Commons Sitting of 24 July 1907

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before Three of the Clock.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
North British Railway Bill [Lords] (by Order.) As amended, considered; to be read the third time.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—Injured Animals Act (1894) Amendment Bill without Amendment; Territorial and Reserve Forces Bill, Advertisements Regulation Bill, Sunderland Corporation Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to—Ashton-under-Lyne, Stalybridge, and Dukinfield (District) Waterworks Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend the Law relating to the capacity of women to be elected and act as members of county or borough councils." [Qualification of Women (County and Borough Councils) Bill [Lords.]
And also a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Aberdeen Corporation." [Aberdeen Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
Aberdeen Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [Lords], read the first time; and ordered, under Section 9 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 285.]

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented, of Report by Dr. W. Leslie Mackenzie and Captain A. Foster on a collection of Statistics as to the physical condition of children attending

  1563
  the public schools of the School Board for Glasgow, with relative tables and diagrams [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  RAILWAY EMPLOYMENT (SAFETY APPLIANCES).
  Copies presented, of Reports of the Committee appointed by the Board of Trade to examine and, where necessary, to test appliances designed to diminish danger to men employed in railway service, together with the Appendices thereto [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  UNIVERSITY COLLEGES (GREAT BRITAIN) (GRANT IN AID.)
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 23rd of July; MR. Runciman]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 267.]
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Report, Annual Series, No. 3868 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Inspection of Balintore Harbour, Ross-shire.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state on what date in April last the harbour at Balintore, Ross-shire, was inspected; is the officer employed attached to the permanent staff of the Board; and, if so, under what title is he designated in the Estimates.
  (Answered by MR. Sinclair.) The harbour was inspected this year by order of the Board by one of its officers. It is not usual to lay responsibility publicly upon a permanent official which properly lies with the Board.

  Housing of the Board of Agriculture.
  MR. ELLIS: To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether, having regard to the important position of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and the vital bearing of a proper exercise of its powers and functions in relation to those great departments of national trade and. industry, he will see that advantage is taken, when the re-adjustment of public
  1564
  departments is made in the opening of the public buildings in Parliament Street, to afford better accommodation to the Board.
  (Answered by MR. Harcourt): I am earnestly considering this subject

  Irish Land —Owners Refusing to Sell.
  MR. LONSDALE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether there are any owners of land in Ireland who have refused to sell untenanted land, required for the purpose of restoring evicted tenants to holdings, to the Estates Commissioners after being offered a price which the land might be expected to realise if sold in the open market.
  (Answered by MR. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that certain owners have refused to sell untenanted land to them for the purpose of restoring evicted tenants. The prices offered by the Commissioners in such cases were estimated in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In all cases the Commissioners offer what they consider to be the value of the land for the purposes entrusted to them by Parliament, and this is ascertained by inspection of the land itself.

  Cost of Royal Commission on Irish Department of Agriculture.
  MR. GWYNN: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury what was the cost of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Irish Board of Agriculture and Technical Instruction.
  (Answered by MR. Runciman.) The charges paid up to the present amount approximately to 3,040, but the expenditure is not yet complete.

  Application of MR. Joseph Philpott.
  MR. FLYNN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have yet considered the application of MR. Joseph Philpott, Knocknacolon, Kanturk (No. 2986, E.C.); and, if not, whether, in view of the fact that the purchase agreements with his sub-tenants were lodged in August, 1905, and that this gentleman has to continue paying a rent-charge of

  1565
  £219 yearly to the head landlord in addition to tithe rent-charges, and in view of other exceptional circumstances already made know to them, the Commissioners will consent to take this application out of order and priority and deal with it promptly.
  (Answered by MR. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have decided that they cannot deal with MR. Philpott's estate out of its due order of priority, and they have so informed that gentleman.

  Kerry Railway Guarantees.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the

  Capital.

  Rate of Interest.

  Treasury Contribution per annum.

  County Contribution per annum.

  £

  Per cent.

  £

  £

  Headford and Kenmare

  Railway

  -

  -

  -

  -

  60,000

  4

  1,200

  1,200

  Killorglin and Valentia

  Railway

  -

  -

  -

  -

  70,000

  4

  1,400

  1,400

  The guarantees are in perpetuity. The loss in working is not made good by the county.

  Overcrowded Condition of Forthill Burying Ground.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the overcrowded condition of the Forthill burying ground, in the Galway urban district; and whether he will send a sanitary inspector of the Local Government Board to report on the matter.
  (Answered by MR. Birrell.) The Local Government Board have received no complaint in the matter since 1904, when it was reported that there was still plenty of room for interments in the burial ground. The Board, however, will now draw the attention of the urban district council to the allegation of overcrowding which is contained in the Question.

  Australian Customs Duties on Goods Imported from the United Kingdom
  MR. J. D. WHITE (Dumbartonshire): To ask the Under-Secretary of State for
  1566
  Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the railways in Kerry, to which the Government contribute annually, a certain guarantee stating the capital, interest, and further period to run in each case, and also the capital, rate of interest, and annual contribution in each case from rates of the county.
  (Answered by MR. Runciman.) The information asked for as regards the guaranteed capital, interest, and amount of the annual contribution paid by the Treasury and county council will be found on page 98, Appendix J., of the Board of Works Annual Report for 190–6, and is as follows: the Colonies whether he can say what was the aggregate amount of the customs duties levied in Australia on goods imported from the United Kingdom during the last financial year.
  (Answered by MR. Churchill.) Information has been received from Australia by telegraph to the effect that the customs duties collected on imports into the Commonwealth from the United Kingdom during 1906 probably amounted to £3,750,000.

  Reorganisation of the Colonial Audit Branch Staff.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, seeing that two junior and redundant Second Division clerks were retained, contrary to Treasury Minute, in the Colonial Audit Branch of the Exchequer and Audit Department on the recent reorganisation of the latter Department, and that certain Second Division clerks senior to these two were sent back to the Civil Service Commission as being redundant, he will explain the reasons, if any, for this procedure.
  (Answered by MR. Runciman.) There was no contravention of any Treasury Minute in the selection of the two clerks referred to for employment in the Colonial Audit Branch of the Exchequer and Audit Department.

  Marylebone Council Schools—Appointment of Representative Managers.
  MR. WHITEHEAD: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the recent appointment by the borough council of Marylebone of representative managers, for the three groups of London County Council schools in Marylebone, and to the fact that the council disregarded the nominations under which candidates had been nominated for particular groups of schools, notwithstanding the resolution of the council of 8th June and the agenda issued to borough councillors on 17th June; and whether he proposes to take any steps in the matter.
  (Answered by MR. John Burns.) I am aware that the borough council at a recent meeting appointed their representatives on the managers for the three groups of county council schools in the borough. Nominations for the purpose were required to be sent in by a prescribed date, and this was done. I understand that nearly all the nominations were made for particular groups of schools, but that in three cases no group was mentioned, and further, that, while for one group there were eleven nominations to till eight vacancies, for another there were only eleven nominations for twelve vacancies. As regards the third group, the number of nominations was the same as that of the vacancies. I am informed that at the meeting, after the voting on the first group of nominations, with which were included the three nominations before referred to, the presiding chairman, with the concurrence of the nominators, included the unsuccessful nominations with the nominations for the second group of schools, and that the unsuccessful nominations for this group were included with the nominations for the last group. Moreover, it is stated that the presiding chairman, at the request of one or two of the nominators, before any voting had taken place, allowed the interchange of a few of the nominations from one group to another.
  1568
  I am also informed that the borough council's resolution of the 6th June in no way prescribed the method of appointment at the meeting, or limited the discretion of the presiding chairman in the matter. It is not one which comes within my jurisdiction, and I have no authority to take any action with regard to it.

  Value of Rateable Property in Scotland.
  MR. MENZIES: To ask the Secretary for Scotland what is the sum total of the present rateable property, as per valuation rolls, in all the burghs and counties of Scotland; and what is the sum total of all the assessments levied by local authorities in that kingdom.
  (Answered by MR. Sinclair.) I may refer my hon. friend to page ix (Table 3) and page xxiii (Table 19) of the prefatory memorandum to the last issued volume of the Local Taxation (Scotland) Returns, i.e., that for 1904–5, where he will find the information he desires. The 1905–6 volume is in course of preparation.

  Desertions from British Cruisers when Visiting America.
  MR. LANE-FOX: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many men were lost by desertion during the visit of the four armoured vessels of the first cruiser squadron to American waters; and how long was the squadron in those waters.
  (Answered by MR. Edmund Robertson.) The Answer to the first part of the Question is 161, and to the second part 40 days.

  Blackpool New Post Office.
  MR. ASHLEY: To ask the First Commissioner of Works what progress has been made in the building operations in connection with the new post office at Blackpool, and when the office will be completed.
  (Answered by MR. Harcourt.) The plans are under discussion with the Post-Office. As soon as they are decided, tenders will be invited and the work will commence; but until the contract is made it is not possible to say at what date the office will be completed.

  Delay in Payment of Gurkha Police in Eastern Bengal.
  SIR SEYMOUR KING: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has any information to the effect that in one sub-division in Eastern Bengal the Gurkha police had not received their pay for three months, and that the delay in paying them their monthly wages has been caused by some Swadeshi baboos in the employ of the Government who have been deliberately delaying the necessary returns and papers; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made in the matter.
  (Answered by MR. Secretary Morley.) I have observed a statement to this effect in a newspaper, but I can scarcely believe that it is correct. I will make inquiry.

  Salaries and Emoluments of Staff Officers.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH (Maidstone): To ask the Secretary of State for War if ho will specify the alterations which have been made during the present financial year, as compared with the standard of 1906–7, in the salaries and emoluments of officers holding staff appointments.
  (Answered by MR. Secretary Haldane.) The reply given to a similar Question put by the noble Lord on the 20th June t will apply to the present Question.

  Army Clothing Contracts placed in Scotland.
  MR. WATT: To ask the Secretary of State for War what was the value of contracts placed in Scotland for clothing, etc., of the Regular Army and Militia during the last financial year; and what was the corresponding value of contracts placed in England.
  (Answered by MR. Secretary Haldane.) The cost of the articles set forth in reply to a Question put by my hon. friend on the 17th instant amounted to £60,783.‡ Information as regards the cost of similar contracts placed in England in 1906–7 would involve considerable labour in preparation, and I hope my hon. friend will not press for it.
  † See(4) Debates, clxxvi, 1371.
  ‡ See(4) Debates, clxxviii, 1371.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Destroyers in the Mediterranean.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN (Worcestershire, E.): I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether it was the intention of the Admiralty to reduce the number of destroyers in the Mediterranean before the recent loss of a destroyer which it is now the declared intention of the Government not to replace; and, if so, whether it is the intention of the Admiralty to make any further reduction in the destroyer strength there.
    THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (MR. Lambert, Devonshire, South Molton): The reply to both parts of the Question is in the negative. It is con sidered that there is a sufficiency of torpedo craft in the Mediterranean to meet the present conditions.

    Naval Barracks.
    MR. BEAUCHAMP: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can give the average number of men in the various naval barracks during the month immediately preceding the formation of the Home Fleet and the number on 31st May, 1907.
    MR. LAMBERT: The average number in the naval barracks in November last was over 10,000. The actual numbers on the 31st May, 1907, were 6,017.

    Channel Destroyer Flotilla.
    MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, in view of the fact that the fully-commissioned destroyer flotilla was removed from the command of the Commander-in-Chief of. the Channel Fleet last January, whether this officer can obtain the services of the fully-commissioned destroyers for such exercises and at such times as he deems desirable.
    MR. LAMBERT: The hon. Member is referred to the Answer given to the hon. Member for the Ludlow Division of Shropshire on 15th July.§The actual transfer of destroyers from the immediate control of the Commander-in-Chief
    §See (4) Debates, clxxviii, 312.

    1571
    to that of another can only be effected by Admiralty order and at their discretion.

    H.M.S. "New Zealand"
    MR. HUNT: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty on what date H.M.S. "New Zealand" parted company with the Channel Fleet; on what date is she to rejoin that fleet; and whether, during any portion of the time, she has been replaced by another battleship.
    MR. LAMBERT: The dates are 23rd April and 18th July, the date of sailing after completion of defects. The reply to the last part of the Question is in the negative; the replacement was in the discretion of the Admiralty not considered necessary.

    H.M.S. "Cumberland."
    MR. HUNT: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he has completed his investigations into the reason why H.M.S. "Cumberland" was not docked after 20th December, 1905, until quite recently; and, if so, whether he can state the result of his inquiry and what was the condition of the ship's bottom when recently docked.
    MR. LAMBERT: The "Cumberland" is being converted into a cadets' training ship. It was not considered necessary by the dockyard officials to dock the ship till she was taken in hand for this service. The condition of the bottom was good.

    The Coastguard.
    MR. MILDMAY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether in a case where a coastguard station is in process of being abolished, the Admiralty will consult the owner before sub-letting the premises for other purposes.
    MR. LAMBERT: As regards Great Britain, the general practice is to give the owner or lessor the first option. In the case of Ireland the matter is in the hands not of the Admiralty, but of the Dublin Board of Works.

    Battleship Armaments.
    MR. GRETTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty
    1572
    whether the experience of the Russo-Japanese War shows that the 12-inch guns now mounted in His Majesty's battleships will still be ready and efficient for immediate service after fighting a sustained fleet action; and, if not, by what method does the Admiralty propose to replace them.
    MR. LAMBERT: The reply is in the affirmative. Guns damaged in action would, of course, be replaced by reserve guns.

    Defence of Home Waters.
    MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet is the officer responsible for the defence of Home waters and of this country against invasion; and whether the strength of the Channel Fleet is to be increased in numbers beyond the fourteen battleships, four armoured cruisers, and three unarmoured cruisers to which it was reduced last January.
    *MR. H. J. CRAIGbefore the Question was answered, asked did not the Board of Admiralty regret being obliged, under the pressure of Questions placed on the paper by the hon. Member and his friends on the opposite side of the House, of which this was an example, to make public information regarding important details of our naval dispositions which ought not in the national interest to be divulged—["Order."]—and which in the case of all foreign Navies was invariably withheld.
    *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member's Question is in the nature of a speech. The Civil Lord of the Admiralty is quite capable of taking care of himself.
    MR. LAMBERT: In reply to the first part of the Question, the hon. Member is referred to the reply to a similar Question given yesterday to the hon. Member for Rutland.†In reply to the second part of the Question, the Admiralty, as has been frequently repeated, are not prepared to indicate in advance the developments they have in view.
    MR. BELLAIRSasked whether there would be a statement in regard to the strength of the Channel Fleet next week.
    † See(4) Debates, clxxviii, 1339
    MR. LAMBERTobjected that these Questions pressed upon the Admiralty asked for information which if published would be at the disposal of foreign countries.
    MR. BELLAIRSasked whether the strength of the Channel Fleet did not appear in the Navy List.
    MR. LAMBERTsaid that if it appeared in the Navy List his hon. friend should be satisfied.
    MR. BELLAIRSsaid that if the statement he asked for was not made on the Navy Estimates he would repeat his Question in debate.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDasked whether, in the interests of the House and the saving of time, it was not desirable to place the full control of all the naval affairs of the country in the hands of the hon. Member for King's Lynn.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: The position of Lord High Admiral is still vacant.

    "King Edward VII. 's" Defective Rudder.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether in view of the public interest in the matter, he will publish a Report giving all the facts and correspondence connected with the fraud committed by the Ayrshire Foundry Company on the Admiralty, who the responsible persons were, with their names and addresses, and the reasons why they were not prosecuted.
    MR. LAMBERT: All the information in the possession of the Admiralty was placed at the disposal of the Public Accounts Committee by an official fully conversant with the facts. This evidence will be published in the usual course.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the defective rudder, fraudulently supplied by the Ayrshire Foundry Company had been built into the battleship "King Edward VII." at the time they were informed by the works manager of the Ayrshire Foundry Company of the fact that it
    1574
    was defective; and, if so, what was the extra cost involved to the public in ripping it out and replacing it with a good one.
    Mk. LAMBERT: The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, the only cost to the Crown ultimately involved in replacing the first rudder with a good one, including the cost of the latter, was £48 4s. 8d.
    MR. LEA: Why was not this £48 4s. 8d. recovered from the directors?
    MR. LAMBERTsuggested that the hon. Member should await the publication of the evidence by the Public Accounts Committee.
    MR. A. DEWARasked whether this matter had not been investigated by the law officers of the Crown under the late Government.
    MR. LAMBERTThat is so, and they came to the conclusion that no prosecution could be instituted.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what steps the latter have taken to prevent defective castings supplied by Admiralty contractors being electrically welded on Sundays or holidays as was criminally done in the case of the rudder supplied by the Ayrshire Foundry Company to H.M.S. "King Edward VII."; whether the Admiralty have on their inspecting staff for the passing of contract-supplied castings any practical moulders; and, if not, will he explain why.
    MR. LAMBERT: The serious attention of the Admiralty inspectors has been called to the possibility of electrically welding defective castings, and conditions are inserted in all present contracts which will prevent the repetition of such practices. As regards the second and third parts of the Question, I must refer the hon. Member to the full replies which I gave to similar Questions yesterday.†

    H.M.S. "Ringdove."
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, and, if
    † See(4) Debates, clxxviii, 1337

    1575
    so, when, His Majesty's ship "Ringdove," which is at present employed on the coast of Scotland for the protection of fisheries under the Admiral commanding the Coastguard and Reserves, is to be withdrawn from that service; and whether any vessel is to take her place.
    MR. LAMBERT: There is no intention at present of withdrawing the "Ringdove."
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: Is any vessel at present employed on this service to be withdrawn?
    MR. LAMBERTasked for notice of the Question.

    Scottish Coastguard.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any reduction in the coastguard in Scotland is in contemplation.
    MR. LAMBERT: The reply which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for the Rye Division of Sussex applies equally to the Coastguard stations in Scotland. †

    Smokeless Blank Cartridge for Artillery.
    MR. LUPTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if smokeless blank cartridge for artillery is used by both French and German armies for training purposes; and, if so, if he will instruct the authorities of the Arsenal to provide smokeless blank cartridge for our Artillery.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (MR. BUCHANAN, Perthshire, E.): I understand that smokeless blank ammunition is used by both French and German Artillery. As I have already explained to my hon. friend on 18th July, the Ordnance Committee are carrying out experiments with this object in view, but the provision of a suitable cartridge at a reasonable cost has not yet been arrived at.
    MR. LUPTON: Is there any particular difficulty in England greater than exists in France and Germany of doing this apparently simple piece of work?
    MR. BUCHANAN: I am afraid it is by no means a simple piece of work.
    † See(4) Debates, clxxviii, 1336.
    1576
    The results arrived at in Germany and France differ from each other; and, I believe, they are not nearly so effective in Germany as in France.

    British Colonial Shooting Team.
    MR. COURTHOPE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that for a number of years past representative shooting teams from Canada, Australia, and other Colonies have visited England, and that the Colonial Governments have made grants in aid of the expenses of the teams representing their respective Colonies; and whether, in view of the above facts, he will make a grant in aid of the expenses of the team representing the mother country which, for the first time, will shortly visit Canada and Australia.
    MR. BUCHANAN: I have nothing to add to the Answer I gave to an exactly similar Question yesterday.‡

    Burma Railways.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, with reference to MR. Brodrick's reply of the 13th June, 1904,§to the hon. Member for the Strand Division of Westminster, upon what dates was the report of the acting chief engineer for construction, Burma Railways [No. 3605/45/8–1], of the 22nd August, 1900, representing that unsound work was being put into the G ôkteik Bridge, received by the board of directors in London and considered by them; what was the date upon which an inquiry was held into the representations as to bad work, and who were the Burma Railways Company's engineers present thereat, and who was the Government inspector, and is he aware that the acting chief engineer was superseded, by order of the acting agent of the Burma Railways in Rangoon, on the 29th August, 1900, owing to the attitude he (the acting chief engineer) had taken upon the question of the work on the G ôkteik viaduct.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE, Bristol, E.): I regret that I have not the information for which the
    ‡ See(4) Debates clxxviii, 1340-41.
    §See(4) Debates, cxxxv., 1475.

    1577
    hon. Member asks. In reply to a previous Question on the 21st February, the Secretary of State stated that he had no ground for apprehending that there was any cause for anxiety as to the stability of the G Ôkteik Bridge, and this statement has been confirmed by a report subsequently received from the Burma Railways Company. The allegations that have been made as to unsound work in the construction of the bridge have been investigated and have not been confirmed. The bridge is periodically inspected, and the Secretary of State does not propose to make any further inquiry on the subject.

    Indian Rupee Coinage.
    MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India what number of rupees was coined in the last financial year; what is the profit on each rupee at the present price of silver; what is the proportion of fine silver to alloy in the rupee; what is the proportion of fine silver in the quoted ounce of standard silver; and what number of silver dollars was coined at the Indian mints, and what is the weight and fineness of this coin.
    MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: The number of rupees coined in 1906–7, including the recoinage of old rupees, was 254,331,516. Taking the price of silver at 31 ½d. per standard ounce the net profit on the coinage of a rupee is approximately 4d. The fineness of the rupee is 916 6 per thousand; and that of standard silver is 925 per thousand. No dollars were coined at the Indian mints in 190–7.

    Transvaal Labour Ordinance.
    SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether this Government intend to make any representations to the Transvaal Government with a view to the removal of the restriction under the Labour Ordinance which prevents British subjects from being imported to do unskilled work in the mines of the Band.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (MR. CHURCHILL, Manchester, N.W.): As the hon. Member is aware, the Labour Ordi-
    1578
    nance which was enacted by the late Government will be repealed at an early date, and His Majesty's Government do not propose to make representations in the sense suggested but it must be borne in mind that even pending the expiry of the Ordinance there is nothing to prevent British subjects who do not come within its special definitions from undertaking work in the mines.

    Workmen's Compensation in the Transvaal.
    Dr. RUTHERFORD (Middlesex, Brentford): I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that a Workmen's Compensation Bill has been gazetted in the Transvaal which provides for compensation by employers to employees under certain circumstances, the advantages of which, however, are extended to white persons only, thus excluding coloured employees from its benefits; and whether such differentiation constitutes a disability or restriction upon coloured people, such as was contemplated by the Government when making the reservations in the Transvaal Letters Patent.
    MR. CHURCHILL: Yes, Sir, I have seen the Bill, and my inclination is to think that it does not fall within the reservation; but the matter is one which must, of course, be determined under legal authority at the appropriate time.

    Assault by Natal Planter on a Coolie.
    Dr. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the recent case of assault upon one Sukhaie, an indentured coolie, by his master, a Natal planter, named John Leask, junior; whether he has read the evidence led at the trial to the effect that the coolie was brutally flogged by his master with a reim, or raw-hide thong, for not obeying his order; that the said coolie was at the time weak and ill with dysentery; that, after his flogging, he was in gaol for seven days on a charge of desertion; that he shortly after died, his death, according to medical evidence, being possibly accelerated by the blows he received; whether he is aware that, although convicted, the punishment of the said John Leask, junior, was a fine of £10;and whether His Majesty's

    1579
    Government will consider the advisability of approaching the self-governing Colonies with a view to abolishing indentured labour.
    MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been drawn to a newspaper report of the case in question, and the Secretary of State will communicate with the Colonial Government and with the Secretary of State for India on the subject. The last part of the hon. Member's Question raises an issue too wide to be conveniently discussed in an Answer to a Question.

    MR. Churchill's Vacation Tour.
    SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies proposes to avail himself of the services of the Under-Secretary for a visit to British East Africa and Uganda; if so, at whose cost such a visit will be undertaken ; and whether he will suggest, through the Secretary of State, that the visit should be carried out by a permanent official of the Colonial Office who deals with matters relating to the Protectorate, so that the Colonial Office may have the permanent advantage of an official personally acquainted with the district to be visited.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN, Stirling Burghs): Perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to Answer his Question, as it personally affects my right hon. friend the Under-Secretary. As the hon. Member was informed on Monday, the Secretary of State for the Colonies has expressed a desire that my right hon. friend should, during the autumn, visit the East Africa Protectorate and Uganda; and unless unforeseen circumstances should prevent him my right hon. friend intends to do so. It will be both convenient and useful that he should be accompanied by a permanent official from the Department. The usual practice will be followed of charging the expense of such a mission, which is not likely to be considerable, to public funds, but my right hon. friend's personal expenses for living and transport, other than Government transport, will be defrayed by himself.
    *MR. REES: asked if the Under-Secretary would
    1580
    endeavour to include British Central Africa in the visit, the distance from East Africa Protectorate not being very great.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: My fear is that we may never see him back again.
    MR. T. M. HEALY: Why not in regard to expenses follow the example of the late Ministry?
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Apart from other circumstances, it is the wish of my right hon. friend co pay his personal expenses.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Why not give him a man-of-war?

    The Hague Conference.
    MR. KING (Cheshire, Knutsford): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can inform the House what instructions have been given to His Majesty's representatives at The Hague on the following points—the bombardment of undefended coast towns by the fleets of belligerents, the seizure and destruction of private property at sea, the publication of loans by belligerent powers in neutral markets, and the obligation of a formal declaration of war.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (MR. Runciman, Dews-bury; for Sir E. GREY): My right hon. friend cannot make statements about the instructions given to the delegates; nor add to the statements which have been made public by the Conference as to its proceedings.

    Company Law in Guernsey.
    MR. H. H. MARKS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Project de Loi, or draft Bill for the amendment of the company law of Guernsey, referred to by him in answer to a Question on the 30th October, 1906,t has yet become law; and, if not, if he can give the House any information with regard to the prospects of legislation on this subject by the authorities of the Island; and if he can state what, if any, is the ad valorem capital duty payable on the registration of companies in Guernsey.
    † See(4) Debates, clxiii, 886
    *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (MR. GLADSTONE, Leeds, W.): The Projet de Loi was referred to a Committee of the States of Guernsey, who for various reasons have not yet been able to report; but it is hoped that their labours will soon be concluded. In March, the Board of Trade suggested a conference with representatives of the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, with the object of seeing whether the the Law relating to joint stock companies in those Islands could be made more uniform with that in force in this country, and a meeting was held on the 4th of this month, when the matter was gone into with, I hope, useful results. As regards the last part of the Question, I understand that an ad valorem duty of is. per cent. on the capital is payable in the case of companies registered in Guernsey.

    Welshpool Cemetery Scandal.
    MR. OSMOND WILLIAMS: I bog to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of the parish clerk of Welshpool, who disinterred human remains from a consecrated place of burial without the right hon. Gentleman's permission; and what he steps he intends taking in the matter.
    MR. REES: Before. the right hon. Gentleman answers this Question, may I ask if he has reason to believe that the action that he took in the matter has not satisfied the objections raised in the locality concerned?
    *MR. GLADSTONE: I had better answer the Question on the Paper. In accordance with my promise to my right hon. friend the Member for Montgomery Boroughs, who asked me about the case on the 1st of this month, I directed legal proceedings to be instituted against the parish clerk. The case was heard by the magistrates at Welshpool on the 16th, when the accused pleaded guilty to an offence against the 25th Section of the Burials Act, 1857 (20 and 21 Vic. cap. 81) and was fined £1 or in default sentenced to fourteen days imprisonment.
    MR. OSMOND WILLIAMS: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will
    1582
    take any steps to arrange who shall be responsible in the future with regard to the churchyard? Is he aware that in this case the clergyman said he was not responsible, and that the clerk alone was responsible? Suppose the clerk dies tomorrow, who is responsible?
    *MR. GLADSTONE: I cannot answer such a Question as that.
    MR. OSMOND WILLIAMS: Is the vicar not responsible at all?
    *MR. GLADSTONE: I cannot answer that.

    Hungerford Justices' Clerk.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the chairman of the Hungerford Bench and the county treasurer for Berks had repudiated liability for £55 5s. penalty and costs collected by the late clerk to the Justices, MR. Hopkins; whether some authority is responsible for this and similar moneys; and, if not, will he take measures to protect these public moneys which are collected in the name of the Crown.
    *MR. GLADSTONE: My attention has been called to the matter. The sum mentioned was due from the estate of the late clerk to the Justices, who died insolvent. Neither the Justices, nor the county treasurer, nor any other authority is responsible. I have no power to intervene in the matter, and I am not prepared to propose any charge in the law by which the clerk to the Justices is responsible for fines and fees collected by him.
    MR. MORTON: But ought not securities to be insisted on in this and other cases? The money has been lost.
    *MR. GLADSTONEsaw no reason for altering the law because of this case.

    Chained Prisoners.
    MR. HAZLETON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will give the figures for the year 1906, showing the number of prisoners in English, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish prisons, respectively, obliged to wear chains or cross irons.
    MR. GLADSTONE: The numbers for the year 1906 of prisoners obliged to wear chains or cross irons were: in prisons in England, 15; Wales, 0; Scotland, 0; Ireland, 1.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: What are cross irons?
    MR. T. M. HEALY: Are we going to take the burglars of Great Britain under our wing?

    Wage Statistics.
    MR. T. DAV1ES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether it is his intention to send out forms to employers in certain trades calling for a return of the number employed, conditions of labour, wages, etc.; if so, in order to make the return more complete, will he consider the desirability of sending out forms bearing distinctive numbers only, retaining in his office a complete register of firms called upon to make a return, with the number attached in case of reference, with a view to removing the objections on the part of many employers to make the return; and will he consider the desirability of following a similar course when collecting returns under the Census of Production Act.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (MR. LLOYD-GEORGE, Carnarvon Boroughs): With regard to the information which is being collected respecting earnings, I am glad to be able to inform my hon. friend that a large proportion of the employers who have been asked to send returns to the Board of Trade have already done so. The employers were all informed that the identity of individual returns would not be disclosed in any way. In making second application to firms which have not as yet supplied returns, the Department is giving them the option of making use of a reference number instead of stating their names and addresses. The Census of Production Act requires the signature of the person filling up the form, but the names will be detached from the forms when received in the Board of Trade so that they will only be known to the officer receiving the returns.
    MR. CHIOZZA MONEY: Will my right hon. friend explain
    1584
    how he proposes to treat the considerable proportion of firms who do not return their wages? How will those firms be treated in working an average of the whole sum paid for wages?
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I think we have sufficient information already. It gives a very good idea of the wages paid in all the leading districts and industrial centres in this country. In fact we have returns already which cover over 3,000,000 of workmen, whereas in returns twenty years ago they only covered about 1,500,000.
    MR. CHIOZZA MONEY: I am sorry to trouble my right hon. friend again. Is it not true that the firms who do not return information are the worst employers and pay the lowest wages?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    School Building Grants.
    MR. GRETTON (Rutland): I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he has received any applications from local education authorities for a share in the sum of £100,000 for erecting new public elementary schools.
    I beg also ask the President of the Board of Education when he will lay upon the Table the regulations informing local education authorities of the methods to be adopted for ascertaining the wishes of parents in single-school areas, with a view to providing a second school from National funds.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF' EDUCATION (MRLOUGH, Islington, W.): In reply to these Questions, I must refer the hon. Member to the Answers which my right hon. friend gave to the hon. Member for the Ecclesall Division of Sheffield on Monday last.†

    Land Tax Commissioners.
    MR. GRETTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if a number of Land Tax Commissioners have recently been appointed; if so, by whom have such appointments been made; and how many have there been.
    † See(4) Debates, clxxviii, 1179
    MR. RUNCIMAN: There have been no appointments of Land Tax Commissioners more recent than those made by the Land Tax Commissioners Act, 1906. The list of Commissioners then appointed was published in the London Gazette of 28th December, 1906, and covered some forty pages. No addition can be made to the list, except by Act of Parliament.

    The Public Trustee.
    MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask MR. Attorney-General whether he will state the date of the provisional appointment of MR. C. J. Stewart to the office of Public Trustee; whether such appointment was verbal or in writing; and, if in writing, whether there is any objection to laying a copy of the same upon the Table of the House, either prior to or concurrently with the rule establishing the office.
    THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SIR JOHN WALTON, Leeds, S.): The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. MR. Stewart has received no appointment, provisional or otherwise, but he is being employed in organising the new Department which it will be necessary to create under the Bill. It is intended to appoint him in the month of October. I understand the rules will be laid on the Table before the end of the month.
    MR. BOTTOMLEYasked if the lion, and learned Gentleman was aware that MR. Stewart still retained his position in the brewery with which he was connected.
    SIR JOHN WALTONasked for notice.

