§ Postponed Proceeding on Motion made on consideration of Question, "That a sum, not exceeding £6,593,646, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1908, for the salaries and expenses of the Board of Education, and of the various Establishments connected therewith, including Grants for the Building of new Public Elementary Schools and sundry Grants in Aid:—"
§ Which Motion was, "That Item A (1) (Salaries, Wages, and Allowances) be reduced by £100."—(Mr. Boland)— resumed.
§ *MR. YOXALLsaid he gathered to his surprise that the hon. Member for North West Ham was prepared to supplant 141 some portion if not all of the instruction now given in the Christian faith in the various schools in the country, by a process or syllabus of moral education which, he supposed, would occupy the time now given to the Bible lessons, and if the right hon. Gentleman should decide to make, obligatory a course of moral education, whether by texts, or by proverbs, or by mottoes, he was sure it could only be made obligatory during the hours at present devoted to the Scriptural system of instruction in the schools. He did not suppose that any considerable body of opinion in that House, except on the Labour Benches, would be in favour of devoting a portion of the time now taken in giving Scriptural instruction to a course of organised moral instruction. He would take that opportunity of protesting against the idea current among certain Members that, unless they placed a subject on the time-table, with a syllabus for it, and a name, and definite and regular hours in the day or week to teach it, and a careful examination in it, and reports upon it by local and Government inspectors, the subject could not possibly be taught. There was no teacher in the public elementary schools to-day worth his salt, who was not all day long and every day giving moral instruction in the best possible way, not by text or proverb, but by example and by the emanation of personality, and that was the only proper method, both as regarded moral instruction and hygiene and temperance. He begged the right hon. Gentleman not to codify and syllabify these subjects, because if he did their very object would be defeated, the letter would kill the spirit which at present in so many eases was alive. He did not join in the criticisms which had been made against the right hon. Gentleman with regard to secondary schools and training colleges. He thought he had taken a step in the right direction by democratising their secondary school system, and so long as he democratised that system and made it efficient, he did not care about other considerations. Similarly, with regard to the training college arrangements, though he thought in practice the fears expressed that night would be by no means realised, after all, in providing that the selection of the 142 entrants to a training college should be made upon their educational merits, and upon that alone, in cases where, other things being equal, there were too many candidates for one place, the right hon. Gentleman would make the colleges more efficient for the teachers and would remove a standing source of injustice and irritation, whereby a teacher, high up in the list on merits, had been unable to obtain admission, because his place was filled by a candidate low in the list on merits, who happened to fulfil a denominational test which the higher candidate did not fulfil. His right hon. friend had done well with regard to the secondary schools as a beginning, and he hoped he meant to go on in the same way. He had done well in respect to the training colleges, and now he must turn his attention to the elementary schools. He thought that night, wise as was his speech, cautious as was his attitude, and cogent as were his reasons, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman was a little too much afraid of what was the real opinion of the local education authorities. He knew that discretion was the better part of valour sometimes, but sometimes also valour was the better part of discretion, and he should like to see him a little more valiant in demanding from the local authorities those improvements which could be obtained by pressure applied by the Board of Education. He would like to refer next to the question of air space. The minimum now allowed in a council school of ten square feet of air space on the floor and fifteen feet above that per child, was loss than the air space required for a man in prison or for the inmate of a workhouse. They talked about national decay, race suicide, diminishing height and weight, but the real thing was to begin with more sanitary conditions for the child, and they could not have any improvement if from 9 a.m. till 12 noon, and from 2 p.m. till 4.30 p.m., the child had to swelter in a crowded room, over-packed, with an air space which at the best represented about as much air as was contained in a yard and a half cube. If they put a boy into a school-room which, built for sixty or seventy children, contained ten square feet on the floor, and fifteen feet above, air space for him. 143 but into which were crowded 80 to 130 children, where did their ten square feet basis come in then? A boy could not breathe in that area. That was going on all over the country and not by any means in the non-provided schools alone. It existed again and again in the council schools and provided schools, and if there was an excuse for it in the non-provided schools because they had not been built out of the resources of the ratepayers, there could be no excuse for the local authorities in the case of the provided schools, with the full resources of the rates at their disposal, refusing to give the children a proper supply of air. He knew of schools not far away where 100 and 103 children were packed into rooms built and intended and measured out and authorised for sixty alone. The delay of reform was sometimes asked for in the name of economy and on behalf of the ratepayers. But he did not believe that plea was a sound one, and he was sure the whole of the ratepayers would rally in favour of his right hon. friend in the policy he had adopted, and he hoped he would do as much for the cause of education in the coming year as he had done in the past year.
