley, William J.

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey)

  Davies,David(Montgomery Co.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Brace, William

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Grove, Archibald

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  1056

  1057

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Hardie,J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Scarisbrock, T. T. L.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Mansfield. H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester

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

  Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston

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

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Marnham, F. J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Harwood, George

  Massie, J.

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Menzies, Walter

  Shackleton, David Jones

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

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

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Mond, A.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Helme, Norval Waltson

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Montagu, E. S.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Montgomery, H. H.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Snowden, P.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morse, L. L.

  Spicer, Albert

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Murray, James

  Stanley, Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Hodge, John

  Napier, T. B.

  Steadman, W. C.

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Hooper, A. G.

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset, N

  Nicholls, George

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Nicholson, CharlesN.(Doncast'r

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Norman, Henry

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Stuart, James (Sunderland.)

  Hudson, Walter

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Summerbell, T.

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Nuttall, Harry

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxeth)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Paul, Herbert

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

  Jackson, R. S.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs Leek)

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Pearson. Sir W.D. (Colchester)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan,E.)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

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

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Perks, Robert William

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Philipps, J.Wynford(Pembroke

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

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Tomkinson, James

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Toulmin, George

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Pollard, Dr.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Kelley, George D.

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

  Verney, F. W.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk. E.

  Villiers, Ernest Amherst

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

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

  Vivian, Henry

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Radford, G. H.

  Wadsworth, J.

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Lamb, ErnestH. (Rochester)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Wallace, Robert

  Lambert, George

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Lamont, Norman

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Rees, J. D.

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St Pancras,E.)

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Ward, W. Dudley(Southampton

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Richards,Thomas (W.Mon'mth

  Wardle, George J.

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich)

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

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Lever, W. H.(Cheshire, Wirral)

  Richardson, A.

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Levy, Maurice

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Watt, H. Anderson

  Lough, Thomas

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Whitbread, Howard

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Robertson, Rt. Hn.E. (Dundee)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  White, J. D. (Dunbartonshire)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Robinson, S.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Macdonald, J R (Leicester)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wiles, Thomas

  Maclean, Donald

  Rose, Charles Day

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rowlands, J.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Runciman, Walter

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  M'Crae, George

  Russell, T. W.

  Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen.

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  1058

  1059

  Wilson, Hn. C.H.W. (Hull, W.)

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

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

  Winfrey, R.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Wodehouse. Lord (Norfolk.Mid)

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

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

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

  Woodhouse.SirJ.T. (Huddersf'd

  Question put, and agreed to.

  And it being after Eleven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) [EXPENSES].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, of an additional Annual Grant, not exceeding one million pounds, to be distributed among Local Education Authorities, in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to make further provision with respect to Education in England and Wales, and of the remuneration and Expenses of the Commissioners appointed under such Act."—(Mr. Lough.)
  Committee report Progress; to sit again to morrow.

  ALKALI, &c., WORKS [STAMP DUTY.]
  Resolution reported, "That it is expedient to authorise the imposition of a Stamp Duty of Five pounds on Certificates of Registration in the case of Alkali Works and of Three pounds in the of any other Work in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to consolidate and amend the Alkali, &c., Works Regulation Acts, 1881 and 1892, and the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of salaries and remuneration and of expenses incurred in the execution of such Act."
  ALKALI, &c, WORKS BILL.
  Considered in Committee, and reported; as amended, to be considered to-morrow.

  IRISH EDUCATION (AFFLICTED CHILDREN) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Objection was taken.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BRYCE, Aberdeen, S.)said the Bill was intended to provide for the care of children of defective intelligence, and he hoped the House would read it a second time.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid surely the Bill would not be objected to. It was the same one as the right hon. Member for South Dublin brought in last year.

  RESIDENT MAGISTRATES (BELFAST) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. O'MARAobjected.
  MR. MCKILLOPsaid both political parties in Belfast, were in favour of the Bill.
  MR. O'MARA: I object.
  Second Reading deferred till Wednesday next.