    Scottish Fisheries Protection.
    MR. MORTON: I bog to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the Government propose to remove the cruiser from watching the trawlers in the North of Scotland?
    THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (MR. SINCLAIR, Forfarshire): No, Sir.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: Is any cruiser to be withdrawn from fishery duties?
    MR. SINCLAIR: The "Ringdove" is the only vessel employed at present.
    MR. MORTON: Did not the right hon. Gentleman give the House to understand yesterday that the vessel was to be withdrawn?
    MR. SINCLAIR: I am sorry if I gave an erroneous impression.

    Scottish Valuation.
    MR. MENZIES: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether his Department have any means of ascertaining definitely the sum total of all the feu-duties and long building leases in each of the counties and burghs of Scotland; if not, as such information would be necessary to know the exact effect of the Prime Minister's promise to exempt these from any proposed taxation under the Land Values (Scotland) Bill, whether he proposes to add a clause in that Bill to insert a further column in the new valuation roll (after the column under the new heading, capital land value) in order to obtain the amount of this value, as otherwise the information gained under the proposed new column might be illusory.
    The LORD ADVOCATE (MR. Thomas Shaw, Hawick Burghs): The first part of the Question is founded on misapprehension. By the Act of 24 and 25 Vict., cap. 83 (1861), County Voters (Scotland) Act, as amended by the Act of 48 Viet., cap. 16 (1885), Registration Amendment (Scotland) Act, all feu-duties and ground annuals are in point of fact at present entered in a separate column in the Valuation Roll. The hypothesis upon which the second and argumentative part of the Question is founded is accordingly erroneous, and it is not proposed to insert a further column duplicating formation already on the roll. Any suggestions by my hon. friend arising out of the shape of the roll under the Bill will no doubt be made by him before the Grand Committee, of which he is a member.

    Scottish Public Parks.
    MR. WATT: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that some town councils in Scotland, having purchased parks on behalf of their ratepayers, daily close the whole of these parks to these same ratepayers, except on payment for admission; whether he is aware that councils have

    1587
    not this power; and whether he will introduce legislation to give them such?
    MR. THOMAS SHAW: I am not aware of the facts mentioned, and as I answered to my hon. friend on a similar subject on 18th June last, I shall be glad to have the particulars on which he bases his statement. When these are furnished I shall consider the need or expediency of legislation.

    Irish Horse Breeding.
    MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether in view of the failure that attended the efforts of his predecessor in the regeneration of the Irish draught horse, he will see that in future proper steps are taken for the attainment of this object, and that practical effect be given to the resolution which the agricultural council have unanimously passed recommending the starting of a stud book for this breed of horse.
    THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOR IRELAND (MR. T. W. RUSSELL, Tyrone, S.): The measures hitherto taken by the Department with a view to establishing a register for the Irish draught horse were, in their opinion and that of their Advisory Committee on House Breeding, on proper lines. The question was again recently considered by the Department in consultation with their Advisory Committee, and it was decided to renew these measures in the current year. It is hoped that the wider acquaintance of owners with the provisions of the scheme will have the result that animals of the requisite description will be forthcoming for registration this year. Of the 322 mares offered for inspection last year not one, in the opinion of the Department's Inspector, was of the type sought.

    Kanturk Guardians and the Newmarket Extra Police Tax.
    MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed by the Kanturk Board of Guardians on the 10th instant, again protesting against the extra police tax levied in the Newmarket or northern portion of the union, and stating that as an excuse for the prolongation of this
    1588
    heavy tax on the ratepayers the constabulary authorities allege the necessity of the maintenance of a protection hut on the farm of Owen Daly, and that if possession of this farm, which was purchased by MR. Daly through the Recorder of Cork East Riding, and the purchase money-paid over by him to MR. Curry, court registrar, nearly two years ago, be handed over to him, any necessity for the maintenance of the hut will be at once removed; whether he will make inquiry as to why possession of the farm is not given to this purchaser without further delay; whether he will state what portion approximately of the free force of police of Cork County is allocated to the Kanturk and Newmarket districts under normal circumstances; and what other extraordinary circumstances (if any) exist to justify the continuance of the extra police tax.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (MR. BIRRELL, Bristol, N.): I have received the resolution referred to in the Question. I am informed that MR. Daly is in actual possession of the greater part of the farm which he has purchased, but that he has not yet got a legal assignment of the farm. The matter is at present before the Courts, and the Government have no power to interfere. About one-sixth of the free force of County Cork E. R. is usually stationed in the Kanturk and Newmarket districts. The police authorities inform me that the three extra policemen for whom a charge is made on local authorities are required for the protection of MR. Daly. There is no other necessity for extra police in the localty.
    MR. FLYNNasked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that this man paid £318, the savings of a lifetime, to the registrar who was the representative of the County Court Judge, and the Government having now obtained a verdict against the sureties, would the money be refunded?
    MR. BIRRELLreplied that of course it was very unfortunate that the court registrar should disappear with the funds, and measures had been taken to recover the amount from his sureties, but these proceedings occurred in Court and the Government had no control over

    1589
    them. He quite agreed it was a very great hardship.
    MR. FLYNN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there was not a single criminal ease in the whole district at the last quarter sessions nor at the assize, and that being so, are the constabulary authorities entitled to quarter extra police?
    MR. SPEAKER: Notice should be given of that Question.
    MR. O'SHEE: Could the right hon. Gentleman say when these police had been transferred from one portion of the county to another, and if they were so transferred why should Kanturk and the other council pay extra for them?
    MR. BIRRELL: I must have notice of that; the point upon my mind is that the police are necessary for the protection of MR. Daly.
    MR. FLYNNasked whether the right hon Gentleman had seen that there was no criminal business at the last session or assize.
    MR. BIRRELLreplied that his last words were that there was no other necessity for the presence of the police than the protection of MR. Daly.
    MR. O'SHEEasked the right hon. Gentleman to look into the whole question of the allocation of the police force.

    Fermoy Relieving Officer.
    Captain CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that one of the relieving officers of the Fermoy district, who was dismissed his office for irregularities committed by him after an inquiry by the Poor Law Board, has since been reinstated; whether he can state the reasons for his dismissal in the first instance; and why he was subsequently reinstated.
    MR. BIRRELL: The relieving officer referred to in the Question was not actually dismissed. It is the duty of relieving officers to give allowances of outdoor relief at the houses of the
    1590
    applicants, but in this particular case the relieving officer required some of the poor people to travel long distances in order to receive their allowances from him, and treated them harshly in other ways. The Local Government Board requested the guardians to call for the relieving officer's resignation. The guardians, however, while strongly censuring the officer for his conduct, unanimously requested the Board to withdraw their demand for his retirement on this occasion, and the Board consented to do so, but upon the distinct understanding that he would be at once dismissed if any further dereliction of duty should occur.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Is it not the fact that the Local Government Board inquiry was brought about at the instigation of the guardians?
    MR BIRRELL: Very likely.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: And had this man not been reprimanded on more than two occasions before the inquiry?
    MR. BIRRELL: I quite agree that in Ireland, as in other places, it is very difficult to get guardians to act promptly and wisely in these matters. They are very often too kind-hearted, but the Local Government Board cannot always be quarrelling with them on that account. No doubt it would have been better if this man had been dismissed.

    J. W. Leahy Estate near Cahirciveen.
    MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now in a position to say what steps have been taken by the Estates Commissioners to fix the purchase price of the J. W. Leahy estate at Aghatubrid, near Cahirciveen, in view of the fact that more than six months have elapsed since the case was put in their hands by the landlord and the tenants.
    MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have issued to the owner a preliminary estimate of the price which they will be prepared to offer for this estate, and as soon as the owner has shown prima facie title they will make a formal offer for purchase.

    Irish National School Teachers.
    MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the number of national school teachers at present in second and third grades, respectively; and the number at the maximum salary of third grade who have now completed three years satisfactory service, and who have not yet been promoted to second grade.
    MR. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education inform me that on 31st December last there were 2,551 principal teachers in the second grade, and 4,316 in the third grade. The present numbers in these grades cannot be stated with accuracy, as promotions are in course of being made. There are 774 teachers who have completed three years service on the maximum salary of the third grade. The Commissioners cannot yet say how many of these have fulfilled the conditions for promotion, but the cases are being investigated as rapidly as possible.

    Irish Industrial Schools.
    MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that in many industrial schools children are retained against the expressed wish of their parents, who have good homes and are in a position to provide for them comfortably; and what are the reasons for refusing to restore the children of parents in such circumstances.
    MR. BIRRELL: I am not aware that the fact is as stated in the Question, and I should be surprised to find that it is so, having regard to the circumstance that in the majority of instances the destitution of the child is a determining factor in the case. Industrial schools were certainly not intended for the children of parents who are in the happy circumstances described by the hon. Member. If any such case as is referred to should be brought to my notice I will have the fullest inquiries made.
    MR. SLOANasked if the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider his decision in regard to three children in the Black-rock School, and would allow their release if he could prove that there was a comfortable home awaiting them.
    MR. BIRRELL: I will certainly look into the case, but I may say that in the great majority of cases the poverty of the parents is the dominating factor which leads to the detention of the children in the schools.
    MR. SLOAN: The case I refer to was one affecting four children. The right hon. Gentleman released one, but refused to allow the other three to go. I can show him there is a comfortable home awaiting them.
    MR. BIRRELL: Well, I will consider the case, but I can give no pledge.

    Kilkishen Evicted Tenants.
    MR. HALPIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will inquire of the Estates Commissioners why Mrs. Margaret Shearin, of Kilkishen, county Clare, has not been reinstated in her holding on the Doonass property; and whether the Estates Commissioners wired to MR. Fitt, solicitor, Limerick, instructing him not to take further steps in getting Mrs. Shearin to sign the agreement as arranged until he heard from them again.
    MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have taken no stops to secure Mrs. Shearin's reinstatement, because the applicant's late husband was not an evicted tenant, but surrendered the holding in which reinstatement is claimed. The holding has since been bought by the present tenant. It was at one time suggested that Mrs. Shearin should receive an allotment of the untenanted land on the estate, but this was found impracticable, and the Commissioners accordingly telegraphed to MR. Fitt telling to him take no further steps in the matter.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire of the Commissioners if it is not possible to obtain another holding for this woman in some other neighbourhood?
    MR. BIRRELL: It is not for me to interfere with the discretion of the Commissioners.

    Irish Education Rules.
    MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of

    1593
    Ireland whether he is aware that the new Rule 127 (b) of the Commissioners of National Education is not universally carried out; and if he can state why preference is given as between Roman Catholic and Protestant schools.
    MR. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education inform me that Rule 127 (b) is carried out, and that no exception is made in favour of schools under any particular management, whether Protestant or Catholic.
    MR. SLOAN: I will give the right hon. Gentleman particulars of one such case.

    Irvine Estate Evicted Tenant.
    MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any representatives of the late John M'Quade, who was formerly evicted from his farm in Drumkirk, on the Irvine estate, near Ederney, county Fermanagh, have made application to the Estates Commissioners for reinstatement on this holding; if so, does he consider the applicant as suitable for, and one that should be provided with, a holding under the Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Bill; and are the Estates Commissioners prepared to offer reasonable compensation to the present occupier who holds it as a grass farm, with a view to the restoration of the representative of the deceased man M'Quade or some other suitable evicted tenant;.
    MR. BIRRELL:The Estates Commissioners have received from John T. M'Quade an application for reinstatement in the holding formerly occupied by his deceased father. The Commissioners after inquiry have placed the applicant's name upon the list of persons suitable to receive an allotment of land, but they do not propose to take any steps to reinstate him in the evicted farm, which has been occupied by another person under lease for the past twenty-three years.

    Cattle Mutilation on the Kenmare Estate
    CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the police have received information that a valuable three-year-old cow, the property of MR. Edward Godfrey, of Donemark, the local
    1594
    bailiff on the Kenmare estate, was killed and mutilated while grazing on the lands of Ardnagoshel, belonging to MR. Hutchins, J.P.; and what steps have been taken to discover the perpetrators.
    MR. BIRRELL:The police authorities inform me that the facts are as stated in the Question. The police have used all possible efforts to discover the offender, but so far without success.

    Colemanstown Evicted Tenant.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether John McNamara, of Mountshannon, county Clare, has applied to the Estates Commissioners for reinstatement on the farm now held by Patrick M'Auliffe, at Colemanstown; whether the present tenant of this farm has held it for upwards of eleven years in the face of persecution by the United Irish League; whether John McNamara is one of the 2,000 for whom holdings are to be provided under the Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Bill; and, in the event of Patrick M'Auliffe being compulsorily dispossessed of his holding, whether he will be given compensation for the permanent improvements he has made, and for the loss he has suffered through the instrumentality of the United Irish League.
    MR. BIRRELL:The Estates Commissioners have received John McNamara's application for reinstatement in a farm which has been occupied by John McAuliffe for the past eleven years. The Commissioners have fully inquired into the case and have decided to take no action upon the application. McNamara is already in possession of a farm of up-wards of sixty acres.

    MR. Conor O'Kelly's Arhagh Speech-
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to a speech delivered by the honourable Member for North Mayo, on 7th July, at a meeting of the United Irish League, held at Arhagh, in connection with the refusal of a man named Haire, who is in possession of an evicted farm, to surrender it for the purpose of enabling the former tenant to be reinstated, in which the hon. Member

    1595
    said they must boycott Haire absolutely, rigorously, and completely, and that they must isolate him from his fellows until he surrendered his farm; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter.
    MR. BIRRELL: My right hon. friend the Attorney-General for Ireland answered a similar Question on my behalf on the 11th instant. I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer then given, †

    Lady Osborne's Nenagh Tenantry.
    MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners received a memorial last January from all the tenants on the estate of Lady Osborne, of Beech wood Park, Nenagh, in the county of Tipperary, several of whom are under £5 rateable value, asking them to request the owner if she would sell the untenanted land on the estate comprising about 300 acres, which is at present let to graziers on the eleven months system, to the Estates Commissioners for distribution amongst the said tenants and several other small holders on the estate and in the district; if so, whether they have taken any action in reference to it; and, further, whether the tenants requested the Estates Commissioners to ask Lady Osborne whether she would sell to them the interest in the tenants' holdings with the object of resale to them.
    MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners received the memorial referred to and communicated with the owner, who informed them that her estate includes no untenanted land except the demesne, which she does not intend to sell. The owner further informed the Commissioners that she had offered terms of sale to her tenants, whose holdings average an area of fifty acres. The majority of the tenants agreed to accept Lady Osborne's terms, but owing to the opposition of a small minority the sale fell through. The Commissioners do not propose to take any action in the matter.

    Education Grants.
    MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to what
    † See(4) Debates clxxviii, 56
    1596
    object he proposes to devote the equivalent grant payable to Ireland in respect of the £100,000 to be voted for the erection of public elementary schools in England and Wales.
    MR. BIRRELL: The hon. Member appears to assume that if the sum mentioned in the Question should be voted, a proportionate grant would be made to Ireland in addition to the £65,000 already provided in the Estimates for the building of national schools in Ireland. This is not the case.
    MR. T. L. COBBETT: Is Ireland to-have no equivalent to that £100,000?
    MR. BIRRELL: No, Sir.

    Kenmare Estate Evicted Tenants.
    MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the cause of the delay on the part of the Estates Commissioners in giving assistance to MR. D. O'Shea and MR. Cornelius O'Sullivan, two tenants who have been reinstated on the Kenmare Estate, county Kerry.
    MR. BIRRELL:The Estates Commissioners are negotiating for the purchase of the holding formerly occupied by Daniel O'Shea, but an agreement as to the price has not yet been arrived at. A grant cannot be given to him until terms of purchase have been arranged. The Commissioners have received their inspector's report on Cornelius O'Sullivan's application for a grant, but have not yet come to a decision in the matter.
    MR. MURPHY: Will the right hon. Gentleman urge the Commissioners to do something in this case before the summer passes?
    MR. BIRRELL: I do not think, the Commissioners require to be reminded of their duty. I will remind them, however.

    MR. Ginnell's Speech.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether in view of the wide publicity given by the Press in Westmeath and the West of Ireland to the speech of the hon. Member for North Westmeath lately delivered at Killulagh,

    1597
    in which he advised his audience to obtain possession of the grass farms by driving the cattle off them, and in which he said they had it on the authority of Lord Denman, a member of the Government, that scattering cattle was no crime if they were not houghed, and in view of the added importance which a speech of this character has when made by a Member of Parliament, he will take steps to have the conduct of the hon. Member adjudicated upon by a Court of law.
    MR. BIRRELL: I informed the hon. Member on Wednesday last that there was no evidence of the speech referred to beyond that afforded by the newspaper report. No proceedings could be taken upon a newspaper report.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Has the right hon. Gentleman endeavoured to get any evidence of what happened at this meeting?
    MR. BIRRELL: The only evidence is a newspaper report, and the Irish Office has had experience of the folly of taking criminal proceedings on a mere newspaper report.
    MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Has not a police report been asked for?
    MR. BIRRELL:I am quite prepared to ask the police what took place, but I do not think we can take criminal proceedings on the recollections of a policeman.

    International Disarmament.
    SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if the British delegates to the Peace Conference have given notice of any resolution in favour of international disarmament.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN(for SIR EDWARD GREY): My right hon. friend must refer to the Answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for the Ecclesall division of Sheffield on the same point †

    The Ayrshire Foundry Company.
    MR. LEA:I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, having in view all the facts of the case and that the action of the works manager of the Ayrshire
    † See(4) Debates, clxxviii,1358
    1598
    Foundry Company in reporting to the Admiralty that it had been supplied with a defective rudder for the battleship "King Edward VII" had probably saved the country from a naval disaster of a national character, he could see his way to recommend a money grant to this man.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have nothing to add to the Answer given by my right hon. friend the Secretary to the Admiralty to a similar Question on the 17th of this month.‡

    Vagrancy Law.
    MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he can see his way to promise to bring in a Bill next session dealing with the Vagrancy Law.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:I cannot give any promise on this subject.

    Alleged Sales of Peerages.
    MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the Motions down on the Order Book praying for the appointment of a Select Committee of this House, with full powers to compel testimony and to send for persons, papers, and records, for the purpose of ascertaining whether there is any truth in the charge of the hon. Member for East St. Pancras that honours are bought and sold in this country; and what action he proposes taking.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am not aware that any case has been laid before the House for such an inquiry as is suggested, and until the Motions to which reference is made become operative Motions by being brought forward and supported in this House, no occasion arises for taking them into consideration.
    MR. LEAasked if he was to under-stand that the Motions for inquiry were to be unnoticed on the Order Paper and the country was to be permitted to infer that neither the last nor the present Government dared face any of these Motions.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANdid not think this would be inferred.
    ‡ See(4) Debates clxxviii, 667

    1599
    When the Motions came on, the Government would know what evidence could be produced and would judge for themselves.
    MR. LEAasked whether the Prime Minister did not consider this one of the gravest matters that could possibly affect the honour of Parliament and that such allegations ought to be investigated.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:That depends on the case that is made. I do not know what evidence the hon. Member has on which he bases his statements. I have no knowledge of the evidence in the matter, and until I know that I cannot tell what weight to attach to the statements of the hon. Member.
    MR. LEA: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would publish an account of the Party funds?

    EARL OF CROMER.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN,at the Bar, acquainted the House that he had a Message from His Majesty the King, signed with His Majesty's own hand, and he presented the same to the House, and it was read by MR. Speaker (the Members being uncovered), and is as followeth:—
    EDWARD REX.
    His Majesty, taking into consideration the eminent services rendered by the Earl of Cromer, O.M., G.C.B., G.C.M.G., K.C.S.I., C.I.E., formerly Agent and Consul-General in Egypt, and being desirous in recognition of such services to confer upon him some signal mark of His favour, recommends to His faithful Commons that He should be enabled to grant Lord Cromer the sum of £50,000.
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:I beg to move, Sir, that His Majesty's gracious Message be referred to Committee of Supply.
    Ordered, "That His Majesty's Most Gracious Message be referred to the Committee of Supply."—(Sir II. Campbell-Bannerman.)
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman
    1600
    when it is likely that this grant will come up for discussion?
    SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:On Tuesday next, Sir.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to give notice that I will oppose it.

    SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
    SIR WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONreported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee C (in respect of the Small Holdings and Allotments Bill): MR. George White; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Small Holdings and Allotments Bill): MR. Beck.
    Report to lie upon the Table.

    PROHIBITION OF MEDICAL PRACTICE BY COMPANIES BILL [LORDS].
    Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 284.]
    TERRITORIAL AND RESERVE FORCES BILL.
    Lords' Amendments to be considered upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 286.]
    ADVERTISEMENTS REGULATION BILL.
    Lords' Amendments to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed., [Bill 287.]
    FINANCE BILL.
    As amended, to be printed. [Bill 288.]
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS BILL.
    Lords' Amendments to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 289.]
NEW BILL.

  STATE REFORMATORIES BILL.
  "To provide for the detention in State Reformatories of young persons convicted of indictable offences, and for

  1601
  purposes incidental thereto," presented by MR. Secretary Gladstone; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 290.]

  EVICTED TENANTS (IRELAND) [EXPENSES].
  Resolution reported, "That it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of expenses incurred and compensation payable by the Estates Commissioners in relation to land acquired under any Act of the present session, to facilitate the provision of land for certain evicted tenants in Ireland, and for other purposes connected therewith, and to authorise the National Debt Commissioners to make advances to the Land Commission for certain purposes of such Act"
  Resolution agreed to.

  EVICTED TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [MR. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
  MR. MOOREmoved to remove from the operation of the clause "land subject to an annuity to the Land Commission." It would be within the recollection of the Committee that on the previous evening the Chief Secretary and the Attorney-General had agreed that some consideration should be given to the case of those new tenants who had contracted with the State and had become owners in fee of their holdings. That, no doubt, was subject to qualification, but there was no reason why that qualification should exist in the present case. As it stood, the Estates Commissioners were to have the power to determine the tenancy of the new tenant where they had acquired the tenant's land. He thought it was an arbitrary distinction on the part of the Government to say that a tenant who had bought under the Land Purchase Act was to be excluded whilst a tenant who had simply signed an agreement which the head of ! the Land Commissioners decided was a sale was to be rendered liable to the compulsory methods of the Bill. He hoped the Government would see their
  1602
  way not to draw any such arbitrary an illogical conclusion.
  MR. CLANCYthought the Amendment was out c order. The question it gave rise to was precisely the same as that which was raised by the hon. Member for Wes Waterford the previous night.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid the point the hon. Member for West Waterford wanted an answer to on the previous night had reference to the tenant purchaser, and upon the Amendment before the Committee that day they were simply debating the same question,
  *THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (MR. EMMOTT. Oldham)said he had some doubts upon this matter. He had under stood that the point just raised by the hon. Member for North Armagh was different from that raised by the hon. Member for West Waterford the previous day, but he had been waiting to see what was the hon. Member's argument.
  MR. CLANCY: The hon. Member has explained it to be the same question.
  MR. MOORE: contended that they were now dealing with a different state of affairs at a different stage of the Bill. There was no reason why different considerations should not apply at different stages.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: What is the difference between a tenant purchaser and a person holding an annuity subject to the Land Commission?
  MR. MOOREsaid that at present he wanted to know the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown as to whether or not this arbitrary distinction was to be carried into the section. He thought he was entitled to ask about the matter.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: If the Amendment s to the same effect as the Amendment which was decided last night, then it cannot be moved.
  MR. MOOREsaid it was not to the same effect. The question they discussed last night was whether or not new tenants were to be included with tenant purchasers. As he understood it, the

  1603
  Government said that where a tenant had ceased to be a tenant and had become a purchaser by vesting order he was to be exempt, but they gave no undertaking with regard to the tenant becoming a purchaser by signing an agreement. He wished to know what course the Government were going to take in the latter case.
  MR. CLANCY: Is there any Question before the House, MR. Chairman?
  *THE CHAIRMAN: If we adopt this Amendment we shall be adopting, as I now am informed, something which we decided not to adopt last night, and therefore it is not in order.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid the first part of the question which they were discussing last night was distinctly replied to by the Chief Secretary. With regard to the second part, however, viz., the case of people signing agreements but not having a vesting order, the Chief Secretary said that the Government would give the matter consideration at a later stage of the Bill.
  *THE CHAIRMANThat does not affect the point we are on now. The Amendment is not in order, and therefore we cannot go on with it.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he wished to move an Amendment providing that all persons interested in the land should receive the notice mentioned in the section. In the clause as it stood at the present time it did not seem to be an obligation on the Estates Commissioners to give any notice to any one except the new tenant. He could not see that the right hon. Gentleman would have any objection to embodying his Amendment in the clause. It was only fair that all persons interested should receive full notice under the Bill. There might be a considerable number of persons having an interest in the land beside the person actually in occupation.
  Amendment proposed —
  "In page 3, line 28, after the word ' tenant' to insert the words 'and all persons interested.'"—(MR. Charles Craig.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (MR. CHERRY, Liverpool, Exchange)said he could not accept the Amendment. He did not think the hon. Member realised what it proposed to do. This notice was in the nature of a notice to quit. Special power was given to the Estates Commissioners to exercise their rights as landlords and determine the tenancy in exactly the same way as the former landlord would do. The Estates Commissioners took the place of the landlord and served the notice to quit, as provided by the section, upon the tenant alone. The Commissioners had no power to find out the various persons interested in the holding. There might be people who had charges and mortgages upon the land, but the tenant was the only man paying the rent and, therefore, he was the person who would be served. The hon. Member would see that a subsection of the same clause provided that where a new tenant was put in possession of a parcel of land in lieu of an old tenancy an order would be made to transmit all charges and liabilities from the old tenancy to the new; therefore, no one could be injured by the transfer, and there would be no need to serve the notice upon a number of persons.
  MR. MOOREregretted that the right hon. and learned Gentleman could not see his way to accept the Amendment. It seemed to him a perfectly reasonable one, and the principle it embodied had already been adopted in the Land Act. It was undoubtedly a case in which the mortgagees and others interested would have their security substituted for another. They must recollect that they were not dealing with a plot of land for labourers' cottages, but with land which might be described as an "estate." It was the first step in the sweeping away of an old security, and yet the people who were interested were not to be consulted. It was conceivable that the tenant might be a bogus tenant who had no beneficial interest in the holding. All his interest might be vested in his creditors, and yet the tenant was to have the entire control of the negotiations with the Estates Commissioners. If they were not to have public inquiries which by their very publicity were a safeguard, the least the Government could do was to secure that the people who were interested in the transaction should have an opportunity

  1605
  of stating their case before the Estates Commissioners. Not only the tenant in name, but the people who were tenants in fact, should have the opportunity of knowing when the first step was to be taken to set in motion the whole compulsory machinery which would terminate the tenancy in which they had invested their money. For this reason he supported the Amendment.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid the hon. Member who 'had just sat down had let the eat out of the bag when he described these tenants, upon whom the Opposition had wasted such gallons of salt tears, as "bogus tenants" and men who had not a shilling of their own.
  MR. MOORE: I said there may because of the sort.
  MR. T. M. HEALY,continuing, said the hon. Member had described them as "bogus tenants," and that was exactly what he (MR. Healy) and his friends had been contending all along. He thought the hon. Member had rendered a public service to his country. As to the bogus tenant, he had a knack of disappearing, and he would suggest that service should be by registered letter. He thought it was very necessary in the case of bogus tenants to prevent their hiding, or making away with themselves temporarily, that personal service should not be necessary. He suggested that the right hon. Gentleman before the Report stage should consider whether, as in the case of an ordinary tenant, or ejectment, it would be quite enough that the bogus tenant should be served by registered letter.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLthought it was rather poor advocacy on the part of the hon. and learned Gentleman
  MR. T. M. HEALY: It is not advocacy; it is debate.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid that that did not make it any fairer—it was rather poor debate to attribute to his hon. and learned friend a statement he had never made. His hon. friend had never said that these new tenants were bogus tenants, but he had referred to cases
  1606
  in which the tenant was not really the person interested in the holding. The hon. Gentleman was very anxious that not a single individual should be injured by the operation of this Bill, and if there was a single case in which the new tenant had incurred an obligation or liability to other people, either under a deed of settlement or a mortgage security, it was essential that the persons entitled under the security should have an opportunity of being heard. He thought the words suggested by his hon. and learned friend were a little too wide, and he would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman the words, "any person interested under a registered encumbrance." All they would have to do would be to search the register, which would certainly not add anything to the expense. Supposing one of these tenants had a marriage settlement: the trustee of the settlement might be the father of the tenant's wife, and might live beside the holding. If this new tenant were transferred to another county, surely the trustee of the settlement or the mortgage creditor was entitled to have a voice as to the place to which the security was to be transferred, or as to what security was to be taken in exchange for the one he had got. That was ordinary justice conceded to every owner of land, purchaser or vendor, in Ireland. He could not understand why any difficulty was raised in this case merely because the tenant happened to be one of those objectionable persons known to hon. Members below the gangway as new tenants.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG,: said he would like to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that the principle of the Amendment was already admitted in Subsection (5) of the preceding clause—
  "'The Estates Commissioners shall, upon making such offer, give notice in the prescribed manner to all persons known or believed by them to be interested in the land of their intention to acquire the same at a fixed price, etc."
  It seemed to him that if they carried the principle out in that part of the Bill they could equally well do it in Clause 3. If it could be done in one part of the Bill, he could not see what extra difficulty there would be in doing it in that part to which this Amendment applied.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsuggested the adoption of the words, "in such manner as they may prescribe," which would meet the entire case referred to by the right hon. and learned Member for Dublin University.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he did not see why they should circumscribe the proposal by the insertion of such words. What they wanted was that every person interested in the land to be acquired should receive due notice of the fact that the tenant was to leave the farm within six months or whatever the period might be.
  MR. CLANCYsaid that any Amendment in this direction would place the Commission, in its capacity of landlord, in a different position from any other landlord in the country.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: It is done already.
  MR. CLANCYsaid the hon. Member did not know what he was talking about. The landlord at present could evict a tenant by simply serving upon him notice to quit, and all those interested in charges or encumbrances would have to look after themselves; but in the case of this new tenant they wanted all sorts of new-fangled regulations
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid the person interested in the security should have some say in the transfer of that security, and he thought the words suggested by the hon. and learned Member for Louth might be accepted, with the addition of other words, making the whole read, "In such a manner as they shall prescribe to all other persons interested."
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I did not make that suggestion at all.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid he would at least ask the right hon. Gentleman to accept his original proposal.
  MR. CHERRYsaid the hon. Member for South Antrim had not withdrawn his Amendment, which was still before the
  1608
  Committee. As to the point put by the hon. and learned Member for Louth, under the terms of the section notice could be served in the same way as a notice to quit, which could be either personally served or sent by letter, and he did not think there had ever been any great difficulty in serving a notice to quit. It would also be in the power of the Estates Commissioners, under the 22nd Section of the Act of 1903, which was incorporated in the Bill, to make rules dealing with the mode of service. He was much obliged to the hon. and learned Gentleman for his suggestion on the point, and between now and the Report stage he would consider whether it was necessary to make any alteration in the Bill. As regarded the Amendment before the Committee, the hon. Member adhered to its words and refused to accept any alternative suggested.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he had not refused, and he would be very glad to accept the words, "In such a manner as they shall prescribe to all other persons interested."
  MR. CHERRYsaid he thought the simple words of the section best provided for serving notice on the new tenant. That was what the landlord had to do now, and it was what the Commissioners could do in their capacity of landlord.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY (Shropshire, Newport)asked whether, if he had a mortgage on a certain piece of land in Ireland from which A, the tenant, was turned out and put into another place, he would have no chance of saying whether he would or would not accept the new security. Was that really so? Was he to understand that the right hon. Gentleman, as a lawyer acting for one of his clients, who was a mortgagee, would be perfectly willing to accept some other property altogether, without having any voice in the change of security?
  MR. BIRRELL: I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman has ever served a notice to quit upon a tenant. If so, did he consider himself bound to serve notice on the mortgagee as well as on the tenant?
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid this was a case in which compulsion was being exercised; the other was a voluntary arrangement. His own experience as to serving notices to quit was peculiarly limited, and he hoped it would long continue to be so. They were here dealing with a change of security compulsorily effected, and all they asked was that notice should be given to the person the validity of whose security might be affected.
  MR. MOOREsaid this was not a mere question of determining the interest in the tenancy. The mortgagee might wake up some morning and find that his mortgage had been transferred to land in another county.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid this provision applied only where the Estates Commissioners had acquired tenanted land. In those circumstances how did the question of the mortgage arise?
  MR. MOOREsaid it applied to the land they had acquired subject to a tenancy. What happened was that the mortgagee's interest was taken from him and transferred to what had been stated to be a better security, and therefore he had a right to say whether it was a better or a worse security. Why should the mortgagee not have his choice as to whether his security should be transferred or not? An analogy had been j drawn between this and the service of a writ of judgment. There was an express rule in the rules of the Court that every person in occupation of the premises should be served with notice, and before judgment could be obtained similar notice had to be served upon every person who was in occupation of any portion of the evicted premises. He could not see why the Estates Commissioners should have any difficulty in serving notices on the people they believed to be interested in the holding.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsubmitted that this discussion was out of order. Subsection (5) of Clause 2 provided that—
  "The Estates Commissioners shall, upon i making such offer, give notice in the prescribed | manner to all persons known or believed by them to be interested in the land of their
  1610
  intention to acquire the same at the aforesaid price"
  Therefore they would have actually acquired the land, given notice to all the persons interested, and they would have got everything except mere possession. They were only dealing now with the mere acquiring of what was legally the property of the Estates Commissioners.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: It is very difficult for a layman like myself to grasp with these legal questions arising on the complicated Irish Land Acts. As I understand the hon. and learned Member for North Armagh, he contends that after the acquisition of the landlord's interest under Clause 2, there is still left the question of the tenant's interest. That being his argument, it is a question of merits, and I think I ought not to deal with it as a matter of order.
  MR. CHERRYsaid that in this matter they were following precedent under the Lands Clauses Act. Under all Acts where compulsory powers were taken notice was required to be given, not only to the actual tenant, but to all persons interested in the tenancy. If the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shropshire had to serve notice-to-quit upon a tenant, it would not be necessary to serve notice upon every person interested. The law was that if they served notice on the tenant that was sufficient to determine the tenancy, and they followed that rule. The difficulties of the Estates Commissioners under this Amendment would be insuperable, for they would have to undertake that all the interests created in any of these holdings by the new tenants should be served with personal notice, and that would be impossible.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that them an might receive compensation before the person who had a charge or claim on the tenancy could do anything, and he might get off to Australia or America without his mortgagee or the person in charge of his farm having a chance of receiving a single penny. Surely it was not the intention of the Government to leave the persons who had advanced money on a farm open to such a risk as

  1611
  that. Under this Act a good many of the new tenants would elect to take compensation and therefore they were open to that very serious danger.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid that if they were going to transfer the new tenant to a new home which was to be as good as his old one his mortgage would be secured, but what was to happen if the new tenant elected to take compensation? Was the compensation going to be paid without any inquiry as to whether it ought to be paid to the tenant or to some person who had a charge upon the holding? He thought the Estates Commissioners should make certain that they were paying the money to the right person.
  MR. CHERRYsaid the subject had been considered most carefully, and if the right hon. Gentleman would read the third sub-clause he would see that his point was amply provided for. Under the Act of 1881 when a landlord exercised this right he was bound to pay full compensation to the tenant. If there was

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood,RtHn Sir Alex. F.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Randles, Sir John Seurrah

  Askley, W. W.