§ MR. SNOWDEN (Blackburn)who was indistinctly heard, was understood to say that they must never lose sight of the fact that it would be a very long time before any but a very small proportion of children could look to any other education than that of the elementary school. Yet they were now engaged, he understood, in building up the secondary rather than in improving the elementary school system. The scheme of the code seemed to be devoted more to the improvement of the secondary schools which were used by the richer classes than to the elementary schools which were frequented by the children of the poor. In his opinion he would be a very bold man who would maintain that the state of things was satisfactory in the elementary schools today. On looking at the papers which dealt with the number of children in the elementary schools, he found that there were 6,000,000 children of whom only 1,000,000 were above the age of twelve. 144 He assumed from that that five out of six of the children left school under the age of twelve. [Mr. MCKENNA: No no!] Then, as to the figures in regard to secondary schools, it appeared to him, from the smallness of the numbers, that the efforts which the department had put forth in recent years in regard to the provision of secondary schools could only be taken advantage of by one child in 100. The provision of floor space in the elementary schools was 8 feet or 10 feet, but in the secondary schools, it was provided that there must be 15 feet. That was 50 per cent, more air space in the secondary school than was considered to be sufficient for the poorer children in the elementary. Then again, as to the teaching staff in the secondary school, the teacher only had under his or her charge twenty-five or thirty children, and it was specially enjoined that there should not be more than thirty-five. That regulation was not applied, however, in the case of the children in the elementary schools who were not counted as individuals at all, but simply dealt with in the lump. The regulations in regard to elementary schools were simply to the effect that the number of children in charge of the teacher must be an average number, and that average number * was something like double the extreme limit permitted in the secondary schools. Then again, in regard to the grant, the difference between the elementary and the secondary school was also apparent; the maximum sum apart from that to be earned for special subjects was in elementary schools 22s., but in secondary schools it was £2 between the ages of twelve and fourteen, and between fourteen and fifteen, £5 a head. Thus children in secondary schools of the same age as those in elementary got in one case double and in another case nearly five times the amount which was considered sufficient in the elementary schools. Mr. MCKENNA: "No, no!] In regard to free places also, there was a marked distinction between elementary and secondary schools. He might be the eldest child of a large family. He had often seen parents come before the education committee of the local authority with which he was connected, and 145 in the most shamefaced way, as if poverty was a disgrace, confess that it was impossible for their child to take advantage of the scholarship he had won. Higher education would never, therefore, be available to any extent for the children of working people, unless maintenance scholarships were provided in very large numbers. His whole protest was that, at present, considerations of caste entered far too much into the administration, not only of the local education authorities, but also of the central body. Although it might be impossible for a large number of the children of the elementary schools to take advantage of the secondary schools, much might be done by extending higher elementary teaching in the elementary schools. If opportunities were afforded to the parents to keep their children at the elementary school a little longer the difficulty might be got over by giving this teaching in the elementary school. The idea seemed, however, that elementary education had reached its maximum, and that nothing more required to be done. The new code permitted public elementary schools with not more than sixty children in attendance, to be in charge of an untrained teacher, but he contended that it was more important to have a thoroughly efficient head teacher in a small school, than in a large one, because he was so much confined. The number of un-certificated and untrained teachers in the elementary schools was increasing much more rapidly than the number of certificated teachers. At present there were 100,000 of them, and what results could any reasonable person expect from their work? There was plenty of room for revolutionising the public elementary school system by administrative methods. Local authorities were paying much more than they ought towards the cost of education, which was not a local but a national matter, and should, therefore, be made a national charge. He contended that a larger expenditure of public money for the education of the children was the best investment the country could make. He had considerable experience of children's schools, and he considered that the children had to leave school at too early an age, and, within six months after they left, they had forgotten all they had learned, 146 except how to read and to write. The people had now the power in their hands, and, though he spoke as a democrat, he would say that the danger of ignorance under an oligarchy was not so great as that which might arise from an ignorant democracy. Therefore it was the duty of the State to give the people such an education as would enable them to use their power wisely and well. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on his appointment to his present position, and he hoped that when he ceased to hold office he would be able further to congratulate him on a record of really substantial work.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool. Scotland)said the regulations which the right hon. Gentleman had just published had excited a feeling, certainty of apprehension, if nit dismay, among the people whom he and his hon. friends around him represented. As an Irish Member he fought the Bill of last year so long as he thought it unjust, and he supported it when he thought it had been so amended as to make it a fair, reasonable, and just compromise. He felt inclined to say of the two great English Parties, "A plague on both your houses." It was quite true that the Minister for Education had issued something like a declaration of war against a certain type of schools; he knew that the right hon. Gentleman did not so call it, but it was certainly so considered by the community which he represented in that House, and especially by the city a part of which he represented. The right hon. Gentleman had gone to the utmost extent of his powers as against the other House, and he could not altogether acquit of blame the Party which had forced upon them this policy by what he regarded as an abuse of their power over the other House. What he had to deal with was the state of affairs which had been produced by what he considered the disastrous mistake of having rejected the Bill of last year. He spoke particularly for the schools and training colleges of the Catholics. What made him condemn the treatment of them more than that of others was that they deserved it less. The Catholic school was separated from other schools, not like Protestant schools from one another, but by an impassable gulf of irreconcileable doctrine. As a result the Catholics of this country and 147 many other countries had imposed on themselves a heavy tax in order to maintain their schools and the religious teaching given in them; and they did so with more energy and zeal because they were a small minority in the midst of a great majority. The Catholic community were not only a minority of the community, but they were the poorest minority of the population. Proportionately to their wealth the Catholic minority had subscribed more generously to their schools than any other body of people in the country. He went further and said that not merely did they subscribe more proportionately, but they subscribed more absolutely, than other bodies. He did not want to make any odious comparisons, or to offend the susceptibilities of hon. Gentlemen above the gangway with whom on this question he was in general agreement. But at the same time lie hoped that they would forgive him for pointing out that the communion which they represented was a wealthy communion compared with the Catholics, who as a body were poor. He had a Return giving the amounts received from 1863 to the year 1905, and he found with regard to the Church of England schools that the amount received from voluntary subscriptions was £508,000 out of a total of £4,563,000, or one-ninth of the whole. He found also that the Wesleyan body, which also was largely well-to-do— ["No"]—well, some were rich and some were poor, but there were very few rich people among the Irish Catholics in this country, certainly there were not nearly so many that were comfortable as there were among the Wesleyan Methodists. The Catholic community had subscribed voluntarily £93,549 out of a total of £409,134, or roughly about one-quarter of the whole. He wished to speak of this with special emphasis, because one of the most important of these training colleges was that of Mount Pleasant in the city of Liverpool. He thought the figures he had quoted showed that the Catholics had the courage of their religious convictions and displayed generosity and self-sacrifice, because out of their poverty they had subscribed very largely for their own schools. It was true that those schools were being treated like the schools of other communions, and the proposition which the right hon. Gentleman applied 148 to one particular form of school must also apply to others. Under these new regulations anybody belonging to any communion whatever would have a right to demand entry into these training colleges and schools, and if they were denied entrance that school or college would first be fined and might finally be extinguished as far as the grant was concerned. The first time he heard that there was a large number of Protestants being educated in Catholic schools he at once denied the statement, but he had since found that he was wrong. As a matter of fact, there were a large number of children being educated in Catholic schools, and why were they sent to those schools? It was because the parents of the children approved of that particular form of education which was given them. Some time ago he travelled home on board ship with a number