  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION BOARD (IRELAND).
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELLsaid he desired to move the Motion

  1061
  standing in his name, that a humble address be presented to His Majesty praying that the rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1906–7 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they were amended so as to give further facilities for the teaching of the Irish language and other subjects in Irish schools. The rules which were issued in April should have been presented to this House at least three weeks afterwards, but, although any person could purchase them in Dublin nearly three weeks ago, hon. Members in this House had not got them. That left them in a very awkward position in discussing the subject. He wished to call the attention of the Chief Secretary to the position which the Irish language occupied in the new rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland, and to ask him to make such alterations as were thought essential in order to place that language on an equality with French, German, and Latin. He would first direct attention to the rule which stated that any two of the following languages might be taken—Greek, Latin, French, German or Irish. Having mentioned the number of languages which the student might take, the rule afterwards said there were three specially favoured languages, and they were Latin, French, and German. He contended that there should be no special favour shown to any one of the languages mentioned, and that the paragraph should either be taken out altogether or the Irish language added. The next rule to which he wished to draw attention was that which said that exhibitions and prizes could be obtained for the following courses, which were named, and that students must obtain honors in three subjects, two of which should be main subjects, which were also named. But there was something which struck practical educationists of today as being very peculiar, and as showing how unfitted were the present Intermediate board. Included in the main subjects for girls were geometry, trigonometry, mechanics, and chemistry. They in Ireland were becoming sufficiently prosaic to imagine that domestic economy, hygiene, and physiology were a good training for girls to enable them to take their part as wives and mothers; but the intermediate board practically said they should not take those subjects. He trusted the right hon. Gentleman would see the reasonableness of the request he
  1062
  made when he asked him to add domestic economy and hygiene as main subjects for girls. In Rule 61 it said that no Greek and German prizes would be given to students, but there were two subjects specially selected for favour, and they were Greek and German. He claimed of the Chief Secretary, who was supposed to represent a Government which had tendencies to govern Ireland according to Irish ideas, that it would be a very good start at least to place Irish on an equality with German and Greek. He knew the right hon. Gentleman had expressed himself in sympathy with this movement. Whilst in opposition he could only give expression to that view as a sentiment, but he was now in a position to translate his ideas into acts, and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would make a beginning to-night and grant the very modest request which he now made of him. He begged to move.
  MR. HAZLETON (Galway, N.)seconded the Motion. He desired to associate himself with the attitude his hon. friend had taken on the subject. It involved a point of real importance to Ireland, and one on which the public opinion of Ireland had been profoundly stirred, namely, the position of the Irish language in their schools, and he was sanguine that by bringing it forward now before these rules had been confirmed the time of the House would be saved and much discussion and irritation in Ireland avoided later on. Much as they would like to see Irish made compulsory in their schools, no question of compulsion was raised in this case. All that they asked was that Irish should not be penalised, but should be placed upon an equality with other languages. It was generally understood that so much had been conceded by the Board of Intermediate Education once and for all, but under these new rules the principle of equality had been unblushingly abandoned, and they were back once more to the old methods of oppression. The Board dare not remove the teaching of the Irish language altogether, but it had deliberately set itself to obstruct, discountenance, and discourage the teaching of Irish by placing it at a distinct disadvantage in comparison with other languages. He believed that some of the great English universities had entertained the idea of abandoning the serious study of Greek