  Forster, Henry William

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gretton, John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Baring, Capt. HnG. (Winchester)

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Ed'ds)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

  Hill,Sir Clement(Shrewsbury)

  Stanley,Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hills, J. W.

  Starkey, John R.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hunt, Rowland

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Bull, Sir William James

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

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Liddell, Henry

  Valentia, Viscount

  Castlereagh, Viscount

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

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cavendish,Rt.Hn.Victor C.W.

  Long.Rt.Hn.Walter(Dublin,S.)

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

  Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Worc)

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Willougrhby de Eresby, Lord

  Chaplin, Rt.Hon. Henry

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

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

  Moore, William

  Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birming'm

  Morpeth, Viscount

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Charles Craig and MRT L.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Pease,HerbertPike(Darlington)

  Corbett.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Barnard, E. B.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bell, Richard

  Agnew, George William

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury,E.)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Baring.Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Bertram, Julius

  Alden, Percy

  Barker, John

  Bethell.Sir J.H (Essex.Romf'rd)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  any doubt as to who should receive the compensation it was lodged in the Court and the Land Commission determined the matter. Precisely similar results would follow in the case of a holding where a new tenant elected not to take an alternative holding.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid the right hon. Gentleman was mistaken. The section referred to by the Attorney-General had been incorporated for the purpose of awarding the compensation and not for paying it. The Estates Commissioners would have no power to bring to their aid Section 1 of the Act of 1881 which was not incorporated. The only section incorporated was Section 5. If the right hon. Gentleman would insert words showing that his intention was to incorporate the machinery of the Act of 1881 for paying over the compensation as well as awarding it the point would be met.
  Question put.
  The 'Committee divided:—Ayes, 62; Noes, 274. (Division List No. 309.)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Halpin, J.

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncaster

  Boland, John

  Hammond, John

  Nolan, Joseph

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Branch, James

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Brigg, John

  Hart-Davies, T.

  O' Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid.

  Bright, J. A.

  Harwood, George

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Brooke, Stopford

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hayden, John Patrick

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

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Hazleton, Richard

  O'Grady, J.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  O'Kelly, James(Roscommon, N)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hedges, A. Paget

  O'Malley, William

  Cameron, Robert

  Henry, Charles S.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  O'Shee, James John

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Parker, James (Halifax.)

  Chance, Frederick William

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Partington, Oswald

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R.

  Hogan, Michael

  Perks, Robert William

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Cleland, J. W.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Clough, William

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset, N.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Clynes, J. R.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Price, C.E.(Edinburgh, Central)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hudson, Walter

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Jackson, R. S.

  Pullar, Sir Robert

  Cooper, G. J.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Rainy, A. Rolland

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

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Jones, William(Carnarvonsh're)

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Cox, Harold

  Joyce, Michael

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Craig, Herbert J.(Tynemouth)

  Kearley. Hudson E.

  Rees, J. D.

  Crean, Eugene

  Kelley, George D.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Crombie, John William

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

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

  Crooks, William

  Kilbride, Denis

  Richardson, A.

  Cullinan, J.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Lambert, George

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Robinson, S.

  Delany, William

  Lea, HughCecil (St. Pancras, E.)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Roe, Sir Thomas

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

  Lundon, W.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Runciman, Walter

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lynch, H. B.

  Russell, T. W.

  Duckworth, James

  Macdonald, J. R, (Leicester)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Duffy, William J.

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

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  MacLean, Donald

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Dunne, Major E. Martin(Walsall

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Scott, A.H.(Ashtonunder Lyne)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Sears, J. E.

  Elibank, Master of

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah(Down, S.)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Erskine, David C

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

  Shackleton, David James

  Essex, R. W.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  M'Killop, W.

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

  Farrell, James Patrick

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

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Field, William

  Maddison, Frederick

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Foster, Rt Hon. Sir Walter

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Fuller, John Michael F

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Meagher, Michael

  Snowden, P.

  Gilhooly, James

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Gill, A."H.

  Menzies, Walter

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Stanley, Hn A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Glover, Thomas

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Straus, B.S. (Mile End)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Morrell, Philip

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)"

  Grant, Corrie

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Grayson, Albert Victor

  Murnaghan, George

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Murphy. John

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Thorne, William

  1614

  1615

  Tomkinson, James

  Watt, Henry A.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

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

  Toulmin, George

  Whitbread, Howard

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

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Verney, F. W.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Winfrey, R.

  Walsh, Stephen

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Walton,SirJohn L. (Leeds, S.)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Young, Samuel

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Ward, John(Stoke upon Trent)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Tellers for the Noes—

  Wardle, George J.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Mr Whiteley and Mr J A

  WasonRt.HnE.(Clackmannan)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  pease.

  Wason.John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Williamson, A.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  MR. CHARLES CRAIGmoved an Amendment to provide that twelve instead of six months notice to quit should be given by the Estates Commissioners in cases where new tenants were to be dispossessed of their holdings in order to reinstate evicted tenants. He said the section as it stood did not state that the notice was to run from any particular day of the year. The Estates Commissioners could give notice on any day of any month, and it was obvious to any person who had any knowledge whatever of agricultural operations that it would be highly inconvenient and cause considerable pecuniary loss if a tenant received notice to quit at the wrong period of the year. The ordinary dates were 1st May and 1st November, and he did not suppose there would be quite so much objection if it was known that notice would be given on one of those dates. It would be unfair to ask a farmer to give up his holding, say, in the middle of July or August. The date on which a farmer was to give up his holding should be carefully considered in reference to the operations on the particular class of farm lie occupied. On the other hand if twelve months notice was given the occupier would have ample time to make arrangements for quitting the farm at the end of the period.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 30, to leave out the word 'six,' and insert the word 'twelve.'"—(MR. Charles Craig.)
  Question proposed, "That the word ' six ' stand part of the clause"
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he had endeavoured as far as possible to follow the precedents to be found in previous land legislation for Ireland. In the Congested Districts Act of.1901 provision
  1616
  was made for six months notice, and he was not aware that any evil consequences had followed. Under previous legislation six months notice had been found to be ample time in Ireland, and certainly it was ample time in England. By doubling the time they would only postpone the object they had in view.
  MR. MOOREsaid the statement of the right hon. Gentleman had not a real bearing on the point raised by the Amendment. In the case of the congested districts the need was urgent, and the legislation went through the House practically unopposed. This Bill had been brought in to settle quite a different problem in regard to which there had been a good deal of feeling. There was not the same ground for opposition to the congested districts legislation, and, therefore, it was not a fair analogy to compare it with this contentious measure. The ordinary tenant in Ireland was entitled to twelve months notice. That was in the Act of 1877, but under this hostile Bill the existing tenant was to be forced to quit in six months. There was no analogy whatever between this Bill and the 5th Section of the Act of 1881 which applied to compensation and pre-emption. There the tenant went out voluntarily and had made all his plans and arrangements. The time of year when the tenant was preparing the ground for crops was that between November and May; and, therefore, if he was transferred under the Bill as it stood to the new farm in May, he would not have time to perform tillage operations and would therefore lose the year's crops. A tenant's labour was his capital, and he could not be expected to labour on his farm from November to May when he knew he would have to leave it and would not reap the result of his work. He maintained that six months notice was too

  1617
  short. He assumed that they were going to give the tenant notice on gale day. He agreed with what his hon. friend had said, that this Bill ought to be worked by gale days and as part of the land code. Surely it would be a reasonable thing to make the notice run for twelve months from the gale day next' after the service of the notice.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid that the right hon. Gentleman was unfortunate in his references to English land laws and customs. Under the Agricultural Holdings Acts there was twelve months notice to quit from a particular day. Therefore the right hon. Gentleman was incorrect again. He would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman should make it worth his while to go across the floor and sit beside him in order to supply him with information on English land law.
  MR. MOOREasked whether, if this Amendment were voted upon, it would be open to him to move the next Amendment standing in his name, to leave out "six months service thereof" and insert "twelve months from the gale day nest after the service of such notice."
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid that, as a point of order, the hon. Member would be entitled to strike out from the word '' months "and insert" from the gale day next after the service of such notice."But the hon. Member could not discuss it now if he meant to move it later.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid he was at a loss to understand why the right hon. Gentleman was so anxious deliberately to draw an analogy from a statute which was a hardship to the tenant, and had overlooked various statutes both in Ireland and England under which the tenant was entitled to twelve months notice to quit. He would not personally object to six months if the right hon. Gentleman would give him an assurance that the tenant would get compensation for loss sustained if he had to leave his crops on the ground behind him or was compelled to dispose of them or his chattels and stock by forced sale. Of course, where
  1618
  a tenant quitted his holding voluntarily and the landlord pre-empted, the notice was six months, but that was a different thing. In the cases he had 'mentioned it was only justice that the tenant should receive twelve months notice to quit, which was the case with every other tenant in Ireland by the operation of the ordinary law
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid that the right hon. and learned Member for Dublin University had complained of the analogy drawn by the Chief Secretary. That analogy was taken from the Lands Clauses Act under which, when the money was lodged in Court, the purchaser was entitled to get possession in a period of six months. In dealing with cases of compulsion why not follow the procedure of compulsion? He was inclined to think that six months was too long.
  MR. CHERRYstated that in reality the tenant would have much more than six months notice, because he would know from the moment that the Estates Commissioners opened negotiations that the land was to be acquired for particular purposes. He would, therefore, know long before the notice was served what was to be done. Moreover, the Estates Commissioners were bound to offer alternative farms so that there would be no interference. The tenant would go out of one farm into another. The Estates Commissioners, of course, were not fools, and they would undoubtedly arrange that the transference should take place at the most convenient time of the year. At the present time it was the usual practice that transferences should take place towards the end of the year when the grazing was all over and the harvest had all been got in. It was not to be supposed that the Estates Commissioners, as some hon. Members seemed to suggest, would seek to irritate and annoy everybody as much as possible. They would see that the notice was served at a reasonable time. A long notice was not really required. The hon. Gentleman said, "Why not fix the notice to quit as running from the next gale day? "For the very good reason that the Estates Commissioners would have no power; the gale days were an arrangement between the landlord and his tenants; and in many

  1619
  cases there was no fixed gale day. As to compensation, as he understood the law, the Land Act of 1881 gave the fullest compensation for every possible inconvenience to which the tenant was put under that Act. Assuming that a tenant would not take an alternative farm, but desired to go out of possession finally, the Bill provided that he should have the compensation given under the Act of 1881. That Act, he understood, gave the fullest compensation to tenants, for it gave them the full market value of the holding which would undoubtedly cover crops, stock, and chattels.
  MR. BARRIEpointed out that if notice was given that the farm was required by the 1st May, the diligent farmer's crops would all be in the ground at that period and it would be a most intricate and complicated matter for any Estates Commissioner or assessor to ascertain the compensation to be paid to a farmer under such circumstances. He agreed that it was not probable that the Estates Commissioners would serve a notice which would take effect on the 1st May, and he assumed they would serve a notice which would take effect on the 1st November, at which time most changes in agricultural tenancies took place; but he thought that some alteration should nevertheless be made in the provision in regard to notice. If the first day of May was a possible day for these new tenants to be dispossessed, he thought it possible some hardship might arise, because no farmer doing his work properly would enter upon the performance of the ordinary routine work of a farm if it was possible that he might be dispossessed on the 1st of May in any year.
  MR. ASHLEYalluding to the fact that the Attorney-General for Ireland had said that the Amendment of his hon. friend was not necessary because the new tenant would not want more than six months notice as the Estates Commissioners were;buying land for him somewhere else, pointed out that there was no possible means under the Bill by which the tenant could ascertain where the land to be acquired for him was situated. How could a tenant in the south of
  1620
  Ireland possibly know that the Commissioners were acquiring land for him in the north of Ireland?
  MR. CHERRYobserved that what he had said was that the tenant would know that the landlord's interests were being acquired in regard to the farm he occupied, and he would also know that land was being secured for him elsewhere before the formal steps were taken.
  MR.ASHLEYsaid he did not see what that had to do with the matter. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that leaving one farm for another was like a man in an hotel going up from the first floor to the second. But it was not so easy for a man to leave a farm as the right hon. Gentleman seemed to think. He did not think that the Estates Commissioners would intentionally inflict injustice, but surely the Committee ought to make such injustice impossible.
  SIR F. BANBURYsaid that on the first blush the argument of the Attorney-General for Ireland seemed to be a reasonable one, because the new tenant would under the Bill be put in to another farm; but looking a little-further in to it he contended that the argument would not hold water at all. A parcel of land might be offered to the tenant which was not suitable for him at all. The tenant might say, "I think the land which you offer to me is not at all equivalent in value to my farm, and therefore I do not think it will suit me to take it." In those circumstances six months-was not a sufficient time in which to look for another farm. This unfortunate man might wait for six months, and the Estates-Commissioners might not offer him a new farm until the expiration of that period, and then he would have no notice at all. How in that case was he to make arrangements for the transfer of his stock and farming implements? Moreover, the Commissioners might say, "The farm we offer you you say is not the sort of farm you want. But we have offered you the farm and if you do not like it out you go."The right hon. Gentleman had said they might rely upon the Commissioners not to turn a man out at the last minute until he had got his crops in. Might he point out that when all the crops had

  1621
  been got in was a bad time for the new man to come in and a bad time for the old tenant to go out? The right hon. Gentleman had said that the Commissioners were not going to make themselves unpopular by doing anything unreasonable, but that was the sort of argument with which they had been met on every Amendment. Every argument they had advanced had been met with the reply "Trust the Commissioners." If that was a good reply why have this Bill at all? Why not pass a measure simply giving the Commissioners full power to deal with all these questions according to their discretion?
  *THE CHAIRMANpointed out that the hon. Baronet was allowing himself great latitude; he could not discuss the Bill upon a particular Amendment.
  SIR F. BANBURYsaid he was dealing with the argument of the Attorney-General for Ireland who said "Trust the Commissioners," and he was entitled to say that that recommendation was one which no sane House of Commons would adopt. He did not, however, want to pursue the matter further, except to say that they should have in this clause, as in every other, directions laid down to guide the Commissioners. What happened ought not to depend upon what might be after all the fanciful dictates of the Estates Commissioners. In England, which was supposed to be the home of the wicked landlord who did everything that was wrong while the tenants did everything that was right, twelve months notice was given, and, what was of more importance, that notice was usually received at a fixed date.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid he must remind the hon. Baronet that the period of notice which was given in England had already been referred to in the debate many times.
  SIR F. BANBURYsaid he was not aware of that, but it was a very strong precedent and he thought was well worth mentioning. He did not know that it had been mentioned before and the Attorney-General did not reply to it. It was, however, a subject which was worthy of consideration.
  MR. CHERRY: I did reply to it.
  SIR F. BANBURYsaid that he did not notice that the right hon. Gentleman had done so, but he would not further pursue the topic. He had much pleasure in supporting the Amendment of his hon. friend, and if it was pressed to a division he should vote for it.
  MR. LAMBTONremarked that a good deal was said about the English landlords and about their turning people out of hearth and home in a cruel manner, but he challenged the right hon. Gentleman to point out cases in which people were turned out at six months notice.
  MR. CHERRY: We have to provide him with another farm.
  MR. LAMBTONsaid that that was not the same thing. If a man was turned out of a farm in England ho could get another farm to his liking in any other part of the country. In this case, however, it did not seem to matter whether or not he liked the farm which was offered him. He challenged the right hon. Gentleman to make this Bill appear analogous to the English practice.
  MR. T. M. HEALYdid not think hon. Members knew what was going on in England in the way of turning men out of their holdings and their homes. They were frequently turned out of their homes under the Lands Clauses Acts with only six months notice. He might also ask what notice had been given to tenants removed to make room for important Government buildings such as those in Parliament Street? None whatever. The late Government served notices on all the tenants of the island of Bereh,even and fixed as arbitrators two local resident magistrates. When those gentlemen had the courage to say they did not believe they had jurisdiction, the law officers of the Crown took them by certiorari be-, fore, the King's Bench. That was the action of a Conservative Government. This Government said to the new tenant "If you need it we will give you a salubrious farm in another district, where you will require no police protection, and

  1623
  where you will be in the promised land of the Orangeman"
  MR. T. L. CORBETTsaid the last speech was no doubt of a very humorous character, but this was a very serious matter, as there was something tragic and pathetic about new tenants, many of whom had been on their holdings twenty-four or twenty-five years, being turned out neck and crop and told to go elsewhere without due notice. After all, in the life of every man there were social and business associations, and it was a serious thing by this new form of statute to remove a man from one part of the country to another. [NATIONALIST laughter.] Although this was a laughing matter for hon. Members below the gangway, he did not think they had grasped the fact that the new tenant might have been in his holding for a quarter of a century. The Government knew that there was really no necessity for this Bill. They were acting in a most harsh, unjust, and tyrannical way to men whose only fault was that they had paid their rent and had done their duty, in order to favour others who had not.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had used most uncontrover-tible arguments in favour of accepting this Amendment. He had said that to accept it would be to rob the Act of one-half of its chief vietues. Then the Attorney-General came on the scene at a later stage and informed the Committee that the Estates Commissioners were above reproach and most sagacious men in all respects, and that they would never dream of turning a man out of his farm until the end of the year. They would have to give six months notice and no man could be put out at the end of this year, so that eighteen months must elapse before these men could be reinstated. But the Chief Secretary never intended that eighteen months should elapse before these evicted tenants were reinstated. The right hon. Gentleman refused the Amendment to postpone the operation of the Act for twelve months after its passing. Both the right hon. Gentleman and the Attorney-General adduced totally different
  1624
  arguments, arguments in direct opposition to each other and neither of which would have been accepted by anyone except the present House of Commons. Another thing which the Attorney-General had said was that no matter what notice was given the unsuitability of the date of the notice would be taken into account in fixing the market value of the farm. It could not possibly be taken into account. The Estates Commissioners fixed the value, and they would not know within a couple of months the time when a tenant would be compelled to give up the farm, and those two months might make a considerable difference. There was no suggestion that the Estates Commissioners would revise the value of the farm when the date was decided as to when it should be given up. They would decide that a farm of a new tenant was to be acquired for the purpose of reinstating an evicted tenant, and after the price which they were to pay to the outgoing tenant and the owner of the soil had been fixed, they would give notice to the new tenant. No price, unless it was fixed on a very extravagant outside scale by the Estates Commissioners in nearly every case where the tenancy was determined at unsuitable dates, could result in anything else than the outgoing tenant being a considerable loser. For these reasons he hoped the right hon. Gentleman might yet see that it was unreasonable for him to tie down these men to this short and inadequate notice.
  MR. CHERRYsaid the hon. Gentleman seemed to think he had discovered some incontrovertible argument, but he himself had been impressed in the directly contrary way. The hon. Member had said that under this Bill it would be impossible to get persons into these holdings until the end of 1908. That was true. The tenants must be served with notice, but the Commissioners could not give notice until they had acquired the untenanted land. The Bill would not be got through until August. Then there would be a month or two to make rules which would bring them to October, and the Commissioners would commence their compulsory proceedings about November. It would be impossible to have the land in their possession before the end of the

  1625
  following May, because the process to obtain it would certainly take six months, and then they might serve their six months notice and be in possession of the new holding by the end of 1908. But the effect of the Amendment would be to delay the matter one year and they would not be in possession until 1909.
  MR. MOOREsaid the Committee had been so entertained by the denunciations of the right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury bench that they were likely to lose sight of the real effect of this Amendment. If this was a case of an ordinary landlord not one could get rid of a present tenant or a future tenant without twelve months notice, but the Estates Commissioners were to be put in the position of being able to get rid of future tenants with six months notice. This was a penal clause against the future tenants. They were to have six months in order to make

  AYES.

  Abrahara.William (Cork, N.E.)

  Chance, Frederick William

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Agnew, George William

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Clough, William

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Alden, Percy

  Clynes, J. R.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Gilhooly, James

  Astbury, John Meir

  Cooper, G. J.

  Gill, A. H.

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Corbett, CH(Sussex, E.Grints'd

  Gladstone.Rt.Hn. Herbert John

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Glover, Thomas

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Barker, John

  Crean, Eugene

  Grant, Corrie

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Barnard, E. B.

  Crooks, William

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Crossley, William J.

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Cullinan, J.

  Halpin, J.

  Bell, Richard

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Hammond, John

  Bertram, Julius

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Bethell, SirJH(Essex, Romf'rd)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Birrell, Rt. Hn. Augustine

  Delany, William

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Boland, John

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Harwood, George

  Boulton, A. C. F.

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

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Branch, James

  Duckworth, James

  Hazleton, Richard

  Brigg, John

  Duffy, William J.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Bright, J. A.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Brooke, Stopford

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Elibank, Master of

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Erskine, David C.

  Hogan, Michael

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Essex, R. W.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Byles, William Pollard

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Cameron, Robert

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Hope.W.Bateman (Somerset.N

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Field, William

  Horniman, Emslie-John

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  up their minds whether they should take a farm which not they themselves had found but somebody else had found for them. Why should, these men be hustled?They were entitled to twelve months notice and he saw no reason why the notice should be cut down to six months. In fact, if the Committee adopted the principle the hon. Member for North Louth had suggested, instead of getting the new tenants out of their holdings in three months it would take three years. The proposal of the Amendment was that a man should have twelve months' notice to give him time to look about him to see if the farm would suit him. Six months was a very short time to find out whether the farm was suitable.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 291; Noes, 69. (Division List No. 310.)

  Hudson, Walter |

  Nicholson.Charles N.(Donc'st'r

  Sileock, Thomas Ball

  Jackson, R. S.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Snowden, P.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Jones,William(Carnarvonshire

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Jowett, F. W.

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Stanley,Hn. A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Steadman.W. C'.

  Kekewich, Sir George

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

  Stewart, Halley (Greenoek)

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Grady, J.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Kelly,James (Roscommon,N

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Malley, William

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  O'Shee, James John

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Lambert, George

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Lamont, Norman

  Partington, Oswald

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan,E.)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Thome, William

  Lea,HughCecil (St.Pancras.E.)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Tomkinson, James

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Philipps.Owen, C. (Pembroke)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Toulmin, George

  Lundon, W.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Lupton, Arnold

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Verney, F. W.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh,Central

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lynch, H. B.

  Price.Robert John(Norf olk.E.)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Pullar, Sir Robert

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

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

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Maclean, Donald

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Wardle, George J.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro*

  Wason,RtHnE. (Clackmannan

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Wason,JohnCathcart (Orkney)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.

  Rees, J. D.

  Watt, Henry A.

  MacVeigh,Charles (Donegal, E.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Weir, James Galloway

  M'Killop.W.

  Richards, T.F.(Wolverhampt'n

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

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

  Richardson, A.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Robertson,Rt.Hn.E. (Dundee)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Robinson, S.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Mansfield,H.Rendall (Lincoln)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Wiles, Thomas

  Marks, G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Massie, J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Meagher, Michael

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Runciman, Walter

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Menzies, Walter

  Russell, T. W.

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

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

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

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Mooney, J. J.

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Winfrey, R.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Sears, J. E.

  Young, Samuel

  Morrell, Philip

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Shackleton, David James

  Murnaghan, George

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Tellers fob the Ayes—Mr.

  Murphy, John

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

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Myer, Horatio

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Pease.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Napier, T. B.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood.Rt.HnSirAlex F.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Dalrymplr, Viscount

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bull, Sir William James

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Arkwright,John Stanhope

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

  Duncan, Robt. (Lanark,Govan

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. Hn SirH

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cavendish,Rt.Hn.Victor C. W.

  Fardell.SirT. George

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fletcher. J. S.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George.

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joieey-

  Forster, Henry William

  Baring, Capt.Hn.G (Winchester

  Chamberlain,RtHnJ.A. (Wore

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

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

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

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

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Hunt, Rowland

  1628

  1629

  Kennaway.Rt.Hn.Sir John H.

  Percy, Earl

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

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

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  King.SirHenry Seymour (Hull)

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

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

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

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

  Liddell, Henry

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

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

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

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

  Long, Rt.Hn.Walter(Dublin.S.

  Smith,F.E. (Liverpool, Walton

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Starky,.John R.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Tellers for the Noes—Mr.

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

  Charles Craig and Mr.

  Moore, William

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Ashley.

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Valentia, Viscount

  MR. MOOREmoved an Amendment providing that the Commissioners' notice to a new tenant should have the effect of determining his tenancy as from the date mentioned in the notice not being less than six months from the "gale day next after the service of such notice." His object, he said, was that the notice to quit should expire on gale day, and the adoption of the Amendment would be in the interests of the Commissioners themselves, and would suit the arrangements of the tenants. The gale term was from the 1st May to 12th November, and that old custom was still kept up in some parts of the country. If liberty were given to serve six months notice in the middle of the wrong month, if he might so speak, to end in the middle of the wrong month, rent was being paid all the time by the tenants, and that would lead to the necessity in every case of apportioning the rent, a very troublesome matter; whereas, if the eviction took place on gale day, there would be no question of apportioning the rent, for it was the proper time for settlements, the tenants being in the habit of paying rent on gale day. There was really no comparison between gale day and any other day in regard to the convenience of the tenant, which he thought the Committee ought to consider to some extent. This point also affected the labourers. The farms, a good many of them, were large and the labourers upon them were engaged from the 1st May and were bound to serve for six months. Therefore, it was for the convenience of the labourers as well as the tenants that the notice should be effective on the last gale day of the year. He thought that would be in the interests of the speedy working of the Act; it would save inconvenience, and to a certain extent would be showing consideration to the new tenant, though
  1630
  possibly that might be a reason why hon. Members below the gangway would oppose his Amendment. He thought they ought to try to meet the convenience of those tenants, and there was no doubt that, in the circumstances of the case, the notice ought to expire on. gale day. Having regard to the fact that the Committee had already decided on the period of six months definitely, he begged to move his Amendment as "from gale day next."
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 31, to leave out the words ' service thereof,' and insert the words ' gale day next after the service of such notice.' "— (Mr. Moore,)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  MR. BIRRELLsaid it was provided that the notice to quit should not be less than six months. The Estates Commissioners had to take into consideration all the circumstances, but as a minimum the notice must be six months. This was an emergency measure, and it could not be justified on any other grounds, although on those grounds it could be amply justified. They wanted to deal with this matter as quickly as possible. They were not disposed to lay themselves open to any risks, and they had provided in this clause for ample notice. It might be a longer period if the Estates Commissioners thought it would be desirable, and they had ample latitude to regulate their conduct according to the necessities of the case. He could not bring himself to believe that any single new tenant under the arrangements of this Bill would be treated with harshness, because he would have had ample notice by inspection of his land, there would have been all

  1631
  the proceedings of the Estates Commissioners seeking to acquire the title of the land, and there was not the faintest reason to suppose that he would be taken unawares. The new tenant would be offered a new farm; he would have time to make himself acquainted with it, and if he did not want it he need not take it. If he refused the offer he would be given compensation. The hardship in the case consisted in his being required to give up his farm, just as there was a hardship in a man being made to turn out of his ancestral hall. Some hon. Members thought there was some hardship in a tenant giving up his land to a

  AYES.

  Abraham,William (Cork, N.E.)

  Cherry, Rt. Hn. R. R.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Adkins, W.Ryland D.

  Clough, William

  Grant, Corrie

  Agnew, George William

  Clynes, J. R.

  Grayson, Albert Victor

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Alden. Percy

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Cooper, G. J.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Corbett C.H.(SussexEGrinstead

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Halpin, J.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Hammond, John

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cox, Harold

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Baker,Joseph A. (Finsbury,E.)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Crean, Eugene

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Baring.Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Cremer.Sir William Randal

  Harwood, George

  Barker, John

  Crooks, William

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Crossley, William J.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Barnard, E. B.

  Cullinan, J

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Hazleton, Richard

  Beauchamp, E.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Bell, Richard

  Delany, William

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

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Devlin, Joseph

  Henry, Charles S.

  Bertram, Julius

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Herbert,T.Arnold (Wycombe)

  Bethell,SirJH (Essex.Romford

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

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Dickson-Poynder. Sir John P.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Hogan, Michael

  Boland, John

  Duckworth, James

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Duffy, William J.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness)

  Hope, W.Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Branch, James

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Brigg, John

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Hudson, Walter

  Bright, J. A.

  Elibank, Master of

  Jackson, R. S.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Erskine, David C.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Brooke, Stopford

  Essex, R. W.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Jones, William(C'arnarvonshire

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Jowett, F. W.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Field, William

  Joyce, Michael

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Findlay, Alexander

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Kelley, George D.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Cameron, Robert

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Gardner.Col.Alan (Hereford,S.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Gilhooly, James

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Chance, Frederick William

  Gill, A. H.