of Mormons, and he found that a large number of their young ladies had been educated in a Catholic convent. Of course that did not affect their convictions in regard to the multiplicity of wives. The doors of Catholic schools were open wide to all comers, and anyone who knew the inner working of those schools would agree with him when he said that no attempt at proselytism had ever been proved. What would happen under these regulations? He would take, for example, the training college at Mount Pleasant in his own constituency. Religious practices and exercises were to those in Mount Pleasant College as much a part of the education, and in some respects a more essential part of the education, given to the teachers than the secular instruction, because the fundamental principle of a Catholic school was that religion should not be a separate or isolated part of education. He was not at all overstating the Catholic ideal—and with a little change of words he believed it would also be the Protestant ideal—when he said that the training of Catholics in manhood, morality, and virtue was regarded as far away the most important part of education. They were under those regulations in this convent school at Mount Pleasant, but nevertheless they were obliged to open their doors to the Protestant child. He found no fault with that if it did not bring along with it the disqualification that the very fact of those teachers coming in would derange the 149 whole machinery of the establishment. In a Catholic training college it was an essential part of the instruction and discipline of the school that teachers who were to go abroad to teach Catholic children Catholic doctrine and practice and ideals should be compelled, if necessary, to attend the religious exercises and devotions of the college. Under these new regulations all that would be upset. One could imagine a case where a number of Nonconformist children in a place like the West Riding of Yorkshire might possibly send so many applications for admission to a Catholic school as would change the school from its exclusively Catholic atmosphere and make it entirely undenominational and Nonconformist. These proposals were filling the people he represented with alarm and also with a strong sense of indignation. These Catholic colleges and schools had been built largely out of the pence of the poorest of the poor, and this was a poor return for the generosity they had shown in maintaining very largely these schools out of their own pockets. He thought it was very hard that they should now be penalised by the unjust regulations which the President of the Board of Education had issued.
§ Lord R. CECILsaid there were one or two observations which he desired to make. Upon the question of training colleges he did not wish to add anything to what had been said. The question was a very serious one. He agreed with the remark that the Board of Education little knew the storm of indignation which had already been raised and which would undoubtedly go on increasing on account of the provisions which had been put into the regulations with respect to training colleges and secondary schools. He regretted that the Government had thought fit to add one more religious question to those which already encumbered the subject of education. The President of the Board of Education had said that it would not be right for him to overrule existing legislation. He was afraid the right hon. Gentleman had overlooked the fact that his regulations dealing with secondary schools did overrule existing legislation in spirit, if not in letter. Secondary schools were to receive a smaller grant unless they were put on a 150 wholly undenominational basis. That appeared to him to be going distinctly in the teeth of two statutory provisions. The Endowed Schools Act, 1869, said that schools with a religious or denominational foundation should not be the subject of a scheme including provisions of the character of those contained in the regulations. Then there was Section 4 of the Act of 1902. It was evidently the intention of the Legislature that denominational and undenominational schools should be treated on a precise equality so far as county council assistance was concerned. In the prefatory memorandum to the new Code there was the following paragraph—
Questions hive been asked as to whether compliance with Section 14 of the Elementary Education Act, 1870 (commonly known as the 'Cowper-Temple clause') is at present required either by the Education Acts or by the Code to be one of the conditions fulfilled by all public elementary schools in order to obtain a Parliamentary grant. In order to make the position quite plain, the Board have inserted a provision making it a condition of annual grant that every school must comply with the regulations of the Education Acts in so far as they are applicable to the type of school in question, which, therefore, makes compliance with the 'regulation' contained in Section 14 a condition of grant.He did not quite understand this paragraph. He remembered that a deputation of Nonconformists waited on the Minister of Education and complained of the syllabus prepared by the local education authority. This alteration was then promised in order to meet the views of the deputation.
§ MR. McKENNAThe noble Lord must not say that. The change was made before the deputation came.