  1063
  altogether, but the value of its knowledge to the small farmers in the West of Ireland, or to the shop assistants of intellectual Belfast must be obvious to anyone. He bitterly resented the anti-Irish policy of the Intermediate Board. In the junior, middle, and senior grades the Board laid it down as an absolute rule that if only one language other than English were learnt, that language must be either French, Latin, or German. The Tower of Babel was not built in Ireland, and there was no pressing necessity that it should be there. Dublin Castle with its forty odd boards had brought confusion enough upon them, but if the Intermediate Board thought that a knowledge of French, German, or Latin was essential for the Irish, he did not for one object. He was out of their clutches, anyhow. But he did object, and would object, to this, or any other board, attempting to strike a cowardly blow at the national language in the sacred name of education. Here was he, the representative of a constituency, three-fourths of which was Irish-speaking, and the children of his constituents were barred and banned under this rule from learning their own language unless they took, besides English, the study of French, Latin or German. In Russia that was what would be called tyranny, but in Ireland it was called education. This rule was not a survival of the Penal Code, but was made last month in Dublin, and approved and countersigned John Campbell, Earl of Aberdeen. He was not blaming the Lord-Lieutenant, or the Irish Administration. He knew they had absolutely nothing to do with this matter, but the House had it in their power to-night to remove this grievance. There was something unutterably contemptible and mean about this latest attempt to strangle the Irish language in the secondary schools. It was intolerable that a great branch of education should be at the mercy of a Board of partisans such as these gentlemen had proved themselves to be. He knew there were members on the Board in whom the Irish had confidence. The Archbishop of Dublin was a member of the Board, but he was also a member of the National Board of Education, and he was driven from it. Was he and others to be driven from this Board also? He sincerely hoped not. But he was sure that the last thing the Chief Secretary
  1064
  himself would desire would be the creation of anything in the nature of an educational crisis over the administration of the intermediate system to increase still further the difficulties of his present position. Nationalist Members would sincerely deplore any such eventuality, but they had a poor opinion of the right hon. Gentleman's advisers, who, on a subject about which a great mass of the Irish people felt so warmly, should have treated the Irish language in the way they had. It was the hall mark of their separate and distinct nationality, and in that fact was perhaps to be found the explanation of why it had been so much persecuted by those who would like to see Ireland reduced to the level of a glorified English shire. This provocation of public opinion in Ireland only served to strengthen their determination to stand by their own language. What Russia could not do in Poland, what Austria could not do in Hungary, England, even were it to try, would never succeed in doing in Ireland, and he therefore trusted the House to-night would amend these rules and show these anti-Irish gentlemen upon the Intermediate Board that the day when they could subordinate the duties of their office to their political venom was past and gone.
  Motion made, and Question proposed— "That the Rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1906–7 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they are amended in the following particular:— Rule 34 (B), page 20, line 4, to leave out the words 'If only one language is taken it must be either Latin, French, or German '."—(Mr. Thomas O'Donnell.)
  MR. BRYCEsaid it was only fair to the Intermediate Education Board that he should read a communication which they had addressed to him in reply to a request from him as to what they had to say with regard to these proposals. The Board said that it was impossible to state in detail the many reasons which weighed with them in making the Rules. But, speaking generally, the Board were of opinion that for intermediate students the study of French or German was of greater educational value and more likely to be of practical use in after life than was that of Irish, and they pointed out that were Rule 34 altered, as suggested, a student even in the senior

  1065
  grade could pass the examination generally by taking up (1) English; (2) Irish; (3) Arithmetic; (4) Experimental Science; (5) Shorthand; (6) Bookkeeping. The Board considered that this course of study would not amount to an intermediate education. The present Rules were, in the opinion of the Board, to a slight extent more favourable to Irish than those of former years. He would only add a few words in regard to this matter. The hon. Member who moved this Resolution was mistaken in supposing that he had any authority over the Intermediate Education Board. It was an independent Board, and he had no power to suggest what rules it should make. The Board made the rules for itself and stood apart from the Irish Government. This was a question for the House, because the Government could not interfere with the Board. He was willing, however, to give his own view of the subject. He felt that the considerations of which hon. Members had spoken entered into the present case. On the whole he thought it a pity that the Board had not included Irish, and if a division were called he would be inclined to vote with the hon. Member. There was no reason why Irish should not take its place among other languages; and, as to its practical value in life, certainly no language could give the student more severe marital training; it was a language far more difficult to learn than French or German, and if young people of from fourteen to eighteen years of age were Subjected to the examination, it would be well calculated to test their abilities, provided it was a test of something more than colloquial knowledge, or else a distinct advantage would be given to those who came from Irish-speaking districts, and there would be little educational result. As much freedom as possible should be given, and a free choice should be allowed among Greek, Latin, German, French, Irish, Italian, and Spanish.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELL (Dublin University)said the House had been made acquainted with a rather interesting development arising out of a very innocent Motion. Speaking for himself, he was always glad when he found himself able to sympathise in the objects of hon. Members for Ireland below the gangway. But there was certainly
  1066
  an object-lesson in what had occurred to-night. There was an Intermediate Education Board in Iceland consisting of all political persuasions and political beliefs, men of the highest position in the educational world. He had never before heard in this House any suggestion that this Intermediate Education Board was animated by anything except the desire to promote intermediate education in Ireland; but the hon. Member who proposed this resolution said these rules were drawn up in a spirit of political venom. That charge had been more or less adopted by the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. BRYCE: No.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLCertainly sanctioned by the attitude taken up by the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he had not said a single word to associate himself in any way with it.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid all he could say was that he had heard no disclaimer from the right hon. Gentleman. On the contrary, he had sanctioned by his language and by his attitude the resolution that had been proposed, the recommendation for which was that the so-called restriction upon the teaching of Irish was due to political venom.
  MR. BRYCEsaid the right hon. Gentleman was entirely inaccurate in attributing any such opinion to him, and after his express statement, his right hon. friend was not entitled to repeat the assertion. [Cries of "Withdraw."]
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid he should not be put off in the least by these interruptions. All that he could say was that he had heard no disclaimer from the right hon. Gentleman opposite, but he quite accepted his view that this Intermediate Education Board were not open to the suggestion that they were animated by political venom. But what he would ask hon. Members to bear in mind was that the boy who acquired a knowledge of the Irish language in the intermediate schools of Ireland would not be able to convert that knowledge into cash. After all, why they wanted to equip these boys in the intermediate