  Lambert, George

  Cheetham, John Frederick,

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Lamont, Norman

  man who was there before him, but he did not see any hardship in allowing the Court to consider their cases. The Estates Commissioners had full control over them, and they could decide whether it was right and equitable to ask one of these new planters to go out. He felt satisfied that they must act quickly, and instead of adopting dilatory proceedings they must adhere to the principle of the Bill.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 301; Noes, 73. (Division List No. 311.)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Snowden, P.

  Lea.Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras.E.

  O'Grady, J.

  Soames, Arthur Welleslev

  Lewis, John Herbert

  O' Kelly,James(Roscommon,N,

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon David

  O'Malley, William

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Lough, Thomas

  O'Shanghnessy, P. J.

  Stanley,Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Lundon, W.

  O'Shee, James John

  Steadman, W. C.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Parker,James (Halifax,

  Stewart, Halley(Greenock)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Partington, Oswald

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Lynch, H. B.

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Macdonald, J.M.(FalkirkB'ghs)

  Philipps,Col.Ivor(S'thampton)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Mackarness, Frederick C.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Maclean, Donald

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Macnamara.Dr. Thomas J.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Thomas.Sir A. (Glamorgan.E.)

  MacNeill.JohnGordonSwift

  Price, C E.(Edinburgh,Central)

  Thorne, William

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Price,RobertJohn(Nofolk,E.)

  Tomkinson, James

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.)

  Radford, G. H.

  Torrance, Sir A. M..

  Mac Veigh,Charles (Donegal,E.)

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Toulmin, George

  M'Callum, JohnM.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Verney, F. W.

  M'Killop, W.

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Walsh, Stephen

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

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Walters, John Tudor

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

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

  Maddison, Frederick

  Rees, J. D.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Wardle, George J.

  Mansfeld.H. Rendall (Lincoln)

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

  Wason. Rt Hn E. (Clackmannan

  Marks. G.Croydon (Launeeston)

  Richardson, A.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Massie, J.

  Roberts, CharlesH. (Lincoln)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Robertson,Rt.Hn.E.(Dundee)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Meaghor, Michael

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Robinson, S.

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Menzies, Walter

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Whitley.John Henry (Halifax)

  Mooney, J. J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wiles, Thomas

  Morgan,J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Runciman, Walter

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Morley, Rt. Hon. John

  Russell, T. W.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Morrell, Philip

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Murnaghan, George

  Sohwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

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

  Murphy, John

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

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

  Myer, Horatio

  Sears, J. E.

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Winfrey, R.

  Napier, T. B.

  Shackleton, David James

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Nieholson,CharlesN.(Doneaster

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Young, Samuel

  Nolan, Joseph

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Norton, Capt.Cecil William

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  O'Brien,Kendal(TipperaryMid)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Tellers for the Ayes—

  O'Brien.Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Pease.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood,RtHnSir Alex. F.

  Cavendish,Rt.Hn. Victor C.W.

  Forster, Henry William

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Gretton, John

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn.Sir H.

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Balcarres, Lord

  Chamberlain.RtHn.J.A.(Worc.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hill. Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Banbury.SirFrederickGeorge

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

  Hills, J. W.

  Baring,Capt. Hn.G.(Wincheste'r

  Collings,Rt.Hn.J. (Birmingham

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

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

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon. SirJohnH.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Craig,Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.

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

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark. Govan

  Liddell, Henry

  Campbell. Rt. Hn. J. H. M.

  Faber, George Deniaon (York)

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

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Long, Col. CharlesW.(Evesham

  1634

  1635

  Long,Rt,Hn.Walter(Dublin,S)

  Smith.F.E. (Liverpool,Walton)

  Willoughby do Eresby, Lord

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Starkey, John R.

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

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Wolff, Gustay Wilhelm

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark)

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

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrent

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Percy, Earl

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Valentia, Viscount

  Tellers for the Noes—Mr.

  Randies, Sir John Scurrah

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Moore and Mr. Remnant.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

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

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

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

  MR. MOOREmoved an Amendment to provide that where the Estates Commissioners acquired any tenanted land under this Act the notice to quit should be served on the occupier within three years after the land had been acquired. He hoped the Amendment would be accepted by the Government, because he was sure that everyone interested in the question would be glad to have some finality. When the Estates Commissioners had bought an estate, they were to have the right of giving what were described as "new tenants" notice to quit. The Chief Secretary had said that any new tenant would know easily without formal notice whether he had to go or not. It was not too much to ask the Commissioners to decide within three years after they had acquired an estate whether they were going to get rid of a new tenant or not. It was bad enough for a new tenant to be on tenterhook? for three years while the Estates Commissioners were making up their minds what action they would take. This was a perfectly reasonable limitation to put in. If these people were to be turned out, their period of uncertainty—a grave and anxious period for many of them—should not be allowed to extend beyond three years. The Amendment would safeguard them from having to go through an indefinite period of anxiety with the risk of being turned out at some remote time.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 31, at the end of Sub-section (1) to insert the words, ' Provided that such notice shall be served within three years after the land has been acquired.' "—(MR. Moore.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."'
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he could not see that there was any necessity whatsoever for a limitation of this kind. The Estates
  1636
  Commissioners knew the gravity of the circumstances of the case; they fully recognised that a disagreeable business was being put upon them, and their only desire would be to get rid of it as speedily as possible. Hon. Members opposite had stated an imaginary hardship that would be imposed on the new tenants. The tenants were represented. He was perpectly certain that if they were only made acquainted with the terms of the measure most of them would think that they were afforded good opportunities for making beneficial use of their holdings; they could have new farms if they wanted them, or full compensation if they preferred to go out, in which case they would, at all events, get money to try their luck elsewhere. He did not admit that any hardship was being imposed on them, or that they were in any way being interfered with in the ordinary course of the culture of their land. Nobody could form any estimate as to how many new tenants would be served with notices. That would depend on a variety of circumstances, and it might be found that the number of cases in which notices would be given were comparatively few.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid the Chief Secretary took a remarkable view of the new tenants. He seemed to think the new tenants were different in their tastes and inclinations from all the other agricultural tenants in Ireland. He, himself, did not think that opinion was well-founded. It might be that some of them answered the description which the Chief Secretary and the Attorney-General had given, but he thought the rest of them did not differ from the other agricultural tenants in their liking for home or in their knowledge of business. The Chief Secretary had repudiated any suggestion of that kind, and time would show who was right. He thought the right hon. Gentleman was lumping them together

  1637
  in one class, whereas he would find that there were two quite different sets of thorn, and that in all probability the majority would not take the view which he and the Attorney-General took.
  MR. BIRRELL: The right hon. Gentleman must not assume that notice will be given to every new tenant.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he was not assuming that. He did not suppose that the land every new tenant was occupying would be required for the purposes of this Bill when other land could be used. He was attributing to the Estates Commissioners no mala fides in the performance of their disagreeable task. The Chief Secretary had stated that the Estates Commissioners did not wish this task put upon them. He could well believe that, and it was a most unfortunate thing that the Government had decided to do so. They had enough work to do in the carrying out of the Act of 1903. The duty of extreme difficulty which was now to be cast upon them was to be made more difficult by the refusal of the Government to put in the statute what they had frequently put in their speeches, namely, that the Bill was intended for a temporary purpose which was to be brought to a conclusion within a reasonable time. The Government had again and again declared that the Bill was intended to apply only to a limited number of persons and to operate only for a limited time. The Chief Secretary believed that there would not be a considerable amount of pressure brought to bear on the Estates Commissioners to deal with more than 2,000 cases. When he and his friends on that side of the House talked of pressure they did not mean illegitimate pressure, or pressure which would be used in an improper way. What they meant was perfectly legitimate pressure by those who wished to be regarded as evicted tenants. If a reasonable time-limit was stated in the Bill, all who brought their cases before the Estates Commissioners would know that, unless their claims were satisfied within that time, there were insuperable reasons against the claims, or that there had been blameworthy delay on their part in
  1638
  making the claims. He could not understand why, in view of their protestations that the Bill was intended for only a limited purpose, the Government did not accept the Amendment which would give effect to their own words. The Chief Secretary had said that they on the Opposition side of the House talked as if all the sitting tenants were going to be displaced. They did not say that, but they thought that when this Bill became law the new tenant who had spent time and labour on his farm would believe that there was a good prospect of his displacement. And with all these conditions before him there would be unsettlement in his mind, which would lead him not to take the same interest in his holding. The Amendment seemed to be most reasonable, and carried out what the Government had said was their desire. He could not believe that either the Chief Secretary or the Attorney-General had seriously considered what they were saying when they alleged that to displace a man from his holding, if he were doing well, would be no hardship provided he was paid for it. The foundation of all the trouble in Ireland was the sentiment which attached the peasants and small farmers to their holdings. And why were they restoring the evicted tenants now? It was because the Government said that the men who had been evicted for twenty-three or twenty-four years from their holding for nonpayment of rent still retained that sentiment. But did not the same sentiment exist among the men who had been on these farms for twenty-three or twenty-four years and in some cases twenty-eight years and who had made these holdings a success? The majority of them were not bogus tenants who had taken no interest in their holdings nor tried to develop them and make the best of them. Many of them were successful agriculturists; and unless some such limit as was suggested were put into the Bill, a great injury would be done to the tenants owing to the feeling of insecurity. To do this injustice in order to restore evicted tenants could not be justified.
  MR. BARRIEsaid he was sorry that the Chief Secretary had refused to accept the limit as proposed. New

  1639
  tenants should know for how long the sword was to be suspended over their heads. He quite differed from the view expressed by the Government that these tenants were going to have a good thing done to them. The vast majority of them were really first class agriculturist—men who were not afraid to take their courage in both hands and to take these farms when many of them were left derelict, not through anything that the landlord had done, but because of the action of a certain body to which he would not further refer. These men had many of them come to these holdings twenty years ago, and had been successful on them as they had been in other parts of Ireland. They had shown by the improvements they had effected that they knew their business. They were a credit to the district in which they lived, even though the Attorney-General for Ireland had called them centres of disturbance. Under the operation of the Bill they were to have this unkind reward for all they had done. It would not make for the peace of the districts or for good husbandry for these agriculturists to have this unkind fate hanging over them without some time limit. Money compensation would not compensate them for the summary dismissal that was to be their fate. It was in the interests of the peace of the districts and only fair to the tenants that some such time limit as was now proposed should be inserted in the Bill. If three years were too short let the Chief Secretary suggest some reasonable time. If the matter were as urgent as the Government made out, such a limit would help matters.
  MR. CLANCYsaid that one of the ideas most eloquently expounded by the opponents of the Bill was that there should be no priority given to the evicted tenants in cases of restoration, but the effect of the Amendment before the Committee would compel the Estates Commissioners to give priority to the new tenants. After such inconsistency he hoped the Government had no intention of giving way.
  MR. CHAELES CRAIGpointed out that the ten or twelve eminently reasonable Amendments which had been submitted Unionist Members had all been ruthlessly
  1640
  brushed aside as though they were unreasonable and absurd. The Chief Secretary had said that not many sitting tenants would be asked to leave their holdings, but he and his friends knew quite well that the greatest effort would be made by Nationalist Members, who had great influence in Ireland.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: We are not conscious of it.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that giants were rarely conscious of their strength; and that influence would be used to get every one of these new tenants put out of his farm and the original occupant, or his descendant, reinstated. The United Irish League would be sure to exert its influence in this matter, and the tenant would be constantly apprehensive that he might be the next to be turned out; but yet the Government declared that these men had nothing to complain of, and that their lot was a perfectly happy one. In many ways the uncertainty would be a hardship to the tenant. There was the question of schooling for the children and so on, and all these things would be kept hanging over the heads of these unfortunate people, while the only excuse given was that the measure was urgent. The right hon. Gentleman's idea seemed to be that the whole business should be carried through within four or five years. But he did not see why he should object to three years as the period to be fixed. Surely it was not too much to ask the Commissioners to say within three years whether a man should be turned out or not. The Bill was coming into operation within two months and it seemed to him that three years was more than a reasonable time to allow for this purpose. Moreover, to refuse to put a limit upon the time within which the preliminary notices should be served was to deprive these men of what hon. Members below the gangway had been agitating for for a long time, namely, fixity of tenure. They would be kept in a state of suspense with this sword of Damocles hanging over their heads for a very long period. The Chief Secretary apparently had a fixed determination not to accept any Amendment of any sort or kind from that side of the House. [MINISTERIAL cries

  1641
  of "Oh!"] Well, that was the only conclusion they could come to after the discussion of the last ten or twelve Amendments which the right hon. Gentleman himself had admitted to be reasonable. He thought it was an unprecedented state of affairs that the Bill upon which they had been engaged for three days should go forward without a single word of Amendment.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid he must remind the hon. Member that his remarks were not germane to the Amendment before the Committee.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that the proceedings had become a farce. It was insulting that they should argue there clay after day and hour after hour, and the Attorney-General for Ireland or the Chief Secretary budge not a single inch to meet them in any way. He repeated that the present state of affairs came perilously near to insult, although he knew that the Chief Secretary did not think it a serious thing to insult a small minority.
  MR. BIRRELL: I never insulted anybody.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he had heard many expressions from the right hon. Gentleman which he regarded as insults, although the right hon. Gentleman's idea of insult and his might not agree.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Really, MR. Chairman, I must ask what is the question before the House.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must confine himself to the Amendment before the House.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he thought that there might be some hon. Members on the opposite side of the House who would listen to the appeals which were made from the Opposition side that a limitation should be put upon the operations under the Bill, so that men should not be left in a state of uncertainty. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that there was urgsncy
  1642
  in the matter. The Amendment would secure that urgency would be recognised, because the Commissioners would know that they had only three years in which to make up their minds, and that they would have to carry out the provisions of the Bill in that time. Therefore, so far from hindering the Bill from coming into operation and destroying the urgency of its character the Amendment would go in that direction. It was well to have unpleasant things over as speedily as possible, and therefore he supported the Amendment.
  SIR C. HILLwho appealed to the Chief Secretary to give them something in the nature of a concession, considered that the Amendment was a reasonable one. He was sure that the Chief Secretary would not think that they wanted to obstruct, but he thought they ought to be met in some manner. The hon. Member was proceeding to refer to some of the details of the Bill when
  THE CHAIRMANsaid that his remarks were not relevant to the Amendment before the House.
  MR. T. L. CORBETTsaid that the Amendment was a most fair and reasonable one. It simply provided that men who had been living on their holdings for a quarter of a century and over, should not have this sword of Damocles suspended over them. He hoped the Government would come to a just decision in the matter and accept the Amendment. The Bill was one which might be worthy of the Empress of China, but it certainly was not worthy of the House of Commons. If hon. Members had listened at all to the arguments of the right hon. Member for South Dublin, they must have seen that the suspense which hung over the heads of these men must tend to bad farming. He would not repeat the arguments of sentiment that had been used, but he certainly thought that some of the sentiment should be kept for those who stood in closer relation to these farms than the evicted tenants; for those whose families had been born on these farms, who had known no other home, and whose associations,

  1643
  social and business, were wholly gathered round them.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLsaid it was exceeding difficult to impress hon. Members opposite with any of the Amendments which were proposed from the Opposition side of the House. If they proposed to extend the scope of the Bill, they were told it was a question of urgency, and now when in the interest of urgency they proposed a limit of time in which these compulsory powers were to come to an end as regarded the new tenants it was rejected. Such limitations were universal in Acts of Parliament. Under the Lands Clauses Acts a period was fixed. Under every special Act he had known or read which incorporated the Lands Clauses Acts, the time was limited; yet in this matter, which was so urgent that it would not admit of the extension of a day when they asked that the fate of the new tenant should be known in three years, the right hon. Gentleman was no longer a middle-aged man in a hurry, but a disappointed politician. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the Committee was not to assume that notice would be given to every one of these new tenants, and he had stated that he would not like to see, nor did he believe that there ought to be, any interference with those new tenants who were to be deemed ordinary farmers. If that was his view why did he not put it in his Bill? Why did he not give these men the knowledge that if they were spared for three years they would not be interfered with at all? Three years was long enough to keep them in suspense. Did he not know what was going on in Ireland? Many of these men were bonafde hard-working farmers, and they had been the victims of intimidation for a long period. What opportunities for the intimidation of the tenants of these farms was not the right hon. Gentleman giving, if he enabled the fear of being expropriated from their holdings to hang over their heads for the rest of their lives. There was no limit whatever in the Bill. He could have understood it if the right hon. Gentleman had put in a limit of five years. He had said that if compulsory powers were not taken it would take five years to settle
  1644
  the question. Therefore it should take less with compulsory powers. Yet when they asked for a limit of three years the Chief Secretary would not listen to it, because the request camp, from his opponents. The right hon. Gentleman was absolutely sincere when he stated that his belief was that the Estates Commissioners would not desire to disturb many of these new tenants who were bone fide agriculturists. But the hon. Member for West Waterford stated yesterday most distinctly that the impression left in the minds of the Irish people, was that the Government intended by these means to expropriate every one of these new tenants.
  MR. O'SHEEremarked that what he said was that the impression left on the minds of the people of Ireland and upon the minds of himself and some of his colleagues was that the Estates Commissioners were to have the discretion to expropriate any tenants they desired.
  MR. JAMES CAMPBELLaccepted the hon. Gentleman's statement of what he intended to convey, but his own distinct impression from what the hon. Member said yesterday was that the result would be that the powers of this Bill would be applied to every new tenant without distinction. However, the Attorney-General had left very little doubt about his view of the subject. He had said that one of the great benefits of the Bill would be that they would be able to get rid of the new tenants and thus save the expense of protecting them; that they were centres of disturbance. But if it was not the intention to expropriate the whole of these new tenants why was not some indication to be found on the face of the Bill? Was it fair play or justice or anything approaching it that these men should for the rest of their lives be left under a sentence which might at any time as the result of pressure brought to bear on them or on the Estates Commissioners turn them out of their holdings? Supposing a man was not required to turn out: according to the right hon. and learned Gentleman the people of the district knew that if they interfered with him he would become a centre of disturbance and be

  1645
  got rid of. Although they had not interfered with him before, when this Bill was passed they would do so, and the Government would be placed in the dilemma that they would have either to protect him or to expropriate him. Although he did not for a moment doubt the assurances of the Chief Secretary, he must still ask why he did not provide for this in his Bill'? He would like to remind the right hon. Gentleman that while he objected to fetter the discretion of the Estates Commissioners in this way he had fettered their discretion in the case of landowners in a number of ways in Section 6. But so far as these tenants, whose lot had not been the happiest, were concerned and who had carried on their business with great difficulty, the right hon. Gentleman proposed to put upon them an extra burden and expose them to an extra trial for the rest of their lives by putting into the hands of their neighbours a power which could be forged into a weapon for their expropriation and expulsion. The right hon. Gentleman believed the objects of the Bill would be accomplished in three years, because he had said he could not afford to wait five years; then why in the name of justice would he not accept this Amendment which enabled Parliament to say to the new tenant: "If you are not interfered with in the next three years you may know that you are safe."
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid that hon. Members above the gangway had shown themselves to be such splendid spendthrifts of the public time that no one would suppose that the guillotine fell at. It was suggested that these compulsory powers should be exercised within the next three years. What happened in regard to the Leasehold Clauses Act of 1877? It was provided that any leaseholder who desired to break his lease should make application within three years. When that Bill was sent down from the House of Lords it enabled the. landlord to break his agreement as well as the tenant within the same period, but the House of Commons insisted, upon giving only the tenant the Bill. In every Expiring Laws Continuance Bill the Conservative Government found it necessary to renew these powers. In 1896, the
  1646
  Conservative Government provided that the right of application to break his lease should be made perpetual for the leaseholder. The argument used was this: Was the landlord to be harrassed every year by applications from his tenants to break his lease; was he never to have peace and quietness in relation to his holding? Two years was to be the limit, and the justice of the case seemed to be such that the Conservative Government ultimately provide I that at any time a tenant might go into Court with an application to break his tenancy. The Bill now before the House proceeded upon the hypothesis that the evicted tenant should be restored to his holding. There were hundreds of cases to be inquired into of a painful character which would take, a considerable time. The Bill could not restore any one of these evicted tenants within eighteen months, and yet they had the calm proposal that in the year 1909, or three years hence, the powers of the Estates Commissioners should lapse. He remembered that in 1881 the late MR. W. H. Smith made an exactly similar proposal to this with regard to the Land Act of that year. He proposed that the Act of 1881 should come to an end in seven years, which, he said, would be amply sufficient to settle the whole of the fair rents and settle the whole land question in Ireland. The same gentleman who made that proposal was himself afterwards a party to a far more drastic and peremptory, and from his point of view, far more harsh proposal, than MR. Gladstone had submitted. Not only had seven years elapsed, but three times seven years, and the powers which it was then declared would be entirely exhausted in seven years, were still unexpired, unexhausted, and absolutely necessary. Formerly coercion, which was declared to be abhorrent, was only passed for three years. Who made coercion perpetual in Ireland? Was not the Party that made coercion applicable at any time, taking away the liberties of the whole of the people of Ireland, acting as a perpetual menace to the Irish people, the very Party who were saying that this beneficent measure of assessment was to be put an end to at the close of three years? It was an absurd position that hon. Gentlemen were

  1647
  taking up. At one time they declared that the planters were bogus tenants, so immersed in debt that it was necessary to give notice to their creditors. Two hours had been occupied in discussing the position of the planters, men who had been brought from the north and other parts of Ireland, accompanied by armed policemen, and who were to cultivate that land not with ploughs but with blunderbusses. But they all knew the object of this prolonged discussion. They were on Clause 3, and the real clause of interest to hon. Gentlemen above the gangway was Clause 12, which dealt with the tenure of office of the Estates Commissioners, and upon that they would have some chance of discussing the letter of MR. Bailey to a certain gentleman, who should be nameless, and the letter of that gentleman to MR. Bailey. That was what they really wanted to come to, but Gentlemen above the gangway, before they approached that ChesterfieldIan correspondence, would take up time in discussing three years, and five years, and the indentures of the planters' children. He begged of them, as at all events the shears must close at half-past ten, to approach some

  AYRS.

  Acland-Hood.RtHn.SirAlex. F.

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Duncan,Robert (Lanark,Govan

  Pease,HerbertPike(Darlington

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt,Hon.SirH.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Percy, Earl

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Forster, Henry William

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Balfour,RtHn. A. J.(City Lond.)

  Gardner, Ernest (Borks, East)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Banbury, Sir FrederickGeorge

  Gretton, John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Baring,Capt.Hn.G (Winchester

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Robert, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

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

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Kenyon-Slaney.Rt. Hon. Col. W.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. VictorC. W.

  King,Sir HenrySeymour (Hull)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Win.

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

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

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

  Liddell, Henry

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Worc.

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

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Long. Col. Charles W.(E Yesham

  Coates.E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Tellers for the Ayes—

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

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Mr. Ashley and Mr. Charles

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Craig.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Moore, William

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork.N.E.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Baker Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Agnew George William

  Asquith, Rt.Hn.HerbertHenry

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Alden, Percy,

  Astbury, John Meir

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight]

  question of public interest. Let them approach at any rate the question of the tenure of the sub-commissioners. His last reason for opposing the Amendment was this. Let them give the planters and crofters a chance. In three years time a Conservative Government might be back in office. Why was all this work to be done against planters under a Liberal Government? If it was to be limited to three years they would hurry up, and the whole work of expropriation and spoliation and hardship would be done under the regime of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. But if the time was extended in the way the Bill proposed so that they might be six or seven years over the work, the hon. and learned Gentleman might probably be Chief Secretary for Ireland with MR. Bailey and Mr. Finucane under his thumb, and then, if the time remained as the Bill proposed, would be the paradise of the land grabbers under the regime of a Conservative administration.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Aves, 70; Noes, 292. (Division List No. 312.)

  Barker, John

  Fullerton, Hugh

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Gardner, Col. Alan(Hereford,S.)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Gilhooly, James

  MacVeagh. Jeremiah (Down,S.)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Gill, A. H.

  MacVeigh,Charles (Donegal. E.)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John

  M'Callum, John M.

  Bell, Richard

  Glendinning, R. G.

  M'Kean, John

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Bertram, Julius

  Gooch, George Peabody

  M'Killop, W.

  Bethell, Sir J.H.(Essex, Romf'rd

  Grant, Corrie

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

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Grayson, Albert Victor

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Bcland, John

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Mansfield,H.Rendall (Lincoln)

  Branch, James

  Halpin, J.

  Marks, G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Brigg, John

  Hammond, John

  Massie, J.

  Bright, J. A.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Meagher, Michael

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Hart-Davies. T.

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Menzies, Walter

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Mooney, J. J.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hazleton, Richard

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cameron, Robert

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Morgan,J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Campbell-Bannerrman, Sir H.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morrell, Philip

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

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

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Causton. Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Henry, Charles S.

  Murnaghan, George

  Chance, Frederick William

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Murphy, John

  Cheetham, Jolin Frederick

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Myer, Horatio

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hogan, Michael

  Napier, T. B.

  Clough, William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Newnes, F. (Notts., Bassetlaw)

  Clynes, J. E.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hope, W.Bateman(Somerset,N)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hudson, Walter

  O'Brien,Kendal(TipperaryMid)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Cox, Harold

  Jackson, R. S.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

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

  Crean, Eugene

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Kelly,James (Roscommon, N

  Crcmer, Sir William Randal

  Jones, William(Carnarvonsh're

  O'Malley, William

  Crombie, John William

  Jowett, F. W.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Crooks, William

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Shee, James John

  Crossley, William J.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Parker, James (Halifax.)

  Cullinan, J.

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Partington, Oswald

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Kelley, George D.

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Dalmeny, Lord

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Pearee, William (Limehouse)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Philipps,Col.Ivor (S'thampton)

  Delany, William

  Kilbride, Denis

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Devlin, Joseph

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Price,C.E.(Edinburgh,Central)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Lambert, George

  Price,RobertJohn(Norfolk.E.)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Lamont, Norman

  Radford, G. H.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Duckworth, James

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Duffy, William J.

  Layland-Barratt, Franeis

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Duncan,C (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras,E.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Elibank, Master of

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Richards,T.F.(Wolverhampton

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lough, Thomas

  Richardson, A.

  Faber, G. H.)Boston)

  Lundon, W.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lupton, Arnold

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Robertson.Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Field, William

  Lynch, H. B.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Robinson, S.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mackam;ss,Frederic C.

  Roehe, Augustine (Cork)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Maclean, Donald

  Roehe, John (Galway, East)

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  1650

  1651

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Runcimin, Walter

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Russell, T. W.

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Whitley.John Henry (Halifax)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Scott, A. H.(AshtonunderLyne

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Sears, J. E.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Shackleton, David James

  Tomkinson, James

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

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

  Toulmin, George

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Wilson, J.W.WorcestershircN.)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Verney, F. W.

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

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

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

  Winfrey, R.

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Ward,John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Young, Samuel

  Snowdon, P.

  Wason, Rt. Hn. E. (Clackmannan

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Wason,JohnCathcart(Orkney)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Waterlow, D. S.

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

  Stanley.HnA.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Watt, Henry A.

  .

  Steadman, W. C.

  Weir, James Galloway

  *MR. ASHLEYmoved an Amendment providing that the Estates Commissioners should "within three months" from the service of the notice determining the tenancy of a new tenant offer to put him forthwith into possession of another parcel of land. He said he proposed the substitution of the words "within three months, etc.," for the words in the original text, with a view to giving the new tenant sufficient time to go over the new farm offered to him and see whether it would suit him or not. As the Bill stood there was nothing to prevent his having only a week or a fortnight to make up his mind. This proposal would give the tenant three months to make up his mind whether he would take the farm offered to him or accept compensation. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, lines 32 and 33, to leave out the words ' on or before the aforesaid date,' and insert the words ' within three months from the service of the aforesaid notice.' "—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  MR. BIRRELLsaid he had no objection to the Amendment. Its object was that the new tenant who was going to be provided with a new farm should have a proper opportunity of seeing it in order to decide whether he would
  1652
  prefer to have the farm or refuse it and accept compensation. Although he did not think the words were really necessary it was a proper Amendment to move, and he was perfectly willing to accept it.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. POWERmoved an Amendment providing that the parcel of land should be one which, "in the opinion of the said Commissioners," was as suitably provided with buildings and other requirements as the original holding. He proposed the insertion of the words quoted in order to remove ambiguity from the clause, and diminish litigation and disputes. The clause was, to some extent, ambiguous, and he thought it was in the interests of all classes that there should be no ambiguity about it. To secure the expeditious working of the Act the words he had suggested were necessary, and they were intended to confer upon the Estates Commissioners discretionary power. They had in the past had occasion to criticise these gentlemen, but they knew that they had been handicapped by the Conservative Government in carrying out their duties. He thought the words he suggested would commend themselves to the Government. It might be said that the words were unnecessary and redundant, but the matter ought to be made absolutely clear. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 39, after the word 'which,' to insert the words ' in the opinion of the said Commissioners.' "—(MR. Power.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. CHERRYsaid he recognised that the Amendment was in accordance with the spirit of the clause, the object of the Government being to make the Commissioners judges in all these matters, and he was prepared to accept it.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that for precisely the same reasons which the Attorney-General had given for accepting the Amendment he had decided to oppose it. All through the Bill the Estates Commissioners were made judges in everything, and now the Government were accepting an Amendment which would make them judges as to the

  AYES.

  Abraham. William (Cork, N.E.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cleland, J. W.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Clough William

  Gilhooly, James

  Alden, Percy

  Clynes, J. R.

  Gill, A. H.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Gladstone.Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Asquith,Rt. Hon.HerbertHenry

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Asbury, John Meir

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Goddard, Daniel Foru

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

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

  Grant, Corrie

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Barker, John

  Cox, Harold

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Halpin, J.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Crombie, John William

  Hammond. John

  Beauchamp, E.

  Crooks, William

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Crossley, William J.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Bell, Richard

  Cullinan, J.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Curran Peter Francis

  Haworth. Arthur A.

  Bethell.SirJ.H. (Essex.Romf'rd

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Delany, William

  Hazleton. Richard

  Black, Arthur W.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Boland, John

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charlea

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Dobson, Thomas W.

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

  Branch, James

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Brigg, John

  Duckworth, James

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Bright, J. A.

  Duffy, William J.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Hogan, Michael

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Elibank, Master of

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Holt, Richard Dinning

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Cameron, Robert

  Ferens, T. R.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Field, William

  Hudson, Walter

  Causton,Rt.Hn.RichardKnight

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Chance, Frederick William

  Findlay, Alexander

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Jackson, R. S.

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  suitability of the buildings. He wished to express his entire dissent from the principle of making the Commissioners judges in their own cause throughout the Bill.
  MR T. L. CORBETTsaid they were now beginning to realise the reason why the last Amendment was accepted. There was generally a sort of "deal "I effected in these matters, and the conicession of a reasonable and fair Amendment which had just been made to the Opposition was discounted by the acceptance of the Amendment of the hon. Member below the gangway. They were making the Estates Commissioners absolute dictators in everything.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes. 264; Noes, 57. (Division List No. 313.)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Joyce, Michael

  Nicholson,Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Snowden, P.

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Kennedy. Vincent Paul

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkeeny)

  Stanley,Hn.A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool

  Steadman, W. C.

  Kilbride, Denis

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

  Stewart, Halley (Greenoek)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N.

  Strachey. Sir Edward

  Laidlaw, Robert

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Lambert, George

  O'Shee, James John

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Lamont, Norman

  Parker, James (Halifax;)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Partington, Oswald

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radeliffe)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Thomas,Sir A. (Glamorgan, E,)

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras,E.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Tomkinson, James

  Levy. Sir Maurice

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Verney, F. W.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

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

  Vivian, Henry

  Lough, Thomas

  Price.RobertJohn (Norfolk, E.)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lundon, W.

  Radford, G. H.

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

  Lupton, Arnold

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Wardle, George J.

  Lynch, H. B.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Wason,John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Maclean, Donald

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Weir, James Galloway

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Riehards.T.F. (Wolverhampt'n

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)1

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Richardson, A.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  White, Patrick (Meath. North)

  MacVeigh,Charles(Donegal, E.)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Whitley.John Henry (Halifax;)

  M'Callum, John M.