§ LORD R. CECILsaid he supposed the change was made before in order to mollify the wrath of the deputation. He asked the Committee to consider what the change meant. Under the existing law it was for the Courts to consider, on proper proceedings being taken, whether or not the Cowper-Temple clause had been complied with, and he understood this to be put in in order to create a concurrent jurisdiction in the Board of Education. He confessed to a considerable distrust of the view of the present Board towards the Cowper-Temple clause. As to education in 151 Wales, it was the duty of the Board to see that the Welsh local education authorties did not, in the exercise of their Nonconformist acerbity, so far oppress the non-provided schools as to make the teaching in those schools inefficient. He had had submitted to him a vast quantity of evidence which convinced him that that condition was not observed in a very large number of schools in Wales. It was a regular thing to have differential rates of salaries between provided and non-provided schools. In Glamorgan, not only did they differentiate between the two classes of schools, but they had actually gone so far as to reduce salaries in non-provided schools to a lower rate than was being paid before the Act of 1902. Then there was the question of under-staffing. That was another method of petty persecution. It was a regular practice of the local education authorities in certain districts of Wales deliberately and intentionally to under-staff the non-provided schools in order to starve them into submission. He would take the case of the Usk school. In 1901 they had a headmaster, an Article 68 assistant, and two trained pupil-teachers; in 1907 they had a headmaster, two supplementary teachers, and a monitor. That was a considerable reduction. In the infant school in 1901 they had a headmaster, three Article 68 teachers, one pupil-teacher, and one monitress, and in 1907 that was reduced to a headmistress and two supplementary teachers. And in more than one case they had gone on under-staffing the schools until they had been compelled by a threat, sometimes by the Board of Education itself, to deprive them of grants unless they increased the staffs. In his judgment it was the duty of law-abiding citizens to carry out the law even if they did not approve of it. One of their favourite methods was to try and seize an opportunity of getting a school declared unnecessary because for some short period of time the attendance fell below thirty. Then, of course, there was the familiar plan, sometimes, recommended in that House which consisted in insisting on repairs in order to compel the closing of a school. That had teen done in Anglesey, and in many other cases. He asked the atten- 152 tion of the right hon. Gentleman and of the Committee to the system of petty malignity prevailing in Wales, which was a scandal to the administration of education. It did not fall on the hated Church of England; it would be bad enough if it did; but it fell on the teachers and children, and it was a perfect outrage that it should be allowed to continue. He could not conclude without pointing out to the Committee that it was not only in Wales, in the administration of elementary schools, and in the regulations which had been reported to the Committee that afternoon, but in every respect the administration being carried on by the right hon. Gentleman or under the pressure of his extreme supporters was characterised by hatred of denominationalism. This bloodless administration was nothing but the fruit of bigotry and intolerance, and it showed that the Nonconformist could be as great a bigot as the Jesuit. It appeared to him that in this matter, the undenominational majority of the House was using its power deliberately to oppress the denominations of the country, and when the country realised it, as it was beginning to realise it, it would sweep from power the present administration. He asked hon. Members opposite to consider the effect of a policy of this kind. They were in power at this moment; they were able for the moment to oppress those who held opposite opinions; but if they went on they would, without a doubt, arouse a very strong feeling of indignation against themselves, and when his Party was returned to power it would be returned with embittered feelings and supported by a section which might be as bitter as the Nonconformist section which supported the present Government, and it might be that the Treasury Bench of that day would be as little able to resist those extreme supporters as the Treasury Bench of the present day were able to resist theirs. He did not see what prospect of religious peace there was unless the Government definitely turned their backs on the policy which they were now pursuing, and based themselves on the principle, the only sound principle, that the parent should decide what the religion of his child should be, and abandoned once and for all the miserable and malignant 153 policy which they had, in England to some extent, and still more in Wales, hitherto pursued.
§ MR. McKENNAremarked that the noble Lord had used very strong language as to the education administration in Wales, and his only reply was that those observations ought to have been addressed, not so much to himself, as to the hon. Baronet opposite who represented the Board of Education when the Act of 1902 came into force. Whatever was happening in Wales now happened under his administration; there had been no jot or tittle of change. Had the noble Lord been in the last Parliament he would have known that every complaint he made now was equally capable of being made under the administration of the last Government.
§ LORD R. CECILAnd at the instigation of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that the noble Lord denied that what he said was right, and then said it was right because he (Mr. McKenna) instigated it. Would the noble Lord make up his mind which answer he was going to adhere to? He could assure him that whatever happened now, happened then.
§ SIR W. ANSONsaid the right hon. Gentleman had charged him with enduring the, maladministration in Wales of which the noble Lord complained, but supposing it to be true, the right hon. Gentleman ought to have attempted to redress the grievance.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that he was making as great efforts as the hon. Baronet did in that direction.