  1067
  schools was that they should be able to compete in life with Englishmen, Scotchmen, and foreigners in commerce and other pursuits. He put it to hon. Members for Ireland whether they thought they were acting wisely and in the interests of these boys. If he thought they were right he would support them all he could, for he would like to see the Irish youth holding their own all over the world. But it was because he thought they would be handicapped in the competition if they were compelled or even allowed to devote time to the study of Irish which they might otherwise devote to German or French, which in commercial life they might be able to turn into capital, that he opposed this Motion. He did not profess to know what the commercial value of Irish was, but he believed it had none. Whether that were so or not, the Intermediate Board as present constituted in Ireland had upon it leading representatives of educational opinion in Ireland of all sections and creeds, and they in their united wisdom had come to the conclusion that it was not desirable to give the prominence to Irish language which some hon. Gentlemen desired to see. He could not understand why the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had not a word to say in defence of the Intermediate Board, more particularly as the attack upon them was that they were animated by political venom. He entirely repudiated that. The members of the Board, whether they were right or wrong, were animated by the desire to do what was best in the interests of intermediate education, and, speaking for himself, he believed the Board came to a wise conclusion in preferring the study of French, German, or Latin to that of Irish, which, however interesting from a national point of view, could never be turned into cash. Most of the Members of the Board were unknown to him personally, but they had been for many years in their present position, and this was very laborious work for which no emoluments were given. It was very ungracious that it should be
  1068
  left to the Opposition to have to defend the Board at least from being actuated by any other motives than those of the best interests of education.
  MR. BOLANDsaid the right hon. Gentleman had based his whole objection to the proposal to put Irish in its proper position on the ground that it had no cash basis. Nationalist Members did not take that view. They regarded it as a national matter, but he would like to inform the right hon. Gentleman that in Ireland Irish had a cash value. They could not take up the organ of the Gælic language without seeing advertisements for speakers of the Irish language. He knew a case of a young man in Kerry who, because of his knowledge of the Irish language, instead of receiving only 10s. a week on the railway line now got £100 a year for teaching the Irish language, and he knew of instances all over the country in which the knowledge of the Irish language had actually a cash value. But his colleagues did not act upon that ground, but upon an educational ground, and he was sure that anyone who had acquaintance with the subject would know that if they only interested boys and girls in the knowledge of the language and got them to understand it, it would lead to the acquisition of other languages. Any boy or girl who had mastered the Irish language was undoubtedly more capable of acquiring a knowledge of French or of German. He was not at all desirous of removing French or German from the curriculum. All that they said was that Irish should be put on an equality.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDsaid the right hon. Gentleman on the front Opposition Bench had introduced a certain measure of what he might perhaps consider to be humour into this matter, but what they wanted the House to understand was that this matter involved something which the Irish people held very dear. They all hoped and believed that they had now arrived at