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee)

  Whittaker. Sir Thomas Palmer

  M'Kean, John

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Wiles, Thomas

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Robinson, S.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  M'Killop, W.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Williamson, A.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Mankeld, Harry (Northants)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Massie, J.

  Runciman Walter

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

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Russell. T. W.

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

  Meagher, Michael

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Menzies, Walter

  Scott,A.H. (Ashton under Lyne

  Young, Samuel

  Mooney, J. J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Shackleton. David James

  Morrell. Philip"

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

  Tellers for the Ayes, Mr.

  Murnaghan. George

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Murphy, John

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Pease.

  Myer, Horatio

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Nannetti. Joseph P,

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  NOES.

  Aeland-Hood,RtHn.SirAlex.F.

  Du Cros, Harvey

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Duncan,Robert (Lanark.Govan

  Moore, William

  Ashley, W.W

  Faber, George Denigon (York)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Aubrey-Fletcher.Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Pease.Herbert Pike(Darlington

  Balcarres. Lord

  Forster, Henry William

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Randies, Sir John Scurrah

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

  Gretton, John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Beckett. Hon. Cervase

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield,EcclesalI

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. Carlile, E. Hildred

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Edmd's

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Cavenidsh, Rt.Hon.VictorC.W.

  Hills, J. W.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Hunt, Rowland

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

  Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.

  Kennaway.Rt.Hon.Sir JohnH.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

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

  Coates. E.Feetham (Lewisham)

  King,Sir HenrySeymour (Hull)

  Tellers for the Noes—Mr.

  Coehrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

  Lane-For;, G. R.

  Hugh Barrie and Mr. Charles

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Liddell, Henry

  Craig.

  Craik, Sir Henry

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

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Long,Rt.Hn.Walte'(Dublin,S.)

  MR ASHLEYmoved an Amendment to provide that, instead of the Estates Commissioners, the tribunal to award compensation to a new tenant who refused to enter on a parcel of land offered to him by the Commissioners, should be a court of arbitration appointed as provided in the schedule to the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870. He did not consider it was right that two Estates Commissioners, or even the whole three together, should be the only tribunal to decide what compensation should be given to the new tenant. The decision of the Commissioners was to be final, no provision for appeal being contained in the Bill. If the Amendment was not accepted, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would outline some form of appeal from the Estates Commissioners. The Act of 1870 provided—
  "If both parties concur a single arbitrator may be appointed.
  "If both parties do not concur in the appointment of a single arbitrator, each party on the request of the other party shall appoint an arbitrator.
  "If for the space of fourteen days after the service by one party or the other of a request made in writing to appoint an arbitrator, such last mentioned party fails to appoint an arbitrator, (hen upon such failure the party making the request may apply to the Court, and thereupon the dispute shall be decided by the Court in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
  "Where more than one arbitrator has been appointed, the arbitrators shall, before they enter upon the matters referred to them, appoint by writing under their hands an umpire to decide on any matters on which they may differ.
  "The decision of every umpire on the matters referred to him shall be final."
  The proposal in the Amendment had the advantage over the one contained in the Bill that in all probability the arbitrators appointed would be experts who had a first class knowledge of the value of land, and would be able to arrive at a correct conclusion as to the amount of money the new tenant should receive. They would be absouitely impartial. This method of appointing arbitrators was embodied in the Arbitration Act of 1889, and the Lands Clauses Acts, of which one or two clauses were embodied in this Bill. It appeared, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman thought some portions
  1658
  of the Lands Clauses Acts were good. Perhaps he might think that other portions could be introduced in this measure. The Lands Clauses Acts had been in force for sixty years, and had worked satisfactorily.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, lines 2 and 3, to leave out the words ' the Estates Commissioners,' and insert the words ' a court of arbitration shall be appointed as in the schedule to The Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, mentioned and.' "—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Question, proposed, "That the words | proposed to be left out stand part of the ' clause."
  MR BIRRELLsaid he was sorry he could not accept the Amendment. The question they had to determine here; was the value of so many acres of Irish land. He quite agreed that that was an important question, and that the people who had to decide it should have some knowledge of the value of Irish land. That knowledge came not by erudition or study or by university degrees, but could be gained only by knowledge of the different localities. Therefore, they had to find a tribunal which would be likely to have possession of that knowledge and experience, and which should at the same time act with some degree of common sense and similarity of judgment. Therefore they had come to the conclusion that it would be impossible to hope to arrive at any determination of the question by adopting the process of arbitration. Of course, if a single arbitrator could be hit upon, that, no doubt, might be a satisfactory solution of the problem. There was something like that provided in the Lands Clauses Act, although it had not been frequently found practicable, and therefore they could not rely upon it. Then there was the case of double arbitration. The probability was that the two arbitrators would differ, though not, materially; they would not look at the figures in the same way; and therefore the umpire was called in. That would involve a great deal of delay and difficulty; on the question of the value of an Irish holding there would be a great variety of opinions, and the Government thought they were entitled to

  1659
  make use of the great knowledge of this subject which the Estates Commissioners had obtained during the last four or five years in different parts of Ireland. The Judges of the Supreme Court were, in his opinion, the last persons to be imported into questions of this sort; he did not think English Judges would ever dream of taking up such cases. His hon. friend had suggested that they should set up machinery under the Irish Land Act to arbitrate on each individual case, and to settle the value of the piece of land affected, rather than hand over the duty to the three Estates Commissioners to deal with the whole of the cases. He hoped he could dissipate the cloud of suspicion with which hon. Gentlemen opposite had veiled the Estates Commissioners. It had been said that this Bill had been drafted by the Estates Commissioners, or a majority of them; and that they had implored that the duties should be placed upon them. He could assure the Committee that the Estates Commissioners had no desire whatever to have those powers thrust upon them, and that they never saw the Bill till after it was drafted, and until they were asked to undertake the heritage imposed upon them. How any three gentlemen could desire that those duties should be imposed upon them he could not see, but the Government knew that the great knowledge which these gentlemen had acquired during the last four or five years as to the value of the land made them a body which would act speedily and without much cost. 80,000 acres of land had to be acquired in Ireland for the purpose of providing accommodation for some 2,000 persons, and it was desirable that that work should be done quickly and fairly.
  MR MOORE: What about an appeal?
  MR BIRRELLsaid that the hon. Gentleman suggested that each side should appoint a man, and the two men, should appoint an umpire. No doubt that was an appeal. There would be a landlord's man and a tenant's man, and a man supposed to be neither a landlord's nor a tenant's man, but an impartial man. The Estates Commissioners were in no sense either landlords' men or tenants' men, and the result would be of no
  1660
  benefit to them. It was nothing to them how much the transaction cost. They were not in the position of the promoters of an undertaking who were anxious to get land in order to run a railway through it, and to get it as cheaply as possible, so that their earning powers should be all the greater.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid that this was an entirely new change. Even under the Labourers Act of last year there were arbitrators appointed.
  MR. BIRRELLsaid that the rural district councils acted quite differently. They were animated by local patriotism, and wanted to see the labourers on the land in order that they might get their votes at the next election, or were perhaps anxious to give their friends a job. The Estates Commissioners, however, had no constituents. They were entitled to the rights of civil servants, whatever those rights might be; and they had no object in getting something for their' friends, and did not expect any reward. If the Estates Commissioners could not fix the value of the land to be acquired he did not know who could, and he did not think it possible for anybody to suggest that any land would under the provisions of this Bill be taken at an unfair price. The Commissioners, who would be charged with very difficult duty, did not desire these powers, which, however, he believed would be discharged without fear or favour. They would not be the purchasers of the land; they would acquire it for a public purpose with the Treasury behind them. They would not benefit by the transaction; they would not be actuated by animosity towards landlords. He repudiated the idea that in this matter the Commissioners could be looked upon as being judges in their own cause, or promoters of an undertaking in which they had a personal interest. On the contrary, in discharging the difficult duty of fixing the value of the land, he took them to be perfectly impartial. Sometimes questions were put before the Estates Commissioners of a most difficult character, but these were not subjects of that kind, and he was sure that the Commissioners would act in regard to them in a way in which substantial justice would be

  1661
  done, whether the landlords thought that they had got as much as they ought to have or whether the tenants were satisfied or not. The Opposition in objecting to the Estates Commissioners seemed to him to be straining at a gnat while it swallowed a camel. The Estates Commissioners had been entrusted for years past with very important duties, and now it was said that they could not be trusted to buy a few thousand acres of land and dispose of them to the evicted tenants. He submitted that this was a small matter having regard to the enormous quantity of land passing through the hands of the Estates Commissioners and the Land Commission, and considering the important responsibilities of those who were entrusted with the preservation of law and order in Ireland. He thought the Estates Commissioners would carry through in a perfectly impartial manner the work which they had been trained to do for the last four or five years. He did not dispute that they were appointed for certain other purposes, but under the circumstances he did not think that they had any alternative but to accept the three Estates Commissioners as the tribunal which should deal with the question of evicted tenants.
  LORD R, CECILobserved that yesterday the Chief Secretary said that the right hon. Member for Dublin University had used observations which had filled him with despair, and he now ventured to retort that the right hon. Gentleman's speech filled him with despair. His whole speech showed that the right hon. Gentleman utterly misconceived the objection and the whole attitude of the Opposition in regard to this measure. What they desired to direct the right hon. Gentleman's attention to were the first principles of justice.
  MR FLAVIN: Justice to Hottentots.
  LORD R. CECILsaid that he was not conscious of having said anything which could offend the hon. Member
  1662
  for North Kerry. He was only asking for justice.
  MR FLAVIN: My reference was to Hottentots.
  LORD R. CECILsaid he understood that that was the case, but it appeared to him to be a most irrelevant observation. As he had said, what he was asking for was justice, and if the Government were to appoint any kind of tribunal the first essential was that it should be impartial. [MR. BIRRELL: "Hear, hear"] To be impartial this tribunal must fulfil two conditions—it should decide solely on the evidence brought before it and it must command the confidence of those who appealed to it. They must have men who came to the consideration of the questions submitted to them without any preconceived opinion. If men came to the decision of a matter with a preconceived opinion, they were incapable of dealing with it impartially. He knew nothing about the Estates Commissioners, he did not know whether they were good, bad or indifferent. They might be "angels of light "or they might be the contrary so "far as he was concerned, but assuming that they were like other people, a wild hypothesis in regard to anything which took place in Ireland, the Government was going to give to them the task of settling the whole matter. First of all, they settled who were to be the applicants and who were to be the landlords they dealt with; then they settled the land to be taken and they went and chose it; then they offered it in exchange for other land without any discussion; and, apparently, having selected a piece of land in the neighbourhood where the tenant lived or in some other county, if the dispossessed persons said: "It is not good enough or is not sufficient," then they were taken away from the administrative side of their duties and put into a judicial position; the Government asked them to come in and decide what was really a dispute between them and the tenant as to the value of the land and as to whether the man should receive compensation in money. Surely that ought not to be looked upon as a judicial inquiry. It

  1663
  reminded him of what was said in "Alice in Wonderland"
  "I am the judge, I am the jury.' said cunning old Fury
  I will try the whole case and condemn you to death' "
  In listening to the Chief Secretary he could not hear any reason against the Amendment, although the right hon. Gentleman talked about similarity of judgments. He did not know anything about that or how it was to be secured in this case. Then the right hon. Gentleman said something about speedy administration. If that was the whole object, and all the Government wanted was to get the thing done, why go before the Estates Commissioners at all? It might just as well be settled by one of the Nationalist Members. But they must have some pretence of justice, and it was said that these Commissioners had a knowledge of the land and were acquainted with these matters. But other people also had a knowledge of the land and were acquainted with them. Apart from the Irish land question he did not think the right hon. Gentleman would have put such a proposal before the House, because he must know that as it stood at present it was indefensible. Indeed no real reason had been offered against the Amendment.
  MR CHERRY,dealing with the suggestion that arbitration should be substituted for the procedure of the Bill, said that the principle of arbitration had been adopted in 1887. The system was in force for many years, but it was found in practice to be so troublesome and costly to all parties that eventually the late Government abolished it in 1896 in the case of compulsory redempton of head rents. With the consent of all parties, the late Government passed an Act abolishing the arbitration, and the matter was left to the unfettered decision of the Land Commissioners. There was a nominal appeal to the Court of Appeal, but the Court had laid it down over and over again that they would not go into questions of fact, and the Land Commission fixed the value in the dispute between the head rent owner and the landowner.
  MR. MOORE: Under the supervision of a Judge of the High Court.
  MR CHERRY: Yes. In this Bill the Government had adopted very nearly the same system. They had Estate Commissioners instead of Land Commissioners. It was the land Commissioners and not the Judge who fixed the value, and the Judge relied on the knowledge of these gentlemen who did justice as between all parties.
  MR WALTER LONGsaid he was astonished at the arguments adduced by the right hon. and learned Gentleman who had sought to justify the rower now proposed to be given to the Land Commission, by comparing the procedure with that in regard to head rents. There was not the smallest analogy between a head rent which carried nothing with it but a money value, and the occupation of a holding which carried with it not only a money value but the whole of the future life and career of the occupant and his wife and family. The Attorney-General looked upon it as a mere bagatelle that a man living in his own house should be turned out. The right hon. and learned Gentleman had said it was not inconvenient to the occupier who was willing to go. Not being a lawyer he could not accept the right hon. and learned Gentleman's view as to the inconvenience felt by the person going out. He thought the inconvenience would be extreme and that the analogy had no relevance whatever. The Chief Secretary's argument, all through, was that the Estates Commissioners were the best men for the purpose of dealing with this question. But that was not the question before the Committee; the question was that they were called upon in the first instance to step in and do certain things—to find land in order to reinstate a particular individual. They selected the individual, and they selected the land on which to put him. Then the man was to be rooted out of his home and placed elsewhere. The new farm, according to the Attorney-General, would prove a better holding to the sitting tenant than that which he at present had. The sitting tenant might not take that view; it might be in another county miles away from where he was, or desired to live, and he might say he objected to go there and that the holding offered was not proper compensation for the holding which he was giving

  1665
  up, and to that man an appeal was given to the persons who had carried out the transaction to which he objected. Could that be regarded as just? Was there any precedent for it? It was quite true that the Attorney-General had given the illustration of the head rent and used it as an argument against arbitration, but he had carried it somewhat further and used it as a justification for abolishing arbitration and then gave no appeal. They did not pin the right hon. Gentleman down to arbitration; his hon. friend would accept the proposal of the Government if the right hon. Gentleman would propose some alternative kind of appeal. The proposed appeal of the Government had not even the semblance of justice. He could not see why the Government had brought in a Bill of this kind at all. Why did they not bring in a Bill of one clause giving the Commissioners the power to do as they pleased? The right hon. Gentleman said the Estates Commissioners had no constituents to satisfy and would receive no reward for their services, and that it would not be their duty to consider how little they could pay. With a larger Ministerial experience than the right hon. Gentleman he said that to speak of a Government official not being governed by motives of economy and by the desire to do the work as cheaply as possible was to deny all the experience of the public service. These men were just as much bound to consider what they were doing with the money as they would be if it was their own, and to say that because it was public money they would not be governed by this consideration was absurd. A public servant said that, if it was his own money, he could afford to be generous, but, as it was public money, he was governed by the law in its administration. Therefore, it was absurd to say that these men would not be bound by principles of economy. The right hon. Gentleman said that they had no constituents. He was not so certain about that. There were constituents of different kinds. They knew perfectly well that this Bill had been introduced in order to gratify, he did not say whether rightly or wrongly, the Nationalist Members of Parliament, who demanded that the evicted tenants should be restored
  1666
  to their holdings. But would. there be no pressure, no criticism, on the part of the public in Ireland if the Estates Commissioners did not give prompt realisation of the hopes raised by this Bill, and if they did not deal in a generous way with the difficulties by which they were confronted? They were asked to leave the whole of this case in the hands of the Estates Commissioners. He agreed with his hon. friend that the Commissioners might all be as clever as the archangel Gabriel, they might do their work as well as possible, but it was inconceivable that there would not be some injustice, some inevitable cases of hardship; and it seemed amazing that the Government were, not prepared to provide some court, or some individual, other than the people who had themselves caused the injury, to whom appeal could be made by an aggrieved person. But it was useless to appeal to the Government. They had civil words from the Chief Secretary and learned arguments from the Attorney-General, but they had no attempt made to meet the difficulties which were pointed out. The Government were apparently determined to go steadily on with the policy which they had laid down. All he could say was that the Chief Secretary had told them that the Commissioners did not desire those powers that were being forced upon them, but however reluctant they might be to accept them now, he was confident that they would not have enjoyed them for six months before, with all their hearts, they would wish that they had never been thrown upon them, and would realise that, if injustice was to be avoided, there must be at all events some tribunal to which injured people could appeal.
  MR MOOREthought the Committee would do well to consider the subject matter of the Amendment. They had it on record that it was the intention of the Government through the Estates Commissioners to provide holdings of 40 acres for the evicted tenants. In a light and airy and butterfly manner the Chief Secretary supposed that land could be purchased at £20 an acre, which would do very well. The Chief

  1667
  Secretary professed righteous indignation when it was suggested that. the Commissioners were judges in their own cause, and had expressed a feeling of despair at certain arguments addressed to him. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that despair was not only on his side of the House. He and those around him had submitted Amendments which were admitted by members of the Government to be not only meritorious but reasonable, yet from some reason or other those Amendments were not accepted. When it was said that the Commissioners were not judges in their own cause it was really playing with words. The Estates Commissioners had the public and statutory duty cast upon them to acquire land and to retail it, and when they were fixing the value of the land they had to take into consideration what they would get from the intending purchasers; so that they were judges in their own cause when they proceeded to fix the price to the retail purchaser. They had a direct interest, if they were to solve the problem at all; the whole tribunal would fall into disfavour if they did not effect a replantation, and they could not do it unless they bought land at a price which would enable them to resell without a loss. In England £800 might appear a small sum, but in Ireland it was a very substantial amount. In the County Court in Ireland the limit of jurisdiction was £500. Here were 40 acres at £20, to be bought for £800, and he did not suppose that the Commissioners would be so foolish as to acquire only one holding at a time on different estates with different considerations of title. They would buy three or four holdings on an estate at one price and one expense, and this gave £2,400 as subject matter of the Amendment. Those on his side of the House i were determined that, if the Commissioners were to take the land and decide the price, there must be some sort of revision of their decision. There was one way of escape from revision, and that was under the Amendment of his hon. friend, because there was never an appeal from an arbitration award, save to the High Court where the arbitrator went wrong on points of law. Arbitration had worked very well under the Land Acts of 1870 and 1880, before the
  1668
  Land Commission was born, and if they deliberately rejected arbitration, from which there was no appeal, he did not see how they were going reasonably to refuse some form of revision of the decision of the Estates Commissioners, who were at once plaintiffs, judge, and jury in their own cause. The Attorney-General had stated that the Unionist Government in 1896, in the matter of the redemption of head rents, had abolished the principle of arbitration. That was perfectly true, but they substituted a form of revision by a tribunal presided over by a Judge of the High Court. But here the only cry they heard from the Government was that the Estates Commissioners were so honest. Aristides was driven into exile because the people were tired of hearing him called honest. The answer to every objection was that the Estates Commissioners were honest. They wanted the answer of the Government brought down to the points they made. It was no answer to say that because the Government had unlimited confidence in the Commissioners, therefore, arbitration should not be resorted to. He took it that there was not to be any arbitration; was there to be any appeal? If land was taken compulsorily under any other statute, the owner or tenants had some way of having the matter rectified. If a railway company desired to take any land or it was required under the Housing Act or for any public purpose whatever, there was a special schedule-fixing the compensation to be paid and an arbitration with or without a jury was provided for.
  MR. CHEERY: Would you like a, jury?
  MR MOOREsaid that would come up later. At present they were anxious to learn what reasons the Government had for rejecting arbitration. The fact that the Estates Commissioners could fix their own price for the land that they took, without the occupiers having any right of appeal or even the protection of a public hearing, seemed highly amusing to the Attorney-General for Ireland, but it was a serious matter for the people who were to be dispossessed. The right hon. Gentleman had said the new tenants

  1669
  were obstinate and occasioned a large amount of expense in respect of police protection, and that it was in their own interest that they should go to some other neighbourhood where they would be welcomed and could become good citizens; but he did not know that they would be any better off than those who had left the Clanricarde estates and had been hunted with sticks. [A NATIONALIST MEMBER: It is not true.] It would be a very unfortunate thing if these people were to be dispossessed that there should be no guarantee under the Act that the decisions of the Estates Commissioners would be subject to revision. It would not tend to create public confidence in the working of the Act.
  MR T. M. HEALYsaid he preferred the hon. and learned Member's reference to Mr. Bailey as Aristides to his letter of March 19. The other night Aristides was to be tried by the hon. and learned Gentleman as soon as he came into office, and instead of Aristides getting an oyster shell he was to get a Royal Commission, presided over by the hon. and learned Gentleman himself. Now Mr. Bailey had become the gentleman whom' the Greeks were tired of calling "the just. "But in the letter of March 19— "Bailey," said he, "you are appointed to hold the scales between Finucane and Wrench, neither of whom was just. "Which of them was Aristides? It could not have been Finucane; it could not have been Wrench, because Aristides had hold of the golden scales between them, and therefore the result of the hon. and learned Gentleman's lubrictions to-night was that Mr. Bailey alone was fit to bear the mantle of Aristides. Every effort in that House had been devoted to a simplification of procedure where compulsion had been a necessity. Under the Workmen's Dwellings Act they could take £1,000 worth of property, and on the bare award of an arbitrator, without a jury and without appeal, in the interests of the working man, the decision of the tribunal was final. Why was that? Because it was felt that in relation to working men's dwellings it was desirable to give a cheap and speedy procedure. When the Labourers Act was passed that was grafted on to it, so
  1670
  that when taking an acre of land compulsorily the same procedure was applied. Now the hon. and learned Gentleman supported an arbitration;but who was going to pay for those awards? The two arbitrators commonly appointed an umpire, and if they paid 20 guineas a day to each and allowed for the expense of the shorthand writer, a room, etc., they would have an expenditure of 100 guineas a day, and these contentious cases might last two days. Thus in an£800 case they proposed to put the cost of a fourth of the total sum in question upon, the parties for an arbitration. Was there any Government out of Bedlam that could accept such an Amendment? The hon. and learned Member would one day be sitting on the Treasury Bench, and he would remind him that these sayings of his would be on record in the pages of Hansard — that work which was quoted in the House as if it were as sacred as the Bible. And with that brief period looming ahead, in which the hon. and learned Gentleman proposed to apply to Mr. Bailey what he would call, for short, the "dry shampoo," was it worth while for a man of his seriousness and solemnity to be engaged in that light-handed extravaganza? No, it was not. The Front Benches had again and again shown their reasonableness in this matter, but there came up fresh crops of Orangemen—he would not say fresh crops of fools, because that would be unparliamentary—but they were callow birds; the Chief Secretary had applied to them a term drawn from the rookery which he would not venture to apply to them, but he would ask them to take a lesson from hon. Members who were their elders, and remember that they were dealing with a serious Irish problem which went to the root of the life of the country. And, therefore, he would beg hon. Gentlemen above the gangway to address themselves to these problems with a more serious mind.
  MR BARRIEsaid he would address himself to the matter now under review rather than to the earlier portion of the bright and interesting speech of the hon. Member for North Louth. They were now dealing with the proposal that what were called the "new tenants "—although in Some cases they might have

  1671
  been in possession of their holdings for twenty-eight years—should be placed absolutely in the power of the Estates Commissioners, who were to be able to say whether these men were to continue in their holdings or to lose them on six months notice. It was proposed by the Bill that the compensation to be paid to these men, if they were dispossessed, should be decreed arbitrarily by the Estates Commissioners. He was not going to say a single word about the Estates Commissioners. He had no acquaintance with these gentlemen, and therefore he had no right to criticise them. He preferred to say they were honourable men fit for the position they occupied, and that it was sought to impose upon them a duty from which they, as honourable men, would wish to be free. As one with some slight knowledge of a court of arbitration he did not believe that such a court would be as costly as had been stated by the hon. and learned Member for North Louth. He confessed he had no knowledge of arbitration courts where the costs ran so high as the hon. and learned Member had prophesied they would do in the cases where new tenants who were displaced in favour of evicted tenants were dissatisfied with the offer of the Estates Commissioners. He hoped it was not too late for the Government to reconsider the matter. It was not only un-British, but un-Irish that a body of three gentlemen should have the power of decreeing that certain tenants were to vacate their farms on short notice, and also of deciding the amount of compensation they were to have for that compulsory removal. That was a provision hitherto unheard of in British legislation. He thought a great deal would be done to facilitate the working of the measure if this duty were taken from the Commissioners and placed upon some neutral body. He did not care how the arbitration court might be constituted, but he said it was the duty of the Government to set up some form of arbitration court so that the new tenants who were dispossessed might have confidence that they would be fairly treated.
  MR CHARLES CRAIG: said his hon. friend the Member for North London-
  1672
  derry had dealt seriously with the Amendment, and his treatment of it contrasted favourably with the light-hearted extravaganza in which the hon. and learned Member for North Louth had indulged. The present Secretary of State for India, when he introduced the Evicted Tenants Bill in 1894, which measure had much the same object as the present Bill, did not suggest that the Land Commissioners should carry out the very onerous and serious duties now proposed. The right hon. Gentleman proposed then to set up an entirely fresh tribunal for that purpose. Moreover, in that Bill some sort of appeal was provided. But it was now suggested that the three Estates Commissioners, who had already an immense quantity of work to do, and were in fact taxed to their utmost, should have additional responsibility thrown upon them. It was a proposal totally different from anything to be found either in the Housing of the Working Classes Act or the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act. The present Bill had for its object the dispossessing of one class of persons to put in another. That was a high-handed proceeding, and all the dictates of justice and commonsense suggested that such a proposal should be hedged round with every safeguard for the purpose of ensuring a fair hearing and a fair trial. It was suggested that there should be an appeal to the county court, but it would be admitted that an appeal to the county court—
  *THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: We cannot discuss the proposed appeal to the county court under the Amendment now before the Committee. That will come up later on another Amendment.
  MR CHARLES CRAIGsaid he would bow to the Chairman's ruling, and endeavour to restrict his observations to the Amendment. He wished the Committee to realise the circumstances under which they were asked to set up some form of tribunal other than the Estates Commissioners which was not only to fix the price of the land, but where the displaced tenant was to go. The tenant whose present residence was in the county of Mayo or

  1673
  Wicklow, might be sent to the county of Derry. That might inflict a great injury on the unfortunate peasant which was contrary to all sense of justice.
  *THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMANcalled the hon. Member to order. He was repeating two or three times arguments with which the Amendment had nothing to do.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid that there was one more objection to giving these powers to the Estates Commissioners who would have practically no knowledge of the land to be dealt with. The Estates Commissioners would have to depend entirely on the report of an inspector, who had no practical knowledge of the value of land in the particular district where the sitting tenant was to be displaced, and no knowledge of the county in which the farm was situated that was to be placed at his disposal. All. the inspector could do would be to go on the land and probably dig up a spadeful of earth and say, "this land is worth so much." He maintained that before that could be done there should be a hearing in some open court as in cases where rents were fixed.
  *THE DEPUTY - CHAIRMANagain called the hon. Member to order. He must confine himself to the question of substituting a court of arbitration for the Estates Commissioners. It was no use discussing these matters which he had ruled over and over again were not germane to the question before the Committee.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he bowed to the Deputy Chairman's ruling, but he could not admit that his remarks were not germane to the Amendment.
  MR. FLAVIN: Go on, and give us something fresh.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 272;

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork.N.E.)

  Baker, Sir John (Portmouth)

  Barnard, E. B.

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Baker,Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Agnew, George William

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Baring,Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Ambrose, Robert

  Barker, John

  Bell, Richard

  Astbury, John Meir

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he hoped the Chief Secretary might still see his way to give them some court of appeal.
  MR. T. L. CORBETTthought that considering the way they had been gagged they ought to be protected from the continual interruptions from below the gangway. He thought that there must be some stirrings of conscience in that direction. He observed that the hon. Member for Bath—
  *THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Order! The hon. Gentleman must confine himself to the Amendment.
  MR. T. L. CORBETTsubmitted that this was an Amendment dealing with the tenant in possession. He objected to the term "new tenant" being applied to a man who had been a quarter of a century on a farm.
  *THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That has nothing to do with the Amendment.
  MR. T. L. CORBETTthought he might be allowed to develop his argument. Without this Amendment the tenants in possession would be left to the dictation of the Estates Commissioners. No doubt the men who had evicted those tenants must come into friction with the men whom they had evicted he asked how it was possible without courts of arbitration, which the Amendment proposed to set up, that three Commissioners could deal with 3,000 cases almost immediately, and possibly 6,000 other cases? As the hon. Member for South Antrim had stated, the proposal of the Bill was to hand over entirely the dealing with these evicted tenants to the three Estates Commissioners, and so paralyse the whole working of the Land Act.
  Question put.
  Noes, 51. (Division List No. 314.)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Halpin, J.

  Murnaghan, George

  Bertram, Julius

  Hammond, John

  Murphy, John

  Birrell, Rt. Hn. Augustine

  Harcourt, Right Hon. Lewis

  Myer, Horatio

  Black, Arthur W.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Boland, John

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Napier, T. B.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Harwood, George

  Nolan, Joseph

  Branch, James

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Brigg, John

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

  Bright, J. A.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Hazleton, Richard

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hemmerde, Edward George

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

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Henry, Charles S.

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  O'Malley, William

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Shee, James John

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Partington, Oswald

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset, N

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Pearce, Willam (Limehouse)

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Hudson, Walter

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Cleland, J. W.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Clough, William

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Price, C.E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Jackson, R. S.

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Radford, G. H.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Joyce, Michael

  Raphael, Herbert H.

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

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Corbett, CH(Sussex, E. Grinst'd

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mptn

  Cowan, W. H.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Richardson, A.

  Cox, Harold

  Lambert, George

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Crean, Eugene

  Lamont, Norman

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Crombie, John William

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Crooks, William

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Robinson, S.

  Crossley, William J.

  Lea, HughCecil (St. Pancras, E.)

  Roche. Augustine (Cork)

  Cullinan, J.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Roche. John (Galway. East)

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Roe. Sir Thomas

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Rogers. F. E. Newman

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Russell, T. W.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lupton, Arnold

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Samuel. S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Donelan, Captain A.

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

  Scott.A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Duffy, William J.

  Maclean, Donald

  Sears J. E.

  Duncan, C(Barrow-in-Furness)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Seely, Major J. G.

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah(Down, S.)

  Shackleton, David James

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Farrell, James Patrick

  M'Callum, John M.

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

  Ferens, T. R.

  M'Kean, John

  Sheehan. Daniel Daniel

  Field, William

  M'Killop, W.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Findlay, Alexander

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Shipman. Dr. John G.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Maddison, Frederick

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Foster, Rt. Hn. Sir Walter

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Marks, G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Snowden, P.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Massie, J.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.

  Gilhooly. James

  Meagher, Michael

  Steadman, W. C.

  Gill, A.H.

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Menzies, Walter

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Glover, Thomas

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Mooney, J. J.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Morgan, J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Morrell, Philip

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

  1676

  1677

  Tomkinson, James

  Watt, Henry A.

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

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Toulmin, George

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Verney, F. W.

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

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

  Vivian, Henry

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

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

  Waldron. Laurencs Ambrose

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Winfrey, R.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Young, Samuel

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Wardle, George J.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Wason, Rt. Hn. E.(Clackmannan

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Wason. John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Williamson A.

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Pease.

  NOES.

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

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

  Balcarres, Lord

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

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

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

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

  Keswick, William

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

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Liddell, Henry

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

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

  Turnour, Viscount

  Darlymple, Viscount

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin. S)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Duncan. Robert (Lanark, Govan

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Fletcher. J. S.

  Moore, William

  Forster, Henry William

  Nield, Herbert

  Tellers for the Noes—Mr.

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

  Ashley and Mr. T. L.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Corbett.

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

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Hills, J. W.