§ Lord BALCARRES (Lancashire, Chorley)asked what the right hon. Gentleman was doing about the questions of understaffing and under - paying of teachers.
§ MR. McKENNAsaid that he was acting according to the decisions arrived at by
§ his predecessor, and had done nothing that that was not warranted by those decisions. As to the Roman Catholic colleges, he could not subscribe to the view of the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool, that Nonconformists would be anxious to go to denominational colleges and by means of a kind of concerted action on the part of a number of students seek to obtain admission wrongfully with the object of subverting the discipline of the college. Such fears were absolutely without foundation. The fears of the hon. Member for Blackburn that, because the Board of Education had been directing their attention to secondary education, therefore they had been neglecting elementary education, were absolutely groundless. The hon. Member had argued that elementary education was in a perilous condition because only 1,000,000 children out of the 6,000.000 who attended them remained at the elementary schools after twelve; but he had forgotten that the 6,000,000 included children from five to fourteen, and naturally, therefore, the children between twelve and fourteen would be only one-sixth of: the whole. Similarly, the inferences the hon. Member had drawn from the grants made in respect of elementary school children had no relation to the facts. The fears of the hon. Member with regard to the intentions of the Board were entirely groundless. In answer to another criticism, the circular issued by the Board to the local authorities with regard to the feeding of school children was solely with the intention of inciting them to act up to the spirit of the Act. With regard to medical inspection, it was the intention of the Board, if the Bill now before Parliament passed, to establish a medical bureau, which would guide and advise the local authorities as to the nature of the work they would have to do under the Act, and he hoped that when the names were published the House would be fully satisfied.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 97; Noes, 220. (Division List No. 276.)
157| AYES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Rt Hn Sir Alex. F | Ashley, W. W. | Banbury, Sir Frederick George- |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H. | Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks |
| Anstruther-Gray, Major | Balcarres, Lord | Beckett, Hon. Gervase |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Hills, J. W. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington |
| Boyle, Sir Edward | Hogan, Michael | Percy, Earl |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Houston, Robert Paterson | Randles, Sir John Scurrah |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hunt, Rowland | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Joyce, Michael | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Butcher, Samuel Henry | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W. | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Keswick, William | Roche, John (Galway, East) |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Kilbride, Denis | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Cave, George | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Lardner, James Carrige Rushe | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel |
| Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey- | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) | Sheehy, David |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A. (Worc- | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin, S. | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lowe, Sir Francis William | Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton) |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Lundon, W. | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Crean, Eugene | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Starkey, John R. |
| Duffy, William J. | MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) | Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh. |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Fell, Arthur | M'Killop, W. | Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark) |
| Fletcher, J. S. | Magnus, Sir Philip | Valentia, Viscount |
| Forster, Henry William | Marks, H. H. (Kent) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East) | Meagher, Michael | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Gilhooly, James | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Gretton, John | Morpeth, Viscount | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Gwynn, Stephen Lucius | Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield) | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R.) |
| Halpin, J. | Nield, Herbert | Young, Samuel |
| Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid | |
| Hay, Hon. Claude George | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. |
| Hazleton, Richard | O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) | Boland and Mr. William |
| Helmsley, Viscount | O'Malley, William | Redmond. |
| Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Clough, William | Greenwood, Hamar (York) |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Clynes, J. R. | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward |
| Alden, Percy | Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Gurdon, Rt. Hn. Sir W. Brampton |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Collins, Sir Wm. J.(S. Pancras, W. | Hall, Frederick |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Cooper G. J. | Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) |
| Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry | Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow.) | Harvey, A. C. C. (Rochdale) |