  1069
  a time in the relations between England and Ireland when the English people were anxious to show that the attempt to suppress the distinct nationality of Ireland was to be relinquished. In no possible way had the Irish national sentiment in the past been more attacked than in the efforts made to suppress the Irish language. Sometimes they were asked by their friends from Wales how it was that the national language in Wales was so widespread and in general use, whilst in Ireland the national language had been waning for many long years. The reply to their Welsh friends was that in Wales no such attempts were made to strangle the national sentiment of the people for their language as was done in Ireland. The use of Irish in Ireland had been made positively a crime in days gone by. People were taught that it was a dangerous thing in the eyes of the Government to use the native tongue, and in that way Irish largely disappeared, and what they now asked was that in the better spirit which prevailed in this country towards Ireland the ancient tongue of the land should be encouraged to be spoken by the people if the people so desired. No doubt, if the Irish people thought only of the cash value of things the country would probably be much more prosperous than it was at the present time; but, thank Heaven, they did not measure things in the past or to-day by their cash value. They had regard for sentiment, for honour, for the traditions of their country, and it was not that they desired to deprive their young people of the opportunity which the knowledge of French or German might give them, but that they were anxious that their pride and self-respect should not be offended in their youth, because the one tongue in the world which was practically forbidden them was the tongue of their forefathers. They were not seeking to impose as a necessity the cultivation of the Irish language by their people, but they were simply asking that it should be given the same privilege as any other
  1070
  language, and he appealed to hon. Gentlemen who were anxious to cultivate the national sentiment of the Irish people to give to them what they passionately longed for.
  MR. DOLANsaid that the right hon. Member for the University of Dublin denied that the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland were animated by political bias. They might or might not be so animated, but they were undoubtedly animated by a desire to Anglicise Ireland. They were animated by ideas which were entirely foreign to the spirit which animated the young generation of Irishmen. They were made up very largely of a kind of individual who was neither a good Englishman nor a good Irishman, and if the House wished to study that type of individual some very interesting specimens would be found on the Opposition Benches above the gangway.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he should perhaps tell the House what the Intermediate Board said of this rule, because it was not fair to say they were indifferent to the importance of the subject. The Board, while they were always willing to give prominence to domestic economy and hygiene in the education of girls, felt that these subjects were not suitable for the special kind of examination prescribed for "main subjects." He might perhaps take this opportunity of saying that he had some reason to complain of the right hon. Gentleman opposite for having endeavoured to tax him with a charge for which he would find absolutely no ground whatever. Nothing was further from his mind than to lower the services which the Board rendered in the public interest, and although some criticisms were made upon the Board by the proposer of the Resolution he regarded them as being in the nature of the flowers of rhetoric, which bloomed naturally n an Irish soil. He should have thought that they would have been regarded in the same manner by the

  1071
  right hon. Gentleman who had much more knowledge of them than he had.
  MR. DILLONsaid he could not imagine anything more preposterous than the programme offered to girls in preference to domestic economy, hygiene, and physiology. It was Mr. Plunkett's department that had forced this programme upon the Intermediate Board, and had saddled upon Ireland a set of laboratories in which girls were to study practical chemistry. He hoped the House would have the good sense to substitute the course suggested.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid he had not the least objection to domestic economy or hygiene, but he did suggest that it was a very inconvenient way, by a hurried debate in this House, to introduce radical changes in a programme that had been selected presumably after careful consideration by a competent tribunal. Of course if the Board were of the character suggested by some hon. Members he could have understood this House being asked at twelve o'clock at night to overrule the well-considered judgment of the Board; but he confessed he did not understand the faint praise with which the right hon. Gentleman had endeavoured to sustain and defend the action of this Board and the way he had completely thrown them over. The right hon. Gentleman had not given them any reason whatever in defence of his action. He knew their conduct was to be impugned to-night, but he had not taken the trouble to read their defence.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he had read every word he had received from the Board.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid all he had to say was that if the action of a district council were involved they would have had a much more elaborate defence, and it seemed most extraordinary that a Board on which were some of the most eminent Irishmen of all religious denominations, who had given their
  1072
  services unpaid for this work, should have been thus treated. It would be a poor consolation to the Board that the right hon. Gentleman, so far from saying one word in their defence or in justification of their policy, had got up and said he would content himself by reading the communication he had received from them, at the same time expressing himself in entire sympathy with a Motion made in a hostile spirit. While he had no objection to teaching Irish girls domestic economy and hygiene, he would suggest that it was rather a curious way of legislating at this hour of the night.
  Resolved, That the Rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1906–7 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they are amended in the following particular:—
  Rule 34 (B), page 20, line 4, leave out "If only one language is taken it must be either Latin, French, or German."
  Resolved, That the Rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1906–7 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they are amended in the following particular:—
  Rule 43 (iv), add "Domestic Economy, Physiology, and Hygiene" as "main subjects" for girls.
  Resolved, That the Rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland, for the year 1906–7 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they are amended in the following particular:—
  Rule 61, page 26, line 1, at beginning, insert, "In Irish."—(Mr. Thomas O'Donnell)
  And, it being after half-past Eleven of the clock on Monday, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned accordingly at a quarter after Twelve o'clock.