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  MR. MOOREmoved an Amendment with the object of providing that where the Estates Commissioners tried to make the new tenant remove to a farm of which he did not approve he should have the option of one more suitable farm before being turned off with money compensation. If the tenant were not satisfied with the first parcel of land he should be offered another. It was said on the other side of the House that many of these new tenants were not good tenants, but their reputation with the Opposition was exactly the opposite as they thought they were entirely satisfactory tenants. He would much rather see these men in new holdings, but when a man in the ordinary way desired to go to a new holding he selected the holding for himself. In the present case the new tenant who was being dispossessed had not the power of selection, although the desire was expressed to assist him to some other farm. The selection was left with these sympathetic Government officials whose duty was to retail without any loss to the State the land which they had compulsorily acquired. It might well be that in their
  1678
  desire to get rid of a certain parcel of land on their hands the Commissioners might say that all the Act required them to do was to see that the land they selected should not be subject to a higher annuity than the tenant was at present paying, and that therefore the tenant must take the piece of land which fulfilled those conditions whether it was suitable to him or not, and that if he did not he should be compulsorily compensated in money value. The right hon. Gentleman had refused to allow them to put any limitation in the Bill, and, that being so, he thought the new tenant should be given some opportunity of a second refusal before he was compulsorily compensated. Many of these new tenants were most anxious to continue farming. They had to spend their lives in farming when they were not engaged in protecting themselves from the assaults of their neighbours, and if a suitable farm was offered to them they would be content, but he thought they should have some chance of the refusal of a second farm if the first one offered to them was not suitable. There were other reasons besides the

  1679
  quality of the land which, might render the farm unsuitable. The Estates Commissioners might take a new tenant on the ground alluded to by the Attomey-General, that he was unpopular in the district, and cost too much for police, and migrate him to another part of the country. But it had happened that in parts of Ireland compulsory migrants had not been welcomed by the tenants of that district with the effusion that the right hon. and learned Gentleman seemed to expect. It might be that the environment of a farm offered in this way was such that the irresistible temptation to hold mass meetings on the least provocation might lead the tenant of the farm to suspect that the Estates Commissioners had not properly considered his position when selecting the farm. He, therefore, considered that it was only just and fair that the tenant should have the choice of refusing a second farm before he was told: "Out you go, there is your money" He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not say once more that the Amendment was reasonable, but that he could not accept it and that it was a matter in the discretion of the Estates Commissioners. That did not satisfy them; they believed that the more safeguards they placed in the Bill the more satisfactory it would be to those tenants with whom they at least had some sympathy. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 4, after the word 'heard,' to insert the words "offer him another parcel of land which shall be suitable and in the event of his refusal of such parcel shall.'"—(Mr. Moore.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid that as the Chief Secretary had been forbidden to speak of the reasonable character of this Amendment he hoped the hon. Member for North Armagh would permit him to recommend this Amendment to the Government in the strongest manner as a most reasonable proposal. It was proposed that, in case a planter was dissatisfied with the farm offered to him, he should have an alternative offer; and, having regard to the advantages of Canada as a field of emigration, and to the fact that there they could
  1680
  get not 40 but 163 acres for nothing, and having regard to the further fact which was the most important of all, namely the bloodthirsty character of these men, and the fact that they could get to Canada by the all-red route, he thought the proposal worthy of support, and he would support it in the most cordial spirit, always provided that that discretion was given to the Estates Commissioners.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid the Chief Secretary evidently felt debarred from saying anything at all on this Amendment. Could it be considered in anyway unreasonable? A man was told to leave his farm and go 20 miles or perhaps 100 miles where another farm awaited him which carried the same annuity that he was now paying and was in other ways suitable. The person who judged that was the inspector. The Estates Commissioners then said that the man must take the land or take a money compensation. That surely was a great hardship, and he was surprised that the hon. Member for North Louth should treat the Amendment with such levity.
  MR. T. M. HEALYsaid he was never more serious in his life.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGthought the hon. Member had a very curious method of showing it. It was a very serious matter. This was only another example of the want of sympathy which pervaded this Bill. Nothing could be more reasonable than that a man placed in such a position should have a choice of another farm if the one offered did not suit him. It was really a sad thing to hear the Committee treating in this manner a perfectly serious Amendment, which the Goverment could accept without in the slightest degree spoiling or deviating from the principle laid down in the Bill.
  MR. CHERRYsaid he was really astonished at the moderation of the hon. Member. Why restrict the choice of farms to two? Why not have a choice all over Ireland? Why not give the man a choice of twenty? One man might be offered a farm in Munster and another one in Connaught; were they to have two farms in every county

  1681
  in order that the man might have his choice? Or were they to take the tenants about the country in first class carriages—["Motors!"]—to see which farms they would like? He could not believe that the Amendment was seriously intended. What would be the effect of it? They had heard great complaint about the powers to obtain land compulsorily; it was said to be harsh; but by this Amendment they wanted the, Commissioners to take two farms where now it was only proposed to take one. They were to buy two farms in order that each tenant might have his choice. Such a proposal at once doubled the amount of land that would be required. At one time they were told that they were not to take more land than they absolutely required, and at another they were asked to take double the the amount of land they needed. Supposing farms were required by several people, the Commissioners would be bound to take sufficient land to give each tenant his choice of two farms, and, if that were so, what was to become of the farms which were left untenanted? Really he did not think that the Amendment could be intended seriously, and he need not waste the time of the Committee over it.
  MR. MOOREsaid the Amendment was seriously moved, and he regretted that the Committee did not treat it seriously, and that the right hon. Gentleman should have imported into the discussion the suggestion that the tenants should be taken about in first-class carriages. In the first place, it was perfectly easy for the Commissioners to avoid all difficulty by offering a man his choice of two farms, before they proceeded to acquire the land. Considering that under this Bill the Commissioners had power to take land compulsorily, they could ascertain what land was suitable and then proceed to acquire it. If the tenant accepted the farm proposed to him the Commissioners need not buy the other. He did not see anything simpler than that. Though the right hon. Gentleman had treated the proceedings in a spirit of hilarity, he thought it right that a man should have a choice of two farms, however it might be regarded as a matter of joke. The
  1682
  subject ought not to be approached in that spirit. These new tenants had led a very strenuous life, and they were now to be dispossessed and turned out of their farms, some of which they had occupied for twenty-five years and more. He thought that these men ought not to be turned out without their being given the choice of suitable holdings in exchange for those they were compelled to give up; and the Commissioners, with the land they had already, and what they could acquire under the Bill, 80,000 acres, would have plenty of land to enable them to offer the tenant his choice of farms. He deeply regretted the spirit which the Front Bench opposite had shown on this occasion, because it showed how right hon. Gentlemen opposite were accustomed to approach this subject in a spirit of subservience to the unchristian and uncharitable cry against the new tenants raised by hon. Members below the gangway.
  Colonel KENYON-SLANEY (Shropshire, Newport)said the Committee was supposed to be trying to hold the scales fairly between different classes of the population over whom the chances of the election had given them power. In this case they were dealing with the life prospects of men whose fate depended on the action taken under this Bill. [A Nationalist Member: How about Horne?] Nothing illustrated better the spirit in which these matters were being dealt with than that irrelevant, and, might he say, in plain language, that vulgar and unworthy interruption. He asked the Committee to consider what would be the feelings of these men whose fate they were deciding if they could hear the way in which their case was met by those who were, he supposed, their fellow-countrymen. These men had a right to expect that their feelings should be treated by that House with respect and courtesy. He regretted very much that fair consideration was not given to their case. The Amendment was a fair and worthy proposition, deserving of courteous treatment. He confessed to a personal lack of knowledge upon this subject, but he could well understand that there were among this class of tenant a large number who were worthy

  1683
  of fair play and fair treatment. What would they think when they read the reports of what was happening in this House? They would say that they had been made fools of. [Cries of "Question."] They would say that no respect had been paid to their feelings, that they had been made the laughing-stock of the House of Commons by the action of hon. Members below the gangway, and they had not found any defenders on the Front Ministerial Bench whose duty it was to see that they got fair play. Many of these men, to whom this removal meant ruin and destruction, could not help feeling intense resentment. A home was not made up of acres only, but of its surroundings, its amenities, and its possibilities for instruction. Some consideration ought, therefore, to be shown to men who were taken away from their homes in order to give them some choice of selection. [Nationalist cries of "Horne."] He had neither liking nor respect for hon. Members below the gangway [Laughter and cheers]; and he was glad to think that the prejudices of his past life—[Nationalist cheers and cries of "Order."]
  The CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The right hon. and gallant Gentleman must not go beyond the limits of the Amendment.
  Colonel KENYON - SLANEY:said he would confine himself to the Amendment if the Chairman would see that hon. Members keptorder. [Cries of "Chair."] When the Chairman called him to order he knew how to reply, and when hon. Members opposite called him to order he knew how to reply to them. [Cries of "Order" and "Speak up."] He had had to face many interruptions and a good deal of insult because he had championed the cause of those who had been ill-treated. The Amendment would at least do something to relieve the harshness of treatment with which they were threatened. He be-

  AYES

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Anson. Sir William Reynell

  Balcarres, Lord

  Baring, Capt. Hn. G. Winchester

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  lieved that his attitude was not without sympathy on the part of hon. Members opposite. ["Oh, oh."] He did not think that those who laughed at him represented the best of the Liberal Party. [Cries of "Question."] At any rate, he was not ashamed to raise his voice on behalf of what he honestly believed to be a slight measure of justice and fair play on behalf of those who were without champions, and to put their case as being worthy of the attention of the House.
  MR. T. M. HEALYexpressed regret that the right hon. Member had been cut short in his tale about his past life. The right hon. Member had stated that he had been met with jeers and insult. So far from that being the case, he could say that, as far as he was concerned, he had shown that he was willing to think Imperially on this question. He had thrown out the suggestion of Colonial preference for the evicted men, but that had not met with the approval of hon. Members. He would make another suggestion. On some estates in England there was a large amount of untenanted land, he would not say from what cause or under what circumstances, because if he did he would be accused of vulgar abuse. As there was such a desire that English landlords should be enabled to acquire the services of these men, and English yeomen might have to be supplanted through disputes about game and things of that sort, a large body of most loyal, hard-working, and contented men could be placed at the service of British agriculturists. If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman would propose to translate to his own county these men from the Clanricarde estate, he could assume him that, at whatever cost, they would be glad to support him in that proposition.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 85; Noes, 331. (Division List No. 315.)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hills, J. W.

  Roberts. S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Rutherford, John (Lansashire)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Carlile, E. Hildred

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

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Cavendish. Rt. Hn. Victor C.W.

  Keswick, William

  Smith. F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Starkey, John R.

  Chamberlain. Rt. Hn. J. A. (Wor.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Liddell, Henry

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

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

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Long. Rt. Hn. Walter (Dublin. S.

  Turnour, Viscount

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lowe. Sir Francis William

  Valentia, Viscount

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Duncan. Robert (Lanark. GV'n

  Magnus, Sir Philip

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

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

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Forster, Henry William

  Nield, Herbert

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

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  O'Niell, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Younger, George

  Gretton, John

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Ratcliff, Major R, F.

  Moore and Mr. Charles Craig

  Hervey, F.W.F.(Bury S. E'm'ds

  Rawlinson. John Frederick Peel

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

  Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knigh t

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Agnew, George William

  Churchill, Rt, Hon. Winston S.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Field, William

  Alden. Percy

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Findlay, Alexander

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Cleland, J. W.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Clough, William

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Ambrose, Robert

  Clynes, J. R.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Armitage, R.

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

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

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Gilhooly, James

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Cooper, G. J.

  Gill, A. H.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

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

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

  Barker, John

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Glover, Thomas

  Barnard, E. B.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Barnes, G. N.

  Crean, Eugene

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Grant, Corrie

  Beauchamp, E.

  Crombie, John William

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Crooks, William

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Bell, Richard

  Crossley, William J.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Cullinan, J.

  Gwynn, Setphen Lucius

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Bertram, Julius

  Dalmeny, Lord

  Halpin, J.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Hammond, John

  Black, Arthur W.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Boland, John

  Davis, Timothy (Fulham)

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Delany, William

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Branch, James

  Dewar, Arthur (Eninburgh, S.)

  Harwood, George

  Brigg, John

  Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Bright. J. A.

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

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Duffy, William J.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Cameron, Robert

  Elibank, Master of

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Erskine, David C.

  Hogan, Michael

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Seddon, J.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Hope, W.Bateman (Somerset, N

  Morrell, Philip

  Shackleton, David James

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Hudson, Walter

  Murnaghan, George

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

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Murphy, John

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Myer, Horatio

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Jackson, R. S.

  Napier, T. B.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Donc'st'r

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

  Snowden, P.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Kekewich, Sir George

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Stanley. Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

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

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Grady, J.

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  O'Malley, William

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Lambert, George

  O'Shee, James John

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Lamont, Norman

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Partington, Oswald

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

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Tomkinson, James

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Lea. Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Toulmin, George

  Lehmann, R. C.

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

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)

  Vivian, Henry

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Philipps, Owen C.(Pembroke)

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lough, Thomas

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Lundon, W.

  Powell. Sir Francis Sharp

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Lupton, Arnold

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

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

  Wardle, George J.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Radford, G. H.

  Wason, Rt. Hn. E.(Clackmannan

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Wason. John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Macdonald, J.M.(Lalkirk B'ghs

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Mcckarness, Frederic C.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Maclean, Donald

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Weir, James Galloway

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Whitbread, Howard

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Rendall. Athelstan

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

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

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

  Richardson, A.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  M'Callum, John M.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax

  M'Kean, John

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Wiles, Thomas

  M'Killop, W.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Robinson, S.

  Williamson, A.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Robson, Sir William Snowden

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

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

  Marks. G. Croydon (Launceston)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Massie, J.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wilson, J.W. (Worcestersh. N)

  Meagher, Michael

  Runciman. Walter

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

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Russell, T. W.

  Winfrey. R.

  Menzies, Walter

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Young, Samuel

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Samuel, S. M. (White chapel)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Mond, A.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Tellers for THE Noes—Mr.

  Montagu, E. S.

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Sears, J. E.

  Pease.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Seaverns, J.H.

  And, it being after half-past Ten of the clock, the Chairman proceeded, pursuant
  1688
  to the Order of the House of the 22nd July, successively to put forthwith the

  1689
  Questions on the Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given, and the Questions necessary to dispose of the Business to be concluded.

  AYES.

  Abraham,William (Cork, N.E.)

  Crean, Eugene

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Henry, Charles S.

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Crombie, John William

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Agnew, GeorgeWilliam

  Crooks, William

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Crossley, William J.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Alden, Percy

  Cullinan, J.

  Hogan, Michael

  Allen, A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Dalmeny, Lord

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Ambrose, Robert

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Hope,W.Bateman (Somerset,N

  Armitage, R.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eition)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Asquith.Rt.Hon.HerbertHenry

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Astbury, John Meir

  Delany, William

  Hudson, Walter

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Devlin, Joseph

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Baker.Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Dewar,Sir J.A. (lnverness-sh.)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

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

  Jackson,R. S.

  Barker, John

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Barnard, E. B.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Barnes, G. N.

  Duffy, William J.

  Joyce, Michael

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Beauchamp, E.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Kelley, George D.

  Bell, Richard

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Elibank, Master of

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Erskine, David C.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Bertram, Julius

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Farrell, James Patrick

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Boland, John

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Lambert, George

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Field, William

  Lamont, Norman

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Branch, James

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Brigg, John

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Bright, J. A.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Lea,Nugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Burke, K. Haviland

  Gilhooly, James

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gill, A. H.

  Lough, Thomas

  Burnyeat. W. J. D.

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Lundon, W.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Glendinning, R. C.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Byles, William Pollard

  Glover, Thomas

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Cameron, Robert

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Causton,Rt.Hn. RichardKnight

  Grant, Corrie

  Macdonald,J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Cherry. Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Maclean, Donald

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Clancy. John Joseph

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Clarke. C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Halpin, J.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down.S.

  Clough, William

  Hammond, John

  MacVeigh,Charles (Donegal, E.

  Clynes. J. R.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  M'Callum, John M.

  Cobbold, Felix, Thornley

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Kean, John

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  M'Kenna, fit. Hon. Reginald

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

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  M'Killop, W.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Harwood, George

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Cooper G. J.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Maddison, Frederick

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

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Cowan, W. H.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Marnham, F. J.

  Question put, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 336; Noes, 83. (Division List No. 316.)

  Massie, J.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Meagher, Michael

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Menzies, Walter

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Thomas,Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Mond, A.

  Rendall, Athelstan

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

  Montagu, E. S.

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

  Tomkinson, James

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Richardson, A.

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Toulmin, George

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Vivian, Henry

  Morrell, Philip

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Robertson.Sir G.Scott (Bradf'd

  Walsh, Stephen

  Murnaghan, George

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Murphy, John

  Robinson, S.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Myer, Horatio

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Wardle, George J.

  Napier, T. B.

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Wason,Rt.Hn.E.(Clackmannan

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wason,John Cathcart (Orkney

  Nicholson,Charles N.(Donc'st'r

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Runciman, Walter

  Watt, Henry A.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Russell, T. W.

  Weir, James Galloway

  O'Brien,Kendal(TipperaryMid.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Whitbread, Howard

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Samuel,Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  White,J.D. ((Dumbartonshire)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Whitehead, Rowland

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

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  O'Grady, J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Wiles, Thomas

  O'Malley, William

  Seddon, J.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  O'Shee, James John

  Shackleton, David James

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Williamson, A.

  Partington, Oswald

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

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

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

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Pearson, Sir W.D. (Colchester)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

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

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

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

  Philipps.Col.Ivor (S'th'mpton)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

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

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Winfrey, R.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Snowden. P.

  Young, Samuel

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Price, C.E. (Edinburgh, Central

  Stanley,Hn. A. Lyulph (Ches.)

  Price,Robert John (Norfolk, E.

  Steadman, W. C.

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

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

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Radford, G. H.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Kennaway,Rt.Hn. Sir John H.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

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

  Ashley, W. W.

  Craig,Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.

  Keswick, William

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn.Sir H.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull

  Balcarres, Lord

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

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

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Liddell, Henry

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark.G'v'n

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

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesh'm

  Baring,Capt.Hn.G (Winchester

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Long.Rt.Hn. Walter (Dublin, S.

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Forster, Henry William

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks., East)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Poyle, Sir Edward.

  Gretton, John

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Carlile, E. Hildred

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

  Nield, Herbert

  Cavendish.Rt.Hn. Victor C.W.

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hills, J. W.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J.A.(Wor.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Rawlinson,John Frederick Peel

  Starkey, John R.

  Williams, Col. R, (Dorset, W.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Thomson.W.Mitchell- (Lanark)

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

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Younger, George

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Tumour, Viscount

  Tellers for the Noes—Sir

  Smith.F.E. (Liverpool, Walton

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Acland-Hood and Viscount

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

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

  Valentia.

  Clause 4:—
  Amendments madeߞ
  "In page 4, line 28, after the word 'under,' to insert the words 'the foregoing provisions of.'"
  "In page 4, line 30, at the end, to add,' (3) Allcosts and expenses in the opinion of the Judicial Commissioner necessarily and properly incurred by any petitioner in respect of a petition under this Act, or by any new tenant on a hearing before the Estates Commissioners, or by any person having a claim

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cameron, Robert

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Agnew, George William

  Causton,Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Elibank, Master of

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Erskine, David C.

  Alden, Percy

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Allen,A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Churchill,Rt.Hon. Winston S.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Ferens, T. R.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Armitage, R.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Field, William

  Asquith.Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Clough, William

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Astbury, John Meir

  Clynes, J. R.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Baker, JosephA.(Finsbury,E.)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

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

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Baring.Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Barker, John

  Cooper, G. J.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

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

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Barnard, E. B.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Gilhooly, James

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Gill, A. H.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cowan, W. H.

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn. Herbert John

  Beauchamp, E.

  Craig,Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Crean, Eugene

  Glover, Thomas

  Bell, Richard

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Crombie, John William

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Crooks, William

  Greenwood,G. (Peterborough)

  Bertram, Julius

  Crossley, William J.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Cullinan, J.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Boland, John

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Halpin, J.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Hammond, John

  Branch, James

  Delany, William

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Brigg, John

  Devlin, Joseph

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Bright, J. A.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Dewar.Sir J. A.(Inverness-sh.)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

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

  Harwood, George

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Burns, Rt. Hn. John

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Duffy, William J.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  upon the purchase money of land acquired under this Act in the ascertainment of the titleto and distribution of that money, shall be paid as part of the expenses of the Land Commission to the person who incurred such costs or expenses.'"—(Mr. Cherry.)
  Question put, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 336; Noes, 83. (Division List No. 317.)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Montagu, E. S.

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton underLyne)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Seddon, J.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Morrell, Philip'

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Hogan, Michael

  Morse, L. L.

  Shackleton, David James

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Murnaghan, George

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

  Hope,W.Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Murphy, John

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Myer, Horatio

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Hudson, Walter

  Napier, T. B.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Nicholson,Charles N(Doncaster

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Nolan, Joseph

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Jackson, R. S.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Snowden, P.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  O'Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Stanley,Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  O'Connor, John(Kildare, N.)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Kekewich, Sir George

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

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Grady, J.

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  O'Malley, Wiliam

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  O'Shee, James John

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan,E.)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

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

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Partington, Oswald

  Tomkinson, James

  Lambert, George

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Lamont, Norman

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Toulmin, George

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Pearson, Sir W.D. (Colchester)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

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

  Vivian, Henry

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras,E.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Walters, John Tudor

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

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

  Wardle, George J.

  Lough, Thomas

  Price,Robert John(Norfolk E.)

  Wason.Rt.Hn.E (Clackmannan

  Lundon, W.

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

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Lupton, Arnold

  Radford, G. H.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Watt, Henry A.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Whitbread, Howard

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk Bg'h

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Maclean, Donald

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Richards, T.F.(Wolverhampt'n

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  MacVeagh,Jeremiah (Down.S.)

  Richardson, A.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  MacVeigh, Charles(Donegal, E.)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wiles, Thomas

  M'Callum, John M.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  M'Kean, John

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighsh.)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  M'Killop, W.

  Robertson,SirGScott (Bradford

  Williamson, A.

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Maddison, Frederick

  Robinson, S.

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

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

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

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

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

  Marnham, F. J.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Winfrey, R.

  Massie, J.

  Rowlands, J.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Meagher, Michael

  Runciman, Walter

  Young, Samuel

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Russell, T. W.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Menzies, Walter

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland;

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Mond, A.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Pease.

  1696

  1697

  NOES.

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

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Forster, Henry William

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Gretton, John

  Rawlinson, JohnFrederickPee

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt, Hon.SirH.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Remnant, James Farouharson

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Balfour, RtHn.A.J.(City Lond.

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

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hills, J. W.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Baring, Capt.Hn.G(Winchester

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith.F.E. (Liverpool,Walton)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon.SirJohnH.

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

  Bowles, G. Stewart

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

  Starkey, John R.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Keswick, William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Liddell, Henry

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Cavendish, Rt.Hn.Victor C.W.

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

  Turnour, Viscount

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Long, Col. CharlesW.(Evesham

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Long, Rt.Hn, Walter(Dublin, S.

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

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J.A(Worc.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Younger, George

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Moore, William

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Tellers for the Noes—Vis-

  Duncan,Robert(Lanark,Govan

  Nield, Herbert

  count Valentia and Lord

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Edmund Talbot.

  Clause 5:—
  Amendment made—
  "In page 4, line 40, at the end, to add the words, 'in redemption of an equal amount of the original advance.'"—(Mr. Cherry.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Branch, James

  Crean, Eugene

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Brigg. John

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Bright, J. A.

  Crombie, John William

  Agnew, George William

  Brodie, H. C.

  Crooks, William

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Crossley, William J.

  Alden, Percy

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Cullinan, J.

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Burns. Rt. Hon. John

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Ambrose, Robert

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Armitage, R.

  Burt, Rt, Hon. Thomas

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Asquith, Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Byles, William Pollard

  Delany, William

  Astbury, John Meir

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Causton,Rt.Hn. Richard Knight

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Dewar, Sir. J. A (Inverness-sh

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

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

  Barker, John

  Churchill, Rt. Hon, Winston S.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Barnard, E. B.

  Clacke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Duffy, Will am

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Clough, William

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Bell, Richard

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

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

  Elibank, Master of

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Erskine, David C.

  Bertram, Julius

  Cooper, G. J.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

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

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Black, Arthur W.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Boland, John

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Field, William

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Cowan, W. H:

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Findlay, Alexander

  Question put, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 332; Noes, 82. (Division List No. 318.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Macdonald,J.M.(FalkirkB'ghs

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Maclean, Donald

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

  Gilhooly, James

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Richardson, A.

  Gill, A. H.

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Gladstone, Rt.HnHerbertJohn

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Glendinning, R. G.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Glover, Thomas

  MacVeigh,Charles(Donegal, E.)

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Callum, John M.

  Robertson,SirG. Scott(Bradf'rd

  Gooch, George Peabody

  M'Kean, John

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Robinson, S.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  M'Killop, W.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Maddison, Frederick

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Halpin, J.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Hammond, John

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Rowlands, J.

  Harcourt, Right Hon. Lewis

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Runciman, Walter

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Russell, T. W.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Massie, J.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Meagher, Michael

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Harwood, George

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Menzies, Walter

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Hazleton, Richard

  Mond, A.

  Sears, J. E.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Montagu, E. S.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Montgomery. H. G.

  Seddon, J.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Mooney, J. J.

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Shackleton, David James

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morgan, J.Lloyd(Carmarthen)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morrell, Philip

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

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Morse, L. L.

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Hogan, Michael

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Murnaghan, George

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Murphy, John

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Myer, Horatio

  Simon. John Allsebrook

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Napier, T. B.

  Smeaton, Donald.Mackenzie

  Hudson, Walter

  Newnes, F, (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Snowden, P.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncast'r

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Stanley,Hn.A.Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Steadman, W. C.

  Jackson, R. S.

  O'Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

  Stewart-Smith. D. (Kendal)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N,)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

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

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  O'Grady, J.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Kelly,James(Roscommon,N.

  Thomas,SirA.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Malley, William

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

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  O'Shauglmessy, P. J.

  Tomkinson, James

  Kilbride, Denis

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Partington, Oswald

  Toulmin, George

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Verney, F. W.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Vivian, Henry

  Lambert, George

  Pearson,Sir W.D. (Colchester)

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Lamont, Norman

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

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Philipps,Col.Ivor-S'thampton)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Ward,John(Stoke upon Trent)

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras.E.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wardle, George J.

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Wason.Rt.Hn.E. (Clackmannan

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Price,C.E.(Edinburgh, Central)

  Wason,JohnCathcart(Orkney)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Price,RobertJohn(Norfolk,E.)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

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

  Watt, Henry A.

  Lough, Thomas

  Radford, G. H.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Lundon, W.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Whitbread, Howard

  Lupton, Arnold

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire);

  1700

  1701

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Winfrey, R.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Willaimson, A.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Young, Samuel

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Wilson,J.W. (Worcestersh. N.

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

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

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gretton, John

  Rawlinson, JohnFredorickPeel

  Ashley, W. W.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield,Eeclesall)

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

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

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hills, J. W.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Baring, Capt.Hn,G(Winchester)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith,F.E.(Liverpool,Walton)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Kennaway,Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

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

  Bowles, G. Stewart'

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

  Starkey, John R.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Keswick, William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  King, Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Liddell, Henry.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Cavendish,Rt.Hon.Victor C. W.

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

  Turnour, Viscount

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Long,Col. Charles W. (Evesham)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Dublin.S)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J.A.(Worc.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

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

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Craig,CharlesCurtis(Antrim,S.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Moore, William

  Younger, George

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Nield, Herbert

  Tellers for the Noes—Sir

  Duncan, Robert(Lanark,Govan

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Lord Balcarres.

  Forster, Henry William

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Clauses 6 and 7 agreed to.
  Clause 8:—
  Amendment made—
  "In page 5, line 22, at the end, to add, '(2) No holding purchased by an evicted tenant, whether under the Act of 1903 or this Act, shall be made available in any bankruptcy, or by any process or proceeding of law, to pay, satisfy, or discharge, in whole or in part, any debt contracted or incurred by such evicted

  AYES.

  Abraham, William(Cork, N.E.)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Baring,Godfrey(Isle of Wight)

  Boland, John

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Barker, John

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Agnew, George William

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Barnard, E. B.

  Branch, James

  Alden, Percy

  Barnes, G. N.

  Brigg, John

  Allen, A. Acland(Christchurch)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Bright, J. A.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Armitage, R.

  Bell, Richard

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Asquith,Rt. HonHerbertHenry

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Astbury, John Meir

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bertram, Julius

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Byles, William Pollard

  tenant prior to the date of the order vesting such holding in him.' "—(Mr. Cherry.)
  Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 9:—
  Question put, "That the clause, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 329; Noes, 80. (Division List No. 319.)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Menzies, Walter

  Causton.Rt.Hn.RiehardKnight

  Harwood, George

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mond, A.

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Montagu, E. S.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hazleton, Richard

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Mooney, J. J.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Clough, William

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Clynes, J. R.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morrell, Philip

  Cobbold, Felix; Thornley

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morse, L. L.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

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

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Murnaghan, George

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hogan, Michael

  Murphy, John

  Cooper, G. J.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Myer, Horatio

  Corbett,CH(Sussex,E. Grinst'd

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Napier, T. B.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hudson, Walter

  Nicholson,Charles N(Doncast'r

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Nolan, Joseph

  Crean, Eugene

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  O'Brien,Kendal(TipperaryMid

  Crombie, John William

  Jackson, R.S.

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Crooks, William

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Crossley, William J.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Cullinan, J.

  Jones, William Carnarvonshire

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Joyce, Michael

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

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Grady, J.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  O'Kelly,James (Roscommon.N

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Malley, William

  Delany, William

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  O'Shee, James John

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Dewar,Sir.J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Partington, Oswald

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

  King,Alfred John(Knutsford)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Lambert, George

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lamont, Norman

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

  Duffy, William J.

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Philipps,Col. Ivor(S'thampton)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Elibank, Master of

  Lewis, John Herbert

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

  Erskine, David C.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Price.RobertJohn(Norfolk, E.)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lough, Thomas

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

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lundon, W.

  Radford, G. H.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Field, William

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Findlay, Alexander

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Macdonald.J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Maclean, Donald

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Richards, T. F.(Wolverh'mptn

  Fullerton, Hugh

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Richardson. A.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Gilhooly, James

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Gill, A. H.

  MacVeigh,Charles(Donegal, E.)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Gladstone.Rt. Hn Herbert John

  M'Kean, John

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Glover, Thomas

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Robertson, Rt.Hn. E. (Dundee)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Killop, W.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Gooch, George Peabody

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

  Robinson, S.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Halpin, J.

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Rowlands, J.

  Hammond, John

  Marnham, F. J.

  Runciman, Walter

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Massie, J.

  Russell, T. W.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Meagher, Michael

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  1704

  1705

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Sears, J. E.

  Thomas,Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Seaverns, J. H.

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

  Wiles, Thomas

  Seddon, J.

  Tomkinson, James

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Shackleton, David James

  Toulmin, George

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Verney, F. W.

  Williamson, A.

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

  Vivain, Henry

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Waldron. Laurence Ambrose

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

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Walsh, Stephen

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

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

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

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

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wardle, George J.

  Winfrey, R.

  Snowden, P.

  Wason,Rt.Hn E.(Clackmannan

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Young, Samuel

  Stanley, Hn. A.LyuIpty(Chesh.)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Steadman, W. C.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Whitbread, Howard

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Straus, B S. (Mile End)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Pease.

  NOES.

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  O'Niell, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Forster, Henry William

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Gretton, John

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn. Sir H.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Hervey.F.W.F. (Bury S.E'm'ds

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hills, J. W.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Baring,Capt.Hn.G.(Winchester

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith,F. E.(Liverpool,Walton)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Kennaway,Rt.Hn. Sir John H.

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

  Bowles, G. Stewart

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

  Starkey, John R.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Keswick, William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull

  Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thornton, Percy AL

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Liddell, Henry

  Turnour, Viscount

  Cavendish, Rt.Hn. Victor C.W.

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

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Long,Col. Charles W.(Evesham

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Long,Rt.Hn. Walter (Dublin, S.

  Williams, Col R. (Dorset, W.)

  Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.J.A.(Wore

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

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

  Courthope, G. Lloyd

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Younger, George

  Craig,Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Moore, William

  Tellers for the Noes—

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Viscount Valentia and Lord

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Nield, Herbert

  Edmund Talbot.

  Clause 10:—
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 328;

  AYES.

  Abraham,William (Cork, N.E.)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Barker, John

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Armitage, R.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Barnard, E. B.

  Agnew, George William

  Astbury, John Meir

  Barnes, G. N.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Alden, Percy

  Baker,Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Allen,A.Aeland (Christchurch)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight

  Bell, Richard

  Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
  Noes, 78. (Division List No. 320.)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Gill, A. H.

  MacVeagh.Jeremiah (Down, S.

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Gladstone,Rt. Hn.Herbert John

  MacVeigh,Charles(Donegal, E.)

  Bertram, Julius

  Glendinning, R. G.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Kean, John

  Black, Arthur W.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  M'Kenna. Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Boland, John

  Grant, Corrie

  M'Killop, W.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

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

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Branch, James

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Brigg, John

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Bright, J. A.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Halpin, J.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Hammond, John

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Marnham, F. J.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Massie, J.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Meagher, Michael

  Byles, William Pollard

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harwood, George

  Menzies, Walter

  Causton,Rt.Hn.RichardKnight

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Mond, A.

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Clancey, John Joseph

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Montagu, E. S.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Clough, William

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Mooney, J. J.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morgan,J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morrell, Philip

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

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Morse, L. L.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hogan, Michael

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Cooper, G. J.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Murnaghan, George

  Corbett,C.H.(Sussex,E. Gr'st'd

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Murphy, John

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hope,W.Bateman (Somerset,N

  Myer, Horatio

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Howard, hon. Geoffrey

  Napier, T. B.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hudson, Walter

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Crean, Eugene

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Crombie, John William

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Crooks, William

  Jackson. R. S.

  O'Brien,Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  Crossley, William J.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Cullinan, J.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  O'Grady, J.

  Delany, William

  Kelley, George D.

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon,N.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Malley, William

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Shee, James John

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

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Partington, Oswald

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Lambert, George

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lamont, Norman

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Duffy. William J.

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

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

  Dunn, A. Edward (Cambrone)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Philipps.Col. Ivor(S'thampton)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Elibank, Master of

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Erskine, David C.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lough, Thomas

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

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lundon, W.

  Price,Robert John (Norfolk,E.)

  Field, William

  Lupton, Arnold

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

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Radford, G. H.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Macdonald,J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Maclean, Donald

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

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

  Gilhooly, James

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Richardson,A.

  1708

  1709

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Weir, James Galloway

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Whitbread, Howard

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Robertson,SirG.Scott (Bradf'rd

  Snowden, P.

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Robinson, S.

  Stanley, Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Steadman, W. C.

  Whitley, John Henry(Halifax)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Wiles, Thomas

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Rowands, J.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Runciman, Walter

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Willimson, A.

  Russell, T. W.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

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

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

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

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Tomkinson, James

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Toulmin, George

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

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Verney, F. W.

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

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Vivian, Henry

  Winfrey, R.

  Sears, J. E.

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Young, Samuel

  Seddon, J.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Shackleton, David James

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wardle, George J.

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

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

  Wason,Rt.Hn.E.(Clackmannan

  Pease.

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Wason, JohnCatheart (Orkney)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Waterlow, D. S.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gretton, John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

  Ashley, W. W.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH

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

  Rutherford,John (Lancashire)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Balfour,RtHn.A.J.(City Lond.)

  Hills, J. W.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Smith, F.E. (Liverpool, Walton

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hunt, Rowland

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

  Baring,Capt.Hn.G (Winchester

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir John H.

  Starkey, John R.

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.

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

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  King,Sir HenrySeymour (Hull)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Bowles. G. Stewart

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thomson,W.Mitchell- (Lanark)

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Liddell, Henry

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

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

  Turnour, Viscount

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Long,Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cavendish,RtHon.Victor C.W.

  Long, Rt.Hn.Walter(Dublin,S.)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Chamberlain,RtHn. J. A.(Worc.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

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

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

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Moore, William

  Younger, George

  Craig,Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Nield, Herbert

  Tellers for the Noes—Sir

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Mr. Forster.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Clause 11:—
  Amendment made—
  "In page 5, line 36, after the word 'agreement,' to insert the words 'and the provision? of section fourteen of The Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, with respect to money paid into
  1710
  the Bank of Ireland shall apply where money is so paid under this Act."—(Mr. Cherry.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question, "That Clause 11, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.
  Clause 12:
  Amendment made—
  "In page 6, line 2, leave out from the word 'as,' to end of line 4, and insert the words ' if they were county court judges in Ireland.'"—(Mr Cherry.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Hudson, Walter

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Agnew, George William

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Delany, William

  Jackson, R. S.

  Alden, Percy

  Devlin, Joseph

  Jacoby. Sir James Alfred

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire

  Ambrose, Robert

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

  Joyce, Michael

  Armitage, R.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Astbury, John Meir

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Kelley, George D.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Duffy, William J.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Duncan,C.(Barrow-in-Furness)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Edwards, Clement (Dengbigh)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Barker, John

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Elibank, Master of

  Lambert, George

  Barnard, E. B.

  Erskine, David C.

  Lamont, Norman

  Barnes, G. N.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Ferens, T. R.

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Field, William

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lloyd-George. Rt. Hon. David

  Black, Arthur W.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lough, Thomas

  Boland, John

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Lundon, W.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Branch, James

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Brigg, John

  Gilhooly, James

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Bright, J. A.

  Gill, A. H.

  Macdonald, J.M(FalkirkB'ghs

  Brodie, H. C.

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Mackarness. Frederic C.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah(Down, S.)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  MacVeigh, Charles(Donegal,E.)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  M'Callum, John M.

  Causton,Rt. HnRichardKnight

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B

  M'Kean, John

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Halpin, J.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hammond, John

  M'Killop, W.

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

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

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Clough, William

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Harwood, George

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Marks, G.Croydon(Launceston)

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

  Hazleton, Richard

  Marnham, F. J.

  Condon. Thomas Joseph

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Massie, J.

  Cooper, G. J.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Meagher, Michael

  Corbett,C.H.(Sussex,EGrinst'd

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Menzies, Walter

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Mond, A.

  Crean, Eugene

  Hogan, Michael

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Montagu, E. S.

  Crombie, John William

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Crooks, William

  Hope, W.Bateman(Somerset,N

  Mooney, J. J.

  Crossley, William J.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cullinan, J.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Morgan, J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 312; Noes, 75. (Division List No. 321.)

  Morse, L. L.

  Richardson, A.

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Murnaghan, George

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Murphy, John

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Myer, Horatio

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Robertson, SirGScott(Bradf'rd

  Tomkinson, James

  Napier, T. B.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Toulmin, George

  Newnes, F. (Notts. Bassetlaw)

  Robinson, S.

  Verney, F. W.

  Nicholson, CharlesN. (Doncast'r

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  O'Brien,Kendal(TipperaryMid)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ward, John(Stoke-upon-Trent)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wardle, George J.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Rowlands, J.

  Wason, Rt. Hn.E(Clackmann'n

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Runciman, Walter

  Wason, JohnCathcart(Orkney)

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

  Russell, T. W.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  O'Grady, J.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Watt, Henry A.

  O'Kelly, James(Roscommon, N)

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Weir, James Galloway

  O'Malley. William

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Whitbread, Howard

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  O'Shee, James John

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

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

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Partington, Oswald

  Sears, J. E.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Seddon, J.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wiles, Thomas

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

  Shackleton, David James

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Philipps,Col. Ivor(S'thampton)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

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

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Williamson, A.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

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

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh,Central)

  Sileock, Thomas Ball

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Price, RobertJohn(Norfolk, E.)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

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

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wilson, J.W.(Worcestersh. N)

  Radford,G. H.

  Snowden, P.

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

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Winfrey, R.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro')

  Steadman, W. C.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—MR.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

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

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood, RtHnSirAlex.F.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Anson. Sir William Reynell

  Forster, Henry William

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Rawlinson, John FrederickPeel

  Ashley, W. W.

  Gretton, John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

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

  Hervey, F. W.F. (BurySEdm'ds

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hill. Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Banner. John S. Harmood-

  Hills, J. W.

  Smith,F.E.(Liverpool, Walton)

  Baring, Capt. Hn.G(Winchester

  Houston, Robert Paterson

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

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Starkey, John R.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Kennaway, Rt.Hon.SirJohn H.

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Kenyon-Slaney, R t. Hon. Col. W,

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Keswick. William

  Turnour, Viscount

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  King. SirHenrySeymour(Hull)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Carlile, E. Hildrcd

  Lane-Fox. G. R.

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

  Cavendish, Rt.Hon.VictorC.W.

  Liddell. Henry

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

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Long, Col.CharlesW(Evesham)

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Dublin,S.)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Chamberlain, RtHn.J.A(Wore.

  Lowe. Sir Francis William

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

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Younger, George

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Tellers foR the Noes.—Vis-

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Ant rim,S.)

  Meysey-Thompson. E. C.

  count Valentia and Lord

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Moore, William

  Edmuud Talbot.

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Morpeth. Viscount;

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Nield, Herbert

  Clause 13:—
  Amendment made—
  "In page 6, line 18, at end, to add the words '(2) The annuity payable in respect of an advance made in pursuance of this section shall, in accordance with regulations made by the Treasury, be consolidated and made payable with the purchase annuity payable in respect

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Crooks, William

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Crossley, William J.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Cullinan, J.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Agnew, George William

  Curran, Peter Francis

  Hogan, Michael

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Alden, Percy

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Allen, A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Delany, William

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Ambrose, Robert

  Devlin, Joseph

  Hudson, Walter

  Armitage, R.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Dewar Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Astbury, John Meir

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

  Jackson, R. S.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Baker,Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Duffy, William J.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Duncan,C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Joyce, Michael

  Barker, John

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Kelley, George D.

  Barnard, E. B.

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Barnes, G. N.

  Elibank, Master of

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Erskine, David C.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Beauchamp, E.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Ferens, T. R,

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Field, William

  Lambert, George

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Lamont, Norman

  Black, Arthur W.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Boland, John

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Branch, James

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Brigg, John

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bright, J. A.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Brodie, H. C.

  Gilhooly, James

  Lough, Thomas

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Gill, A. H.

  Lundon, W.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Lupton, Arnold

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Glendinning, R. G.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Byles, William Pollard

  Grant, Corrie

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Macdonald, J. M. (FalkirkB'ghs)

  Causton,Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Maclean, Donald

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  MacVeagh,Jeremiah (Down,S.)

  Cleland, J. W.

  Halpin, J.

  MacVeigh.Charles (Donegal,E.)

  Clough, William

  Hammond, John

  M'Callum, John M.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  M'Kean, John

  Cobbold, Felix Thornley

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hart-Davis, T.

  M'Killop, W.

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

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

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

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Harwood, George

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Cooper, G. J.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Corbett,C.H.(Sussex, E. Gr'st'd

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Crean, Eugene

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Marnham, F. J.

  Cremer, Sir William Randal

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Massie, J.

  Crombie, John William

  Henry, Charles S.

  Meagher, Michael

  of the purchase money of the parcel of land.' "—(Mr. Cherry.)
  Question put, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 315; Noes, 71, (Division List, No. 322).

  Meehan, Patrick A.

  Radford, G. H.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Menzies, Walter

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro

  Sutherland, J. B.

  Mond, A.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Montagu, E. S.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Montgomery, H. G.

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

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

  Mooney, J. J.

  Richardson, A.

  Tomkinson, James

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Toulmin, George

  Morgan, J.Lloyd(Carmarthen)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Verney, F. W.

  Morrell, Philip

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Waldron, Laureace Ambrose

  Morse, L. L.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradf'rd

  Walters, John Tudor

  Murnaglian, George

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Murphy, John

  Robinson, S.

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Myer, Horatio

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Wardle, George J.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Wason,RtHnE.(Clackmannan)

  Napier, T. B.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wason,JohnCathcart (Orkney)

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncast'r

  Rowlands, J.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Runciman, Walter

  Weir, James Galloway

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Russell. T. W.

  Whitbread, Howard

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire.)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Samuel. Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Samuel. S. M. (Whitechapel)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax

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

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Whittaker, Sir Thornas Palmer

  O'Grady. J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Wiles, Thomas

  O'Kelly, James(Roscommon,N.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  O'Malley, William

  Seddon. J.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J,

  Seely,.Major J. B.

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  O'Shee, James John

  Shackleton, David James

  Williamson, A.

  Parker, James (Halifax.)

  Shaw, Charles E Iw. (Stafford)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Partington, Oswald

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

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

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Pearson, SirW.D. (Colchester)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Pearson, W. H. M. (S uff olk,Eye)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

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

  Philipps,Col.Ivor(S'thampton)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

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

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Winfrey, R.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Snowden, P.

  Young, Samuel

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Spicer, Sir Albert

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

  Stanley,Hn.A.Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr

  Price.RobertJohn(Norfolk,E.)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

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

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reyneil

  Craig,CharlesCurtis(Antrim,S.)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Douglas. Rt. Hon A. Akers-

  Moore, William

  Balcarres, Lord

  Faber, George Danison (York)

  Morpeth, Viscount

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

  Harrison-Broadkley, H. B.

  Nield, Herbert

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hay. Hon. Claude George

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

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

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Baring,Capt. Hn. G(Winchester)

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

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

  Hills, J. W.

  Rawlinson.JohnFrederickPeel

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Roberts,S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hunt, Rowland

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon.SirJohn H.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Kenyon-Slaney, R t. Hon. Col. W.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Keswick, William

  Smith,F.E.(Liverpool,Walton)

  Cavendish,Rt. Hon.VictorC.W.

  King,SirHenrySeymour(Hull)

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

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Starkey, John R.

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Liddell, Henry

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Chamberlain,RtHn. J. A.(Wore.

  Long.Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

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

  Long.Rt.Hn. Walter(Dublin,S)

  Turnour, Viscount

  Corbett, T. L. (Down. North)

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Valentia, Viscount

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Lyttelton. Rt. Hon. Alfred

  1718

  1719

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Tellers for the Noes—Sir

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

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

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

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

  Younger, George

  Mr. Forster.

  Clause 14:—
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 302;

  AYES.

  Abraham,William (Cork, N.E.)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Delany, William

  Jackson, R. S.

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Agnew, George William

  Dewar,Arthur (Edinburgh,S.)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

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

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire

  Alden, Percy

  Dobson, Thomas W.

  Joyce, Michael

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Ambrose, Robert

  Duffy, William J.

  Kelley, George D.

  Armitage, R.

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Astbury, John Meir

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Baker,Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Elibank, Master of

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Baring,Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Erskine, David C.

  Lambert, George

  Barker, John

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lamont, Norman

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Barnard, E. B.

  Field, William

  Law, Hugh A (Donegal, W.)

  Barnes, G. N.

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Layland-Barratt, Franci

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Beauchamp, E.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph]

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lough, Thomas

  Boland, John

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Lundon, W.

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Lupton, Arnold

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Gilhooly. James

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Gill, A. H.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Brigg, John

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Bright, J. A.

  Glendinning, R. G.

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

  Brodie,H. C.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Mackarness, Frederic.C.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Grant, Corrie

  Maclean, Donald

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Macpherson. J. T.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

  MacVeagh,Jeremiah (Down,S.)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  MacVeigh,Charles (Donegal,E.)

  Causton,RtHn Richard Knight

  Halpin, J.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Hammond, John

  M'Kean, John

  Cherry, Rt Hon R. R.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon.Reginald

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Killop. W.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hart-Davies, T.

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

  Cleland, J. W.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  M'Micking. Major G.

  Clough, William

  Harwood, George

  Maddison. Frederick

  Cobbold, Felix Thorniey

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

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

  Hazleton, Richard

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Cooper, G. J.

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Marnham, F. J.

  Corbett,CH(Sussex,E.Grinst'd

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Massie, J.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.,

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Meagher, Michael

  Cowan, W. H.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Meehan, Patrick A

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Menzies. Walter

  Crean, Eugene

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Molteno. Percy Alport

  Cremer,Sir William Randal

  Hogan, Michael

  Mond, A.

  Crombie, John William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Crooks, William

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Crossley, William J.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Mooney, J. J.

  Cullinan, J.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Hudson, Walter

  Morrell, Philip

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Morse, L, L.

  Question put, "That the clause, stand part of the Bill."
  Noes, 71. (Division List, No. 323.)

  Morton,Alpheus Cleophas

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Murnaghan, George

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan,E.)

  Murphy, John

  Roberts,John H. (Denbighsh.)

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

  Myer, Horatio

  Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradford

  Tomkinson, James

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Toulmin, George

  Newnes, F. (Notts., Bassetlaw)

  Robinson, S.

  Verney; F. W.

  Nicholson,Charles N(Doncaster

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

  Nolan, Joseph

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Walters, John Tudor

  O' Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Rowlands, J.

  Wason,Rt Hn.E.(Clackmannan

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Runciman, Walter

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Russell, T. W.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Watt, Henry A.

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

  Samuel,Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Weir, James Galloway

  O'Grady, J.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Whitbread, Howard

  O'Kelly,James (Roseommon,N

  Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  O'Malley, William

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

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

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  O'Shee, James John

  Sears, J. E.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Partington, Oswald

  Seddon, J.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Pearson.SirW. D. (Colchester)

  Shackleton, David James

  Wilkie, Alexander

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

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Philipps,Col.Ivor(S'thampton)

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

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Williamson, A.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

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

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Wilson, John (Durham. Mid)

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

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

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

  Sinclair, Rt Hon John

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

  Radford, G. H.

  Snowden, P.

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

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Winfrey, R.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Stanley.Hn.A.Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Wood,T. M'Kinnon

  Rea, Walter Russell(Scarboro')

  Steadman, W. C.

  Young, Samuel

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Tellers for the Ayes—Mr.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Straus B. S. (Mile End)

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

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

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Pease.

  Richardson, A.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Rickett, J, Compton

  Taylor, John \(Durham)

  NOES.

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

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Nield, Herbert

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Ashley, W. W.

  Forster, Henry William

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah.

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Rawlinson, John FrederickPeel

  Balfour.RtHnA.J. (City Lond.)

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

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield,Ecclesall)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hills, J. W.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Baring, Capt.Hn.G.(Winchester

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Scott. Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith,F.E.(Liverpool, Walton)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Kennaway,Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

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

  Bowles, G. Stewart

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

  Starkey, John R.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Keswick, William

  Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  King,SirHenry Seymour (Hull)

  Turnour, Viscount

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cavendish,Rt,Hon. Victor C.W.

  Liddell, Henry

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

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

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

  Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

  Long,Rt.Hn.Walter(Dublin,S.)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Chamberlain,Rt Hn J.A(Worc.

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. H on. Alfred

  Younger, George

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Tellers for the Noes—

  Craig,Charles Curtis (Antrim.S.

  Meysey-Thompson, E.G.

  Viscount Valentia and Lord

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Moore, William

  Edmund Talbot.

  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 290.]

  EVICTED TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL.

    METROPOLITAN WATER BOARD (VARIOUS POWERS) BILL (BY ORDER).
    As amended, considered.
    Mr. CLAUDE HAYsaid that an arrangement had been come to that neither this Bill nor the Metropolitan Water Board (Charges, etc.) Bill, which was discussed last night, would be taken after the proceedings in Committee on the Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Bill had been disposed of. The hon. Member for Hammersmith had asked him to state that he left the precincts of the House on the distinct understanding that neither of these Bills would be taken. [An Hon. Member: No.] Whether such an arrangement had been come to or not, he had at any rate carried out the undertaking he gave to the hon. Member. It was now a quarter past twelve o'clock, and he submitted that it was improper to take so important a Bill after a heavy Parliamentary day's work. He was not speaking without precedent, for it was only thirteen months since it was decided in the case of the Great Northern Railway of Ireland Bill that it was improper to proceed with the discussion of it after midnight. This Water Bill affected the interests of 6,000,000 people, and involved something like £40,000,000. The measure could not receive proper consideration in the early hours of the morning when hon. Members were fatigued by a long day's work. He begged to move the adjournment of the debate.
    The Motion was not seconded.
    MR. STUART WORTLEY: in moving a new clause (for the protection of railway companies), expressed the hope that the House would not be alarmed at its length. It simply provided the protection which Parliament on all previous occasions of a like nature had granted to railway companies. He was glad to be able to inform the House that, subject to one Amendment, the promoters of the Bill had agreed to the new clause. It was proposed to
    1724
    amend Sub-clause (5) by inserting words which would have the effect of relieving the Metropolitan Water Board of the consequences of what might be called inevitable accident. For the rest, he knew perfectly well that he had to deal with any persons who dissented from the policy of the agreement arrived at, and who thought that the policy of the Joint Committee ought to be upheld. That made it necessary that he should to some extent explain the nature of the new clause. In connection with the water schemes of Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester, it was necessary to construct works above or below the existing railways, and in all these cases a specific provision closely resembling the clause he now moved had been granted for the protection of the railway companies. The clause provided three requisites, namely, in the first place, that the works to be carried out should be executed under the supervision of the railway company's engineer after the submission to him of the necessary plans; secondly, that the traffic should not be interfered with; and thirdly, that if any damage resulted to the company's servants, or to the public, or to the company themselves in consequence of these works, compensation must be paid. What was the objection which was made? It was said that there were provisions under the Public Health Act of 1875 which gave the public authority power for sewer-laying purposes to enter upon the premises of anybody under the sidewalks of public highways. They were told that they ought to be satisfied with the pecuniary compensation which was set up under the Public Health Act, but he did not think they ought to be. That compensation was quite inappropriate to the present case, and moreover was given only in respect of Clause 61 of this Bill, and not at all in respect of the equally novel and even more dangerous proposals of Clause 58. He begged to move his Amendment in its amended form.
    MR. CLAUDE HAYcalled attention to the fact that no one had seconded the Amendment.
    *MR. SPEAKERsaid no seconder was required.
    New clause—

    "(1) In constructing laying down altering improving enlarging extending maintaining repairing, renewing or removing any conduits mains pipes wires appliances apparatus or other works in exercise of any of the powers conferred by this Act or by any of the Acts incorporated wholly or partly therewith upon along across under or over the railways works lands or property of the railway companies or under over or across any level crossing over any such railway or under over across or in any way affecting the structure of any bridge or tunnel over or under such railways or the approaches to or roads over any such bridge or tunnel or any other road which the railway companies are or may be liable to maintain the same shall be done under the superintendence and to the reasonable satisfaction of the chief engineer of the railway company whose railways bridges tunnels works lands or other property or level crossing may be affected or by whom any such road is liable to be maintained (in this section called 'the engineer') and in accordance with plans specifications sections and detailed drawings (in this section referred to as 'the plans') previously submitted to and approved in writing by the engineer or in case of difference settled by arbitration in manner hereinafter provided. Provided that if the engineer shall not within twenty-eight days after the plans shall have been submitted for his approval notify to the Board in writing his disapproval thereof he shall be deemed to have approved the plans;

    "(2) All such works shall be done by and at the expense of the Board who shall also make good and restore to the reasonable satisfaction of the engineer any property or works of the railway companies or any roads liable to be maintained by them affected by such works and shall to the like satisfaction maintain such roads (so far as the same may have been interfered with by the execution of such works) for three months after such restoration and for such further time (if any) not being more than twelve months in the whole as such roads shall continue to subside;

    "(3) All such works and any matters incidental to or connected therewith shall be done and carried out by the Board at such times and in such manner as the engineer may reasonably direct and so as to cause as little injury as may be to the railways bridges tunnels works lands and property of the railway companies or to any road which such companies may be liable to maintain;

    "(4) In the execution of any such works or incidental matters the Board shall not at any time or in any manner cause any injury or danger or (so far as can be avoided) any interruption impediment or delay to the safe passage and conduct of traffic over the railways or at to or from the stations sidings or works of the railway companies;

    "(5) If any such injury danger interruption impediment or delay shall be caused by or be attributable to any of such works or incidental matters or by or to the acts or defaults of the Board or t heir officers servants contractors or workmen or any other person employed in
    1726
    connection with such works or by or to the failure of any such works (such injury danger interruption impediment or delay not being the result of inevitable accident) the Board shall indemnify and save harmless the railway companies from all and any claims and demands which may be made upon the railway companies in connection with such injury danger interruption impediment delay or failure and shall also make compensation to the railway companies in respect of any loss or injury which. they may sustain or any expense to which they may be put in connection with any such injury danger interruption impediment delay or failure and the amount of such compensation shall in case of difference be settled by arbitration in the manner her in after provided: Provided that in the case of the exercise by the Board of the powers of the section of this Act of which the marginal note is 'Power to Board to exercise powers of Local Authorities under Public Health Act 1875' this subsection shall apply instead of Section 308 of 'The Public Health Act 1875 ';

    "(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any Act incorporated wholly or partly therewith the Board shall not without the consent in writing of the railway companies under their common seal purchase or acquire any of the lands or property of the railway companies but the Board may acquire and the railway companies shall if required grant to the Board an easement or right of constructing and maintaining works on through in under over or along such lands and property and the sum to be paid for the acquisition of such easement or right shall be settled in the manner provided by 'The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 ' with respect to the purchase of lands otherwise than by agreement. Provided always that where the Board shall have acquired any such easement or right as aforesaid nothing in this Act shall prevent the Railway Companies from using their lands ant property as they may think fit subject to such reasonable protection for the works of the Board as may be agreed or settled by arbitration in manner hereinafter provided;

    "(7) The Board shall so construct maintain and work any wires and apparatus for the transmission of messages or reservoir level indications by means of electricity which they may establish under the powers of this Act as not to interfere with the working of any telephone telegraph train signalling or other apparatus of the railway companies by any stray currents induction or contacts and if any such interference shall take place the railway companies shall be at liberty to construct and provide an insulated return to the circuits affected by such interference or to do such other works as may be reasonably necessary and the Board shall on demand pay to the railway companies the reasonable cost of constructing and providing such insulated return or of such other necessary works as aforesaid;

    "(8) The railway companies may if they so elect to do themselves carry out at the cost charges and expenses of the Board any works upon in under across or affecting their railways lands works or property except the provision

    1727
    of pipes and laying and jointing the same which shall be done by the Board;

    "(9) If the railway companies at any time or times hereafter require (of which they shall be the sole judges) to adapt their railways or any part or parts thereof for working by electrical power or to construct any additional or other works upon their lands or railways or in connection therewith or to widen alter reconstruct or repair their railways bridges tunnels subways viaducts or works upon cross over or under which any of the works the Board may have been constructed or laid If at any time or times hereafter a bridge shall be constructed in substitution for a level crossing upon across over or under which any of the works of the Board may have been constructed or laid the railway companies may on giving to the Board twenty-eight days' notice in writing under the hand of their secretary or general manager of their intention so to do and in case of emergency (of which the engineer shall be the sole judge) without notice at their own expense divert alter support or carry the said works of the Board across over or under their railways lands works or property at any other point doing as little damage as may be and without being liable to pay compensation in respect of such diversion alteration supporting or carrying such works. Provided always that such diversion or alteration shall be done without unduly interfering with the supply of water by the Board;

    "(10) In the execution or alteration by the railway companies of any works of the Board under either of the two last preceding sub-sections the same shall be done under the superintendence and to the reasonable satisfaction of the engineer to the Board and in accordance with plans specifications sections and detailed drawings previously submitted to and approved in writing by the said engineer or in case of difference settled by arbitration in manner hereinafter provided and if the said engineer shall not within twenty-eight days after the said plans specifications sections and detailed drawings shall have been submitted for his approval notify to the railway companies in writing his disapproval of the same he shall be deemed to have approved thereof and the railway companies shall not at any time or in any manner cause any avoidable interruption in the supply of water by the Board and if any such interruption shall be caused by or be attributable to the works of the railway companies or to the acts or defaults of such companies or their officers servants contractors or workmen or any other person employed in connection with such works or from the failure of any such works the railway companies shall indemnify and save harmless the Board from all and any claims and demands which may be made upon the Board in connection with such interruption and shall also make compensation to the Board in respect of any loss or injury which they may sustain or any expense to which they may be put in connection with such interruption and the amount of such compensation shall in case of difference be settled by arbitration in the manner hereinafter provided;

    "(11) If having regard to the proposed position of any work to be executed by the
    1728
    Board in relation to the position of the works of the railway companies at any point where the works of the Board will be constructed over under or along any railways or works of the railway companies it becomes reasonably necessary that any of the works of the railway companies should be altered the railway companies may execute the works reasonably necessary for such alteration and the reasonable costs of executing such works shall be repaid by the Board to the railway companies;

    "(12) Nothing in this Act contained shall enable the Board to raise sink remove or otherwise alter the position of any railway sidings embankments bridges tunnels stations and works of a similar character belonging to the railway companies;

    "(13) If by reason of the execution of any of the works of the Beard it shall become necessary to reconstruct alter strengthen or in anywise interfere with the structure of any bridge tunnel or other work of the railway companies such alteration reconstruction or strengthening shall be carried out by the railway companies at such times and in such manner as they may reasonably think expedient or necessary and the reasonable cost thereof shall be borne by the Board;

    "(14) The Board shall bear and on demand pay to the railway companies affected by the construction laying down alteration improvement enlargement extension maintenance renewal or removal of or the execution of repairs to any works of the Board all reasonable costs of the superintendence by the railway companies of the said works and repairs and of watching lighting and protection of the railways and works of the railway companies with reference to and during such works or repairs but such superintendence shall not relieve the Board from liability for any accidents which may be occasioned by or through any act or default of the Board or any contractors agent or workman or other person or persons employed in or about the execution and carrying out of such works or repairs;

    "(15) Any dispute or difference which may arise between the railway companies and the Board with reference to the provisions of this section or in any way arising there out or as to any works to be carried out by the Board or by the railway companies shall be settled by arbitration by an engineer or other fit person to be agreed upon between them or failing such agreement to be appointed by the President of the Institution of Civil Engineers on the application of the railway companies and the Board or either of them."