| Astbury, John Meir | Corbett, C. H.(Sussex, E. Grinst'd | Harvey, W.E.(Derbyshire, N.E. |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Hazel, Dr. A. E. |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Helme, Norval Watson |
| Barker, John | Cowan, W. H. | Hemmerde, Edward George |
| Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Cremer, Sir William Randal | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Barnes, G. N. | Crooks, William | Henry, Charles S. |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Crossley, William J. | Higham, John Sharp |
| Beauchamp, E. | Curran, Peter Francis | Holt, Richard Burning |
| Bellairs, Carlyon | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Hudson, Walter |
| Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport | Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Idris, T. H. W. |
| Benn, W.(T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo. | Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel |
| Bertram, Julius | Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) | Jackson, R. S. |
| Bethell, Sir J. H.(Essex, Romford | Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.) | Jardine, Sir J. |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Dickinson, W. H.(St. Pancras, N. | Jenkins, J. |
| Boulton, A. C. F. | Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. | Johnson, John (Gateshead) |
| Brace, William | Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Branch, James | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) |
| Brigg, John | Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Jowett, F. W. |
| Bright, J. A. | Elibank, Master of | Kekewich, Sir George |
| Brodie, H. C. | Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward | Kelley, George D. |
| Brooke, Stopford | Erskine, David C. | Kincaid-Smith, Captain |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) | Esslemont, George Birnie | Lambert, George |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Everett, R. Lacey | Lamont, Norman |
| Burnyeat, W. J. D. | Fenwick, Charles | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Ferens, T. R. | Lea, Hugh Cecil(St. Pancras, E.) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace | Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter | Lehmann, R. C. |
| Cameron, Robert | Freeman-Thomas, Freeman | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Gibb, James (Harrow) | Levy, Sir Maurice |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Gill, A. H. | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Churchill, Mt. Hon. Winston S. | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David |
| Cleland, J. W. | Grant, Corrie | Lough, Thomas |
| Lyell, Charles Henry | Radford, G. H. | Straus, B. S (Mile End) |
| Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Raphael, Herbert H. | Summerbell, T. |
| Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk Bg'hs | Rees, J. D. | Taylor, Theodore C, (Radcliffe) |
| Maclean, Donald | Rendall, Athelstan | Thompson, J. W. H.(Somerset E. |
| Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Renton, Major Leslie | Tomkinson, James |
| M'Kenna. Rt. Hon. Reginald | Richards, T. F.(Wolverhampton | Toulmin, George |
| M'Micking. Major G. | Richardson, A. | Walsh, Stephen |
| Mallet, Charles E. | Rickett, J. Compton | Walters, John Tudor |
| Markham, Arthur Basil | Ridsdale, E. A. | Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.) |
| Marks, G. croydon(Launceston) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Ward, W. Dudley(Southampton |
| Marnham, F. J. | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) | Wardle, George J. |
| Massie, J. | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Micklem, Nathaniel | Robertson, J. M. ((Tyneside) | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkhey) |
| Mond, A. | Roe, Sir Thomas | Wason, Rt. Hn. E. (Clackmannan. |
| Money, L. G. Chiozza | Rogers, F. E. Newman | Waterlow, D. S. |
| Montagu, E. S. | Rose, Charles Day | Whitbread, Howard |
| Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall). | Rowlands, J. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Morrell, Philip | Runciman, Walter | White, Luke (York, E,R.,) |
| Morse, L. L. | Russell, T. W | Whitley, John Henry (Halifax) |
| Murray, James | Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford) | Wiles, Thomas |
| Myer, Horatio | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Newnes. F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) | Seaverns, J. H. | Williams, Llewelyn(Carmarthen |
| Nicholls, George | Seddon, J. | Williams, Osmond (Merioneth) |
| Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncaster | Seely, Major J. B. | Wills. Arthur Walters |
| Norton, Capt. Cecil William | Shackleton, David James | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
| O'Grady, J. | Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Parker, James (Halifax) | Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.) | Wilson, J.W.(Worcestersh. N.) |
| Partington, Oswald | Shipman, Dr. John G. | Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.) |
| Paulton, James Mellor | Silcock, Thomas Ball | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | Soares, Ernest J. | Winfrey, R. |
| Pearson. W. H. M. (Suffolk. Eye) | Spicer, Sir Albert | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| Perks, Robert William | Stanger, H. Y. | Yoxall, James Henry |
| Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke) | Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.) | |
| Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Steadman, W. C. | Tellers for the Noes—Mr. |
| Pollard, Dr. | Stewart, Halley (Greenock) | Whiteley, and Mr. J. A. |
| Price, C. E.(Edinburgh, Central) | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) | Pease. |
| Priestley, W. E. B.(Bradford. E.) | Strachey, Sir Edward |
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ And, it being after Eleven of the clock, and objection being taken to further Proceeding, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.