    Brought up, and read a first time.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this clause be read a second time."
    *MR. LUKE WHITEas a member of the Joint Committee said that they took evidence on behalf of the railway companies and

    1729
    against them, and heard counsel for and against the Bill. It was not a measure establishing for the first time a water-work undertaking, but was simply to carry out certain works and make provision with regard to the many powers which were given to the Water Board. There were ten members of the Committee present when the decision was arrived at, and they were unanimous in coming to the conclusion that this clause should not be allowed. In coming to that conclusion, and in considering the evidence produced by the railway companies, no statement was made of any difficulty which had arisen in London with regard to the present powers possessed by the railway companies with regard to the waterworks of the companies or the Water Board, and of course, one, that night, was placed in a somewhat difficult position. With some experience of Private Bill Committees he might say that he was not one of those who thought that because some agreement was made under pressure and for the purpose of getting a Bill through the House, the agreement was binding on the House of Commons, and that they should in any way sacrifice the large community whose interests they were concerned to look after. He asked the House of Commons to support the Committee in the decision which they came to after hearing the evidence and all the arguments of counsel. The Committee had decided that the clause should not be inserted in the Bill, and of course, it was for the House of Commons to say whether it should be inserted or not. There were no new facts brought forward in the House other than those which came before the Committee, and the Committee had the advantage of hearing all the evidence and the arguments which could be advanced.
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD OF TRADE (MR. Lloyd-George, Carnarvon Boroughs)said that, before the debate closed, he wished to say a few words on behalf of the Board of Trade. Of course the Board of Trade had looked at this matter purely from the point of view of the public interest, which was involved in the proposal. He was informed that an arrange-
    1730
    ment had been arrived at between the parties concerned which involved a very considerable modification of the clause on the Paper. It was an arrangement, in fact, which altered the original proposals in one very material respect. He need hardly say that the Board of Trade had gone into the matter very carefully. Having considered the evidence given before the Committee, and also the point as it was put by the hon. Member who had just spoken, he thought the clause in its altered form was a perfectly fair one. What, after all, did it involve? He was not reflecting on the Committee or suggesting for one moment that on the evidence before them they should not have come to the decision they did; but in one respect he believed they took too favourable a view of the clause in the Public Health Act to which his hon. friend had alluded. He was informed by the legal advisers of his Department that this clause in the Public Health Act did not cover all the points which might be raised under the conditions created by this Bill. It was their opinion that it would be necessary for the legitimate protection of the railway companies that some provision in the nature of the clause now submitted by the right hon. Gentlemen the Member for Sheffield, should be inserted in the Bill. All they had to ensure was that fair play was done by the Department. What, then, was the position? Here they had a railway company on a bridge across a river which they had erected at an enormous expense. The Water Board came and asked for an easement to enable them to use that bridge for the purpose of carrying a pipe main across the river. All the railway company asked was this: If anything happened to the bridge in consequence, say, of the pipes bursting, the damage would be made good by the water company. The House should bear in mind that in such a case the damage could not in any sense be said to be due to any fault of the railway company, and if the damage arose; from the fact of the pipes having been laid there it seemed to him to be perfectly fair that the water company should bear the brunt of it. That was the proposition as laid down in the clause on the Order Paper, but the modification which had been agreed to by the railway companies gave away even that proposition,

    1731
    and it was, he believed, only in very exceptional cases that this would apply at all. He could understand that the House was naturally anxious to support the decisions of a Committee, but after all the House of Commons could not altogether part with the power of supervising the actions even of its Committees, otherwise there would be no object whatever in bringing a Bill back to the House for consideration on report. However much disposed the House of Commons might be to support the decision of a Committee which had undoubtedly taken a great deal of trouble in considering the questions raised by the Bill, he hoped that when a matter of this kind came forward the House would see that fair play and justice was done as between the parties. The officials of the Board of Trade had examined into the matter quite impartially. They had seen both parties. They had heard what the Metropolitan Water Board had to say and also what the railway companies had to say. He understood that as the result of conferences which had taken place the Water Board had agreed to the modified form of clause which was now proposed. When the parties had considered the matter fairly and had come to the conclusion that they could safely accept the clause in its modified form he did not think the members of the Committee would go to the extent of pressing their opposition to it. The parties having come to that agreement, he did not see what possible injustice there could be to the great community referred to by his hon. friend. That community, he was sure, only wanted to do what was fair, either in London or elsewhere, and if through any accident to water pipes any injury or damage was done to a railway bridge put up at a great expense it was only fair that that expense should be borne by the water company which was responsible for laying down the mains. He trusted that the House of Commons would accept the clause in its modified form. He thought that, on the whole, it was fair as between the parties. There was nothing very sweeping or drastic in it, and there was nothing in it which the House of Commons need have any fear about if they passed it.
    MR. CLEMENT EDWARDS (Denbigh District)expressed a profound hope that in spite of what the right hon. Gentleman had said the House of Commons would reject what he ventured to criticise as an impudent attempt on the part of the railway companies to secure preferential treatment of an unusual kind. What the right hon. Gentleman had said as regarded the fair treatment of a railway company in respect of a bridge might equally be said of the London County Council in regard to its tramways system. It might also be said of a canal company, where canals and locks interfered with the particular work of another big company, and of almost any other concern. What was asked for here was a special and distinct preferential position for the railway companies. The right hon. Gentleman had suggested that because the representatives of the railway companies on the one side and the representatives of the Metropolitan Water Board on the other, had, under the pressure of Parliamentary circumstances, come to an agreement, the matter was at an end. But there was also to be considered the large and important interest of the community that was represented either by the railway companies on the one side nor even by the Metropolitan Water Board on the other. For that interest they, as Members of the House of Commons, were the trustees. He ventured to say that they would not be discharging the sacred trust which was imposed upon them if they did not look with a careful, jealous, and scrutinising eye upon the proposals now before the House. The moment the proposals were carefully scrutinised it was seen that the railway companies were asking for a kind of treatment at the hands of Parliament in regard to this matter, totally different from that which had been sanctioned in the case of other undertakings. The Committee by whom this matter had been dealt with, had very carefully considered all interests. They had the proposal of the railway companies before them and they thrashed it out with the advantage of the evidence of expert witnesses to guide them. He asked the House to adopt the view that the Committee, who had heard a 1 the arguments

    1733
    on both sides, came to a perfectly right decision in the matter, and he hoped the House would uphold the Committee by rejecting the proposal to insert this extraordinary new clause.
    MR. C. DUNCAN (Barrow-in-Fur-ness)said that as one of those Members who sat on the Committee for no less than thirteen days and listened to all the statements and arguments brought forward by the officials of the railway companies, as well as by the counsel whom they employed, he thought the case was put as fairly and as fully as one could expect before a Committee of that description. It appeared to him that what the railway companies were aiming at was that they should stand first and that the Water Board, representing the supply of water to 6,000,000 of people, should come second. He would be very much surprised if a House of Commons, composed as the present House was, accepted and agreed to a proposition of that kind. They were legislating that night for the supply of water to the biggest city in the world, and it seemed to him, after the difficulties that had been experienced in the Metropolis in the past, that the least the House could do was to give the water authority complete control so that it might take its pipes and works over obstructions. Those works were essential for the supply of water to the people, and the railway companies should not be allowed to dictate terms to the Water Board as they had done in the past. One case which was cited before the Committee struck him as being very important indeed. The position was this: A line of pipes was to be taken over a railway bridge. The said railway bridge passed over a public road. The railway company had got permission to put their bridge over the public road at their own expense, but paving nothing to the public who made the road. When the line of pipes was put over the bridge a nominal rent was fixed for the accommodation; but afterwards the railway company arbitrarily raised the rent charged from a very insignificant figure to a sum of about £38 per annum. That was some evidence of the fact that it was not exactly wise to place a public authority under the hands of either a rail-
    1734
    way or of any other company. It seemed to him that the public requirements, especially in the case of an essential article like water, should stand first all the time, and for that reason he should vote against any Amendment that it might be proposed to make in the Bill with the object of serving other interests than those of the general community. All these questions were argued very fully before the Committee, who examined special witnesses and had every matter bearing on the subject most carefully explained. Instead of sanctioning the arrangement which had been referred to, and of which he was beginning to grow suspicious, as it had been made behind the scenes, the House of Commons, if it did its duty as it ought to do it, would say that the House itself was the place where any arrangement ought to be made. Objecting as he did to the arrangement, he hoped the House would reject the Amendment and put the Water Board in a proper position.
    Sir J. RANDLESsaid that in considering the question the Committee looked first and foremost at the public interest. He thought perhaps it would be going too far to say that because they had decided a matter in a certain way in Committee they should not review the case when it came back to the House of Commons. The chief reason that influenced him in the opinion he gave in the Committee was that he wanted the Water Board to have sufficient facilities and powers for dealing with matters which the Committee thought were in the interest of the public. If the Water Board in their discretion conceived that they could by coming to an arrangement with the railway companies further the interests of the Bill and secure its passage, he, not being unduly suspicious, did not think the members of the Committee need take up a non possumus attitude or be too sensitive about their decision in Committee on a point of this kind. He was inclined to think that if the Board of Trade in their guardianship of the public interest, and the Metropolitan Water Board in pursuit of the same interest, came together in such a matter as that now under discussion, the

    1735
    House might reasonably agree to the modified proposal which had been submitted.
    *MR. DICKINSON (St. Pancras, N.)said that those Members of the House who sat through the small hours of yesterday morning would realise the rather difficult position in which they found themselves. They were then admonished by a member of the Government that they ought not to go behind the decision of the Committee. Now they were advised by another member of the Government that they ought to overthrow the decision of the Committee. He did not differ with the President of the Board of Trade. He certainly held that they were quite entitled to go behind the decision of the Committee. But at the same time, it was surely a matter which must be fairly argued on the floor of that House, and he could not help thinking that they had not had very strong arguments in favour of the Amendment. Let them just see what the Amendment was. He did not proposed to read it all through, but he proposed to ask the attention of the House to the words in Subsection 5—
    "If any such injury, danger, or any interruption, impediment, or delay, shall be caused by or attributable to any of such works o incidental matters or to the acts or defaults of the Board, or their officers, servants, contractors or workmen, or any other person employed in connection with such works, or from the failure of any such works, the Board shall indemnify and save harmless the railway companies from all and any claims and demands which may be made upon the railway companies in connection with such injury, danger, interruption, impediment, delay or failure, and shall also make compensation to the railway companies in respect of any loss or injury which they may sustain or any expense to which they may be put in connection with any such injury, danger, interruption, impediment, delay, or failure, and the amount of such compensation shall, in case of difference, be settled by arbitration."
    *MR. LUKE WHITE: The hon. Gentleman has not got the amended clause.
    *MR. DICKINSON,consulting the amended clause, said it provided that unless in the case of inevitable accident in connection with injury, danger, interruption, impediment, or delay to the works the Board should indemnify and save harmless the railway companies. The
    1736
    House had only to look at the clause to see what an endless vista of responsibility might be placed upon the public authority and what an amount of litigation might arise. What was the position of the public authority? The public authority, as they were told by the document which had been circulated to them on behalf of the Metropolitan Board, was the statutory authority which, under the general law of the land, would have no responsibility unless any damage were due to their own negligence. In other words the effect of the clause would be to reduce the Board to the position in which they would be if they executed the proposed works without the authority of Parliament. That was to say, the treatment which was given to all public authorities constituted by Parliament was to be denied to this one in favour of certain railway companies. The proposal was of enormous magnitude, and if it was of enormous magnitude surely it ought not to come before the House unless with the approval of the Committee. They had no right to put such a burden upon the public authority unless they had had the matter investigated and approved by the Committee. They were placed in this peculiar position by the method adopted of sending Bills to Joint Committees. If the Bill had gone through the ordinary course it would have proceeded to a Committee of the Lords and there would have been another opportunity of investigating these proposals. But as matters stood their only appearance now was on the floor of this House. He ventured to hope that in the interests of the public of London the House would not assent to the Amendment, notwithstanding the fact that they were told the Metropolitan Board of Water had agreed to it. He must say he could not read the document circulated without marvelling as to how and why the Board had come to agree to these proposals. They had not had the advantage of hearing the representative of the Board upon that question. Seeing the Amendments had been down on the Paper for some days or weeks, and that they had been always under the impression that they were Amendments opposed by the promoters of the Bill, now that, at the last moment, they found they had

    1737
    been agreed to, the House should pause before acceding to the request made by the President of the Board of Trade.
    *COLONEL R. WILLIAMSsaid there was one point in his speech where the hon. Member seemed to be rather thankful there was a House of Lords. He wanted to say a word or two as to the gist of his speech about the public authority. He thought the hon. Gentleman had forgotten that railway companies were statutory authorities working under Act of Parliament just as much as the Metropolitan Board of Water. Hon. Gentlemen spoke of the Water Board dealing with a population of 6,000,000. Did they remember the number of the millions who travelled habitually in and out of London on the rail-ways, and of whose safety the railway companies had charge? There was a possibility that the companies might be put to very serious inconvenience through delay to the trains by the Water Board, if the Water Board or anybody else had unlimited access. Yet not one word had been said of that much larger population who used the railways and whose interests the railways had to protect. There was the case of a railway company making a bridge over which the water company desired to carry pipes. Supposing that bridge was not quite sufficiently strong to carry those pipes, was it seriously contended that the water company would have the right to enter and weaken the bridge to a dangerous point in order to carry their water pipes over? Was it contended it was not perfectly right that the water company should pay £30 or £40 a year for the privilege of carrying their pipes over, instead of having to build a new bridge and spend £5,000 or £10,000 of money. He was sure the water company could not grumble at that. Supposing it was not a railway company at all, supposing it was a private bridge, as they sometimes had, would it be seriously contended if the water company laid pipes across and an accident occurred because of those pipes the water company would not have to pay for it? The hon. Member for Denbigh District had spoken of an arrangement being approved by the President of the Board of Trade. He forgot to put in the words "fair and just," upon which the
    1738
    President of the Board of Trade based his approval.
    MR. CLEMENT EDWARDSinterposed to say that what he said was that if the arrangement was just in the case of a railway company it was equally just in the case of a county council or a canal company, and that these were given no such preferential treatment.
    *COLONEL R. WILLIAMSsaid that was not the portion of the speech to which he was referring. It would be absurd to think that in the case where the bridge belonged to a private person the water company would not pay. Not a word had been said as regarded the question of delay to trains. He should have thought it was a sufficiently common experience—it was obtained by almost every public purveyor of transportation, a railway company or anybody else—that there should be a stipulation that if the. company was put to any expense by the act of somebody else whom it had obliged, a corporation or whatever it might be, the company was to be recouped by that person or corporation and was not to bear the expense. That was perfectly fair and reasonable.
    *MR. LUKE WHITEsaid the company could be recouped under the general law.
    *COLONEL R. WILLIAMSsaid they were told by the President of the Board of Trade and his legal advisers that the company could not be recouped under the clause. If the clause was fair and reasonable he could not see why the House should not carry it out. It did not matter whether it was a water company or a railway company or not. It did not matter what they called the two parties. If the House desired to do what was fair and just let them remember that it was not the interests of one particular section against another, but the interests as a whole of the water consumers and of the great population that used the railways.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that if he were clear that the general law would afford the protection his hon. friend had said he would not have intervened in the matter. It was because he

    1739
    was advised the general law did not afford that protection that he took the course he did.
    *MR. HELME (Lancashire, Lancaster)said the general law under the Public Health Acts would give the railway companies all the protection they required. The Public Health Act of 1875 provided that—
    "Where any person sustains any damage by reason of the exercise of any of the powers of this Act in relation to any matter as to which he is not himself in default full compensation shall be made to such person by the local authority exercising such power."
    They had that night to face a very important decision, one which had far-reaching effects and which might apply to a great many public authorities beyond the Water Board in question. The course of private Bill business in that House was entrusted to Committees, and the greatest consideration should be given by the House before it consented to reverse the decision of a Committee, which had sent down a Bill after careful consideration. He held that in dealing that night with this proposal there had been no case made out by the right hon. Gentleman on which they ought for one moment to upset the decision of the Committee upstairs. The case was one in which, owing to the exigencies of the Parliamentary session, there had been an arrangement arrived at between the two parties rather than that the promoters should lose the Bill, and it was for the House to say whether it was wise for it to depart from the usual custom when there had been no case made out for the proposal which was then before them. He submitted that in dealing with Private Bill legislation they ought to stand by the statute law and not allow an exception to be made in that case. No cause had been shown why the Amendment should be considered to be necessary. The railway company would not suffer if it were not inserted. Enormous powers were dealt with in the several sections of the new clause. The railway company might come down with its engineers and direct certain work to be done. The great municipalities throughout the country might be subjected to powers similar to those now sought, if they
    1740
    granted the same to the railway company. Those municipalities were continually seeking such powers, by Private Bills or otherwise, for the purpose of carrying out great sewage, water, and general works. The railway company was an all-powerful authority, and Parliament, naturally, must have regard to the limitation of the interests of railway companies when they come in conflict with the public interest. He held that if the House that night consented to upset the finding of the Committee they would be striking a blow at the public interest by allowing the railway company to come down and reverse the decision of the Joint Committee in order to give the railway company such special powers. They ought to be very careful not to upset their whole system of Private Bill legislation, as it would be upset if the Amendment were accepted that night. The President of the Board of Trade had looked into the matter and consented up to a certain limit, but the right hon. Gentleman's point had been that the Board of Trade need not interfere because an agreement had been arrived at by the parties concerned. He believed that in the circumstances Tinder which the agreement had been come to the House was justified in doing all that it could to prevent its being accepted.
    Viscount TURNOURsaid that in the Amendment there were questions raised which were more important than the Bill itself. They had to decide whether the Bill should be judged on its merits or on socialistic theories. The President of the Board of Trade had given very concisely and very fairly his reasons why the House should accept the Amendment. He had listened to the speeches of the opponents of the new clause, but he had heard nothing to upset any single part of the right hon. Gentleman's speech. The hon. Member for Denbigh had said that the public interest would be prejudicially affected by the Bill. That was an extraordinary statement, and neither the hon. Member nor any of his friends had brought forward any reason in support of it. He did not think it was right that the clause should be allowed to pass without a

    1741
    protest from that side of the House against wild statements of that kind being made against the two parties to the agreement. The hon. Member who had spoken from below the gangway on his own side of the House had said that he was unduly suspicious about the arrangement. He agreed with the hon. Member he was unduly suspicious. He thought it was very unfortunate that when two parties, containing on their boards men of the highest commercial ability, agreed to a clause of that kind, which was accepted by the Government, and therefore by the experts of the Board of Trade, hon. Gentlemen below the gangway on both sides of the House should ask the House to reject the clause on the ground that its acceptance would be prejudicial to the public interest, without giving any reasons in support of this statement. He only rose for the purpose of protesting against the statements made by hon. Members on both sides of the House, and having made that protest he appealed to the House to accept the new clause.
    Sir EDWIN CORNWALLsaid that when he saw the Amendment for the first time on the Paper and knew that the Joint Committee had decided against it, it was his intention strongly to oppose its insertion in the Bill, but he felt that the House was bound to have regard to what had happened since. It seemed to him that it would be unwise not to have regard to the special circumstances of the case. He had listened to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment and who informed the House that the promoters had accepted it. He had ascertained since that the promoters had agreed to the Amendment because they desired to get the Bill through as quickly as possible, in order that they might get on with other Bills. When the promoters of a Bill accepted Amendments even for that reason there could not be so much in the Amendments to lead that House to set aside the agreement which had been come to, especially in view of the latest circumstances. The President of the Board of Trade, acting on behalf of the Govern-
    1742
    ment, after seeing both parties, and hearing what both the promoters of the Bill and those who wanted the Amendment had to say, had advised the House that the clause was not an unfair one. In view of the circumstances they would be straining their principles too far if they did not accept the situation. The hon. Member for Lancaster had spoken in regard to municipal authorities and clauses of the nature they were considering. His experience of Bills promoted by local authorities had been that it was very seldom that a local authority promoted a Bill without a railway company getting some protective clause inserted. He had seen many clauses in Bills promoted by the London County Council and other authorities which had been added after the Bills were introduced, and when he had asked what those clauses were for, he had been told that they were protective clauses for railway companies. When a railway company was promoting a Bill he supposed the Water Board would come along and want protective clauses against the railway company. It was the business of the House fairly to consider a matter of that kind, and he contended that they had given it consideration. When the President of the Board of Trade on the advice of his expert officers had supported the Amendment, and the promoters of the Bill had agreed to it—it might have been from Parliamentary pressure—the House ought to accept it. The Amendment could not be of vital importance to the promoters of the Bill; otherwise they would have had no right to accept it. The point that weighed with him, however, was that the agreement had been arrived at in conjunction with the responsible Government authority, who would not have taken the responsibility of asking the House to agree to an Amendment of that character if it were contrary to Parliamentary precedent. He hoped that they would not by delaying the passing of the Bill entitle people to describe them as being unreasonable.
    MR. WATERLOWsaid he had only one short point to raise. The railway companies and that particular Water Board had been

    1743
    working side by side for many years without the special powers, and he had heard nothing whatever which would justify the special powers being given in that hurry and at that late hour of the night. He was prepared to oppose the Amendment.
    MR. AINSWORTH (Argyllshire)thought it should be understood that there would be no reflection whatever cast on the decision of the Committee if the House chose to accept the Amendment. If the proposal agreed to by the two parties had been made when the Bill was before the Committee the Committee would probably have

    AYES.

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Hervey.F.W.F. (Bury SEdm'ds

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Hill, Sir Clement(Shrewsbury)

    Rea, Walter Russell(Scarboro')

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Banner, John S. Harmood-

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Holt, Richard Durning

    Roberts,S.(Sheffield,Ecclesall)

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Hunt, Rowland

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Simon, John Allsebrook

    Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

    Kennaway,Rt.Hon SirJohn H.

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

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Keswick, William

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

    Courthope, G. Loyd

    Lamont, Norman

    Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Law, Andrew Bonar(Dulwich)

    Turnour, Viscount

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

    Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

    Elibank, Master of

    Lupton, Arnold

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Ferens, T. R.

    Maclean, Donald

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

    Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.)

    Younger, George

    Forster, Henry William

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

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Tellers foR the Ayes—Mr.

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn.HerbertJohn

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    Stuart - Wortley and Mr.

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Morpeth, Viscount

    Ainsworth.

    Henry, Charles S.

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    NOES.

    Adkins, W. Ryland D.

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Richardson, A.

    Braing,Godfrey(Isle of Wight)

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Hudson, Walter

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Joyce, Michael

    Toulmin, George

    Clough, William

    Kelley, George D.

    Waterlow, D. S.

    Cooper, G. J.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Whitbread, Howard

    Corbett,CH (Sussex,E.Grinst'd

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    White, Luke (York, E.R.)

    Duncan,C.(Barrow-in-Furness)

    Macpherson, J. T.

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Manfield, Harry (Northants)

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

    Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

    O'Grady, J.

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    O'Shee, James John

    Gill, A. H.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Dickinson and Mr. Helme.

    Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

    Radford, G. H.

    *Dr. RUTHERFORDsaid that he desired to move a new clause for the benefit and protection of the Heston and Isleworth and Twickenham Urban District Councils.
    1744
    accepted it at once in order to get on with other business. It seemed to him that it was perfectly in order that if an agreement could be arrived at by the parties concerned the House should agree to it. He hoped it would be clearly understood that those who voted as he proposed to do for the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman did so without casting any reflection at all on the Committee, but simply because the parties concerned had arrived at an agreement.
    Question put.
    The House divided:—Ayes, 61; Noes, 44. (Division List No. 324.)
    He regretted that at that hour of the night it was impossible to do justice to the clause. He wanted to be merciful to the House, and he would not go very

    1745
    fully into the details. But, without going into all the sections, he felt that there were two or three points which he might briefly mention. In the first place, the district councils of Heston, Isleworth and Twickenham asked for twenty-one days notice from the Water Board when any new mains were to be laid in their respective districts. They also asked that plans and sections of the works contemplated should be supplied to them. This was not provided for in the Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, and he thought it was a simple request for the public authorities in question to make, more especially as there were as many as eight mains in some roads. Then the district councils asked that if any damage was done by the Board to the surface of the streets the Board should be responsible for it, and should make it good. They further asked that all pipes should be laid at least two feet below the surface of the roads. This was a very necessary provision, because he regretted to say that in some of the streets of Twickenham the collars of the pipes were to be seen projecting above the surface of the ground, and these of course, were a positive danger as well as an eyesore. The presence of the clause in the Bill would be of service to the public in the districts referred to in many ways. At present public traffic was stopped when pipes were being laid by the Water Board, and in some cases the stoppages had been for as long as six-months. That was a very serious matter, and all that the local authorities asked was that only one-half the width of the street should be taken up, and 100 yards dealt with at one time. He would not go into the other subsections of the clause, but would simply point out to the House that they were very simple and very reasonable terms. He knew that the clause had been considered by the Committee upstairs, but the same might be said of the Water Board (Charges) Bill, in the case of which it was well known that very satisfactory concessions were made after the measure had been sent back to the House. He appealed to the President of the Local Government Board to give the proposed clause his favourable consideration, and he hoped
    1746
    that it would be agreed to by the House, being confident that it contained only the most reasonable terms.
    Mr. CLAUDE HAYseconded the clause.
    New Clause—" For the benefit and protection of the Heston and Isle-worth and Twickenham Urban District Councils (in this section called or referred to as 'the Urban District Councils'), the following provisions shall, notwithstanding anything in this Act contained or shown on the deposited plans and sections, unless otherwise agreed to in writing between the councils and the Board, have effect (that is to say):—(a) The Board shall not commence any of the said works to be executed by them so far as they affect any of the roads, footpaths, ways, sewers, drains, surface-water culverts, and water-courses belonging to or under the control of either of the said urban district councils until they shall have given to such urban district council at least twenty-one days' notice in writing of their intention to commence the same, by leaving the notice at the office for the time being of the clerk to such urban district council, with plans and sections of the said works, nor until such urban district council shall have signified its approval of the same, unless the said urban district council shall fail to signify in writing to the Board its approval or disapproval within twenty-one days after service of the said notice and delivery of the said plans and sections, in which event the Board may proceed forthwith with the said works in accordance with the said plans and sections, and in case, after such disapproval has been signified as afore said, any such plans and sections are not agreed upon, any difference between the Board and the said urban district council or councils with reference to the matters aforesaid shall be determined by arbitration as hereinafter provided; (b) Where the surface of any street or footpath or public place has been interfered with or disturbed by the Board in constructing the work or performing" the operations by this Act authorised, the Board shall forthwith well and

    1747
    sufficiently, and to the reasonable satisfaction of such urban district council having control of the same, or its surveyor, restore the surfaces so interfered with or disturbed, and shall make good and repair for one year from any such restoration any sinking or subsidence of such street or footpaths caused by the execution of the said works; (c) No part of the works by this Act authorised shall unnecessarily interfere with the sewers, drains, or watercourses of or under the control of either of the urban district councils, and shall be so constructed that the upper surface of the conduits, mains, or lines of pipes shall throughout the entire length where they respectively pass through the lands, roads, or ways of such urban district council be not less than two feet below the present surface of the ground; (d) The Board shall not without the consent of the urban district council having the control and management of any street referred to in Section 14 of this Act in any way during the progress of the works by this Act authorised stop, or impede, or obstruct the public traffic passing along more than one-half the width of any such street for a greater length than 100 yards at one time, and shall in the execution of such works comply with and conform to all reasonable directions and regulations of any such urban district council in reference to such interference with the said street, footpaths, or public places and the traffic; (e) No sewer, drain, gas, or other main or pipe of or under the control of either of the urban district councils shall be raised, sunk, or otherwise altered in position so as to impair the efficiency of such sewer, drain, gas, or other main or pipe, or of any existing connection therewith, or so as to interfere with or increase the cost of any connection which may hereafter require to be made to such sewer, drain, gas, or other main or pipe by the owners or occupiers of any lands or premises in the district of either of such urban district councils; (f) The Board shall from time to time and within six months from the time at which any new conduits mains, or lines of pipes authorised by this Act shall have been laid down or formed by the Board within the
    1748
    district of any urban district council cause a map or plan to be made on a scale not more than 88 feet to the inch, and shall cause to be marked thereon the course and situation of such conduits, mains, or lines of pipes within the respective urban district council's district, and shall within six months from the making of any alterations or additions cause such map or plan to be from time to time corrected and such additions made thereto as may show the altered line and situation of such conduits, mains, or lines of pipes, and a copy of such map or plan with the date expressed thereon of the last time when the same shall have been so corrected as aforesaid shall be deposited at the offices of the respective urban district councils within one month from the making of such map or plan or any additions, alterations, or deviations; (g)Nothing in this Act shall take away or abridge any powers to open or break up any road along or across which any aqueducts, conduits, or lines of pipes for conveying water are laid, or any other power vested in any such urban district council for any of the purposes for which such urban district councils are respectively constituted, for the purpose of laying down, repairing, altering, or removing any pipes, drains, or sewers, or any tubes, wires, or apparatus for electric lighting, telegraphic, or other purposes, but in the exercise of such power every such urban district council shall be subject to the following restrictions (that is to say):—(1) They shall cause as little detriment or inconvenience to the Board as circumstances admit; (2)Before they commence any work whereby the flow of water along any aqueduct, conduit, or lines of pipes will be interrupted they shall (except in cases of urgency, in which cases no notice shall be necessary) give to the Board notice of their intention to commence such work, specifying the time at which they will begin to do so, such notice to be given seven days at least before the commencement of the work;(3)They shall not be liable to pay to the Board any compensation for injury done to the aqueducts, conduits, or lines of pipes for conveying water by the execution of such work, or for the

    1749
    reasonable exercise of the powers so vested in them as aforesaid;(4) Whenever, for the purpose of enabling them to execute such work, either of the urban district councils shall so require, the Board shall either stop the flow of water along the aqueduct, conduit, or lines of pipes to which the notice shall refer, where it would otherwise interfere with such work, or shore up and secure the same at their own risk and cost during the execution of the work there: Provided that such work shall always be completed by the urban district councils, or either of them, with all reasonable expedition; (5) Neither of the urban district councils shall execute such work, so far as it immediately affects the aqueducts, conduits, or lines of pipes, except under the superintendence of the Board, unless they refuse or neglect to give such superintendence at the time specified in the notice for the commencement of the work, or discontinue the same during the progress of the work, and they shall execute such work at their own expense and to the reasonable satisfaction of the Board: Provided that any additional expense imposed upon any urban district council by reason of the existence of the aqueducts conduits, or lines of pipes in any road or place where any such pipes, drains or sewers, tubes, wires, or apparatus shall have been laid before the construction of such aqueducts, conduits, or lines of pipes for conveying water shall be borne by the Board."
    Brought up, and read the first time.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the clause be read a second time."
    *MR. LUKE WHITEsaid that this clause was brought before the Joint Committee along with a similar clause brought forward by other district councils. After hearing evidence on the point and considering the whole matter the Joint Committee came to the conclusion that the Twickenham Council, as well as other councils, were amply protected by the Waterworks Clauses Act, and accordingly they disallowed the clause. It was very significant that from the entire area of the Water Board there should be only one local authority asking for those special powers.
    DR. RUTHERFORD: Three.
    *MR. LUKE WHITE,said that the special clause was asked for on account of so many mains being laid in the roads or streets. He should have thought that if any local authority within the area of the Metropolitan Water Board required such a clause as this it would be the City of London, but, as a matter of fact, none of the other authorities required it. All the authorities throughout the area were protested by the Waterworks Clauses Act, and he asked the House to support the Committee in disallowing the clause.
    MR. JOHN BURNS: I say ditto to the hon. Member who has just sat down and I hope the House will say the same;
    DR. RUTHERFORDsaid that as the feeling of the House seemed to be against him on the subject he saw no reason why he should press the clause to a division.
    Motion and clause, by leave, with drawn.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 22, lines 11 and 12, to leave out the words 'of water supply,' and to insert the words 'from which the Board are for the time being authorised to take water.' "
    "In page 22, line 12, after the word 'their,' to insert the word 'authorised.' "
    Amendments agreed to—
    *MR. WILLIAM KESWICKmoved to leave out Clause 36. He said that his Motion was made to express the feeling of a number of his constituents who were not satisfied with the site selected. The urban councils of East and West Molesey and Walton-on-Thames were opposed to the proposed site at Molesey. The locality was not adapted for the construction of a reservoir. It was too late in the night to enter into all the points which might be brought forward, but he earnestly hoped a promise might be given that a clause would be inserted by which the protection of the property of the people in East Molesey would be safe-guarded.
    MR. CLAUDE HAYthought he might say the point raised by his hon. friend had never been considered by the Committee, which dealt with the subject in a general way. It was desired to retain under this clause certain powers conferred by the London Waterworks Act of 1900. Those powers were confined to London and specially to the locality of Lambeth. Now it was sought by the clause to give the powers which were originally given to Lambeth to the whole of London, which would make the local circumstances of East Molesey intolerable. Even the technical advisers of the Water Board said that the reservoir which would be created under this clause would be totally inadequate, they being of opinion, he was sure, that both money would be saved and local feeling better consulted by making the reservoir at another point. It seemed to him the House should delete that clause because it did not form part of the general framework of the Bill, but was merely a clause swept in under the general powers which were being given over to the Water Board.
    Amendment proposed:—" To leave out Clause 36."
    *MR. LUKE WHITEsaid it was a misapprehension that the Joint Committee did not consider the matter. The Joint Committee not only heard counsel with regard to this particular point, but they heard a great many witnesses with regard to the reservoir, to which they gave special attention. They con-
    1752
    sidered most carefully the evidence brought before them, and came to the unanimous conclusion that in view of the action of Parliament in 1900, in connection with the reservoir, the Water Board should have the extension of time that was necessary in the interests of the water supply of London. He asked the House to affirm the decision of the Committee. It was absolutely necessary that the powers of the clause should be given. The Committee went into all the details and no harm could be done to anyone.
    Question, proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill,"
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Bill to be read the third time.

    PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.
    Order for consideration, as amended (by the Standing Committee), read.
    Motion made, and Question, "That the Bill be re-committed to the former Committee,"—(MR. Harmood-Banner), —put, and agreed to.
    And, it being after half-past Eleven of the clock on Wednesday evening, MR. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
    Adjourned at twenty minutes before Two o'clock.